I was reading a few articles in about the proposed September 8th speech by President Obama and was struck by the following reader comment:
Posted by ( reptaddict ) on 09/03/2009 at 09:05 pm. "Sometimes you just have to sit back and look at what lies before you. We are actually debating about whether parents should opt their children out of listening to the President of the United States, who rose from meager beginnings to Harvard Law to the highest office in the land, speak to the children about the importance of education. Dear God, what have we become? Can we as a people possibly be this pathetic? I guess on Tuesday we'll find out".
I believe parents have a right to opt out of certain controversial lessons. But as a student I remember having to write book reports on various presidents, or having to memorize speeches. Never and I mean never, did my mother have to ability to opt out of my doing school work. I would have received a zero, plain and simple.
I remember receiving topics I was strongly opposed to when we were learning to debate and I had to argue in favor of the topic. Sometimes my mind was changed and sometimes my position was made stronger (typically the latter). But the lesson did what it was intended to do; create critical, higher lever thinking skills. Isn’t that our job? Some wonderful, spirited debate could evolve out of this Presidential address.
Another point being made by the opposition is the avenue President is using to communicate with students. One statement made was "the concern here is that it's a one-way communication,"… "that's the fear of indoctrination."
His message will be delivered via web cast and broadcasted on CNN. The reality is that today’s kids spend hours searching YouTube videos and updating their MySpace. The internet is what they understand.
It is also being argued that his delivery platform is going to be unprecedented. This is absolutely true. Never before has any other president used technology the way President Obama has. He is the first president to carry a blackberry and have a Whitehouse blog. He has fully embraced technology. Remember that the TV was unprecedented at one time. Bottom line, what does it matter how he communicates his message?
I will conclude with this. I am constantly hearing people say that one of the biggest problems with our society is lack of respect for authority from our youth. Where are they learning this disrespect? One may not agree with a President and has a right to voice opposition, but he deserves respect and he has earned his place in the history books, just like all the Presidents before him. We must respect the Office of the President. Keeping students home or opting out sends the wrong message.
Read the Tampa Tribune articles here and here and the St. Pete Times article here and USA article here.
*UPDATE: As of Sunday morning prior to the speech, the argument is shifting to Education Secretary Arne Duncan's release of the lesson plans prior to the President's message. This shift has taken place because proponents have successfully pointed out that other Presidents have broadcast messages to students in the past; most notably Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. Bush. What is not being pointed out is that Duncan is a former superintendent of a public school system, and understands the impact of integrative lesson plans and how combining the lesson with real world events can make learning more relevant and meaningful for students.
What Secretary Duncan was trying to do when he suggested the lesson plans was to say, “We have a message from the President, this is the gist of the message, and here are some good ideas for lessons for various ages and grades that would make it more meaningful for students”. What has happened is that some of the President’s opposition has short quoted a few parts of the memo released to principals and has taken a life of its own and stirred up this controversy. For example in one of the suggested lessons teachers could take students to the library and research other Presidents and President Obama. When this part referenced ‘research other Presidents’ is left out and changes the context of the message from the DOE, thus creating a different meaning to the message.
11 comments:
My personal opinion is that, while we should all be respectful of each other, we should also be very, very skeptical of authority.
That having been said, the manufactured controversy over the President's speech is a symptom of a sick trend in our society, wherein a substantial minority of the population gets its "information" from a well-coordinated right-wing lie machine. Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity and others create an entire alternate universe for their adherents to live out their lives untouched by reality. This freaky alternate universe is the place where a President's speech encouraging students to stay in school and get an education becomes a sinister political ploy to "indoctrinate" them into some "socialist" ideology.
So again, to wrap it up, I'd say this has less to do with respecting the President or the Presidency, and more to do with a substantial portion of the population being willing to turn over their minds to the right-wing propaganda machine.
The same thing can be said for the "Air America" crowd.
After listening to them bash anything remotely conservative with unmatched vitriol I made a conscious decision to listen to a more conservative voice. I hoped to find something that appealed to my rational side.
While not perfect I have found myself listening to and agreeing with the conservative philosophy.
I think the president's message would have been better presented during prime-time when all options are on the table.
WebCast during FAIR testing? What's important here? I vote for testing bandwidth.
