David Kirp, author of several major books on early childhood education, a model school district, and several other topics, describes a noteworthy educational innovation (everything old is new again):
“These students are grouped at tables, each corresponding to a grade level. The hum of conversation fills the room. After tackling an assignment on their own, the students review one another’s work. If a child is struggling, the others pitch in to help.
“During my visit to one of these schools, second graders were writing short stories, and fifth graders were testing whether the color of light affects its brightness when seen through water. The teacher moved among the groups, leaning over shoulders, reading and commenting on their work. In one corner of the classroom were items, brought to school by the kids, that will be incorporated in their lessons. The students have planted a sizable garden, and the vegetables and fruits they raise are used as staples at mealtime, often prepared according to their parents’ recipes.”
Was he visiting an expensive, elite private school in New York City or Boston or the District of Columbia?
No, he was describing an experimental school in Colombia that is experiencing great success and has been widely replicated:
“During the past four decades, this school — and thousands like it — have adopted what’s called the Escuela Nueva (New School) model….
“Escuela Nueva is almost unknown in the United States, even though it has won numerous international awards — the hyper-energetic Vicky Colbert, who founded the program in 1975 and still runs it, received the first Clinton Global Citizenship prize. That should change, for this is how children — not just poor children — ought to be educated….
“Decades ago, John Dewey, America’s foremost education philosopher, asserted that students learned best through experience and that democracy “cannot go forward unless the intelligence of the mass of people is educated to understand the social realities of their own time.” Escuela Nueva puts that belief into practice. I’ve witnessed the demise of many ballyhooed attempts to reform education on a mass scale. But I’ve tabled my jaded skepticism after visiting Escuela Nueva schools, reviewing the research and marveling at the sheer number of youngsters who, over 40 years, have been educated this way.
“I’m convinced that the model can have a global impact on the lives of tens of millions of children — not just in the developing world but in the United States as well.
“There’s solid evidence that American students do well when they are encouraged to think for themselves and expected to collaborate with one another. In a report last year, the American Institutes for Research concluded that students who attended so-called deeper learning high schools — which emphasize understanding, not just memorizing, academic content; applying that understanding to novel problems and situations; and developing interpersonal skills and self-control — recorded higher test scores, were more likely to enroll in college and were more adept at collaboration than their peers in conventional schools.”

Reblogged this on The Sharing Tree.
LikeLike
John Dewey’s ideas have done enough to wreck education. Let’s just admit it and move on.
The following link and excerpts from that link explain my point:
http://www.improve-education.org/id42.html
The year: 1897. Dewey’s age: 38. “My Pedagogic Creed” is a fascinating and original work. It’s almost art, in the exotic sense that Wittgenstein’s “Tractatus” is art. They’re both breezily dogmatic, stating a thousand decisive Truths, perhaps a few of which are even true. Here’s the key point. Wouldn’t we like Dewey to say he has concluded or demonstrated or observed or discovered something? He does not. Here’s what he says 74 times in My Creed: “I believe…I believe…I believe…” You want education as fevered religious vision, read Dewey. Here’s four of these staccato beliefs:
“I believe that the social life of the child is the basis of concentration, or correlation, in all his training or growth. The social life gives the unconscious unity and the background of all his efforts and of all his attainments.
I believe that the subject-matter of the school curriculum should mark a gradual differentiation out of the primitive unconscious unity of social life.
I believe that we violate the child’s nature and render difficult the best ethical results, by introducing the child too abruptly to a number of special studies, of reading, writing, geography, etc., out of relation to this social life.
I believe, therefore, that the true center of correlation on the school subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but the child’s own social activities.”
Here’s what you need to watch with Dewey. He says education but he means indoctrination. He believes the reason kids go to school is to learn to be part of a group. Dewey had absorbed his collectivism from Marx, Hegel and other big thinkers of the 1800s and had, apparently, never doubted it. But how will we reach that brave new world? That is the tactical problem which Dewey is trying to solve in “My Pedagogic Creed.”
You see the offhand way he tosses aside the traditional school subjects. This contempt for knowledge, for facts, for truths–which Dewey states so openly—has stained the entire twentieth century. Please note the irony. He is himself hugely educated. But he has little interest in letting your kids join him. Instead, he is obsessed with their “social activities.”
Listening to John Dewey, you’d think that children have no families, homes, parents, siblings, friends, relatives, neighbors, communities, sports, religions, hobbies, no life outside the school. If they aren’t socialized at his school his way, they’ll be lost souls. Such arrogance. So Dewey inverts the main reason for the school’s existence, which is to provide the intellectual discipline and direction that might not be provided by all those other forces. Dewey wants to take schools out of the education business, as traditionally understood, and put them in the conditioning (or parenting) business.
LikeLike
You have a really poor understanding of Dewey. Read some more of his works.
LikeLike
Yes, one can argue that Dewey violated his own constructivism and relativism by mandating “his view” of what is essential. So, while he believed in relativism and constructivism (as antithetical to theism), he practiced pedagogic objectivism (as if there is some final truth or set of information that must be taught).
LikeLike
Also, Dewey must be understood in the context of his times; the vision and paradigm of the academic-collective in which he was a stakeholder in. This period was guided by the belief that if we could manipulate the environment and get everything “just right” we could produce a better student, better citizen, better human; as if the right dosage of behaviorism could cure all the evils in society; as if humanity can provide its own atonement for its sins, and that “enlightenment” can produce that which faith cannot.
LikeLike
Rick,
“the right dosage of behaviorism” is exactly what we are dealing with right now with the Common Core and it’s accompanying cockamamie testing and invasive data collection systems. Dewey would be quite happy today as we are moving toward universal pre-k and even schools as the center of the community, open all day to all ages types of models, because he thought the state would do a much better job “training” children than any parent ever could.
LikeLike
Agreed, “A Brave New World” comes from the belief that the State has all the answers, because the populace has rejected the diagnosis and remediation offered by the Church and Faith.
LikeLike
… the populace has only rejected the diagnosis and remediation offered by the Church and Faith because of people like Dewey and Skinner who have been in the business of indoctrination and behavior modification for so many years. And of course the CFR which has controlled our media for so long, only offering ridicule for people who actually uphold the Faith.
LikeLike
Dewey and Skinner are diametric opposites.
LikeLike
They both believe that man is just an animal evolved from one common ancestor, a single-celled creature, therefore children are best corralled and trained by the state to fit into an economic system where they will be useful to the state, most easily trained through indoctrination and behavior modification. Dewey wrote a lot of pretty language describing this situation but it amounts to the same utilitarian view that B.F. held.
