The Ferguson Riots and Lessons from 1964

Policesign

The wrong lesson.

It’s a sad day when the first day of school is delayed a week because of rioting, as it has been in Ferguson, Missouri.  Teachers, instead of being in classrooms teaching, have been getting “crisis training.” Those who have irresponsibly been quick to judge in the case of the shooting of Michael Brown by a police officer without all the facts have only added fuel to the fire.  This is the case in the lessons about Ferguson that have been prepared, free for teachers to download.

They follow the numerous lessons already fashioned out of the Trayvon Martin case (such as one by PBS called “Debating Race, Justice and Policy in the Case of Trayvon Martin”), with the focus on race and social justice, instead of real justice–as in the jury system, evaluation of evidence, etc.

It almost seems that the indoctrinators have been waiting with material.  Within days of the shooting, the lessons were ready for teachers to download. PBS has come out with an entire list of “resources” for teaching about Ferguson and Michael Brown to grades 7-12 (including links to videos from the PBS News Hour). The Anti-Defamation League offers a detailed lesson plan (Common Core-aligned), with discussions centered on race, the “militarization” of police, and the best ways to engage in “activism.” Teachers are instructed to play the lyrics of rapper J.Cole who has already written a song about Michael Brown. Teachers are then to ask students:

“How did you feel while listening to the song?”
“What do the lyrics mean?”
“Why do you think he wrote the song?”
“Will it make a difference?”

These lessons follow the lead of journalists, who have been quick to condemn the police, blaming the “militarization of police” for criminal and subversive elements. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch presented the first night’s looting, which seemed to go on while police stood back, as a justified release of emotion.  It was not.  The gangs came out in even greater force the following nights, perhaps encouraged by their successes and enflamed by the rhetoric of the race agitators that have come out at such moments throughout the twentieth century, especially fifty years ago.

Fifty years ago in Rochester my neighborhood was set on the path to destruction by the riots. This July in a perverse kind of “celebration” media outlets and libraries “looked back” to 1964.  The rationalizations for the rioting back then were what they are now: poverty, unemployment, discrimination, bad housing.

Nothing was the same after the riots in Rochester in 1964, no matter what the teachers or commentators said.  The destroyed businesses, ruined property values, and deteriorating schools that we had to live with defied the politically correct lessons and the commentary from perches in the suburbs or Washington, D.C.  The criminals 50 years later know the script; they know that their actions will be excused by the agitators and the oh-so-sensitive who write from offices far from the violence.  It’s shocking to see it happen over and over, in Rochester in 1964 and in Ferguson in 2014.  Today, audaciously, pundits in Washington, D.C. lecture police to be more understanding, more “brave.”

What’s different today is that the anti-police pundits are seen as being conservative.  But these conservatives are new kinds of conservatives, they insist.  They disparage the old-fashioned conservatism.  All they want is freedom, they say.  They’re purists, lumping every form of social control under Big Government.  They are, proudly, Libertarians.

Barry Goldwater 1962

Barry Goldwater 1962

Really?  Then they ought to consider the words of Mr. Libertarian himself, Barry Goldwater, who in 1964 said this in his acceptance speech for the nomination of Republican presidential candidate:

Security from domestic violence, no less than from foreign aggression, is the most elementary and fundamental purpose of any government, and a government that cannot fulfill that purpose is one that cannot long command the loyalty of its citizens. History shows us – demonstrates that nothing – nothing prepares the way for tyranny more than the failure of public officials to keep the streets from bullies and marauders.

This is what we need to start putting in lessons for school children…after teaching the adults in Washington, D.C., who would lecture us about the “militarization of police” or being more “brave.”

Florida High School promotes Godlessness in the name of ‘Diversity’

Dena Sturm

Dena Sturm, IB Program Adviser, Spanish teacher Riverview HS.

Riverview High School in Sarasota, Florida has an International Baccalaureate (IB) program. Under the Riverview High School IB program is a category titled “Service Organizations.” One of these organizations is the Coexistence Club. Dena Sturm is listed as the Docent Program Adviser for the IB Program Coexistence Club.

According to EmbracingOurDifferences.org:

The Embracing Our Differences partnership with Riverview High School’s International Baccalaureate (IB) Program continues to be the jewel in our crown.

Under our Docent Program, IB students and members of the Coexistence Club serve as docents and mentors to other students participating in our education program. Our student docents work in the parks daily leading groups and inspiring youngsters to recognize the messages delivered through the art and quotes. With their guided questions and planted seeds of inquiry, our young visitors are led to make realizations of their own about diversity and acceptance of others, including those different from themselves. [Emphasis added]

Learn more about Embracing Our Differences.

andrea rankin

Student Andrea Rankin the creator of Life’s Library.

What are the ” inspiring messages” being planted like seeds into the minds of youngsters at Riverview High School?

Perhaps a large 30’x30′ banner titled “Life’s Library” by Andrea Rankin can give us a clue. The banner hangs prominently on the wall at the entrance of the high school directly across from the school’s administrative offices. The banner is in full color and sponsored by the Coexistence Club Riverview High School.

Rankin, a student at the Sarasota Technical Institute, created the “Life’s Library” based upon “her own experiences.” Rankin’s Life’s Library won the Best-in-Show and People’s Choice Award at the Embracing Our Differences 2012 art exhibit.

The “Life’s Library” book titles are solely Rankin’s view of the world. It is her view that is being viewed daily by Riverview High School students, faculty, staff and visitors.

photo (7)

The titles of the books in Rankin’s Life’s Library show exactly what is being promoted in the name of “diversity” by the Coexistence Club. Here are just some of the book titles:

  • Divorce was the best thing for my son.
  • I have two mommies.
  • I am not the 99% and it makes me feel guilty.
  • My brother is now my sister and I still love her.
  • People say I am skinny but I hate my body.
  • Sober 3 years, two months and 3 days.
  • Born this way (with gay flags).
  • I Love My Bubber with Star of David (a bubber is a wino or junkie)
  • I am not sure who God is or if there even is a God.
  • Being Muslim in America is hard.
  • Human – everything else is irrelevant.
  • Every tattoo has a deep personal meaning.
  • My tribe was the original homeland security.
  • My piercings make me pretty.

Diversity now means embracing an anything goes mentality when it comes to family, marriage, sexual behavior, tattoos, body piercing,  science and God. Rankin’s titles confuse nature’s gender differences with unnatural sexual behaviors. It compares real differences based on ethnicity and applies them to human behaviors. It creates cognitive dissonance in the young and impressionable by mixing metaphors. It equates Muslim life in America without addressing Muslim life in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan. Rankin takes morality and turns it on its head in the name of coexistence.

Perhaps the Sarasota County School Board should look into what exactly the Riverview High Coexistence Club is pedaling to the Riverview High School students?

The absurdities listed on this poster are quickly becoming the norm in our public schools, much to the detriment of our community. That is the reality. Our public schools, with the support of the Sarasota County School Board, are creating a generation of Godless children, who have no moral basis upon which to make life’s critical decisions. The only thing being embraced is Rankin’s view of the world, but then again she is a product of our Sarasota County School system.

As Ronald Reagan said, “Without God there is no virtue because there is no prompting of the conscience…without God there is a coarsening of the society; without God democracy will not and cannot long endure… If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under… Government should uphold–and not undermine–those institutions which are custodians of the very values upon which civilization is founded: religion, education and, above all, family.”

