Education is more than ‘irrefutable fact’
Once I had determined that Dennis Hammond was not joking in his letter to the editor (“Math, science are key in education,” July 24), I felt compelled to write that as impressed as I am that he uses algebra on a daily basis, chucking those high school courses not directly related to the physical realities of the world is hardly good advice.
We teach history so that we may learn from the errors of the past to avoid incessant repetition of our mistakes. We teach civics so that we may understand and appreciate why America is the greatest socio-economic experiment in the life of our species, thereby perpetuating our citizens’ ability to do their part in the nation’s continuing success.
And, since the vast majority of decisions made by human beings are based on opinions rather than irrefutable fact, we teach that too so that students may become proficient in creating informed and thoughtful opinions rather than spouting ill-conceived and shallow pomposities.
Jeff R. Wilkins, Fort Collins
dont know what school you teach at jeff but it must not be one in colorado. my kids went to jeffco schools and received a very good one sided lesson taught by union teachers who taught how bad Bush was and everything was Americas fault and that socialism was the way to go. When they would state their opinions, following a consertitive famil view, they were told how wrong they were. part of their creative and opinion and thought processes were directed that governement owed them a living and that wal-mart was rally bad.
I wish they could have gone to your idea school.
Eliminate the NEA and Federal intervention, then return control to local school boards and things would improve.
Posted by RP McMurphy on July 27, 2007 08:58 AMTeachers personal opinions have NO BUSINESS in the classroom! None!
If you teach, keep you opinions to yourself.
I have not taught K-12, but I have taught community college classes, and I kept my political feeling to myself. It can be done! Try it!
Posted by truthy on July 27, 2007 09:48 AM5:48--
Judging by your lack of knowledge of the basics of sentence composition, spelling and punctuation, I'm guessing your kids didn't get much help with their education at home.
Making sure your kids get a quality education is not a spectator sport. Its requires participation on your part. But then, you probably think the schools owe it to you to educate your children.
I cannot believe the letters and comments that have been published lately deriding math education in our public schools. We are talking about math, you cannot politicize it, demonize it, or blame math for encouraging sex outside of marriage or drug use. I can understand how teaching evolution, sex-ed, some history such as antiquity where bestiality and pedophilia were not a big deal, but math, man you cannot go wrong teaching math.
If your kid can graduate at the age of 18 with a solid knowledge of math, the sky is the limit. I can't think of a high paying, high demand profession, aside from athlete and actor, that does not use math to some extent.
Here's a novel idea--
Maybe instead of bitching about the "liberals" and the "evil unions", you so-called conservatives should get off your arses, get a teaching degree and help educate our kids.
You know, actually give something back to this great country of ours instead of just whining about everything.
Posted by Stop Complaining on July 27, 2007 11:54 AMSure, no need for math and science. And after we're broke, we can sit around and complain about all the jobs going to India and China.
Posted by Philip on July 27, 2007 02:08 PMPosted by on July 27, 2007 05:48 AM
"When they would state their opinions, following a consertitive famil view, they were told how wrong they were. "
I'd love to hear the specifics about when and where this happened. Did you go through the proper channels to report it? What has been done if you did.
I'd also love to hear what you consider a "conservative family view".
Thanks.
Posted by Charles B on July 27, 2007 05:06 PMI am a conservative and I tried to get a teaching degree. I had been an engineeering student and wanted to each math.
The first education class was taught by members of the union who wanted us to know that the union was there for all of you and any trouble would be taken care of. If you were having a problme with a principal or someone else in the school being an active union member would be good for you.
I wasn't really worried until we started getting education classes that emphasized "self-esteem" and "individuality" in the students.
In many classes you can change the subject to fit the student. The technical sciences and math can't be changed. Lies can be told (global warming for instance) but the basic laws of Math and science are not subject to interpretation.
That may be why the majority of today's teachers would not want the students exposed to absolutes in any field and absolutes are the bedrock from which Math and the sciences build.
I didn't finish. My disagreements dropped my 3.6 GPA to a 2.9 because I refused to agree and often asked questions that tangled up the entire lecture hall. My summer/weekend job was taxi driving and I dropped out and drove full time but the experience stayed with me.