If man is created in the image of God, endowed by the creator with reason and creativity, then it is our responsibility to reject any system which reduces our children to theories based on lab rats. What is being shoved into our schools right now is exactly that.
LikeLike
Amen, Dawn, Yes, if we are “imago Dei” (reflectors of the Divine person) and all lives have inherent worth, glory, honor and integrity (which cannot be abrogated by the State), then our mission, objectives, curriculum and pedagogy should reflect these axioms and enable a “noble product”. If man is just evolved animal, then the value of the individual can be defined by “science” (ie. sociobiology) and the implementation of State-mandated curriculum will follow. The connection between Darwin and Hitler is undeniable, in that what Hitler believed and sought was based on improving the human race, via selection.
Just what is human fitness, anyway? According the evolutionary theory, what Mother Teresa did (denying her own pursuit of good, for those who could never repay her efforts) is a complete anomaly, if not folly. Just how do atheists define the “good”, without stealing from some faith-concept first. Post-modernists are “epistemological Robin Hoods”, their own axioms and premises are bankrupt of virtue, so they “borrow” terms from the Judeo-Christian paradigm, in order to “dress up” their otherwise morally-void worldview.
LikeLike
We have a winner!
LikeLike
You couldn’t be any more wrong. Dewey was not at all interested in making children “useful for the state”. That’s nonsense. He wanted exactly the opposite, in fact. He wanted children to understand and process their own experiences for themselves so they would have a personal understanding of truth for themselves, not dictated by an authority. That way, students would be best prepared to participate in democracy as full human beings, not as easily manipulated objects of the state.
And your prattle about believing in evolution (which, BTW, isn’t really a belief but established scientific fact) necessitating that “therefore children are best corralled and trained by the state….” is pure unadulterated bovine excrement. While you’re educating yourself on Dewey, add Darwin to your reading list.
LikeLike
I think you confused my comments for someone else; I never said students should be “corralled by the State….” Have you read Darwins “the descent of man, from…” (sorry, title eludes me). Charlie concluded that darker races were not as “evolved” and would inevitably be driven to extinction by more advanced Caucasoid races, and that females were inferior to males, only serving the purpose of being a “womb”. As Sir Charles drifted into a-theism, and rejected the Bible’s teaching of all people equal, all people needing redemption, he deduced some pretty weird ideas (or maybe they are good ideas, but get wrongly used by people like Hitler?). Just why did he infer that darker races are less-evolved, because to him they looked more “ape-like” (I guess he would have agreed with that fraudulent book, “The Bell Curve”).
LikeLike
I was responding to Dawn, but yes I have read Darwin. Have you? Yes, Darwin suffered from the same institutional racism as most people of his time. Doesn’t invalidate the rest of his work.
LikeLike
Yes, both works (origin of specie, descent of man). So, you agree with his thesis, that darker skinned are not as evolved. No, he did not suffer from the “institutional racism” of his day, but was one of the first to try to justify racism in terms of some being more “fit”. Maybe some hypocritical churches taught inequality, but nowhere in the Bible is one race deemed more fit, more important, more valuable. The OT forbade any favoritism based on race, unlike most, if not all, the Gentile “moral codes” of the time, which allowed for preferential treatment.
LikeLike
Darwin provided the supposed scientific justification for institutional racism. Don’t underplay his intentions.
LikeLike
“. . . offered by the Church and Faith. . . ”
Which church?
Which faith?
LikeLike
and which god?
LikeLike
Anyone who believes that Jesus is God, was crucified for our sins, rose from the dead, and is coming again has “Faith” in Jesus Christ and is considered part of “the Church.”
LikeLike
“If man is created in the image of God, endowed by the creator with reason and creativity. . ”
You need an infinitely large font for that “if”.
LikeLike
And you Duane, need a bigger font for “If not”, as if unbelief was not an equal act of faith (a faith to deny that which has volumes of evidence to support it). Facts led me to faith, not the absence of them.
LikeLike
Is this what you mean by “indoctrination”? From the article: “Escuela Nueva turns the schoolhouse into a laboratory for democracy. Rather than being run as a mini-dictatorship, with the principal as its unquestioned leader, the school operates as a self-governing community, where teachers, parents and students have a real say in how it is run. When teachers unfamiliar with this approach are assigned to these schools, it’s often the students themselves who teach them how to apply the method. “In these schools, citizenship isn’t abstract theory, It’s daily practice.””
LikeLike
Dienne,
Are you saying that you agree with Dewey’s own view? These are his words, not my understanding of his work:
“I believe, therefore, that the true center of correlation on the school subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but the child’s own social activities.”– John Dewey
A good example of his failure as an educator would be the fact that all four of John Rockefeller’s sons attended Dewey’s laboratory school. Nelson Rockefeller even admitted in a speech that he had to memorize all of his public speeches because he couldn’t read.
Dewey’s assault on phonics:
Get rid of intensive phonics, the foundation of language mastery and independent intelligence, and put in its place a “sight” or “look-say” method that teaches children to read English as if it were Chinese. Have them memorize a sight vocabulary so that they develop a whole-word reflex and cannot see the phonetic structure of our alphabetic words. Thus they will become reading disabled, dyslexic, or simply low-level readers.
Look no further than what happened to the four Rockefeller boys back in the 1920s when John D. Rockefeller Jr. put his four sons—Nelson, Laurence, Winthrop, and David—in the Progressive Lincoln School in New York. As a misguided admirer of John Dewey, Rockefeller donated three million dollars to the school which then turned his four sons into dyslexics. Mr. Rockefeller’s ignorance condemned his sons to lives of literary frustration. Yes, they had plenty of money, but their life-long reading handicap deprived them of the great pleasures of reading.
http://alpha-phonics.weebly.com/john-deweys-plan-to-dumb-down-america.html
Dienne,
Do you really think memorizing sight words to the exclusion of learning phonics is a superior method of teaching reading?
LikeLike
Seriously, Dawn, read at least one complete work before continuing this conversation. Don’t just take one little snippet. You’re making yourself look foolish. Not to mention rather paranoid, but we already knew that about you.
LikeLike
So you choose not to answer my legitimate questions based on Dewey’s own words but respond with a personal slander which is unacceptable in civil discourse about a subject on which we disagree. Stick to the facts and back off the personal attack.
LikeLike
Dewey has written a combined total of thousands of very dense pages. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain his work to you – do your own reading.
As far as “slander” – it’s not slander if it’s true, which you’ve demonstrated here and numerous other times. Dewey’s work is not all about some crackpot idea of mind control by the state – exactly the opposite in fact, which you would understand if you actually read him.
