Slashdot Mirror
Conservative Textbook Curriculum Passes Final Vote In Texas
suraj.sun sends in a followup to a story we've been following about the Texas Board of Education's efforts to put a more political spin on some of their state's textbooks. From the Dallas Morning News:
"In a landmark move that will shape the future education of millions of Texas schoolchildren, the State Board of Education on Friday approved new curriculum standards for US history and other social studies courses that reflect a more conservative tone than in the past. Split along party lines, the board delivered a pair of 9-5 votes to adopt the new standards, which will dictate what is taught in all Texas schools and provide the basis for future textbooks and student achievement tests over the next decade. Texas standards often wind up being taught in other states because national publishers typically tailor their materials to Texas, one of the biggest textbook purchasers in the country. Approval came after the GOP-dominated board approved a new curriculum standard that would encourage high school students to question the legal doctrine of church-state separation — a sore point for social conservative groups who disagree with court decisions that have affirmed the doctrine, including the ban on school-sponsored prayer."
hardly, that's just local people deciding how their local schools will be. I find the DOE to be even more like the Taliban, trying to force a political agenda and philosophy on the whole nation. The DOE should be eliminated, the federal government abolished from children's education.
They have a ways to go to get to Arizona levels of excellence.
But it won't work, because Texans don't read their schoolbooks, they just keep them in big "depositories" hidden away on upper floors of buildings.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
I'll agree with that thought and it is at the heart of the controversy here. In the past 140 years or so, the "liberals" have controlled education and history, giving us what we "know" today. Before 1859-1870, we wouldn't be having this conversation. From the article: "...the board's five Democrats criticized the Republican majority for injecting their political and religious views into the curriculum". That's completely stupid. No matter what side you're on, you will "inject your views". Also, "I think we've corrected the imbalance we've had in the past and now have our curriculum headed straight down the middle." I don't know if what they have is "straight down the middle", but to me, any correction the other way is a good thing after 140 years of liberal guidance.
The summary is inflammatory and incorrect, but this is Slashdot, so why should I be surprised that it's wrong. There is no more "political spin" here than in the past. The only difference is that the direction of the spin is changing slightly. American history has been written differently than what happened, if you go digging for the facts. The "founding fathers" are depicted quite differently from what they say in their personal letters. Various "facts" have been quietly dropped, giving a different "spin" on why Americas was started as a country and what was important to us.
How about we all put our computer games away for awhile, go pick up some history books (preferably those written before 1870), read about what happened and was said, and make up our own minds based more on facts rather than what some educator says.
When it was co-opted by the left to mean socialism.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
I bet 99,9324% of the angry people on this thread never really read the fucking document, they just mount stereotypes given by left propaganda media in their heads and spit out the only thing they can, which is the repetition of the same parroting we hear on the media.
Read the Fucking Document !
Information like "Africans engaged in the slave trade" and "Entitlements cost more to the gov't than the entire military." We -know- California doesn't want truths like that getting out.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
Sounds to me like you're as nutty as the people in the article, as opposed to in any way rational.
Are you a Teabagger?
Roosevelt's son should have run against FDR. We might not had 20 years of economic hell. Does anyone realize that FDR ran against the "socialistic" Irish in NY, then completed a 180 after the election? He took all of those "socialistic" ideals that he abhorred.
Riiiight, because Hoover had nothing to do with making the great depression worse. FDR wasn't president until 4 years into the depression and 4 of those years people were more concerned with Jerry and the Japanese than what the stock market was doing.
It's like blaming Obama for the melt down and initial bailout: both occurred under Bush's term and TARP was signed by Bush (plus, there's always the question of how much a president's policies affect economics).
Meanwhile, the rest o the world has failed to realize that social conscience is no substitute for economic growth. The us per capital GDP is still 40% more than the EU, making all but the lowest 15-20% of the population better off in the US. If France were a US state, they would be somewhere between Mississippi and Louisiana-- two of the poorest states in the country. Our unemployment is also lower by a signifcant amount. By every economic measure, if you are willing to work in the US you are doing better than Europe. And maybe, just maybe, the fact that we still get to keep some our earnings affects that.
Actually, American citizens are extremely generous as individuals. They give huge amounts of their effort and wealth to foreigners as charity, and sign up for voluntary military service knowing they'll be dropped into inept hellhole nations around the world, not even counting the benefits of American businesses to the world. We simply don't like having some gang of self-appointed do-gooders order us to be "social" in ways that involve granting them unlimited power over us.
Revive the Constitution.
I wonder if that motivation isn't at play here, try to politicize the education standards so much that people lose faith in a state run education system.
I dunno, I think just looking at graduation rates, test scores, and general academic performance in general (both in high school and early college) in the US caused the majority to lose faith in state run education.
I can make arguments both for and against public education. However, I think it's pretty easy for most people to agree that the public education system in the US is an utter failure. Notice I didn't say "public education is a failure", I think Germany has a great education system and the US would do well to study Germany's system. I'm simply pointing out that the US public education system is utter crap and it doesn't even remotely prepare kids well enough to compete with the rest of the world.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
There is no such thing as free healthcare! in France they pay for it as well as for other social services through taxes. They also have no innovation or entrepreneurship, low work ethic, historically very high unemployment even when artificially limiting the work week by law, constant strikes, all of which produces per capita GDP of $33K versus $46K in the USA. They also actually have much lower standard of living that would compare badly even with the poorest USA states, live in tiny (by US standards) overpriced apartments and paying $6 per gallon of gas. Let's not forget the taxes: 46% of the GDP v. 28% in the USA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP
Better car? You mean this: http://www.enjoyfrance.com/images/stories/world/motoring/citroen-2cv.jpg
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
I say get rid of the DOE entirely. Let local communities decide what to teach.
Local communities do get to decide what to teach. If they didn't, we wouldn't HAVE this bullshit with the Texas BOE (hmm, makes you wonder if it's time for a centralized education policy - if people wouldn't make a mockery of their local rights, the Feds wouldn't have to step in at all). Are you allergic to facts?
And what in the name of Satan's bellybutton does the Department of Energy have to do with all this? You look like you could have used some "indoctrination" in school.
That was the logical argument of a teenager (i.e. insult the speaker). Very impressive. You ought to go back to school.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall