I think Sharon is exaggerating a bit. I was outraged at how "packed" our Text books were with "other cultures".
For instance, WW2 consisted of 25 pages about, which was about 14 pages of Blacks and Native Americans in the War. Outrageous.
As you said it differs from locale to locale, but this was not our locale's interests, Nevada has a problem of influx of retarded Californians...
I have no problem of teaching "other cultures" but it needs to be done properly, America in many places is being "phased" out and replaced with
something else. You wouldn't know a white person fought in WW2 if it weren't for your grandparents where I am from.
I'm also probably somewhat younger than sharon so she's remembering early 80s education late 70s, and I'm not. The change in Education standards
in localities would have occured when the "hippy" generation finally came of age. Instead of being balanced (teaching as it is) they just got rid
of a lot of pro-American stuff and stuffed pro-Everyone else stuff in its place.
Our Government Book spent more time trying to "convince" the reader that the Iroqois had anything to do with the formation of our Constitution, than
it did to try and explain how our Constitution was really formulated.
Then our Government teacher interrupted and said, "I can't really be saying this but the reason that is is our text books are selected based on how
many minorities are mentioned and no other criteria. That Iroqois stuff is wrong." That stuck with me lol. So I mean your views are slanted by
whatever experiences Sharon had
I had the complete opposite experience.
Education should be chosen locally, after all locals know how to deal with local problems the best. And primary and secondary education is not
training you to be a man of the world, but a person of the community you are in.
Higher education is good for that....you need a base of local understanding, and national understanding before you can go learning about other nations
This is my views of course because I'm an "Anti-Federalist" who believes the strongest thing about America was it was a Union of States not that it
was governed by Washington D.C.
And I very much want that power of the States to be real, and not "granted".
As for transfers to other schools, America isn't always like that
, there is a big scuff about vouchers.
Democrats claim that all the money will be concentrated making the bad schools even more poor, they think this because they think poverty has
something to do with education quality. Obviously they've never been to the Mid-West.
Republicans wish to see it allowed as it allows people to choose the BEST school for their children.
The issue is "federal funding" vouchers, do the parents have to pay to switch to another School, or will the Federal government pay for it? After
all it is crossing jurisdictions and so forth.
But that's an interesting point you made, guess you Canadians aren't taught enough about America
... it's a land where in many places you can
not just waltz into another school that's better
I believe being able to choose your school would create a competition that would force schools to better themselves, in fact it would be a good way
without enforced testing and such, to ensure that teachers are doing their jobs. As if they are not competitive (teaching well) they will lose
students and their school will lose funding, so the schools will only hire teachers that will bring in the most money so to speak. And that is
teachers that will actually teach and not be lazy fat arses.