I spend hours at my grand daughter's school and when they offered sex ed for the second grade I borrowed a copy of the materials and read them before I signed the permission slip. I also make sure she gets to listen to her favorite radio host on the weekends because I have the 24/7 access to Rush. We usually go over two shows every weekend and then we follow up the quotes and try to find websites or other areas on the subjects. I don't know how much information sticks with her but she is learning how to check facts no matter how much you want to agree with a viewpoint. That will make it possible for her to survive the leftys she will encounter in her schooling. It will also make her a better citizen since she knows how to silently disagree so her grades won't suffer. That is why the math and science fields are disliked and shunted aside. If kids find out that absolutes exisit they might wonder if they apply in other areas as well.
momma y,
In trying to decipher your complaints against education classes, I read that you found classes that "empahsized 'self-esteem' and 'individuality' in the students". Are you saying, then, that this is something that should not be a part of education? That you are opposed to "self-esteem" and "individuality"?
Yet, you yourself insist that presenting your own position - a form of "individuality" - is a paramount need for educational "reform", or change. Isn't this a bit . . . shall we say, incongruous? . . . or even mutually exclusive?
You also go on to illustrate how you feel that "Rush" - Limbaugh? - is a central part of your help when assisting you grand daughter's education. So, are you saying that educational reform necessaarily means that "Rush" - and "Rush's" point of view - MUST be included, or even take precedence over others, even though Limbaugh is not known for being the slightest bit worried about either logic or facts a good deal of the time.
And, when you talk about "check facts", is this a matter of seeing whether or not the "facts" are presented to agree with "Rush"? Or do you find no incongruity in a commentator who commits felony in order to get his own drug supplies, and then insists that he should not be held accountable, while at one and the same time advocating that anyone else addicted to anything be imprisoned, or otherwise harshly punished?
Are we then to see that those absolutes which exist in math and science are to be considered to be of the same value as the opinions and promotions of a radio talk-show celebrity - so long as that radio talk show agrees with your opinions, of course?
And, in the field of science, are we then to take the position that "creationism" - and such ideas as dating the earth to only 5, or 6 thousand years, with dinosaurs considered to be herbivores, with teeth only for breaking coconuts, as one "christian education" site has it, for instance - that these are "absolutes", of equal - or even superior - value to the system of . . . say, carbon dating, and the theory of evolution? And, as such to be taught in the public schools?
And, because you believe that global warming is a "lie", are we then to substitute . . . what? . . . when it comes to the area of such things as glacial receeding, plate techtonics, and other geophysical differences from the "creationist" point of view?
One writer accuses "liberals" of "fear(ing) to hear the other side". For myself, I really would like to hear just what this "other side" actually is, especially when those criticizing public education seem to insist that it, too, is actually a genuinely intellectual area, rather than a belief system based on superstition and total lack of understanding of the nature of mythology.
Perhaps you will be kind enough to clarify.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 28, 2007 09:14 AMAbout ten years ago, my daughter brought home a "contract" from her science (remember Miss Thistlebotom's adage: "i" before "e", except after "c"?) teacher. It was 5 pages long, done in 8 point type. One of her parents or guardians had to sign it.
In it, he had a provision that any spelling, grammatical or punctuation errors would result in an automatic 5 point deduction from an assignment's score.
I signed and returned his contract, along with my humble notations of 102 errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. He even forgot the period at the end of his final sentence.
We do need education - and educators who know how to teach, not preach.
Posted by Stan B on July 28, 2007 01:21 PMOld Grouch
Your agenda is showing again.
You really should try listening to Rush before you rip him. Like most of your ideological stripe, you bash and lambaste something of which all you probably know is what you've heard from others. Rush often responds to callers with stories of teachers pushing liberal agendas and punishing students who dare to challenge their preaching.
While not a regular listener to his program, when I did listen, after a while I began to "get" his style. Rush says over and over that he is an entertainer. He makes fun of absurdity by being absurd. But he also makes far more sense than most of what you yourself post here on this blog.
As a former public school teacher in the sciences, I stayed away from political subjects as much as possible. Yet, I knew of others who regularly did just the opposite. Perhaps your denial to understand that the predominant viewpoints being "taught" in our schools today is a liberal one is because you've been out of schools too long.
Or, maybe, you love it because you agree with that viewpoint.
What public schools are not doing well today is presenting a balance of viewpoints and really teaching our kids how to learn and discern for themselves what to believe.
What is happening is indoctrination and it is endemic in the public schools, "owned" and operated by the teachers union, an arm of the liberal democrat party.
I know it is hard for you to accept that most people see that and understand it for what it is.
Posted by RU Serious on July 28, 2007 02:00 PMRU Serious, public schools do not exist to "teach kids what to believe". They exist to teach facts and facts, as you know, have a liberal bias.
