Parent arrested for speaking out...

[Arbo]

Dr. Dallas Dance, Superintendent of Baltimore County Public Schools, and Lillian Lowery, Maryland Superintendent, had the opportunity Thursday night to make minor amends at an MSDE-sponsored informational meeting after a three-plus year information blackout on Common Core, the new federal curriculum for Maryland schools.

Instead, Dr. Dance added insult to injury by screening, omitting, and editing parents’ questions.

Questions from the audience of about 160 people, which consisted of parents, PTA members, teachers, and school administrators, were submitted on cards prior to and during the 1-1/2 hour meeting for the Q&A period which lasted about 40 minutes.

http://www.examiner.com/article/exclusive-video-school-supers-have-parent-arrested-from-common-core-meeting

Watch the video and see if he assaulted anyone or resisted arrest. This is standard 'government' in how they shut down discussion of topics they have already decided to force on the people, and get rid of those who voice their concerns.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQmUnisDEM&feature=player_embedded#t=165

[Kathianne]

I've never witnessed security at school board meetings like that, I've been to many, (over 30). While I've been to one, that asked for questions to be submitted beforehand, (strike was looming), they did take questions from the floor.

More to the point, within the Examiner article, was some comments from university profs, one struck me:

http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2013/09/07/top-ten-professors-calling-out-common-cores-so-called-college-readiness/


Eighth, Dr. Bill Evers (http://www.nydailynews.com/authors?author=Williamson%20Evers)of Hoover Institute at Stanford University:“The Common Core — effectively national math and English curriculum standards coming soon to a school near you — is supposed to be a new, higher bar that will take the United States from the academic doldrums to international dominance.

So why is there so much unhappiness about it? There didn’t seem to be much just three years ago. Back then, state school boards and governors were sprinting to adopt the Core. In practically the blink of an eye, 45 states had signed on.

But states weren’t leaping because they couldn’t resist the Core’s academic magnetism. They were leaping because it was the Great Recession — and the Obama administration was dangling a $4.35 billion Race to the Top carrot in front of them. Big points in that federal program were awarded for adopting the Core, so, with little public debate, most did.”

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Had that been me the security guy would have got knocked the hell out. I saw nothing the man did that warranted calling security unless asking a rational question is taboo at such meetings. Apparently since its government controlled its no longer to be questioned by we peasants. That's the intimidating dictatorial government spread down to local level when its a government entity involved. A parent asking a question gets tossed out like a punk causing a disturbance. Just sad that the crowd didn't stand up to block the dumbass punk security guy. -Tyr

[Arbo]

Had that been me the security guy would have got knocked the hell out. I saw nothing the man did that warranted calling security unless asking a rational question is taboo at such meetings. Apparently since its government controlled its no longer to be questioned by we peasants. That's the intimidating dictatorial government spread down to local level when its a government entity involved. A parent asking a question gets tossed out like a punk causing a disturbance. Just sad that the crowd didn't stand up to block the dumbass punk security guy. -Tyr

You would have gone to blows with someone that identified themselves as a police officer?

[Larrymc]

http://www.examiner.com/article/exclusive-video-school-supers-have-parent-arrested-from-common-core-meeting

Watch the video and see if he assaulted anyone or resisted arrest. This is standard 'government' in how they shut down discussion of topics they have already decided to force on the people, and get rid of those who voice their concerns.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQmUnisDEM&feature=player_embedded#t=165I haven't payed a lot of attention to this Common Cor issue but with the grand kids coming up, it must warrant a closer like, It appears there is something to hide.

[logroller]

The assault is charge is trumped up bs.
The disrupting a public meeting charge is probably legit, but peaceful resistance is sometimes necessary to draw attention to a cause. Adding assault of an officer is just a way to aggravate the actual crime and downplay his critique. The overzealous prosecution of those who speak out needs to addressed more so than common core IMO.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The assault is charge is trumped up bs.
The disrupting a public meeting charge is probably legit, but peaceful resistance is sometimes necessary to draw attention to a cause. Adding assault of an officer is just a way to aggravate the actual crime and downplay his critique. The overzealous prosecution of those who speak out needs to addressed more so than common core IMO. Obvious is that the "special" security was there to prevent free speech, criticizing questions and anybody pointing out everything isn't just fine and dandy.. Very Gestapo like set up and that desperately points to there being something to hide by those in charge there IMHO....-Tyr

[logroller]

I haven't payed a lot of attention to this Common Cor issue but with the grand kids coming up, it must warrant a closer like, It appears there is something to hide.
In a nutshell, common core is a fix for the failures of nclb where there was no way to compare performance on state-to-state basis. While it may lower the standards in some states, others adopting it may improve.
While federal involvement in education does run against republican ideology, as does nclb, the testing component of common core offers an apples t apples comparison which I believe is helpful, if not necessary in judging the merits of state performance.

