Cancel culture, not real..want proof?

[Libertas]

I saw this on Twitter, did not know this...

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... 235124373/

Louis C.K. Wins Grammy for Comedy Album in Which He Addresses Sexual Misconduct Revelations

https://twitter.com/MoiraDonegan/status ... NrrRv44FvQ

I wonder if the careers of the women comedians Louis CK forced to watch him masturbate—who were allegedly threatened by CK’s manager—have recovered from the stigma of coming forward. Louis CK’s own career seems to have bounced back very well.

People who say Me Too has “gone too far” love to point to what they see as feminism’s supposed sadism. But I for one just wish that men’s sexual abuse and harassment was considered morally worse than women’s complaints about it. The latter seems to get punished more.

[ProfX]

Like "political correctness," I just find it's an epithet without much substance, and usually invoked to grind some axe.

Like the GOPer who said he was going to convince everybody to boycott Disney, then 1 minute later whined about "cancel culture".

Or Vladmir Putin saying Russia is being "cancelled". No, Vlad, it's being punished by sanctions because of your war crimes in Ukraine.

You have a right to say what you wish. At the Oscars. In a classroom. On a stage. In a rally. Or wherever. But this idea that it's supposed to be without consequences. Where does that idea come from?

If people tune you out, turn you off, don't buy your tickets, don't attend your BS, say you don't deserve an award ... that is their right, too.

[JoeMemphis]

Like "political correctness," I just find it's an epithet without much substance, and usually invoked to grind some axe.

Like the GOPer who said he was going to convince everybody to boycott Disney, then 1 minute later whined about "cancel culture".

Or Vladmir Putin saying Russia is being "cancelled". No, Vlad, it's being punished by sanctions because of your war crimes in Ukraine.

You have a right to say what you wish. At the Oscars. In a classroom. On a stage. In a rally. Or wherever. But this idea that it's supposed to be without consequences. Where does that idea come from?

If people tune you out, turn you off, don't buy your tickets, don't attend your BS, say you don't deserve an award ... that is their right, too.

As has been pointed out to me on this board, you do have a right to say what you wish. However, as has also been pointed out on this board, you are NOT guaranteed the forum. As a teacher, you know this as well as anyone. We do agree that freedom of speech doesn’t mean that people will like what you have to say or will listen at all and/or that your speech won’t have consequences.

Do you think we have gotten to the point with social media/internet that we no longer well tolerate differences of opinion? Are we too easily offended when people disagree or don’t see eye to eye? I don’t know.

[ProfX]

Do you think we have gotten to the point with social media/internet that we no longer well tolerate differences of opinion?

Well, Joe, maybe you liked the Fantastic Four reboot, but if you do, you are scum.

And I have no idea where people get this idea.

Are we too easily offended when people disagree or don’t see eye to eye? I don’t know.

Well ... I have said it here, and I have said it in class, I don't hold a view that the purpose of pedagogy is to avoid offending anybody.

I again don't know any teachers who have a goal of making white children offended or uncomfortable, but I find it really weird states are now making it against the law to make white kids offended or uncomfortable.

And what I've seen, from my own experience, is a student who wants to take offense, will twist and distort your point to make it seem offensive.

This happens on MBs too.

[JoeMemphis]

Well, Joe, maybe you liked the Fantastic Four reboot, but if you do, you are scum.

And I have no idea where people get this idea.



Well ... I have said it here, and I have said it in class, I don't hold a view that the purpose of pedagogy is to avoid offending anybody.

I again don't know any teachers who have a goal of making white children offended or uncomfortable, but I find it really weird states are now making it against the law to make white kids offended or uncomfortable.

And what I've seen, from my own experience, is a student who wants to take offense, will twist and distort your point to make it seem offensive.

This happens on MBs too.

I haven’t really seen the Fantastic Four. I am vaguely familiar with it but really can’t offer an opinion. I’ll take you word for it.

As for the rest of my comments, I wasn’t really speaking of the classroom which I think the classroom is a different forum than say the public square or the Oscar’s, a professional sports event or a message board. But you and I have discussed that before. I was referring normal day to day interactions. I was referring to the types of comments people make in day to day conversations that are interpreted in the worst possible way. We no longer give people the benefit of the doubt but rather assume they intend the worst. For example, you can’t simply have your facts wrong but what someone calls you a liar. You can’t have a difference of opinion on a policy or social event without being labeled an extremist.