Slavery, the Manifest Destiny, robber barons, etc. Hard to teach these in a neutral fashion.
Presenting a balance of viewpoints, as you stated would be what?
Could you give us an example of two points of view on something that our kids should hear?
Posted by Sharon B. on July 28, 2007 05:15 PMOG
I saw self esteem and other catch phrases used as an excuse not to teach facts but to rewrite history, as Sharon would wish, and other subjects were targeted for "flexibility" instead of teaching the facts to students we were being trained to let the students change the facts to suit themselves. Major example was the marginalization of correct spellig in favor of "self expression.
As for a balance, we could present slavery along with the abolitionist movement, the "robber barons" could be presented along with the economic progress that eventually started the economic miracle of the middle class.
Leetah loves Rush but I want her to check every opinion given to her by another and perhaps even more closely those you agree with. We look at the transcripts for Rush and if he cites someone we will go to the source and compare the entire article with the excerpt. If he says the revenue reporte for something is X dollars we check the source to see if there is more to the story.
We do the same for the books and movies shown in the classroom and I often visit the class as a volunteer or just to read the story of the day.
I find little merit in the panic over human contributions to global warming and when the absolute total hysteria is presented as fact in a class we evaluate the subject the same way we study Rush.
Your attack on Rush because of his drug conviction shows your opinion.
Leetah decided for herself that she wanted to listen, although I have been a listener every day when home for the four years she has been with us.
I am glad to use Rush as a teaching tool because he covers many subjects and it is easy to find resources on both sides of the issues as well as some neutral sources. I was lucky enough to be taught to analyze opinions for myself and hope to make it almost second nature for her. I don't always agree with Rush but it is not necessary to agree to listen or to study.
Facts don't have any bias. Those presenting them are responsible for the accuracy they impart.
It is my responsiblity to teach my grand daughter about life and to monitor her education. I don't doubt that many of her teachers will be excellent people who try very hard to be subject neutral. She will also encounter those who believe it is their duty to also teach a slanted view of some subjects. My health is very bad and I might not be here to help her after elementary school.
If I am she will most likely be able to survive with her independence and her GPA intact.
Fortunately she has an aptitude for Math and science which we are encouraging. She also knows that her self respect is part of being true to herself. Not a bad beginning. Especially since when we got her she had the development of a one year old. She was four and a half at the time.
momma y,
Thank you for your answer. Sorry I wasn't on the computer yesterday evening; but we had a full day of moving and re-arranging storage; so the machine got passed by, for a bit of quiet "vegetation".
As to spelling: That's an area in which we well might use a whole new approach. Back in my day in grammar school, we had teachers who were trained in the English - "King's English" - form; and taught accordingly. Today, anyone using "our" endings instead of "or" - or "re" instead of "er" - gets called down about it. Yet, those are matters of rote memorization, not "political opinion"; and a good deal of the current "rules" of spelling, grammar, and pronunciation are nothing more that the development of a living language through the years. Shakespeare neither spelled, nor sounded when read, as we do today. Is it then a part of those, "facts (that) don't have any bias", that there is only ONE way to spell?
Which simply brings up the point of just what are those "facts without bias" which MUST always be unchanged? And just what is "correct spelling"?
How do you teach about slavery without teaching the abolotionist movement in the United States - and elsewhere in the world - as history? How do you teach the "Robber Barons" without teaching about Unions, and their massive contribution to that "economic miracle of the middle class"? Is something such as Reagan's "Trickle Down Economics" one of the un-criticizeable "facts" that MUST be a part of teaching?
This is, I think, the heart of the problem. Who establishes these "facts without bias" in the process of education? And in conjunction with that question: What areas of education are to be taught ONLY ACCORDING TO THESE "FACTS"?
One illustration, from Colorado history. There was an event, known as the "Ludlow Massacre". Please give me the "facts that don't have any bias" that are to be taught here. Or, are we just supposed to leave out anything that can't be reduced to such "facts", since teaching is to be limited to "facts, without bias"; and there is no place in education for anything else?
And perhaps one might also ask about the "Sand Creek Massacre" at the same time.
If someone has "bias", i.e., personal "opinion" concerning these events, I suppose that makes that person unfit to teach. Which certainly seems to be the center of all the arguments concerning the need for the kind of one-sided indoctrination that those who criticize our schools seem to think is better than current education.
You are doing a good job of home schooling an individual. You have stated that. In so stating, you have also implied sufficient time to cover many areas with a well rounded approach. And you are to be highly commended for your efforts and your interest.
