It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Public Education vs. Ignorant Parents

page: 10
20
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




This is what hyper self centered and people without sufficient scientific knowledge about the environmental issues say.

All nothing but bloviating opinion from you, not to mention the typical insults from one who is losing an argument. I expected more from such a highly educated person.
Here's a more balanced approach in my opinion.


The science portion of Common Core called “A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas” is written from material provided by The National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The report is 400 pages and I examined PART II: Dimension 7 dealing with Earth and Space Sciences from pages 169 to 201. The coverage is cursory due to the shortness of material. Part ESS3.D: Global Climate Change covers global warming from pages 196-199. The coverage mentions computer models are used for predicting future climate and weather conditions for the planet. The report claimed, “However, it is clear not only that human activities play a major role in climate change but also that impacts of climate change—for example, increased frequency of severe storms due to ocean warming—have begun to influence human activities . The prospect of future impacts of climate change due to further increases in atmospheric carbon is prompting consideration of how to avoid or restrict such increases.” There is insufficient coverage that computer models fail to replicate what happens in the future when data for comparisons are available. In my opinion climate models should not be included in K-12 education because our understanding of forces influencing climate is incomplete and model’s failure to be validated. Material in the book does not make this clear.


Four references are cited at the end of the discussion. One is the 2009 Report “Climate Literacy: The Essential Principles of Climate Change” by the United States Global Change Research Project (USGCRP) which contains scary predictions for the future of the world because of global warming. One example is “C. The impacts of climate change may affect the security of nations. Reduced availability of water, food, and land can lead to competition and conflict among humans, potentially resulting in large groups of climate refugees.” The material says carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing global warming which is a highly controversial topic.
No doubt numerous copies of the 2009 USGCRP Report will be sent to schools as reference material showing fossil fuel use should be abandoned in order to save the planet. This report, and other U. S. government printed reports, provides numerous reference materials to indoctrinate students to accept catastrophic climate change is occurring unless fossil fuel use is abandoned. This all confirms political bias on climate change


The threat of catastrophic global warming due to carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is again emphasized in areas outside the science portion of Common Core.

blog.heartland.org...

But then again, there is the difference between bloviating opinions from educators steeped in certain political ideology and someone who is more interested in truth.
edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
None of what I quoted was from Glenn Beck but from other sources. So you can say it's like I quoted from him all you want, but not true.
In fact the last thing I just quoted is from this guy

James H. Rust is a retired professor of nuclear engineering
blog.heartland.org...

Naturally, you are more educated than he is.


edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Fundadeliaaaa,

I was speaking specifically to the other person, who had made sweeping statements about blame in the education game. I responded to those statements with a basic list of evidenced reasons it isn't all on the teachers. I wasn't referring to all of the other conversations I had on this thread, nor was trying to blow off you. Sorry.


originally posted by: funkadeliaaaa
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


A person is losing an argument who is unable to respond to specific well-informed and evidence-based points with nothing but dismissal.

Everything I put about many of the basic causes of educational problems has a huge amount of evidence and studies behind it.

Second, you say "i have no solutions." You know nothing about my solutions, nor what I have done, nor what I work in. But I'm sure layperson Xuenchen magically is some expert now, and omniscient about "my solutions."

Good job, I'm out, and thanks for playing.


I find it very dissappointing that no attempt was made to address a very important question i had asked before Queztacoatl14 decided to leave the debate.

It was claimed that not having culturally diverse interactions with students from around the world in an academic institution would be "totally insufficient" for a young learner these days.


If someone did not have more education about the rest of the world they would have too small of a sample and a single city to measure things from. It's totally insufficient.

But totally insufficient for what exactly? All these claims are supposedly supported by "evidence", because Quatzacoatl14 has apparently said nothing in this thread not backed up by evidence. Does it include the suggestion that the success or failure of a learner in todays society is dependant on them having relationships with lots of other learners from many culturally diverse backgrounds in an academic instution??? Even if i read a peer reviewed paper that suggest that it was i wouldn't be convinced by it, because its seemingly oblivious to the idea that these interactions would naturally occur outside of academic institutions anyway if migration levels have increased that significantly to claim it has that much importance. If its a reference to foreign learners who simply come overseas to study and then return home, i still dont accept the claims made about the significance of this on learners who live here in the west, as those learners who only come here to study and then return home are not neccessarily going to come bacl here. Im not arguing cultures shouldnt interact, im simply saying its not neccessary to be in an academic institution to experience it. People in institutions like colleges and universities where foreign students study are often busy studying a lot of the time anyway, so the quality of interaction most of the time is probably going to be completely valueless for most learners in the institutions in the long run. If were talking about cliques who make it their duty to befriend foreign students and build strong relationships with them, its still makes a pretty baseless argument because there's no evidence that learners befriending foreign learners from other cultures is in any way valuable to the long term success or failure of learning in an academic institution. And no evidence that home schooling deprives someone of meaningfull relationships with other cultures, or that having meaningfull relationships with other cultures is in any way a significant factor in a learning.

