Debate Now The Dumbing Down of America

[Unkotare]

If your district is substandard and that's a problem for you then deal with it. How many PTA meetings have you been to within the last year?

Here's the thread rules. I post them for my own benefit because I'm tired and not thinking as clearly as I'd like.

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:
1. Links are allowed but are not required and if used must be summarized in the member's own words.
2. Definitions for this discussion only will be provided by the OP as necessary.
3. Comment on the member's argument only and not directly or indirectly to or about the member making the argumenIn answer to your above suggestion. Activism is helpful. I've addressed bullying in a meeting with the Principal, the School Counselor and some teacher s. I attend all school functions and volunteer at the school. I attend Parent/Teacher confernces. I have three kids in one school and one in the high school.

I'm very busy and I do the best I can. I am in school and have a part time business. I have no time for run for a school board seat. My school is considered the best in the county.

Your school is the best in your county and you're unhappy with it? Why?

No harm no foul but do not direct comments to the member directly. Direct comments to the member's post.

Fair enough. So where are you getting your information from? I hope it's more than that video.

Do not direct comments to the member. Direct comments to the member's post. This is the fourth warning.

You're wasting more time on "warning" than discussing the topic. That's counter-productive (among other things).

 

[Unkotare]

No. It's not the proper role of government to control how we educate our children.

Amen to that. And that is one component I didn't include in the OP as it was the content and dishonesty in the education materials and teaching methods that bothered me most. But for sure, the federal government was given absolutely no constitutional authority to dictate any rules or regulations or policy for any school or what curriculum the students were to be taught.

For the longest time, I thought Thanksgiving was a nice meal shared between Indians and Pilgrims who were good friends. Lol.

Oh dear. Thanksgiving wasn't a nice meal shared between Indians and Pilgrims who were good friends? Sigh. Actually I think most of us understand that it is a teaching story for children combined of both history and myth with a little creative exaggeration toss into the mix. No harm for the little ones to begin with that, but by high school and college, a meatier history is in order. This website provides a really interesting discussion on that separating the history from the myth without tearing down the whole story:
Teach the Real Story of the "First Thanksgiving"

We never talked about Thanksgiving once out of grade school.

Not even when you studied Lincoln?

 

[Dhara]

What’s the Wampanoag version of what happened?

What Really Happened at the First Thanksgiving? The Wampanoag Side of the Tale

 

[Foxfyre]

They didn't tell us in school that this was just a plan to gain the trust of the indians and that the Pilgrims ambushed and slaughtered the Indians, and just took their food and things. I was kind of angry when I found out I had been lied to all of those years ago and by my own SCHOOL. Imagine that?

But is that the story? Or the spin on the story that you were taught in the historical revision in the last 30 years or so?

Spin on the story? Or new information? Such as the Native People's version of what happened in their tribles instead of textbook white folks version.

Either way it is likely to be presented with the spin that the 'historians' of any particular group want to put on it. Which is why real education never trusts a single source, especially a source provided by people with an agenda, to tell it exactly like it was/is.

 

[Rouge Rover]

Here's the thread rules. I post them for my own benefit because I'm tired and not thinking as clearly as I'd like.

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:
1. Links are allowed but are not required and if used must be summarized in the member's own words.
2. Definitions for this discussion only will be provided by the OP as necessary.
3. Comment on the member's argument only and not directly or indirectly to or about the member making the argumenIn answer to your above suggestion. Activism is helpful. I've addressed bullying in a meeting with the Principal, the School Counselor and some teacher s. I attend all school functions and volunteer at the school. I attend Parent/Teacher confernces. I have three kids in one school and one in the high school.

I'm very busy and I do the best I can. I am in school and have a part time business. I have no time for run for a school board seat. My school is considered the best in the county.

Your school is the best in your county and you're unhappy with it? Why?

No harm no foul but do not direct comments to the member directly. Direct comments to the member's post.

Fair enough. So where are you getting your information from? I hope it's more than that video.

Do not direct comments to the member. Direct comments to the member's post. This is the fourth warning.

You're wasting more time on "warning" than discussing the topic. That's counter-productive (among other things).

True but I figured out right away that the OP has an axe to grind and no proof to support said axe grinding. The warnings are not a surprise. I may just start my own thread, there are problems in the schools which should be discussed I'm just not certain it won't immediately turn into more of the same. Anyway, I'm outta here.

 

[flacaltenn]

Indoctrination implies force-fed education

Not necessarily. In fact not at all. Indoctrination is far more effective when it's ingested willingly.