Perhaps the “jeweled crown” of diversity needs to be replaced with one made from the vines of a thorn bush and placed upon the head of a Nazarene who was crucified by a people who embraced many of the ideals displayed on this banner.

You see, there is one book you can judge by its cover – The Holy Bible – for it is the library for life. Its lessons are conspicuously absent from Rankin’s Life Library.

EDITORS NOTE: Below is the original “Life’s Library” by Andrea Rankin.

Print

Why is the ‘Conservative’ BizPac Review endorsing Democrat Karen Brill?

Voters_Guide-2014-web-optimized-231x300The Palm Beach County based BizPac Review has sent out its August 26th primary endorsements. Jack Furnari sent out “Jacks 2014 Conservative Primary Voters Guide“. Furnari describes himself as “a conservative writer and political strategist in Boca Raton.” On Jack’s list is Karen Brill running for re-election for the Palm Beach School Board District 3 seat.

Many wonder why a conservative publication endorsed Brill, a liberal Democrat, over her conservative opponent John Hartman. Brill is pro-Common Core and was recently installed by the Florida School Board Association as President of the Greater Florida Consortium of School Boards.

The Greater Florida Consortium of School Boards’ 2014 Legislative Program has a “Priority Goal” to:

Support Common Core State Standards and Accountability, and develop a workable timeline for the implementation of accountability, but not before July 1, 2017, that includes student, teacher, principal, school and school district assessment, professional development, and evaluation.

Karen_Brill

Karen Brill, Democrat Palm Beach School Board, District 3.

Brill will be responsible to implement the Consortium’s legislative program, which includes:

  • Repeal requirements for districts to adopt EOCs in every subject not covered by the state assessment program.
  • Allow alternative ways for Post-Secondary Readiness Test compliance, such as Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, AICE, or Dual Enrollment programs.
  • Oppose any further expansion of the Florida Tax Credit and John McKay Scholarship Programs.
  • Provide state funding for any increased costs to the employer’s contribution to the Florida Retirement System.
  • Identify alternative revenue sources, including efforts to enforce the states existing sales tax on all internet sales made in Florida, and study a phase out of exemptions on non-essential goods.
  • Extend the voter-approved operation millage authority from four (4) years up to ten (10) years.
  • Provide state wide assessments in multiple languages for the first two years of testing.

Does this sound like a conservative legislative program? Is Brill, who will be pushing this program, a conservative? Many think not.

Brill’s campaign website states, “Prior to joining the School Board, I was actively involved in education locally, statewide and on the national level – most notably as an advocate for students with disabilities.” Yet, as President of the Consortium Brill will be working against further expansion of John McKay Scholarship Programs that help students with disabilities. Is this an oxymoron?

We will let you decide if Jack’s picks are conservative or not. Some may want to re-consider the Jack and BizPac Review 2014 Voter Guide?

CAIR: A Shocking Textbook Expert on Peace and Religion

Why is the above image wrong?  Let us count the ways.

1. The quote does not come from the Council on American Islamic Relation (CAIR). It does not even come from a press release. It comes from a fatwa issued by the Fiqh Council of North America at a press conference convened by CAIR. The press release, dated a day earlier, did not contain any such line.

2. CAIR is not a religious authority. It is an activist and advocacy group. In fact, in that press release, CAIR described itself as, “America’s largest Muslim civil rights group.” Educational material should not use advocacy groups as authorities, let alone as experts on religious interpretation. Perhaps the textbook should have quoted a Muslim religious scholar or just explained that the Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa on this issue. Maybe the authors thought that using the correct terminology would be scary or confusing. But that would be kind of bigoted, wouldn’t it?

3. Neither the quote provided in the text nor the full fatwa actually validate the textbook’s claim that “people may mistakenly think that Islam encourages violence.” This fatwa does call on Muslims to refrain from violence against civilians, including terrorism. But it does not state anything about the religion encouraging or not encouraging other forms of violence, such as against militaries.

And finally…

4. No one should listen to CAIR on the issue of peace. The organization simply is not credible. If you are wondering what we mean about this, just look up the following phrases together: CAIR, unindicted co-conspirator, joint venturer, U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation.

If you care about accuracy in textbooks, contact Verity Educate to find out what you can do.

The Best Debt in the World by Emma Elliot Freire

Hard to believe, but Britain’s student loan problem is worse than the Yanks’.

In late 2010, tens of thousands of British students took to the streets of London. They protested government plans to cut direct funding of higher education and raise the cap on tuition from £3,290 ($5,500) to £9,000 ($15,000). Some of them occupied government buildings and clashed violently with police. Hundreds were arrested.

Maybe they shouldn’t have gotten so worked up. It’s now becoming clear that most of them won’t repay their loans in full. Some of them will even be getting their education for free.

The UK government’s student loan scheme is more generous than its American counterpart. Any British student who is accepted to a university is automatically entitled to a government loan for the entirety of their tuition. Most universities are charging £9,000 per year. British students can also get loans for their living costs, which range from £4,418 to £7,751 per year. The average student will graduate £44,000 ($74,000) in debt.

The core difference between the British and American systems lies in the terms of repayment. American students typically have to start repaying 6 months after they graduate. Opportunities for loan forgiveness are extremely limited, and loans cannot be discharged via bankruptcy. By contrast, British students don’t have to start repaying until they are earning £21,000 ($36,000) per year. They must then pay 9 percent of their gross income as long as they stay above the threshold. Their outstanding balance is automatically forgiven 30 years after it became eligible for repayment. Also, the loans do not appear on their credit report. 

“The thing people worry about with debt is that they won’t be able to pay it back. The way this is structured means that is not a worry ever, and it doesn’t follow you around until your old age,” says Sam Bowman, Research Director at the Adam Smith Institute, a free-market think tank. 

Bowman finds it helpful to understand loan repayment as a tax. “You can either think of it as a graduate tax or it’s the best debt in the world,” he says. “It makes sense to think of it as a graduate tax, a specific kind of tax on a specific action that is designed to offset the cost of that action.”

Uncharted waters for repayment

The first students to take on the new, larger type of loans have yet to graduate, so it is hard to estimate what repayment rates are likely to be. However, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), an independent research center, is already projecting that 73 percent of students will not repay their loans in full. They believe the average amount written off will be around £30,000 ($50,500).

report released in July by a committee of the British parliament reached similar conclusions. “By providing favourable terms and conditions on student loans, the Government loses around 45p [cents] on every £1 it loans out.” When the new policies were first announced in 2010, the government projected it would only lose 28p per £1 loaned out. The report notes that government loans to students are expected to total £330 billion by 2044. “We are concerned that Government is rapidly approaching a tipping point for the financial viability of the student loans system,” says the report.

By and large, students still think of themselves as having “real debt” for their education. “One valid criticism of the loan system is that students don’t realize how generous it is,” says Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute. “Students think they’re paying for the entirety of their education when actually they’re not. Taxpayers are covering quite a lot of the cost.”

The IFS report notes that the lowest-earning 10 percent of graduates will only repay £3,879 (in 2014 prices). A survey earlier this year showed that 40 percent of graduates are still looking for a job 6 months after leaving university. If this trend continues, some graduates may never start earning £21,000.