So called "educatores" shouldnt hide behind the franchised ambiguous buzz word "education" either. Its about learning, and we all know thats a life long process.



I agree with you that people can have meaningful interactions with people without that happening in a school. And, as you say, most don't happen at school. A city is a great example. So are workplaces, and so on.

What I am saying is that absent the most amazing outliers of history, i.e. those who are completely self taught AND have travelled the world, most people can't get enough from just existing in a single country, city, or what have you. And without structured study they will not have exposure to not only the countless cultures across the world but also well-researched historical data and issues surrounding those cultures and others.

A lot of problems in this world derive from people having insufficient experience and interaction with other cultures and ideas. Not only that, but even a diverse place such as NYC or London is still not a true microcosm of the whole planet, and has all sorts of self selection biases for the peoples that live there, monetary restrictions, and differing historical trends and demographics.

Part of having the most accurate hypotheses on any topic, but especially social and physical sciences, requires that such hypotheses (or philosophies of life if you will) encompass all known data on the topic. You can't do that if your sample is not representative of all mankind. This is but one issue.

Following up on that, MOST people will never have the opportunity to travel the majority of the world. Most people will not even live in a diverse place, as you and I are blessed to (NYC and London apparently). Many people live in places that are 99% homogenous.

And another problem of home schooling is that students may not get enough diversity of opinion, viewpoints, and teachers in a structured academic environment, even if their parents are brilliant. Because all people are biased, so if a goal is to get a wide variety of views in order to inform your own, it helps not to have only a few teachers.

Let us assume for a moment that homeschooling parents can create all of the variables necessary for a completely well rounded child able to reach their full potential. This still requires very well educated, open minded, and informed parents, travel, exposure to all kinds of diverse ideas and peoples, and so on. Do you think that most families themselves have the vast knowledge of other cultures and their own biases to effectively create respect and knowledge in their kids? How many even know or care about history? Do you really think that most parents, with our misinformed and often brainwashed and apathetic public, are ready to meet this charge? i can tell you having worked with a lot of parents of my students that most, while loving and decent people, didn't seem to be ready. So then it isn't really a viable solution to most families' education needs.

Hopefully i made some kind of sense.

What I am not claiming here is that everything on this post is evidence based. Some of it is, like many people not living in diverse places, or the average educational level of many parents. But my overall view I am not claiming to be something scientific.

edit on 3-11-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




Following up on that, MOST people will never have the opportunity to travel the majority of the world.



That is STILL NOT reason enough to have grade school children bowing down on green prayer rugs and declaring there is no god but Allah! That is not teaching culture, that is indoctrination at best. It's not even teaching theory. It's teaching them to pray to the god of Islam, and if you cannot see that, I think you are in the wrong profession.
Did you see the picture of the kids kneeling down in prayer with their heads on the ground? I bet you didn't even bother to look at my link.
Apparently, the Pledge of Allegiance is out and kneeling on green rugs declaring Allah is god is in.
Again, it must never have been about separating state and religion as professed by those who hate Christianity, but it was always about eliminating the Christian religion and inserting any number of other beliefs which the state happens to like at any given time, which is what makes the whole thing nothing but totalitarian indoctrination.
John Dewey was just that, an authoritarian who believe the State is supreme and children just cogs in the machine.

edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14



A lot of problems in this world derive from people having insufficient experience and interaction with other cultures and ideas.


Like what exactly? Do we have to pray like muslim to know that dates and figs and olives come from Tunisia? You want to expose kids to culture then have them dress up in the exotic traditional dress of various nations, like the darling Burmese children in the King and I. You don't have to make them declare Allah is god to give them cultural experience.
I had lots of cultural exposure as a young girl. My dad bought the record of The King and I and I listened to it every day for weeks. My parents brought us Chinese outfits with slippers.
It just doesn't have to be some indoctrination with an underlying agenda.


edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
None of what I quoted was from Glenn Beck but from other sources. So you can say it's like I quoted from him all you want, but not true.
In fact the last thing I just quoted is from this guy

James H. Rust is a retired professor of nuclear engineering
blog.heartland.org...

