Political Agenda in FX County Schools - How Much Critical Thinking in Level IV?

[Anonymous]

You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

[Anonymous]

What does any of this have to do with AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

DP and one who did not tell you to go to private school.

Is that you above, OP?

Where do you get the idea that "maybe one or two per school" in elementary can comprehend the electoral college and the popular vote? Why do you think that students--let's figure they're AAP students too, since you posted in the AAP forum--in, say, grades 3-6 are not able to understand our presidential election system if it's well taught? You underestimate what they can understand. Sure, not all will get it. But not all get how to do division for a while, or how to structure an essay. Even in AAP.

Many parents could complain that kids don't get enough civics lessons in school and by the time they hit MS know little about how government works. Yet you would rather they not learn basic civics in elementary because it's "not a topic for 3-6 graders." But isn't your real fear that they'll hear that others have opinions different from what you say at home? So you're saying "kids can't understand elections" when you actually mean "election talk will bring up candidates I don't want my kids to hear about."

Did your child's teacher "express excitement" about a woman running for president? Did you hear that for yourself or are you assuming the teacher was promoting Clinton when the teacher might actually have been pointing out to students that it was unique (read: objectively historic, as in a new thing in our history) for a woman to be a major party presidential candidate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

DP and one who did not tell you to go to private school.

Is that you above, OP?

Where do you get the idea that "maybe one or two per school" in elementary can comprehend the electoral college and the popular vote? Why do you think that students--let's figure they're AAP students too, since you posted in the AAP forum--in, say, grades 3-6 are not able to understand our presidential election system if it's well taught? You underestimate what they can understand. Sure, not all will get it. But not all get how to do division for a while, or how to structure an essay. Even in AAP.

Many parents could complain that kids don't get enough civics lessons in school and by the time they hit MS know little about how government works. Yet you would rather they not learn basic civics in elementary because it's "not a topic for 3-6 graders." But isn't your real fear that they'll hear that others have opinions different from what you say at home? So you're saying "kids can't understand elections" when you actually mean "election talk will bring up candidates I don't want my kids to hear about."

Did your child's teacher "express excitement" about a woman running for president? Did you hear that for yourself or are you assuming the teacher was promoting Clinton when the teacher might actually have been pointing out to students that it was unique (read: objectively historic, as in a new thing in our history) for a woman to be a major party presidential candidate?

When all the kids in AAP 4-5th grade say that one candidate stole the election, because he didn't get the popular vote, they clearly don't understand the electoral college. If after learning their civic lessons they still don't know, than the school is not doing s good job of being neutral. Per the Hillary thing, I have no fear of my kids knowing all the candidates. We've actually discussed pros and cons for each person running, because there is good and bad in every one. As long as I don't homeschool, I have no control of the content, so I can't be too scared of it. Nevertheless, I would like to see more thought diversity, not a tunnel view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary school.

Well, I would love to give a lot of specific examples, but I'm afraid to be recognized. Last year the teacher read a book I think called 'glitter boy', which was teaching the children that you are what you like to be. I wonder how vast these choices will become. When I talked to the teacher about it, she gave me the schpeal about diversity and inclusion. There are many of these, and a lot of these topics are out of the grasp of elementary school children. There are endless politicized topics being discussed in elementary school, and these topics are discussed in the prism of the empathetic and generous individual, who should love and tolerance. It seems like a nobrainer, a child will most likely choose to be compassionate. ...

The question is, do people see this in most schools, or is it just an isolated case?

The book is Sparkle Boy. Beyond that, I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say here.

Well, it's not very hard! The question was asked in the original post, and the quoted text was the example.

Different poster: I don’t understand what you’re saying. Either.

Add me to the list. I have no idea what the OP is trying to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary school.

Well, I would love to give a lot of specific examples, but I'm afraid to be recognized. Last year the teacher read a book I think called 'glitter boy', which was teaching the children that you are what you like to be. I wonder how vast these choices will become. When I talked to the teacher about it, she gave me the schpeal about diversity and inclusion. There are many of these, and a lot of these topics are out of the grasp of elementary school children. There are endless politicized topics being discussed in elementary school, and these topics are discussed in the prism of the empathetic and generous individual, who should love and tolerance. It seems like a nobrainer, a child will most likely choose to be compassionate. ...

