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.

 

Which is preferable: Secular Education or Theocracy?

page: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



That's not exactly an unbaised source, d. It's a rightwing outlet. You know that.

And private foundations have put in millions.

That isn't the point. The Feds do have their fingers in this, unlike the claims that you cited on the Common Core website.




posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Did you miss the middle four pages of the thread?

No, I didn't.



You are missing the larger point - children from stressful situations are not as able to learn. We have to address the ROOT of the problem - not set up "band-aid schools". And how do you expect the kids to get to these "schools" if they don't exist in dangerous ghettos, there is no family car, and the bus lines don't go there?

Isn't it better to have all public schools offering a quality curriculum? No one is saying to abolish private schools. Nor are they refusing to allow home-schooling.

We have to remember that not all parents pay attention to this stuff - in fact many are so busy working 2 jobs and struggling to keep food on the table under a roof, that they don't pay any attention at ALL to what their kids are doing. Not all parents are educated and have the luxury of "choosing" a school.

And again: What is wrong with English and Math standards?

edit on 1/29/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



That isn't the point.

Yes, it IS the point:
you are using a propaganda disinformation flaming conservative website that is patently advertising to FIGHT COMMON CORE.

I want to know why. What is wrong with it? (Your video was not indication enough - that was not a "common core" standard being used. It was a 'style of teaching' that a few places are trying out. Now - would you rather have those kids learning Maths and English? Or "yes-ma'aming" the teacher like drones? What's to stop private schools from implementing that Whole Brain trash? Deregulation is bad when it comes to the future of our kids.)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


And how do you expect the kids to get to these "schools" if they don't exist in dangerous ghettos, there is no family car, and the bus lines don't go there?

Here's a map of the Twin Cities… see all those red dots? Not just the flagged ones, the little red dots, too. Those are all Catholic Schools, and that's just the ones that are still open, it doesn't count the ones that have been shuttered and could be re-opened if there was a demand for them.


Trust me, if there was a free and open market for education in the United States, there would be schools put up where there was demand for them.


And again: What is wrong with English and Math standards?

If that's all it was, nothing. But, as I and others have shown, there is more to the current and proposed state of public education in the US than setting English and Math standards, which we already have.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Which is preferable: Secular Education or Theocracy?

Both should be available for people to choose from. The secular schools that are provided by a secular government ... and the 'church schools' should be available for those who wish to go that route. They should be separate. The government shouldn't pay for religion in public schools and shouldn't pay to support 'church schools'. (however, I believe in school vouchers so people can choose where they send their kids - separate issue)

In many cities in the USA, the secular public schools aren't safe to go to. There is no way kids can learn in them when there is so much distraction from the violence and drugs and sex .... etc etc. We sent our daughter to a Catholic school. It was safer. It was calmer. It was a better learning environment. All the classes were the same as in the secular school ... and the Catholic school was actually further along then the secular public school. There was one religion class a day. It wasn't anything outrageous. Things taught were anything from 'the golden rule' to 'what all the different religions believe' etc etc.

My daughters final paper her senior year ... the question in philosophy of religion class was 'does religion unify or divide people'. She said religion divides people. She got an 'A' on her paper.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



as I and others have shown, there is more to the current and proposed state of public education in the US than setting English and Math standards, which we already have.

Then I respectfully request that you give me an actual neutral SOURCE that proves all this shadowy drone-building, nefarious, evil stuff you suspect. Your video was not a demonstratin of Common Core.

I have shown the Common Core site itself. I have not seen evidence of it being some Nazi-Youth type thing.

All those Catholic schools would not be shut down. I want to know what is truly behind this rabid hatred for Common Core.
It is NOT apparent in the standards explained on their website, and your source was clearly an anti-Progressive one.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



In many cities in the USA, the secular public schools aren't safe to go to. There is no way kids can learn in them when there is so much distraction from the violence and drugs and sex .... etc etc.

That's what I've pointed out over and over again.

The answer is to fix the distractions/problems that lie OUTSIDE of school's power - poverty, violence, crime, etc.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



you are using a propaganda disinformation flaming conservative website that is patently advertising to FIGHT COMMON CORE.

Wait a second.

You used a quote from a site that is promoting Common Core to "prove" that the Federal government isn't involved with Common Core, but I can't use a quote from a site that is not promoting Common Core to refute it?

But, regardless, here is the website of one of the organizations cited in that article: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. As you can see they are all about promoting Common Core. And, if you go look at their FAQ, you'll see this:


How is PARCC funded?

 PARCC is funded through a $186 million grant through the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top assessment program to support the development and design of the next-generation assessment system. (Source)

Those are the facts, WT, and not from a "right wing nut" site. Contrary to what your pro-Common Core organization claims, the Feds are using tax payer dollars to promote their program.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Im not sure about why those phrase repeated again and again, somehow not religious means sex, drugs and crime? lol

Probably from this old cliche "i use to be a womanizer, drug user and a thief, then i found jebus, and i turned away from my bad behaviors" lol

Every time i see those type of sentences i facepalm!


