Debate Now The Dumbing Down of America

[Unkotare]

The whole 'kids today couldn't pass the tests we took back in my day' bit is funny. It's straight from the 'uphill both ways in the snow and bare feet' line of reminiscing fiction.

 

[ChrisL]

Well, I don't know what people learned back whenever. I know I got a fairly good education through the public school system in my town growing up. There were things that I didn't learn that I think would have benefited me in life and things that I learned that have never really benefited me in any way. Lol.

 

[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.

It's more like "cheated by Big Govt" than duped.They have empathy for the kids who were mis-served by public schooling. And things would get BETTER with higher expectations, more parental CHOICE, and getting the "fluff" out of the curriculum. All pretty much common sense conservative views of the problem. CERTAINLY won't get better if the Dept of Ed is prevented from requiring National testing.

If by "fluff" in the curriculum you mean art, music, drama and PE I disagree.

As for parental choice, whose choice? Other parents choosing for MY kids? NO thanks.

 

[Unkotare]

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.

It's more like "cheated by Big Govt" than duped.They have empathy for the kids who were mis-served by public schooling. And things would get BETTER with higher expectations, more parental CHOICE, and getting the "fluff" out of the curriculum. All pretty much common sense conservative views of the problem. CERTAINLY won't get better if the Dept of Ed is prevented from requiring National testing.

If by "fluff" in the curriculum you mean art, music, drama and PE I disagree.

As for parental choice, whose choice? Other parents choosing for MY kids? NO thanks.

???

 

[Foxfyre]

Please refer to Rule #3 for the thread stated in the OP. Remarks must be addressed to the members comments here and cannot be addressed to or refer to the member directly. What a member may have posted in another thread is irrelevent to this discussion.

Sure, whatever.

The fact remains that critical thinking involves the ability to see the differences between things and also the ability to indulge in moral reasoning.

In fact, the very essence of a political discussion board SHOULD involve the application of moral reasoning.

Back for a minute and then have to leave again for a bit. But I don't know what the essence of a political discussion board should be, but I sure hope it is possible to include application of moral reasoning as well as objective observations and critical thinking. I hope it is possible to restore that to the schools too--the school has no business subjecting anybody to a teacher's sense of morality, but given good information sufficient to make a choice, it has been my observation that the kids usually do make the best choice available to them. And nowhere is that more important than in the areas of liberties, Constitution, government, civics, foundation history as explained in the OP.

 

[flacaltenn]

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.

It's more like "cheated by Big Govt" than duped.They have empathy for the kids who were mis-served by public schooling. And things would get BETTER with higher expectations, more parental CHOICE, and getting the "fluff" out of the curriculum. All pretty much common sense conservative views of the problem. CERTAINLY won't get better if the Dept of Ed is prevented from requiring National testing.

If by "fluff" in the curriculum you mean art, music, drama and PE I disagree.

As for parental choice, whose choice? Other parents choosing for MY kids? NO thanks.

Music, PE, = fluff? Hell no.. It's the core of teaching kids teamwork and discipline. One of the worst decisions by the academic overlords of education ever to be made. It's MORE important for disadvantaged kids in fact.
And kids that don't have a great discipline at home..

And parental choice means TRUE parental choice in where their kid is "put".. Maybe won't help the dontgiveadamn parents. But it sorts out the LARGE MAJORITY of rescueable kids with parents who care. The lines for "choice" are too long. And if your kid is stuck in a dump -- you don't HAVE another decade for someone to fart around trying to save a failing school by tossing money at it..

 

[Coyote]

I chose "other"...

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.

This I do agree with. I think it's very important to understand the principles that underlie our countries founding....when I was in school, we had a civics class - I don't know if they do that anymore. I think it's important to understand why, for example, the ability to vote is so valuable, and why freedom of religion is one of our pillars. You can't understand the importance of our rights without understanding what the lack of them meant. I feel this should be in Highschool, but not necessary for college graduation.

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.

This one has two different aspects - the first being basic economics. I think a basic economic theory should be taught in Highschool - however, when you throw in the "effect of government programs" - then you are beginning to politicize it. They should learn the theory in highschool, but optional in college. I don't think it's necessary for graduation.

In college - I think all students should be "exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them" - that's one of the most important things college can do.

In highschool - I think critical thinking must be taught, especially given the barrage of media they are faced with every day. Critical thinking doesn't have a "right" or "wrong" answer but a student should be able to describe how arrives at his conclusions and why. I think in highschool it should be necessary for graduation.

 

[flacaltenn]

I chose "other"...

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.