Do you think that conversing with people digitally has made us less tolerant or more coarse? Personally, I think it has to some degree.

[gounion]

I haven’t really seen the Fantastic Four. I am vaguely familiar with it but really can’t offer an opinion. I’ll take you word for it.

As for the rest of my comments, I wasn’t really speaking of the classroom which I think the classroom is a different forum than say the public square or the Oscar’s, a professional sports event or a message board. But you and I have discussed that before. I was referring normal day to day interactions. I was referring to the types of comments people make in day to day conversations that are interpreted in the worst possible way. We no longer give people the benefit of the doubt but rather assume they intend the worst. For example, you can’t simply have your facts wrong but what someone calls you a liar. You can’t have a difference of opinion on a policy or social event without being labeled an extremist.

Do you think that conversing with people digitally has made us less tolerant or more coarse? Personally, I think it has to some degree.

Very true. If you were in your professional capacity, would you just make up lies about a person? Yes or no?

[ProfX]

As for the rest of my comments, I wasn’t really speaking of the classroom which I think the classroom is a different forum than say the public square or the Oscar’s, a professional sports event or a message board.

I concur - there is an academic freedom which I think is not exactly the same as freedom of speech, to present controversial and challenging ideas in class, regardless of how "offensive" they are. Of course, whether that right is actively protected depends on tenure, which many academics don't have, and some legislators are trying to take away, in any case.

That said, I don't think said freedom is any more unlimited than freedom of speech is. Many forms of classroom behavior are and should be unacceptable, and I don't view it as a license to, well, falsify reality. Tenure is not a lack of accountability - I call it "making sure firing is by cause".

Do you think that conversing with people digitally has made us less tolerant or more coarse? Personally, I think it has to some degree.

Yes, there is plenty of research that shows, particularly in text-based communication systems, like this one, the lack of the ability to see the other person's facial expressions, body language, and other nonverbal cues, also makes it easier to both misunderstand them and not get or "see" how your words are impacting them, hence the phenomenon of "flame wars".

But I want to be clear. While I am a fan of Marshall McLuhan and that mediums do shape messages, it is not the case that this behavior is only found in online environments. It certainly seems to me that at certain events, like Trump rallies, , people increasingly behave in ways that are boorish and insensitive and coarse to others who are present, like journalists, or protesters.

I don't believe the Internet is wholly responsible for said phenomenon. We could talk about political polarization. But I would focus on this.



People increasingly act as if the feelings of others don't matter. Of course, to me, this is linked to how people often only view issues through a lens of how they are directly affected, rather than considering the impact of things on others. (Such as public health policy.)

I find a decrease in empathy in this society. Now I am not a spiritual guru telling everybody to be filled with love and light. But I definitely see this growing way in which others, particularly others who are different, their feelings and experiences are negated or ignored.

[JoeMemphis]

I concur - there is an academic freedom which I think is not exactly the same as freedom of speech, to present controversial and challenging ideas in class, regardless of how "offensive" they are. Of course, whether that right is actively protected depends on tenure, which many academics don't have, and some legislators are trying to take away, in any case.

That said, I don't think said freedom is any more unlimited than freedom of speech is. Many forms of classroom behavior are and should be unacceptable, and I don't view it as a license to, well, falsify reality. Tenure is not a lack of accountability - I call it "making sure firing is by cause".



Yes, there is plenty of research that shows, particularly in text-based communication systems, like this one, the lack of the ability to see the other person's facial expressions, body language, and other nonverbal cues, also makes it easier to both misunderstand them and not get or "see" how your words are impacting them, hence the phenomenon of "flame wars".

But I want to be clear. While I am a fan of Marshall McLuhan and that mediums do shape messages, it is not the case that this behavior is only found in online environments. It certainly seems to me that at certain events, like Trump rallies, , people increasingly behave in ways that are boorish and insensitive and coarse to others who are present, like journalists, or protesters.

I don't believe the Internet is wholly responsible for said phenomenon. We could talk about political polarization. But I would focus on this.



People increasingly act as if the feelings of others don't matter. Of course, to me, this is linked to how people often only view issues through a lens of how they are directly affected, rather than considering the impact of things on others. (Such as public health policy.)