Now, good day.
LikeLike
Dienne,
As to the “established scientific fact” of evolution, are you aware that there is a huge debate about micro versus macroevolutionary processes (that process of adaptation and mutation have not yet been shown to be sufficient to “transmutate” one genera into another), or that most of the supposed sequences of “transitions” between types are now disproven by the fossil record? Have you ever read books from a creationist or intelligent design perspective? If not, then you have not yourself honestly analyzed all the evidence for yourself, and are only regurgitating the “party line” in which you yourself have been indoctrinated into. The dominant paradigm (evolution-only) produces curriculum that avoids anomalous data, never includes refutations, and pre-interprets everything for the reader. As Thomas Kuhn observed, when a paradigm becomes entrenched it no longer asks difficult questions; it seeks not honesty but adherents.
LikeLike
There is as much debate about evolution (macro or micro) as there is about human generated global warming. Which is to say, virtually none.
LikeLike
No debate, for those who forget Hegel and thesis vs antithesis. No debate, for those who are never willing to question their assumptions and worldview, and only read from the “pro-side” of any theory. No debate, for those who unquestionably believe “science” has come to the final answer of everything.
LikeLike
Just search “Man-made Global Warming Debate” or “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Debate” and see the plethora of highly educated people on both sides of each debate elucidating that, in fact, the science is very far from settled.
The science is never settled on any subject anyway. Science continues to modify and moderate its previous theories as new evidence is discovered which refutes old ideas. If that were not so we would be stuck with ideas from the second century A.D., when Ptolemy developed a theory that a complex system of circles illustrates how the planets moved around the earth.
LikeLike
Just because some alleged “scientists” with faked or irrelevant credentials have decided to show their ignorance in print doesn’t mean that there is legitimate debate over either climate change or evolution. Over 97% of legitimate scientists agree on man-made climate change. “Doctor of Theology” or whatever is not a legitimate credential to be weighing in on matters of science. And the consensus on evolution is even stronger in the legitimate scientific community. What the right-wing, pseudo-Christian types are really good at is developing their own whole “scientific” communities complete with “doctors” (in non-scientific fields) and “journals” (never peer-reviewed by legitimate scientists) based on “evidence” from the Bible and whatnot to convince the gullible.
Just because something that appears to be a “debate” shows up in a Google search does not mean that there is legitimate scientific debate.
LikeLike
“Doctor of Theology”??? Ben Carson is a brain surgeon.
LikeLike
So what? Same difference as far as evolution goes. Being a brain surgeon gives him no special qualifications regarding evolution.
LikeLike
I was going to complain that your initial comment on Dewey didn’t mention Hitler, but I see now that you’re well on your way to doing it in a followup comment.
LikeLike
Flerp,
The tolerance for opposing views on this blog is heart warming. I don’t understand your enthusiasm to ridicule me at every opportunity but I can tolerate it because tolerance is important.
LikeLike
You know who else lacked tolerance for opposing views? You guessed it . . . .
LikeLike
Agree. The writer, so eager to blame Dewey for everything wrong with education today, is a self proclaimed conservative activist who thinks schools have stopped teaching kids phonics, facts, and are just too, too preoccupied with mushy gushy whatever because educators have swooned over Dewey, non-stop since 1899. Wrong.
LikeLike
I never said schools have stopped teaching phonics. I said Dewey didn’t teach phonics in his school which the Rockefellers attended and graduated without learning to read.
LikeLike
Ya know… I am not an academic (although I have two degrees and the equivalent of two more plus 40 years experience), I am just a classroom grunt who USED any and all strategies which WORKED in each particular setting, in the very different schools and cultures where I practiced my PROFESSION.
Sometimes, this blog is one big head jam for those of us who had to teach Johnny and Leroy and Juanita how to read. I hate to say this, I never read DEWEY! My professor at Brooklyn College had his own reading list to inform my practice.
As for all the ‘experts’ on what a teacher should do, I would like to point out that unlike medicine — where third level research is used to vet practices (except where big pharma is gaming the system) in the education community any ‘study’ gets equal treatment.
Thus, all too often, something that worked in Oshkosh California (like ‘open classrooms’ or ‘balanced literacy’ or a perversion of ‘whole language’ which eliminates direct phonics instruction) is transported to NYC — adopted by some staff-development guru — and suddenly –, we teachers are told we must use this or that, in our classroom or be evaluated as insubordinate.
The discussion about what works in a classroom is valuable, and the voice of the classroom practitioner IS the bottom line!
LikeLike
…and here is the Catch-22: if this is good education, then how do we “test” it. How is a product collected and analyzed, if indeed this must be done?
I agree with the vision and practice of “Escuela Nueva”, it is genius, simple and powerfully efficacious. But the “corporate reformers” would insist in creating some kind of metric for this; yet, learning as real as this cannot be documented only by paper and pencil, via multiple choice questions (too bad Pearson, your narrow way of viewing educational success only applies to narrow-means of educational progress).
LikeLike
One of the reasons that working in cooperative groups can be effective is that this strategy unleashes the ability of students to help each other understand and learn while empowering each student to feel as though they are a competent contributor to the group. I taught in a diverse Blue Ribbon elementary school as an ESL teacher. I have observed many skillful teachers use this approach in my school, and I used cooperative groups in my SIOP (sheltered instruction observation protocol), an approach that unites language and content goals. Our school used cooperative groups as well as whole, small and individual groupings to best serve our students. I think flexible groupings can help teachers reach all members of the class. While the management of the groups can be daunting, it is an approach that can be beneficial to all.
LikeLike
Nothing new here. Cooperative groups, small and large are part of any teacher’s strategies for learning, when used in an appropriate way for an appropriate activity.
When it is used exclusively, to replace teacher-based instruction, or mandated to replace the teacher’s voice, then, like any other method, it fails. In some classrooms where student ‘cooperation’ is nil, the blind leading the blind sheds no light on learning, but top-down evaluators can enter and ‘write-up’ the teacher for being teacher-centered… as if this is insubordinate or inappropriate. That is what Rick Lapworth mentions… creating some metic. Imagine if a doctor was constantly visited by some director of the hospital, to see if he was using a procedure correctly, and then evaluated for not following the protocol which the director mandates, but doing what is bet for the patient.
It is the professional in the room who decides what works, and as Retired Teacher says, management can be daunting. I remember circulating among the groups to discover what conversations were on-going among my 13 year old boys, encouraging one group to change the topic from farting, to the one which was the objective.
