K-12 education Archives - Dr. Rich Swier

There are multiple flaws on our K-12 education system, but the undying one has rarely been discussed, much less analyzed and addressed.

The fundamental premise of the US K-12 education system is basically:

We will teach your children a number of Facts in select subject areas (English, Math, Science, History, etc.).
Spread out over the K-12 period, this will be what we call a Sound Basic Education.
This Sound Basic Education will enable your child to: a) continue on for Higher Education [if they so choose], and b) be a productive, happy member of society.

On the surface this all sounds good and reasonable. However, a more thorough examination exposes the reality that this model is profoundly flawed in several fundamental ways.

Some of these defects are:

Who determines the “Facts” that will be taught? For example, what are the Facts regarding our energy options, climate change, the origins of the universe, American history, gender identity, etc? Our present system has been taken over by Left-leaning academics and activists, so Progressives dictate to K-12 students what the “Facts” are on key issues — even though many of them are in dispute.
Critical Thinking is not taught. No State in the US currently has any statewide subject standards where K-12 students are formally taught how to do Critical Thinking. None. The reason for this purposeful omission is that Progressives do NOT want students questioning the suspect “Facts” they are told to accept.
Worse, the opposite of Critical Thinking is being taught. The pervasive message is that students should be conformists. For example they should: defer to authority, follow what’s politically in vogue, adhere to consensus views, accept what computer models and projections say, etc. In all of these, the message is clear to students: “We do not need or want your thoughts on any societal matters, as computers and smarter people than you have given us proper direction.”
The current Higher Education system is simply more advanced indoctrination. Once Critical Thinking has been squelched and Conformity has become the norm in K-12, it’s child’s play to up the ante.
Nothing about this education system assures productivity. True productivity is based on such qualities as persistent effort, good efficiency, and creativity (part of Critical Thinking). The current system is creating lemmings by instead teaching entitlement and conformity, which are both anathema to real productivity.
Nothing about this education system assures happiness. This can be made a complicated matter, but we are simplifying here. Happiness boils down to having a meaningful life. That comes about by embracing genuine values — e.g., Judeo-Christian. Instead children are infused with the corrosive idea of relativism (via SEL, etc.). This guarantees a mediocre country with inherently unhappy citizens.

The Bottom Line

Let’s make this very simple. The fight over the purpose of our education system can be boiled down to two radically different perspectives:

The Left believes that we should be teaching our children WHAT to think.
The Right believes that we should be teaching our children HOW to think.

For a few decades now the US K-12 education system has been following the Progressives Plan — primarily because no major Conservative organization is paying sufficient attention to the curricula issue. In this pivotal battlefield, the Right has surrendered to the Left!

Until this is fixed, America will continue a steady downhill descent.

Tragically we are quickly approaching the point of no return.

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

On November 6, 2012 Floridians will be asked to vote on eleven amendments to the state constitution. Of these amendments Amendment 8 has become the flash point with groups favoring and opposing passage digging in their heels. The war on words has become a full-fledged battle for the hearts and minds of voters.

The proposed ballot question reads:

Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

The proposed measure would amend Section 3 of Article I of the Florida Constitution to read:

There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace, or safety. No individual or entity may be discriminated against or barred from receiving funding on the basis of religious identity or belief. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

Two groups launched websites explaining Amendment 8: Say Yes on 8 and Vote No on 8.

Vote No on 8 states, “Amendment 8, the so-called ‘Religious Freedom’ Amendment, isn’t about Religious Freedom at all. Amendment 8 actually allows the government to give our tax dollars to any group claiming to be a religious organization.”

Say Yes on 8 states, “Amendment 8 preserves time-honored partnerships between government and social service organizations. Amendment 8 ensures continued delivery of social services by faith-based organizations, lowering government costs for taxpayers. Amendment 8 eliminates discrimination against churches and religious institutions that provide social services.”

Amendment 8, if passed, would take the Blaine Amendment out of the Florida Constitution. The Blaine Amendment refers to constitutional provisions that exist in 38 of the 50 state constitutions in the United States, which forbid direct government aid to educational institutions that have any religious affiliation. The Blaine Amendment was originally aimed at Catholics, most notably the Irish, who had immigrated to the U.S. and started their own parochial schools.

In 2002, the United States Supreme Court in the Zelman v. Simmons-Harris decision partially vitiated these Blaine amendments when it ruled that vouchers were constitutional if state funds followed a child to a privately chosen school, even if it were religious. For a voucher program to be constitutional it must meet all of the following criteria: the program must have a valid secular purpose; aid must go to parents and not to the schools; a broad class of beneficiaries must be covered; the program must be neutral with respect to religion; and there must be adequate nonreligious options.

Billy Atwell in an editorial for the Diocese of Venice in Florida states, “Some support the work of faith-based institutions, but disagree with these institutions accepting government money. They fear faith-based groups would become beholden to the mighty arm of government. Shouldn’t these groups be allowed to serve those in need and do what they do well? It is one thing to say faith-based groups shouldn’t accept government dollars—it is entirely different to outlaw their eligibility for these funds. The current law also flies in the face of religious freedom. Singling out capable social service providers simply because they are faith-based is fiscally unsound and, without a doubt, discrimination.”

While the arguments used by each group focus on religious freedom the real issue is control of taxpayer dollars for K-12 education.

For many it boils down to money, particularly money for K-12 schooling flowing into charter or private faith-based schools. Proponents argue that parents should decide where their child goes to school and the money allocated by the state should follow the child. That is not the case in Florida. Public education fits the definition of a monopoly. This amendment would free parents from being forced into a particular public school. School choice would be empowered if Amendment 8 passes by giving the funding for the child directly to the parent.

Florida Representative Stephen Precourt, a spokesman for the Say Yes on 8 campaigns, stated, “They shouldn’t be telling a group that just because you’re faith-based organization you shouldn’t be participating in the market! Education is a marketplace.”

The ballot question boils down to: Should public funding for education follow the child?

RELATED VIDEO:

Tag Archive for: K-12 education

The Battle Over Florida’s Amendment 8 Begins