Neutrality

[Marvin the Martian]

An Indiana state legislator suggested that teachers should remain neutral when discussing marxism and communism. He has since walked back the remarks.

I am not sure what he meant by "remain neutral". I am not sure a teacher should curse out either ism. So if he meant teachers should not launch into ad hominem attacks on either ism, I would agree.

But if he meant that we have to teach equal doses of "good" and "bad", then I have a serious issue. Neither ism has come close to 50-50 on the good/bad scale.

This remark was regarding of a bill he sponsors on CRT. I theorize the unsaid argument is that we need to teach slavery in a neutral manner. I don't know how else he got into nazi/marxist thought on CRT unless slavery was the end goal. If that's true, then again I have an issue. We don't need to call slave owners names per se, but it isn't a neutrality issue.

GOP state senator walks back comments on Nazi history in schools

Scott Baldwin faced backlash after his comments during a hearing on Senate Bill 167, which would ban ‘concepts that divide’ in schools

www.theguardian.com

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Quote from Chalkbeat.com on the hearing:

“Saying this bill is not intended to prevent the teaching of history is like slashing funding for road maintenance and saying you don’t intend to create potholes,” said Tilly Robinson, a senior at Bloomington High School South in Bloomington.

 

[mrhighlife]

Ignorance is bliss.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

An Indiana state legislator suggested that teachers should remain neutral when discussing marxism and communism. He has since walked back the remarks.

I am not sure what he meant by "remain neutral". I am not sure a teacher should curse out either ism. So if he meant teachers should not launch into ad hominem attacks on either ism, I would agree.

But if he meant that we have to teach equal doses of "good" and "bad", then I have a serious issue. Neither ism has come close to 50-50 on the good/bad scale.

This remark was regarding of a bill he sponsors on CRT. I theorize the unsaid argument is that we need to teach slavery in a neutral manner. I don't know how else he got into nazi/marxist thought on CRT unless slavery was the end goal. If that's true, then again I have an issue. We don't need to call slave owners names per se, but it isn't a neutrality issue.

GOP state senator walks back comments on Nazi history in schools

Scott Baldwin faced backlash after his comments during a hearing on Senate Bill 167, which would ban ‘concepts that divide’ in schools

www.theguardian.com

I think a lot of people on the left are creating a straw man. I really don’t think a lot of politicians or people in general secretly desire a candy coating of the evils of slavery. I see that as more of the same tactic of “if you disagree with me about [insert particular opinion here], you are a racist” retorts.

That said, once you reach a high enough level of education, hopefully you are able to contextualize everything and view things through lenses other than a moral one. (I don’t mean here that we should teach things through a moral lense at younger ages).

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I think a lot of people on the left are creating a straw man. I really don’t think a lot of politicians or people in general secretly desire a candy coating of the evils of slavery. I see that as more of the same tactic of “if you disagree with me about [insert particular opinion here], you are a racist” retorts.

That said, once you reach a high enough level of education, hopefully you are able to contextualize everything and view things through lenses other than a moral one. (I don’t mean here that we should teach things through a moral lense at younger ages).

So why would he make the statement about nazism/marxism? Was it solely based on a concern we don't give those isms a fair shake in this country?

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

So why would he make the statement about nazism/marxism? Was it solely based on a concern we don't give those isms a fair shake in this country?

I think he explained that, in the article:

"Baldwin has since walked back on his remarks. In an email to the Indianapolis Star last Thursday, he said that his intention with the bill was to make sure teachers are being impartial when discussing and teaching “legitimate political groups”.

“When I was drafting this bill, my intent with regard to ‘political affiliation’ was to cover political parties within the legal American political system,” Baldwin said. “In my comments during committee, I was thinking more about the big picture and trying to say that we should not tell kids what to think about politics.”"