LikeLike
Another reason why I think this approach worked well with my beginning ELLS is that I worked in a small school so my beginning groups stayed for the mornings and contained grades 1-5, like a one room school house. My older students in grades 3-5 went through the rest of their day feeling powerless. In my class they were often the “knowers” so it helped build their self esteem. This positive outlook helped them get through the rest of their day in which they felt helpless. All I know is that it worked for everybody, and we helped bridge the content and language gap while keeping students engaged and building positive relationships.
LikeLike
EXACTLY, and as the professional PRACTITIONER you chose the procedures, as my son the doctor chooses what works.
Top-down replaced bottom up, and the top of the schools are run by a bureaucracy intent on destroying public education. There simple plan, make it impossible for the teacher to have a voice.
I love the discussions about education that are ongoing here.
But to me, it is so simple because I went to school in the forties and fifties, saw my sons’ schools. in the sixties through the early eighties, and taught from 1963 to 2000 in a variety of schools, both as a permanent teacher and as a substitute.
In ALL places where the kids learned it was because the professional (i.e, teacher) had the right to choose what worked; if anyone challenged that, the grievance process offered the sixth amendment right to see evidence and rebut charges.
It is that simple. When the teacher no longer had the backing of the LAW, then anything a top dog would say could send them out the door.
Until our unions are run by educatiors who restore the law to the educational workplace they can VAM_slam us out of our classrooms for standing up for best practice! Until the media tells the story of trauma and tragedy that accompanied the reform movement that began in the nineties, and removed the professional pedagogue’s VOICE, not to mention their civil rights, nothing will change!
PERIOD!
http://www.perdaily.com/2011/01/lausd-et-al-a-national-scandal-of-enormous-proportions-by-susan-lee-schwartz-part-1.html
part 2
LikeLike
I agree we are in a very unhealthy era of testing and blaming. We should have learned after NCLB that testing does not solve our problems, and neither does privatization. Unless we can reach a place where innovative thinkers can have the freedom to explore changes within the system designed to reach our most vulnerable students, the politicized madness will continue, especially now that corporate America wants to make a profit from our children.
LikeLike
I have no problem with some public schools operating under a “light a fire rather than fill a bucket,” Dewey-inspired philosophy. It ain’t my cup of tea (or, truly, my own kids’), and I think it’s a bad choice for a variety of kids, but if that’s what some parents want, let them have it.
But to propose a system where 99% of kids in America have a single choice of public school, the one dictated by their school zone and street address, and then to strive for every one of those schools to be straight Dewey, no chaser? No thank you, that’s insane. And the research simply doesn’t support it.
The study on “deeper learning” cited by Kirp has some issues with it. Most importantly, it wasn’t random assignment, and in NYC, there essentially aren’t zoned high schools—even if the “network” schools aren’t selective, the student still has to pick *them*. This report doesn’t compare kids who chose a network school but then ended up in non-network schools (as was the case with the study showing superior outcomes for small high schools in NYC); it compares network students with a group of demographically similar students who chose non-network schools. Big difference.
There are also some significant differences in the student samples: the network sample has more female students (4.6% gap) and white students (2.4%), and fewer Hispanic students (-5.2%). The non-network schools had larger enrollments (particularly the California schools) with a wider range of student abilities. Some of the findings were based on student surveys, which are notoriously unreliable.
Peer effects aren’t a novel educational breakthrough, whether it is a no-excuses charter school, a socioeconomically and racially exclusive zoned public school, or a small progressive opt-in school.
LikeLike
Tim,
Are you aware that every high performing nation has a strong public school system–no charters, no vouchers? A school organized around Deweyan principles can be rigorous or not. It depends.
LikeLike
It is also worth noting that Dewey himself, dismayed by the extreme directions some of his disciples took his ideas, wrote “Experience and Education” to plainly state that experiences had the power to be educative OR miseducative and that it was the role of teachers and schools to use real guidance to make sure students did, in fact, learn facts and skills with purpose.
LikeLike
If people who are against Dewey and Progressive Eduction had bothered to look, they could see that the University of Chicago Lab School, which Dewey established, teaches phonics in primary ed, in addition to sight words, and they provide many meaningful learning experiences for students: http://www.ucls.uchicago.edu/schools/second-grade/index.aspx
The Lab school does not implement the Behavioral engineering that’s promoted by federal policies and so commonly seen in the charter schools ED supports, which focus on drill and kill, as they create compliant drones who will not question authority, demand democratic representation or expect our government to do anything about segregation and the inequitable distribution of wealth. Dienne is right. Progressive schools today are typically the opposite of what is claimed about them on conspiracy theory websites and by those here who see those websites as gospel.
LikeLike
Teacher Ed, I’m familiar with the Lab School. I know that 60% of the students there are the children of professors and doctors at one of the world’s most influential research universities and hospitals. I know that 75% of the rest of the kids come from families who pay full-freight tuition every year, $30,000 or so. I know that admissions are extremely competitive, especially for the kids entering for high school, who are academic rock stars. I know that there are no English language learners and very few children with even minor disabilities.
Is there a public school you’d like to hold up as an exemplar of Dewey-style education? Preferably one where not every kid was born on third base?
LikeLike
The issue raised was the practices that schools based on Dewey implement, including the false claim that they do not teach phonics, not who attends those schools. I wish more children had access to such wonderful programs, especially in public education, including low income kids who are at-risk, instead of the military style drill and kill charters that you think are good enough for them.
LikeLike
I never said anything about all schools that claim Dewey as their mentor. I said Dewey himself, way back when, chose to teach reading without using phonics and it resulted in many children including all four of John Rockefeller’s sons having difficulty with reading. They attended the Lincoln School. The Lincoln School (1917–1940) of Teachers College, Columbia University, was a university laboratory school set up to test and develop and ultimately to promulgate nationwide curriculum materials reflecting the most progressive teaching methods and ideas of the time.
Of course any school worth their salt has reverted to including phonics now even though they may (mistakenly) still tip their hat to Dewey.
LikeLike
We can all see what you wrote and it was this. “I said Dewey didn’t teach phonics in his school which the Rockefellers attended and graduated without learning to read.”
The Rockefellers did not attend Dewey’s U of C Lab School and the Lab school has long provided what we today call “a balanced approach” to the teaching of reading. I grew up in that area in the 50s, 60s and 70s and had many friends who went to the Lab School. They learned phonics just like I did in public school. Phonics is NOT new there.
LikeLike
All the evidence suggests that the United States is a developed nation in reverse and is fast becoming a third world country where poverty, hunger and suffering prevail with a corrupt and rigid police state controlling the behavior and voices of 99.9% of the people or death and/or prison is the reward for not obeying.
An educational program like the one described in this post might threaten the agenda of the oligarchs to achieve their goals to replace the people’s republic with an appointed corporate congress. Once the oligarchs achieve their goals and burn the Bill of Rights, they will lower corporate taxes to zero, because there will be no need to fund elections.
Does anyone think that Bill Gates and the other oligarchs funding the war on America’s public schools would support anything even close to Escuela Nueva?
LikeLike
No one will innovate while there is an assault on the profession, and our leaders either organize the attack or comply with silence like our president. Everyone is in survival mode. Innovation can only occur in a climate of trust.
LikeLike
Innovate??? Who will be crazy enough to go into this profession???
LikeLike
“Does anyone think that Bill Gates and the other oligarchs funding the war on America’s public schools would support anything even close to Escuela Nueva?”
Well, for their OWN kids, sure…
LikeLike
It would be interesting to compare what Lakeside School does to teach the children in that private school where Bill Gates went and his children go to Escuela Nueva.
Tuition at Lakeside is almost $30k annually.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“MONEY DOESN’T MATTER!” – Andrew Cuomo
LikeLike
LOL
Cuomo has already proven to those who pay attention and are not easy to fool that he says one thing to gain votes and then does what he wants once he wins.
Et tu, Brute could be changed to Et tu, Cuomo.
LikeLike
Hee ,hee.
LikeLike
Dienne,
Quotes from Darwin himself, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, 1859:
“To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.”
“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.”
“If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory to descent with slow modification though natural selection.” (The Cambrian Explosion provides this fatal blow.)
“The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.”
“The several difficulties here discussed, namely our not finding in the successive formations infinitely numerous transitional links between the many species which now exist or have existed; the sudden manner in which whole groups of species appear in our European formations; the almost entire absence, as at present known, of fossiliferous formations beneath the Silurian strata, are all undoubtedly of the gravest nature.”
Darwin was concerned that the lack of transitional fossils disproved the theory. He hoped that in the years to come there would be more fossil finds that would prove the theory as he stated it.
“Piltdown man” was a hoax perpetrated on mankind for 41 years (1911-1952.) Over 500 scholarly articles were written on this “discovery” before it was revealed to be an artistically constructed skull combining human and ape bones to provide the missing link. There has been no discovery of a real missing link or any evidence of transitional forms found even with all of the recent digging and technological prowess for unearthing the truth.
I am in good company with neurosurgeon, retired head of Pediatric Surgery at Johns Hopkins, first doctor to successfully separate twins conjoined at the head, Dr. Ben Carson. He publicly states his disbelief in Darwin’s evolution. So do I. Neither of us is disputing the existence of natural selection within a species which is an entirely different subject from one species evolving from another.
I am all for scientific evidence. I am not anti-science in any way. In fact, it is science that has been revealing the well designed glory of the universe that could not possibly be the result of random events. Especially troublesome is the very beginning where evolutionists want to be granted just one miracle: life generating from non-life is a scientific anomaly.
A physics professor stated:
“And I use that trust to effectively brainwash them. . . . our teaching methods are primarily those of propaganda. We appeal — without demonstration — to evidence that supports our position. We only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary.”
Singham, Mark, “Teaching and Propaganda,” Physics Today (vol. 53, June 2000), p. 54.
LikeLike
Deja vu.
LikeLike
What is not being understood is that the Common Core and its accompanying creation of dossiers on every child, including a psychometric profile, is a world-wide endeavor envisioned by UNESCO years ago. Julian Huxley was the first Director General of UNESCO. He wrote UNESCO: It s Purpose and Philosophy which states:
“Further, since the world today is in process of becoming one, and since a major aim of Unesco must be to help in the speedy and satisfactory realization of this process… Unesco must pay special attention to international education – to education as a function of a world society, in addition to its function in relation to national societies, to regional or religious or intellectual groups or to local communities.” p. 29-30
“The fact has also been emphasized by the development of intelligence testing, some authorities in this field going so far as to assert that only 10-20% of the population are capable of profiting by a university course.” p. 29-32
Julian was a eugenicist. So is Bill Gates. The whole global warming thing provides the justification for even talking about population reduction. So it is no coincidence that the United Nations is behind global warming and the world-wide education system known as the Common Core. It is a tracking, ranking and sorting system to make labor recruitment convenient for the state. It has nothing to do with the betterment of our children, intellectually or financially.
LikeLike
WOW…now there’s a leap!
LikeLike
It’s like someone gave Lyndon Larouche an Internet connection. Google search history: illuminati unesco rockefeller “secular humanism” “common core” “new world order” globalism darwin evolution eugenics “wall street” “council on foreign relations” jesuits quotations . . . .
LikeLike
Hee, hee…. head jam!!!!
LikeLike
Buh?
LikeLike
More cogently:
There are many legitimate reasons to be concerned about Common Core.
A One World Government plot to enact eugenics is not among them.
LikeLike
You haven’t done your homework if you think the UN is not ultimately behind the Common Core and data collection system. This country is being collapsed on purpose to bring about “equity” and Bill Gates is one of the players in this game. He signed an agreement in 2004 with UNESCO to use Microsoft as a platform for the dissemination of a world-wide curriculum to spread the agenda of UNESCO. Do you know what the agenda of UNESCO is? Sustainable development, population reduction and the economic collapse of the U.S. to make room for the growth of third world nations.
Check it out.And look at the Common Core. It is loaded with sustainable propaganda. They need to start in kindergarten convincing our children they do not deserve the house in the suburbs with air conditioning and two cars in the driveway and meat on the table so that they will accept “the deal” when they are grown. Read and research. The people behind this are all big population reduction guys….Gates, Ted Turner, etc.
LikeLike
Dawn, the United Nations has nothing to do with the Common Core and data collection. Not even the strongest opponents of both have ever claimed such–at least not the responsible ones. Please don’t make this claim, as it undermines your argument. And while it is clear that Bill Gates paid for the creation and dissemination of the Common Core, I have never heard anyone say that Ted Turner was involved in any way, or UNESCO, or that it has any connection to population reduction. No conspiracy theories, please!
LikeLike
The only thing you left out of that was calling the rest of us “sheeple”.
Frankly, if you do believe in an international conspiracy to collapse the United States and implement population control, you should be THRILLED that the United Nations is supposedly tasked with carrying it out effectively.