I find a decrease in empathy in this society. Now I am not a spiritual guru telling everybody to be filled with love and light. But I definitely see this growing way in which others, particularly others who are different, their feelings and experiences are negated or ignored.

I don’t have a problem with the idea of academic freedom especially at the.collegiate level. I do think that there are limits to what gets presented K thru 12. That balance has to be struck between the parents, the students, the community, and academia. As you said earlier, you have the freedom of speech but you aren’t guaranteed the forum. Public schools are owned by and serve the public. So while we should respect the views of educators, educators should respect the views of students and parents which they serve. It’s a two way street. Public school students are not educators’ to do with as they wish. Everybody is accountable to someone.

I get your point on lack of empathy. There was plenty of it to go around during the pandemic.

[ProfX]

Public school students are not educators’ to do with as they wish. Everybody is accountable to someone.

Well I will again state my view: in K-12, parents are welcome to have input into the curriculum, but they do not set the curriculum, nor do they have a veto. Education has never worked that way. After all, if they know more than the teachers, they can homeschool. No? But they don't. It's why they send their kids to school.

As I said before: you can talk to your doctor, who is a medical professional, you can discuss treatments with him, but you do not get to prescribe. He does, because he is the professional. Teachers are professionals. Not unaccountable ones, anymore than MDs are not unaccountable. I don't dispute they work for the public, but that doesn't mean know-nothings in the public get to tell them how and what to teach. Anymore than doctors working for the local public hospital (Jackson Memorial) don't keep the right to prescribe.

You can ask your doctor about Ivermectin. You might even be able to find a nut job who will prescribe it. But you can't MAKE your doctor do it. It's not how this works.

If you don't want your kid to read Maus, tell them not to check it out of the library.
If you don't want them learning about gay people - dunno, take them out of school.
If you don't like the 1619 Project being used in the classroom - exercise a different option?

What you feel is "right" for your kids does not mean you get to deprive other parent's children/students of reality. And if you really want to shelter them from various parts of reality, you do have other options, like homeschooling etc.

Lawmakers at the state level should not be making these decisions which at best belong at the district/board level ... I'm firmly a localist on this issue. And yes, school boards should listen to parents, but the ones screaming the loudest at a meeting don't necessarily speak for the majority of the community.

[JoeMemphis]

Well I will again state my view: in K-12, parents are welcome to have input into the curriculum, but they do not set the curriculum, nor do they have a veto. Education has never worked that way. After all, if they know more than the teachers, they can homeschool. No? But they don't. It's why they send their kids to school.

As I said before: you can talk to your doctor, who is a medical professional, you can discuss treatments with him, but you do not get to prescribe. He does, because he is the professional. Teachers are professionals. Not unaccountable ones, anymore than MDs are not unaccountable. I don't dispute they work for the public, but that doesn't mean know-nothings in the public get to tell them how and what to teach. Anymore than doctors working for the local public hospital (Jackson Memorial) don't keep the right to prescribe.

You can ask your doctor about Ivermectin. You might even be able to find a nut job who will prescribe it. But you can't MAKE your doctor do it. It's not how this works.

If you don't want your kid to read Maus, tell them not to check it out of the library.
If you don't want them learning about gay people - dunno, take them out of school.
If you don't like the 1619 Project being used in the classroom - exercise a different option?

What you feel is "right" for your kids does not mean you get to deprive other parent's children/students of reality. And if you really want to shelter them from various parts of reality, you do have other options, like homeschooling etc.

Lawmakers at the state level should not be making these decisions which at best belong at the district/board level ... I'm firmly a localist on this issue. And yes, school boards should listen to parents, but the ones screaming the loudest at a meeting don't necessarily speak for the majority of the community.

I will restate my position. Teachers work for the school system and the school system ultimately works for the community. It isn’t the other way around. Many times I have worked with and for people who did not understand much of exactly what it took to do the job or didn’t understand tax law or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. I did not and could not dictate policy to them. Ultimately it was their decision. If I did not like the decision, I could either live with it or I could leave. It’s no different with educators. It’s a job with a boss. Last I checked, that’s the electorate. Parents are part of that. You as an educator are part of that. So it’s whomever wins in the public forum or election or school board meeting. So if you don’t like the decisions, you have options as well. What YOU feel is right for kids doesn’t mean you get to dictate your values to other parents or students. You are welcome to make yourself heard at the school board just like the parent. You shouldn’t have a veto anymore than any other member of the community.