[Larrymc]

In a nutshell, common core is a fix for the failures of nclb where there was no way to compare performance on state-to-state basis. While it may lower the standards in some states, others adopting it may improve.
While federal involvement in education does run against republican ideology, as does nclb, the testing component of common core offers an apples t apples comparison which I believe is helpful, if not necessary in judging the merits of state performance.That's doesn't sound half bad, Hmm So what or they trying to hide?

[logroller]

That's doesn't sound half bad, Hmm So what or they trying to hide?
My guess would be lack of public involvement in the adoption process--similar to the 'you have to pass it to see what's in it' kind of thinking which drives the 'they're ramming it down our throats' narrative. Which probably isn't the case fwiw; its just that few actually pay attention to state register for info on public meetings. But there may be some argument that 'elitists' (experts appointed by elected officials in committee) are the ones deciding such without consulting the public at local levels. However, the government is so compartmentalized that its hard to stay abreast of all the goings-ons and that's a lot of the reason we have a republican form of govt and not a democracy.

Bottom line is the public should be given the opportunity to discuss such things at the local level and they should not be oppressed as they were in the video ; whether or not their voiced concerns are addressed is where your vote is your voice, not YouTube. But you can't have the latter if the former is verboten.

[Arbo]

In a nutshell, common core is a fix for the failures of nclb where there was no way to compare performance on state-to-state basis. While it may lower the standards in some states, others adopting it may improve.
While federal involvement in education does run against republican ideology, as does nclb, the testing component of common core offers an apples t apples comparison which I believe is helpful, if not necessary in judging the merits of state performance.

I haven't followed it very closely, but I believe there is something about how it tracks students, data beyond school stuff, that is one of the main concerns. Of course, there is the issue that it is at a federal level, which means that it is a 'one size fits all', which is never good for the nation. That's probably why the founders left stuff like that to the states.

[Kathianne]

There are many reasons some are unhappy with common core. The following are some reasons for one person; some I agree with, others not at all. However, one that I do agree with is the 'measurement' tools should be outcome, not 'how' we get there:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/eight-problems-with-common-core-standards/2012/08/21/821b300a-e4e7-11e1-8f62-58260e3940a0_blog.html


Eight problems with Common Core StandardsBy Marion Brady

...

One: Standards shouldn’t be attached to school subjects, but to the qualities of mind it’s hoped the study of school subjects promotes. Subjects are mere tools, just as scalpels, acetylene torches, and transits are tools. Surgeons, welders, surveyors — and teachers — should be held accountable for the quality of what they produce, not how they produce it.Two: The world changes. The future is indiscernible. Clinging to a static strategy in a dynamic world may be comfortable, even comforting, but it’s a Titanic-deck-chair exercise.
Three: The Common Core Standards assume (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/teacher-one-maddening-day-working-with-the-common-core/2012/03/15/gIQA8J4WUS_blog.html)that what kids need to know is covered by one or another of the traditional core subjects. In fact, the unexplored intellectual terrain lying between and beyond those familiar fields of study is vast, expands by the hour, and will go in directions no one can predict.
Four: So much orchestrated attention is being showered on the Common Core Standards, the main reason for poor student performance is being ignored—a level of childhood poverty the consequences of which no amount of schooling can effectively counter.
Five: The Common Core kills innovation. When it’s the only game in town, it’s the only game in town.
Six: The Common Core Standards are a set-up for national standardized tests, tests that can’t evaluate complex thought, can’t avoid cultural bias, can’t measure non-verbal learning, can’t predict anything of consequence (and waste boatloads of money).
Seven: The word “standards” gets an approving nod from the public (and from most educators) because it means “performance that meets a standard.” However, the word also means “like everybody else,” and standardizing minds is what the Standards try to do. Common Core Standards fans sell the first meaning; the Standards deliver the second meaning. Standardized minds are about as far out of sync with deep-seated American values as it’s possible to get.

Eight: The Common Core Standards’ stated aim — “success in college and careers”— is at best pedestrian, at worst an affront. The young should be exploring the potentials of humanness.

...

I think Michelle Rhee brings some very good ideas to education, however I do agree with the article author regarding standardized tests and US 'results':


...