A few savvy individuals are learning to work the system. British financial advisors encourage parents who could contribute to their child’s education to have their kid take out government loans instead. Martin Lewis, who runs the popular website moneysavingexpert.comwrites, “If a parent pays the £27,000 tuition fees upfront, and their child becomes a poet and never earns above £21,000, the whole £27,000 would have been wasted.”

The only people who can expect to repay their loans plus interest in full are the small group who take high-paying jobs soon after graduating and get regular pay increases for the next 30 years. These individuals are thinking hard about whether they need a degree. “The only income group that has gone to university less are the richest. That might be surprising, but what the debt does is it imposes some cost on people for going to university,” says Bowman. “So if they have other options, they take them. Maybe they could skip college and join their parent’s business or their parents can find them jobs.”

This is one immediate impact of the new loan scheme. There will undoubtedly be unintended consequences that may only become evident years or decades from now. For example, Britain may see an increase in the number of stay-at-home parents. Loan repayment is tied to an individual’s income. Spouse’s earnings are irrelevant. Child care is already very expensive. For some families, the extra 9 percent they would lose in loan repayments will be enough to push one parent out of paid employment.

Loans without borders

Loan repayments are collected by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the British equivalent of the IRS, via withholding from a person’s paycheck. This makes it fairly simple to collect money from anyone working for a British employer. Things become harder when a graduate leaves the country. 

“There is no way that the government can collect money from people who go abroad,” says Bowman. “There is a big incentive for them to stay away. Say you’re an English graduate and you go to America for a couple of years to work. If you have this debt waiting for you when you get home, there’s a big reason for you to stay abroad for as long as possible.”

The number of students who would actually permanently leave is probably very small. “It would be a much bigger problem than the student loan book if we were seeing Irish levels of emigration,” says Bowman. However, a determined few will be able to dodge repayment.

And then there’s the question of students who come to Britain from other European Union countries. Since 2006, EU law has required Britain to offer these students the same loan deals for tuition, though not for living costs. It is a tradition in British politics to blame problems that are largely homegrown on the widely-hated EU. As the issues with loan repayment have come to light, stories about EU students borrowing money and then “going to ground” have also been hitting the headlines.

This problem is still fairly small, since EU students have only been receiving loans since 2006. Hillman says that about half of EU students who study in Britain choose not to borrow or repay their loan in full before they leave the country. Many EU students enroll at British universities because they want to work in Britain later. Thus, they have a strong incentive to repay. However, data is now emerging that shows unpaid loans in the low millions. “The issue is less about what has happened to date but what might happen in the future because there aren’t many people yet who are liable to repay, but it’s growing all the time,” says Hillman. 

“If a French or Dutch person studies at a British university then goes home and gets a job, we can certainly chase them through the French or Dutch courts because they’ve signed a legal contract and they should repay,” Hillman says. “But the trouble is that it’s an incredibly expensive business. The person may owe £27,000, which is a lot of money, but chasing someone through the courts can easily cost that much.”

One way to address this problem would be an EU-wide agreement. “But there’s no real incentive for other European countries to do this because other European countries don’t use loans in the same way we do,” says Hillman. 

Relative improvement

Despite the problems, both Hillman and Bowman say the new system is an improvement over the way British higher education used to be funded. Tony Blair’s government only introduced tuition in 2004. “Before loans and fees came in, British taxpayers paid 100 percent of the cost of going to university. Now they don’t. But they still fund part of the loan cost,” says Hillman.

Bowman says it is important to remember the overall British context. “The alternative is not a kind of free market where you have everybody paying their own way and banks privately making loans to people. The alternative is going back to a situation where the government pays for everything, and that’s a disaster,” he says. “The political climate in the UK is very hostile to any kind of marketization of anything. That’s not going to change for a couple of years, at least until we’re growing rapidly, and we all feel rich and safe again.” 

Potential Solution

One interesting idea put forward by David Willetts, a Member of Parliament and former Minister of State for Universities, is to sell government student loans to universities, making them responsible for collecting repayment. This approach would address a problem that afflicts both American and British higher education: Universities collect tuition upfront and then have little incentive to ensure loans are repaid. 

Bowman supports the proposal. “Making universities responsible for whether people repay might make them more willing to turn people away if they’re not a great bet in terms of their future earning, and that might counteract some of the qualification inflation. Right now, you need a university degree for any job that isn’t blue collar manual labor.”

He believes Willetts’ idea is politically viable. “Britain has lots of middle-class people who think of themselves as being working-class. They feel like they’re fighting against the man when in reality they are the man. You could say to them that we don’t want people who haven’t gone to university picking up the bill in any way for people who have gone to university.” 

The only question is whether universities would go along with it. Right now, they have a very beneficial arrangement. 

Much will depend on how loan repayment rates develop in the next few years. Graduates will probably soon grasp that they have the best debt in the world. Maybe taxpayers will start to realize this debt isn’t such a good deal for them. 

ABOUT EMMA ELLIOTT FREIRE

Emma Elliott Freire is a freelance writer living in England. She has previously worked at the Mercatus Center, a multinational bank, and the European Parliament.

RELATED ARTICLE: Can You Pay Student Loans With a Credit Card?

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

A picture is worth a thousand words!

In 1911 New York Journal editor Arthur Brisbane while discussing journalism and publicity said, “Use a picture. It’s worth a thousand words.” That has morphed into the now commonly used phrase “a picture is worth a thousand words.” So it is with politics.

Early voting has begun in Florida. In Sarasota County at least two of the three races, and perhaps all three, for school board will be determined on August 26, 2014. To win the primary one of the candidates must receive 50% plus one vote.

The picture below tells you who the local union, Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association, is backing.

scta school board candidates

For a larger view click on the image.

If one picture is not enough to convince you where Brown, Goodwin and Marsh stand on issues then here is another picture worth a thousand words. It is the early voting ballot put out by the Sarasota County Democrat Party:

democrat party of sarasota 2014 primary

For a larger view click on the image.

To learn more about Brown, Goodwin and Marsh read these articles:

Any questions?

PLAGIARISM: Students fail, politicians resign, but professors go back to work

Students_in_a_computer_lab

No peeking!

The Dissident Prof has spent many an agonizing hour with the student who has insulted her intelligence by copying and pasting large pieces of text into her own paper.  She has followed the policy of the various institutions in which she has taught and punished students accordingly.  She remembers one case of a solid B student who in the midst of the rush or the excitement of the end  of the semester decided to use the cut and paste functions on her keyboard for large portions of the final paper.  Alas, I had to inform her that her paper received a zero.  Her final letter grade dropped down to the next one.  That is one reason why college professors always have boxes of tissues on their desks.

The same punishment is not meted to some tenured professors, however. 

In Minding the Campus, I write about the case of Slavoj Zizek, the Slovenian pseudo-philosopher who was discovered to have lifted entire passages from the magazine American Renaissance.  Writers jumped to his defense.  At Inside Higher Ed the worshipful Hollis Phelps contextualized the “sharing” in terms of postmodernism and death of the author, etc.–plus the fact that such a celebrity academic cannot be fully responsible for errors committed by assistants.  Zizek holds forth, sometimes bare-chested from his bed, mixing Marxism, Freudianism, Hegelianism, and pop psychology to offer what is taken as trenchant commentary.  There are entire college courses and books on Zizek. Fortunately, Professor Zizek remains covered up in his bed.

