Two Anti-Choice Parties

[Chris]

What we need is an alternative to the Donkephant.

Two Anti-Choice Parties (http://capitalismmagazine.com/2014/09/two-anti-choice-parties/)


Democrats often call themselves “pro-choice.” Republicans defend “freedom.” Unfortunately, neither party really believes in letting individuals do what we want.

When Democrats say they are “pro-choice,” they are talking about abortion. Some act as if a right to legal abortion is the most important freedom in America.

But Democrats aren’t very enthusiastic about other kinds of choice. They don’t want you to have the right to choose your kids’ school, work without joining a union, buy a gun, pay people whatever you contract to pay them if they choose to work for you, buy things you want to buy without regulations constantly interfering and so on.

...Democrats constantly increase limits on individual choice. President Obama won’t let people work in unpaid internships, and health officials in liberal cities ban trans fats from restaurants.

I like the way Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) summarized liberals’ love of crushing choice: “It’s light bulbs. It’s toilets. It’s cars. You name it. Your freedom of choice is gone. For a party that says they are the pro-choice party, this is the most anti-choice administration we’ve seen in a lifetime.”

Republicans have their own list of ways in which they want to control us. Many are not just anti-abortion (as is Sen. Paul); they’re also anti-gay marriage, anti-drugs, anti-gambling and, in a few cases, anti-free speech.

...I wonder just how many things social conservatives would outlaw if they thought the public would accept the bans. Perkins doesn’t approve of gambling, gay marriage, plural marriage, sex work or making a political statement by burning a flag.

And some of those things harm people. But we should use law to punish those who harm others, not to micromanage their lives.

Meanwhile, liberals keep adding new things to their own list of items to control: wages, hate speech, high-interest loans, plastic shopping bags, large cars, health care, e-cigarettes, Uber, AirBnB and more.

One choice America needs urgently is an alternative to politicians who constantly want to ban more things.

[Gunny]

In a perfect world, The ultra-right that alienate voters by trying to force their morals on others, and the ultra-left "it's my body" crowd that attracts people who wish to duck the consequences of their poor decisions wouldn't exist. But then, that would leave two special interest groups that reap millions looking for real jobs, wouldn't it?

[Chris]

You mean those ultra-wingers would have to resort to doing something productive with their own lives rather than trying to control ours?

[Gunny]

You mean those ultra-wingers would have to resort to doing something productive with their own lives rather than trying to control ours?

Pretty much. "Mind your own business" comes to mine.

If my rights and/or yours infringe upon each other's, THEN we need to compromise. Not legislate, compromise. If they don't? I don't need ANYONE telling me how to live.

[Chris]

Pretty much. "Mind your own business" comes to mine.

If my rights and/or yours infringe upon each other's, THEN we need to compromise. Not legislate, compromise. If they don't? I don't need ANYONE telling me how to live.

Agree. Compromise, or find a third party both parties agree on to arbitrate.

[Mac-7]

You mean those ultra-wingers would have to resort to doing something productive with their own lives rather than trying to control ours?

I guess you mean gay marriage to mind warping drugs.


Many Americans do have problems with those and other libertine habits.

[Chris]

I guess you mean gay marriage to mind warping drugs.


Many Americans do have problems with those and other libertine habits.



What I mean is keeping your political nose out of other people's business.

[Mac-7]

What I mean is keeping your political nose out of other people's business.

Thats pretty non specific.

it could mean practically anything from one malcontent to another.

[Chris]

Thats pretty non specific.

it could mean practically anything from one malcontent to another.

It was stated in the specific context of your post.

[donttread]

What we need is an alternative to the Donkephant.

Two Anti-Choice Parties (http://capitalismmagazine.com/2014/09/two-anti-choice-parties/)


The amazing thing is how they manipulate the voters into never holding them collectively accountable

[Chris]

The amazing thing is how they manipulate the voters into never holding them collectively accountable

It's the other party's fault when things go wrong, my party's doing when things go right.

And even that can get extreme to where they're always wrong and we're always right. Obama's doing the same thing in the ME Bush did. To Reps Bush was right and Obama wrong, to Dems Bush was wrong and Obama right.

It's bewildering. :shocked:

[donttread]

It's the other party's fault when things go wrong, my party's doing when things go right.

And even that can get extreme to where they're always wrong and we're always right. Obama's doing the same thing in the ME Bush did. To Reps Bush was right and Obama wrong, to Dems Bush was wrong and Obama right.

It's bewildering. :shocked:


He's doing the exact same stuff and being supported by the same people who hated Bush for the same actions? Some kind of brainwashing at play

[Gunny]

It's the other party's fault when things go wrong, my party's doing when things go right.

And even that can get extreme to where they're always wrong and we're always right. Obama's doing the same thing in the ME Bush did. To Reps Bush was right and Obama wrong, to Dems Bush was wrong and Obama right.