“On international tests,” she says, “the U.S. ranks 27th from the top.”
Michelle Rhee, three-year teacher, education reactionary, mainstream media star, fired authoritarian head of a school system being investigated for cheating on standardized tests, is given a national platform to misinform. She doesn’t explain that, at the insistence of policymakers, and unlike other countries, America tests every kid — the mentally disabled, the sick, the hungry, the homeless, the transient, the troubled, those for whom English is a second language. That done, the scores are lumped together. She doesn’t even hint that when the scores of the disadvantaged aren’t counted, American students are at the top.
Disadvantaged not only regarding socio-economics, but also intellectually impaired with no bottom in IQ or educability.

...

[logroller]

I haven't followed it very closely, but I believe there is something about how it tracks students, data beyond school stuff, that is one of the main concerns. Of course, there is the issue that it is at a federal level, which means that it is a 'one size fits all', which is never good for the nation. That's probably why the founders left stuff like that to the states.

That's all reasonable, ideologically speaking, but pragmatically the tracking information on state performance is a legitimate purpose of the fed govt; like alcohol related traffic fatalities: there's no doubt that enforcement and laws on DUI is solely under state authority, but if there's no equal standard for how such things are measured its far too easy for a state to just raise the BAC for DUI and then say they have less of a problem, when that's not all the case.

So I wouldnt say its so much one ring to rule them all as it is one ring to gauge them all. Each state still has a huge degree of discretion in how standards are taught and there's nothing to keep a state, district or individual teacher from exceeding those standards.

I'd say that this could just as likely encourage excellence because, since there's a universal standard there's actually more of an incentive to compete better-- Not just within states, but between them. It'd be like the Olympics if each nation was allowed to play by its own rules-- not really a fair competition, is it? That's not to say that each nation can't train the way they see fit to reach and exceed those standards, but the measurement for achieving success needs to be universal.

[Arbo]

That's all reasonable, ideologically speaking, but pragmatically the tracking information on state performance is a legitimate purpose of the fed govt;

Where is 'tracking information on state performance' a power granted or a duty given to the feds?


So I wouldnt say its so much one ring to rule them all as it is one ring to gauge them all. Each state still has a huge degree of discretion in how standards are taught and there's nothing to keep a state, district or individual teacher from exceeding those standards.

The whole system is set up so people do not exceed those standards, as all must be treated 'equally'. That means teaching to the student at the lowest level. My son is a Junior in HS, he complains about this all the time, and most of his courses are AP. He says they move far too slowly, and they never really get far because it is always a 'wait' on the slower 'smart' kids in the class. It seems as a nation we have been trying to remove individual accomplishment and excellence out of students for decades. Heaven forbid a less intelligent student realize they are less intelligent.

[logroller]

Where is 'tracking information on state performance' a power granted or a duty given to the feds?
The all-inclusive Commerce clause. :poke:



The whole system is set up so people do not exceed those standards, as all must be treated 'equally'. That means teaching to the student at the lowest level. My son is a Junior in HS, he complains about this all the time, and most of his courses are AP. He says they move far too slowly, and they never really get far because it is always a 'wait' on the slower 'smart' kids in the class. It seems as a nation we have been trying to remove individual accomplishment and excellence out of students for decades. Heaven forbid a less intelligent student realize they are less intelligent.

That's a rather conclusive posit for someone who admits to not following the issue of state standards very closely. But as I said, no child left behind opened the doors, common core simply makes measuring its (in-)efficacy possible. Sure, excellent students are going to be bored and challenged students are going to reap a disproportionate amount of additional efforts, but Whether or not schools actually produce highly capable citizens is pure opinion if there's no standard for gauging such.

The simple fact of the matter is the responsibility for excellence is shared-- it's not just the schools that fail-- parents too have a responsibility. Data collection tied to performance will no doubt expose these correlations (and imply causation) that some might find inconvenient. In fact my wife saw a study that showed 4th grade reading scores correlated to incarceration statistics for 18-24 year-olds.

The question is, if and how do we as a society seek to amend this? Surely making our best and the brightest better and brighter doesn't ameliorate that blight. Even ditch diggers need to know how to balance a checkbook, else others need cover their bankruptcies.

[Arbo]

The all-inclusive Commerce clause. :poke:

Possibly one of the most abused things government uses to overstep their bounds.


That's a rather conclusive posit for someone who admits to not following the issue of state standards very closely.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant I didn't follow Common Core. Not that I didn't follow the other continual failures of government schools.