LikeLike
Dienne,
My point is that Ben Carson has a doctorate in hard science, the kind you need to study evidence and proof for. You said he had a doctorate in theology which means he would have a grasp of the Bible and philosophy but not hard science. He is a scientist. He invented THE procedure for separating twins conjoined at the head so that both children can be saved. That is something a man created in God’s image can do because he is endowed with reason and creativity from the creator.
Actually anyone can weigh in on evolution. It really only takes logic to discredit it. It is not logical to believe that life came from non-life after the universe Big Banged itself into existence. It is not logical that people have such perfectly designed bodies filled with interconnecting systems and organs, eyes and eye sockets, somehow evolving separately slowly over years in a way that allows each one to completely depend on the other even though they didn’t exist together as a system because they just randomly occurred… including DNA made up of four proteins spelling out a complex code for genetic replication…..it isn’t logical to have a code without a coder. Perfect designs are evidence of a Perfect Designer.
It isn’t logical to keep hanging on to a theory that has failed to provide any evidence even with over 150 years of research being done on its behalf. It isn’t logical to believe (and evolution is a belief system requiring faith because there is no proof) that the magnificence, symmetry, and mathematical perfection of the Universe all came about as the result of chance and randomness. It is not logical to believe that everything from a banana to an orchid to a lovely human baby all came from one common ancestor, a single-cell organism with a coil of DNA floating inside which somehow arose out of the Primordial Soup, breaking the scientific rule that life cannot come from non-life, but the fossil record fails to provide even one small example of one species transitioning into a different one. I don’t have a doctorate in anything but I have a brain which can use logic to debunk unscientific atheism.
LikeLike
Now your reading comprehension is off. I didn’t say Ben Carson, specifically has a doctorate in theology. That was one example of the type of doctorate that evolution deniers have. Carson’s doctorate is a medical doctorate, which is a professional degree, not a research degree (MD, not PhD – there’s a difference). Just because he may be fabulous at brain surgery doesn’t give him any special credentials to understand evolution (which he clearly does not).
And if you think there hasn’t been any evidence for evolution in the past 150 years, you simply haven’t been paying attention. Yet another area I’d suggest you educate yourself about before spouting off and making yourself look ignorant. Anyway, given the tinfoil hattiness of your 3:24 post, it’s pretty clear I’m not going to get anywhere trying to convince you of anything. But I can’t just let your ignorance pass unchecked.
LikeLike
Can you refute any of the “tin foil hattiness” you refer to? Can you deny the logic of any of my claims against evolution? Intellectual bullying which consists of things like saying “the science is settled, 97% of all scientists believe xyz,” and calling me ignorant does not give you a “pass” on refuting anything I have to say. So far, you’ve got nothing.
LikeLike
Dawn, correct me if I’m mistaken, but you’re not a respected expert in the fields of biology, anthropology, geology, or genetics. You’re not even an expert in any of those fields, or perhaps in any field at all. You’re a layperson. Dienne is a layperson, and I’m a layperson.
We can’t convince you that humans evolved by natural selection, partly because we’re not competent experts and partly because you appear to deeply believe that God created Man in his image. And you can’t convince us that humans didn’t evolve by natural selection. For purposes of our sample survey, I, like Dienne, believe that there is overwhelming consensus among experts that humans evolved by natural selection. Do I *know* this to be case because I personally understand the merits of every part of the theory and have investigated the supporting evidence? No. What I’ve done is read a lot of stuff over a lifetime and develop a sense of how to distinguish between reputable and less reputable sources, down to and including the intangible things like tone and the likelihood that the speaker is a bull$hitter or a nutjob .
Ultimately, the only useful thing that can come from debating us about the theory of natural selection is that we will have produced a sample of what three laypeople think about natural selection. Dienne and I appear to think the general theory of human evolution by natural selection is “settled science” among experts. You think it’s not. Send off the results to the Associated Press for its next “What Americans Think About Evolution” poll. In the meantime, hopefully, actual scientific experts will keep doing their jobs without regard what any of us think.
LikeLike
Well, can you refute that Neptune is *not* made of green cheese? Have you been there? Have you studied it? Well, there you go – you can’t refute it.
LikeLike
Great try guys, but as demonstrated here and in previous posts, when some people’s lives center around trying to prove the veracity of their Iron Age belief system, they are more likely to see a power behind silence and invisibility than recognize rational thinking.
LikeLike
Hello Dawn, Rick Lapworth, Flerp:
It is nice to show off your knowledge, but it is necessary NOT to beat around the bush with intention to distract the focus MATTER = DEMOCRACY with RESPONSIBILITY and ACCOUNTABILITY.
Let get back to the basics of reality = LOOTING public education fund.
PLEASE do whatever you truly care for FREEDOM of choice with CONSEQUENCE.
PLEASE do not SAY that you care for children and their college career ready, but you intentionally DO OPPOSITE to whatever you carefully SAY in wording to sound good, to mislead the general public, and to cultivate THE CULTURE OF FEAR in educational field.
DO NOT ruin or destroy the spirit and the joy of learning to CHILDREN K-12 in early childhood development.
In your current age, would you be honest to confirm that you prefer do 3 hours test each day for 9 days continuously in knowing that you would be labelled and insulted as being ”substandard mind” in the work force? Most of all, these tests are FLAW with technical glitches and ambiguous wording due to intentional money scheme.
In short, conscientious leaders or parents WILL NOT impose experimental testing procedure on children WITHOUT following properly guidelines from expertise in many centuries from many advanced countries where educational procedure is famously applicable. Back2basic
LikeLike
Dienne,
I suggest a course in logic. Throwing up a straw man argument to make me seem like I am arguing for something illogical and improbable is a cheap trick used by people who have no way to actually refute what is on the table.
I am asking you “Do you acknowledge that all four of John Rockefeller’s sons who were taught by Dewey using his cockamamie ‘look say’ method instead of phonics never learned to read?”
I am asking you “Is it logical to think that something as complex as DNA code just magically appeared randomly without an intelligent designer?”
I am asking you “Is it logical to insist on the veracity of global warming when it has been documented that David Rockefeller and his Club of Rome buddies simply made the decision to create fear and media hype around an idea called ‘global warming’ for the purpose of unifying people of all countries to be willing to be subjected to UN directives concerning carbon emissions because the atmosphere is shared by all regardless of national borders or sovereign governments?” It is political not scientific. (The email trail demonstrated that officials knew they had no proof of actual temperatures rising so they were conspiring to hide that fact.)