See the below video clip. It’s from one of his full-length movies in his filmography, probably The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology.

The Cabinet of Plagiarism blogger calls this “the summer of plagiarism,” and brings to our attention also the case of Professor Matthew C. Whitaker, who is Professor of History and Founding Director of the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy at Arizona State University, who was recently accused of plagiarizing.

Professor Whitaker:  the Cabinet has wearied of him.  No interesting defense of his actions has ever come forth.  Yet Professor Whitaker sails majestically on, writing editorials decrying the immorality of, for example, net metering (to the great delight of the Edison Institute, at whose conference he also spoke) and preparing for another semester in which he will require his students to purchase his University of Nebraska Press book — thereby inducting them into one aspect of academic scholarship, even if he is woefully unable to induct them into others.  Too big to fail at his university and press, Professor Whitaker is perhaps too small to matter to anyone else.  But….

No doubt these professors are directing their minions (a term used to describe Marxist Zizek’s student assistants) to compile syllabi in preparation for the upcoming school year.

Not only professors, but history book writers, are being accused of plagiarism this summer.  Today, we learn that New York Times/NPR darling Rick Perlstein is being accused of “sloppy scholarship, improper attribution and plagiarism” in his new book on Ronald Reagan, The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan.  The Times refers to its own “prominent book critic” Frank Rich, who in his review applauded Perlstein’s “gifts as a historian.”

Unlike the professors, it doesn’t look like Montana Senator John Walsh will escape political punishment for plagiarizing his master’s thesis at the U.S. Army War College.  He is getting pressure to resign, and Democrats seem to be talking about a replacement candidate.

In the case of Professor Whitaker, Inside Higher Ed reported that after he was found not guilty of deliberate academic misconduct, “the chair of his department’s tenure committee resigned in protest and other faculty members spoke out against the findings, saying their colleague – who recently had been promoted to full professor – was cleared even though what he did likely would have gotten an undergraduate in trouble.”  As the Cabinet of Plagiarism reported, Whitaker will likely assign his plagiarized books to students in the upcoming semester.

As for the globe-trotting, lecture-bed-hopping Professor Zizek?  He seems to be a one-man academic-industrial complex.  In 2012, Salon reported he had published over 50 books. In some years he has published four books.  But of course that cannot be too much when his Marxist ideas will be redistributed to students buying his books as they study the great man in seminars devoted to Slavoj Zizek.

Inspiring Success Stories [VIDEO]

The Foundation for Economic Education’s mission is to inspire, educate and connect future leaders with the economic, ethical and legal principles of a free society.

Click here for more FEE Success Stories: http://www.fee.org/about/page/alumni-…

AP History, Fake Indians, and Donate Buttons!

Russell_Kirk

Russell Kirk: 10 Principles.

Dispatching from the Alexander Hamilton Institute, where Professor Robert Paquette outdoes himself in a post titled “The New Discrimination on U.S. Campuses” at SeeThruEd.  It’s discrimination against intended beneficiaries of affirmative action, illustrated by the fake Indians Ward Church and Elizabeth Warren, former Harvard law professor, now senator from Massachusetts. Warren has issued Eleven Commandments of Progressivisim:

During her ascent, [Senator Elizabeth] Warren, no Sitting Bull, has paused to fire up the faithful by issuing from barked scrolls what some of her fans in the media have called the “eleven commandments” of progressivism (note “commandments,” not principles). Since many Americans wonder why the country is floundering at best and unraveling at worst, Warren’s eleven commandments might be usefully contrasted with a set of conservative precepts to suggest why the United States has entered a period reminiscent of the 1850s, when domestically a sectional political struggle was metamorphosing into a clash of civilizations and eventually civil war.

Professor Paquette then contrasts these commandments to the ten principles of conservatism articulated by the late Russell Kirk, but not before reminding readers about the one-drop rule and how it is being perversely exploited by opportunistic professors on the left:

In certain areas of the Jim-Crow South, for example, no matter how light a person’s phenotype, if his or her genealogy contained an identifiable African ancestor somewhere in the past, then the category “black” was applied for various discriminatory social and legal purposes.  Within the arcane, darkened corridors of the postmodern campus, however, a strain of institutionalized discrimination has emerged under pressure from the diversity cartel that is not debilitating but consciously elevating. It might be called the no-drop rule.

Today, progressives “Opportunistic whites, openly of a radical bent or pose, take advantage of affirmative action criteria to attain jobs as aggrieved minorities for the dual purpose of advancing themselves and the progressive beliefs that they purport to hold dear.”  Such is the case with the former Harvard law professor, now Senator Elizabeth Warren, who thinks she has established her bona fides enough to issue from “barked scrolls” her Eleven Commandments, which are contrasted to Russell Kirk’s principles here.  The appointment of professors based on faked anceestry might be worthy of campus protests.

Smoke and Mirrors in the New AP History Exam

Don't ask how/ it's magic

Don’t ask how/ it’s magic.

Don’t ask how/ it’s magic Speaking of history, specifically, AP history, non-historian, non-teacher-ever, English major David Coleman who now is president of the College Board which develops AP and SAT tests, has issued a letter in response to the demands of the little people, er, those who signed an open letter or who were on the National Republican Committee, and who have dared to question the content of the new AP exams.

According to Inside Higher Ed, Coleman in an open letter:

said he hoped the unprecedented move of releasing an exam to non-certified A.P. teachers would quell concerns that framework neglected or misrepresented the important parts of American history.

Some of the “non-certified” critics of the exam had originally questioned the 98 pages of directives that replaced the 5-page topical outline. Like Common Core, the AP standards supplant local and state curricula, as Jane Robbins and Larry Krieger wrote in their critique. (and here by National Association of Scholars President Peter Wood)

In response to the sample test, Joy Pullman said that Coleman’s “graciously worded letter, still leaves unanswered questions about what half a million of nation’s brightest high school students will learn about their country’s character and history each year.

The sample exam had been released to the certified evaluators who had also signed “confidentiality letters.”  You can read the practice exam for yourself.  The number of questions has been reduced from 80 to 55 in order to permit more focus on “historical thinking skills.” These “historical thinking skills” seem to involve pictures and photographs and open-ended questions about short reading passages, ala Common Core.  Cutting back the number of multiple choice questions and asking students to interpret and write about photos that display negative aspects of American history seems to be a means to testing for correct progressive views under the guise of “deeper learning.”  All this is notwithstanding Coleman’s repeated claims to improving rigor through “original documents.”

All of this discussion of “original documents” is smoke and mirrors, an opportunity to impose selective passages on youngsters who will know little history outside of the progressive perspective issued in the nearly 100 pages of AP guidelines.

Jim Galloway, political columnist at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, however, doesn’t address anything in the guidelines specifically, but calls the controversy over the new AP standards and exams a “sequel to the fight over Common Core.”  Galloway does not bother to break down the standards or to address any of the detailed arguments made by opponents. Instead he impishly relies on Republican State School Superintendent John Barge’s charge that ideological motives might be behind Georgia Concerned Women for America’s opposition to the new AP standards, as well as some nefarious money-making motives because, get this, the website has a donate button!

Galloway quotes one-time Common Core opponent Barge:

“I’m going to be very honest and very blunt about what I think is behind this. And I think it’s money”. . .

He described a visit to the website of Concerned Women for America:

“The first thing that comes up is a bright red ‘donate now’ button,” he said. (We tried it. The red button is there at the top, but it didn’t jump to the front.)

In a similar display of lazy reporting and innuendo, Maureen Downey’s column, “Running for cover over Common Core,” about current hearings on Common Core is a cut-and-paste rehash of previous attacks and the talking points distributed in 34-page messaging “tool kit” from the public relations department of one of the major agencies behind Common Core, the CCSSO.  One would expect more from an education editor and former teacher than this:

Extremists in the Republican Party contend Common Core is Obamacare transferred from doctors’ waiting rooms to America’s classrooms, dressed in sensible shoes and a cardigan and carrying a pointer.

I’m still waiting for this education expert to point to specific parts of the Common Core that are superior to the previous Georgia Standards.  I would like the “evidentiary standards” that proponents claim are being demanded of students under the new AP and Common Core guidelines.

A children’s problem to test the aptitude of politicians

There is a reason why the question above, from a Hong Kong elementary school test, is making the rounds on the internet. Most adults can’t solve it – not for want of math skills, but because most of them have lost the child’s ability of unconventional thinking. Instead, they have acquired the debilitating unwillingness to try a different perspective.

The answer to the problem is provided at the bottom, but before you give up, here are some clues.

This problem is not mathematical, but rather philosophical. It proves that, in spite of what the modern “progressive” philosophers tell us, not all viewpoints are equally valid; in most cases, there is only one point of view that leads to the right answer.

This may cause objections from proponents of moral relativity, who believe that everyone’s viewpoint is correct in its own way. Moral relativity is merely a nice-sounding cover for intellectual laziness; it relieves one of guilt for not trying to find the right solution. It’s a lot easier to presume that one’s viewpoint is always correct: wherever one happens to be at any given moment, that must be the correct position. By this logic, any position one had yesterday or will have tomorrow must also be correct. Therefore, all such positions must be equally valid, and anyone else’s conflicting positions at different points of time must be equally valid, too. This is a way to madness.

Anyone can misjudge the facts due to the wrong vantage point. But while some will admit their mistake and will try to look at things differently, a moral relativist will insist that his perspective doesn’t need changing and will blame the lack of solutions on the unknowable nature of the universe. He will then devise far-fetched schemes and erroneous complex formulas explaining why things are the way they are. It may be entertaining, but it will not lead to the right answer.

This test problem is, in fact, an optical illusion; it misleads us into judging the reality from the wrong perspective. In this sense, it is akin to agenda-driven movies, political speeches, media editorials, college courses, and writings by “progressive” economists, who, knowingly or not, blind us to simple facts, causing us to make wrong choices that benefit their cause to our detriment.

Oftentimes deceit can be accomplished not by hiding facts, but by replacing the coordinates and switching the entire frame of reference, which leads us to misjudge the same facts because we look at them from the wrong angle. This particular children’s problem is a good reminder that out of many ways to look at facts, only one is correct, and all others will only take us on a maddening and fruitless quest for nonexistent solutions.

It also calls to mind the ongoing political and cultural disputes between “liberals” and “conservatives.” Even though the “liberals” have never offered a workable answer, they rest assured in the superiority of their complex and morally relative approach to facts, despising “conservatives” for their simple belief in absolute truths that work. Unwilling to look at things from their opponents’ “simple” perspective, they like to end their discussions with “let’s agree to disagree.”

Likewise, quite a few foreigners look at America from across the border or across the ocean and misjudge this country’s realities simply because of the wrong perspective. Convinced of the superiority of their vantage point, they predictably arrive at bizarre and far-fetched conclusions, each one stranger than the last.

The simple truth of this test problem is that the numbers on the parking lot were placed there for the drivers; therefore, the only correct way to look at them is from inside the parking lot. That is the only correct system of coordinates; any other system or point of view leads to errors.

In summary, when faced with a seemingly unsolvable problem, check your absolutes; you may well be on the wrong side. Verify your system of coordinates, and make sure you are looking at the facts from the right perspective.

Wouldn’t we all be better off if our political candidates were tested with this question before running for office – starting with our president? As it happens, the current president’s far-reaching and flexible approaches to the country’s problems seem to include every possible angle except that of the people in the parking lot.

If you’re still unsure about the answer, see below.

Test_Parking_lot_Answer.png

ISIS, Mosul, Textbooks and Bad Headlines

What do you do when editors place an unfortunately worded headline above an opinion piece you wrote?

We have been struggling with that issue since last night. An opinion piece of ours was published today in the Washington Times about the need for people to witness atrocities—particularly the atrocities being perpetrated right now in Iraq—because we cannot rely on history books to accurately portray them. The column was not an attack on anyone. In the column, we explain that textbooks have sanitized historical atrocities that were similar or identical in nature to those now committed by ISIS. The Washington Times titled the column, “Sanitizing Islam.” We would have preferred something relating to witnessing history, recording history, accurately portraying atrocities, or sanitizing history.

At Verity Educate, we are committed to sharing the truth. We help inform parents and the public about what is really in their schools’ educational material and whether or not it is accurate. Sometimes it means pointing out inaccuracies in the history of empires ruled by Muslims. Sometimes it means pointing out inaccuracies in the history of the United States. Sometimes we deal with European history. Sometimes we deal with African history. And so on.

Our work is about honesty, accuracy, and objectivity. It is not about focusing on one religion. We began that piece by writing about the worst recorded atrocity in history, an atrocity committed entirely by Europeans—the Holocaust.

We hope you do read the column [below] in the Washington Times because the message is important: bear witness to what happens around you in your time and retell it, because you cannot be sure it will be accurately recorded for posterity.

Sanitizing Islam in textbooks

Soft-pedaling of past intolerance mustn’t obscure current eradication of competing faiths.

When shocking events happen, it is worthwhile to consider how future generations will retell them. In April 1945, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower wrote to Gen. George Marshall, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to explain why he visited the concentration camps even though it was “so overwhelming as to leave [him] a bit sick” and too powerful for even Gen. George S. Patton to enter. Eisenhower wrote, “I made the trip deliberately in order to be in position to give firsthand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to ‘propaganda.’”

It is for the same reasons that the world must pay attention to what has been happening in Iraq. Our society does exhibit a tendency to forget and dismiss atrocities.

By now, anyone who cares has heard the horrifying news that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has eradicated the ancient Christian community of Mosul after forcing an ultimatum on the population to choose between conversion to Islam, paying a special tax, or dying. ISIS relied on a centuries-old Islamic practice of placing Christians and Jews in a lower societal rank, referring to them as “dhimmi.” The associated tax non-Muslims paid to preserve their lives and religion historically was called “jizya.”

The dhimmi system and the jizya requirements were not universally applied in historic Muslim states and, in fact, they were adopted from the Sassanid (Persian) Empire that predated Islam. These practices were common in medieval caliphates and the 600-year Ottoman Empire. Yet today, in a revision of history, it has become common to minimize, ignore or misinterpret such historic subjugations and discriminations. In near-lockstep, essentially every world history and geography textbook emphasizes the “tolerant” nature of historic Muslim states, often in the same paragraph it teaches about dhimmis and jizya.

