Ulaven_Demorte
Non-Prophet Organization
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2006
- Posts
- 30,016
Classic. Faneros has gone on a kick of late berating other's education / spelling / writing.
I suppose when you have no other argument, nit-pick at grammar and spelling.
"Duck Dynasty" star banned from show for anti-gay comments
- Thread starter RoryN
- Start date
Classic. Faneros has gone on a kick of late berating other's education / spelling / writing.
I suppose when you have no other argument, nit-pick at grammar and spelling.
Beco
I'm Not Your Guru
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2002
- Posts
- 57,795
Classic. Faneros has gone on a kick of late berating other's education / spelling / writing.
I suppose when you have no other argument, nit-pick at grammar and spelling.
What is your problem? you bored?
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
julybaby04
...always dreaming....
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Posts
- 19,442
I have been involved with the local schools my children go to....as well as met with the superintendent numerous times. Of course, it starts at the local level. This is a much larger issue and the state officials needed to be involved to direct change.
This issues include Common Core (some of which I shared.....there are teachers with agendas and they are teaching those agendas .......which, by the way, is NOT ok with the principals nor the superintendent, but isn't stopping). Other issues have to do with safety in the schools....this is on the local level.
As far as State Legislative people (including the Education Director of the State), this is strictly on Common Core. As I mentioned, states adopted Common Core without knowing what it was really about and what it would entail (including the testing required, which is incredibly expensive as well as overly time consuming, i.e. will take approx 7 hours to take the SBAC so they are proposing to do this over a 4 week period which will greatly impact educational time in the classroom).
The state I am in adopted Common Core simply for the ability to apply for funding from the US. They blindly went into this. The Senators and Reps in the state are hearing from people all over the state. They open the session in January and this will be one of the first issues up for discussion. States can "opt-out". That is the goal of those of us fighting this.
(and no, it is not banning books or coming from some religious reasoning as you think. It is simply not good for the children nor the state. The state is perfectly capable of developing their own standards which will not confuse children and are based on a foundation of excellence....not on a foundation of "common".)
Last edited:
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 25,603
julybaby04
...always dreaming....
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Posts
- 19,442
One of MANY who write about the problems with Common Core......
The Problem With the Common Core Math Standards
Posted: 10/31/2013 8:00 pm
Read more
Common Core, Common Core Standards, George Orwell, Common Core Math, Common Core State Standards, Mathematics, Education News
In this essay, I argue that the Common Core literature tries to intimidate opposition, in part, by using pretentious language. To support this claim, I cite math standards as well as the literature explaining them. To paraphrase George Orwell, words like commutativity and associativity give a scientific air to dubious judgments about the quality of the Common Core.
***
I am reading a second grade math homework assignment. To get full credit, students must not only determine which of two numbers is higher, they must also demonstrate knowledge of place value. The assignment illustrates Common Core State Standard 2.0A.A.1:
Use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem.
In case this is opaque to you, the New York State Education Department (NYSED) offers the following explanation:
Real-life situations provide context and empirical support for the mathematical properties of addition (commutativity and associativity, which combine to make the so-called "any which way rule") and for the mathematical relationship between addition and subtraction (subtraction is an unknown-addend problem).
Although I studied statistics and econometrics in graduate school, I must admit that I can barely follow these quotes. Later in the NYSED document, we encounter the following statement:
The Common Core State Standards present a balanced approach to mathematics that stresses equally the goals of conceptual understanding, fluency, and application.
On the contrary, this statement is crystal clear. The standards teach good things, e.g. conceptual understanding. If you don't understand the Common Core, the implication is that it's your problem.
George Orwell warned against this kind of abuse of language in his essay, "Politics and the English Language." Orwell argues that authors should write as clearly and simply as the material allows. He criticizes authors who use "pretentious diction" to give "an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments." Authors can use big words and convoluted sentences to make readers feel stupid. In this case, the Common Core literature may intimidate administrators, teachers, and parents to accept the new educational regime.
