I knew I was different than other teachers when during my student teaching, I substituted for a 9th Grade 'US History' and 10th Grade 'Political and Economic Systems' teacher at nearby High School in a local public school. This event really struck home to me how different I was as a teacher from the majority (50%+) of teachers in public schools, in particular social studies teachers- they were mostly liberal and some were very liberal teachers, and I was a very conservative teacher.
The teacher that I subbed for had so many inappropriate left leaning liberal communist Democrat pieces of propaganda and teaching materials in her room that I was immediately frightened for the students of this teacher. These students were surrounded by slogans and images that assaulted them continuously, especially if they were conservative, Republican, libertarian, or moderate. For example, there was a sticker on her desk that had in large letters "Hey Congress, Don't let Bush Ruin Social Security." What purpose does displaying this sticker to a classroom of students have? You put stickers like that where students can view them for the purposes of teaching students that that phrase or thought or idea is acceptable, desired, and to be believed.
Another sticker (covering up the fire alarm) read "Kerry for President." You know, that's okay- a lot of social studies teachers collect stickers and slogans and show them as an example of the types of thought that go through American society- as long as they are historical, meaningful, and balanced, there is nothing wrong with that particular sticker. So, seeking parity or equality in political representation in the room, I looked around the room. I immediately saw another large poster displayed that read "Kerry/Edwards", but had to keep looking before I eventually found a Bush poster in the room. There it was, a big picture of Bush- and tacked over it were dozens of editorials printed from the teacher's computer that criticized Bush and attacked him- so many angry attacking editorials were taped over Bush's picture that it was almost entirely covered.
Also up in her room, tacked to the front board, was a print-out of an article calling Bush a dummy, a poster that advocated car pooling with the slogan on it "collectivism beats individualism!", and a big poster against peace through strength and against a strong nuclear policy (good thing people like her had no power in government during the Cold War, or we'd all be speaking Russian or dead) (bad thing people like her have power over students education on the Cold War).
Skin still crawling and almost in shock at the liberal leftist overload that this room assaulted students with, I browsed through some of her teaching materials (there were no students yet- I had gotten to school early to prepare myself for the days lessons).
One eternal truth that I now know is that a liberal left teacher does not seek to enlighten and educate students, but rather seeks to indoctrinate and brainwash students. Critical thinking and opposing viewpoints are not welcome in a liberal teacher's classroom, only affirmations of their beliefs to satisfy a liberals lack of self-worth. Because of this truth, once a liberal left teacher is spotted, their teaching materials will obviously be slanted as well, as they seek to warp students to their viewpoints.
This liberal teacher's unit on WWII was a good example of the type of liberal indoctrination that goes on too frequently in the public schools of the United States. It was liberally slanted- for example, there were long discussions in the class 'debating' whether to drop the atomic bombs- but debate is a weak word, since the discussion prompts were designed to point students toward being against dropping the atomic bombs, and in the teacher's notes she herself wrote down many more arguments against dropping the bombs than for, so in reality, there was no real 'debate' with this issue (and from my later questioning of students, they told me that there was little education behind the debate as well, as this teacher felt that military theory and tactics and strategy was un-politically correct to mention in a classroom).
Another key part of this liberal teacher's WWII lesson focused on a long talk on the Japanese internment, had several days planned on the Holocaust, there was a lecture on how WWII ended the Great Depression, there was a lesson on how rationing and state control of the economy helped to win the war, and lastly there was an article written by a German that criticized the US for bombing civilians. All of these items were in the "WWII" unit. This was all that was in the unit on WWII (I looked through many folders in this teacher's closet trying to find more).
Lacking from this liberal teacher's WWII unit were discussions on opening a second front, war aims of the various countries, strategy and tactics of battle, stories from GI's of individual courage, sacrifice, or heroism, "Saving Private Ryan" type stuff displaying real qualities of people in the war, or anything at all that was moderate or critical of liberal ways of thinking. A student, after spending a week or two learning about WWII in this teacher's class, would be ill-prepared for anything but a shockingly liberal and incomplete view of WWII. This liberal teacher, like many more all over the nation, choose to have a discussion about how price controls helped us win WWII rather than discuss the individual heroism of our ancestors in WWII.
Another example from this one teacher's files was her lesson on rating the Presidents. As she taught it, the Presidents could be rated as FDR 2, Clinton 20, Reagan 40, Bush 25, etc the list was liberally and Democratic slanted. Her unit on political cartoons was filled with cartoon after cartoon that ripped into conservatives, libertarians, and Republicans- and had not a single cartoon that ripped Democrats or liberals. This teacher had a book on her desk almost burned my hands- it was called "A Necessary Evil" and here is a quote from it 'antigovernment sentiment is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of history...' and the book goes on to defend big statist government. This is the type of material that inspired her and that she passed on tot he students in her classroom.
I sat and thought about the situation I was in a little more, and suddenly it occurred to me- it was no surprise that the district had hired, employed, and supported a teacher such as this to teach "Political and Economic Systems." This class, mandated by the school district, had a syllabus that should have read "Attacking Capitalism and the American Way of Life." The whole class and semester of learning was just a series of liberal leftist attacks on conservatives, limited government, freedom, individuality, and libertarianism. From looking through all of her materials, it became apparent that every discussion about economics was focused on obligations the employer owed the voluntarily employed employee, and were heavily pro-union.
This liberal teacher's Progressive Era test actually had the following as the 'right' answer- Rockefeller's description was 'wealthy industrialist who ran standard oil, and was asked about his duty to the public, replied 'public be damned.'" The one thing this teacher wants students to take away about an innovative and brilliant industrialist such as Rockefeller is that he said 'public be damned,' thereby creating a whole new batch of people who hate Rockefeller and 'industrialist's'. Her 'Progressive Era' test and teaching materials were interesting- I assumed she meant the time period, and thus other things that occurred during this time, but instead the unit should have been called "Why Progressive’s were Right". According to students who studied in her class, from 1870 to 1910, the only thing that occurred were Progressives people saying the right things.
The capstone of this class was for students to watch and discuss Michael Moore's controversial film "Roger and Me." Again, it's not necessarily wrong to show this film, if it will serve as a basis for a critical discussion, bring up contrary arguments, and expose different viewpoints to the students, and is matched by some sort of conservative film. But not in a liberal's class- in this class, it was shown as fact. There was to be no criticism of his methods, beliefs, or agenda allowed. Oh, students did have to get a permission slip signed for this movie- but not because most parents would not want their child learning about this guy and his sick methods and agenda, but because in the movie there is shown "violence against animals." Rudeness, violence, foul language, heavily slanted viewpoint- no permission slip needed, but "Violence against animals" needs a permission slip.
Liberal students feel encouraged and safe in an environment such as this, while non liberal students are threatened and made to feel unsafe- emotionally they are belittled and told how evil they are, and intellectually they are attacked daily. And it was after seeing this teacher's classroom and teaching materials that I knew in my heart that I was different than other teachers, and was a heavily conservative teacher, and would have to struggle against the education system the whole time as such. But I don't care- if I can do even a little bit to counter what this teacher is doing in her classroom through my conservative teacher philosophy of teaching students critical thinking and individual responsibility and real knowledge, I will have made the world a better place.
UPDATE: The level of detail in this post should convince readers of the depth of liberal indoctrination that can occur in government skools.
I Knew I Was Different From Liberal Teachers When...
Diposting oleh
Unknown
|
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar