Youngkin Says Report on ‘Honesty Gap’ Points to Decline in Virginia Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Achieve pushes “competency-based pathways.”

I say we need more critical thinking in schools, more holistic approaches.

Conservatives hate that idea because they won’t win future elections if voters think critically. So they push things like “competency based pathways.”

What you characterize as "critical thinking" is understood by many to mean the indoctrination of younger students with a particular set of political views by teachers who do not seek to explore multiple perspectives. "Comptency-based pathways" at least connotes learning things that will help graduates earn a living wage.

Yes, I am aware of the twisted narrative.

The difference is like the difference between teaching liberal arts in college or attending trade school. The most successful people in society today have a liberal arts/critical thinking background. It’s actually the opposite of indoctrination because it teaches students to challenge authority, which includes what is being taught.

The “just learn skills” crowd only wants students to know how to change a light fixture or repair a car or program a computer. It doesn’t want anyone seeing the forest for the trees. Because then people might second-guess voting for conservative politicians who promote policies that are bad for them. It makes them more prone to acquiescence.

This has been in the works for 30+ years in public education. What we’re seeing now is next level, however.

That's a lot to unpack.

It's not like students who just have liberal arts degrees graduate and set the world on fire. Many can barely find decent employment, and the higher-paid liberal arts graduates often are those who've gone on to attend graduate or professional schools, which may not be a financial option for many students.

As for whether "critical thinking" is being encouraged, it's notable that the School Board has been exploring, if it has not already adopted, revisions to an existing "controversial issues" policy that required teachers to consider presenting competing perspectives, which would be consistent with encouraging students to develop their own views, to instead allow teachers to advocate in classrooms for a particular point of view. That would be fine if students already had the so-called "critical thinking" skills to challenge their teachers, but in practice it may lead to race and class-centered indoctrination.

Finally, as for the suggestion that "competency-based pathways" boil down to "just learn skills," that would be unfortunate if it were all that it entailed. At least some conservatives want to ensure all students are receiving an education in what used to be called "civics" that entails gaining an understanding of the basics about, for example, the three branches of the federal government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and a federal system (under which certain powers are exercised by the federal government, while others are reserved to the states). That type of education can make for an informed citizenry and electorate, not one that only learns vocational training.

Certainly it would be preferable to some of what currently happens in FCPS, where multiple schools (including some where students might benefit the most from additional vocational pathways) instead have International Baccalaureate programs that purport to develop "global citizens," but are poorly subscribed, treat the United States as just one of many countries around the world, fail to cover basic "civics," and graduate few students on track to receive an IB diploma.

To “unpack” your response, one has to dispute the premises you lay out.

1) The notion that “it’s not like those who just have a liberal arts degree have set the world on fire” or cannot find decent employment is simply unsupported by the facts. In fact, it’s a lazy trope. Yes, many go on to get professional degrees or certifications but the liberal arts background equipped them to do so and succeed in those environments. Others become entrepreneurs or find gainful employment in major corporations, which value the ability to think and make connections. Continuous education is necessary for anyone who wishes to succeed and progress in a career — same for trades. But it’s not true that liberal arts graduates are barely employable. Are there some? Sure — there are always outliers. Just like there are crappy plumbers who can’t hold a job.

2) The notion that teachers “advocate” a point of view on controversial subjects is similarly unsupported. That’s some straight up bullshit you have lapped up from propaganda outlets like the Federalist or Washington Examiner or any number of right wing publications masquerading as news. I have known literally hundreds of teachers in my life and none of them do this. It’s a complete and bizarre fantasy of conservatives that this happens — my guess many are confusing the lack of parroting about their own world view in the classroom with “indoctrination.” In other words, they’re complaining about the omission of right-wing dogma in schools. And again, there may be anecdotes here and there of outliers or nutty teachers who have, but in general, teachers are following a state-approved curriculum with accountability in the form of things like SOLs — there’s no time for “indoctrination.” The kids are learning reading, writing, arithmetic. They are also learning how to be citizens and basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc. This is important because they might not be learning these concepts at home and society needs for them to know them in order to function. This is essential to that basic “civics” you mention.

We need *More* emphasis on global citizens, not less. We live in a globalized economy. The more holistically we can help our children think and disabuse them of the notion of things like American exceptionalism (teach the concept, but don’t indoctrinate them to the jingoism), the better.

DP here. I'm on your side, PP; however, the empathy, equity, and tolerance you refer to is exactly what these people consider to be indoctrination.
Also, even if teachers aren't formally teaching a specific politically-biased curriculum or "dogma," the liberal bias in this area permeates the school environment and - not infrequently - classroom discussion, to include teachers being very clear about their personal beliefs and positions on social and political issues.

+1. PP, do you have kids in MS or HS in northern VA?

Yes. 2 in HS.

DP.

So, “liberal indoctrination” means teaching kids “how to be citizens” and “basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc.”

Liberal indoctrination would mean failing to teach kids about the branches of government under the Constitution and their respective roles, or about individual rights, and instead lambasting the United States as a "settler colonialist" society whose defining characteristic is racism and that can only be salvaged through future discrimination in favor of "oppressed" races and classes.

"Equity" is not a "basic society skill," so much as a political agenda. Equality under the law, on the other hand, is a fundamental right.

Confirming that all the hubbabaloo about indoctrination is overblown, as this is generally not happening in our schools.

Depends on whose schools you're talking about. It's happening in many places and seeping into the local public schools as well.

Here's one example at a public university: https://www.commonsense.news/p/why-im-giving-up-tenure-at-ucla

An op-ed from commonsense.news. Seems like a reputable source

It is more reputable than the typical column or opinion piece published in the Washington Post.

In any case, if you weren't a typical left-wing shill you'd address the article on the merits, and not try to discredit it based on the site that published it.

Uh, really. It's not. They aren't even on the same playing field -- the Washington Post is professional media with editors, standards and centuries-old track record of stellar journalism.

Commonsense News is just ... Bari Weiss, a notorious provocateur and hack who embodies the worst in self-branding look-at-me "journalism."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This report came out over a month ago and was challenged at the time as misleading.

https://bluevirginia.us/2022/05/va-senate-dems-rip-youngkin-education-report-as-a-joke-dog-whistle-talking-points-outright-lie-supported-by-cherry-picked-data-and-warped-perspective

Didn’t it bother you at all that the content in your link is lacking in, uh, content? The data is cherry picked, how? Misleading how? Inaccurate how?

On the national assessment, the term "proficient" is used to indicate a score that is above grade level. The term "basic" is used to refer to a score that indicates grade level. Youngkin and his ed dept deliberately conflated the two terms to make it look like virginia students are not at grade level. The national exam scores do in fact match the SOL scores once you realize that "basic" means grade level and "proficient" means above grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This report came out over a month ago and was challenged at the time as misleading.

https://bluevirginia.us/2022/05/va-senate-dems-rip-youngkin-education-report-as-a-joke-dog-whistle-talking-points-outright-lie-supported-by-cherry-picked-data-and-warped-perspective

Didn’t it bother you at all that the content in your link is lacking in, uh, content? The data is cherry picked, how? Misleading how? Inaccurate how?

On the national assessment, the term "proficient" is used to indicate a score that is above grade level. The term "basic" is used to refer to a score that indicates grade level. Youngkin and his ed dept deliberately conflated the two terms to make it look like virginia students are not at grade level. The national exam scores do in fact match the SOL scores once you realize that "basic" means grade level and "proficient" means above grade level.

This is one example. Also citing "the number of homeschooled students jumped 56 percent in the 2020-2021 school year. That same year, the report says, 3,748 public-school students transferred to private schools in Virginia." as if that's indicative of some sort of trend because of educational performance of the public school education system, rather than acknowledging it's entirely driven by the realities of an evolving unprecedented-in-our-time global pandemic, and our underfunded schools not being able to realistically support in-person learning during that period of time, and so many parents with the means to temporarily pursue other options choosing to do so. Would be interesting to see how the number of 2022-23 homeschooled students compares to the number from 2020-21... if it has dropped (as I'm sure it has), does that mean our schools are now suddenly beacons of competence and that the concept of homeschooling is on the decline? Or is it just a correction of the equally anomalous 2020-21 blip that had nothing at all to do with long-term trends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This report came out over a month ago and was challenged at the time as misleading.

https://bluevirginia.us/2022/05/va-senate-dems-rip-youngkin-education-report-as-a-joke-dog-whistle-talking-points-outright-lie-supported-by-cherry-picked-data-and-warped-perspective

Didn’t it bother you at all that the content in your link is lacking in, uh, content? The data is cherry picked, how? Misleading how? Inaccurate how?

On the national assessment, the term "proficient" is used to indicate a score that is above grade level. The term "basic" is used to refer to a score that indicates grade level. Youngkin and his ed dept deliberately conflated the two terms to make it look like virginia students are not at grade level. The national exam scores do in fact match the SOL scores once you realize that "basic" means grade level and "proficient" means above grade level.

This is one example. Also citing "the number of homeschooled students jumped 56 percent in the 2020-2021 school year. That same year, the report says, 3,748 public-school students transferred to private schools in Virginia." as if that's indicative of some sort of trend because of educational performance of the public school education system, rather than acknowledging it's entirely driven by the realities of an evolving unprecedented-in-our-time global pandemic, and our underfunded schools not being able to realistically support in-person learning during that period of time, and so many parents with the means to temporarily pursue other options choosing to do so. Would be interesting to see how the number of 2022-23 homeschooled students compares to the number from 2020-21... if it has dropped (as I'm sure it has), does that mean our schools are now suddenly beacons of competence and that the concept of homeschooling is on the decline? Or is it just a correction of the equally anomalous 2020-21 blip that had nothing at all to do with long-term trends?