[Libertas]

fascists

[ProfX]

It’s a job with a boss. Last I checked, that’s the electorate.

Only in a public school.

And to be clear, teachers are not elected. School board members are.

Nowhere have I said (K-12) teachers are not accountable to the principal or the school board. They are accountable in many ways, and of course for misconduct in the classroom they should be disciplined.

What I keep saying is, I hope the school board makes decisions on the curriculum based on science, facts, logic, and scholarship. I deeply believe in democracy, but just because in a room of 100 know-nothings 55 say gravity isn't real doesn't mean this is what teachers should teach. I will repeat, parents get some input in the curriculum, but they should not SET it.

The alternative leads to things like we are seeing elsewhere in the world. Poland forbidding educators from teaching about Polish involvement in the Holocaust. Russians arresting educators in Ukraine who don't teach their "authorized version" of Russian/Ukrainian history or their narrative about the war/"special operation". Or how China actually used to imprison teachers who didn't open with a daily reading from Mao's Little Red Book.

What YOU feel is right for kids doesn’t mean you get to dictate your values to other parents or students.

Of course, I'm not in K-12, but ...

I don't dictate anything to anyone. What I do believe is students need to be taught the facts and the truth of situations, even if it makes them uncomfortable, or their parents unhappy. But secondly, and I have said this, I do not indoctrinate. I don't tell students what conclusions to reach from everything I present, but that doesn't mean I won't help contextualize information for them. After all, if all they needed was facts and information, they could get it from an encyclopedia.

I like to think I show them more - I show them how facts and information exist within context. This includes how to contextualize the present. They may not like that I show how Trump fits into a long history of U.S. Nativism. But no, that's not "just my opinion" - I think it can be academically demonstrated.

[Motor City]

austerity culture

[JoeMemphis]

Only in a public school.

And to be clear, teachers are not elected. School board members are.

Nowhere have I said (K-12) teachers are not accountable to the principal or the school board. They are accountable in many ways, and of course for misconduct in the classroom they should be disciplined.

What I keep saying is, I hope the school board makes decisions on the curriculum based on science, facts, logic, and scholarship. I deeply believe in democracy, but just because in a room of 100 know-nothings 55 say gravity isn't real doesn't mean this is what teachers should teach. I will repeat, parents get some input in the curriculum, but they should not SET it.

The alternative leads to things like we are seeing elsewhere in the world. Poland forbidding educators from teaching about Polish involvement in the Holocaust. Russians arresting educators in Ukraine who don't teach their "authorized version" of Russian/Ukrainian history or their narrative about the war/"special operation". Or how China actually used to imprison teachers who didn't open with a daily reading from Mao's Little Red Book.



Of course, I'm not in K-12, but ...

I don't dictate anything to anyone. What I do believe is students need to be taught the facts and the truth of situations, even if it makes them uncomfortable, or their parents unhappy. But secondly, and I have said this, I do not indoctrinate. I don't tell students what conclusions to reach from everything I present, but that doesn't mean I won't help contextualize information for them. After all, if all they needed was facts and information, they could get it from an encyclopedia.

I like to think I show them more - I show them how facts and information exist within context. This includes how to contextualize the present. They may not like that I show how Trump fits into a long history of U.S. Nativism. But no, that's not "just my opinion" - I think it can be academically demonstrated.

It doesn’t matter if you work in the public sector or the private sector. Most of us are accountable to someone. So it matters how those folks feel about what you do and how you do it. You don’t have to agree and you don’t have to think they are smart. Just like the parent you suggested could home school, you can always opt to go work somewhere else. Or you can put up your own money and work for yourself.

Respecting parents right to weigh in on the education of their children doesn’t necessarily lead to all the gloom and doom consequences you mentioned. You act as if there is no middle ground. There is.

[ProfX]

Respecting parents right to weigh in on the education of their children doesn’t necessarily lead to all the gloom and doom consequences you mentioned. You act as if there is no middle ground. There is.

You will note I have said several times I have said parents may - and BTW do - and BTW have for decades - "weigh in" on the curriculum.

