That’s pretty much this guy’s message.
Parents have an important role in the education process, no doubt, but when it comes to what is being taught, that should be left up to elected and appointed professionals that have a background in education and actual experience with teaching. Just because a parent disagrees with something doesn’t make what they disagree with inappropriate for the classroom.
Parents tend to let their personal views cloud what they think should and should not be taught in schools. Being an educated person means that you are a well-rounded person. A well-rounded person learns about many different topics and perspectives.
Parents that are demanding to have a say in what is and isn’t taught need to think about the consequences of their demands.
At best, parents dictating what teachers teach could lead to dangerous inaccuracies in the many facets of education. At worst, it could poison our students’ minds with nonsensical dribble.
Looks like another childless expert. Their agenda is being exposed and they don’t like the spotlight.
Recent quote from MJM on a University Professor:
““And why? Well, because it is obvious she sees herself the same. She’s been teaching for 25 years, you know, so she is an “expert”, too! And it matters not what the “expertise” is. Its a circular confirmation. I believe the “experts”, I am an “expert”, therefore others must believe me.”
Fits here too. I love his last line starting with “At best…” and the “at worst” part is exactly what the majority of conservatives believe is currently happening today while being run by almost exclusively rabid liberals without any parent input.
I think that at best, parents could help balance the exclusively liberal platforms of today’s educators from doing their worst, poisoning the students minds with one sided nonsensical drivel.
The arrogant teacher really should not be in the teaching profession.
First Alex Jones, as mentioned in the article, is just 1 voice, so, while he can have input, his views wouldn’t necessarily be taught.
Parents and voters have every right to have input into the school district’s education curriculum and the teachers and administrators need to follow what the voters and parents demand.
But many teachers don’t like being what to do, many are on power trips.
I think it is a thin line. I don’t agree with parents forcing specific ideas into a curriculum, I agree with parents forcing balance into a curriculum. Multiple sides of history and other Arts subjects need to be constantly taught. Today’s liberal educator generally wants to teach one side or if required to teach multiple sides, but teaching one side as right/good and one side as evil/wrong. The problem is that with only one side taught there is no real good/evil or that when teaching one side as right and one side as wrong, there is no decision (learning) process in school. It is all rote/programming.
On the saddest of levels, it amazes me how any information not coming from a liberal source is automatically an evil lie to most every successful product of today’s schools. Having discussions is largely pointless as non-liberal facts are immediately considered fantasy and will never be thought about by most liberal minds. So of course they are right, they are experts with all the pertinent (Liberal approved) ‘facts’ already entered into their programming.
Parents tend to let their personal views cloud what they think should and should not be taught in schools.
This jackhole is projecting to the 100th degree and so deeply intrenched and indoctrinated as to not realize it.
“Parents tend to let their personal views cloud what they think should and should not be taught in schools.”
The same goes for teachers and administrators and they take it a step further determine how it will be taught, what exactly will be taught and what will be left out.
Careful when using the term “side” referring to subject matter.
Properly speaking, what should be taught is ‘the truth.’ There are not ‘two sides’ to ‘truth.’ But there is such a thing as “incomplete,” which is what most useful and productive discussions are all about.
We may never know ALL there is to know about World War One. The objective of education is to declare what we DO know, and admit that there’s stuff we do NOT know.
Anything else is propaganda.
This contempt educators feel for their subjects is nothing new. What’s new is that so many of them no longer feel the need to mask it.
I had two aunts (dad’s younger sisters) who were government teachers whose discretion at family gatherings tended to wane as their alcohol consumption rose. I’ll never forget them laughing together derisively over one’s comment about having to endure parent/teacher conferences with ‘those dirt farmers and their spawn’ in the presence of the entire extended family. Dead silence. All eyes went to my grandfather, who was himself a dirt farmer and coal miner as a younger man. He stopped chewing for a few seconds, but never looked up from his plate. Grandma had been that dirt farmer and coal miner’s wife in her younger years. Her face turned a nice shade of purple, but she took her cue from Grandpa and held her tongue. The uncles were all building tradesmen. Those two women were themselves only one generation removed from the dirt.
Even as a kid I knew when and where that behavior was learned. Hint: It didn’t from the home.
“Careful when using the term “side” referring to subject matter.
Properly speaking, what should be taught is ‘the truth.’ There are not ‘two sides’ to ‘truth.’ But there is such a thing as “incomplete,” which is what most useful and productive discussions are all about.”
I am not really sure I agree Dad29. Slant has evolved so greatly that I have watched people using the same set of facts (truth) come up with completely opposite conclusions. The truth is used, abused, stretched and yes, partially omitted today. Even if (most of) the facts are given, teaching conclusions (‘sides’) is the real problem.
History has always been written by the victors which will include fact omission, and often interpretation of facts, rather than just the facts. Teaching conclusions is where the discussion should be focused. It both sets ‘sides’ and discourages/replaces teaching critical thought. Right now the ‘victors’ are liberal scholars and they are writing an agenda designed both to make liberals and let those in power control the population more easily.
“Properly speaking, what should be taught is ‘the truth.’ There are not ‘two sides’ to ‘truth.’ ”
Agree wholeheartedly.
“Agree wholeheartedly.”
But yet you bring forth lies and hatred.
Is that your version of the truth?
What lie are you claiming now? Or is that just your knee jerk reaction to anyone that disagrees with you?
You lie constantly, Pervert Boy Le Roi. It’s been documented many, many times.
Well provide proof that I am lying now. Or is that too much work for you?
Thank you for deleting the comment where Le Roi du Nord called Mar the n-word.
“Well provide proof that I am lying now.”
So, you admit that you have lied in the past.
Good for you
And your lie is that HQC never works despite numerous studies show that if used at the right time, it can be a benefit
But you choose hate over science. Like your typical liberal
And learn to use a comma correctly, Pervert Boy Le Roi.
“Properly speaking, what should be taught is ‘the truth.’ There are not ‘two sides’ to ‘truth.’ ”
Agree wholeheartedly.
I still think it is incorrect, your whole heart notwithstanding. Of course there can be multiple sides to ‘truth’. Ever heard of a double entendre?
I think Trump was saying he thought the election was lost through fraud, others think his speech was just sour grapes, Le Roi and Dem politicians looking for payback on Trump thought Trump was calling for armed insurrection. Which is truth? The speech is there for anyone to re-watch…
There are very few absolute truths. Maybe in math.
But in science, religion, politics, history, there many truths. That’s why we have so many disagreements
Mar, there are absolute truths in physics. There are not “many truths” to history–there is one. There is absolute truth in religion–but some are those who will not see.
Double entendre is a rhetorical device not a statement of fact, but its ‘truth content’ is easily discerned. And of course what Trump said speaks for itself. if there is doubt about what he meant let some time pass to determine reality or ask Trump.
“There are very few absolute truths. Maybe in math.”
No wonder you struggled in school.
“But in science, religion, politics, history, there many truths. That’s why we have so many disagreements”
More evidence of that eternal struggle. And boy, will k argue till the end of time on that religion crack.