It's bewildering. :shocked:

It's only bewildering insofar as the mass willful ignorance, blind obedience and/or stupidity that's displayed. And you should have known posting a thread like this some partisan nit-picker was going to come along with a legislative agenda. ;)

[Gunny]

He's doing the exact same stuff and being supported by the same people who hated Bush for the same actions? Some kind of brainwashing at play

Yeah, it's called as a society, most people are too lazy to think for themselves. They'd rather be told what to think.

[Ethereal]

I guess you mean gay marriage to mind warping drugs.


Many Americans do have problems with those and other libertine habits.

Unless it's alcohol, then "many Americans" couldn't care less.

[Chris]

Not sure it's laziness or plain simple human nature. We can know and do only so much within our immediate surroundings, community, beyond which is too complex, knowledge to distributed, action too dynamic.

[Gunny]

Not sure it's laziness or plain simple human nature. We can know and do only so much within our immediate surroundings, community, beyond which is too complex, knowledge to distributed, action too dynamic.

True, but the dynamic of our two-party system is hardly rocket science. As a government, it accomplishes little to nothing in the best interest of the people, and each party panders for votes with promises they can't keep. THAT works because the people listening to the promises don't bother to consider that unless it's a universally accepted promise across the board, it isn't going to happen.

[Chris]

True, but the dynamic of our two-party system is hardly rocket science. As a government, it accomplishes little to nothing in the best interest of the people, and each party panders for votes with promises they can't keep. THAT works because the people listening to the promises don't bother to consider that unless it's a universally accepted promise across the board, it isn't going to happen.

It's a failure, I agree.

A piece of Washington's farewell address:


The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

[Gunny]

As relevant today as it was then.

[donttread]

Yeah, it's called as a society, most people are too lazy to think for themselves. They'd rather be told what to think.


Don't you think the increased federalization of education discourages the thought of teaching kids to think for themselves?

[Chris]

We might could have a discussion of the recent common core agenda: Common Core Ads Claim Standards Will Equalize All Children (http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/26/common-core-ads-claim-standards-will-equ). It's not exactly about kids thinking for themselves.

[Gunny]

Don't you think the increased federalization of education discourages the thought of teaching kids to think for themselves?

Why would the government that tells people what to think want to educate them to think for themselves? Counterproductive to their own game. And the media plays along, bombarding us with nothing but partisan, GOP and/or Democratic rhetoric.

Trivia moment: Something I learned back in the day in journalism ... Did you know if you had a Rand-McNally globe during the 50's-60's that the USSR was misrepresented as being much smaller than it was and the US misrepresented as being much larger?

[Gunny]

We might could have a discussion of the recent common core agenda: Common Core Ads Claim Standards Will Equalize All Children (http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/26/common-core-ads-claim-standards-will-equ). It's not exactly about kids thinking for themselves.

More socialism, geared to the lowest common denominator.

[Chris]

More socialism, geared to the lowest common denominator.

Yea but everyone's a winner!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgLGDu_5YiU

[Dr. Who]

We might could have a discussion of the recent common core agenda: Common Core Ads Claim Standards Will Equalize All Children (http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/26/common-core-ads-claim-standards-will-equ). It's not exactly about kids thinking for themselves.
From what I read at the Put Children 1st.org website, the aim is to increase the educational standard across the country such that it is competetive or exceeds world standards. This involves children reaching specific bars particularly in math and reading. The curricula and methodology are up to the schools, but they must support the standards. It appears that from state to state the standards have varied and many children graduate high school without having achieved the requisite proficiency in core subject matter, leaving them unable to pursue post secondary education without a great deal of remedial help. Common Core seeks more parental involvement in the education process and States adopting Common Core will require the administration of standardized tests in certain grades to benchmark how successful the schools are in meeting the milestones. It wouldn't seem to be a bad thing.

[PolWatch]

I would request that people go to the actual site & find out what Common Core actually says about standards. Don't rely on rumors or those with an agenda to decide if the program makes sense...check it out:
http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/

[Gunny]

From what I read at the Put Children 1st.org website, the aim is to increase the educational standard across the country such that it is competetive or exceeds world standards. This involves children reaching specific bars particularly in math and reading. The curricula and methodology are up to the schools, but they must support the standards. It appears that from state to state the standards have varied and many children graduate high school without having achieved the requisite proficiency in core subject matter, leaving them unable to pursue post secondary education without a great deal of remedial help. Common Core seeks more parental involvement in the education process and States adopting Common Core will require the administration of standardized tests in certain grades to benchmark how successful the schools are in meeting the milestones. It wouldn't seem to be a bad thing.


I would request that people go to the actual site & find out what Common Core actually says about standards. Don't rely on rumors or those with an agenda to decide if the program makes sense...check it out:
http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/

I'll help keep my grandkids in private school thanks. :)

[Bob]

You mean those ultra-wingers would have to resort to doing something productive with their own lives rather than trying to control ours?


Aren't we all having fun today, trashing both parties while pretending we know the only correct way.

I would love to take on so called gay marriage for one issue.

I did my best along with the majority of CA citizens to solve the problems the homosexuals protested over for years and years. They wanted rights of survivorship, to visit in hospitals and a litany of things too long to restate since they are commonly known.