Nothing's stopping you from going to a school board meeting and saying (for example) "You know, there's this really cool book I saw the other day called Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. Maybe you could incorporate it into your art classes?"

This happens every day. Sometimes these suggestions are incorporated. What a lot of these legislators don't acknowledge is the 1619 Project curriculum is being adopted by many districts because ... drum roll, please ... parents suggested it. Well, maybe not white conservative parents.

The middle ground you want exists already.

However, and I've said this, I do not think you have the right to go to a school board meeting and say "I don't want my kid learning that gay or trans people exist". Well ... dunno, you can shelter your kid from reality, maybe, but just because you feel that way doesn't mean you can tell the teachers to avoid showing reality to the entire class.

[gounion]

I guess the question to Joe would be, do you want fact-based education, or fantasy indoctrination?

Do you want a religious education, denying the reality of things like gay and trans people existing, there's no such thing as evolution, and teaching that the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery?

Well? Joe? Of course, we already know you're not much for germ theory, either.

[JoeMemphis]

You will note I have said several times I have said parents may - and BTW do - and BTW have for decades - "weigh in" on the curriculum.

Nothing's stopping you from going to a school board meeting and saying (for example) "You know, there's this really cool book I saw the other day called Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. Maybe you could incorporate it into your art classes?"

This happens every day. Sometimes these suggestions are incorporated. What a lot of these legislators don't acknowledge is the 1619 Project curriculum is being adopted by many districts because ... drum roll, please ... parents suggested it. Well, maybe not white conservative parents.

The middle ground you want exists already.

However, and I've said this, I do not think you have the right to go to a school board meeting and say "I don't want my kid learning that gay or trans people exist". Well ... dunno, you can shelter your kid from reality, maybe, but just because you feel that way doesn't mean you can tell the teachers to avoid showing reality to the entire class.

I am not about limiting someone’s right to free speech simply because I might not agree with what they say. A public school board meeting is a public forum. You have every right not to listen or to offer a different point of view.

The classroom which is funded with public money. So while you may believe you have a “right” to teach a six year old about the facts of life, parents may disagree. What you believe is appropriate and when, where and how some of these ideas and values are presented is not your decision alone. By the way, I and other members of the community may agree with some of those concepts. Parents have every right to question what values are being taught and how they are presented. These are their children. They do not belong to the state.

If the attitude of public educators is that they can choose what values they teach, how they teach them, and at what age they get presented to the student without regard to what the parent may think or believe, I think it is high time we go to a voucher system and let the parent decide what is best for their children.

[Libertas]

I guess the question to Joe would be, do you want fact-based education, or fantasy indoctrination?

Do you want a religious education, denying the reality of things like gay and trans people existing, there's no such thing as evolution, and teaching that the Civil War wasn't fought over slavery?

Well? Joe? Of course, we already know you're not much for germ theory, either.

Does he know the difference?

[ProfX]

The classroom which is funded with public money. So while you may believe you have a “right” to teach a six year old about the facts of life, parents may disagree. What you believe is appropriate and when, where and how some of these ideas and values are presented is not your decision alone.

While I do believe there needs to be decisions about what is and is not age-appropriate ... yeah, I don't think sex ed with full anatomical diagrams belongs in Kindergarten, totally agreed ... this is what bothers me.

It should be educators making these decisions and setting them, in consultation with parents, but not determined by parents. And for sure, I would not leave it up to state legislators to decide. They have no freaking clue, and they keep making this clear over and over again.

Again, I totally agree a 3rd grade teacher doesn't need to go into clinical detail about how gay people have sex. But they wouldn't anyway. These "don't say gay" laws pre-empt ANY discussion. Now they're going to fire a teacher who's gay and mentioned he had a husband. That's it. He did not discuss their sex life, he did not try to "recruit" any kids into the gay lifestyle. This is the reductio ad absurdum of where this crap leads.

Parents have every right to question what values are being taught and how they are presented. These are their children. They do not belong to the state.

You keep talking about values. I keep talking about facts and knowledge.

Look, Joe, this is the bottom line for me. It may offend you that 2+2 does not = 5, you may not want it taught, it may go against your values, but whether you agree with me or not, parents don't get to tell the teacher that 2+2 = 5 because this is what they want their kids learning.

But see, this is the thing, I also think this is as true for biology, social studies, and art history as it is for math and science/"STEM" subjects.

