Group items tagged

Page 39 "If textbooks allowed for controversy, they could show students which claims rest on strong evidence, which on softer ground. As they challenged students to make their own decisions as to what probably happened, they would also be introducing students to the various methods and forms of evidence- oral history, written records, cultural similarities, linguistic changes, human genetics, pottery, archaeological dating, plant migrations- that researches use to derive knowledge about the distant past. Unfortunately, textbooks seem locked in rhetoric of certainty." The article talks about the debate currently happening between the Texas State Board of Education regarding the curriculum covered in textbooks. In the article, he points out what is being debated at the three-day conference, in particular that textbooks should reflect the Christian roots of our nation. He points out that on the states' curriculum advisory panel are two very religious advocates, Reverend Peter Marshall and David Barton. This brings light to how the curriculum is chosen and by whom it is chosen by. The author points out that by having these two men on the board, the decision of the board ultimately reflects their views of how and what society needs to be taught. On the contrary, he states, these men should instead be making decisions to "respect the ideas and needs of the larger public". This article relates to the quote because textbooks are locked into a "rhetoric of certainty" decided by certain individuals. By deciding what is to be put in textbooks, they are regarding as facts, and instead they are just opinions and beliefs of individuals and by offering no other information to challenge these beliefs, it allows for no controversy and are students' full educational development is limited.

Although I generally agree with the point made by the author of this article, I find the tart and sarcastic way it is written to be slightly offensive. I feel that the tone of this article sounds somewhat belittling, particularly when it states "Forget crossing over the line; these folks don't even acknowledge that the line exists." I believe the author's point was made in an unnecessary and disrespectful manner. As to the content, I do agree with the article. Although I am a Christian and firm believer in Christ (and would therefore be among the majority in America and would want schools to reflect my Christian faith), I stand by our Constitution and laws and support the separation of church and state. In my opinion, the article is right when it states "we know that there is a difference between teaching about the history of religion in America and preaching the Gospel to a captive audience of children in our nation's classrooms." I see no problem with teaching history or even the history of theology, but forcing theology and beliefs into classroom is a form of oppression in my eyes. Students HAVE to go to school. If schools preach doctrine (regardless of which religion it is), then students HAVE to listen to the preaching and are therefore in an oppressive environment.

"Religion has animated many causes in our nation's history, and our children are entitled to hear the entire story in all its complexity." I'm reading this book and this quote definitely describes what the author is trying to point out. He named several examples of famous people in history like Hellen Keller, Christopher Colombus and many other events in the past that are being sugar-coated by our textbooks nowadays. He talked about how writers neglect to show the negative stories of these people which are necessary for the children to be learned.

The idea that parents are willing to sacrifice anything for their children is not a new concept. Although this mother may have gone about trying to get her children a better education in the wrong way she had the best of intentions. I think the real crime is that this mother was forced into breaking the law in order to provide her children with a good education. The inconsistency and inequality of our education system is the real crime here.

Having lived just outside of Tallahassee for 20 years and also living in an area with sub-par standards in education, I can honestly say that I have known people who have committed this federal offense. Perhaps that calls into question my bias, but I believe that concurrent five-year prison sentences is unacceptable(as seen by the outcome). It almost seems that the judge was attempting to make an example of the offender, but regardless the law is the law. That means that the real question is why was she forced to send her children to another school? I think it would be important for the district of the school that the defendant lived in to start a series of reviews to see if they can possibly improve their educational system. Books, facilities, food, and teachers are all relevant to the equation of school improvement. That is the lesson we have been drawing from the entire course and I think that cases like this where people are willing to risk felonies in order to give their child a better education reinforce the idea that the school districts need to constantly review themselves.

I find the fact that this woman's actions are considered criminal to be deplorable. But, at the same time I can understand why the current structure would fail if everyone took their kids and put them where they wished. The answer, in my eyes, is far from criminalizing these actions. We should closer analyze the motivations of these actions with an aim to create a system that reduces the need for this behavior. Perhaps we need to broker a contract between the state and local governments so that school funding is not so drastically unequal from district to district.

Here's another source relating to "Why Are There So Few Male Teachers?"

It's amazing how far we have come in terms of education, especially when considering that males used to dominate the profession. Now, it is almost foreign to us now a days when we hear of a male teacher and not a female teacher teaching students. It 's also amazing how much the US society has perverted the teaching profession, especially concerning male teachers teaching in any grade level. How much worse could it possibly get? Will this society get to the point where we can no longer allow males to teach students?

This topic definitely stood out to me as a male who may potentially find himself in the teaching environment. It really got me thinking, "What would it have been like to have a male teacher in Elementary school?" I don't really know. I agree that females have the tendency to be more nurturing; it is simply in their nature. And as a male student who was less confident in himself at the time than the other males, it was nice to have that nurturing teacher in the classroom. I feel like a male would have been more apt to call me out on my mistakes rather than help me through them. But that seems like stereotyping! Veronica makes a good point. It really is amazing to see how things have changed over the years. 16 percent of Elementary school teachers are males! I don't even consider Elementary school when I consider teaching. Maybe it's the challenge of High Schoolers? Maybe I feel like I can relate with them better or I won't have patience to work with young kids? Whatever it is, I never thought that I'd be in danger of having suspicion poured upon me as a teacher with possible inappropriate intentions. But I can definitely see where that could come from if someone were a young, single, male teacher working with fourth graders. It's a shame. But that's just how it is! My final comment is that if someone is in that situation, they should just take the challenge and try extra hard to show the goodness of their heart and the reason behind their decision to teach that grade. People will see if the teacher is genuine or not. Don't let other peoples presumptions change the way you teach!