We listened to their desires and took action. We passed a brand new law that gave them their union and called it a civil union. I suppose any couple could use it, but make no mistake, we did it for them to correct a problem they called our attention to.

We then defined marriage in our state constitution.

Those bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After we solved their problem for them, they took direct aim at marriage and took us to court to overturn that constitution definition. They overturned our constitution.

When they did that, It pissed me off.

So, do not expect me to feel sorry for homosexuals.

[Bob]

Agree. Compromise, or find a third party both parties agree on to arbitrate.

Third parties are empty promises.

It is like you expect to buy premium gasoline and drive in only to find the tank is dry.

[Gunny]

Aren't we all having fun today, trashing both parties while pretending we know the only correct way.

I would love to take on so called gay marriage for one issue.

I did my best along with the majority of CA citizens to solve the problems the homosexuals protested over for years and years. They wanted rights of survivorship, to visit in hospitals and a litany of things too long to restate since they are commonly known.

We listened to their desires and took action. We passed a brand new law that gave them their union and called it a civil union. I suppose any couple could use it, but make no mistake, we did it for them to correct a problem they called our attention to.

We then defined marriage in our state constitution.

Those bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After we solved their problem for them, they took direct aim at marriage and took us to court to overturn that constitution definition. They overturned our constitution.

When they did that, It pissed me off.

So, do not expect me to feel sorry for homosexuals.

Let me guess ... we have no Gay Marriage threads on the board .....

[Chris]

From what I read at the Put Children 1st.org website, the aim is to increase the educational standard across the country such that it is competetive or exceeds world standards. This involves children reaching specific bars particularly in math and reading. The curricula and methodology are up to the schools, but they must support the standards. It appears that from state to state the standards have varied and many children graduate high school without having achieved the requisite proficiency in core subject matter, leaving them unable to pursue post secondary education without a great deal of remedial help. Common Core seeks more parental involvement in the education process and States adopting Common Core will require the administration of standardized tests in certain grades to benchmark how successful the schools are in meeting the milestones. It wouldn't seem to be a bad thing.


Standards to me imply common denominator, mediocrity.

[Chris]

Aren't we all having fun today, trashing both parties while pretending we know the only correct way.

I would love to take on so called gay marriage for one issue.

I did my best along with the majority of CA citizens to solve the problems the homosexuals protested over for years and years. They wanted rights of survivorship, to visit in hospitals and a litany of things too long to restate since they are commonly known.

We listened to their desires and took action. We passed a brand new law that gave them their union and called it a civil union. I suppose any couple could use it, but make no mistake, we did it for them to correct a problem they called our attention to.

We then defined marriage in our state constitution.

Those bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After we solved their problem for them, they took direct aim at marriage and took us to court to overturn that constitution definition. They overturned our constitution.

When they did that, It pissed me off.

So, do not expect me to feel sorry for homosexuals.




Aren't we all having fun today, trashing both parties while pretending we know the only correct way.

Yes, we are, without knowing the only correct way.

Part of the diversion into Common Core is to make the point there is not one correct way.

[Bob]

I would request that people go to the actual site & find out what Common Core actually says about standards. Don't rely on rumors or those with an agenda to decide if the program makes sense...check it out:
http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/

I discussed this with a teacher who has taught high school for so long, she has grown children of her own.

The whining about NCLB applies equally to Common Core.

She says the tests are as if done by one of those service agencies in India. Recall how you are when you talk to an Indian in India over your problems?

She lamented both, programs. The idea behind both is good. Problem is, the tests are made up by people who are not involved in education. Who thinks it is difficult to figure out good test questions? Teachers or bureaucrats?

DC is your source of bureaucrats. She hates common core. Says it is not helping our children.

[PolWatch]

1/3 of Alabama high school graduates require remedial classes in math & reading before they can enter college. I see this as a problem. I suspect other states have a similar problem...'specially southern states. Standards can also mean raising the bar...

http://www.dothaneagle.com/news/article_af3d7448-ed9d-11e2-8903-0019bb30f31a.html

[Mister D]

The first ad features children of different races running a 100-meter dash and all finishing at the same time...

Oh dear...

[Bob]

You mean those ultra-wingers would have to resort to doing something productive with their own lives rather than trying to control ours?

Is this control going on in your state or your city? I don't know a thing about this control you guys are talking about other than the Feds are not the place for state and local matters.

We are 100 percent left wing here. i don't see this threat by republicans. Here we have no power of any kind.

[Chris]

I would request that people go to the actual site & find out what Common Core actually says about standards. Don't rely on rumors or those with an agenda to decide if the program makes sense...check it out:
http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/


I watched a video there that started off with the need to measure. Most of what people learn is immeasurable, I think.

[Chris]

Is this control going on in your state or your city? I don't know a thing about this control you guys are talking about other than the Feds are not the place for state and local matters.

We are 100 percent left wing here. i don't see this threat by republicans. Here we have no power of any kind.



Follow OP link for specific examples.

[Dr. Who]

Standards to me imply common denominator, mediocrity.
No standards result in kids not having the requisite knowledge to compete. Schools can exceed the standards, they just cannot drop below them like they do now.