He's a state representative. I don't consider those people eloquent speakers and he didn't double down on the idea you are worried about so I don't think your characterization is correct.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Quote from Chalkbeat.com on the hearing:

“Saying this bill is not intended to prevent the teaching of history is like slashing funding for road maintenance and saying you don’t intend to create potholes,” said Tilly Robinson, a senior at Bloomington High School South in Bloomington.

the "intent" of any action is much tougher to discern than the action itself.

the actual intent in the above scenario is much tougher to discern than the slashing of funding itself, which could be for various reasons such as just frugality or preferring the funds go elsewhere, and potholes are just a consequence of the action, and not necessarily the base intent of the action.

i could just as easily argue that not going to medicare for all is done with the intent of killing the 60,000 per yr who die due to insufficient access to sufficient healthcare, rather than say it was done with the intent of perpetuating the private health insurance business or the vast sums flowing into the many sides of the healthcare industry, or perpetuating the flow of vast sums of money from the healthcare, insurance, big pharma, and devise, industries, into the pockets of lawmakers.

reality is, lawmakers could be continually refusing to steer us to better and universally available healthcare at half the cost, just to line their pockets and those of their donors, and increase/perpetuate their power/position, rather than doing it with the intent of killing 60,000 people in the US per yr.

the killing of the 60,000 per yr in the US could just be a consequence of their actions, and not their intent.

were the killing itself the intent, that would be personal imo.

i doubt it's personal. more likely it's just business.

 

[IUCrazy2]

An Indiana state legislator suggested that teachers should remain neutral when discussing marxism and communism. He has since walked back the remarks.

I am not sure what he meant by "remain neutral". I am not sure a teacher should curse out either ism. So if he meant teachers should not launch into ad hominem attacks on either ism, I would agree.

But if he meant that we have to teach equal doses of "good" and "bad", then I have a serious issue. Neither ism has come close to 50-50 on the good/bad scale.

This remark was regarding of a bill he sponsors on CRT. I theorize the unsaid argument is that we need to teach slavery in a neutral manner. I don't know how else he got into nazi/marxist thought on CRT unless slavery was the end goal. If that's true, then again I have an issue. We don't need to call slave owners names per se, but it isn't a neutrality issue.

GOP state senator walks back comments on Nazi history in schools

Scott Baldwin faced backlash after his comments during a hearing on Senate Bill 167, which would ban ‘concepts that divide’ in schools

www.theguardian.com

As @BradStevens said, this whole "they don't want to teach slavery" stuff is just nonsense. They don't want the kind of crap that adults have to sit through as part of diversity training at work being foisted on their kids. Ibram Kendi inspired books are being pushed onto teachers as part of their professional development and those controversial topics are making it into classes.

Books with content like this:

https://external-preview.redd.it/r335qvh4uMP_IQaY2uopRqAX-GLd5-DMfJgcmPOtkaY.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=522c02b0ea0a9f41967e356771e526218b3409a7

Are in school libraries. And when you bring it up, teachers say, "well I don't do that...." but then some of them turn around and do it behind the backs of parents and administrators. Next to no one has an issue with slavery being taught. There is just a sizable portion of us who believe that the "antiracism" craze that has swept academia is a steaming pile of bullshit and we want an assurance that it is not being taught in schools. And when teachers say it is not but then throw a fit when you say you are going to ban something they supposedly don't teach, you understandably come to the conclusion that they are lying to you.

This book was handed out to teachers in one of the elementary schools in my district as development for teachers:

These development sessions are deemed important enough that the district builds in e-learning days so the kids "learn" at home while the teachers learn stuff like that book. Why would they spend time professionally developing something they do not intend to use in the classroom?

Those Bill's would not be in front of the legislature this year if schools would not have been monkeying around with this bull shit. The parents had a hands off approach and a not insignificant percentage of the education community abused the trust. So now they get the watchful eye.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

As @BradStevens said, this whole "they don't want to teach slavery" stuff is just nonsense. They don't want the kind of crap that adults have to sit through as part of diversity training at work being foisted on their kids. Ibram Kendi inspired books are being pushed onto teachers as part of their professional development and those controversial topics are making it into classes.

Books with content like this:

https://external-preview.redd.it/r335qvh4uMP_IQaY2uopRqAX-GLd5-DMfJgcmPOtkaY.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=522c02b0ea0a9f41967e356771e526218b3409a7

Are in school libraries. And when you bring it up, teachers say, "well I don't do that...." but then some of them turn around and do it behind the backs of parents and administrators. Next to no one has an issue with slavery being taught. There is just a sizable portion of us who believe that the "antiracism" craze that has swept academia is a steaming pile of bullshit and we want an assurance that it is not being taught in schools. And when teachers say it is not but then throw a fit when you say you are going to ban something they supposedly don't teach, you understandably come to the conclusion that they are lying to you.

This book was handed out to teachers in one of the elementary schools in my district as development for teachers:

View embedded media

These development sessions are deemed important enough that the district builds in e-learning days so the kids "learn" at home while the teachers learn stuff like that book. Why would they spend time professionally developing something they do not intend to use in the classroom?

Those Bill's would not be in front of the legislature this year if schools would not have been monkeying around with this bull shit. The parents had a hands off approach and a not insignificant percentage of the education community abused the trust. So now they get the watchful eye.

The second book link didn't come through.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

it's easy to make political hay out of demonizing someone for saying that the underlying concepts of nazism or communism can be taught without moralizing on the subjects at the same time.

but it's a slippery slope.

we see the organized demonization of social programs daily for political gain, rather than objectively discussing the benefits and drawbacks of the programs themselves.

just the term "liberal" has been non stop demonized for political/financial gain.

and the term "conservative" looks more malevolent daily, and tieing that malevolecy to the term itself could be done much more than it has to date, just as has been done with the terms "liberal" or "democratic socialist".

while the teacher made the mistake of touching the "nazi" and "communist" third rails, he has a point that political and financial concepts should be objectively taught in school, absent attaching moral teaching in doing so.

teaching the possible/probable consequences of such political/economic concepts can be done as well, but again, should be done objectively.

when such concepts and their possible consequences are taught objectively, the student can attach and deduce their own moral conclusions and observations.

 

[IUCrazy2]

The second book link didn't come through.

"This Book is Antiracist."

 

[IU_Hickory]

I think a lot of people on the left are creating a straw man. I really don’t think a lot of politicians or people in general secretly desire a candy coating of the evils of slavery. I see that as more of the same tactic of “if you disagree with me about [insert particular opinion here], you are a racist” retorts.

That said, once you reach a high enough level of education, hopefully you are able to contextualize everything and view things through lenses other than a moral one. (I don’t mean here that we should teach things through a moral lense at younger ages).

I think the gop are creating a straw man all because of CRT. Let the teachers teach real history and not the white washed history we learned growing up.

 

[TMFT]

The fascism/Nazism/marxism question was an argument appealing to the absurd. And the state rep gave an absurd response to it.

I have no expectation that the intent of the bill is that teachers have to give a "fair shake" or teach "opposing viewpoints" when it comes to fascism.

But the devil is in the details.

There will CERTAINLY be objections somewhere in the state for a history teacher that follows generally accepted history that the Civil War was primarily about the institution of slavery and its spread. Some parent will want to mythologize the Lost Cause narrative or follow some UDC lesson plan. They'll object to anything short of the veneration of Robert E. Lee. Or what have you.

I would argue this is equally absurd to being soft on fascists. But there are a lot more people in Indiana that identify positively with the CSA than fascist Germany/Italy. And the fact of the matter is that the plain text of the bill doesn't allow exceptions for the parts of history that 99.9% of the people think are bad vs. the ones that 80% (or less) think is bad. And that's where the devil is in the details.

If/when this becomes law, it's going to push teachers out. Parents are going to object to lessons teaching different algorithms to do math than the parents learned, the Civil War, Civil Rights movement, Pluto being demoted to dwarf planet. Teachers are going to have to come up with multiple lesson plans. It's going to be a mess.

At the end of the day, IMO, what the activists are wanting with this bill is to go back to a glossy view of American history where American/native relations were good after Squanto, Pocahontas, & the first Thanksgiving. We'll just gloss over Indian Removal Act & Wounded Knee. That race relations were bad until the slaves were freed. Except not really with Black Codes, Plessy v. Ferguson, & Jim Crow. But they were better once Rosa Parks took a stand by sitting. Except they weren't until MLK told us what his dream was. Except not entirely until the CRA & VRA, except not really until Obama was elected. The bad parts of history are uncomfortable, but they're there. We shouldn't ignore them to feel better.

 

[IU_Hickory]

If a parent doesn't want their kid to learn real history, then maybe they can try their hand in home schooling. Or maybe each school district can have a single school dedicated to teaching an alternate reality where their ancestors were angels that never did anything wrong.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

An Indiana state legislator suggested that teachers should remain neutral when discussing marxism and communism. He has since walked back the remarks.

I am not sure what he meant by "remain neutral". I am not sure a teacher should curse out either ism. So if he meant teachers should not launch into ad hominem attacks on either ism, I would agree.

But if he meant that we have to teach equal doses of "good" and "bad", then I have a serious issue. Neither ism has come close to 50-50 on the good/bad scale.

This remark was regarding of a bill he sponsors on CRT. I theorize the unsaid argument is that we need to teach slavery in a neutral manner. I don't know how else he got into nazi/marxist thought on CRT unless slavery was the end goal. If that's true, then again I have an issue. We don't need to call slave owners names per se, but it isn't a neutrality issue.

GOP state senator walks back comments on Nazi history in schools

Scott Baldwin faced backlash after his comments during a hearing on Senate Bill 167, which would ban ‘concepts that divide’ in schools

www.theguardian.com

on the flip side, we see the term "capitalism" constantly attached with a positive or a negative moral bent.

when taught in schools, "capitalism", it's more than one definition and side and meaning, should be done totally objectively, and divorced from moral attachment, since capitalism is a thing, and is totally amoral as are all "things".

and capitalism has both positive and negative moral consequences, which can also be taught objectively, but only when all sides are presented, and done so strictly objectively.

the instant isms are tied to morality, those with non objective agendas become the ones doing so.

"isms" that are inherently immoral, when taught objectively, will reveal their inherent immorality in the objective teaching itself.

when someone themself wants or needs to do the "attaching" of morality to "isms", perhaps the isms themselves aren't inherently moral or immoral, but are the agenda of the "attacher" to being percieved so.

 

[Bill4411]

This is what Steven Colbert had to say about Baldwin:

 

[IU_Hickory]

This is what Steven Colbert had to say about Baldwin:

View embedded media

Who wants to teach in Indiana now? Low pay and you have to get 100% parent approval to teach anything (or create multiple lesson plans and separate the students for alternative learning options). Lets watch any good teacher with a vehicle leave for a better situation in another state.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

The fascism/Nazism/marxism question was an argument appealing to the absurd. And the state rep gave an absurd response to it.

I have no expectation that the intent of the bill is that teachers have to give a "fair shake" or teach "opposing viewpoints" when it comes to fascism.

But the devil is in the details.

There will CERTAINLY be objections somewhere in the state for a history teacher that follows generally accepted history that the Civil War was primarily about the institution of slavery and its spread. Some parent will want to mythologize the Lost Cause narrative or follow some UDC lesson plan. They'll object to anything short of the veneration of Robert E. Lee. Or what have you.

I would argue this is equally absurd to being soft on fascists. But there are a lot more people in Indiana that identify positively with the CSA than fascist Germany/Italy. And the fact of the matter is that the plain text of the bill doesn't allow exceptions for the parts of history that 99.9% of the people think are bad vs. the ones that 80% (or less) think is bad. And that's where the devil is in the details.

If/when this becomes law, it's going to push teachers out. Parents are going to object to lessons teaching different algorithms to do math than the parents learned, the Civil War, Civil Rights movement, Pluto being demoted to dwarf planet. Teachers are going to have to come up with multiple lesson plans. It's going to be a mess.

