I have to mostly agree with Michael Atherton on this one.  I sure as heck
don't want teachers foisting their own viewpoints on my kids, whether it be
religious, economic or political.  Even Michael's example of comparing the
ten commandments posted by the Alabama judge to the "Peace education"
brochure makes a certain amount of sense.  At first I thought it was a bit
of a reach, but then I saw that it did make sense.  Sure the judge's
behavior is illegal under the Constitution as an establishment of religion,
while teaching "Peace" in a public school is not.  But it's an ethical
matter, not a legal one.  Why should it be verboten to use government
resources to support a religion, but acceptable to use these resources to
support a philosophic point of view?

Many have responded that all education is political.  Their point of view
seems to be that because one can't be completely objective, why try at all?
I think it is worth the effort.  There is a continuum between total
objectivity and total propaganda.  We can't get all the way to objectivity,
but lets try to stay on that side of the line.

I agree that the schools have to teach some values in order to function.
"Knowledge is good" is something the schools should be demonstrating every
day.  The schools must value order in the classroom, or nothing would get
done.  And the schools must dictate which things are the most important to
learn in the classroom.  The schools have decided that it is important to
teach Math.  They could have decided that the kids will learn everything
they need to know through osmosis or something. (Oh, wait a minute.  The
school has pretty much decided that, at least for basic arithmetic facts,
through their embracing of the "Chicago Method.")

But the schools do not have to teach a particular philosophical point of
view, except as a study of many different politics held by various groups
(and even that isn't appropriate at the elementary school level, beyond a
superficial review of different groups).  When I speak of objectivity, I
mean teaching should be of what is known to be true, or at least accepted by
the vast majority of people (in other words, we can dismiss the Flat Earth
Society).

Objectivity is hardest to achieve in the area of social studies, as is
obvious by the big to-do about the state standards.  The school does
inevitably express its values by what facts it teaches in history, what
countries get studied in geography, and which government processes it
discusses in civics.  But when the school starts making value judgments
about these facts to their captive audience, they've moved into the realm of
propaganda.  The school obviously shouldn't support any particular religion
(or religion in general).  They shouldn't be teaching patriotism.  And they
shouldn't be teaching "Peace Education."

Several posters seem to be confusing teaching "Peace" with maintaining order
in the classroom.  Whenever I've heard the discussion of "Peace Education,"
it's always related to the relationships between countries, not between
individuals in a school.  If you think that the two facets are related, well
that's a philosophical point of view that I do not share.  There is a real
value to teaching peace education, or using the more old-fashioned term,
teaching the delicate art of diplomacy.  But to get much out of this
education, the student must have a pretty good understanding of geography,
history, sociology, economics, government structures, and psychology.  In
other words, it's probably a college course.  It can only be taught at the
elementary school level as propaganda.  Or does someone have an idea how
young kids can be taught something useful in the area of conflicts between
nations?

Two of the posters said that their own education in the Mpls public schools
included a lot of right wing ideology being taught.  Well, I hope we can
strip that out also.  Could you two please give examples of what you are
talking about?  My experience with my kids (3rd grade and 7th grade) is that
they do occasionally bring home things where I see left wing ideology, but
I've not once seen any right wing stuff.

Mark V Anderson
Bancroft



REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to