As the PP in the post above yours, and also a parent that switched to private last year, it had nothing to do with sol scores. I think our public is horrible, but it's mainly BECAUSE of the focus on testing, so Youngkin's implication that more focus on tests is needed is just more of the same thing that makes our public schools so bad to begin with. I'm also a teacher who knows exactly why our schools are so bad, and no tests are going to improve the problem. We need smaller class sizes, better administrators, and less bureaucracy. We need to test less and teach more (testing actually takes up so much time that we lose instructional time). We also need better curriculum - the current VA curriculum is a random bunch of nonsense that no one needs to know and none of the kids will remember anyway. The math instruction is atrocious, and the reading instruction is non-existent.

We'll come back to public when we can't afford private any more, and not a minute sooner.

[Anonymous]

For those of you that believe that public education in Virginia is failing… what are you going to do about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Achieve pushes “competency-based pathways.”

I say we need more critical thinking in schools, more holistic approaches.

Conservatives hate that idea because they won’t win future elections if voters think critically. So they push things like “competency based pathways.”

What you characterize as "critical thinking" is understood by many to mean the indoctrination of younger students with a particular set of political views by teachers who do not seek to explore multiple perspectives. "Comptency-based pathways" at least connotes learning things that will help graduates earn a living wage.

Yes, I am aware of the twisted narrative.

The difference is like the difference between teaching liberal arts in college or attending trade school. The most successful people in society today have a liberal arts/critical thinking background. It’s actually the opposite of indoctrination because it teaches students to challenge authority, which includes what is being taught.

The “just learn skills” crowd only wants students to know how to change a light fixture or repair a car or program a computer. It doesn’t want anyone seeing the forest for the trees. Because then people might second-guess voting for conservative politicians who promote policies that are bad for them. It makes them more prone to acquiescence.

This has been in the works for 30+ years in public education. What we’re seeing now is next level, however.

That's a lot to unpack.

It's not like students who just have liberal arts degrees graduate and set the world on fire. Many can barely find decent employment, and the higher-paid liberal arts graduates often are those who've gone on to attend graduate or professional schools, which may not be a financial option for many students.

As for whether "critical thinking" is being encouraged, it's notable that the School Board has been exploring, if it has not already adopted, revisions to an existing "controversial issues" policy that required teachers to consider presenting competing perspectives, which would be consistent with encouraging students to develop their own views, to instead allow teachers to advocate in classrooms for a particular point of view. That would be fine if students already had the so-called "critical thinking" skills to challenge their teachers, but in practice it may lead to race and class-centered indoctrination.

Finally, as for the suggestion that "competency-based pathways" boil down to "just learn skills," that would be unfortunate if it were all that it entailed. At least some conservatives want to ensure all students are receiving an education in what used to be called "civics" that entails gaining an understanding of the basics about, for example, the three branches of the federal government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and a federal system (under which certain powers are exercised by the federal government, while others are reserved to the states). That type of education can make for an informed citizenry and electorate, not one that only learns vocational training.

Certainly it would be preferable to some of what currently happens in FCPS, where multiple schools (including some where students might benefit the most from additional vocational pathways) instead have International Baccalaureate programs that purport to develop "global citizens," but are poorly subscribed, treat the United States as just one of many countries around the world, fail to cover basic "civics," and graduate few students on track to receive an IB diploma.

To “unpack” your response, one has to dispute the premises you lay out.

1) The notion that “it’s not like those who just have a liberal arts degree have set the world on fire” or cannot find decent employment is simply unsupported by the facts. In fact, it’s a lazy trope. Yes, many go on to get professional degrees or certifications but the liberal arts background equipped them to do so and succeed in those environments. Others become entrepreneurs or find gainful employment in major corporations, which value the ability to think and make connections. Continuous education is necessary for anyone who wishes to succeed and progress in a career — same for trades. But it’s not true that liberal arts graduates are barely employable. Are there some? Sure — there are always outliers. Just like there are crappy plumbers who can’t hold a job.

2) The notion that teachers “advocate” a point of view on controversial subjects is similarly unsupported. That’s some straight up bullshit you have lapped up from propaganda outlets like the Federalist or Washington Examiner or any number of right wing publications masquerading as news. I have known literally hundreds of teachers in my life and none of them do this. It’s a complete and bizarre fantasy of conservatives that this happens — my guess many are confusing the lack of parroting about their own world view in the classroom with “indoctrination.” In other words, they’re complaining about the omission of right-wing dogma in schools. And again, there may be anecdotes here and there of outliers or nutty teachers who have, but in general, teachers are following a state-approved curriculum with accountability in the form of things like SOLs — there’s no time for “indoctrination.” The kids are learning reading, writing, arithmetic. They are also learning how to be citizens and basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc. This is important because they might not be learning these concepts at home and society needs for them to know them in order to function. This is essential to that basic “civics” you mention.

