America - The Official Thread

[prisonermonkeys]

there is a plan, the plan is to go back to the way it worked

So what worked then will work now, even though the world has changed since then and there has been a global shift towards progressive trends in education based on empirical evidence established in modern educational pedagogy?

When you say "go back to the way it worked", what time period are you talking about? The 1950s? The 1960s? 1970s? 1980s? 1990s? 2000s? And what's your time frame for reintroducing this system?

 

[xyloscissor]

So what worked then will work now, even though the world has changed since then and there has been a global shift towards progressive trends in education based on empirical evidence established in modern educational pedagogy?

When you say "go back to the way it worked", what time period are you talking about? The 1950s? The 1960s? 1970s? 1980s? 1990s? 2000s? And what's your time frame for reintroducing this system?

Yes, believe it or not old ways do work. This notion of 'progressive' whatever is nonsense to some of us, what is clear is that we have at the very least tried that for the past years and gone downhill fast.

I say go all they way back to when we were formed and check it out up until about 60 years ago, take a look and you will see why. I'm not going to spell it all out because if you do not know what I am talking about then you don't know what you are talking about and we are both wasting time.

It might be an interesting read for the others but most likely not

I posted a really good article about it in the election thread, I will be kind enough to find it if you are kind enough to actually read it this time.

I'll tell you what, don't ask me to read something too liberal and anti american and I will return the favor.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/president-trumps-limited-government/

 

[prisonermonkeys]

This notion of 'progressive' whatever is nonsense to some of us

Just cutting-edge educational theory on how the brain develops, how children process knowledge and apply it in the real world, and the use of sophisticated thinking skills. It views education as more than just the acquisition of knowledge in a vacuum with no direction on how to use it.

Yes, believe it or not old ways do work

Not. You're talking about going back sixty years; well, sixty years ago, there was only really one way of learning - learning by rote. There was no recognition that students could learn visually or kinaesthetically, and that was one of the first stages of the educational theory that defined the second half of the twentieth century.

 

[xyloscissor]

Just cutting-edge educational theory on how the brain develops, how children process knowledge and apply it in the real world, and the use of sophisticated thinking skills. It views education as more than just the acquisition of knowledge in a vacuum with no direction on how to use it.


Not. You're talking about going back sixty years; well, sixty years ago, there was only really one way of learning - learning by rote. There was no recognition that students could learn visually or kinaesthetically, and that was one of the first stages of the educational theory that defined the second half of the twentieth century.

So first off I take it you did not read the article, I'm not surprised. Second off sure there is cutting-edge(can you define that term for me?) what makes you think we need a huge federal government to tell us that?

I fear now that you are simply calling the american people stupid, we can do all that and can do all of that well, what we don't do well is live under some umbrella designed to dictate and take away our liberty.

Lets just look at this, surely you can do that much for me.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

In other words, no one has a right to tell us how we should consider education other then ourselves, not even our own government. Still don't see?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I fear now that you are simply calling the american people stupid

I don't know, but openly rejecting half a century of research into childhood development and educational theory for the vague hope that something that worked sixty years ago will somehow magically fix your educational system does seem to be pretty stupid to me.

So first off I take it you did not read the article

You'll probably need to re-post it for me, please. I read a lot of articles about education and development, so I don't recall it off the top of my head.

Second off sure there is cutting-edge

Absolutely. I am, after all, a teacher, and have a Masters degree in education.

what makes you think we need a huge federal government to tell us that?

It's usually the responsibility of individual teachers to be familiar with modern trends in pedagogy. If they're not, maybe they do need a federal government to give them a kick up the pants. After all, don't you think that parents would want their childrens' teachers to be familiar with the newest and most effective means of teaching?

 

[xyloscissor]

I don't know, but openly rejecting half a century of research into childhood development and educational theory for the vague hope that something that worked sixty years ago will somehow magically fix your educational system does seem to be pretty stupid to me.


You'll probably need to re-post it for me, please. I read a lot of articles about education and development, so I don't recall it off the top of my head.


Absolutely. I am, after all, a teacher, and have a Masters degree in education.


It's usually the responsibility of individual teachers to be familiar with modern trends in pedagogy. If they're not, maybe they do need a federal government to give them a kick up the pants. After all, don't you think that parents would want their childrens' teachers to be familiar with the newest and most effective means of teaching?

1. We are not ignoring anything, do we need a government to tell us that or can we do it by our big boy self?

2. I did repost it.

3. I know what you have and do, and I also understand where you are coming from but still disagree with you.

4. Of course and we expect you to do that, I am glad that you do and that is why I am also glad to pay for your service when needed. I'm still not seeing the part where we need the government. The kick in the pants is when I take my kid to a different school where they know what they are doing 💡

You offer no definition of cutting edge as near I can tell. it is a simple question "what is cutting edge"

No comment on the declaration?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I did repost it.

Right, I see it now.

Didn't finish it. Wasn't particularly insightful.