At the end of the day, IMO, what the activists are wanting with this bill is to go back to a glossy view of American history where American/native relations were good after Squanto, Pocahontas, & the first Thanksgiving. We'll just gloss over Indian Removal Act & Wounded Knee. That race relations were bad until the slaves were freed. Except not really with Black Codes, Plessy v. Ferguson, & Jim Crow. But they were better once Rosa Parks took a stand by sitting. Except they weren't until MLK told us what his dream was. Except not entirely until the CRA & VRA, except not really until Obama was elected. The bad parts of history are uncomfortable, but they're there. We shouldn't ignore them to feel better.

I agree with your last sentence 100%.

But I think you are catastrophizing the results of this--local leaders will find pragmatic solutions to these things because they have to; I highly doubt Indiana will face an exodus of teachers; I doubt teachers are just going to stop teaching about the effects of slavery, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights movement, etc. because of this bill; and math instruction isn't going to grind to a halt.

Aren't there state standards for this now(I don't know)? Does this bill change what subjects/history needs to be taught?

 

[Bill4411]

I agree with your last sentence 100%.

But I think you are catastrophizing the results of this--local leaders will find pragmatic solutions to these things because they have to; I highly doubt Indiana will face an exodus of teachers; I doubt teachers are just going to stop teaching about the effects of slavery, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights movement, etc. because of this bill; and math instruction isn't going to grind to a halt.

Aren't there state standards for this now(I don't know)? Does this bill change what subjects/history needs to be taught?

It would be difficult to leave for established teachers but I can't imagine that a young person would want to go into teaching in Indiana, so the quality is going to drop-off. Public school teachers are not very respected in Indiana. It used to be considered a very honorable profession.

 

[IU_Hickory]

Indiana state senator linked to extremist militia group Oath Keepers

Indiana Sen. Scott Baldwin (R-Noblesville) has been linked to the anti-government extremist group the Oath Keepers.

www.wbaa.org

Not sure he should be making suggestions/laws for our education.

 

[TMFT]

I agree with your last sentence 100%.

But I think you are catastrophizing the results of this--local leaders will find pragmatic solutions to these things because they have to; I highly doubt Indiana will face an exodus of teachers; I doubt teachers are just going to stop teaching about the effects of slavery, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights movement, etc. because of this bill; and math instruction isn't going to grind to a halt.

Aren't there state standards for this now(I don't know)? Does this bill change what subjects/history needs to be taught?

I'm actually less concerned about a failure of local leaders than a select few parents finding a reason to be angry about something.

The State does have standards (HERE), but when the rubber meets the road, the people who object will object that these standards were created by the unelected bureaucrats at the IDOE.

I can only speak for my kids' school where parents complain constantly about how kids are taught math because it's different than we were taught. One of the teachers testifying in the House committee the other day even said she gets calls regularly about which algorithm are taught because it's not necessarily the same as it used to be. I'm not saying it'll grind to a halt. I am saying it'll be very inconvenient for teachers, to say nothing of frustrating if they use a method that is supported by research and have to teach a secondary method because parents want their kids to learn the same way they did.

Beginning teachers make what, low $30s? It'll be hard to keep young ones around if they have to put up with too much. Teachers in their 40s & 50s might be too locked in where they're making good enough money that it'd be hard to leave.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

It would be difficult to leave for established teachers but I can't imagine that a young person would want to go into teaching in Indiana, so the quality is going to drop-off. Public school teachers are not very respected in Indiana. It used to be considered a very honorable profession.

I guess I find it highly unlikely that a meaningful number of 19-year-old kids are going to change majors or decide to live in another state based on this bill.

