Individuals Used To Matter

We old-fashioned types are pretty shocked when we hear crazy collectivist talk spewing out of what is at least in theory a mainstream media outlet.  We shake our heads and shake our fists and cry out in despair and confusion, “What the hell is going on here? What is wrong with you people?”

It’s hard.  It’s hard to understand what has happened to our country.  How have we managed to elect and reelect a man demonstrably uncomfortable with the constraints of our Constitution?  How have we devolved from the land of opportunity to the land of entitlement?

The scary results before us now are the fruition of many years of individual abdication.  We, as individuals, keep relinquishing our responsibilities.  Young adults wandering the streets today are the grandchildren of a culture that demands both rights and blamelessness.

Nobody wants to take responsibility anymore.  We could list examples all day long, but that doesn’t really help us to understand how we got here.

The devil’s in the details.

Even the smallest decision can resonate far beyond its initial design.

Older son learned to read early.  We naively expected schools to take this skill into account, but by the final year of his brick-and-mortar experience, we knew that would never happen.  In third grade, the slow and thorough application of “reading strategies” to standardized (and therefore lame) material was not only the norm but mandatory, regardless of a child’s reading level.

They have to go through this process, I was told.  Even if they can mechanically read the words, they won’t be able to comprehend the meaning unless we use these strategies to teach them, I was told by Educators Who Are Well Meaning But Shall Remain Nameless.

I might have bought this premise, too, were it not for my own experience.  I was a child once, and a good reader.  My 1st grade teacher noticed.  She told me one day, go to the 2nd grade classroom during reading time.

While my classmates recited aloud the latest 1st grade adventures of Dick and Jane, I went upstairs and into a strange 2nd grade classroom.  The teacher there informed me that her class was at P.E., and I was to read all the “readers” at my own pace.  The shelf of readers extended the length of one wall.

No one ever asked me to apply a reading strategy.  No one ascertained whether I was really reading, or just messing about and taking advantage of the situation.  By the end of the year, I had ingested every reader shelved on that wall.

Fast forward thirty years.  I proposed the same arrangement to a very kind and capable teacher, and she looked at me as if lobsters were coming out of my ears.  You can’t do that, she protested.  The schedule won’t allow it.

Right.  The schedule won’t allow it.

In other words, its not her responsibility.

Thirty years ago, an underpaid urban public school teacher didn’t think twice about taking responsibility for the needs of an early reading student.  The arrangement was probably concocted in the teacher’s lounge.  They probably didn’t even run the idea by the principal first.

Did this arrangement substantially improve my education?

I don’t know.

It sure feels significant, though.  It sure feels like proof that the individual used to matter.

But not anymore.

Offend A Feminist Week Already?

Thank goodness for a good man like Mr. G to remind silly me it’s That Time Of Year again.  I’ve been too busy cooking and child-raising to write a proper post on the subject.

For now, feminists will have to be satisfied with gnashing their teeth over the rank misogyny of a TV show that portrays a woman entirely owned by a man, to whom she refers to as ”master.”

Common Core Train Wreck (Part II): North Carolina & Beyond

Reblogged from Lady Liberty 1885:

• 
• 

This is part two of what is likely to be a continuing series on the Common Core Standards.  This particular post will follow the implementation and related commentary as it applied to my home state, North Carolina. To get up to speed, read Part One: The Common Core Train Wreck: Part One

Common Core Train Wreck (Part II):

North Carolina & Beyond…

Read more… 1,395 more words

A fellow blogger has run into the same education predicament as I have:

"Every other week, a folder comes home with a book in it. There are accompanying questions, most of which are things a Kindergarten age child shouldn’t be asked and which usually have to be modified to even fit the book that came home. . . . Instead of working on actual reading and basic comprehension, these kids are being quizzed on what the role of the narrator is, what the illustrations bring to the text and to re-tell parts of the story as they relate to their own lives."

Yep. Be sure and look at the Common Core slideshow that Lady Liberty linked. It demonstrates how far removed the educational experts are from the simple act of teaching actual information. Instead of teaching facts, they are laser-focused on teaching kids how to think. Nevermind the fact that kids need to absorb some basic information, so that they have something about which to think critically. You can find more of my expounding ranting on this subject here.