We need *More* emphasis on global citizens, not less. We live in a globalized economy. The more holistically we can help our children think and disabuse them of the notion of things like American exceptionalism (teach the concept, but don’t indoctrinate them to the jingoism), the better.

DP here. I'm on your side, PP; however, the empathy, equity, and tolerance you refer to is exactly what these people consider to be indoctrination.
Also, even if teachers aren't formally teaching a specific politically-biased curriculum or "dogma," the liberal bias in this area permeates the school environment and - not infrequently - classroom discussion, to include teachers being very clear about their personal beliefs and positions on social and political issues.

+1. PP, do you have kids in MS or HS in northern VA?

Yes. 2 in HS.

DP.

So, “liberal indoctrination” means teaching kids “how to be citizens” and “basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc.”

Liberal indoctrination would mean failing to teach kids about the branches of government under the Constitution and their respective roles, or about individual rights, and instead lambasting the United States as a "settler colonialist" society whose defining characteristic is racism and that can only be salvaged through future discrimination in favor of "oppressed" races and classes.

"Equity" is not a "basic society skill," so much as a political agenda. Equality under the law, on the other hand, is a fundamental right.

Confirming that all the hubbabaloo about indoctrination is overblown, as this is generally not happening in our schools.

Depends on whose schools you're talking about. It's happening in many places and seeping into the local public schools as well.

Here's one example at a public university: https://www.commonsense.news/p/why-im-giving-up-tenure-at-ucla

An op-ed from commonsense.news. Seems like a reputable source

It is more reputable than the typical column or opinion piece published in the Washington Post.

In any case, if you weren't a typical left-wing shill you'd address the article on the merits, and not try to discredit it based on the site that published it.

Uh, really. It's not. They aren't even on the same playing field -- the Washington Post is professional media with editors, standards and centuries-old track record of stellar journalism.

Commonsense News is just ... Bari Weiss, a notorious provocateur and hack who embodies the worst in self-branding look-at-me "journalism."

What nonsense. The Post has given us us Janet Cooke, internal end-fighting that culminated in Felicia Sonmez’s firing, utterly boring and predictable pieces by second-rate talents like Petula Dvorak, and an endless array of biased news articles that toe an ideological line. Weiss is a former WSJ and NYT reporter who struck out on her own when she decided that she’d had enough of the censorious cancel culture that had overtaken the Times. She continues to cover and highlight stories that mainstream left-wing publications like the Post and the Times will no longer touch, even though such articles once would have been their bread and butter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Achieve pushes “competency-based pathways.”

I say we need more critical thinking in schools, more holistic approaches.

Conservatives hate that idea because they won’t win future elections if voters think critically. So they push things like “competency based pathways.”

What you characterize as "critical thinking" is understood by many to mean the indoctrination of younger students with a particular set of political views by teachers who do not seek to explore multiple perspectives. "Comptency-based pathways" at least connotes learning things that will help graduates earn a living wage.

Yes, I am aware of the twisted narrative.

The difference is like the difference between teaching liberal arts in college or attending trade school. The most successful people in society today have a liberal arts/critical thinking background. It’s actually the opposite of indoctrination because it teaches students to challenge authority, which includes what is being taught.

The “just learn skills” crowd only wants students to know how to change a light fixture or repair a car or program a computer. It doesn’t want anyone seeing the forest for the trees. Because then people might second-guess voting for conservative politicians who promote policies that are bad for them. It makes them more prone to acquiescence.

This has been in the works for 30+ years in public education. What we’re seeing now is next level, however.

That's a lot to unpack.

It's not like students who just have liberal arts degrees graduate and set the world on fire. Many can barely find decent employment, and the higher-paid liberal arts graduates often are those who've gone on to attend graduate or professional schools, which may not be a financial option for many students.

As for whether "critical thinking" is being encouraged, it's notable that the School Board has been exploring, if it has not already adopted, revisions to an existing "controversial issues" policy that required teachers to consider presenting competing perspectives, which would be consistent with encouraging students to develop their own views, to instead allow teachers to advocate in classrooms for a particular point of view. That would be fine if students already had the so-called "critical thinking" skills to challenge their teachers, but in practice it may lead to race and class-centered indoctrination.

Finally, as for the suggestion that "competency-based pathways" boil down to "just learn skills," that would be unfortunate if it were all that it entailed. At least some conservatives want to ensure all students are receiving an education in what used to be called "civics" that entails gaining an understanding of the basics about, for example, the three branches of the federal government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and a federal system (under which certain powers are exercised by the federal government, while others are reserved to the states). That type of education can make for an informed citizenry and electorate, not one that only learns vocational training.