And there's television again. It's the most effective propaganda tool ever created. And nobody is forced to watch it.

To paraphrase an old wisdom, "who controls television controls the world".

That only happens if you are intellectually lazy. Have no personal defense against the "dark arts".. OBVIOUSLY -- whatever we're doing is making our next generations lazy and easy prey. That's why Journals are going bankrupt. And Twitter is more popular than The Nation or Reason Magazine. No different than instituting a PERSONAL desire to eat right.

I used to love "The Soup" on TV.. Because in 30 minutes, ole Joel McHale could feed me a concentrated broth of all the TV junk food I missed for the week. And THEN -- I could laugh it off and go back to working out my brain..

Not glorifying my "discipline" -- because it should be the norm to "read the nutritional content" on the label.. And BE TAUGHT where to find the "healthy stuff".. Instead -- in an effort to "entertain" the kids into learnin sumthin -- they dress it up as reality drama or pop culture. That's like trying to fool your kids into eating broccolli by hiding it..

 

[Dhara]

Here's yet another version of the history that may or may not be familiar to members on this thread with a completely different twist that the Indians might have crashed the first Thanksgiving instead of being invited. How to know if this is the right version?

Did the Indians Gatecrash Thanksgiving?

"Gatecrash" is an inflammatory way of saying they arrived to check things out because the Pilgrims had been firing cannons. They camped and kept an eye on the Pilgrims. There were about 90 of them versus the 20 or so migrant survivors.

 

[Dhara]

Your school is the best in your county and you're unhappy with it? Why?

No harm no foul but do not direct comments to the member directly. Direct comments to the member's post.

Fair enough. So where are you getting your information from? I hope it's more than that video.

Do not direct comments to the member. Direct comments to the member's post. This is the fourth warning.

You're wasting more time on "warning" than discussing the topic. That's counter-productive (among other things).

True but I figured out right away that the OP has an axe to grind and no proof to support said axe grinding. The warnings are not a surprise. I may just start my own thread, there are problems in the schools which should be discussed I'm just not certain it won't immediately turn into more of the same. Anyway, I'm outta here.

Thank you for showing up. I think the OP has a point of view, not an "axe to grind" and I've enjoyed your contribution. If you start another thread I'll contribute. This kind of thread requires a lot of self-discipline which I actually enjoy.

 

[Foxfyre]

What’s the Wampanoag version of what happened?

What Really Happened at the First Thanksgiving? The Wampanoag Side of the Tale

This is closer to the ABC version I posted a few posts back. But neither cites where they got their information. Now I'm thinking this would be a great research project for a major high school or college paper. How near the real history can we get to determine the origins of Thanksgiving?

 

[Foxfyre]

No harm no foul but do not direct comments to the member directly. Direct comments to the member's post.

Fair enough. So where are you getting your information from? I hope it's more than that video.

Do not direct comments to the member. Direct comments to the member's post. This is the fourth warning.

You're wasting more time on "warning" than discussing the topic. That's counter-productive (among other things).

True but I figured out right away that the OP has an axe to grind and no proof to support said axe grinding. The warnings are not a surprise. I may just start my own thread, there are problems in the schools which should be discussed I'm just not certain it won't immediately turn into more of the same. Anyway, I'm outta here.

Thank you for showing up. I think the OP has a point of view, not an "axe to grind" and I've enjoyed your contribution. If you start another thread I'll contribute. This kind of thread requires a lot of self-discipline which I actually enjoy.

But again this comment should be in a PM to the member. No addressing members directly in the thread please.

 

[flacaltenn]

The only way to preserve the Constitution is to make sure that kids understand the Founding of this nation.
And the only way to preserve Free Markets is to confront the conflicting claims for Socialism vs Capitalism.

You can't indoctrinate teens. You can only arm them with the background to rapidly reach the conclusion that ignorance WILL BE EXPLOITED by politicians and the media.. Make them less susceptible to outrageous claims. They need to know HOW STUFF WORKS. And how the future of the country lies in separating truth from fiction and politicized BS..

The conditions as expressed in the video say much more about the power of mass media than anything else methinks, and its power of influence.

This is exactly why I'm always railing against the concept of television; this is its bounty.

It is my experience that when you expect certain standards from the students, many more of the students will choose to meet those standards than those who will not. If we expect students to have a reasonable knowledge of our history and the basics of economics, cause and effect, and encourage them to consider all points of view and think critically to form opinions about what they see, hear, and read, most will do it.