It would be an interesting study to do, though: analyze the quality/number of teachers in a state based on the state policies regarding actual teaching (not compensation) and see if the latter has any meaningful effect on the former.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

i find it interesting, and predictable, that people are upset with the concept that schools should teach things and concepts objectively and neutrally.

to not do so, is to teach them subjectively and with bias, which has the end result in teaching the subjectivity and the bias, rather than the concept itself.

if something is inherently immoral, then teaching it objectively and neutrally will reveal any inherent immorality, without needing any imposed bias or subjectivity to do so.

once one subject is banned from "neutral" and objective teaching, then where is the line drawn on what other subjects are banned from being taught neutrally and objectively.

should the Indiana General Assembly make a list of what subjects can be taught neutrally and objectively in schools, and which ones can't?

if so, that list in itself should be quit interesting.

perhaps if US history, civics and how laws are passed and elections run, drug education, sex education, US foreign policy, and economics, had actually been taught neutrally and objectively, all those who went to school would be far more knowledgeable and enlightened, and far less brainwashed and ignorant, than they now are.

 

[IU_Hickory]

i find it interesting, and predictable, that people are upset with the concept that schools should teach things and concepts objectively and neutrally.

to not do so, is to teach them subjectively and with bias, which has the end result in teaching the subjectivity and the bias, rather than the concept itself.

if something is inherently immoral, then teaching it objectively and neutrally will reveal any inherent immorality, without needing any imposed bias or subjectivity to do so.

once one subject is banned from "neutral" and objective teaching, then where is the line drawn on what other subjects are banned from being taught neutrally and objectively.

should the Indiana General Assembly make a list of what subjects can be taught neutrally and objectively in schools, and which ones can't?

if so, that list in itself should be quit interesting.

perhaps if US history, civics and how laws are passed and elections run, drug education, sex education, US foreign policy, and economics, had actually been taught neutrally and objectively, all those who went to school would be far more knowledgeable and enlightened, and far less brainwashed and ignorant, than they now are.

The bill is more than that.

House Bill 1134 died in the Indiana Senate. Here's its path through legislature in 2022

Indiana HB 1134 is advancing and SB 167 is stalled during the 2022 session of the Indiana General Assembly.

news.yahoo.com

 

[hookyIU1990]

i find it interesting, and predictable, that people are upset with the concept that schools should teach things and concepts objectively and neutrally.

to not do so, is to teach them subjectively and with bias, which has the end result in teaching the subjectivity and the bias, rather than the concept itself.

if something is inherently immoral, then teaching it objectively and neutrally will reveal any inherent immorality, without needing any imposed bias or subjectivity to do so.

once one subject is banned from "neutral" and objective teaching, then where is the line drawn on what other subjects are banned from being taught neutrally and objectively.

should the Indiana General Assembly make a list of what subjects can be taught neutrally and objectively in schools, and which ones can't?

if so, that list in itself should be quit interesting.

perhaps if US history, civics and how laws are passed and elections run, drug education, sex education, US foreign policy, and economics, had actually been taught neutrally and objectively, all those who went to school would be far more knowledgeable and enlightened, and far less brainwashed and ignorant, than they now are.

Holy crap. I find myself agreeing with IGW for the second time within a 12 month span.

Full text of the bill for anyone who is interested enough to read it. http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2022/...64-1642016378-0-gaNycGzNA6U#document-859f4618

 

[zeke4ahs]

This is what Steven Colbert had to say about Baldwin:

View embedded media

I guess I find it highly unlikely that a meaningful number of 19-year-old kids are going to change majors or decide to live in another state based on this bill.

It would be an interesting study to do, though: analyze the quality/number of teachers in a state based on the state policies regarding actual teaching (not compensation) and see if the latter has any meaningful effect on the former.

It’s not just this bill, it’s multiple issues in education throughout the country. My first year at IU, there were 8 girls in the house in education. 2 decided not to teach after their student teaching experiences. My last two years there was 1 and zero. Anecdotal, but I’m going to see if I can find IU numbers from school of education. I loved my job every minute. I absolutely would not become a teacher in this environment.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I'm actually less concerned about a failure of local leaders than a select few parents finding a reason to be angry about something.