I think it is high time we go to a voucher system and let the parent decide what is best for their children.

Well, of course, you would think that no matter what.

[JoeMemphis]

While I do believe there needs to be decisions about what is and is not age-appropriate ... yeah, I don't think sex ed with full anatomical diagrams belongs in Kindergarten, totally agreed ... this is what bothers me.

It should be educators making these decisions and setting them, in consultation with parents, but not determined by parents. And for sure, I would not leave it up to state legislators to decide. They have no freaking clue, and they keep making this clear over and over again.

Again, I totally agree a 3rd grade teacher doesn't need to go into clinical detail about how gay people have sex. But they wouldn't anyway. These "don't say gay" laws pre-empt ANY discussion. Now they're going to fire a teacher who's gay and mentioned he had a husband. That's it. He did not discuss their sex life, he did not try to "recruit" any kids into the gay lifestyle. This is the reductio ad absurdum of where this crap leads.



You keep talking about values. I keep talking about facts and knowledge.

Look, Joe, this is the bottom line for me. It may offend you that 2+2 does not = 5, you may not want it taught, it may go against your values, but whether you agree with me or not, parents don't get to tell the teacher that 2+2 = 5 because this is what they want their kids learning.

But see, this is the thing, I also think this is as true for biology, social studies, and art history as it is for math and science/"STEM" subjects.



Well, of course, you would think that no matter what.

You say you believe in accountability in education, in your world to whom are educators accountable? Not legislatures, not parents - they aren’t intelligent enough to decide what’s best for their children? Who exactly do you propose to provide oversight and accountability for educators?

Most professionals, doctors, lawyers, accountants make recommendations. They don’t have nor should they have the authority to impose their will on their clients. They don’t have veto power. That is left to the client. I get you don’t have much respect for some parents, school board members or legislators. I don’t have a lot of respect for some of them either. They often pass laws that make no sense to me whatsoever. I don’t get to disregard those laws and regulations. I don’t get to dismiss them because I believe they are fundamentally wrong and passed by idiots. As a CPA I have a duty to abide by those laws whether I agree with them or not and the public has a right to expect me to do so.

This isn’t a math problem we are discussing. This isn’t 2 + 2. That’s a oversimplification. These are other peoples children and they as parents have every right to question educators and the education system regardless of your personal opinion of their level of intelligence or right to question the system. So if we are moving towards a system where public education is some kind of autonomous fiefdom, I think we need to let parents make the decision on where their public education dollars are spent. No accountability or little accountability is not a good idea in my opinion. You mentioned doctors before as a comparison. If I don’t agree with my doctor, I can always go to another doctor. I think the same choice should be available to parents and students. We are in the toilet in education as compared to other industrialized nations. We should explore other options.

[Libertas]

I bet con wants public schools to teach christianity.

[ProfX]

You say you believe in accountability in education, in your world to whom are educators accountable?

We both know, and I stated the answer, earlier: in a public school, a) to the principal and the administration and b) the school board.

So if we are moving towards a system where public education is some kind of autonomous fiefdom,

No: we have a system which is based on the principles of John Dewey (google him), and I think it has to be maintained.

I think we need to let parents make the decision on where their public education dollars are spent.

Absolutely Joe. They do that by voting for the local school board, and maybe secondarily on bond issues or lottery programs or whatever else funds education.

Truth be told, and I'm just stating reality, lately school boards have been in the news a lot lately, so things may be different than normal, but in most years, school board elections have some of the lowest turnout of any municipal elections. Most people totally ignore them. I'm not saying that's good, but I am just saying it's usually the case.

No accountability or little accountability is not a good idea in my opinion. You mentioned doctors before as a comparison. If I don’t agree with my doctor, I can always go to another doctor. I think the same choice should be available to parents and students. We are in the toilet in education as compared to other industrialized nations. We should explore other options.

Uh huh. I said that. (in bold).

BTW, we're somewhere in the middle of the pack. We can discuss why that is.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... h-science/

We can talk about why. It is definitely not because students are being exposed to too much CRT or gayness.

If you're gonna say "teachers unions," you should note the highest scoring Western European country, Finland, also has one of the highest levels of teacher unionization.

P.S. it also has nothing to do with your bugaboos.