The question is, do people see this in most schools, or is it just an isolated case?

The book is Sparkle Boy. Beyond that, I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say here.

Well, it's not very hard! The question was asked in the original post, and the quoted text was the example.

Different poster: I don’t understand what you’re saying. Either.

Add me to the list. I have no idea what the OP is trying to say.

It must be past your bedtime. Give it another try when you're awake tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

DP and one who did not tell you to go to private school.

Is that you above, OP?

Where do you get the idea that "maybe one or two per school" in elementary can comprehend the electoral college and the popular vote? Why do you think that students--let's figure they're AAP students too, since you posted in the AAP forum--in, say, grades 3-6 are not able to understand our presidential election system if it's well taught? You underestimate what they can understand. Sure, not all will get it. But not all get how to do division for a while, or how to structure an essay. Even in AAP.

Many parents could complain that kids don't get enough civics lessons in school and by the time they hit MS know little about how government works. Yet you would rather they not learn basic civics in elementary because it's "not a topic for 3-6 graders." But isn't your real fear that they'll hear that others have opinions different from what you say at home? So you're saying "kids can't understand elections" when you actually mean "election talk will bring up candidates I don't want my kids to hear about."

Did your child's teacher "express excitement" about a woman running for president? Did you hear that for yourself or are you assuming the teacher was promoting Clinton when the teacher might actually have been pointing out to students that it was unique (read: objectively historic, as in a new thing in our history) for a woman to be a major party presidential candidate?

When all the kids in AAP 4-5th grade say that one candidate stole the election, because he didn't get the popular vote, they clearly don't understand the electoral college. If after learning their civic lessons they still don't know, than the school is not doing s good job of being neutral. Per the Hillary thing, I have no fear of my kids knowing all the candidates. We've actually discussed pros and cons for each person running, because there is good and bad in every one. As long as I don't homeschool, I have no control of the content, so I can't be too scared of it. Nevertheless, I would like to see more thought diversity, not a tunnel view.

I have a 4th grade AAP kid, and the kid thinks that it's very unfair that someone who most people did not choose won because, in their voting experience (limited to sports team names, school elections, etc.) is a majority-wins. We have talked about the EC and why it was set up that way at a very high level and how compromise was required to form the country - and also about some of the modern criticism of the EC and proposals to change it to ensure that election results aren't far off the "will of the people". I'm not sure how much sunk in, but I'm also not sure, at that age, that "stole" is some sort of public school conspiracy indoctrination versus their life experience and sense of what they think is fair/not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

When all the kids in AAP 4-5th grade say that one candidate stole the election, because he didn't get the popular vote, they clearly don't understand the electoral college. If after learning their civic lessons they still don't know, than the school is not doing s good job of being neutral. Per the Hillary thing, I have no fear of my kids knowing all the candidates. We've actually discussed pros and cons for each person running, because there is good and bad in every one. As long as I don't homeschool, I have no control of the content, so I can't be too scared of it. Nevertheless, I would like to see more thought diversity, not a tunnel view.

Most of the kids are repeating what they've heard or discussed with their families at home. My AAP kid thinks that one candidate stole the election due to the Russian hacking. He also thinks the electoral college is blatantly unfair, but more due to the over-representation of less populous states than due to other factors. Elementary school kids discuss politics with their families or even read/watch the news. They're not getting these views from school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

DP and one who did not tell you to go to private school.

Is that you above, OP?

Where do you get the idea that "maybe one or two per school" in elementary can comprehend the electoral college and the popular vote? Why do you think that students--let's figure they're AAP students too, since you posted in the AAP forum--in, say, grades 3-6 are not able to understand our presidential election system if it's well taught? You underestimate what they can understand. Sure, not all will get it. But not all get how to do division for a while, or how to structure an essay. Even in AAP.