[Bob]

1/3 of Alabama high school graduates require remedial classes in math & reading before they can enter college. I see this as a problem. I suspect other states have a similar problem...'specially southern states. Standards can also mean raising the bar...

http://www.dothaneagle.com/news/article_af3d7448-ed9d-11e2-8903-0019bb30f31a.html

We have over twice the population around the SF Bay Area as you have in your entire state.

I was looking at your census data and it seems your state is doing a lot better than I had assumed it was.

70 percent are white alone
82.6 graduated high school

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/01000.html

[Mister D]

What is the problem isn't the standards?

[Gunny]

Is this control going on in your state or your city? I don't know a thing about this control you guys are talking about other than the Feds are not the place for state and local matters.

We are 100 percent left wing here. i don't see this threat by republicans. Here we have no power of any kind.

Translation to English, please ....

[Chris]

No standards result in kids not having the requisite knowledge to compete. Schools can exceed the standards, they just cannot drop below them like they do now.

And who decides what those standards are? The video at polwatch's link speaks to learning what's needed after schooling, iow, what's needed in the real work-a-day world. Educators are the last to know that.

[Dr. Who]

I watched a video there that started off with the need to measure. Most of what people learn is immeasurable, I think.
There was undoubtedly much more standardization in education when you were going to school than there has been in the last 30-40 years. There used to be standardized text books which pretty much determined what material had to be learned by the end of the school year. More recently things have become much more loosey goosey and as a consequence the results are loosey goosey, with some kids able to read the works of Homer by the time they are ready for college and others struggling to read comic books.

[Dr. Who]

And who decides what those standards are? The video at polwatch's link speaks to learning what's needed after schooling, iow, what's needed in the real work-a-day world. Educators are the last to know that.
You should read the FAQs in that same link - it will answer your questions.

[PolWatch]

this is how the standards were developed:

The state-led effort to develop the Common Core State Standards was launched in 2009 by state leaders, including governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia (http://www.nga.org/cms/home/news-room/news-releases/page_2009/col2-content/main-content-list/title_fifty-one-states-and-territories-join-common-core-state-standards-initiative.html), through their membership in the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). State school chiefs and governors recognized the value of consistent, real-world learning goals and launched this effort to ensure all students, regardless of where they live, are graduating high school prepared for college, career, and life.

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/

[Chris]

this is how the standards were developed:

The state-led effort to develop the Common Core State Standards was launched in 2009 by state leaders, including governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia (http://www.nga.org/cms/home/news-room/news-releases/page_2009/col2-content/main-content-list/title_fifty-one-states-and-territories-join-common-core-state-standards-initiative.html), through their membership in the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). State school chiefs and governors recognized the value of consistent, real-world learning goals and launched this effort to ensure all students, regardless of where they live, are graduating high school prepared for college, career, and life.

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/


That's fine, if all students aimed at becoming educators. Where are the business people, the plumbers, electricians, IT people?

[Chris]

You should read the FAQs in that same link - it will answer your questions.

Educators set the standards.

[PolWatch]

I don't think anyone would deny that Alabama is one of the most conservative, Washington-hating, red states in the nation. The local & state school boards paid for a publicity campaign supporting Common Core, objecting to the governor using it as political fodder. Ultra-conservative, republican, Christian Alabama teachers actually bucked the repub governor to have the standards accepted in Alabama. just think about that for a minute or two...

[Chris]

There was undoubtedly much more standardization in education when you were going to school than there has been in the last 30-40 years. There used to be standardized text books which pretty much determined what material had to be learned by the end of the school year. More recently things have become much more loosey goosey and as a consequence the results are loosey goosey, with some kids able to read the works of Homer by the time they are ready for college and others struggling to read comic books.


I attended Catholic elementary school. About the only real standard was the Baltimore Catechism. Yet I probably learned more there than I ever did in public high school.

[Dr. Who]

I attended Catholic elementary school. About the only real standard was the Baltimore Catechism. Yet I probably learned more there than I ever did in public high school.
Catholic schools have standards too. Were you taught by Nuns and Priests?

[Dr. Who]

And who decides what those standards are? The video at polwatch's link speaks to learning what's needed after schooling, iow, what's needed in the real work-a-day world. Educators are the last to know that. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts/

"The standards have made careful use of a large and growing body of evidence. The evidence base includes scholarly research, surveys on what skills are required of students entering college and workforce training programs, assessment data identifying college‐ and career‐ready performance, and comparisons to standards from high‐performing states and nations.


In English language arts, the standards build on the firm foundation of the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) frameworks in reading and writing, which draw on extensive scholarly research and evidence.


In mathematics, the standards draw on conclusions from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and other studies of high‐performing countries that found the traditional U.S. mathematics curriculum needed to become substantially more coherent and focused in order to improve student achievement, addressing the problem of a curriculum that is “a mile wide and an inch deep.”"

[Chris]

Catholic schools have standards too. Were you taught by Nuns and Priests?

Yes, they do, just not national, political, PC standards.

Nuns, who knew their grammar!