This I do agree with. I think it's very important to understand the principles that underlie our countries founding....when I was in school, we had a civics class - I don't know if they do that anymore. I think it's important to understand why, for example, the ability to vote is so valuable, and why freedom of religion is one of our pillars. You can't understand the importance of our rights without understanding what the lack of them meant. I feel this should be in Highschool, but not necessary for college graduation.

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.

This one has two different aspects - the first being basic economics. I think a basic economic theory should be taught in Highschool - however, when you throw in the "effect of government programs" - then you are beginning to politicize it. They should learn the theory in highschool, but optional in college. I don't think it's necessary for graduation.

In college - I think all students should be "exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them" - that's one of the most important things college can do.

In highschool - I think critical thinking must be taught, especially given the barrage of media they are faced with every day. Critical thinking doesn't have a "right" or "wrong" answer but a student should be able to describe how arrives at his conclusions and why. I think in highschool it should be necessary for graduation.

I don't think it would be political at all to give H.S. kids a tour of the massive Federal bureaucracy and explain how well it works or doesn't. In fact --- having them understand the SCOPE and SIZE of all the agencies and all the programs in the budget is basic citizen defense.. Not included in any Social Studies texts that I've seen. But the map of Govt is actually more important to survival than knowing the capitols of all 50 states.

 

[flacaltenn]

Just had to add. If Rick Perry had had a teacher giving him a tour of all those Federal Agencies -- he wouldn't have been embarrassed in that debate and would be Prez today !!!!

 

[dblack]

Just had to add. If Rick Perry had had a teacher giving him a tour of all those Federal Agencies -- he wouldn't have been embarrassed in that debate and would be Prez today !!!!

I have no use for Rick Perry. But the fact that he lost so much credibility over such a trivial gaff speak volumes about the petty, irrational nature of our political process.

 

[Foxfyre]

I chose "other"...

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.

This I do agree with. I think it's very important to understand the principles that underlie our countries founding....when I was in school, we had a civics class - I don't know if they do that anymore. I think it's important to understand why, for example, the ability to vote is so valuable, and why freedom of religion is one of our pillars. You can't understand the importance of our rights without understanding what the lack of them meant. I feel this should be in Highschool, but not necessary for college graduation.

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.

This one has two different aspects - the first being basic economics. I think a basic economic theory should be taught in Highschool - however, when you throw in the "effect of government programs" - then you are beginning to politicize it. They should learn the theory in highschool, but optional in college. I don't think it's necessary for graduation.

In college - I think all students should be "exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them" - that's one of the most important things college can do.

In highschool - I think critical thinking must be taught, especially given the barrage of media they are faced with every day. Critical thinking doesn't have a "right" or "wrong" answer but a student should be able to describe how arrives at his conclusions and why. I think in highschool it should be necessary for graduation.

I am on the same page with most of this except the bolded paragraph. Here I have to disagree. For instance, if the students are not exposed to all points of view re the long range effect of the Great Depression, if they do not hear all theories or opinion that the social initiatives put into place at that time--some camps say necessary and the moral choice; others say the larger effect was to prolong the Depression, etc.--how are they ever going to know enough history to use it to inform themselves? I would object to politicizing it too; but to provide students information of the various theories and opinions is to educate, not politicize or indoctrinate.

My goal for including a core curriculum that all students must pass both in highschool and college is in the interest of providing a real education instead of simply training for a specific task or occupation. I want educated citizens elected to high office where they can affect the lives of others, and I want educated voters going to the polls to cast their vote for those who will be elected.

 

[Disir]

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.

Historians speak out against proposed Texas textbook changes

I noticed the video is from Texas. It appears Texas achieved what it was after.
There was an excellent article that I cannot for the life of me find and I don't have the time to wade through that many pages of a search to do it on how the lack of civics being taught shows up in the voter turnout in Texas.

The past twenty years has catered to the testing companies. You either want kids to regurgitate facts so they can pass the exams OR you want them to be able to critically think. As it stands right now, you cannot have both. Lesson plans that allowed kids to critically think have been cut to teach to the test.

For your enjoyment:
How to do the right thing in a system that is wrong?


Economics is required in high schools.

 

[dblack]

Well, I'm proud to be the only one who chose the correct answer.

 

[Foxfyre]

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.

Historians speak out against proposed Texas textbook changes

I noticed the video is from Texas. It appears Texas achieved what it was after.
There was an excellent article that I cannot for the life of me find and I don't have the time to wade through that many pages of a search to do it on how the lack of civics being taught shows up in the voter turnout in Texas.