The State does have standards (HERE), but when the rubber meets the road, the people who object will object that these standards were created by the unelected bureaucrats at the IDOE.

I can only speak for my kids' school where parents complain constantly about how kids are taught math because it's different than we were taught. One of the teachers testifying in the House committee the other day even said she gets calls regularly about which algorithm are taught because it's not necessarily the same as it used to be. I'm not saying it'll grind to a halt. I am saying it'll be very inconvenient for teachers, to say nothing of frustrating if they use a method that is supported by research and have to teach a secondary method because parents want their kids to learn the same way they did.

Beginning teachers make what, low $30s? It'll be hard to keep young ones around if they have to put up with too much. Teachers in their 40s & 50s might be too locked in where they're making good enough money that it'd be hard to leave.

It's interesting that you are concerned about several different methods being taught for math. At my school, and I think the reason for the different algorithms being taught everywhere that parents are complaining about, is that they now teach several different methods for basic arithmetic. That's the problem. Google addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division strategies.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I think the gop are creating a straw man all because of CRT. Let the teachers teach real history and not the white washed history we learned growing up.

IMO both groups are creating staw men characterizing the other as evil.

The fact is and as others have stated here...most people want a more realistic presentation of our history warts and all but:

The right doesn't want their kids (or themselves) to be painted as evil racist people that owe minorities something beyond respect and fair treatment. They don't want the kids blamed or to feel guilty for something they did not do.

The left doesn't want the right to blow this off and propagate racism in society. They want white peole to own this. Some on the left want compensation.

Each then creates overdone staw men that paint the other as described.

 

[TMFT]

It's interesting that you are concerned about several different methods being taught for math. At my school, and I think the reason for the different algorithms being taught everywhere that parents are complaining about, is that they now teach several different methods for basic arithmetic. That's the problem. Google addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division strategies.

I may be in the minority, but I don't think it's a problem at all. I love that my kids are learning different strategies for basic math. They each have glommed onto different ones. What works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other. The complaints I'm hearing from parents is that they aren't (or aren't only) being taught the one algorithm we were taught with carrying digits for long subtraction problems, for example.

Personally, and again this is only me, I love some of the strategies they're being taught because it matches up with how I do math in my head. Like if I'm doing a longer subtraction problem in my head, like 235 - 96, I'll get them both to 100s (35+4=39) and subtract the 100s (200-100=100). Answer is 139. I'm not able to set it up in my head to say 15 minus 6 is 9, then the 3 becomes a 2, 12 minus 9 is 3, the 2 becomes a 1 and answer is 139. I'd have to have pen & paper to do it that way.

 

[IU_Hickory]

I may be in the minority, but I don't think it's a problem at all. I love that my kids are learning different strategies for basic math. They each have glommed onto different ones. What works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other. The complaints I'm hearing from parents is that they aren't (or aren't only) being taught the one algorithm we were taught with carrying digits for long subtraction problems, for example.

Personally, and again this is only me, I love some of the strategies they're being taught because it matches up with how I do math in my head. Like if I'm doing a longer subtraction problem in my head, like 235 - 96, I'll get them both to 100s (35+4=39) and subtract the 100s (200-100=100). Answer is 139. I'm not able to set it up in my head to say 15 minus 6 is 9, then the 3 becomes a 2, 12 minus 9 is 3, the 2 becomes a 1 and answer is 139. I'd have to have pen & paper to do it that way.

I'm glad they are teaching new strategies. The only difficult thing is trying to help them with their homework and having to learn their strategy first. It is probably more about the parents not wanting to learn a new strategy.

 

[TMFT]

I'm glad they are teaching new strategies. The only difficult thing is trying to help them with their homework and having to learn their strategy first. It is probably more about the parents not wanting to learn a new strategy.

AMEN to that!

I still have to Google the 2nd grader's math concepts to be able to work through it with him. It seems things have gotten more conventional for the 4th grader.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I may be in the minority, but I don't think it's a problem at all. I love that my kids are learning different strategies for basic math. They each have glommed onto different ones. What works for one doesn't necessarily work for the other. The complaints I'm hearing from parents is that they aren't (or aren't only) being taught the one algorithm we were taught with carrying digits for long subtraction problems, for example.