If anyone thinks a teenager is going to pay the least bit of attention to anything a politician tells them then why do we have such a high smoking mortality rate, teen birthrate, single mothers, gangs, drunk driving, and drug problems to name a few? Athletes, performers, celebrities and the like have equally dismal effect.
Please, can we get and apply a little common sense in such matters?
Actually, the "Air America crowd" spends most of its time debunking right-wing lies. These days, that is a full-time job.
But the accusation is a perfect example of the Alternate Universe of which I spoke. Clearly the Becks and Limbaughs are completely off the chain with their accusations against the President, including racism (which half of himself is he racist against?), and being both a fascist (which is a right-wing phenomenon) and a socialist or Marxist (clearly of the left). That's just the tip of a very dirty iceberg. There is nothing even close from the "Air America crowd." But there you go- in the right-wing Alternate Universe, the left's behavior is as bad or worse than the right (the facts be damned). Oh, well. These remarks will fall on the deaf ears of anyone who's fallen into the RWAU (Right-Wing Alternate Universe).
So as an antidote, I offer Joan Walsh's take on the topic.
Like Walsh, I'm no Joe Scarborough fan, but he was certainly on target with his criticism of the fearmongers: “It's just assinine. Get your ratings if you want, you’re just screwing your political party.” The video of Scarborough's remarks is included with Walsh's commentary at the link above.
(Does this make Scarborough part of the "Air America crowd?")
Here is a simple solution:
Section 3.9, Manatee County School Board Policies:
"3.9 POLITICAL ACTIVITY POLICY
Political activity shall be prohibited on School District property whether such
activity is undertaken by individuals of political parties or by individuals or
groups representing non-partisan issues. It is the intent of the School Board to
not open school facilities as a forum for political activity except as expressly
provided." Source: www.manatee.k12.fl.us
-------------------------
Primary schools (k-6)should be completely off limits. 7-12 should learn the process of government by being involved in student government. Civic learning should be limited to US and FL history class where the students learn about how our country was formed, how the three branches of government work, how state and federal government work and reading and studying the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (of course at age appropriate levels).
Ms. Griffin, in a polite as possible manner, I need to address your quote in a recent news article.
1) Children should NOT be taught to respect the President of the United States. As an adult, we do not need to respect the President; that is something that is earned. What we should be teaching our children is showing proper decorum (appearance and behavior) if in the presence of an elected official.
2) Life lesson #1, never minimize an individual's or a group's feelings or emotions. Ms. Griffin, you are an elected official yourself. You have a constituent base that you represent, the entire county of Hillsborough. If your constituents are expressing to you how they feel, then you need to listen and come to an understand why they feel the way they do and REPRESENT them on the board. If that cannot be done, then maybe you should not represent them anymore come 2010. Your quote in the St. Pete Times article completely dismisses your constituents feelings and you have superimposed your own feelings in reaction.
3. Our children are very impressionable. They learn through modeling and direct learning. Their minds are like sponges! Even the inadvertent message or word gets learned! That's why considerable care MUST be taken in what our children are exposed to in school. The classroom should be an environment where the parents and the child feel that the child is safe and nurturing.
4. Leave cultural, religious and political ideological education in the home. That's not to say there is nothing wrong in exposing our children to other cultures, religions and political parties (age appropriate) but not to impose them is key!
Sorry April I was hoping to divert this to a "common sense universe".
Preparing for FAIR testing of so many students is far more important to my administration and faculty than a web cast that will be compete for the same bandwidth.
Same can be said for these no-win "political" debates for that matter.
Meanwhile know that the majority of teachers I know are focused on preparing our students for all these tests coming their way.
The controversy started when the DOE's suggested "curriculum" of questions and projects for the 3 specific school groups were provided to school systems across the nation.
Where is the local school system's and teacher's usual response of "don't tell us how to teach our students?"
Local school systems frequently complain about the intrusive sanctions and requirements that the federal government places on them. The tenth admendment has little or no influence anymore. Some believe that the Civil War was the start of the increased power of the federal government and the declining rights of the states. When the southern states tried to exercise their sovereign rights, there was hell to pay,and they lost the war.