Volusia parents protest chapter on Islam in world history…

A McGraw-Hill middle-school text, “World History and Geography,” reads, “Muslim administrators were relatively tolerant, sometimes allowing local officials to continue to govern. Both Christians and Jews were allowed to practice their religions. Following the concept of dhimmitude, however, these peoples were free to practice their religions, but they were also subjected to some regulations in order to make them aware that they had been subdued by their conquerors. Those who chose not to convert were required to be loyal to Muslim rule and to pay special taxes.” In other words, it is “relatively tolerant” to require people to pay, convert or die — the same choice ISIS offers today.

A high school McGraw-Hill textbook, “World History,” reads, “The Ottoman system was generally tolerant of non-Muslims, who made up a significant minority within the empire. Non-Muslims paid a tax, but they were allowed to practice their religion or to convert to Islam.” This textbook deems it generally tolerant to require people to pay, convert or die — just like ISIS does.

Another text avoids applying the modern concept of tolerance, but it also minimizes the jizya requirement and the dhimmi system. Pearson-Prentice Hall’s, “World History” reads, “These Arabs imposed certain restrictions and a special tax on non-Muslims, but allowed Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians to practice their own faiths and follow their own religious customs within those restrictions.” It is disputed how often Zoroastrians were afforded the same privileges as Christians and Jews, but the text takes the rosy view on that. It obscures the historical fact that Arab rulers decreed a choice for non-Muslims: pay, convert or die — just as ISIS does.

The history of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim-ruled states is well known and well documented, but for decades now there has been an effort to sanitize it in education and even in scholarship. This happens when we are not dedicated to promoting truth and teaching facts. This is why it was vital that Gen. Eisenhower and many others witnessed the Holocaust, recorded it and refused to allow people to deny it.

Similarly, today it is vital to witness and record the destruction of the ancient community of Mosul, just as yesterday it was important to witness and record the atrocities in Rwanda and Sudan. If we do bear witness without wavering, maybe the textbooks of future generations will actually teach the facts about ISIS’ intolerance.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image titled Three Choices Illustration is by Greg Groesch/The Washington Times

The New Advance Placement U.S. History Exam: Providing Opportunities for Indoctrination

College Board dictates for the new Advanced Placement U.S. History exam have already garnered criticism. Jane Robbins and Larry Krieger charged that the new course of study “inculcates a consistently negative view of the nation’s past.” Units on colonial America stress “the development of a ‘rigid racial hierarchy’ and a ‘strong belief in British racial and cultural superiority.’” At the same time, the new Framework “ignores the United States’ founding principles and their influence in inspiring the spread of democracy and galvanizing the movement to abolish slavery.”

Advanced Placement (AP) teachers, of course, will need retraining for this; accordingly, Summer Institutes are being held across the country. I got a look at how teachers are pitched the new program at a session titled “Boundaries of Freedom: Teaching the Construction of Race and Slavery in the AP U.S. History Course” at the annual meeting of the Organization of American Historians (OAH), “the largest professional society dedicated to the teaching and study of American history,” in Atlanta this month. Identity politics and the assumption that conservatism is evil and backwards infused the conference. The AP session fit right into this year’s theme, “Crossing Borders,” highlighting the evils of the United States, in its past with slavery and segregation, and in its present in regards to “immigrants” (illegal aliens).

One of the AP panelists, Lawrence Charap, of the College Board, said that although there was no direct “coordination,” Common Core’s approach is being implemented in the AP and SAT exams by his boss, David Coleman, Common Core’s  architect and the new president of the College Board, which produces the AP and SAT exams. The new approach includes using the scholarly papers that one would find at this conference.

No More Facts, Ma’am

He told  high school teachers the new exams eliminate unnecessary memorization of facts and replace them with “historical thinking skills.” As examples of such irrelevant “facts,” Charap referred to Millard Fillmore and the Lend-Lease program.

The revisions to the exam began in 2006, at the request of college professors who said AP history tried to jam a college survey course, “a mile wide and an inch deep,” into a high school class, according to Charap. So the course has been redesigned to focus on skills, where students go in-depth and ask questions in an engaging way—traits AP shares with Common Core and the SAT. Accordingly, multiple-choice questions count for less of the score and have been reduced from 80 to 55, which Charap would like to reduce even further.

So what will replace facts about the thirteenth president or a controversial wartime program? Students will be tested for “skills,” in relating secondary (scholarly) sources back to the primary (historical) sources.

Dramatic Re-enactments

Such an exercise may sound good. But as I found out, it is a means by which teachers can impose their ideological views on students who do not yet have a foundation in history. The exercises showed that historically significant facts would be replaced with emotional exercises focused disproportionately on negative parts of American history. Two members of the AP development committee, UC-Irvine professor Jessica Millward and high school teacher James Sabathne, demonstrated how.

Millward said she brings her research on female slaves and their children in the Chesapeake Bay area of Maryland into the classroom. She claimed her students use “critical thinking skills” and focus on concepts, like “freedom” and “bondage.” Millward also recognizes students don’t do the assigned reading, so she breaks them into groups and has them read assignments on the spot. The exercises include a visual timeline and scenarios in which students imagine a way to “resist and rebel” against, for example, the whipping of a six-month pregnant slave face down, her belly in a hole (to protect the future “property”). Millward then play-acts the slave owner. She praised the new “interactive exam” for allowing the freedom to recreate such experiences. She offered a list of online resources, such as the University of North Carolina’s Documenting the American South, the African American Mosaic, and Depression-era Works Progress Administration interviews at the Library of Congress, as well as secondary sources, including her article, “‘That All Her Increase Shall Be Free’: Enslaved Women’s Bodies and the 1809 Maryland Law of Manumission” in Women’s History Review. No one can deny her contention that slavery involves “heartbreak,” but she seems intent on exploiting it.

After one teacher in the audience noted that the U.S.’s share of slave trade was only 5 percent, the panelists suggested that that fact and the one that some blacks owned slaves should be downplayed to students. Clearly, the aim is to give high school students a limited, emotional perspective of white-on-black racism, instead of the larger historical one.

Racist White People

The next panelist, James Sabanthe, who teaches at Hononegah High School in Rockton, Illinois, heralded the new focus on “historical interpretations.” It became apparent from his, Millward’s and other teachers’ comments that although high school students are treated as adults who “think like historians,” they do not do the reading that real historians do. Because students do not read all 20 to 30 pages of a typical scholarly article, Sabanthe distributes excerpts among groups of students. As an example of an exercise, students would be asked to use their “historical thinking skills” to demonstrate change while comparing revolutions in France, Russia, and China, a conversation launched by asking students about prior knowledge of labor systems, Indians, servants, and racism.

For the unit on slavery, Sabanthe provided hand-outs, with sample readings. Half of his groups would tackle excerpts from Edmund S. Morgan’s “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox,” in The Journal of American History (June 1972), and Kathleen M. Brown’s Good Wives, Nasty Wenches, & Anxious Patriarchs: Gender, Race, and Power in Colonial Virginia (1996). The other half would read excerpts from Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North America (1998) by Ira Berlin, former president of OAHand How Race Survived US History: From Settlement and Slavery to the Obama Phenomenon (2008) by David Roediger, who writes from a Marxist perspective. These groups would make “t charts” and Venn diagrams, and discuss similarities and differences between the excerpts.