Personally, and again this is only me, I love some of the strategies they're being taught because it matches up with how I do math in my head. Like if I'm doing a longer subtraction problem in my head, like 235 - 96, I'll get them both to 100s (35+4=39) and subtract the 100s (200-100=100). Answer is 139. I'm not able to set it up in my head to say 15 minus 6 is 9, then the 3 becomes a 2, 12 minus 9 is 3, the 2 becomes a 1 and answer is 139. I'd have to have pen & paper to do it that way.

The complaint I hear most often is that if your kid already understands how to add or subtract, wasting a half-year of school time teaching him different strategies is a waste.

 

[Spartans9312]

AMEN to that!

I still have to Google the 2nd grader's math concepts to be able to work through it with him. It seems things have gotten more conventional for the 4th grader.

Shouldn’t your 2nd grader be able to do the problems without your help?
Unless they don’t understand the teaching.
Hmm

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Who wants to teach in Indiana now? Low pay and you have to get 100% parent approval to teach anything (or create multiple lesson plans and separate the students for alternative learning options). Lets watch any good teacher with a vehicle leave for a better situation in another state.

I hear the Chicago Public School System is a wonderful place to teach. You'd like it.

 

[IU_Hickory]

I hear the Chicago Public School System is a wonderful place to teach. You'd like it.

Lol not a teacher but can't be any worse than this shit show if it passes.

 

[TMFT]

Shouldn’t your 2nd grader be able to do the problems without your help?
Unless they don’t understand the teaching.
Hmm

Probably. Because lord knows no kid ever asked for help from their parents prior to tape diagrams being a thing.

 

[VanPastorMan]

An Indiana state legislator suggested that teachers should remain neutral when discussing marxism and communism. He has since walked back the remarks.

I am not sure what he meant by "remain neutral". I am not sure a teacher should curse out either ism. So if he meant teachers should not launch into ad hominem attacks on either ism, I would agree.

But if he meant that we have to teach equal doses of "good" and "bad", then I have a serious issue. Neither ism has come close to 50-50 on the good/bad scale.

This remark was regarding of a bill he sponsors on CRT. I theorize the unsaid argument is that we need to teach slavery in a neutral manner. I don't know how else he got into nazi/marxist thought on CRT unless slavery was the end goal. If that's true, then again I have an issue. We don't need to call slave owners names per se, but it isn't a neutrality issue.

GOP state senator walks back comments on Nazi history in schools

Scott Baldwin faced backlash after his comments during a hearing on Senate Bill 167, which would ban ‘concepts that divide’ in schools

www.theguardian.com

Martina Navritilova spoke about the evil of communism because when she won a major she was asked what she would do with the prize money. She simply said that she didn't get it because it went to the Czech government. I would say today we should see communism as the same evil as we used to. We fought in Korea and Vietnam so communism would not spread. Today in China the only way to see the people over there is that they are slaves. They can't choose where and when they will work. The government decides for them. It is modern slavery on a very large scale because of the population.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

If people think this is all made up, look up The American Pageant, 17th edition came out in the last couple years and is widely used. It refers to Blacks coming into the South as "immigrants". It speaks about "mulattoes" as being from slave owners and their mistresses. Mistress implies voluntary.

Why on earth would an Indiana state senator decide we need a bill for neutrality and come up with his bust examples to sell it as Nazis and Marxists? Does anyone really think those are two groups in desperate need of protection.

He could easily have used Republicans/Democrats, populists, BLM, Trump supporters, green party, militia groups, etc. If he was looking for modern political movements and could not think of a single one than clearly no one should have voted for him.

 

[Spartans9312]

Probably. Because lord knows no kid ever asked for help from their parents prior to tape diagrams being a thing.

Did you get a good grade?

 

[TMFT]

Did you get a good grade?

I feel bad for your kids