Parents of young children might be willing to endorse the Common Core math standards if they are confident that the payoff will be worth it. In a recent policy paper, two professors on the Common Core Validation Committee, R. James Milgram and Sandra Stotsky, observe that the math progression does not reach precalculus. College students who did not take a precalculus course in high school rarely go on to earn a bachelor's degree in a STEM area. In point of fact, the Common Core does not prepare students for careers in science, mathematics, engineering, finance, or economics. "At this time, we can only conclude that a gigantic fraud has been perpetrated on this country, in particular on parents in this country, by those developing, promoting, or endorsing Common Core's standards."
When discussing politics, citizens should speak to one another as clearly and sincerely as possible. Right now, the Common Core literature uses technical terms and tortuous prose to sell an educational philosophy that may not deliver what it promises.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-tampio/common-core-math-standards_b_4180854.html
The Problem With the Common Core Math Standards
Posted: 10/31/2013 8:00 pm
Read more
Common Core, Common Core Standards, George Orwell, Common Core Math, Common Core State Standards, Mathematics, Education News
In this essay, I argue that the Common Core literature tries to intimidate opposition, in part, by using pretentious language. To support this claim, I cite math standards as well as the literature explaining them. To paraphrase George Orwell, words like commutativity and associativity give a scientific air to dubious judgments about the quality of the Common Core.
***
I am reading a second grade math homework assignment. To get full credit, students must not only determine which of two numbers is higher, they must also demonstrate knowledge of place value. The assignment illustrates Common Core State Standard 2.0A.A.1:
Use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem.
In case this is opaque to you, the New York State Education Department (NYSED) offers the following explanation:
Real-life situations provide context and empirical support for the mathematical properties of addition (commutativity and associativity, which combine to make the so-called "any which way rule") and for the mathematical relationship between addition and subtraction (subtraction is an unknown-addend problem).
Although I studied statistics and econometrics in graduate school, I must admit that I can barely follow these quotes. Later in the NYSED document, we encounter the following statement:
The Common Core State Standards present a balanced approach to mathematics that stresses equally the goals of conceptual understanding, fluency, and application.
On the contrary, this statement is crystal clear. The standards teach good things, e.g. conceptual understanding. If you don't understand the Common Core, the implication is that it's your problem.
George Orwell warned against this kind of abuse of language in his essay, "Politics and the English Language." Orwell argues that authors should write as clearly and simply as the material allows. He criticizes authors who use "pretentious diction" to give "an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments." Authors can use big words and convoluted sentences to make readers feel stupid. In this case, the Common Core literature may intimidate administrators, teachers, and parents to accept the new educational regime.
Parents of young children might be willing to endorse the Common Core math standards if they are confident that the payoff will be worth it. In a recent policy paper, two professors on the Common Core Validation Committee, R. James Milgram and Sandra Stotsky, observe that the math progression does not reach precalculus. College students who did not take a precalculus course in high school rarely go on to earn a bachelor's degree in a STEM area. In point of fact, the Common Core does not prepare students for careers in science, mathematics, engineering, finance, or economics. "At this time, we can only conclude that a gigantic fraud has been perpetrated on this country, in particular on parents in this country, by those developing, promoting, or endorsing Common Core's standards."
When discussing politics, citizens should speak to one another as clearly and sincerely as possible. Right now, the Common Core literature uses technical terms and tortuous prose to sell an educational philosophy that may not deliver what it promises.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-tampio/common-core-math-standards_b_4180854.html
bronzeage
I am a river to my people
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Posts
- 49,684
What is this horseshit?
Does anyone here have trouble understanding this statement?
I would be willing to bet half the opposition thinks Common Core is too hard and the other half think it's too easy.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
"Them uppity liburhuls is jibbery jabberin tew much!!" .....that's what I got out of it.
No...pretty straight forward.
I bet you're right, and it is easy.
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,305
Ah the problem becomes increasingly clear, not that any of us really had any doubts. JB doesn't understand basic education.
This is stuff that when I was in school was taught to first graders complete with the proper terminology. Like many things we were taught we'd forgotten a lot of it right after the test because other than its common sense it doesn't matter what the name is. The commutative property of math just means it doesn't matter what order you put the numbers when adding them together.
I'll grant you most adults have long since forgotten this, they just sort of instinctively know it and if you give most adults a list of numbers they'll arrange them into groups that add up to 10 because it makes it easier to do in their head. They just don't remember the name.
Associative property in addition is the same thing just with three or more numbers. I can't find a graphic for it but it says.
(3+4) + 5= 3+(5+4) = 12
Though nobody would use the parenthesis in this case.
So basically JB is and the author are getting pissy because kids are being encouraged to solve the problem the way it makes the most sense to them. It doesn't matter what order you put your numbers because as long as you get to twelve who the fucks cars how you got there. Being able to show your work however is vital for two reason. First understanding how you got to an answer proves amongst other things that you didn't guess and once you start getting into the higher levels of math knowing the steps is important. I can personally attest (and no teacher could explain it better than Just cus) that Algebra 2 was a real kick in the teeth because I couldn't do it in my head.
George Orwell did not warn against teaching people the proper terms, he in fact argued about making up new and increasingly broad terms. The exact opposite of what seems to be happening.
This is stuff that when I was in school was taught to first graders complete with the proper terminology. Like many things we were taught we'd forgotten a lot of it right after the test because other than its common sense it doesn't matter what the name is. The commutative property of math just means it doesn't matter what order you put the numbers when adding them together.
I'll grant you most adults have long since forgotten this, they just sort of instinctively know it and if you give most adults a list of numbers they'll arrange them into groups that add up to 10 because it makes it easier to do in their head. They just don't remember the name.
Associative property in addition is the same thing just with three or more numbers. I can't find a graphic for it but it says.
(3+4) + 5= 3+(5+4) = 12
Though nobody would use the parenthesis in this case.
So basically JB is and the author are getting pissy because kids are being encouraged to solve the problem the way it makes the most sense to them. It doesn't matter what order you put your numbers because as long as you get to twelve who the fucks cars how you got there. Being able to show your work however is vital for two reason. First understanding how you got to an answer proves amongst other things that you didn't guess and once you start getting into the higher levels of math knowing the steps is important. I can personally attest (and no teacher could explain it better than Just cus) that Algebra 2 was a real kick in the teeth because I couldn't do it in my head.
George Orwell did not warn against teaching people the proper terms, he in fact argued about making up new and increasingly broad terms. The exact opposite of what seems to be happening.
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,231
That was a genuinely strange article, and from reading the HuffPo comments I'm evidently not the only one who feels that way.
Every vocation has its own particular jargon, yet this professor seems to take offense that Common Core has the audacity to use educational jargon. (Holy special pleading, Batman!).
Invoking Orwell (twice) and James Madison indicates to me the writer has ulterior motives in demonizin' the Common Core. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I've yet to see a compelling reason to unilaterally jettison Common Core. It seems well-intentioned.
Every vocation has its own particular jargon, yet this professor seems to take offense that Common Core has the audacity to use educational jargon. (Holy special pleading, Batman!).
Invoking Orwell (twice) and James Madison indicates to me the writer has ulterior motives in demonizin' the Common Core. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I've yet to see a compelling reason to unilaterally jettison Common Core. It seems well-intentioned.
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,305
I assume that part of the problem is that most adults have long since forgotten those terms because they learned them for the test just like I did and seeing them again is scary.
Ulaven_Demorte
Non-Prophet Organization
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2006
- Posts
- 30,016
Reading the article made me laugh pretty hard. All I could think of was:
Wait, the problem with "Common Core" is that the explanations are too intellectual for the PARENTS, education professionals, and obviously the author who studied "statistics and econometrics in GRADUATE SCHOOL"? Because that's who the guidelines were meant for, not the first and second graders. What adult doesn't know what the commutative and associative properties are in math?
THAT is the problem, parent's (and moron Professors) who don't want children smarter than they are. Trying to cite Orwell really gave me a laugh!
Ho! Ho! Ho!
Wait, the problem with "Common Core" is that the explanations are too intellectual for the PARENTS, education professionals, and obviously the author who studied "statistics and econometrics in GRADUATE SCHOOL"? Because that's who the guidelines were meant for, not the first and second graders. What adult doesn't know what the commutative and associative properties are in math?
THAT is the problem, parent's (and moron Professors) who don't want children smarter than they are. Trying to cite Orwell really gave me a laugh!
Ho! Ho! Ho!
julybaby04
...always dreaming....
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Posts
- 19,442
I have 3 Dogs in the fight. Each day in school brings a new issue to deal with...all stemming from Common Core.
That article is not the end-all be-all to opposition to Common Core. If people want to see the issues, just google it. Also, on youtube are numerous example of what is wrong with Common Core.
I understand that because I brought it up, in your opinions, it must be wrong. Funny how people who are dealing with this in my state have meetings that I regularly attend (i.e. legislative members) who welcome real life experiences dealing with this. I am by no means the only parent there, but I am one of them.
I know many like this and support it. There are just as many who do not, and like I said...I have 3 dogs in this fight.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 25,603
They're issues you invent.
I'm not saying CC is perfect, but when stripped away of all the issues that have nothing to do with CC, your main point of frustration with CC is that the people who wrote it used big words.
I've read & watched a lot from both sides of this argument. Your main issue with education, not necessarily CC, is based in your bigotry. You would have no problem if your child's teacher selected Romeo & Juliet or Lord of the Flies. Both about teenagers killing each other. The Crucible, adults setting teenage girls on fire. Or any other work of fiction with incredibly violent themes, so long as they were written by white people.
There are laws that govern a labor relationship. An employer may be able to fire any one for any reason or no reason. But I've heard that during the hiring process, there are certatain questions an employer cannot even ASK a potential employee. An employer cannot hire anyone they chose. They can't ask about age, race, religion, sexual orientation, marital status, in some cases even their criminal background. How does the duck guy's beliefs affect his labor relationship with his boss? My point being, if they asked the duck guy about his position on homosexuality at his interview, that act would be a violation at least in some states. So how is it OK If they fire him fo his beliefs after the fact? There is every indication that he is fulfilling his obligations of his job? He shows up for work, follows directions, is respectful, etc..so my question is, why is something that would be wrong pre-employment be OK intra-employment?This is a clear cut case of Republican/conservative's crying victim after they stepped on their own dicks. They wanted and staunchly advocate at will labor laws....THEY GOT THEM!! YOUR FIRED PHIL!! GTFO BITCH!! Suck A&E's freedom loving capitalist dick mother fuckers!!
Also what about A&E's freedom to fire people off their shows?
It's not the duck guy's show, it's A&E's....his freedoms have not been touched b/c NOTHING is stopping him from getting his own TV network and having all the gay hatred on his channel that christian america demands!! His freedoms are 100% unmolested.
What don't you get about that??
They shouldn't even need a reason to fire him.
"Because the boss said so that's the fuck why" is all anyone needs.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 25,603
This isn't about his beliefs. This is about the fact that he didn't follow directions. He is still employed & not fired.
ms_ann_thrope
Resurrected
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2012
- Posts
- 25,731
All I can smell in this thread is beaten, dead horses.
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Posts
- 52,256
Much to the chagrin of Republicans and conservatives the nation over.
That's right, the evil socialist that are centrist democrats won some basic labor laws.
Actually you can ask about most those things (except race/religion) IF they can be proven to be directly related to the job.
Yea they can....no one else picks their employees, and at the end of the day I still see business's with all white males, all Hispanic females, all black etc. etc. you can tell the business owners preference for race/gender and most likely religion too.
It affects their employment relationship because Phil's job as a Pop icon/Reality TV celeb WHATEVER you want to label him, he is a representative of Duck Dynasty and thus A&E. Which means in the public eye he needs to behave in accordance with A&E's policies.