I know it is difficult to break free of the brainwash we have all been subjected to about evolution and global warming. But it is not difficult for you to fight the propaganda they are feeding us about how great and rigorous and necessary the Common Core is. I am saying that these things have more in common than you think they do and they are being promoted by the same families generation after generation. Just try and do a little research on the subjects and positions you so vehemently fight for and be open to what you may find out. Real science is about testing hypotheses and letting the chips fall where they may. Science is never settled.
I don’t know if you watch TV or not but if you do, you are getting a daily dose of brainwash which is hard to overcome when it is an ongoing daily assault. Turn off the TV and allow your own sense of who you are emerge. You may realize you are a phenomenal human being created in the image of God imbued with the ability to reason and create. Don’t let the eugenicists make you believe you evolved from sea slime and there are too many people on this earth so we should develop a ranking system to determine who are the useless eaters. That is what the Common Core is.
Marc Tucker’s Plans as described in his “Dear Hillary” letter in 1992:
1. Bypass all elected officials on school boards and in state legislatures by making federal funds flow to the Governor and his appointees on workforce development boards.
2. Use a computer database, a.k.a. “a labor market information system,” into which school personnel would scan all information about every schoolchild and his family, identified by the child’s social security number: academic, medical, mental, psychological, behavioral, and interrogations by counselors. The computerized data would be available to the school, the government, and future employers.
3. Use “national standards” and “national testing” to cement national control of tests, assessments, school honors and rewards, financial aid, and the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM), which is designed to replace the high school diploma.
Designed on the German system, the Tucker plan is to train children in specific jobs to serve the workforce and the global economy instead of to educate them so they can make their own life choices.
Bill Gates supports Marc Tucker.
LikeLike
Dawn,
I am going to ask politely to end any further discussion of religion and global warming. Those are important topics but not appropriate for this blog. Take the discussion to other blogs devoted to those topics. And remember: I delete comments that delve into conspiracy theories.
LikeLike
Diane,
If you would allow me to post my response…..I respectfully disagree that the Common Core, UNESCO, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, global warming and population reduction are unrelated. I would ask you to take a look at this incomplete Cliff Notes version of a timeline showing the connections. I think they are significant. Then I will respect your request and take the discussion of global warming and God elsewhere.
1972-2005 Maurice Strong was the adviser to a succession of UN Secretary Generals organizing sustainable development conferences to discuss global warming
1985 – Ted Turner established the Better World Society to promote two of his pet issues: environmentalism and the UN. Turner persuaded Maurice Strong to lead the organization. Ted Turner quote: “Global warming is caused by too many people using too much stuff. I think 2 billion people is about right.”
1990 – Education shifts toward globalism when President George Bush, Sr., endorsed the UNESCO “Education for All” (EFA) initiative, which was implemented in the Goals 2000 Act.
1992 – Maurice Strong as the Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, convenes the Earth Summit. 178 heads of state attend the summit and agree to implement Agenda 21
Quote by Maurice Strong: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
1992 – Marc Tucker writes “Dear Hillary Letter.” This letter, written to Hillary Clinton, addressed Tucker’s ideas for radical education reform after Bill Clinton’s presidential win. The goal is “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same systems for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.”
1993 – President Bill Clinton created the Presidential Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD).
1994 – The PCSD published Education for Sustainability: An Agenda for Action, which laid out a plan for pushing forward with UNESCO’s “Education for All” (EFA) initiative, and the goals of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
1994 – The North American Free Trade Agreement was implemented (and the economic collapse of our country was initiated by shipping our manufacturing overseas)
1998 – Ted Turner donated $1 billion to the new United Nations Foundation.
2000 -At the World Education Forum held in Dakar in 2000, the international community and national governments made a commitment to achieve Education for All (EFA) goals by 2015. The mission of UNESCO’s International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP) is to strengthen capacities of Member States to draw up coherent plans for the development and reform of the education sector and implement them
2004 – Bill Gates signs a “Cooperative Agreement” with UNESCO to use Microsoft as a platform to disseminate a world-wide curriculum promoting the goals of UNESCO
2005 – Bill Gates funds the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce created by Marc Tucker. Bill Clinton: “We have to do away with our love of local control of our schools”
2007 – Bill Gates gives millions in grants to Achieve, Inc. and CCSSO and NGA to create the Common Core, simultaneously granting millions to UNESCO.
2009 – Arne Duncan uses stimulus money to create the RTTT
2010 – U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan addressed the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) “The Vision of Education Reform in the United States” November 4, 2010
“America alone cannot combat terrorism or curb climate change. To succeed, we must collaborate with other countries. My department has been pleased to partner with the US Agency for International Development… The United States provides over a billion dollars annually to partner countries working on educational reform. Our goal for the coming year will be to work closely with global partners, including UNESCO, to promote qualitative improvements and system strengthening. Sir Michael Barber’s book, Instruction to Deliver, reminds us that the unglamorous work of reform matters enormously.” – Duncan (Barber is the head of Pearson International)
2012 – A meeting at the home of Sir Paul Nurse in NYC took place attended by Ted Turner, Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, William Buffet, David Rockefeller, and Oprah Winfrey. They decided that “Population Control” was the most pressing issue they could address with their billions.
2015 – The Trans Pacific Partnership Trade agreement is negotiated in secret because it will collapse what is left of our manufacturing sector and our well-paid union jobs will be gone forever.
LikeLike
Diane,
These are UNESCO’s Education for All Goals:
Six internationally agreed education goals aim to meet the learning needs of all children, youth and adults by 2015.
Goal 1
Expanding and improving comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children.
Goal 2
Ensuring that by 2015 all children, particularly girls, children in difficult circumstances and those belonging to ethnic minorities, have access to, and complete, free and compulsory primary education of good quality.
Goal 3
Ensuring that the learning needs of all young people and adults are met through equitable access to appropriate learning and life-skills programmes.
Goal 4
Achieving a 50 per cent improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women, and equitable access to basic and continuing education for all adults.
Goal 5
Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2005, and achieving gender equality in education by 2015, with a focus on ensuring girls’ full and equal access to and achievement in basic education of good quality.
Goal 6
Improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence of all so that recognized and measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy and essential life skills.
They mention the efficacy of some programs in other countries, such as Escuela Nueva and Activity Based Learning, in their Global Monitoring Report: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002256/225660e.pdf
I see a lot of positives in this, not evidence of chicanery.
LikeLike
Teacher Ed:
Reality is that when poor children are hungry, they need food, NOT LEARNING what so ever, period.
Children in single parent family need attention, care and love, NOT LEARNING what so ever, period.
Children in above well-to-do family only focus on material needs or competition, NOT LEARNING what so ever, period.