Certainly it would be preferable to some of what currently happens in FCPS, where multiple schools (including some where students might benefit the most from additional vocational pathways) instead have International Baccalaureate programs that purport to develop "global citizens," but are poorly subscribed, treat the United States as just one of many countries around the world, fail to cover basic "civics," and graduate few students on track to receive an IB diploma.

To “unpack” your response, one has to dispute the premises you lay out.

1) The notion that “it’s not like those who just have a liberal arts degree have set the world on fire” or cannot find decent employment is simply unsupported by the facts. In fact, it’s a lazy trope. Yes, many go on to get professional degrees or certifications but the liberal arts background equipped them to do so and succeed in those environments. Others become entrepreneurs or find gainful employment in major corporations, which value the ability to think and make connections. Continuous education is necessary for anyone who wishes to succeed and progress in a career — same for trades. But it’s not true that liberal arts graduates are barely employable. Are there some? Sure — there are always outliers. Just like there are crappy plumbers who can’t hold a job.

2) The notion that teachers “advocate” a point of view on controversial subjects is similarly unsupported. That’s some straight up bullshit you have lapped up from propaganda outlets like the Federalist or Washington Examiner or any number of right wing publications masquerading as news. I have known literally hundreds of teachers in my life and none of them do this. It’s a complete and bizarre fantasy of conservatives that this happens — my guess many are confusing the lack of parroting about their own world view in the classroom with “indoctrination.” In other words, they’re complaining about the omission of right-wing dogma in schools. And again, there may be anecdotes here and there of outliers or nutty teachers who have, but in general, teachers are following a state-approved curriculum with accountability in the form of things like SOLs — there’s no time for “indoctrination.” The kids are learning reading, writing, arithmetic. They are also learning how to be citizens and basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc. This is important because they might not be learning these concepts at home and society needs for them to know them in order to function. This is essential to that basic “civics” you mention.

We need *More* emphasis on global citizens, not less. We live in a globalized economy. The more holistically we can help our children think and disabuse them of the notion of things like American exceptionalism (teach the concept, but don’t indoctrinate them to the jingoism), the better.

New poster here.

Can anyone explain what exactly "critical thinking" is? How do the schools teach it? How do you transfer the critical thinking skills taught in a controlled environment (classroom) to use it in other subjects and in the world?

Critical thinking & problem solving are thrown around a lot nowadays, but many schools don't even know what critical thinking is, left along teaching it. My kid's principal avoided telling me what he thinks critical/logical/analytical thinking is, or giving me an example of a problem to problem solve or to think critically of.

Regarding teachers discussing/debating controversial topics in classes, it is simply impossible as human beings to be completely neutral on topics they are biased or passionate about. Can anybody guarantee to provide a list of equal good & bad things done for this country by Obama (if you are the extreme right,) or by Trump (if you are the extreme left)? When you are biased on either sides, it becomes what other people called 'indoctrination'.

I think you hit the nail on the head. The extreme left and extreme right basically lack critical thinking skills. They are only able to understand and regurgitate what they hear, with extreme bias. Critical thinking cannot really be taught, but is an intellectual skill that one is born with at a given level. It means you have the ability to ingest information and facts, then analyze that for yourself. I think the extreme left is made up of book smart people, who are able to understand issues and repeat them, but lack the true skill of high level critical thinking. But like I said, it is not something that is taught or obtained. You either have it or you don't.

Strongly disagree. Yeah, some people lack the skill or aren't as good at it - just like any skill. But you absolutely can teach and develop critical thinking abilities. But what I disagree with more is your characterization of the extreme left being book smart/sans critical thinking. It's actually the far right who are less adept at critical thinking, aren't able to/unwilling to appreciate different experiences and viewpoints. The far left folks may all agree and parrot each other trying to out-left each other; but their positions (mostly) incorporate the understanding that one size does not fit all and different people have different beliefs and needs. They don't all agree with each other because they can't think for themselves. They agree because they have developed the critical thinking skills, empathy, compassion, and tolerance for others (mostly). Furthermore, it's the conservative sheep (those people used to call rednecks and such) who lack both book smarts and critical thinking skills. If they valued education more, they'd probably have better critical thinking abilities and be more likely to think for themselves before coming to their same shared conclusions.

Nope there are so many people on the left that regurgitate the NYT, NPR or pod save America. One example white liberals think racisim is worse than actually it is and think its a bigger problem that actual minority populations. It's worse because they are educated but they still lack critical thinking skills.

And how are those in the right any different? They just cite different sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This report came out over a month ago and was challenged at the time as misleading.

https://bluevirginia.us/2022/05/va-senate-dems-rip-youngkin-education-report-as-a-joke-dog-whistle-talking-points-outright-lie-supported-by-cherry-picked-data-and-warped-perspective

Didn’t it bother you at all that the content in your link is lacking in, uh, content? The data is cherry picked, how? Misleading how? Inaccurate how?