You offer no definition of cutting edge as near I can tell. it is a simple question "what is cutting edge"

David Sousa's model of Visual Learning, for one.

 

[xyloscissor]

Right, I see it now.

Didn't finish it. Wasn't particularly insightful.


David Sousa's model of Visual Learning, for one.

That article is not insightful? Well maybe not to a socialist that doesn't understand liberty, oh well.

I'm asking for a very simple definition of the term "cutting edge" the most simple you can get, what does the term mean?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'm asking for a very simple definition of the term "cutting edge" the most simple you can get, what does the term mean?

Current. Not just up-to-date, but up-to-the-minute. The latest, the greatest, the most insightful and the most exciting.

That article is not insightful? Well maybe not to a socialist that doesn't understand liberty, oh well.

It mostly amounted to "liberty, yay!" and not much else. Like what to do with it.

 

[xyloscissor]

I don't think we can see eye to eye enough to really converse tbh.

A cutting edge? You know that furthest point of the knife that cuts first? Going into uncharted waters I would say, that does not mean that it is automatically the correct path it means going in and going in deep no? Maybe not. Cutting edge, that reminds me of the term "state of the art" no need to explain that one as it makes even less sense to such a simple 'murican.

What to do with liberty? Use it. Use it to the fullest, never take it for granted, cherish it, protect it, do whatever you have to do to keep it. That way you can, I don't know, live your life?

Bringing things back to the election just for a brief moment, there is a reason Trump is in office. It's not so much to do with how he presented his crazy self as it has to do with how poorly Hillary did her part. Much like when Obama was first elected, he didn't win either, the other lost.

I'm not going to keep going with you, I see you point and I take it to heart because I know you want good for the kids and the future. I don't agree with what you say pure and simple because I don't like to 'punish' kids who don't care to learn for one thing. For another thing I don't think we need a government to interfere with regulations about it.

It's all good and I'm glad that there are people like you willing to take on the task. You would have hated me if I was a parent of a child in your class.

👍

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What to do with liberty? Use it. Use it to the fullest, never take it for granted, cherish it, protect it, do whatever you have to do to keep it.

How, exactly, do you use it? You wax lyrical about it, but it's ironic that you give the distinct impression that having liberty is more than than using it.

Perhaps it would do you well to stop assuming that because I subscribe to educational theories put forward by socialist societies, I have no idea what liberty is. It would also help if you stopped assuming your country is the only guardian of liberty.

 

[xyloscissor]

How, exactly, do you use it? You wax lyrical about it, but it's ironic that you give the distinct impression that having liberty is more than than using it.

Perhaps it would do you well to stop assuming that because I subscribe to educational theories put forward by socialist societies, I have no idea what liberty is. It would also help if you stopped assuming your country is the only guardian of liberty.

Man you are lit up. Ok that is fine, what would you say if I told you no one should be required to go to school? Because that is true.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

what would you say if I told you no one should be required to go to school?

I would say "that's fine", but express doubt at the wisdom of your decision.

 

[xyloscissor]

I would say "that's fine", but express doubt at the wisdom of your decision.

It's all good 👍

 

[Dotini]

In this Fox news video, UFOs will be seen buzzing president-elect Trump's official government plane at the 1:50 and 2:55 marks.



The below video has stop motion views, and speculates the UFOs were aliens escorting Trump - and possibly even controlling him.

 

[Joey D]

Looks like the Simpsons were right once again, our president is an alien

 

[Biggles]

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

You should that understand that quoting the Declaration of Independence always underlines the fact that basic hypocrisy was baked into the Constitution from the start:


The Constitution of the United States took effect in 1789 and included several provisions regarding slavery. Section 9 of Article I forbade the Federal government from banning the importation of slaves before January 1, 1808. As a protection for slavery, the delegates approved Section 2 of Article IV, which prohibited states from freeing slaves who fled to them from another state, and required the return of chattel property to owners.

In a section negotiated by James Madison of Virginia, Section 2 of Article I designated "other persons" (slaves) to be added to the total of the state's free population, at the rate of three-fifths of their total number, to establish the state's official population for the purposes of apportionment of Congressional representation and federal taxation. The protections afforded slavery in the Constitution disproportionately strengthened the political power of Southern representatives, as three-fifths of the (non-voting) slave population was counted for Congressional apportionment.

In addition, many parts of the country were tied to the Southern economy. As the historian James Oliver Horton noted, prominent slaveholder politicians and the commodity crops of the South had a strong influence on United States politics and economy. Horton said,

in the 72 years between the election of George Washington and the election of Abraham Lincoln, 50 of those years [had] a slaveholder as president of the United States, and, for that whole period of time, there was never a person elected to a second term who was not a slaveholder.

This increased the power of southern states in Congress for decades, affecting national policies and legislation. The planter elite dominated the southern Congressional delegations and the United States presidency for nearly 50 years.

What most thinking people in the rest of the world understand is that ideas about even such basic concepts as "equality" change over time, I like to refer to it as "progress", so that what may have been considered "correct" in the past is re-evaluated. The same may be true about education.