Many parents could complain that kids don't get enough civics lessons in school and by the time they hit MS know little about how government works. Yet you would rather they not learn basic civics in elementary because it's "not a topic for 3-6 graders." But isn't your real fear that they'll hear that others have opinions different from what you say at home? So you're saying "kids can't understand elections" when you actually mean "election talk will bring up candidates I don't want my kids to hear about."

Did your child's teacher "express excitement" about a woman running for president? Did you hear that for yourself or are you assuming the teacher was promoting Clinton when the teacher might actually have been pointing out to students that it was unique (read: objectively historic, as in a new thing in our history) for a woman to be a major party presidential candidate?

When all the kids in AAP 4-5th grade say that one candidate stole the election, because he didn't get the popular vote, they clearly don't understand the electoral college. If after learning their civic lessons they still don't know, than the school is not doing s good job of being neutral. Per the Hillary thing, I have no fear of my kids knowing all the candidates. We've actually discussed pros and cons for each person running, because there is good and bad in every one. As long as I don't homeschool, I have no control of the content, so I can't be too scared of it. Nevertheless, I would like to see more thought diversity, not a tunnel view.

I have a 4th grade AAP kid, and the kid thinks that it's very unfair that someone who most people did not choose won because, in their voting experience (limited to sports team names, school elections, etc.) is a majority-wins. We have talked about the EC and why it was set up that way at a very high level and how compromise was required to form the country - and also about some of the modern criticism of the EC and proposals to change it to ensure that election results aren't far off the "will of the people". I'm not sure how much sunk in, but I'm also not sure, at that age, that "stole" is some sort of public school conspiracy indoctrination versus their life experience and sense of what they think is fair/not.

That's one way in which the school is pushing something. If the fake elementary school elections were to teach the children anything, they could resemble the electoral college by having one vote per class. This would be more reasonable for a teaching experience, since in school elections you don't have multiple opportunities to vote. Imagine in one class, on Election Day, half the class is absent because someone spread the flue, or lice, or strep throat. Now as a community those kids may share similar ideas, and if the were at school they would have made a difference in the school election, but they can't voice their opinion because they're not at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary school.

Well, I would love to give a lot of specific examples, but I'm afraid to be recognized. Last year the teacher read a book I think called 'glitter boy', which was teaching the children that you are what you like to be. I wonder how vast these choices will become. When I talked to the teacher about it, she gave me the schpeal about diversity and inclusion. There are many of these, and a lot of these topics are out of the grasp of elementary school children. There are endless politicized topics being discussed in elementary school, and these topics are discussed in the prism of the empathetic and generous individual, who should love and tolerance. It seems like a nobrainer, a child will most likely choose to be compassionate. ...

The question is, do people see this in most schools, or is it just an isolated case?

The book is Sparkle Boy. Beyond that, I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say here.

Well, it's not very hard! The question was asked in the original post, and the quoted text was the example.

Different poster: I don’t understand what you’re saying. Either.

Add me to the list. I have no idea what the OP is trying to say.

It must be past your bedtime. Give it another try when you're awake tomorrow.

Guess you can't clarify it either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When all the kids in AAP 4-5th grade say that one candidate stole the election, because he didn't get the popular vote, they clearly don't understand the electoral college. If after learning their civic lessons they still don't know, than the school is not doing s good job of being neutral. Per the Hillary thing, I have no fear of my kids knowing all the candidates. We've actually discussed pros and cons for each person running, because there is good and bad in every one. As long as I don't homeschool, I have no control of the content, so I can't be too scared of it. Nevertheless, I would like to see more thought diversity, not a tunnel view.

Most of the kids are repeating what they've heard or discussed with their families at home. My AAP kid thinks that one candidate stole the election due to the Russian hacking. He also thinks the electoral college is blatantly unfair, but more due to the over-representation of less populous states than due to other factors. Elementary school kids discuss politics with their families or even read/watch the news. They're not getting these views from school.

So according to what you are saying, then the school is allowing the parents' political points of view to flow into the classroom. Kids in elementary school could not possibly be having these conversations in a free setting, because except for recess (when they're running around and not philosophizing) they aren't allowed to talk. Even during lunch, they have to stay hush hush, and if they get away with talking, they won't have time to eat.

We know that civil rights are essentially minority rights. In essence, how are the rights of these minorities different form those of election minorities? Is the school doing anything to explain this parallel to the children? Both of these are in the same spirit, but only one is actively being enforced, whereas the other is being let be. What if civil rights would be left up to the parents? I don't think the outcome would be very pleasing, otherwise civil rights wouldn't have become law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary school.

Well, I would love to give a lot of specific examples, but I'm afraid to be recognized. Last year the teacher read a book I think called 'glitter boy', which was teaching the children that you are what you like to be. I wonder how vast these choices will become. When I talked to the teacher about it, she gave me the schpeal about diversity and inclusion. There are many of these, and a lot of these topics are out of the grasp of elementary school children. There are endless politicized topics being discussed in elementary school, and these topics are discussed in the prism of the empathetic and generous individual, who should love and tolerance. It seems like a nobrainer, a child will most likely choose to be compassionate. ...

The question is, do people see this in most schools, or is it just an isolated case?

The book is Sparkle Boy. Beyond that, I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say here.

Well, it's not very hard! The question was asked in the original post, and the quoted text was the example.

Different poster: I don’t understand what you’re saying. Either.

Add me to the list. I have no idea what the OP is trying to say.

It must be past your bedtime. Give it another try when you're awake tomorrow.

Guess you can't clarify it either.

OP doesn't want to say that she's a GOP snowflake who doesn't want her kids to hear anything aside from the propaganda that FoxNews is pushing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should pull your kid and send them to a private school. If difference makes you uncomfortable, you can opt your child out. Or tell the teacher you want your kid reading something different. They can be removed from the class to a study hall during ELA or Social Studies or Math or Science or whatever content you don't want your child to know.

Theoretically you're right, but you can't pull the kid out from half the lessons. These indoctrinated teachings come in all forms, not only in FEL. Kids are discussing the voting process in elementary school as a classroom topic: they are debating on what is nest, the popular or the electoral vote. I bet that almost all kids will pick popular vote, because that's easy to grasp. This is not a topic for 3-6 graders. Maybe 1 or 2 of them per school will truly understand the difference and the effect, and that's a very large maybe. During the '16 election the school held mock elections, and the children were so happy to 'vote' for Hillary because she was the first woman to run for president. I am not against Hillary, but is that a topic for elementary school? Of course children will feel the vibe and excitement when the teacher expresses excitement, and they like to please, do they do.

You say, go to private school! Easier said than done. Private is expensive, and I shouldn't have to spend excessive amounts of money for a neutral education.

There is no such thing as a neutral education. Education involves values about what should be taught--what is needed to function in a contemporary world. All social studies comes from a perspective. Things regarded as "classics" are based on values from a particular cultural and historical viewpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elementary school.

Well, I would love to give a lot of specific examples, but I'm afraid to be recognized. Last year the teacher read a book I think called 'glitter boy', which was teaching the children that you are what you like to be. I wonder how vast these choices will become. When I talked to the teacher about it, she gave me the schpeal about diversity and inclusion. There are many of these, and a lot of these topics are out of the grasp of elementary school children. There are endless politicized topics being discussed in elementary school, and these topics are discussed in the prism of the empathetic and generous individual, who should love and tolerance. It seems like a nobrainer, a child will most likely choose to be compassionate. ...

The question is, do people see this in most schools, or is it just an isolated case?

The book is Sparkle Boy. Beyond that, I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say here.

Well, it's not very hard! The question was asked in the original post, and the quoted text was the example.

Different poster: I don’t understand what you’re saying. Either.

Add me to the list. I have no idea what the OP is trying to say.

It must be past your bedtime. Give it another try when you're awake tomorrow.

Guess you can't clarify it either.

OP doesn't want to say that she's a GOP snowflake who doesn't want her kids to hear anything aside from the propaganda that FoxNews is pushing.

A good school experience is one in which you learn how to evaluate the pros and the cons. A one sided evaluation to an issue is only teaching children how to be oneminded, and to eventually fear saying something different.

Looking at only one side of the coin, is exactly
what you're trying to do here: you're trying to use shame to bring down a point, when in fact you are free to bring up your own point.