Sure, excellent students are going to be bored and challenged students are going to reap a disproportionate amount of additional efforts, but Whether or not schools actually produce highly capable citizens is pure opinion if there's no standard for gauging such.

We should not let the excellent students get bored and go without being challenged. Those are the people society NEEDS. What the system does now is discourage them from hitting their potential. When government makes the 'standard' of what a good or capable citizen is, you are asking for trouble. For right now the definition seems to be 'a citizen that sits down and STFU, does not question and collects their benefit check with a smile.'

[Kathianne]

There are numerous changes and attitudes that our schools could undertake to improve:

1. IMO the most important would be to track by ability. Pretending that if no one is singled out, all will rise is nonsense and probably hurts the low end most of all. Classes are not geared toward the lowest or even the average, but to the mean, which is too far above the lowest.

2. Make 'inclusion classes' fit the tracking suggested in #1. By establishing such a bar, many now in inclusion would not be and many that are in classes below their ability would be in more meaningful classes. On same topic, for budgets sake, get rid of requirement that if even one student has an IEP, the class must be team taught by subject area and spec ed teacher. In most classes, the spec ed teacher is a non-entity, with the exception of pulling out for tests for the few that cannot read or complete within time limits. Those types of accommodations can be made without dedicating two teachers to the same class period.

3. Remove spec ed kids that are so ill or so intellectually challenged from school budgets and results. Care for these children and adults should not be on local school districts, but on disability or some other funding source. While I personally feel should be charity based, for this convo I'm going with adapting from what 'is.'

4. Instead of requiring 'one size' fixes like NCLB or Common Core, require teachers to write out lesson plans in detail at least 3 weeks per semester. Video at least one lesson each of those 3 weeks. Will be used in evaluations with test scores. These would be useful in finding what works within a school, but also in helping to identify strengths and weaknesses of each teacher and addressing those.

5. Deal with reality, not all should go to universities, it's not in their best interests or society's. Requirements for graduation from HS should not presume that as a goal. Instead the requirements should reflect being ready to assume basic participation in adult society, including ability for further training in universities, trade schools or on-the-job. That presumption would be more realistic than the huge number of students enrolling, garnering debt, and flunking out of college courses today. It would also allow schools to be rewarded for setting up meaningful trade courses and apprenticeships for the students with interests and aptitudes in those fields. By being realistic the schools would be better serving all, from the gifted to the educible intellectually impaired.

I could go on. but would hope to make some $$ for doing so. ;)

[Arbo]

5. Deal with reality, not all should go to universities, it's not in their best interests or society's. Requirements for graduation from HS should not presume that as a goal. Instead the requirements should reflect being ready to assume basic participation in adult society, including ability for further training in universities, trade schools or on-the-job. That presumption would be more realistic than the huge number of students enrolling, garnering debt, and flunking out of college courses today. It would also allow schools to be rewarded for setting up meaningful trade courses and apprenticeships for the students with interests and aptitudes in those fields. By being realistic the schools would be better serving all, from the gifted to the educible intellectually impaired.

Pretty much what Ben Franklin and many others believed in and pushed for prior to the US Revolution. They called it 'useful knowledge'. Things that put people in a better spot to be an asset to the country. Thankfully for us, Franklin and others pushed these ideas pretty hard during the years of 'enlightenment', as without them, and what came from them, we may well still be a British colony.

[Abbey Marie]

Going to have to disagree with Marion Brady on this point:


Four: So much orchestrated attention is being showered on the Common Core Standards, the main reason for poor student performance is being ignored—a level of childhood poverty the consequences of which no amount of schooling can effectively counter.


There certainly are ways to "counter poverty" and thereby raise student performance. They are called parental valuing of education, parental involvement in a child's life and schoolwork, parental modeling of working hard, and consequences at home for failure to obey the rules at school and/or not showing respect for your teachers.

Frankly, as a child of the projects in the Bronx who did well in schools, I am long sick of hearing economic excuses for failure in school. We had very little, but my parents attended to the above. What you need to succeed does not come in a box or a computer or a new pair of sneakers. And with all the aid programs we have today, eating enough shouldn't be an issue.

[Kathianne]

Going to have to disagree with Marion Brady on this point:



There certainly are ways to "counter poverty" and thereby raise student performance. They are called parental valuing of education, parental involvement in a child's life and schoolwork, parental modeling of working hard, and consequences at home for failure to obey the rules at school and/or not showing respect for your teachers.