But upon reading Sabanthe’s hand-out, it became clear the excerpts do not stand alone. Sometime surnames pop up, with prior references obviously in an omitted section. His assignment, to annotate the primary document, “’Decisions of the General Court’ regarding William Pierce’s Plantation, Virginia, 1640,” and relate it to Brown’s feminist tract, is bewildering. Students would need considerable direction. Instead of the full narrative of a textbook, history book, or full article that they could digest for themselves, students turn to their teacher for direction. Of course, this leaves wide open opportunities.

Trauma—From Whom?

This activity, according to the hand-out, fulfilled AP U.S. History Curriculum Framework, 2014, “Key Concepts,” pages 35-39, which focused on the especially racist qualities of the British system, for example: “Unlike Spanish, French, and Dutch colonies, which accepted intermarriage and cross-racial sexual unions with native peoples . . . , English colonies attracted both males and females who rarely intermarried with either native peoples or Africans, leading to the development of a rigid racial hierarchy” and “Reinforced by a strong belief in British racial and cultural superiority, the British system enslaved black people in perpetuity, altered African gender and kinship relationships in the colonies…”

With all the attention on abuses of slavery, it’s no wonder that one of the teachers, who teaches in an Orthodox Jewish school, wondered how she should handle the only black student in her class. In response, Millward acknowledged that these topics bring up anger and white guilt. “I believe in educational affirmative action,” she said and suggested removing the black student from the class discussion to avoid “trauma.”

Quite obviously, the “trauma” is a problem of the teachers’ own making—now to be reinforced by the College Board.

The new AP exams, like Common Core, presumably are inspired by what “engages” students. From what I heard at this and other panels, the revisions come from what engages, and profits, teachers developing the exams.

Although Sabathne said he is getting away from textbooks, he also said he has been working with Charap and publishers on new AP-aligned history books and guides. Sabathne encouraged teachers to sign up for his upcoming week-long AP session in St. Petersburg. The huge publisher Bedford-St. Martins has been working with the College Board on new books and was a “platinum” (highest level) sponsor of the conference. Norton Publishing (silver sponsor) is also coming out with new books. Charap optimistically said that in three years there should be a good bank of materials to prepare students for the new AP exam.

No doubt there will be, at the expense of taxpayers who subsidize the indoctrination.

Image by MC Quinn.

Remove the Feds From Education

Noah_Webster_pre-1843_IMG_4412_Cropped

Noah Webster, American lexicographer and educator (Wikipedia Image).

In 1838 Noah Webster, the father of American education, expressed the purpose of schools was the advancement of the Christian faith:

In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children under a free government ought to be instructed … No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.

Whether you believe in Jesus Christ or not, until he was given the old kick to the curb in 1963, when prayer was tossed out of American government schools, education was at or near the highest quality on earth.

But since the official dismissal of God and godly principles from U.S. Government school education, the overall quality of education in America now pales in comparison to that of most nations throughout the world. Education in America was supposed to reflect the good values of local communities, with a heavy emphasis on a rigorous curriculum meant to educate the mind, invigorate the soul, and encourage the spirit.

Originally, teachers in the United States understood that no two people are exactly alike. That is why until recent years, generations of Americans were encouraged to learn as much as possible and develop their God-given talents to the best of their ability.

Thus, “We The People” of prior generations of Americans were the most inventive on earth. Another primary goal of past generation teachers was to encourage and stimulate the imagination of young students, while at the same time giving them a sense of optimism about their future, their ability to achieve, and their country.

Unfortunately, in time a philosophical shift took place in America and the biblical principles for education were slowly eroded and abandoned. As a result, there have been sad and tragic consequences that continue to unfold.

John_Dewey_in_1902

John Dewey, American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer (Wikipedia Photo)

John Dewey, known as “the architect of modern education,” said “there is no God and there is no soul. Hence, there are no needs for the props of traditional religion.” Those so-called props have been obliterated. Thus, the loss of moral standards has opened the door to untold numbers of unwanted teen pregnancies, abortions, high suicide rates, less reliance on one’s God-given abilities, and more dependency on government, stupid violence, etc.

If we believe the founders were correct in asserting that America would fail if she lost her religious, or Judeo-Christian foundation, it is incumbent upon Christian believers to reaffirm and reclaim our Christian educational heritage. There are many ways to instigate change, but it begins with a willingness to become engaged in the battle.

Now please don’t freak out! I am not saying that we suddenly turn schools into theology centers. But a return to the inclusion of Godly or biblical standards would help reestablish an atmosphere of caring, excellence, and a sense of pride in the vocation of truly educating students. That is a departure from the current prevailing attitude of loyalty to the union and obedience to the one-size-fits-all Department of Education.

It is my opinion that the federal government has no moral, ethical, or logical grounds on which to continue dominating the education of our Republic’s young ones. Our students should, and must, be better prepared via parents, real education, and the church to perpetuate our exceptional way of life.

Unfortunately, the Department of Education has only helped to foster the decline in the quality of education that was already in a bad way when it was brought to fruition during the 1970s. The Department of Education (or indoctrination) is simply a bureaucratic beehive of centralized control over education that dictates to local school boards the politically correct indoctrination they want for American students.

Of course, local parents are not considered important unless they willingly go along with the status quo of the indoctrination industry headquartered inside the beltway. The result? Another recipe for disaster currently unfolding throughout our republic turned mob-rule democracy. The Department of Education hierarchy has systematically replaced family values with its own version of “the government is there to take care of you.”

The results of this travesty are self-evident. Hopefully, before it is too late, real local based education will soon replace the dangerous, centralized government den of indoctrination that has done more to stupefy America than almost any other known entity.

RELATED VIDEO: Who is behind FED LED ED/Common Core/21st Century Learning? To learn more about Linda Darling Hammond click here.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of ABC News Channel 7 in Denver, CO.

Common Core and Howard Zinn’s Controversial History Book “A People’s History of the United States”

A People’s History of the United States is a 1980 book written by Dr Howard Zinn, a U.S. historian and political scientist. This is a controversial history book since he presented United States history through the view point of the common people, radicals, socialists, and Marxists.

A People’s History of the United States, or the free materials that accompany the book which can be easily downloaded for free from the internet, is being used in middle and high schools in the Miami-Dade County Public School, the fourth largest school district in the United States, as well as in other middle schools and high schools and colleges and universities across the United States.

Zinn described United States entry in World War II as being manufactured through the institutions of American society. He stated that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 were unnecessary since the United States knew Japan was ready to surrender. Again this view is a distortion of reality.

Zinn explained the Cold War differently from standard American history textbooks. He wrote that the United States government used the Cold War to increase control of the American people and to create a state of permanent war.

Zinn argued that there will be a radical movement of rebelion involving labor unions, black radicals, Native Americans, feminists, and members of the middle class that would use strikes, civil disobedience, marches, demonstrations in order to redistribute wealth and to change the political and economic structure of the United States. Zinn wanted to establish a socialist or a Communist system in the nation.