[Chris]

http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts/

"The standards have made careful use of a large and growing body of evidence. The evidence base includes scholarly research, surveys on what skills are required of students entering college and workforce training programs, assessment data identifying college‐ and career‐ready performance, and comparisons to standards from high‐performing states and nations.


In English language arts, the standards build on the firm foundation of the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) frameworks in reading and writing, which draw on extensive scholarly research and evidence.


In mathematics, the standards draw on conclusions from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and other studies of high‐performing countries that found the traditional U.S. mathematics curriculum needed to become substantially more coherent and focused in order to improve student achievement, addressing the problem of a curriculum that is “a mile wide and an inch deep.”"


All within education. I mean, it sounds like standards for entering college, not working world.

You can teach and test facts but you can't teach and test thinking.

[Peter1469]

All within education. I mean, it sounds like standards for entering college, not working world.

You can teach and test facts but you can't teach and test thinking.

Sure you can. Good law schools do exactly that.

[Chris]

Sure you can. Good law schools do exactly that.

Sorry, but you cannot teach and test that. You can provide a setting in which that might take place, but you can teach it or test it.

[Chris]

Common Core: The Latest Flaw in One-Size-Fits-All Public Schools (http://reason.com/archives/2014/01/01/common-core-the-latest-flaw-in-one-size) succinctly states the problem:


...when the federal government imposes a single teaching plan on 15,000 school districts across the country, that's even more central planning, and central planning rarely works. It brings stagnation.

Education is a discovery process like any other human endeavor. We might be wrong about both how to teach and what to teach, but we won't realize it unless we can experiment—compare and contrast the results of different approaches. Having "one plan" makes it harder to experiment and figure out what works.

Some people are terrified to hear "education" and "experiment" in the same sentence. Why take a risk with something as important as my child's education? Pick the best education methods and teach everyone that way!

But we don't know what the best way to educate kids is....


Thinking itself is experimental, creative, rather than regurgitating facts. Get out in the real world you need to come up with novel solutions to new problems everyday, not repeat answers to already solved problems.

[Dr. Who]

All within education. I mean, it sounds like standards for entering college, not working world.

You can teach and test facts but you can't teach and test thinking.
You can teach critical thinking: http://images.austhink.com/pdf/teaching-critical-thinking.pdf

[Private Pickle]

Ha! "Anti-Choice".

[Chris]

You can teach critical thinking: http://images.austhink.com/pdf/teaching-critical-thinking.pdf

That looks like recommendations to teach the mechanics of critical thinking, what long ago was called rhetoric and logic. But the creative aspects just can't be taught, I don't believe.

And common core standardization would seem antithetical to creativity.

[Dr. Who]

Common Core: The Latest Flaw in One-Size-Fits-All Public Schools (http://reason.com/archives/2014/01/01/common-core-the-latest-flaw-in-one-size) succinctly states the problem:




Thinking itself is experimental, creative, rather than regurgitating facts. Get out in the real world you need to come up with novel solutions to new problems everyday, not repeat answers to already solved problems.

Except that Common Core is not a Federal program. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts/
Who was involved in the development of the Common Core State Standards?States across the country collaborated with teachers, researchers, and leading experts to design and develop the Common Core State Standards. Each state independently made the decision to adopt the Common Core. Local teachers, principals, and superintendents lead the implementation of the Common Core in their states. The federal government was not involved in the development of the standards.

The fact that States can get additional funding if they adopt a set of standards, with ties in with the Federal agenda (No Child Left Behind) doesn't mean that they can't teach beyond the standard. The standard is only acquiring X knowledge at Y stage of education. States and schools are free to go beyond the benchmark. They are also free not to adopt the program. They are answerable to their own electorate.

[Chris]

Except that Common Core is not a Federal program. http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts/
Who was involved in the development of the Common Core State Standards?States across the country collaborated with teachers, researchers, and leading experts to design and develop the Common Core State Standards. Each state independently made the decision to adopt the Common Core. Local teachers, principals, and superintendents lead the implementation of the Common Core in their states. The federal government was not involved in the development of the standards.

The fact that States can get additional funding if they adopt a set of standards, with ties in with the Federal agenda (No Child Left Behind) doesn't mean that they can't teach beyond the standard. The standard is only acquiring X knowledge at Y stage of education. States and schools are free to go beyond the benchmark. They are also free not to adopt the program. They are answerable to their own electorate.


No, not directly, but...


...The standards were developed in 2009 by education policy bureaucrats at the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. President Obama's Department of Education took an immediate interest, and the federal government encouraged state governors and legislatures to sign on to the standards by bribing them with Race to the Top grant money. This led 45 state governments to commit to Common Core implementation, even though hardly anyone knew what that would cost (lots of money) or require (retraining teachers, purchasing new technology).

Since then, the American people have had ample time to learn about Common Core—and the more they hear, the less they like it.

@ The Populist Uprising Against Common Core Is Libertarian and It’s Winning (http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/25/the-populist-uprising-against-common-cor)

[Dr. Who]

That looks like recommendations to teach the mechanics of critical thinking, what long ago was called rhetoric and logic. But the creative aspects just can't be taught, I don't believe.