Frankly, as a child of the projects in the Bronx who did well in schools, I am long sick of hearing economic excuses for failure in school. We had very little, but my parents attended to the above. What you need to succeed does not come in a box or a computer or a new pair of sneakers. And with all the aid programs we have today, eating enough shouldn't be an issue.

I hear what you are saying and agree, However you were the exception to the rule back when and still are.

Always are the exceptions, when do we make them the norm?

I gave a starting point:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?43179-Parent-arrested-for-speaking-out&p=666428&highlight=#post666428

[logroller]

Possibly one of the most abused things government uses to overstep their bounds.

Probably even, but there it is.


Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant I didn't follow Common Core. Not that I didn't follow the other continual failures of government schools.
Based on what though: anecdotes that speak to ideological constructs? And if you follow failures, what of successes-- Surely there are some-- how do you track those so that they can be expanded?



We should not let the excellent students get bored and go without being challenged. Those are the people society NEEDS. What the system does now is discourage them from hitting their potential.
Not challenging them may not be encouraging, but discouraging them is an affirmative act which I don't believe to be the case. More so I believe that too much emphasis is placed upon what schools and government are expected to do. Surely some encouragement and drive to succeed (and i would argue most) should hail from the home and the individual. It is when this fails to happen that government becomes more involved, whether grossly or relatively, and maybe that's the problem, not that the average joe should be second class to the elite.



When government makes the 'standard' of what a good or capable citizen is, you are asking for trouble.
True, but didn't you just say that excellent students are who society NEEDS, but what is excellence if not exceedingly standards- based, and how is this any less troublesome?


For right now the definition seems to be 'a citizen that sits down and STFU, does not question and collects their benefit check with a smile.'
one certainly should understand there's a time and place for that. Just because one has a right to discourse doesn't mean that it should prevail.

[red state]

Had that been me the security guy would have got knocked the hell out. I saw nothing the man did that warranted calling security unless asking a rational question is taboo at such meetings. Apparently since its government controlled its no longer to be questioned by we peasants. That's the intimidating dictatorial government spread down to local level when its a government entity involved. A parent asking a question gets tossed out like a punk causing a disturbance. Just sad that the crowd didn't stand up to block the dumbass punk security guy. -Tyr
As usual, SPOT ON, Tyr. I saw nothing offensive or disturbing about this concerned parent, but I did see a "cop/security" acting differently than one in his position should have conducted himself. The problem was the QUESTION and not the one questioning. Some questions are not meant to be asked and some actions, leadership calls and obvious bias (as seen from these two gents...one in the background and the security) should not be tolerated. I believe this parent acted appropriately but it would have been nice to have seen someone besides that one white lady stand up and ask the same question. YES, all of them should have stood by the door and by the parent being escorted out and DEMAND an answer.

And is it just me or is there much detectable hatred in the security guy's eyes.....as was the ignorant person asking Tyr that stupid question when the issue at hand is the injustice we see from liberals who feel themselves to be GOD and are determined to SILENCE the opposition?!

Tyr, you would have been wrong to deck the SOB but sometimes a man simply must be a man....yet we have those among us who know little of what it is to be a man. Just saying...

[red state]

Then again....who am I to say you would have been wrong. As some have mentioned above, Ben Franklin and our dear founders STOOD up to King George (even though it was against the law to do so). This guy should have been allowed to finish his question and receive an answer. He wasn't up there long and he seemed to be very respectful.

[Arbo]

Not challenging them may not be encouraging, but discouraging them is an affirmative act which I don't believe to be the case. More so I believe that too much emphasis is placed upon what schools and government are expected to do. Surely some encouragement and drive to succeed (and i would argue most) should hail from the home and the individual. It is when this fails to happen that government becomes more involved, whether grossly or relatively, and maybe that's the problem, not that the average joe should be second class to the elite.

Most should come from home. But what good does it do coming from home when the school system bogs them down in mediocrity?



but sometimes a man simply must be a man....yet we have those among us who know little of what it is to be a man. Just saying...

:laugh2:

[Arbo]

As some have mentioned above, Ben Franklin and our dear founders STOOD up to King George

Actually Ben Franklin started off supporting the British and was against forming an independent nation. Of course, he spent a LOT of time in England and was unattached to the 'on the ground' stuff going on in the colonies. He came home and was greatly ostracized for the appearance of standing with England. Thankfully he was quick to see all of what was going on and shifted from scientific study to politics, and went back overseas and won us the support of France.

