Teacher Engages Inner City Kids
And is fired for it -- even though parents were fine (with the exception of one kid's parent) with her using the book of stories from other inner city kids with sometimes "graphic" language. The story -- from CNN.
Teacher Engages Inner City Kids
And is fired for it -- even though parents were fine (with the exception of one kid's parent) with her using the book of stories from other inner city kids with sometimes "graphic" language. The story -- from CNN.
People think I'm paranoid when I tell them that the public school system is set up to spit out morons.
They dont teach you how to think and reason, they teach you how to reguritate information with no sense of how that information connects to anything in the world around them.
We're teaching are kids to pass tests by rote and it isnt an accident. What is better for business? A highly trained skilled worker who knows his rights and what hes worth, or a mass of brain dead drones so desperate for work they'll submit to being treated like shit?
No child left behind, abstinace only, condems spreading AIDS, goddidit reasoning taught rather than rational thought - these arent accidents people
They want you crapping out more kids than you can afford, they want stupid under-educated people commiting crimes and winding up in jail, they want people so close to losing their homes they are willing to accept a bigger goverenment if it means getting a "free" check from the government.
They want a reason to expand the government so they can moniter every aspect of you life and fuck with you however they want
Case in point http://www.historylink.org/essays/printer_friendly/index.cfm?file_id=7065
lujlp at June 30, 2008 7:39 AM
lujlp:
Agree with everything you've said. One of the best, most concise summaries of the road we're headed down that I've seen.
I remark on some of the same things to my wife, and she accuses me of being full of rage and paranoia. I respond by advising her not to complain to me when the societal ills and dysfunctions, and the abridgements of freedoms that she takes for granted, that will inevitably result, come to pass. The way we're headed, I'm sure my fears will be borne out, and well within my lifetime.
In fact, I think we've already reached the tipping point, at which the members of the cult of dependency can now, when combined with the normal number of "undecideds", swing elections their way on a national level. I think it's likely that the voters will announce their final surrender to the concept of all-inclusive, overriding government power in the 2008 elections. We may all be learning in a relatively short time about life in a police state environment.
cpabroker at June 30, 2008 9:41 AM
I think the teacher's over-reacting and just wanted to make a stand about a book she happened to like. If the standards were already in place and the book violated the standards and she went ahead and taught the book anyway...
Yes, let me have it. And I will agree with you the standards are arguable. So take it up with the school board to have them amended, don't just go and do it on your own.
I can see where this could very easily have been something else. After all, how is this any different from the science teachers breaking rules and teaching creationist/intelligent design? She shouldn't be let off the hook any more than they should.
Bottom line. She knew the rules. She knew she was breaking them. She wanted to question them and she did. Heroine only because she agrees with you but how many of you would be singing her praises if it instead of bad words it was something teaching that you can only have morals if you had Christ in your heart, how big a hero would she then be for rebelling against the rules rather than working to have them changed?
You can't hold one set of standards for those you agree with (disclosure: I've never heard of this book let alone read it; though, it sounds like something that would be interesting to read) and another for those you vehemently disagree with.
Donna at June 30, 2008 10:40 AM
Wasnt this the same state where a few school boards banned Huckelberry Finn as well?
lujlp at June 30, 2008 10:47 AM
I have to agree with Donna. Rules that suck should be changed, don't like them, fight to change them. If instead you choose to break them (sometimes a right good way to try changing them) then you have to accept the consequences.
Case in point, back in the day I was all about protests (still am but with kids you learn to temper it). My favorites were marijuana related, not just because there was usually weed around but because I actually believe in legalization. I accepted that lighting joints in front of various state capitals would probably cause bad things to happen and never bitched about getting maced, getting whacked about a bit by cops and spending nights in jail.
I'm sympathetic to hating the stupid policy, i do too. I am all for kids reading a much wider swath of literature and discussing with the class. But I am not all that sympathetic to people who break the rules and then bitch when it bites them in the ass.
DuWayne at June 30, 2008 7:08 PM
My computer can't open the link, so I will have to open it later; but, I don't agree with Donna's statement. I understand where you are coming from, but in the real world of teaching, breaking rules on the rule-makers' side happens all the time with a thin chance of complaining without getting fired or retaliated against. For example, the policy might be that you can only have 35 kids in a class, but it is the norm to have class rolls above 40. You can complain, and they will make sure your rolls are never over 35, but you better believe every other aspect of your working life will be total hell. One teacher I know was forcibly transferred to a middle school after teaching over 10 years in a high school that was her alma mater. All because she complained about legit concerns and abuses.
People who become teachers today better be passionless passive pushovers. All you have to do is teach the standardized test. All you better do is teach the standardized test.
kg at July 1, 2008 6:25 AM
Point well, taken, kg. But the fact still is that if you break the rules, you are taking a known risk. If you don't think that risk worth it, don't do it. She obviously did just to protest. As DuWayne said, that can be a way to protest but don't boo hoo when the law takes action.
Also, I'm not so sure she's right, in this case. I can't really argue as I'm not familiar with the book in question. But it seems to be about language used and you know the public put pressure on the school board in the first place to set standards for language. (Look at the uproar they get into about the f-word.) The board then responded to the people and did so. Now this teacher, who is, after all, one person just blatantly disregards the rule and lands them in a shit storm not of their making.
I'd be pissed at her too and would take action also and I'm not of a mind that the little darlings (even the little, little ones much yonger than her students) need to be protected from a few curse words. (Or was it more graphic than that? If it was, she's even further off-base.) Frankly, any parent who thinks their little darling doesn't hear such words is fucking kidding themself. They do and they should. Kids shouldn't be raised with the impression that the world is a rose garden then surprise, surprise when you hit 18, there's thorns in there.
The scary thing is I also agree with lujlp. That is exactly what the powers that be want. However, it's exactly what they already have -- unfortunately. A bunch of sheep following where they lead -- to the point that they would have a fit if teacher sent home a book with fuck, shit and damn in it. C'mon, there was also a reason she felt the need to prevent the expected reaction and send home the permission slips. Do you think the parents' reactions -- even the 49 who signed -- would be the same if she hadn't?
She knew what she was doing and what would happen if she did it. She decided to make a spectacle of herself to make a point. Am I now suppose to cry for her because the expected happened? Hell, it's only a year and a half suspension. Could have been much worse.
Donna at July 1, 2008 6:46 AM
You don't have to cry for her, but a year and a half is bullshit. (and again, I still haven't read the article....it can't open here.) But the point is one dumbass parent with a limited view of the "effects of profanity on youth" has the power to come in and get this person jobless for 18 months? When a person becomes educated in a field, their expertise should be respected. A school system shouldn't allow a dumbshit parent that much power. If the book is shit, fine. Let's say it's shit and don't use it again. Good teachers take risks and get better at their art through trial and error. That school board should have supported that teacher and allowed for professional growth, if in fact schools really care about real knowledge instead of bullshit numbers.
And an INNER CITY SCHOOL? Do you know how bang-your-head-against-the-fucking-wall hard it is to motivate young people toward success when all around them is productive deviance? You know what this teacher's mistake was? She gave a shit. And now you won't go crying in your beer for her.
Nice.
kg at July 1, 2008 9:22 AM
It's all well and good to censor reading material at school, I suppose, which is why I don't censor my daughers' reading material at home. They can read whatever they want. If they have any question, they can ask me whatever they want. There are ways to circumvent the stupid, and one way is to encourage your children to read anything and everything they can get their hands on, and to provide the caveat that not everything they read should be taken seriously or as the absolute truth. YMMV
Flynne at July 3, 2008 11:23 AM
Leave a comment