On the other hand, no one has yet answered me as to how this is to be done in a classroom of . . . say 25 students . . . with everyone of them attacking anything that he, or she, doesn't hold to be "facts without bias" in his, or her, own way.
And, generally speaking, the only form of "thought" that seems to be most prevelant among our most vocal critics of education today is one of "getting rid" of anyone who doesn't happen to have THEIR OWN bias, or prejudice, when presenting controversial areas.
Again, thank you for your excellent response. I just wish I had had a room full of parents/guardians/grand-parents, or truly interested adults, such as you, at every one of the parent-teacher conferences back when.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 29, 2007 09:10 AMR U Serious: "What is happening is indoctrination and it is endemic in the public schools, "owned" and operated by the teachers union, an arm of the liberal democrat party."
Of course, R U Serious has no idea as to whether it is endemic or not, but it's fun to put one's prejudiced guessing in absolute terms as gospel facts. It would take quite a survey to permit a person to have an honest answer to the question of whether or not it is endemic. But not all posters are into honest answers. Serious does mention that Limbaugh gives some anecdotal stories about indoctrination. Perhaps Serious likes to extrapolate those anecdotal stories and pretend they describe the whole system. That is not an unusual technique on this forum.
This business of judging the entire teaching profession on the basis of anecdotal stories out of Limbaugh's playbook is an insult to rational thinking. And it smacks of an irrational prejudice motivated by bias rather than, need I say the word?, truth.
RUSerious,
I do like that remark about my "ideological stripe". Reminds me of "AnAmerican", and his position on anyone and everyone whom he refers to as "Democrats".
But, that aside. I have listened to Limbaugh; and I have also read some of his writings. Perhaps today, he mentions the idea of being an "entertainer"; but . . . ? And if that be , "making fun of absurdity by being absurd" - as you have it - then all I can say in return is that Republicanism/ "conservatism" is about the most ABSURD nonsense to be found around today.
I, too, can provide anecdotal incidents of what I found, or find, to be problems. However, wouldn't it be rather "absurd" of me to insist that a whole system - education, for instance - is to be trashed and condemned, the way you do, because of MY singular experiences, or anecdotal experiences I'm relating 2nd hand from others? Vide, that wonderful phrase of yours, " . . . 'owned' and operated by the teachers union, an arm of the liberal democrat party.".
From what I read, almost everywhere the subject comes up in these postings, it is the "political subject" - the so-called "science of Creationism" - that is at the heart of the "conservative" opinions that the anti-public-shool-education claque is demanding be taught as an "equal", or alternative, to the established scientific knowledge of today. Not teaching this absurdity is, among other whining, sniveling, and generally sanctiphoniously absurd assertions that education - especially education in public colleges and universities - are "persecuting Christians"; and/or "not allowing 'Christian truths' to be heard and/or have a place".
But, as you say, I have been out of the schools for a while; and I long ago left Kansas, where "Creationism" textbooks have been made part of the mandatory curriculum.
Well, it's nice to learn that a fundamental position of Constitutional coservatism - together with the inability to fall down and worship before the idols of the day and accept the absurd ideologies of the likes of Limbaugh and the other "entertainers" of his ilk - is indicative of an "ideological stripe" that is identified as being one of "indoctrination"; as opposed to the ABSURDITIES otherwise propounded here.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 29, 2007 10:48 AMI have 2 children one going into 2nd and one going into 5th grade.
The one going into 5th is very bright and ahead of her peers in math and reading.
A letter was sent home to all parents when she was in 1st , 2nd, and 3rd grades,telling parents not to correct their writng assignments for spelling or other errors. They claimed it would stunt their writing abilities.
I went along with the policy thinking they knew what they were talking about and they are the teachers so they know whats best,right? WRONG! My 5th grader is horrible at spelling.Now I am forced to teach and drill her at home on spelling to bring her up to 5th grade standards.
My youngest just completed 1st grade and was sent home the same letter asking the parents not to correct their writings.I wrote a letter to the teacher explaining to her the harm that policy is causing and I would not abide by it.
My now 2nd grader is a better speller than her sister.She didn't study one spelling test last year and missed not one word on every spelling test given.
Where do they come up with this stuff?
Correcting the spelling of a word your child misspelled is harmful?
That is plain laziness on the teachers part.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on July 29, 2007 01:47 PMOG
We are not home schooling. She attends a public elementary school. We supplement her education.
I know there are sensitive subjects like Ludlow and Sand Creek which I have addressed with my (much older) nephews.