If You Have a Problem, Consult 10th Newspeak Dictionary

Via The Corner at NRO, I’ve learned that “common core state standards in English spark a war over words.”  The Post article I’m quoting is currently a page not found, but it’s still up at The Independent:

“The Common Core State Standards in English, which have been adopted in 46 states and the District, call for public schools to ramp up nonfiction so that by 12th grade students will be reading mostly ‘informational text’ instead of fictional literature. . . .

Proponents of the new standards, including the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, say U.S. students have suffered from a diet of easy reading and lack the ability to digest complex nonfiction, including studies, reports and primary documents. That has left too many students unprepared for the rigors of college and demands of the workplace, experts say.”

A “diet of easy reading” is one of the big problems in schools these days.  Huh.  The problem’s nothing to do with the dog’s breakfast already known as public school textbooks.  Well never fear–we’ve got our Little Helpers In DC to straighten out the problem:

“The new standards, which are slowly rolling out now and will be in place by 2014, require that nonfiction texts represent 50 percent of reading assignments in elementary schools, and the requirement grows to 70 percent by grade 12.

Among the suggested nonfiction pieces for high school juniors and seniors are Alexis de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America,” “FedViews,” by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (2009) and “Executive Order 13423: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management,” published by the General Services Administration.”

Notice the little bit of chaff used to throw us off:  de Tocqueville.  Nothing wrong with a more vigorous curriculum that requires some classic foundations of political philosophy, is there?

Maybe I’d be sold, notwithstanding the fact that de Tocqueville belongs in history, social studies, or some kind of government or civics class, not english.  When the de Tocqueville example is immediately followed by stereo instructions from a Federal Reserve Bank, and then a bureaucratic, Dilbert-inspired double-speaking document full of fluffy non-action action plans and catch phrases (Caveat:  I haven’t read that particular executive order.  Does anybody want to check my description for accuracy?), I can’t help but wonder exactly what kind of “workplace demands” for which these educators are preparing our young people.

A particular movie scene comes to mind.  Requiring students to read excessive amounts of tedious legalese might prepare them quite nicely for that cozy little cubicle in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth, as seen at 6:00:

crossposted at Disrupt the Narrative

Warning: This Post is Offensive

Are people really that outraged at Ann Coulter’s use of the word “retarded?”

Well that’s retarded.

Oops.

How was rude of me.

I am trying to make a point, of course, with my lack of manners.  Good manners are good, and bad manners are bad, but political correctness is worst of all:

“Political correctness . . . seeks to reduce the range of the mind by homogenizing its contents and imposing mindless conformity.  The catch is that, while imbeciles would not know the difference between plain and politically correct speech – they are not the objects of the tyranny – it works only if one is willing to submit, Muslim-style, to a higher ‘authority,’ only if one knows that it is expected of one to knuckle under and bow to the god of sensitivity.  This in turn contributes to a habitual conformity in politics, art, and in speech.  Which in turn contributes to the growth of a servile, passive, complacent citizenry.”

We all know “retarded” as a sort of medical term for various developmental delays or cognitive disabilities.  This clinical usage of “retarded” began around the turn of the 20th century, but in the last thirty-ish years it has fallen out of favor and given way to gentler terms.  The word is much older than all this, of course.  It is originally from the Latin word retardare: ”delay, protract . . . to loiter, be slow, derivative of tardus slow.”

Today, the word “retarded” has a haircut (“retard”) and a new occupation:  insult.  Boy is it a naughty insult, because it demeans not just your intended target, but presumably all people who are developmentally delayed or disabled.

This just begs the question, however:  why do we presume that the word is an insult to those born with mental disabilities?

I’ll phrase the question another way:  would Coulter have been criticized for using a commonly accepted insult like “idiot,” “imbecile,” or “moron?”

Those were also once medical terms for various developmental delays or cognitive disabilities.

Their usage predates the use of “retarded,” and so we don’t automatically connect those words with Downs Syndrome or any other of the myriad mental disabilities.

So . . . why is the word “retard” is off-limits, while the words “idiot,” “imbecile,” and “moron” are not?

And are the phrases ”mentally disabled,” “developmentally delayed,” and “intellectually disabled” the verboten insults of tomorrow?