We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The broad view is that the Common Core didn’t grow out of grassroots demand for curricular reform. It isn’t the work of school boards or an initiative put in motion by dissatisfied parents. It didn’t come about because good teachers convened and came up with a proposal to improve K-12 education. It was instead the product of a handful of very-well connected intellectuals who dreamed up their own vision of what American schools should do.
One of the local realities is that many parents who are actively involved in their children’s education view the Common Core as state-imposed disaster. They are immune to the Coleman-Gates appeal for uniformity of teaching for the sake of uniformity itself. They are suspicious of an approach to math that vaults over tried-and-true approaches for the sake of the unproven benefits of a new “theory.” They are equally perturbed by an approach that derogates the importance of literature and, when it does introduce literary works, chops them into fragments and short extracts.
Combine arrogance, money, fancy degrees, and a top-down attitude, and this is what you get: a one-size-fits-all central plan designed for the masses by our moral and intellectual superiors whether you want it or not.
Might have been a different conversation if they had the common sense to try and standardize on tried and true approaches that are proven to work - kind of a "best-practices" approach.. But, NOOOOO, they know better than everyone!
Formerly known as Skeptic
Is there ANY aspect of our lives liberals don't want to control? Other than abortion, I mean. I know they don't want to control abortion.
So glad to see you finally getting riled--really riled--about what goes on in our education system. Welcome to the club!
Now, would you like to dig a little deeper into common core? What if I told you the two guy from your favorite tribe who created CC are the children of well-known, well-documented communists. They are called red diaper Jews and they want the same thing Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon, UPS, Costco, all those Seattle based oligarchs want--TOTAL CONTROL of the masses! That is what cc is about--that and the opportunity for these two guys to make billions off the program. Too bad they are a protected group--might be good to get some of these thieves into jail once in a while. Not for their ideas--but, rather for their deliberate mis representation of the product. We used to call that fraud I believe.
Good for you! Common Core is the biggest disaster with the largest payoff since the educational establishment became Nervous Nellies over Sputnik and tried to revamp the entire system via "experts."
We are better off going back to the methods used in the early 1800s, updated for new knowledge using new technology, and allowing for some to thrall over one subject, others to excel at trades and apprenticeships, but all know how to read, write and do basic math, geometry and algebra at age appropriate levels.
I for one do not want any elitist telling my family how to run our lives, nor do I believe Islam is a religion of peace which should be taught in a classroom that is denied basic Judeo-Christian rituals that founded our nation.
The food policy article is worrisome, and I have had no doubt that those on the Left want to control the food supply. It is harder to control the population if resources aren't made scarce, and I am sure the ultimate goal is to ration food and thus gain total control over the population.
I don't see it happening in the near term, but it is sure possible a food policy could be implemented in the next 10-20 years.
One of the reasons cited in the article for a food policy was to curb global warming. I find it interesting that the Left fights the 'carbon foot print' at every turn until it comes to immigration. All these immigrants undoubtedly exert a carbon foot print that is orders of magnitude larger than the ones made in their native countries, but in the inconsistent view from the Left, that's ok. Perhaps it is because votes trump 'carbon foot prints'?
A national food policy would be 100% political to reward cronies and special interest groups. Can you imagine environemtalists and vegans setting our food policy? That IS what would happen. The worst part of this attempt to set a national food policy is that no one really knows and very few people even agree on what is good and what is bad. Most of the identifiable health issues related to food are the result of individual genetic or health problems. Just as some people cannot eat peanut butter 99% of us can with no negattive side effects. Then there is the mythology of food that always interferes with science and common sense. The latest fad diets and fad allergies appeal to people with extreme or excessive preoccupation with avoiding certain foods and these people tend to become activists for their biases interjectng themselves into any discussions on food policy. Do you really want national food policiy determined by individuals with indefensible looney tunes food biases?