[logroller]

Most should come from home. But what good does it do coming from home when the school system bogs them down in mediocrity?




:laugh2:
Well I could only say that the world outside school is no less burdensome and probably more so. The mediocre will attempt to bring down the achievers but part of what makes success so sweet is overcoming these obstacles; the other part is vindication of the times one failed. Either way, the onus of one's success is self-realized, not what you're taught in school-- save learning to thrive in spite of mediocrity-- but thats self-taught. Just my twocents, but its a hard- earned twocents.

[Arbo]

Well I could only say that the world outside school is no less burdensome and probably more so. The mediocre will attempt to bring down the achievers but part of what makes success so sweet is overcoming these obstacles; the other part is vindication of the times one failed. Either way, the onus of one's success is self-realized, not what you're taught in school-- save learning to thrive in spite of mediocrity-- but thats self-taught. Just my twocents, but its a hard- earned twocents.

I agree, however there is a big difference between primary schooling and life in general. In life you can make moves to get into a better position, in primary schools not so much.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Then again....who am I to say you would have been wrong. As some have mentioned above, Ben Franklin and our dear founders STOOD up to King George (even though it was against the law to do so). This guy should have been allowed to finish his question and receive an answer. He wasn't up there long and he seemed to be very respectful. Very glad you came around my friend. The man forced out had his free speech rights violated IMHO. Simply asking an embarrassing question is neither rude nor is it legitimate grounds for expulsion. That action was wrong on many levels. As I stated come hell or high water I would have shoved that asshat backwards and had he came at me again I'd knocked his ass out. A cop working off duty security is not a God just as on duty he is not a god. Perhaps I saw it wrong but looked like he showed the victim a badge . In my life I have seen many off duty cops try to act as if they are God. Such people are always arrogant asses that desperately need a damn fine attitude adjustment. The security guy in that video strikes me as one such type. The official used force to avoid either lying or having to admit to a truth. -Tyr

[Arbo]

As I stated come hell or high water I would have shoved that asshat backwards and had he came at me again I'd knocked his ass out.

Would someone bail you out of jail before the court date?

[red state]

Yeah, a cop off or on duty is not GOD....neither was the guy who led the committee or whatever it was. He actually reminds me of someone who would derail their own comment or thread and then try to teach history to those of us who know our history. Most of this crap spewed by such people is to avoid the obvious but just so such people know, my reason in mentioning Franklin; it had nothing to do with Ben's early or late involvement in our founders standing or striking against "THE LAW". It was merely because Ben's name was brought up. Quite simple to follow, really (unless you're simple minded).

So, the guy was ushered out because the black guy didn't wish to answer the question so he had the other black guy strong arm the parent. VERY CLASSY!!! But, in life, we must always deal with the classless acts as best we can by voicing our opinion, getting ourselves thrown off or out and even adjusting an attitude here and there (the good ole boy way).

As an illustrator, I appreciate Ben Franklin on so many levels and I simply love what is one of the first and BEST political cartoons to be circulated when much of what they had back then wasn't. So, I'll close with this recreation of Mr. Ben Franklin (who happens to be one of my VERY favorite founders):

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/11/7/129021057446083893.jpg

[logroller]

There are many reasons some are unhappy with common core. The following are some reasons for one person; some I agree with, others not at all. However, one that I do agree with is the 'measurement' tools should be outcome, not 'how' we get there:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/eight-problems-with-common-core-standards/2012/08/21/821b300a-e4e7-11e1-8f62-58260e3940a0_blog.html



I think Michelle Rhee brings some very good ideas to education, however I do agree with the article author regarding standardized tests and US 'results':
Im going to disagree in part. I believe that common core focusing on the how is what prevents it from being static, indeed that's the dynamic-- that regardless of the subject matter, and even the problem itself, the focus on methods of probem solving is universally beneficial. I mean I don't need a calculator to do math, but it helps-- but it is absolutely necessary to learn how and why certain functions are used.

It may be easier to test based on outcome...scratch that-- it is easier, but multiple choice standardized testing doesn't really measure ability if test taking isn't ones forte. I happen to test well, but many extremely capable people i know do not.

[Arbo]

He actually reminds me of someone who would derail their own comment or thread and then try to teach history to those of us who know our history. Most of this crap spewed by such people is to avoid the obvious but just so such people know, my reason in mentioning Franklin; it had nothing to do with Ben's early or late involvement in our founders standing or striking against "THE LAW".