Naturally, you are more educated than he is.



Sorry for the Beck jab.

But remember, Nuclear Engineering doesn't mean you are educated on other topics, which goes back to the point that even if your parents are nuclear engineers, they aren't necessarily knowledgeable on history, culture, etc.

Someone can have a phd in microbiology and know nothing about history. Hence a person with a bachelors in history would be better educated on that topic.

Most important, a person can have a phd in some random topic but that doesn't mean they know more than a professional teacher about education. Different subject matter.

And, someone can be a nuclear engineer and while thereby knowing physics and mathematics, not be any kind of expert on the environment nor climatology. That doesn't mean they shouldn't question.

But most of the questions about anthropogenic climate change have been answered by those actual experts. And, there is a majority that support it, an almost complete consensus.

Remember, people that are not experts in a field do not count as detractors from consensus. I do not count as a detractor if I blog about doctors and medical researchers being wrong. I would not be a peer-reviewed nor credible source. You should know that if you are educated on science. This dude's blog does not qualify, nor does his nuclear science degree.

I pulled the selfish card because honestly, with all due respect, the evidence is overwhelming for massive human impact on the environment and need for action. At some point, if there is a wall of evidence across countless disciplines, there does have to be some psychological variable that is stopping people from listening. And usually, that is ignorance, selfishness, and so on. Because if it is true the science is true, then the responsible thing to do is act and support action. If it is true, then it isn't acceptable for people to keep balking.

I apologize if I spoke disrespectfully.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

And you know more about Climate Science than the Nuclear Engineer, and therefore more qualified to teach it?

mmhmmm




I pulled the selfish card because honestly, with all due respect, the evidence is overwhelming for massive human impact on the environment and need for action.


No, that is a political ideology and an unsubstantiated opinion that has no place in grade K-12

The whole "you are too selfish to care about the world" is just a tired old bit of rhetoric imposed on us by the nanny stater socialists who use shame and ridicule to try to make everyone believe how incredibly altruistic they are in forcing us into global financial transaction fees to pay for all their programs.
But you know what, even the Common Core math is completely nuts, and is just confusing kids, and even parents, engineers who cannot make any sense of it. Because it's all bs.
edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Well, first are you talking public or private schools? As both of these entities teach entirely different. Second in a utopian world your thesis would work. However in order to bring your thesis to fruition would take gutting out all religions. As, once you incorporate religion back into the mix, you now are back on the ground floor persay. I see were your coming from and partially agree, but long as the two percent pull their ideas exclusively out of texas for all acedemic text books and the masses know,it will be back to good ole protectionism.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14




Following up on that, MOST people will never have the opportunity to travel the majority of the world.



That is STILL NOT reason enough to have grade school children bowing down on green prayer rugs and declaring there is no god but Allah! That is not teaching culture, that is indoctrination at best. It's not even teaching theory. It's teaching them to pray to the god of Islam, and if you cannot see that, I think you are in the wrong profession.
Did you see the picture of the kids kneeling down in prayer with their heads on the ground? I bet you didn't even bother to look at my link.
Apparently, the Pledge of Allegiance is out and kneeling on green rugs declaring Allah is god is in.
Again, it must never have been about separating state and religion as professed by those who hate Christianity, but it was always about eliminating the Christian religion and inserting any number of other beliefs which the state happens to like at any given time, which is what makes the whole thing nothing but totalitarian indoctrination.
John Dewey was just that, an authoritarian who believe the State is supreme and children just cogs in the machine.


I think you are intentionally derailing. Surely its role-play?



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: funkadeliaaaa

You must be steeped in "values clarification".

You can role play without declaring Allah is god. Can you not? I can prance around and dance like the Children of Siam(yes I think I did get that one wrong... it was Siam) and still get the cultural experience no?

Derailing? Really? I am talking about current curriculum in the Common Core Standards being implemented in public schools. I know a lot more about it than I've said, so if you want to go down this road, I'm game.
Oh wait, did you want me to admit that parents are too stupid and only educators can be entrusted to the proper education of our little ones? Oh wait, I just addressed that as the nanny state.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I think we want you to be less inflammatory, more respectful, and to focus on the point not derail. You brought in a pretty ridiculous story about Muslims using a very very biased source.

Let's start with you finding a credible source for this Muslim indoctrination thing.

Also how do you know more than you've said. Are you a teacher? A parent? Do you work for your local board of ed. What qualifications or experiences do you bring to the table?



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Um, yes, it is possible for me to know more about climate science than a nuclear engineer. I have a masters degree in science education. I also have other degrees related to energy and environmental issues.