This Marxist point of view of America explained that America’s riches are due to theft, and as such, America is under the obligation to redistribute its wealth to the Third World nations. Similarly, America needs also redistribute the wealth among its citizens in the nation to end income inequality.

The influence of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States can be seen in what is happening with the College Board Advance Placement U.S. history test. In an article written by Mary Grabar entitled “The New Advance Placement U.S. History Exam: Providing Opportunities for Indoctrination,” which was published by Bear Witness Central on August 5, 2014, she explained that this new test is being widely criticized.

Zinn described himself as “something of an anarchist, something of a socialist, and something of a Marxist.” He suggested looking at socialism in its full historical context as a popular, positive idea that got a bad name from its association with Soviet Communism.

Read  full article by clicking here.

Education in Florida: Where did we go wrong? What can we do about it?

Several leaders of the growing “Stop Common Core” movement recently were invited to meet with Dr. Kim McDougal, Governor Rick Scott’s chief adviser on education, in an attempt to dispel concerns about Common Core in Florida. Sadly, our meetings were spent talking past each other with absolutely no progress.

McDougal claims that the Florida Legislature made great headway on Common Core by passing SB 864 to allow for local districts to choose their own textbooks and have parental oversight.

As a member of the Lee County Schools textbook adoption committee, I can tell you that is a weak to non-existent tool. Pearson PLC controls 80% of the American market in education. We can only choose from Common Core aligned materials because our standards and high stakes testing drives teaching to the tests. The GED, ACT and SAT tests will all be Common Core aligned. Our children are still being fed anti-American propaganda and moral relativism at best. They are still deprived of the classical education they need.

SB 188 pretends to protect Florida’ students from data mining. It is non-functional on its face. It relies on FERPA to stop data sharing. Click here for a complete explanation why that fails. While the bill does say that our state will not collect 3 items of data, there are over 400 items required by the agreement they signed to adopt Common Core.

Dr. McDougal is a likable and intelligent person, but worked for Jeb Bush and completely swallowed the argument on “rigorous” Federal standards and accountability. Neither of those has been effective in truly changing education results. Here’s a quote from Wikipedia (of all places):

“[O]n the Standards movement which was an evolution of the earlier OBE (outcomes-based education) which was largely rejected in the United States as unworkable in the 1990s” “merely a re-labeling of a failed, unrealistic vision. It is believed to be the educational equivalent of a planned economy which attempts to require all children to perform at world-class levels merely by raising expectations and imposing punishments and sanctions on schools and children who fall short of the new standards.”

During our meeting, McDougal asked me, “Don’t you want any standards?” That got me thinking.

What happened before standards? Perhaps we should revert to a time before mandatory standards were dictated from above which was not all that long ago since the inception of the USDOE was 1979. Competition drives improvements, not government dictated, inflexible, dumbed down standards. In fact empirical evidence shows that more and more government involvement results in lower scores and much higher cost.

Our founding fathers were very well educated, yet there were no “standards.” People were individually accountable. Lindsey Burke of The Heritage Foundation has produced many articles on the negative effects of standards.

The Cato Institute has produced multitudes of interesting data showing the increased Federal spending and Federal programs exploding costs while students learn less. Here’s a link to one short report to Congress. Here is a more recent report on the impact of federal involvement on America’s classrooms

This Cato report graph says it all:

cato report

Over the last 100 years, our education system has been under attack by those who would like to undermine and defeat America. Common Core is the latest and most comprehensive attempt. It’s not just that our kids are not learning the 3 R’s. It is that they are being brainwashed.

From an excellent article on UNESCO Dr. Thomas Sowell summarized this mind-changing process in a 1993 article titled “Indoctrinating the Children“:

“The techniques of brainwashing developed in totalitarian countries are routinely used in psychological conditioning programs imposed on American school children. These include emotional shock and desensitization, psychological isolation from sources of support, stripping away defenses, manipulative cross-examination of the individual’s underlying moral values, and inducing acceptance of alternative values by psychological rather than rational means.”

“America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville

The positive Psychological tone in this lesson in the 1834 McGuffey’s Second Reader (below right) is a striking contrast to current lessons featuring “Johnny has Two Mommies” or worse in first and second grades.

eclectic reader

Taken from McGuffey’s Second Reader. For a larger view click on the image.

Let’s examine the ideas popular in today’s education circles to achieve higher results: 1.) rigorous national standards are necessary, 2.) accountability to national standards should be imposed on schools and teachers and 3.) with monetary and other high stakes consequences to students, teachers and school districts.

How does this actually fit with our objective of education, and does it really work? To measure if it works, we need to know just what is our goal in education?

Is it to give individuals the knowledge and skills to achieve their highest potential? Or is it to prepare people to fit into society’s needs: to be ready for college and careers?

Put another way, are we individuals who have a God given right to pursue happiness of our own volition? Or are we ruled by the state which demands us to become productive citizens, or “human capital” as advocates of Common Core have labelled our children?

In a free society, I would suggest the first, not the second would foster creativity, freedom, experimentation, and sometimes failure. But without failure, there is no success. History proves time and again that at the simple lack of intellectual boundaries and controls will cause societies to flourish. Most advances come at the beginning of great societies, before bureaucracy binds creativity and the society collapses of its own weight as we are witnessing today in America.

The greatest advances in the United States came soon after its beginning. Freedom, justice and property rights propelled us to the unprecedented pinnacle of the progress of civilization, enjoying the highest standards of living ever achieved since the dawn of mankind.

So where did we get our educational goals in the first place to achieve all this? Our founding fathers knew that the Bible was the foundational resource for education:

“Romans 12:2 – And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

And what does the Bible say about who is responsible for educating our children? Is it you, the parent, or the government?

“Deuteronomy 11:19 – And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.”

Let’s look backward to a time when there were no external standards and see what was studied in schools and how much they learned.

One of the most fascinating and successful names in American education was William McGuffey, who wrote textbooks in the 1820-30s. “The lessons in the Readers encouraged standards of morality and society throughout the United States for more than a century. They dealt with the natural curiosity of children; emphasized work and an independent spirit; encouraged an allegiance to country, and an understanding of the importance of religious values. The Readers were filled with stories of strength, character, goodness and truth. The books presented a variety of contrasting viewpoints on many issues and topics, and drew moral conclusions about lying, stealing, cheating, poverty, teasing, alcohol, overeating, skipping school and foul language. The books taught children to seek an education and continue to learn throughout their lives.” Between 1836 and 1960, over 120 million were estimated to be sold. His books are still in use today by many homeschoolers.

Here’s a link to a 1912 8th grade test. Expectations and results were clearly higher without the imposition of State or Federal “Standards.”

So, Dr. McDougal is right. I do not want state or federally imposed standards because empirical evidence shows that this does not accomplish the goal of education, to help each student reach their highest potential.

The accountability aspect is likewise counterproductive. By some accounts, approximately 40% of time in school is testing, and not learning. A simple reduction of learning time alone would account for the lower results we are achieving in public schools.

In conclusion, we need to remind Dr. McDougal that Common Core is also unconstitutional, unaffordable, unwise, ineffective, and intrusive. No matter what you call it, we want it out of our schools and we want Governor Scott to listen to growing, intelligent and thoughtful opposition instead of listening to those who stand to gain money and power by its implementation. We will NOT abandon our children for your political gain, but we may abandon you!