Its similar to "i use to be stupid, gullible little sheep who parroted what my preacher said" then i found its more to the world than religious brainwashing"

Obviously, for the above sentences to make sense, everyone need to be in status A "find something" then status B, which is not the case and its simple generalization.
edit on 1/29/2014 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   

wildtimes
The answer is to fix the distractions/problems that lie OUTSIDE of school's power - poverty, violence, crime, etc.

What causes poverty, violence, crime, etc?
Did a conservative political situation?? Did a progressive political situation? Both? Neither?

Did the progressive attitude towards unmarried sex and drugs cause the situation? Yes.
Did the conservative attitude towards immobile social layering cause the situation? That can be argued for.
Did the progressive attitude towards entitlement society cause the situation? It probably contributed.
Did the conservative attitude towards 'reward the rich with more money' exasperate the situation? Yes.
DId the progressive attitude towards 'open wide the borders for poor illegals' hurt? Well, it didn't help.

Did the conservative attitude towards in-your-face evangelizing cause people to throw the baby out with the bath water? Did it cause people to reject that which is good in the conservative camp just to be able to put distance between themselves and the 'thumpers'?? You bet.

Do the progressives ignore the fact that the sexual revolution has brought a myriad of problems upon America? Economic and social problems? Seems to be that they do.

Is it just a basic natural flow that every human society will crash and burn ... and that's what we are witnessing? Could be.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



You used a quote from a site that is promoting Common Core

I used the actual Common Core official home website. I posted it for all to access.

In the last few minutes I've been googling my fingers numb looking for where this "fight" originated. The myths about Common Core being a federal take-over of schools are debunked. You're falling for conservative disinformation. And you probably think I'm falling for liberal hype.

What I'm trying to establish are the actual FACTS - and having just read several articles bashing CC, I then went to some of the liberal sites that are promoting it.

This is another political fracas, of people trying to stir things up and making mountains out of molehills.
Did you join the Tea Party? They are the main driver behind "fighting" it. They also shut down the government, and were proud of it.

MY interest is the kids. I don't give a crap about "party affiliation" - I care what the kids in this nation have to look forward to - and it just seems like right-wing shrieks of "doom!" that are bashing it. It isn't even a "curriculum!" It's a "standard" that states can choose to adopt that was developed by educators and governors with an eye toward global competitiveness for our kids.

Governors can tweak it, take it or leave it. It's meant to up the country's ability to compete in the beloved "free market" that you all adore so much.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



You're falling for conservative disinformation.

I'm not falling for anything.

What I've said, consistently, is that government has had control of education long enough to demonstrate that they are terrible at implementing it, that parochial schools consistently outperform public schools, and that the solution is to provide choice to all parents, not just the wealthy ones, to allow them to send their kids to the school of their choosing.

The answer is not more mandates, more bureaucracy, more theories like "Whole Brain Teaching", and less choice. It's as simple as that.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



the Feds are using tax payer dollars to promote their program.

You know how grants work, right?

People apply for them. They have to write up a proposal, and it is reviewed. The Feds have always used tax dollars to provide public education! These standards aim to improve outcomes - and you have a problem with that, and I don't know why.

Do away with public education? That's preposterous. Then millions of kids wouldn't be in school at all, if it was a 'discretionary' expense and based only on "demand."

Now, I can understand not wanting to pay taxes for education if one is childless - but it's a bit short-sighted. I have to live in this neighborhood - I'd rather that the kids are educated than having them wandering around doing nothing all day. Even though my kids are out and grown - I'm still paying taxes so that my NEIGHBORHOOD remains relatively educated and competitive.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



The answer is not more mandates, more bureaucracy, more theories like "Whole Brain Teaching", and less choice. It's as simple as that.

It's not a mandate! And it's not about "less choice"! Good grief, adj, it's a suggestion, that states can take or leave with no sanctions for or against - and the government has given grants to promote what can be seen as an improved educational standard.

The govt also gives grants for mass transit lines. My city received one - based on the proposal sent in.
Is that federal demonic totalitarian control also?


sigh



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


You guys calling for a 'vouchers only' system seem to forget that it would take a tremendous amount of "bureaucracy" to make sure those 'vouchers' are actually used for their intended purpose. You complain about fraud and abuse of government handouts - and that only exacerbates the "haves v have-nots" issue.

You think that every household has their act together so well that parents will all CARE what school their kid goes to? People who raise successful kids are involved with their local schools - people who are struggling to survive and avoid being shot don't have that luxury. You're talking about using a system that could EASILY be abused.

"Here, Mick, take my kid's vouchers and sell them to some snooty family over in luxury-ville. I just need some crack. And some more ammo. I don't want my kids in school anyway - I need them to peddle weed and clean up the house and raise each other without supervision. I can't read, and my kids don't need to know how to read, either!"