On the national assessment, the term "proficient" is used to indicate a score that is above grade level. The term "basic" is used to refer to a score that indicates grade level. Youngkin and his ed dept deliberately conflated the two terms to make it look like virginia students are not at grade level. The national exam scores do in fact match the SOL scores once you realize that "basic" means grade level and "proficient" means above grade level.

This is one example. Also citing "the number of homeschooled students jumped 56 percent in the 2020-2021 school year. That same year, the report says, 3,748 public-school students transferred to private schools in Virginia." as if that's indicative of some sort of trend because of educational performance of the public school education system, rather than acknowledging it's entirely driven by the realities of an evolving unprecedented-in-our-time global pandemic, and our underfunded schools not being able to realistically support in-person learning during that period of time, and so many parents with the means to temporarily pursue other options choosing to do so. Would be interesting to see how the number of 2022-23 homeschooled students compares to the number from 2020-21... if it has dropped (as I'm sure it has), does that mean our schools are now suddenly beacons of competence and that the concept of homeschooling is on the decline? Or is it just a correction of the equally anomalous 2020-21 blip that had nothing at all to do with long-term trends?

As the PP in the post above yours, and also a parent that switched to private last year, it had nothing to do with sol scores. I think our public is horrible, but it's mainly BECAUSE of the focus on testing, so Youngkin's implication that more focus on tests is needed is just more of the same thing that makes our public schools so bad to begin with. I'm also a teacher who knows exactly why our schools are so bad, and no tests are going to improve the problem. We need smaller class sizes, better administrators, and less bureaucracy. We need to test less and teach more (testing actually takes up so much time that we lose instructional time). We also need better curriculum - the current VA curriculum is a random bunch of nonsense that no one needs to know and none of the kids will remember anyway. The math instruction is atrocious, and the reading instruction is non-existent.

We'll come back to public when we can't afford private any more, and not a minute sooner.

I’m curious. I also teach in VA. What parts of the curriculum are a “random bunch of nonsense”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those of you that believe that public education in Virginia is failing… what are you going to do about it?

Nothing beyond complain for DCUM and vote for different school board members, both of which will not drive change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Youngkin's solution will be to privatize everything so he can basically say its not my problem

I'm down. At least then we can choose to go to a good school.

With what money? No voucher will begin to pay the cost of tuition at a good school

Except Dumbkin's base doesn't know that. It's really a way to get the state to subsidize the religious schools. What's even more sad is that these people have no clue how bad the private schools are where I live. They don't come close academically to the public schools. I guess that is the desired outcome. Even drump knows it's the dumb ones who vote for him.

[Anonymous]

Youngkin Lies you took the lies and elected him

Now VA schools will die a horrific death.

They will privatize schools and if you think Youngkin will ever leave the governorship HAHAHAHAHA

Thank god for L Louise Lucas she is saving your asses.

Once mid terms hit VA is hosed and good luck because now you not only will get to pay for public schools they will suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Achieve pushes “competency-based pathways.”

I say we need more critical thinking in schools, more holistic approaches.

Conservatives hate that idea because they won’t win future elections if voters think critically. So they push things like “competency based pathways.”

What you characterize as "critical thinking" is understood by many to mean the indoctrination of younger students with a particular set of political views by teachers who do not seek to explore multiple perspectives. "Comptency-based pathways" at least connotes learning things that will help graduates earn a living wage.

Yes, I am aware of the twisted narrative.

The difference is like the difference between teaching liberal arts in college or attending trade school. The most successful people in society today have a liberal arts/critical thinking background. It’s actually the opposite of indoctrination because it teaches students to challenge authority, which includes what is being taught.

The “just learn skills” crowd only wants students to know how to change a light fixture or repair a car or program a computer. It doesn’t want anyone seeing the forest for the trees. Because then people might second-guess voting for conservative politicians who promote policies that are bad for them. It makes them more prone to acquiescence.

This has been in the works for 30+ years in public education. What we’re seeing now is next level, however.

That's a lot to unpack.

It's not like students who just have liberal arts degrees graduate and set the world on fire. Many can barely find decent employment, and the higher-paid liberal arts graduates often are those who've gone on to attend graduate or professional schools, which may not be a financial option for many students.

As for whether "critical thinking" is being encouraged, it's notable that the School Board has been exploring, if it has not already adopted, revisions to an existing "controversial issues" policy that required teachers to consider presenting competing perspectives, which would be consistent with encouraging students to develop their own views, to instead allow teachers to advocate in classrooms for a particular point of view. That would be fine if students already had the so-called "critical thinking" skills to challenge their teachers, but in practice it may lead to race and class-centered indoctrination.

Finally, as for the suggestion that "competency-based pathways" boil down to "just learn skills," that would be unfortunate if it were all that it entailed. At least some conservatives want to ensure all students are receiving an education in what used to be called "civics" that entails gaining an understanding of the basics about, for example, the three branches of the federal government (executive, legislative, and judicial) and a federal system (under which certain powers are exercised by the federal government, while others are reserved to the states). That type of education can make for an informed citizenry and electorate, not one that only learns vocational training.