The past twenty years has catered to the testing companies. You either want kids to regurgitate facts so they can pass the exams OR you want them to be able to critically think. As it stands right now, you cannot have both. Lesson plans that allowed kids to critically think have been cut to teach to the test.

For your enjoyment:
How to do the right thing in a system that is wrong?

Economics is required in high schools.

One of the videos was on the Texas Tech University campus, yes. The other two were not. My motivation for posting the Texas Tech one was in part to show that even in the heart of Texas red neck country, the lack of basic education is woefully apparent. I agree that teaching kids answers to questions so they can pass a standardized test is NOT education. I don't agree that economics is required in high schools or we would see students having at least a rudimentary understanding of economics. Most don't.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well, I don't know what people learned back whenever. I know I got a fairly good education through the public school system in my town growing up. There were things that I didn't learn that I think would have benefited me in life and things that I learned that have never really benefited me in any way. Lol.

I have always operated under the theory that there is no knowledge that is not worth having. I will admit, that I have never ever had any use for having read Beowulf and nobody has ever in my entire life engaged me in a discussion of Silas Marner, both required in HS freshman English and both of which I hated at the time. I have had no opportunity or need to diagram a sentence, and I can think of little practical use to know where Sikkim used to be on the world map. I use a tiny fraction of the algebra I learned in my everyday life. But all of It over all the years, that which I remember and that which I have forgotten, have formed me into who I am and all of it together broadens my general perspectives and the practical sense that there is so much more in the world than my personal reality. I like to think it has all helped me to think more objectively as well as creatively, to develop the ability to analyze and consider information outside the box and form my own opinions.

Of course many public schools do a credible job of education, probably through the sheer force of dedicated and wise teachers determined to educate instead of indoctrinate. Most are backed up by administrations and school boards and parents who do the same. But I fear they are increasingly rare and a dying breed. I think we can testify to that by the woeful lack of education in the area of government, civics, economics, and the cause and effects of it all that create blind partisanship and make people so gullible to the sound bites and erroneous notions spoon fed them by those who would direct public opinion for their own purposes.

And I believe it has created and perpetuates the permanent political class in Washington that exists for its own benefit and only throw the people enough bones so it will keep voting to keep them there.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well, I'm proud to be the only one who chose the correct answer.

If the 'correct answer' is that there should be no requirement that some basic history, economics, government, civics be required for graduation from high school or college, what should the criteria for graduation be?

 

[Coyote]

I chose "other"...

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.

This I do agree with. I think it's very important to understand the principles that underlie our countries founding....when I was in school, we had a civics class - I don't know if they do that anymore. I think it's important to understand why, for example, the ability to vote is so valuable, and why freedom of religion is one of our pillars. You can't understand the importance of our rights without understanding what the lack of them meant. I feel this should be in Highschool, but not necessary for college graduation.

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.

This one has two different aspects - the first being basic economics. I think a basic economic theory should be taught in Highschool - however, when you throw in the "effect of government programs" - then you are beginning to politicize it. They should learn the theory in highschool, but optional in college. I don't think it's necessary for graduation.

In college - I think all students should be "exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them" - that's one of the most important things college can do.

In highschool - I think critical thinking must be taught, especially given the barrage of media they are faced with every day. Critical thinking doesn't have a "right" or "wrong" answer but a student should be able to describe how arrives at his conclusions and why. I think in highschool it should be necessary for graduation.

I am on the same page with most of this except the bolded paragraph. Here I have to disagree. For instance, if the students are not exposed to all points of view re the long range effect of the Great Depression, if they do not hear all theories or opinion that the social initiatives put into place at that time--some camps say necessary and the moral choice; others say the larger effect was to prolong the Depression, etc.--how are they ever going to know enough history to use it to inform themselves? I would object to politicizing it too; but to provide students information of the various theories and opinions is to educate, not politicize or indoctrinate.

My goal for including a core curriculum that all students must pass both in highschool and college is in the interest of providing a real education instead of simply training for a specific task or occupation. I want educated citizens elected to high office where they can affect the lives of others, and I want educated voters going to the polls to cast their vote for those who will be elected.

I draw a difference between Highschool and College. Highschool should provide the educational foundation to be a good citizen, learn to navigate the modern world, be prepared for college if that is a choice or a vocation.

College is different - for one, it's optional. Students are preparing for specialized vocations. I am firm believer in a classical liberal arts education where the thoughts and ideas and ideologies of our founders are discussed from all points of view, where philsophy is explored, and logic is taught, etc etc - courses that would strongly encourage critical thinking skills - this is where I think it's especially important to be exposed to all kinds of views and it's where it typically happens.