And common core standardization would seem antithetical to creativity.
Common Core does not impose methodology. It only ensures that by X grade kids are up to the required levels of comprehension in math and reading. It just imposes a level of accountability on the individual schools to at least meet the standard. There is nothing preventing the simultaneous teaching of critical thinking. Creativity is not taught so much directly taught but rather encouraged through practice. It's a broad area covering the arts or even thinking outside of the box. You cannot turn someone with no artistic inclination into an artist, but in the other sense it is possible with practice to teach the creative centers of the brain to think outside of the box.

[Dr. Who]

No, not directly, but...



@ The Populist Uprising Against Common Core Is Libertarian and It’s Winning (http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/25/the-populist-uprising-against-common-cor)
I think that some people will reject anything that has any connection to the Federal government, no matter how remote. There is demonstrable proof that children coming from some States have been receiving a substandard education. Those States cannot do any worse comparatively, by at least ensuring that their graduates have met the standard. Those who don't wish to participate should prevail upon their State governments in a referendum. If the majority rejects the notion, then so be it. Otherwise they are free to home school or send their kids to private school.

[Chris]

I think that some people will reject anything that has any connection to the Federal government, no matter how remote. There is demonstrable proof that children coming from some States have been receiving a substandard education. Those States cannot do any worse comparatively, by at least ensuring that their graduates have met the standard. Those who don't wish to participate should prevail upon their State governments in a referendum. If the majority rejects the notion, then so be it. Otherwise they are free to home school or send their kids to private school.

I tend to reject central planning. It doesn't work. I don't have anything against standard per se, just that localities should set their own while allowing for experimentation and innovation.

[The Xl]

Yea but everyone's a winner!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgLGDu_5YiU

I hate that everyone wins crap. It's......crap.

I remember I came in 4th in a swimming tournament when I was 10, they gave me a ribbon for being in 4th place. I was like, wtf? Why am I getting a ribbon for 4th place?

[Peter1469]

You can teach critical thinking: http://images.austhink.com/pdf/teaching-critical-thinking.pdf

Right.

[PolWatch]

'And common core standardization would seem antithetical to creativity.'

a little less creativity in grammar, spelling, etc. might be a good thing for kids...

[Captain Obvious]

I've made the statement before that we need to reduce our volume of legislators by half. Just fire half of them, maintain federal and state legislation with half the current ranks.

Why? For this reason. I don't think this is a proactive movement by most legislators to control our lives by banning light bulbs and big gulps, I think the reason shit like this happens is two-fold. First, most of them aren't smart enough to focus on real issues. There are too many of them and those who are "b" players need to make it look like they're doing something.

There's a concept in business, offices. I see it all the time and in a period of my life went through it myself. When you get to a position that's a challenge for you, new job promotion thing human nature is such that you gravitate toward that what you know, not that which your new role demands of you. You go to familiar territory and run with that, in many cases to too much of an extreme. I think we see that in legislation, a lot of our legislators are just trying to do something and it winds up being counter productive.

Second, and Rand Paul is a great example of this, legislators with ambitions want to appease their constituents. Paul will do what he thinks what benefits his personal goals and keeps the largest part of his support base happy. Romney is great for doing this, so you get a lot of bullshit happening that benefits a personal agenda and maybe a special interest group but not the collective.

Reducing the volume of legislators would IMO force them into having to focus on the important and not the idle.

[Peter1469]

We could also ask how 435 Representatives can represent over 320M Americans and be considered democratic. Instead of less legislators, maybe just less days Congress is open, outside of emergency sessions. Make it a part time job.

[Ethereal]

We could also ask how 435 Representatives can represent over 320M Americans and be considered democratic. Instead of less legislators, maybe just less days Congress is open, outside of emergency sessions. Make it a part time job.

The issue of proportional representation is less than an afterthought, when it should be one of the main focuses of the American electorate. If America had the same ratio of representatives to population in 1800 that it does now, two states would have had no representatives at all. That is thanks to the "progressive" movement, who managed to unconstitutionally cap representation at 1911 levels.

[Chris]

'And common core standardization would seem antithetical to creativity.'

a little less creativity in grammar, spelling, etc. might be a good thing for kids...

That's the same as dr who's earlier contention you can teach critical thinking which ended up just the mechanics of rhetoric and logic. The mechanics of language--grammar, spelling, etc--are needed, yes, but what you do with them is the creative part.

[Dr. Who]

That's the same as dr who's earlier contention you can teach critical thinking which ended up just the mechanics of rhetoric and logic. The mechanics of language--grammar, spelling, etc--are needed, yes, but what you do with them is the creative part.
Language, it's structure, grammar and vocabulary are essential to creative writing. They are to the writer as paint and brushes to an artist. School is also about giving students the tools with which to develop their creativity.

[Chris]

Language, it's structure, grammar and vocabulary are essential to creative writing. They are to the writer as paint and brushes to an artist. School is also about giving students the tools with which to develop their creativity.