Therefore, educational environment needs to provide teaching professionals with autonomy, so that these teachers can guide, motivate and cultivate all children in different needs to learn how to treasure their education effectively.
Do not build castle on sand, because business corporate control the livelihood of all parents’ basic economy, and the country’s economy. This means that UNESCO’s Education for All Goals is like dream hardly comes true. Back2basic
LikeLike
May,
Did you read UNESCO’s Global Monitoring Report which I provided a link to above? http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002256/225660e.pdf
Addressing hunger is a priority and was addressed in many places: In 2012, 95% of humanitarian aid went to food. 1.4% of aid went to education, which was down from 2.2% in 2009. (pp. 133-134)
I see no indication that UNESCO has conspired with corporate billionaires. They wrote, “Diversify the tax base: Governments could raise considerable additional revenue by increasing the amount they receive in taxes from corporations” (p.120)
LikeLike
Teacher Ed:
I read all 6 goals with indicators, but without suggestions or practical solution to achieve those goals.
It is just like we promotion education to all children, but union leaders can not fight to preserve tenure track for all teachers who already qualify to earn it, or advocate to have jobs that should not be replaced with TFAs…many more about special Ed, music, track and field, field trips, programs that are cut…
In education, parents should cultivate themselves how to deal with business owners or employers. Similarly, all teachers should cultivate themselves how to deal with local and states Board of Education, Department of Education. The economy need to be stabilized and in control in order to teach and to learn by all.
Society will be chaos if people cannot take responsibility for themselves. Remember that a person can take care well for himself or herself, but will be in trouble if his/her loved ones are careless and irresponsible and drag him/her in debt…
In short, my mantra is to do our best, but not die hard for irresponsible and greedy corporate because of any disguised slogan in patriotism or humanity. Take one to know one. We have been there and done that in order to reveal con artists’ strategies.
To individual, it take time, effort, will to improve, passion to learn, perseverance and focus with CONSCIENCE in order to achieve certain goal within our ability, but NOT BEYOND.
To community or society, it will need the co-operation of all individuals who harmoniously unite with mutual-respect in order to work toward PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR ALL. Back2basic
LikeLike
May, You didn’t see ANY practical solutions in that 481 page document? I saw many, beginning with the matter of funding public education, as well as reforming taxation, such as increasing taxes on corporations and redistributing tax dollars to provide adequate resources to populations that are marginalized and disadvantaged, whose schools often receive less even though they are the most needy, .
They have provided examples of strategies that have worked for the better good in various countries, as well as those that have not been effective. A search of the word “tax” alone found 282 results! They even discussed how GDPs could be increased, such as in countries that have exploited their resources and sold them to other nations under market value. Please read the entire document to see the practical details.
LikeLike
Thank you Teacher Ed for educating me.
I am sure that you are older and much more knowledgeable than me.
The point that I try to make is about self-discipline, self-motivation, self-reliance, perseverance in goal-setting, and will to learn and to improve.
I am sure that many teachers will tell business corporate to take their money away, and leave public school alone in order all teachers can enjoy teaching within their teaching autonomy and born-to-be teaching professional.
It would be a wonderful world if all evil and greedy business corporate take their claws away from public education. Their claws have already involved in many different chaos in society.
All suggestions in page 481 or 282 could sum up in one WORD like CONSCIENCE or ACCOUNTABILITY, or a sentence like LAW MAKERS need to be conscientious and accountable for the well-being of citizenry, NOT for the power and the rich.
Realistically, business corporate are born with money hunger brain-wash (=Scrooge in Christmas Carol). Therefore, as I said that all suggestions in page 481 and 282 are JUST LIKE building castles on sand = you cannot tax on corporate who are movers and shakers and who are the LAW MAKERS indirectly.
Even the terminal illness cannot change the greedy mindset in all rich dying businessmen. Earth has its life span of millions of years whereas our life span is too short for us to grasp the true meaning of IMPERMANENCE in material like our body, and nature, except CONSCIOUSNESS and SUB-consciousness. As a result, greedy people keep killing themselves and others for their own deceptive and hallucinating desire.
My deepest thought is about unfortunate people and children who are vulnerable and exploited in the hand of the greedy and lusty
people who sold their soul to devils. Back2basic
LikeLike
I love the way you speak. You said: “I am sure that many teachers will tell business corporate to take their money away, and leave public school alone in order all teachers can enjoy teaching within their teaching autonomy and born-to-be teaching professional.It would be a wonderful world if all evil and greedy business corporate take their claws away from public education. Their claws have already involved in many different chaos in society.”
What a great metaphor for those monsters who have their talons in our schools.
Also, those of us who taught in the sixties and seventies know that that is the only way– we practiced the PROFESSION when teachers had total autonomy to meet the STATE objectives for learning in each subject, by choosing the most important, interesting AGE APPROPRIATE materials and activities,
No one would tie the hands of the doctor by ordering the use of medicines or procedures that hurt patients (and if the patients died, the doctor would not be blamed.
But today, the professional teacher who is at the bottom, in the room with the kids, must follow top-down mandates or be fired…and if the education dies the teacher is blamed.
How perfect a plan. With the help of the media they demonized teachers, and sold the Duncan narrative as truth.
Now, how do we undo the mendacity?
ALSO, teacher education has to improve. Too many teachers went into teaching for the wrong reasons and are clueless as to what learning looks like and how to facilitate it. Better professional education would make a difference.
Love you, May. You are tuned to the real universe, and if you have difficulty with expressing what you know to be true, do not worry… those of us who can hear truth, do hear YOU!
LikeLike
1992 – Maurice Strong as the Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, convenes the Earth Summit. 178 heads of state attend the summit and agree to implement Agenda 21. Nancy Pelosi and Elliot Engel and many others in congress embrace it and commit to implementing it in 1992.
Quote by Maurice Strong: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
The goal of the UN is to collapse the United States.
LikeLike
It’s obvious that Dawn has no intention of honoring the agreement to stop spouting her conspiracy theories.
Enough already!
LikeLike
Just the facts.
LikeLike
And so Dawn provides yet more evidence of her intentions to defy Diane’s request and continue to promote her propaganda / conspiracy theories here.
I guess we can all play this game then.
Agenda 21 is a non-binding agreement that addresses climate change and inequality, in order to promote a sustainable earth and support indigenous people. If you want to know who’s behind all the fear mongering and nonsense that Dawn is committed to infecting this blog with, see AGENDA 21 – Myths Debunked & the Truth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UioAeYW8K8Y
LikeLike