Certainly it would be preferable to some of what currently happens in FCPS, where multiple schools (including some where students might benefit the most from additional vocational pathways) instead have International Baccalaureate programs that purport to develop "global citizens," but are poorly subscribed, treat the United States as just one of many countries around the world, fail to cover basic "civics," and graduate few students on track to receive an IB diploma.

To “unpack” your response, one has to dispute the premises you lay out.

1) The notion that “it’s not like those who just have a liberal arts degree have set the world on fire” or cannot find decent employment is simply unsupported by the facts. In fact, it’s a lazy trope. Yes, many go on to get professional degrees or certifications but the liberal arts background equipped them to do so and succeed in those environments. Others become entrepreneurs or find gainful employment in major corporations, which value the ability to think and make connections. Continuous education is necessary for anyone who wishes to succeed and progress in a career — same for trades. But it’s not true that liberal arts graduates are barely employable. Are there some? Sure — there are always outliers. Just like there are crappy plumbers who can’t hold a job.

2) The notion that teachers “advocate” a point of view on controversial subjects is similarly unsupported. That’s some straight up bullshit you have lapped up from propaganda outlets like the Federalist or Washington Examiner or any number of right wing publications masquerading as news. I have known literally hundreds of teachers in my life and none of them do this. It’s a complete and bizarre fantasy of conservatives that this happens — my guess many are confusing the lack of parroting about their own world view in the classroom with “indoctrination.” In other words, they’re complaining about the omission of right-wing dogma in schools. And again, there may be anecdotes here and there of outliers or nutty teachers who have, but in general, teachers are following a state-approved curriculum with accountability in the form of things like SOLs — there’s no time for “indoctrination.” The kids are learning reading, writing, arithmetic. They are also learning how to be citizens and basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc. This is important because they might not be learning these concepts at home and society needs for them to know them in order to function. This is essential to that basic “civics” you mention.

We need *More* emphasis on global citizens, not less. We live in a globalized economy. The more holistically we can help our children think and disabuse them of the notion of things like American exceptionalism (teach the concept, but don’t indoctrinate them to the jingoism), the better.

DP here. I'm on your side, PP; however, the empathy, equity, and tolerance you refer to is exactly what these people consider to be indoctrination.
Also, even if teachers aren't formally teaching a specific politically-biased curriculum or "dogma," the liberal bias in this area permeates the school environment and - not infrequently - classroom discussion, to include teachers being very clear about their personal beliefs and positions on social and political issues.

+1. PP, do you have kids in MS or HS in northern VA?

Yes. 2 in HS.

DP.

So, “liberal indoctrination” means teaching kids “how to be citizens” and “basic society skills like empathy, equity, tolerance, etc.”

Liberal indoctrination would mean failing to teach kids about the branches of government under the Constitution and their respective roles, or about individual rights, and instead lambasting the United States as a "settler colonialist" society whose defining characteristic is racism and that can only be salvaged through future discrimination in favor of "oppressed" races and classes.

"Equity" is not a "basic society skill," so much as a political agenda. Equality under the law, on the other hand, is a fundamental right.

Confirming that all the hubbabaloo about indoctrination is overblown, as this is generally not happening in our schools.

Depends on whose schools you're talking about. It's happening in many places and seeping into the local public schools as well.

Here's one example at a public university: https://www.commonsense.news/p/why-im-giving-up-tenure-at-ucla

An op-ed from commonsense.news. Seems like a reputable source

It is more reputable than the typical column or opinion piece published in the Washington Post.

In any case, if you weren't a typical left-wing shill you'd address the article on the merits, and not try to discredit it based on the site that published it.

Uh, really. It's not. They aren't even on the same playing field -- the Washington Post is professional media with editors, standards and centuries-old track record of stellar journalism.

Commonsense News is just ... Bari Weiss, a notorious provocateur and hack who embodies the worst in self-branding look-at-me "journalism."

What nonsense. The Post has given us us Janet Cooke, internal end-fighting that culminated in Felicia Sonmez’s firing, utterly boring and predictable pieces by second-rate talents like Petula Dvorak, and an endless array of biased news articles that toe an ideological line. Weiss is a former WSJ and NYT reporter who struck out on her own when she decided that she’d had enough of the censorious cancel culture that had overtaken the Times. She continues to cover and highlight stories that mainstream left-wing publications like the Post and the Times will no longer touch, even though such articles once would have been their bread and butter.

What a bunch of word salad.

Janet Cooke was literally 40 years ago. Since then the Post has won more than 2 DOZEN Pulitzer Prizes.

Felicia Sonmez is a vengeful and spiteful nutter who has already lost her discrimination suit. Not sure what you mean by “end-fighting.”