I don't disagree. But teaching grammar a novelist or poet does not make.

[PolWatch]

I don't disagree. But teaching grammar a novelist or poet does not make.

true...but please consider most of the great novelists/poets of the past were taught by rote...no creativity in the classroom allowed. Creativity is a talent, imho. You can't teach it or learn it...you are born to create or not. Everyone needs basic skills. Those who are creative will create.

[Chris]

Writers from Charles Dickens to harper Lee dropped out of school. :D

But now, PolWatch, I think we're saying the same thing. Basics can be taught, but what people do with those basics cannot.

So the basics, how are they best taught? Not even educators know. So should we adopt a single standard system that would stifle innovation, or localize education to promote innovation?

[Dr. Who]

I don't disagree. But teaching grammar a novelist or poet does not make.
It's fairly certain that without acquiring said tools, the potential novelist or poet would be unlikely to be sufficiently literate to even discover a talent in such things. While everyone is not going to become a great novelist or want to be one, good writing skills can serve anyone well in the future. You can help children to write creatively by teaching them how words can paint a picture.

[Chris]

It's fairly certain that without acquiring said tools, the potential novelist or poet would be unlikely to be sufficiently literate to even discover a talent in such things. While everyone is not going to become a great novelist or want to be one, good writing skills can serve anyone well in the future. You can help children to write creatively by teaching them how words can paint a picture.

We're not disagreeing here. Basics--the three Rs--are necessary.

But what's the best way to teach even those? We do not know.

Writers from Charles Dickens to Harper Lee dropped out of school.

[PolWatch]

Writers from Charles Dickens to harper Lee dropped out of school. :D

But now, @PolWatch (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1099), I think we're saying the same thing. Basics can be taught, but what people do with those basics cannot.

So the basics, how are they best taught? Not even educators know. So should we adopt a single standard system that would stifle innovation, or localize education to promote innovation?

Common Core is not a set program that tells the school systems HOW to teach or even what to teach. It simply says that all systems should educate students to a level...how and what material or method is used is the systems' choice. They are very adamant that no system will be told to reduce their standards...there is no plan to use a lowest common denominator scale.

The educators in my area are very supportive...all students arriving at any college will be at a similar level and should (?) be able to enter directly into college courses without having to spend a year learning high school level subjects.

[Mac-7]

Chris:

How about promoting the gay and lesbian
lifestyle in
public schools?

Thats sexual deviants poking their nose into the children's private business.

[Dr. Who]

We're not disagreeing here. Basics--the three Rs--are necessary.

But what's the best way to teach even those? We do not know.

Writers from Charles Dickens to Harper Lee dropped out of school.
But not before they were literate - Dickens was 15 and Lee perhaps 19. They had already developed the skills necessary for writing as well as passion for literature, which combined with obvious talent allowed them to begin writing early in life. Dickens didn't drop out voluntarily - it was for economic reasons. He liked school.

[Chris]

Common Core is not a set program that tells the school systems HOW to teach or even what to teach. It simply says that all systems should educate students to a level...how and what material or method is used is the systems' choice. They are very adamant that no system will be told to reduce their standards...there is no plan to use a lowest common denominator scale.

The educators in my area are very supportive...all students arriving at any college will be at a similar level and should (?) be able to enter directly into college courses without having to spend a year learning high school level subjects.

A link you or who gave earlier, http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/, says


The standards are:

Research- and evidence-based
Clear, understandable, and consistent
Aligned with college and career expectations
Based on rigorous content and application of knowledge through higher-order thinking skills
Built upon the strengths and lessons of current state standards
Informed by other top performing countries in order to prepare all students for success in our global economy and society



Those, at a high level, are teaching standards.

I'm sure educators love it, educators created it.

[Chris]

Here's the Common Core method for teaching math: http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/2014/09/02/common-core-homework-helper/14925331/

That's specific.

It's also strange.

[PolWatch]

A link you or who gave earlier, http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/, says



Those, at a high level, are teaching standards.

I'm sure educators love it, educators created it.

I'm not sure I get your point...would it be more acceptable if the standards were set by plumbers? The teachers in each school system would be the ones who know what works with their students (imho)...so it would make sense if they were the ones to decide how to teach the subjects. Books, curriculum, etc are set by the local school boards. Its not like Washington is gonna send a set of books they pick out and tell everyone that at 9 am, every Tuesday, you will discuss the Middle Ages.

We have experimented with creativity & innovation in the classroom for several years and it doesn't seem to have produced too many well educated students. I hear lots of people calling for a return to the basics but then they are complaining about efforts to do so. It may sound extreme, but I think it might be time to do away with so much Montessori & return to more McGuffey.

[Chris]

I'm not sure I get your point...would it be more acceptable if the standards were set by plumbers? The teachers in each school system would be the ones who know what works with their students (imho)...so it would make sense if they were the ones to decide how to teach the subjects. Books, curriculum, etc are set by the local school boards. Its not like Washington is gonna send a set of books they pick out and tell everyone that at 9 am, every Tuesday, you will discuss the Middle Ages.