C'mon. Can't we find a middle ground here? No one is talking about a federal "take-over" of every school! Nor threatening to criminalize private schools or home-schooling!



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Yeah, personally, I would rather see public schools improve. In most topic I am accused of being a rightwing nutjob, but when it comes to education, I lean more left. I want everyone to get quality education, not just people who can afford it. And helping more people afford to pull out of the public system, will only worsen the whole situation in my mind. I am pretty sure beuracracy is a big reason that public schools seem to be so underfunded, adding more isn't going to help. We need to get in there and stop people from embezzling and syphoning from the system for one thing. That would be a big step towards improvement, instead of cutting art and music, cut the damn parasites off.

edit on Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:43:09 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 



That would be a big step towards improvement, instead of cutting art and music, cut the damn parasites off.

I totally agree. In 1989, right after my daughter was born, there was a 'referendum' in the county of my birth that dealt with cutting music and art from curricula. I wrote a letter to the Reps of that county and declared that Music and Art are important for education.

It bothers me a great deal that the "classical" stuff is no longer taught.

Even 4-year universities don't require the "two years of Liberal Arts & Humanities" before declaring a major. I think that is a mistake.

Now, the 4-yr universities are more like high-priced technical schools. That is not preparation for global interaction - it is, as has been said many times, 'dumbing down' our youths!

People need to be aware of 'world history', "western civ", arts, music, humanities....



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



The Feds have always used tax dollars to provide public education! These standards aim to improve outcomes - and you have a problem with that, and I don't know why.

I don't. The only reason that I brought up the Federal government in this context was you posting something from a pro-Common Core website that claimed that the Feds had nothing to do with Common Core, and I showed you proof that was not true, because spending $186,000,000 on promotion of Common Core can certainly be seen as Federal involvement.


Do away with public education? That's preposterous. Then millions of kids wouldn't be in school at all, if it was a 'discretionary' expense and based only on "demand."

Kindly show where I ever suggested doing away with public education. As I said, both I and my daughter were educated in the public schools, and if she winds up living in the same community that I do, I would recommend that her kids go to public school, because it's one of the best in the country.

What I have consistently said is that competition in education for all people, not just the wealthy, would result in better schools, rather than this "re-invention of teaching" merry-go-round that's been happening since you and I were kids. Remember "New Math"?


The govt also gives grants for mass transit lines. My city received one - based on the proposal sent in.
Is that federal demonic totalitarian control also?

No, but if your local mass transit was unable to bring passengers to their destinations, frittered money away on stagecoaches and trolley cars instead of buses and light rail, and had shown over many decades that they were unable to improve, and unlikely to ever improve, I would question the sanity of continuing to give them money.


You guys calling for a 'vouchers only' system seem to forget that it would take a tremendous amount of "bureaucracy" to make sure those 'vouchers' are actually used for their intended purpose.

Now you're just being silly. If everyone has a voucher to send their kids to school, who's going buy one? And it's not like everyone would be handed a little card that said "Gift Certificate - One Year's Tuition", accredited schools would just be reimbursed for the tuition of qualified students. So the only "oversight" you're likely to need are people to accredit the schools (which they already do) and some system to ensure that students who are claimed by the school to be going there actually do (a simple audit.)


edit on 29-1-2014 by adjensen because: oopsies



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



you posting something from a pro-Common Core website that claimed that the Feds had nothing to do with Common Core,

Okay. Deep breath. I posted something from THE Common Core website, which states that Feds had nothing to do with "building the standards". The Feds did not design it. They are now giving grants to states that have 'accepted it' and shown reason to be worthy of funding to implement it.

They DID NOT 'design it.' They didn't write it, or invent it, or anything like that. It isn't equivalent to "Obamacare" - (which, I noticed, was another headline on your chosen 'source' site) - which WAS dreamed up by Obama & Co....

And your inflammatory video had nothing at all to do with Common Core.

The private sector is every bit as invested in it as the govt. It's not a federally invented, bureaucracy-driven set of standards, and it's not intended to produce drones.

You know I love ya back, adj, but....but.....

are you really not getting my point?



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



If everyone has a voucher to send their kids to school, who's going buy one? And it's not like everyone would be handed a little card that said "Gift Certificate - One Year's Tuition", accredited schools would just be reimbursed for the tuition of qualified students.

What are "qualified" students?

It sounds to me like you're saying (and I may be wrong, because I haven't looked into the 'voucher system' all that much - but we do have 'Charter Schools' in my city - the same district that failed the federal standards and lost accreditation) that everyone in the whole country gets the same "allowance" and then chooses the school. Is that correct?

Okay, fine. If so, we''re on a level playing field. I understand that. We still have the problem of parents not caring where (or whether) their kid attends school.

How are you going to follow up on people who don't use those vouchers, and instead neglect their kids' schooling altogether?

So, then - is your problem the idea that the 'CC standards' are inept and lame, as public school has seemed to become?

With a voucher system, will every school have equally competent, trained teachers? Or is it more like a crapshoot?




top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join