Absolutely.. Lower the standards or coaching them thru the test is counterproductive. HOWEVER -- teachers cannot solve upbringing issues. There WILL BE kids who fail to achieve with the higher standards because of home life. They need a different approach. One that involves more motivation and socialization.. Lots of different ways to do this separately from the mainstream. One example is "military style academies". Not the flag waving -- gun toting type --- but the longer day -- more disciplined enviro that allows for sports, music, leadership skills, etc...

 

[Dhara]

Fair enough. So where are you getting your information from? I hope it's more than that video.

Do not direct comments to the member. Direct comments to the member's post. This is the fourth warning.

You're wasting more time on "warning" than discussing the topic. That's counter-productive (among other things).

True but I figured out right away that the OP has an axe to grind and no proof to support said axe grinding. The warnings are not a surprise. I may just start my own thread, there are problems in the schools which should be discussed I'm just not certain it won't immediately turn into more of the same. Anyway, I'm outta here.

Thank you for showing up. I think the OP has a point of view, not an "axe to grind" and I've enjoyed your contribution. If you start another thread I'll contribute. This kind of thread requires a lot of self-discipline which I actually enjoy.

But again this comment should be in a PM to the member. No addressing members directly in the thread please.

Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. I don't see that level of feedback equally applied, LOL. But I can take it.

 

[Foxfyre]

They teach it in my school and they have ever since I've been there. Sometimes I'm baffled by where you people come up with this stuff.

How can a student judge whether he/she is being taught all the information or is being taught a cherry picked version of it to influence opinion about it?

It's not up to students to judge. They learn the same things today I learned when I was in high school back in the 1980's. I honestly will never understand how you anti-public school people come up with this crap.

Violation of Rule 3. Please direct comments to the member's argument and not any member or members themselves.

That was directed towards your argument. You are claiming students aren't even taught the basics. You've offered nothing to prove that other than a 3:00 minute video, by the way Carson used to do that schtick 40 years ago, and where you're getting your information from is a valid question, I hope it's from more than Facebook videos. So, I repeat, yes they should be taught the basics and fortunately they already are.

Maybe the point is that the basics they are taught may need some fluffing up. I have previously seen an argument, (not in this thread) that people should not even get to vote if they don't have a Masters level or above understanding of history and civics.

That I disagree with. That's elitism.

The argument is that the basics are not being taught. And while I agree that a civics or history exam is not practical to establish criteria for voting, and a master's degree required to vote is ridiculously elitist, I am horrified that some people are given a name and a promise of some reward if they will go into the voting booth and vote for that name. They have no clue who are what they are actually voting for or what the implications of that might be,

So since a voter qualification test is not practical as a requirement to vote, how about we have an education system that best encourages students to be reasonably informed about these things when they graduate, so we will have a better chance to have an informed electorate not to mention a people who are smarter about what kind of people they want to trust with the government.

 

[Pogo]

Indoctrination implies force-fed education

Not necessarily. In fact not at all. Indoctrination is far more effective when it's ingested willingly.

And there's television again. It's the most effective propaganda tool ever created. And nobody is forced to watch it.

To paraphrase an old wisdom, "who controls television controls the world".

We used to say who controls the press controls the world. Bill Moyers was talking about the rise of giant media conglomerates owned by a few elite mega billionaires and his concerns about an informed populace have come true.

News spends more time on graphic violence and negativity than on civics and serious communities issues of any kind.

As well as on empty fluff that sells ratings but disseminates no useful information ----- which is why we see everybody in the video who don't know their wars, have no trouble nailing who the hell Brad Pitt was married to.

 

[Unkotare]

.... how about we have an education system that best encourages students to be reasonably informed about these things when they graduate....

We do have one.

 

[Dhara]

How can a student judge whether he/she is being taught all the information or is being taught a cherry picked version of it to influence opinion about it?

It's not up to students to judge. They learn the same things today I learned when I was in high school back in the 1980's. I honestly will never understand how you anti-public school people come up with this crap.

Violation of Rule 3. Please direct comments to the member's argument and not any member or members themselves.

That was directed towards your argument. You are claiming students aren't even taught the basics. You've offered nothing to prove that other than a 3:00 minute video, by the way Carson used to do that schtick 40 years ago, and where you're getting your information from is a valid question, I hope it's from more than Facebook videos. So, I repeat, yes they should be taught the basics and fortunately they already are.

Maybe the point is that the basics they are taught may need some fluffing up. I have previously seen an argument, (not in this thread) that people should not even get to vote if they don't have a Masters level or above understanding of history and civics.

That I disagree with. That's elitism.