We have experimented with creativity & innovation in the classroom for several years and it doesn't seem to have produced too many well educated students. I hear lots of people calling for a return to the basics but then they are complaining about efforts to do so. It may sound extreme, but I think it might be time to do away with so much Montessori & return to more McGuffey.


The teachers in each school system would be the ones who know what works with their students (imho)...so it would make sense if they were the ones to decide how to teach the subjects. Books, curriculum, etc are set by the local school boards.

That's sounds good to me. That's what I'm for.

I'm against one-size-fits-all national/federal standards.

[Dr. Who]

A link you or who gave earlier, http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/, says



Those, at a high level, are teaching standards.

I'm sure educators love it, educators created it.
A standard is just that - a standard. It's not an instruction manual. It simply provides the benchmarks for comprehension that are necessary at each level - how teachers get there is up to them. The program provides examples of text representative of the reading level to be achieved in each grade. It's up to the teacher to find and select appropriate reading material and to teach the linguistic comprehension to allow students to meet the standard of literacy for that level. Similarly there is a level of mathematical ability to be achieved by the end of each school year. Statewide tests are administered every few years to determine whether the students are achieving the desired standard. This makes every school accountable to the electorate to meet expectations.

[Chris]

A standard is just that - a standard. It's not an instruction manual. It simply provides the benchmarks for comprehension that are necessary at each level - how teachers get there is up to them. The program provides examples of text representative of the reading level to be achieved in each grade. It's up to the teacher to find and select appropriate reading material and to teach the linguistic comprehension to allow students to meet the standard of literacy for that level. Similarly there is a level of mathematical ability to be achieved by the end of each school year. Statewide tests are administered every few years to determine whether the students are achieving the desired standard. This makes every school accountable to the electorate to meet expectations.

Sorry but I don't see that in the videos I just linked to that specify teaching methods.

While long this is a good background video on Common Core:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ4L7mEKyK8#t=849

It's really just a child of NCLB which lead many schools to teach to tests in order to get higher funding. And while it started out with governors asking educators for standards, it went national with the 2009 stimulus package.

One reason you see little about Common Core curriculum is because the US Dept of Education's charter specific states it cannot promote a national curriculum. But what I've seen works around that.


Again, I don't think we disagree on goals, just on methods of achieving them.

But I do enjoy the exchange of opinion and have learned a lot.

[Dr. Who]

Here's the Common Core method for teaching math: http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/2014/09/02/common-core-homework-helper/14925331/

That's specific.

It's also strange.
It's a homework helper. The methodology is a fairly common one these days. I don't find it all that strange.

[Chris]

It's a homework helper. The methodology is a fairly common one these days. I don't find it all that strange.

I think most parents would find the methodology so strange they wouldn't know how to help their kids with homework. That's a common complaint.

[PolWatch]

I think most parents would find the methodology so strange they wouldn't know how to help their kids with homework. That's a common complaint.

parents who want to help their children will figure it out....unless they just want to complain. I wonder if difficulty in 'figuring out the methodology' is gonna end up another reason for home school? 'it was too difficult to understand the program, so I decided to teach little Joey myself '.....

[Mac-7]

parents who want to help their children will figure it out....unless they just want to complain. I wonder if difficulty in 'figuring out the methodology' is gonna end up another reason for home school? 'it was too difficult to understand the program, so I decided to teach little Joey myself '.....

the public teachers have not been doing a good job and some parents can go better .

[Chris]

parents who want to help their children will figure it out....unless they just want to complain. I wonder if difficulty in 'figuring out the methodology' is gonna end up another reason for home school? 'it was too difficult to understand the program, so I decided to teach little Joey myself '.....

That's true but I see CC as another effort to push parents away from their kids.

[Dr. Who]

That's true but I see CC as another effort to push parents away from their kids.
Using visual aids to teach math is a pretty old idea. Teachers have used pencils, apples, oranges, balls and even the abacus as a teaching aid. In the first example in your link, the teacher was doing visually what I often do in my head. Addition using 10, 20, 30 etc is easier than using mixed numbers, or so I have found. So rather than add 27 + 13, the hard way, I add 30 plus 10. I thought all of the examples were very easy to follow. I'm not sure that this would push parents away. The visual aids only serve to teach the meaning behind the traditional algorithms and make it easier for the kids to conceptualize. It's not like the algorithms are going away, they are being taught as well.

[Chris]

Using visual aids to teach math is a pretty old idea. Teachers have used pencils, apples, oranges, balls and even the abacus as a teaching aid. In the first example in your link, the teacher was doing visually what I often do in my head. Addition using 10, 20, 30 etc is easier than using mixed numbers, or so I have found. So rather than add 27 + 13, the hard way, I add 30 plus 10. I thought all of the examples were very easy to follow. I'm not sure that this would push parents away. The visual aids only serve to teach the meaning behind the traditional algorithms and make it easier for the kids to conceptualize. It's not like the algorithms are going away, they are being taught as well.

What? That wasn't the point of the videos, to show how to use visual aids, pencils.

Anyway, I've put forth m argument, you and pollwatch you all's, it's been informative, people will decide.