Your point doesn't work. A common misconception by lay people is that someone that is any kind of scientist or engineer is thus educated on all science and qualified to critique all science. They are not, fact. They are only experts or educated on one or two major areas.

For example, I did psychology research in a lab for several years, beyond studying it for four years formally. I know more about psychology than some dude with a microbiology phd. Unless of course they have ALSO dedicated a bunch of time formally to studying it.

Arm-chair philosophers, no matter how intelligent, do not count as equals to actual experts in a given field.

And again, beyond climate change the evidence is ABSOLUTELY incontrovertible we are dangerously impacting our delicate biosphere and environment. Because the evidence is so vast across virtually all scientific fields, then you tell me why people like you seem to not care or refuse to see the need for responsibility. ONce someone points you towards the evidence, then ignorance stops being an excuse unless IQ is an issue. If it is not, then the only possibility in the face of overwhelming evidence is either faulty ethics and responsibility, complete apathy about the future of the world, or selfishness.


originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

And you know more about Climate Science than the Nuclear Engineer, and therefore more qualified to teach it?

mmhmmm




I pulled the selfish card because honestly, with all due respect, the evidence is overwhelming for massive human impact on the environment and need for action.


No, that is a political ideology and an unsubstantiated opinion that has no place in grade K-12

The whole "you are too selfish to care about the world" is just a tired old bit of rhetoric imposed on us by the nanny stater socialists who use shame and ridicule to try to make everyone believe how incredibly altruistic they are in forcing us into global financial transaction fees to pay for all their programs.
But you know what, even the Common Core math is completely nuts, and is just confusing kids, and even parents, engineers who cannot make any sense of it. Because it's all bs.

edit on 3-11-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: tavi45

Oh excuse me? Now you are going to try to insult me by suggesting I cannot have any knowledge without being a professional educator?
A parent yes, and also I have had Montessori teacher training. In fact, I met Dr. Elisabeth Caspari, who worked directly under the tutelage of Dr. Maria Montessori, who revolutionized pre-school pedagogy. There are Montessori schools all over the world. Do you think I really require that queztl guy's opinion?

www.montessori.edu...

www.montessori-pams.org...

Now do you really want to go down this road of "who do you think you are to challenge the status quo establishment education around here"?
You mean I have to be certified by the board of education to know that this Common Core stuff is cra&?
Oh yah and as a parent.... parochial schools, private, and homeschool, thank you very much.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

I'd just appreciate you sharing your qualifications rather than just declaring yourself an expert.

So you have no experience with public schools at all.

Also Montessori is for preschoolers and especially focused on those with learning disabilities such as autism.

www.dcurbanmom.com...

According to this insider it's not all its cracked up to be anyways. It definitely has no place in a discussion like this.

We aren't talking about preschool.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: qQuoting Quetzalcoatl14




And another problem of home schooling is that students may not get enough diversity of opinion, viewpoints, and teachers in a structured academic environment, even if their parents are brilliant. Because all people are biased, so if a goal is to get a wide variety of views in order to inform your own, it helps not to have only a few teachers.




But remember, Nuclear Engineering doesn't mean you are educated on other topics, which goes back to the point that even if your parents are nuclear engineers, they aren't necessarily knowledgeable on history, culture, etc. Someone can have a phd in microbiology and know nothing about history. Hence a person with a bachelors in history would be better educated on that topic. Most important, a person can have a phd in some random topic but that doesn't mean they know more than a professional teacher about education. Different subject matter.


Thank you for using "may not" as opposed to " do not". When we home schooled teens in advanced subjects we set up a coop to make sure our children were being taught by experts in that field. English was taught by a former English professor. Statistics was taught by a senior Statistics Analyst, biology was taught by a vet, doctor, and a nurse, Chemistry by a Chemical Engineer, etc. Foreign Language started with Latin and within four years most students were comfortable with the five Latin based languages. By pooling resources field trips were more frequent than we experienced in public school. Worldview was taught through reading and volunteering at the local University once a week serving free meals to a Foreign Exchange Students. Each week our children would read books from the countries of the students they were serving and learn to cook one of their countries traditional meals. The parents would sit back and not interfere as the two groups enjoyed meeting others in a more intimate setting. Many of the Foreign students were of different faiths/beliefs Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Atheist, etc.

My family are conservative Christians, yet unlike the description in this thread we do not fear those who have chosen something different. I'm sorry the squeaky wheels are always noticed. It creates ill conceived perceptions concerning the whole.

Homeschooling is far more sophisticated than many believe. It benefitted my child in ways private or public school wasn't able to at that time in their life. I deeply believe whatever system a parent chooses to educate their children can only be successful if the parent is fully engaged.