In some liburhul states it might be IF it was A&E asking the questions.
No one is firing him for his beliefs. They are 'suspending' I guess? for being an asshole about it. He could have said he only belived in Biblical marriage as a christian, left the "your ruining the world, now yous want to do bestiality!!" bullshit out and nothing would have happened. But he was looking to start a storm and be a victim, and he did.
No....
And none of this changes the fact that the RW/Republicans/conservatives fucking HATED free speech and labor laws right up until this red neck got a taste of yall's medicine.
I simply can't understand why you guys aren't cheering A&E, that's who you voted for.
Last edited:
Beco
I'm Not Your Guru
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2002
- Posts
- 57,795
Under Armour stands strong
By Tim Swift, The Baltimore Sun
11:50 a.m. EST, December 23, 2013
Under Armour may not want to talk about "Duck Dynasty," but fans of the now controversial reality show took to the Baltimore-based company's social media accounts this weekend to praise Under Armour for sticking by the embattled franchise.
Other than a brief statement condeming star Phil Robertson's comments, representatives from Under Armour have not responded to multiple requests for comment.
Interviewed in GQ magazine, Robertson called homosexuality a sin and said African Americans were "happy" in the pre-civil-rights era south.
A&E -- the cable network that airs "Duck Dynasty" -- suspended Robertson indefinitely from the show last week, leading to online campaigns to reinstate him and conservative politicians condemning the network's action.
Under Armour is one of many companies caught in the cultural crossfire. The restaurant chain Cracker Barrel removed "Duck Dynasty" products from its stores last week, but reversed itself after customers complained.
By Tim Swift, The Baltimore Sun
11:50 a.m. EST, December 23, 2013
Under Armour may not want to talk about "Duck Dynasty," but fans of the now controversial reality show took to the Baltimore-based company's social media accounts this weekend to praise Under Armour for sticking by the embattled franchise.
Other than a brief statement condeming star Phil Robertson's comments, representatives from Under Armour have not responded to multiple requests for comment.
Interviewed in GQ magazine, Robertson called homosexuality a sin and said African Americans were "happy" in the pre-civil-rights era south.
A&E -- the cable network that airs "Duck Dynasty" -- suspended Robertson indefinitely from the show last week, leading to online campaigns to reinstate him and conservative politicians condemning the network's action.
Under Armour is one of many companies caught in the cultural crossfire. The restaurant chain Cracker Barrel removed "Duck Dynasty" products from its stores last week, but reversed itself after customers complained.
julybaby04
...always dreaming....
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Posts
- 19,442
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,305
And yet you've made almost no coherent argument. So far you have two things. The first is that the math is explained using actual math terms as it should be and too many parents are too stupid to understand it.
The second is that the books are largely non-fiction and as chosen by the teach er may support the teachers agenda whatever it may be. Teachers however already have considerable power over what to teach their kids adn their agendas are always part of their teachings but still you make a point. One that could be fixed quite simply but stating all US school children need to read the same books or books from the same approved list.
Though your argument on the Quran and equal time on all religions is silly. This is America they are already familar with Christian Mythology, they are not familiar with Jewish, Muslim, Hindu etc etc. It's like Black History month. We teach white history the other eleven months often leaving out or minimizing the accomplishments of non-whites during that time.
The second is that the books are largely non-fiction and as chosen by the teach er may support the teachers agenda whatever it may be. Teachers however already have considerable power over what to teach their kids adn their agendas are always part of their teachings but still you make a point. One that could be fixed quite simply but stating all US school children need to read the same books or books from the same approved list.
Though your argument on the Quran and equal time on all religions is silly. This is America they are already familar with Christian Mythology, they are not familiar with Jewish, Muslim, Hindu etc etc. It's like Black History month. We teach white history the other eleven months often leaving out or minimizing the accomplishments of non-whites during that time.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 25,603
I agree with everything you said except the part about her wanting equal time for all religions. She only wants equal (or more time) for Christianity.
A & E moral imperiative = $