The general sense I try to impart is that the things that happened were wrong and the reasoning used to justify them was wrong. That said I also try to explain that the general attitude and opinions of the time were much different and while people did things that were wrong they did not recognize the wrongness. Society as a whole did not see it either.
Guess we could call it historical hindsight. We have different moral views and different social opinions now. Viewing any history through these makes it necessary to emphasize the absolute value of the individual which is the unique perspective granted by our founding fathers. I also try to explain the "blind spots" in our past, as well as those we will discover in the future, by the example of a stop sign on a corner. Before the stop sign was there cars didn't stop. The reason for the sign probably did exist but no one HAD to stop. Once the stop sign was installed they had to stop or risk a penalty. To impose our viewpoint on the actions of others without trying to understand their historical viewpoint is very much like trying to issue tickets for those cars that didn't stop when there was no sign.
As for grammer and spelling, the rules of grammar and spelling enable us to commuicate clearly with others. Today we have many new methods of communication but the written word retains its power. Often the meaning can be distorted or even lost without those rules.
Bias in teaching, in my opinion, is when things like Ludlow and Sand Creek are taught and then the teacher declares that the "white people are all evil" or "the indians deserved it because...(just pick any reason the teacher who made that statement in his class seemed to be making it up as he went along. He also resented my attending with my nephew and asking questions after class.)
I like to teach that treating your fellow man as an equal worthy of respect is an absolute basic tenet of any civilized society. But how do I explain the McVeighs and the Mansons? My answer is to teach Leetah to think for herself and give her the skills to analyze what others tell her. Right now she probably is too young to understand a great deal of what we do when we "check Rush." I hope she retains the skills as she gains understanding. Right now it's more of a "find the words and match them" game.
As for needing parents who are involved we are in total agreement. My disability limits me but it gives me the opportunity to spend time at the school. I offer only a shadow excuse for a very few other parents who have tried and given up. We were taught how to brush off parents who tried to "interfere", their wording, in the education classes I took. The edcation professors definition of interference was basically anyone who disagreed with what you were teaching. There are parents/people, and we can find them in those who would either require or deny the teaching of creationism, who I define as interfering. I would allow the class to be taught so long as evolution was taught with it. Not in separate classes-together. Evolution is a scientific study based on FACT and as such has a place in the classroom. Allowing the introduction of a second opinion, so long as it is expressed as opinion, paired with the FACTS is acceptable.
Anyone, from either side, who teaches their opinion as part of the subject is cheating the students of the opportunity to learn by thinking. Admitting an opinion is not the same as teaching one. I have strong opinions and did my best to offer sources that stated the other views with reason and logic. It doesn't count if you only pick the idiots from the other side. (When voting if all you have is two idiots pick the other guys bad choice so you don't get stuck with them forever.)
That is why I love math and science. Numbers are absolute and we all know what 2 is. In Physics all spheres will beat all disks which will beat all hoops when all are the same diameter. H2SO4 is always sulfuric acid. You can disagree and test all you want but if you bet on the hoop in the race you will lose.
Kids like clear boundaries and absolute answers. It is important that they learn facts and skills. It is also important that they learn how to think.
I admit to teaching for a few years in a Catholic School. Great for discipline and order. I didn't have to deal with either the administrative or the disruptive elements in my classroom. Students knew who was in charge so I could concentrate on the subject and so could the kids. Someday I hope we return that authority to the teachers in the public schools. Nothing would improve public schools faster than letting teachers teach.
momma y,
That last sentence says it all!
I don't think we're really so far apart on essentials. And I do admire your efforts very much. There may be particulars on which to agree to disagree; but the recognition that the incapacities of some are not reason to blame an entire system - as is the general run of postings from the anti-public-school-education claque - gives you the strongest position for offering suggestions for change, and the soundest basis for argument as well, of nearly all the rest who keep on insisting that our educational system is a "failure", or otherwise nothing more than some kind of one-sided place where THEIR point of view isn't prevelant.
Bless you. May you live long, and have many years in which to enjoy the fruits of your efforts with your grand children.
Posted by Old Grouch on July 29, 2007 03:03 PMThanks. I would like vouchers but mine would go to the local public elementary school. Bet a lot would. Nothing is ever a failure if there are people open to improvements and positive changes.
Don't forget...many years to post each other as well. There should be some relief now. Four heart attacks in the past year and now a pacemaker/defribrilator. (Put the lie to a lot of old rumors that I don't have one..mostly from my old students)They amputated most of the left foot. I intend to be here long enough to test out the batteries and wear out the walker.