Petula Dvorak is a local columnist. Like her not, whatever. But if that’s the biggest thing you have to complain about, i roll my eyes.

Bari Weiss should consider hiring Felicia, though. They’re both very experienced in dramatic exits from their employers that involve Twitter and behavior by their former colleagues. Framing everything through zealous support for Israel and Zionism is pretty disqualifying, too.

Naw, I will take the Post all day long. Weiss embodies the worst in personal brand, look-at-me journalism. She is an embarrassment to the craft.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This report came out over a month ago and was challenged at the time as misleading.

https://bluevirginia.us/2022/05/va-senate-dems-rip-youngkin-education-report-as-a-joke-dog-whistle-talking-points-outright-lie-supported-by-cherry-picked-data-and-warped-perspective

Didn’t it bother you at all that the content in your link is lacking in, uh, content? The data is cherry picked, how? Misleading how? Inaccurate how?

On the national assessment, the term "proficient" is used to indicate a score that is above grade level. The term "basic" is used to refer to a score that indicates grade level. Youngkin and his ed dept deliberately conflated the two terms to make it look like virginia students are not at grade level. The national exam scores do in fact match the SOL scores once you realize that "basic" means grade level and "proficient" means above grade level.

This is one example. Also citing "the number of homeschooled students jumped 56 percent in the 2020-2021 school year. That same year, the report says, 3,748 public-school students transferred to private schools in Virginia." as if that's indicative of some sort of trend because of educational performance of the public school education system, rather than acknowledging it's entirely driven by the realities of an evolving unprecedented-in-our-time global pandemic, and our underfunded schools not being able to realistically support in-person learning during that period of time, and so many parents with the means to temporarily pursue other options choosing to do so. Would be interesting to see how the number of 2022-23 homeschooled students compares to the number from 2020-21... if it has dropped (as I'm sure it has), does that mean our schools are now suddenly beacons of competence and that the concept of homeschooling is on the decline? Or is it just a correction of the equally anomalous 2020-21 blip that had nothing at all to do with long-term trends?

As the PP in the post above yours, and also a parent that switched to private last year, it had nothing to do with sol scores. I think our public is horrible, but it's mainly BECAUSE of the focus on testing, so Youngkin's implication that more focus on tests is needed is just more of the same thing that makes our public schools so bad to begin with. I'm also a teacher who knows exactly why our schools are so bad, and no tests are going to improve the problem. We need smaller class sizes, better administrators, and less bureaucracy. We need to test less and teach more (testing actually takes up so much time that we lose instructional time). We also need better curriculum - the current VA curriculum is a random bunch of nonsense that no one needs to know and none of the kids will remember anyway. The math instruction is atrocious, and the reading instruction is non-existent.

We'll come back to public when we can't afford private any more, and not a minute sooner.

I’m curious. I also teach in VA. What parts of the curriculum are a “random bunch of nonsense”?

I agree with a lot of this. I'm a teacher and kids are not retaining information from one year to the next. They retain the information for the test and then, poof, it is gone from their brains. That's the downside of teaching to the test.

I have 4 kids (2 in college, 2 in HS) and 1 of my HS kids goes to a private because it was better suited for his needs. He's thrived at the private whereas he struggled in public school from K-8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Achieve pushes “competency-based pathways.”

I say we need more critical thinking in schools, more holistic approaches.

Conservatives hate that idea because they won’t win future elections if voters think critically. So they push things like “competency based pathways.”

What you characterize as "critical thinking" is understood by many to mean the indoctrination of younger students with a particular set of political views by teachers who do not seek to explore multiple perspectives. "Comptency-based pathways" at least connotes learning things that will help graduates earn a living wage.

Hogwash. Once the right faced the fact that the more educated someone is more likely liberal they are, they began attacking our public schools. The right actually want to shut down open discourse. They are all about forcing crap pseudo-science and faux history on our kids. Conservatives are not fans of critical thinking. Look at how they twist themselves to make the orange man seem acceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Youngkin's solution will be to privatize everything so he can basically say its not my problem

I'm down. At least then we can choose to go to a good school.

You can choose a good school now. Either move or pay for it, don't ask the government to give you a hand out.

That's a ridiculous take. The entire purpose of public schools is to provide a good education for every student. Right now some schools are doing very poorly and FCPS has continually failed to demonstrate that they have the backbone to make decisions that are universally optimal but unpopular with the vocal minority.

What the heck are you talking about? Every school system in the world has problems showing improvements with certain populations. These issues are not unique to a specific school or school system. Decisions that are "universally optimal but unpopular"? Like what? Maybe we move all the black people and children with special needs to an island and then everything will be better for your group of people? I can tell you about the "vocal minority" where I live. They are religious fundamentalists with a good bit of racism thrown in and all they care about educating are their kids and they really don't want to talk about history. They like to pretend that racism and the Holocaust didn't happen.