The argument is that the basics are not being taught. And while I agree that a civics or history exam is not practical to establish criteria for voting, and a master's degree required to vote is ridiculously elitist, I am horrified that some people are given a name and a promise of some reward if they will go into the voting booth and vote for that name. They have no clue who are what they are actually voting for or what the implications of that might be,

So since a voter qualification test is not practical as a requirement to vote, how about we have an education system that best encourages students to be reasonably informed about these things when they graduate, so we will have a better chance to have an informed electorate not to mention a people who are smarter about what kind of people they want to trust with the government.

I'd say the basics are being taught but they aren't taught in way that engages all students equally. Some students are more disadvantaged than others and I walk away from this post wondering if the position expressed in this post cares about them or would leave them behind possibly even limit their voting opportunity.

It comes across as elitist or classist. Well meaning or intentioned perhaps, but not respectful of the range of citizens we have in our country and how o really address informed citizenry.

 

[Pogo]

Would they put it on the bottom of their priority list if it was required to graduate from high school? To get into college? To graduate from college?

Observation: Most of those educated in the 1940's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and probably most of the 80's would probably be able to answer all those questions EXCEPT for the media based ones. But education has deteriorated greatly since then.

Has it though?

Is it that education has deteriorated --- or is it that mass media has risen to be so powerful in influence that traditional education can't even effectively compete? In the eras you cite above, it didn't have nearly that level of influence.

You're also touching on the definition of "learning".... it's one thing to retain an abstract stream of facts and dates long enough to write them down on a test paper; it's quite another thing to grok that background because it has personal meaning.


I can't escape the moment of epiphany, riding on public transportation in some city (wherever it was), watching six people across the aisle -- obviously unconnected, older, younger, male, female, black, white, nothing in common ---- and all six of them, faces buried in their smartphones, tapping out their allotted 140 characters at a time, oblivious to everything around them.

When you've come up with technology to lead people around to that degree --- you've got a power that can't be matched by a school building.

I disagree. Yes the smart phone and similar technology has significantly changed the culture, especially for the younger boomers and subsequent generations. And, in my personal opinion, not in a good way. But I also believe human nature has not changed. Only what the modern culture has made important has changed. IMO, if we make those history and economics grades important for the student's future, he/she will develop a sufficient interest to learn something about them. You overcome one compelling power with a better, stronger one.

I think it's possible you may have had a better education than is availabe to my kids at this time. High school credits involve accumulating points, not competencies. At the very least, even Spanish classes for four years ought to result in fluent Spanish literacy.

It's not happening. Only the elite, two parent middle or upper class kids are accessing what they need to compete.

Again no harm, no foul, but a gentle reminder not to address me personally. Address my post.

I know I got a far superior basic education in high school and college than what my children got. They got a far superior education in high school and college than many modern day students are getting. It is rather alarming.

Ok Foxfyre. I'll try not to address you personally. It's hard when you mention your own experience or your families experience. I know my own experience, my experience working in the rural school district I live in and my children's experience.

Otherwise I'd have to be constantly studying and referencing other people's works and opinions rather than writing my own.

Maybe I'm not up to speed enough for your thread.

It's uh, kind of impossible to address the topic without an accompanying examination of one's own experiences, as well as reflection on someone else's. I did it myself in probably every post here.

 

[Pogo]

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:


youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not is that important?

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION:
1. Links are allowed but are not required and if used must be summarized in the member's own words.
2. Definitions for this discussion only will be provided by the OP as necessary.
3. Comment on the member's argument only and not directly or indirectly to or about the member making the argument.

Interesting contrast in the video. I would have had no clue whatsoever about the last two quesitons on "Snookie" and Brad Pitt. None whatsoever.

Obviously they've bought the idea that that sort of thing is more important than knowing basic --- really really basic -- history.

That doesn't mean they're not being taught that history --- it means they've put it on the bottom of the priority list.

Would they put it on the bottom of their priority list if it was required to graduate from high school? To get into college? To graduate from college?

Observation: Most of those educated in the 1940's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and probably most of the 80's would probably be able to answer all those questions EXCEPT for the media based ones. But education has deteriorated greatly since then.

Has it though?

Is it that education has deteriorated --- or is it that mass media has risen to be so powerful in influence that traditional education can't even effectively compete? In the eras you cite above, it didn't have nearly that level of influence.

You're also touching on the definition of "learning".... it's one thing to retain an abstract stream of facts and dates long enough to write them down on a test paper; it's quite another thing to grok that background because it has personal meaning.


I can't escape the moment of epiphany, riding on public transportation in some city (wherever it was), watching six people across the aisle -- obviously unconnected, older, younger, male, female, black, white, nothing in common ---- and all six of them, faces buried in their smartphones, tapping out their allotted 140 characters at a time, oblivious to everything around them.

When you've come up with technology to lead people around to that degree --- you've got a power that can't be matched by a school building.

I disagree. Yes the smart phone and similar technology has significantly changed the culture, especially for the younger boomers and subsequent generations. And, in my personal opinion, not in a good way. But I also believe human nature has not changed. Only what the modern culture has made important has changed. IMO, if we make those history and economics grades important for the student's future, he/she will develop a sufficient interest to learn something about them. You overcome one compelling power with a better, stronger one.

If we can do that, more power to us. But it isn't the reality of what's out there in the world right now.

Again, if you can command an entire population to swim in the soup of their Twitters and iPhones ...... then you have their undivided attention. And that means you can pour anything you want into that mind. And that ends up not at all limited to "buy our product", but even the mundane ---- the idea that it actually freaking matters who Brad Pitt used to be married to. And those ideas are already planted and entrenched.

That's what education, and societal values in general, are up against. And I submit it is the underlying reason for exactly what the thread title invokes.

 

[Dhara]

Indoctrination implies force-fed education

Not necessarily. In fact not at all. Indoctrination is far more effective when it's ingested willingly.

And there's television again. It's the most effective propaganda tool ever created. And nobody is forced to watch it.

To paraphrase an old wisdom, "who controls television controls the world".

We used to say who controls the press controls the world. Bill Moyers was talking about the rise of giant media conglomerates owned by a few elite mega billionaires and his concerns about an informed populace have come true.

News spends more time on graphic violence and negativity than on civics and serious communities issues of any kind.

As well as on empty fluff that sells ratings but disseminates no useful information ----- which is why we see everybody in the video who don't know their wars, have no trouble nailing who the hell Brad Pitt was married to.

What really worries me, is that people with a political persuasion think they ought to control the thinking of citizens by what they're taught and how they're taught. They want schools privatised in order to affectmore control. They would kick kids out of school if they didn't spit back their version of history or Constitutional interpretation. They want to limit who votes. The implication is people who vote against THEIR politcal position are "duped" by "big government education and are "too stupid" to vote.

 

[Dhara]

Has it though?

Is it that education has deteriorated --- or is it that mass media has risen to be so powerful in influence that traditional education can't even effectively compete? In the eras you cite above, it didn't have nearly that level of influence.

You're also touching on the definition of "learning".... it's one thing to retain an abstract stream of facts and dates long enough to write them down on a test paper; it's quite another thing to grok that background because it has personal meaning.


I can't escape the moment of epiphany, riding on public transportation in some city (wherever it was), watching six people across the aisle -- obviously unconnected, older, younger, male, female, black, white, nothing in common ---- and all six of them, faces buried in their smartphones, tapping out their allotted 140 characters at a time, oblivious to everything around them.

When you've come up with technology to lead people around to that degree --- you've got a power that can't be matched by a school building.

I disagree. Yes the smart phone and similar technology has significantly changed the culture, especially for the younger boomers and subsequent generations. And, in my personal opinion, not in a good way. But I also believe human nature has not changed. Only what the modern culture has made important has changed. IMO, if we make those history and economics grades important for the student's future, he/she will develop a sufficient interest to learn something about them. You overcome one compelling power with a better, stronger one.

I think it's possible you may have had a better education than is availabe to my kids at this time. High school credits involve accumulating points, not competencies. At the very least, even Spanish classes for four years ought to result in fluent Spanish literacy.

It's not happening. Only the elite, two parent middle or upper class kids are accessing what they need to compete.

Again no harm, no foul, but a gentle reminder not to address me personally. Address my post.

I know I got a far superior basic education in high school and college than what my children got. They got a far superior education in high school and college than many modern day students are getting. It is rather alarming.

Ok Foxfyre. I'll try not to address you personally. It's hard when you mention your own experience or your families experience. I know my own experience, my experience working in the rural school district I live in and my children's experience.

Otherwise I'd have to be constantly studying and referencing other people's works and opinions rather than writing my own.

Maybe I'm not up to speed enough for your thread.

It's uh, kind of impossible to address the topic without an accompanying examination of one's own experiences, as well as reflection on someone else's. I did it myself in probably every post here.

You may have done it in every post but you haven't had a warning for every post you did it in, LOL. Lucky you.