 

[andrea]

Pretty sure the Women's March has more people than the inauguration. I hope that fragile ego is feeling an amazing burn right now.

 

[ryzno]

Here's a perfect example of common core and the extra work to figure out a simple problem.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Pretty sure the Women's March has more people than the inauguration. I hope that fragile ego is feeling an amazing burn right now.

Fragile ego is the opposite to the way I'd describe Trump

 

[Northstar]

Pretty sure the Women's March has more people than the inauguration. I hope that fragile ego is feeling an amazing burn right now.

If anything the women's march is feeding his ego.

Fragile ego is the opposite to the way I'd describe Trump

You think people would catch onto that fact considering how often he said stupid crap prior to the election seemingly just to get a response.

Trump is a bully and the best way to defeat a bully is mass indifference. They crave a reaction and when they can't get one they lose their power. Granted in this case there's actual power involved so it's a tad more complicated.

 

[Joel]

Here's a perfect example of

and the extra work to figure out a simple problem.

Uhhh...so exactly the way people good at math do mental math? Sure we all know how to do 243-87 the way we were taught as 7 year olds but it's a lot easier to do the problem in your head as 87+X=243.

Fragile ego is the opposite to the way I'd describe Trump

He stays up until 3AM tweeting about SNL and awards shows. The mark of a self assured alpha male.

 

[ryzno]

Uhhh...so exactly the way people good at math do mental math? Sure we all know how to do 243-87 the way we were taught as 7 year olds but it's a lot easier to do the problem in your head as 87+X=243.

He stays up until 3AM tweeting about SNL and awards shows. The mark of a self assured alpha male.

It is a waste of time teaching them twice. Besides most 7 year olds have a phone that is a walking scientific calculator.
I just thought of something funny.
COMMON sense = COMMON core.
It's a shame we need a school to teach our kids common sense... #blametheparents

 

[TenEightyOne]

Here's a perfect example of common core and the extra work to figure out a simple problem.

I'd struggle to do the top one mentally and would use the second method. Guess what? Some people are different from me... that's why you need good differentiating teachers in addition to a clear set of basic curricular standards.

I just thought of something funny.
COMMON sense = COMMON core.

Why is that funny? Those guys are a group of teachers who think exactly the same way about common core that you seem to.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

It is a waste of time teaching them twice.

I don't think you'd argue that having more than one way to solve a problem is a good thing, not a bad one. I know I was taught one way of doing multiplication at school, yet in practice, do it slightly differently in my head. In my earlier years, I would be docked marks for not showing my work. When I did, since it wasn't the method taught in class, it was deemed wrong, regardless of whether I got to the right answer or not.

That's not teaching kids how to learn: that's teaching them how to parrot.

As someone who has been a server on and off over the years, the number of people that have a hard time with simple math in the case of a split cheque, or giving back change, leads me to believe the one-size-fits-all approach failed them.

 

[Joey D]

I don't think you'd argue that having more than one way to solve a problem is a good thing, not a bad one. I know I was taught one way of doing multiplication at school, yet in practice, do it slightly differently in my head. In my earlier years, I would be docked marks for not showing my work. When I did, since it wasn't the method taught in class, it was deemed wrong, regardless of whether I got to the right answer or not.

That's not teaching kids how to learn: that's teaching them how to parrot.

As someone who has been a server on and off over the years, the number of people that have a hard time with simple math in the case of a split cheque, or giving back change, leads me to believe the one-size-fits-all approach failed them.

I think the problem with common core, at least in Michigan, was that they weren't teaching kids multiple ways to solve a problem. They just wanted kids to know one way to solve it differently. I'm all for teaching multiple ways to get the solution and then having the kid figure out on their own which is the easiest method for them.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Some people are different from me... that's why you need good differentiating teachers in addition to a clear set of basic curricular standards.

And that's what we're encouraged to do. Some people have a mental style of learning, and could do the top example. Others are visual, and so would benefit from the second method. Others still are kinaesthetic, and need to experiment on their own terms. There is no one right way to learn - only the style that best suits the individual learner.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Here's a perfect example of common core and the extra work to figure out a simple problem.

View attachment 622212

Both methods are equally easy, there are actual other parts of common core that are convoluted. All the second method is doing and what the "clever" creator of that image seems to lack, is that you're just doing addition to find the answer. Which in reality is what you do with subtraction. What do you think adding a negative number to a positive number is...?

Both methods are math and since there are multiple ways to solve any degree of math problems you point is moot.

 

[Johnnypenso]

He stays up until 3AM tweeting about SNL and awards shows. The mark of a self assured alpha male.

Or it's the mark of someone who thinks they are always right...which is one of the hallmarks of an inflated ego.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Or it's the mark of someone who thinks they are always right...which is one of the hallmarks of an inflated ego.

Is there a job for that in his cabinet, cause that person would make some yuge money.