Good lord, quit playing games and say what you want to say. You mentioned Ben Franklin 'standing up' to the king of england. In the end he did, but at first he was not on board. So if you want to talk about 'knowing' history, perhaps you should have known that. Just sayin'.


So, the guy was ushered out because the black guy didn't wish to answer the question so he had the other black guy strong arm the parent. VERY CLASSY!!! But, in life, we must always deal with the classless acts as best we can by voicing our opinion, getting ourselves thrown off or out and even adjusting an attitude here and there (the good ole boy way).

A suggestion that it was race based when it was not? Interesting turn. And more of that 'internet tough guy' gonna hit a cop? :laugh2:


As an illustrator, I appreciate Ben Franklin on so many levels and I simply love what is one of the first and BEST political cartoons to be circulated when much of what they had back then wasn't. So, I'll close with this recreation of Mr. Ben Franklin (who happens to be one of my VERY favorite founders):

That image is of the Gadsden flag. It was designed by General Christopher Gadsden in 1775. Not Ben Franklin. His 'cartoon' was actually this:

5593

:laugh:

[red state]

Uuuummmm....again, your ignorance is overwhelming. Truly!!!!! So, since you are in need....here's you a history lesson, mr. know it all:

'JOIN or DIE' was first made and published to bring about support during the French Indian War in May or 1754. The original (not the re-do) as I said, was of a segmented snake. Can you even read?!!! By the way, as a political cartoonist myself, I should know but it was from one of my favorite founding fathers and I love this RE-DONE cartoon/publication that the tea party and others like me love to use as a flag. Go read some more books before you start trying to spread your ignorance. In fact, Tyr has MANY books that I'm sure he'd be willing to pass along (just as long as you bring them back). His penalty is worse than the library (as would be my penalty).

Would folks here PLEeeeeeZZZzzzeee start correcting or calling out this guy/gal more often for the FAKE/FRAUD that he/she is....

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Uuuummmm....again, your ignorance is overwhelming. Truly!!!!! So, since you are in need....here's you a history lesson, mr. know it all:

'JOIN or DIE' was first made and published to bring about support during the French Indian War in May or 1754. The original (not the re-do) as I said, was of a segmented snake. Can you even read?!!! By the way, as a political cartoonist myself, I should know but it was from one of my favorite founding fathers and I love this RE-DONE cartoon/publication that the tea party and others like me love to use as a flag. Go read some more books before you start trying to spread your ignorance. In fact, Tyr has MANY books that I'm sure he'd be willing to pass along (just as long as you bring them back). His penalty is worse than the library (as would be my penalty).

Would folks here PLEeeeeeZZZzzzeee start correcting or calling out this guy/gal more often for the FAKE/FRAUD that he/she is....


http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/gadsden.html Three years later, in 1754, he used a snake to illustrate another point. This time not so humorous.

Franklin sketched, carved, and published the first known political cartoon in an American newspaper. It was the image of a snake cut into eight sections. The sections represented the individual colonies and the curves of the snake suggested the coastline. New England was combined into one section as the head of the snake. South Carolina was at the tail. Beneath the snake were the ominous words "Join, or Die."




Franklin's Join or Die snake woodcut
[Benjamin Franklin's woodcut from May 9, 1754.
Newspaper Serial and Government Publications Division,
Library of Congress.]


This had nothing to do with independence from Britain. It was a plea for unity in defending the colonies during the French and Indian War. It played off a common superstition of the time: a snake that had been cut into pieces could come back to life if you joined the sections together before sunset.

The snake illustration was reprinted throughout the colonies. Dozens of newspapers from Massachusetts to South Carolina ran Franklin's sketch or some variation of it. For example, the Boston Gazette recreated the snake with the words "Unite and Conquer" coming from its mouth.

I suppose the newspaper editors were hungry for graphic material, this being America's first political cartoon. Whatever the reason, Franklin's snake wiggled its way into American culture as an early symbol of a shared national identity.




American independence

The snake symbol came in handy ten years later, when Americans were again uniting against a common enemy.

In 1765 the common enemy was the Stamp Act. The British decided that they needed more control over the colonies, and more importantly, they needed more money from the colonies. The Crown was loaded with debt from the French and Indian War.

Why shouldn't the Americans -- "children planted by our care, nourished by our indulgence," as Charles Townshend of the House of Commons put it -- pay off England's debt?

Colonel Isaac Barre, who had fought in the French and Indian War, responded that the colonies hadn't been planted by the care of the British government, they'd been established by people fleeing it. And the British government hadn't nourished the colonies, they'd flourished despite what the British government did and didn't do.