The fact that several of the original suggested follow-up discussions that focused on supporting the current President's agenda were quickly removed also follows a pattern of throwing out controversial ideas for the calculated purpose of desensitizing their presentation.
They will come back, packaged differently.
On a side note, I know of a student who was called out of the classroom to be told that that a consevative message displayed by a student "was offensive" by a teacher, all the while the teacher had an "Obama" coffee cup on her desk. The concern here is abuse of the teacher's authority over the student.
Politicizing the Department of Education: Obama’s Lesson Plan » The Foundry: "While it appears the President’s speech will focus on the value of education and personal responsibility, federally-directed lesson plans set a concerning precedent for the government’s role in education. Education analyst Frederick Hess writes at the American Enterprise blog that the lesson plans “were developed with federal funds, devised on taxpayer time, and made available on the Department of Education’s website” and “might be construed as an invitation to engage in advocacy rather than instruction”.
The President, however, clearly wants his own children to be off limits to such classroom politicization. Upon moving to Washington, he chose to enroll his children in the private Sidwell Friends School."
For all these people who are concerned that the President may provide socialist indoctrination: seriously?
Socialism - noun -
A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
In looking at the definition of socialism the true irony of the modern conservative populist movement is revealed. Populism, the idea that a government derives it's power solely through the will of the people, is a cornerstone of the modern conservative movement. The irony is that populism has been historically proven to be the step immediately preceding socialism... yes socialism, the very thing our conservative friends are wringing their hands over.
The very notion of public education is in itself socialist. So if you people are so concerned about socialism, please remove your children from our socialist inspired school system and pay for a private education. Oh, I'm sorry; do your children have a RIGHT to public education? You sure don't SOUND like you have a problem with socialism.
While you are at it, you could stop using other socialist inspired services such as social security, medicare, medicaid, the fire department, the police department, 911, public roads, public water and sewage, and don't fly; you never know when that socialist inspired FAA might take down a plane full of true American patriots. What's that you say? Your are entitled to these services? Hmmm. Your conservative credentials are looking tarnished.
If you work for the school system and abhor the very notion of socialism... you should resign! Your employment and pay is tied to a socialist system that forces people to pay taxes so that you can be paid to teach kids. Oh, you have a right to make a living? Why would you tie your livelihood and career to a socialist agency if you have a problem with socialism?
When the founding fathers created a system of government "of the people, for the people" they were clearly espousing populist ideals and we are merely navigating the logical progression of those ideals.
So let's get real, this isn't really about socialism is it?
Ditto, Sizie---
BO has not shown good judgement--I don't trust him to do what he says--JUST speak on education-- and I will not expose my students to his agenda. This speech should be given at night when parents can discuss this with their children--after they have watched it together. As for the rest of BO's choices--AMERICA does NOT need CZARS--especialy those that are Mrxist, Communist, criminal and the list goes on ...
Enough with the labeling and name calling already… I am an Independent, and I look for the truth. I can't stand the MSM because most anchors don't report the news; they twist the news to serve their political agenda and leanings.
One a logical note, if Malkin or any other writer printed PURE lies or an alternate reality, their books wouldn't make it to print or they'd be sued once they did. With parenthetical documentation, it's hard to say real journalists and writers are all liars and live in an alternate universe. Before making such a damning allegation, the judging party should actually READ the book and find the lies before drinking the kool-aid. Also, quoting people directly and showing videos of them in their own words and actions isn't lying either. Van Jones was brought down on his own radical sword. It didn’t take a liar or a racist to do it.
Both the left and the right have some liars and some crazies, but what matters is that Americans learn to think INDEPENTDENTLY so that the "crazies" decrease, and we can have a real debate. People should have seen how flawed and mislead Bush was, right or left. People should also see the many mistakes and flaws in Obama, right or left. I can’t stand either man. They both expanded government and wanted to step on the republic in their own ways. STOP worshiping these fools and STOP defending them.
Who cares if Obama spoke to the kids! People have the right to watch or not… to picket it or not, to show it or not! That’s America.
A glimpse inside of what goes on in a Hillsborough classroom can be seen by what a Hillsborough teacher says.
Since when is racism based on the race of the person who is a racist?
If a person hates members of a specific race based solely on the fact of the race, then the person is a racist, even if they are of the same race.
Post a Comment