Edited to add: Isn't it time to take off the white hats and black hats, and figure out how we are going to raise a new civil generation through establishing common ground?
edit on 3-11-2014 by 2gd2btru because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: 2gd2btru

Great post. Very constructive. Most importantly you realize what many parents do not, "children can only be successful if the parent is fully engaged."

Sounds like your family are the model of Christians people should look up to.

Completely unrelated and only for my own curiosity (I will not retract my previous statement regardless of your answer, everyone is entitled to their views), what is your stance on homosexuality?
edit on 3-11-2014 by tavi45 because: added an extra paragraph



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


I have a masters degree in science education. I also have other degrees related to energy and environmental issues.



Ok I respect that.




A common misconception by lay people is that someone that is any kind of scientist or engineer is thus educated on all science and qualified to critique all science. They are not, fact. They are only experts or educated on one or two major areas.
For example, I did psychology research in a lab for several years, beyond studying it for four years formally. I know more about psychology than some dude with a microbiology phd.



ok that's great. So now you are telling me that I have to accept your opinion because you have some background in psychology? I'm inclined to think that just makes you prime for all that behavior modification which is masquerading as real education.
So a nuclear engineer does not know about energy? ok I guess you really meant that a nuclear engineer cannot understand empirical scientific methods and how they should be taught in schools? And instead we should just rely on some computer models programmed to get the desired result the social engineers...I mean professional educators who believe in Anthropological Global Warming theory want to show? I tell you the hubris of education professionals is just so dazzling to observe.
ok well I'm done arguing with someone who believes that Establishment education steeped in values clarification, behavior modification, and ideological indoctrination masquerading as education makes them superior to the common sense of caring parents.
edit on 3-11-2014 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


I have a masters degree in science education. I also have other degrees related to energy and environmental issues.



Ok I respect that.




A common misconception by lay people is that someone that is any kind of scientist or engineer is thus educated on all science and qualified to critique all science. They are not, fact. They are only experts or educated on one or two major areas.
For example, I did psychology research in a lab for several years, beyond studying it for four years formally. I know more about psychology than some dude with a microbiology phd.



ok that's great. So now you are telling me that I have to accept your opinion because you have some background in psychology? I'm inclined to think that just makes you prime for all that behavior modification which is masquerading as real education.
So a nuclear engineer does not know about energy? ok I guess you really meant that a nuclear engineer cannot understand empirical scientific methods and how they should be taught in schools? And instead we should just rely on some computer models programmed to get the desired result the social engineers...I mean professional educators who believe in Anthropological Global Warming theory want to show? I tell you the hubris of education professionals is just so dazzling to observe.
ok well I'm done arguing with someone who believes that Establishment education steeped in values clarification, behavior modification, and ideological indoctrination masquerading as education makes them superior to the common sense of caring parents.


That point about psychology was just another parallel to the point about expertise. People are really only qualified on that which they have studied formally or worked in for a long time.

Hubris is your claiming that the vast majority of actual experts on climatology saying climate change is real are lying, wrong, or conspiratorial. That, is arrogance. And, it is dangerous to us taking effective action.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: tavi45

I have loved ones who are gay. I love them very much. When asked, I have talked with them about marriage, and what marriage means to me. For me it is a covenant that represents Christ and the Church. I do not believe their relationships are "icky" as some Christians do. Marriage within the church I belong to has a specific spiritual reference and meaning. To over simplify, it is to represent Christ's love for the Church (the Bride), and Her faithfulness to Him (the Groom). If another church chooses to celebrate a union between a man and a man or woman and a woman it is none of my business as that is their heart felt conviction. I deeply believe a person should follow their convictions. My loved ones understand I have personal convictions concerning marriage, yet would never shove my conviction down their throats. They do not need to live my convictions to be appreciated. We may differ on whether or not marriage is a Spiritual Covenant vs a Spiritual Union but have chosen to not allow our differences to interfere with our relationship. They also know I see them as equally made in the image of God and equally valuable. I am thankful they are in my life. Most importantly I do not want to add to the hurt and rejection they face due to their sexuality.


edit on 3-11-2014 by 2gd2btru because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Perhaps youre right a whole week does seeem a bit OTT. I dont see why a trip to a local Mosque would not suffice.

I still think youre derailing a little bit by focusing so much on the clash of ideologies in particular subjects presented by the curriculum instead of the issues indoctrination and programming as a whole that these institutions are capable of producing inflicting on us as a society.



new topics




 
20
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join