In this speech, Barre referred to the colonists as "sons of liberty."

In the following months and years, as we know, the Sons of Liberty became increasingly resentful of English interference. And as the tides of American public opinion moved closer and closer to rebellion, Franklin's disjointed snake continued to Right you are, I learned that at about ten years old, that was almost 50 years ago---they really taught school back then.. ;)--Tyr

[Arbo]

Uuuummmm....again, your ignorance is overwhelming. Truly!!!!! So, since you are in need....here's you a history lesson, mr. know it all:

'JOIN or DIE' was first made and published to bring about support during the French Indian War in May or 1754. The original (not the re-do) as I said, was of a segmented snake. Can you even read?!!! By the way, as a political cartoonist myself, I should know but it was from one of my favorite founding fathers and I love this RE-DONE cartoon/publication that the tea party and others like me love to use as a flag. Go read some more books before you start trying to spread your ignorance. In fact, Tyr has MANY books that I'm sure he'd be willing to pass along (just as long as you bring them back). His penalty is worse than the library (as would be my penalty).

Would folks here PLEeeeeeZZZzzzeee start correcting or calling out this guy/gal more often for the FAKE/FRAUD that he/she is....

FAIL.

Love the spin. Caught up in your own BS, shown you didn't know what you were talking about. You a political cartoonist? I think you are confused, posting cartoons others make (and most of the time it is against their copyright to post elsewhere) does not make one a 'political cartoonist', it merely shows that someone is unable to use their own words and must use the work of others to make strange and failed points. I have seen not one bit of wit or humor that is normally seen in political cartoons in your postings, which makes it even harder to believe. And this isn't an attack, you brought up what you do, thus making it relevant to the discussion. So if you are as you claim, let's see your own work.

[Arbo]

Right you are, I learned that at about ten years old, that was almost 50 years ago---they really taught school back then.. ;)--Tyr

Thanks for posting an article that shows the image he posted was not by Ben Franklin, just as I said. :laugh2:

ps- you still need to learn how to cut/paste/edit your quotes... lord o lord.

[Abbey Marie]

Probably even, but there it is.


Based on what though: anecdotes that speak to ideological constructs? And if you follow failures, what of successes-- Surely there are some-- how do you track those so that they can be expanded?


Not challenging them may not be encouraging, but discouraging them is an affirmative act which I don't believe to be the case. More so I believe that too much emphasis is placed upon what schools and government are expected to do. Surely some encouragement and drive to succeed (and i would argue most) should hail from the home and the individual. It is when this fails to happen that government becomes more involved, whether grossly or relatively, and maybe that's the problem, not that the average joe should be second class to the elite.


True, but didn't you just say that excellent students are who society NEEDS, but what is excellence if not exceedingly standards- based, and how is this any less troublesome?


one certainly should understand there's a time and place for that. Just because one has a right to discourse doesn't mean that it should prevail.

:salute:

[Abbey Marie]

Most should come from home. But what good does it do coming from home when the school system bogs them down in mediocrity?




:laugh2:

Lots of the good that can come from home, will make the mediocrity almost irrelevant. Intellectual curiosity, the desire to learn and succeed, and the ability to learn outside of those mediocre schools, all are homemade recipes for success. Additionally, local libraries are free, and contain lots of books and computers for learning. I practically lived in ours when I was young. And on top of that, it is very easy to stand out academically in a sea of mediocrity.

[Abbey Marie]

I hear what you are saying and agree, However you were the exception to the rule back when and still are.

Always are the exceptions, when do we make them the norm?

I gave a starting point:

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?43179-Parent-arrested-for-speaking-out&p=666428&highlight=#post666428

I like your points; didn't mean to ignore them. I am just saying we cannot move forward and make anything good "the norm", as long as we blame poverty for the problems, as Brady did. It's a victim mentality that will never work.

I don't think I was an exceptional or special child, which is why I gave my experience as an example of why I believe a shift in focus can work for many. I know it would practically be a 180 these days, to expect parents to instill these values in their kids. They are too used to looking to the government as their (supposed) problem-solver.

I don't have the answers. But I feel pretty strongly that (to paraphrase the Urban Cowboy song) we first have to stop looking in the all the wrong places. ;)

Btw, Kath, we were reminiscing with our daughter this weekend about her high school days, and she remembers only a handful of teachers who really seemed to care about their students and their subject. I don't know if I've ever said this to you, but you seem to me to be one of that handful.