In Highschool - they should be exposed to basic economic theory and encourage to use it to analyze real world situations. When they are taught about the Depression, they should be taught - imo - what is broadly supported by historians in terms of what happened, why, etc with other ideas brought in and discussed in relation to what is accepted to encourage discussion but not at the level of detail I think you are calling for. That really belongs in college.

I'd like to know what kids are actually taught now - I have no children, I graduated in 1977 - what I was taught is probably so so different.

 

[jillian]

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.

students should be taught civics.

constitutional law would be nice.... but not your version of it... the one that actually exists.

in terms of what is "dumbing down" this country, it is less what is or is not being taught in school and more the unadulterated garbage people get online.

 

[Foxfyre]

I chose "other"...

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.

This I do agree with. I think it's very important to understand the principles that underlie our countries founding....when I was in school, we had a civics class - I don't know if they do that anymore. I think it's important to understand why, for example, the ability to vote is so valuable, and why freedom of religion is one of our pillars. You can't understand the importance of our rights without understanding what the lack of them meant. I feel this should be in Highschool, but not necessary for college graduation.

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.

This one has two different aspects - the first being basic economics. I think a basic economic theory should be taught in Highschool - however, when you throw in the "effect of government programs" - then you are beginning to politicize it. They should learn the theory in highschool, but optional in college. I don't think it's necessary for graduation.

In college - I think all students should be "exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them" - that's one of the most important things college can do.

In highschool - I think critical thinking must be taught, especially given the barrage of media they are faced with every day. Critical thinking doesn't have a "right" or "wrong" answer but a student should be able to describe how arrives at his conclusions and why. I think in highschool it should be necessary for graduation.

I am on the same page with most of this except the bolded paragraph. Here I have to disagree. For instance, if the students are not exposed to all points of view re the long range effect of the Great Depression, if they do not hear all theories or opinion that the social initiatives put into place at that time--some camps say necessary and the moral choice; others say the larger effect was to prolong the Depression, etc.--how are they ever going to know enough history to use it to inform themselves? I would object to politicizing it too; but to provide students information of the various theories and opinions is to educate, not politicize or indoctrinate.

My goal for including a core curriculum that all students must pass both in highschool and college is in the interest of providing a real education instead of simply training for a specific task or occupation. I want educated citizens elected to high office where they can affect the lives of others, and I want educated voters going to the polls to cast their vote for those who will be elected.

I draw a difference between Highschool and College. Highschool should provide the educational foundation to be a good citizen, learn to navigate the modern world, be prepared for college if that is a choice or a vocation.

College is different - for one, it's optional. Students are preparing for specialized vocations. I am firm believer in a classical liberal arts education where the thoughts and ideas and ideologies of our founders are discussed from all points of view, where philsophy is explored, and logic is taught, etc etc - courses that would strongly encourage critical thinking skills - this is where I think it's especially important to be exposed to all kinds of views and it's where it typically happens.

In Highschool - they should be exposed to basic economic theory and encourage to use it to analyze real world situations. When they are taught about the Depression, they should be taught - imo - what is broadly supported by historians in terms of what happened, why, etc with other ideas brought in and discussed in relation to what is accepted to encourage discussion but not at the level of detail I think you are calling for. That really belongs in college.

I'd like to know what kids are actually taught now - I have no children, I graduated in 1977 - what I was taught is probably so so different.

But there are components of college that are not optional. Most colleges require a language course, at least some basic math, some proficiency in English--things required for a degree so that a student emerges educated and prepared to utilize whatever specialty he/she uses. Or at least that is the way it used to be. I haven't studied a college catalogue in awhile. And what specialty can anybody go into that is not affected by economics and government? It requires some history to understand both, and both are necessary in order for a person to actually be educated. I will continue to argue that such be components of the core curriculum.

When I was in college, most of the first two years was taken up with required courses--core curriculum--required for ALL degrees--of course we also had some electives in areas of special interest or that went toward our major when we declared one. English, history, economics, civics were all part of that core curriculum. They still should be.

 

[Foxfyre]

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.

students should be taught civics.

constitutional law would be nice.... but not your version of it... the one that actually exists.

in terms of what is "dumbing down" this country, it is less what is or is not being taught in school and more the unadulterated garbage people get online.

"My" version of anything is not allowed in this structured discussion. See rule #3.

But I agree that there is a lot of garbage on line. But a solid grounding in honest, non partisan history, government, civics, and economics in high school and college would go a long way toward exposing the garbage for what it is.