[JoeMemphis]

We both know, and I stated the answer, earlier: in a public school, a) to the principal and the administration and b) the school board.



No: we have a system which is based on the principles of John Dewey (google him), and I think it has to be maintained.



Absolutely Joe. They do that by voting for the local school board, and maybe secondarily on bond issues or lottery programs or whatever else funds education.

Truth be told, and I'm just stating reality, lately school boards have been in the news a lot lately, so things may be different than normal, but in most years, school board elections have some of the lowest turnout of any municipal elections. Most people totally ignore them. I'm not saying that's good, but I am just saying it's usually the case.



Uh huh. I said that. (in bold).

BTW, we're somewhere in the middle of the pack. We can discuss why that is.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... h-science/

We can talk about why. It is definitely not because students are being exposed to too much CRT or gayness.

If you're gonna say "teachers unions," you should note the highest scoring Western European country, Finland, also has one of the highest levels of teacher unionization.

P.S. it also has nothing to do with your bugaboos.

School boards are accountable to the public. That’s been my point. Ultimately the public decides.

I never said where we rank in education has anything to do with CRT or gayness or bugaboos. I never mentioned teachers unions. But I get your point. We are mediocre. A “C” average among other nations. I would also note that we are not Finland. We have a bigger, more diverse, geographically dispersed population and a different constitution. A few differences just to name a few.

Perhaps one reason we lag is that we have a public school systems whose first priority is maintaining the education bureaucracy and not on actual education. Every teacher I know in public education in Memphis is looking for work in private schools or they are looking for ways to retire. I do tax returns for 6 teachers and they are all unhappy. They love teaching they just hate what the education system has become. In Memphis, they have had superintendent after superintendent that claimed to know how to fix it and nothing has changed. Maybe they just needed to read another study or go to Finland.

So it’s not a bugaboo unless you consider mediocre to failing a bugaboo.

[ProfX]

I would also note that we are not Finland. We have a bigger, more diverse, geographically dispersed population and a different constitution. A few differences just to name a few.

Uh huh Joe. I know that. This is your go to statement on a lot of things.

If you're interested, you could examine what they are doing right in education, and we could learn from it. You may not be, that's fine, other people are, and have written about it.

I mean, what is the point of doing rankings, if you're not interested in examining what the people at the top of the rankings are doing right? Now I will note the ones at the top are all in Asia, Singapore is at the top of the charts.

Oh but they are different, so let's not look at what they do right.

Perhaps one reason we lag is that we have a public school systems whose first priority is maintaining the education bureaucracy and not on actual education. Every teacher I know in public education in Memphis is looking for work in private schools or they are looking for ways to retire. I do tax returns for 6 teachers and they are all unhappy. They love teaching they just hate what the education system has become. In Memphis, they have had superintendent after superintendent that claimed to know how to fix it and nothing has changed. Maybe they just needed to read another study or go to Finland.

I know teachers too, Joe, and I'm talking ones in K-12.

They are frustrated, too. Mostly, what frustrates them is a system that teaches to a standardized test, and not a pupil's needs; that they are underfunded, particularly when it comes to school supplies and other resources they often pay for out of their own pocket; that many of their pupils have trouble learning, but it's because of problems in their home and their neighborhood. Oh and that deStupid and many other state officials are not listening to them on keeping them AND their kids safe during the pandemic. Plus all those damn "active shooter' drills.

Maybe we just know different teachers. So it goes.

[carmenjonze]

As has been pointed out to me on this board, you do have a right to say what you wish. However, as has also been pointed out on this board, you are NOT guaranteed the forum. As a teacher, you know this as well as anyone. We do agree that freedom of speech doesn’t mean that people will like what you have to say or will listen at all and/or that your speech won’t have consequences.

Do you think we have gotten to the point with social media/internet that we no longer well tolerate differences of opinion? Are we too easily offended when people disagree or don’t see eye to eye? I don’t know.

Dumb question, if it's even a real question.

The rightwing is the inventor of not just the so-called cancel culture you guys pavlov about these days, but the phony political correctness canard, red scares, lavender scares, boycotts of Disney because they market to LGBTQs, excommunication, shunning, and all the personal, vigilante, and state-based violence to back it up.

How many towns and parts of town did conservative whites literally cancel and wipe off the map because some Black people tried to vote?

Shut up and sit down.