Fayette County Public Schools in full Woke Mode

Apr 13, 2002
44,001
97,142
0
The left does this any time a result doesn't align with their ideological agenda. If someone doesn't do what the left wants, it then has to be forced. If someone excels over a black person then the standards get lowered, Asians and white students have to be knocked down a peg, and then they exalt their desired group.

You saw this with Asian students suing Harvard for being denied admission despite having better test scores. You saw this with the famous Princeton study that showed Asians were penalized 50 points on SATs while black students were given an extra 230. Time and time again, if someone who isn't white or Asian doesn't succeed at something then it's always "racism" and "unfair." Never mind that they're in the same damn classroom as you are, taking the same classes, taking the same tests.

Thomas sowell has some fantastic commentary on what he calls "intellectuals". Based on the first part of your post you'd probably really enjoying reading some of it

Milton Friedman wrote alot of the purported efforts of equality in education. That's exceptional reading as well
 

BigBlueFanGA

New member
Jun 14, 2005
26,435
23,455
0

ukcatz12

New member
Mar 27, 2009
5,199
12,325
0
These have zero business being taught in public schools. Especially so by the people who currently want to teach it.
So you object to teaching kids how to participate in society and interact and communicate with people of different backgrounds? Seems to me like those two things make up part of the bedrock of a functioning society.

Only a fourth of the population can name all three branches of government. Half the voting population doesn't vote. States with a civics class requirement for graduation have higher rates of youth community volunteering and youth voting. Seems to me like maybe we should start teaching civics again.
 

BigBlueFanGA

New member
Jun 14, 2005
26,435
23,455
0
These have zero business being taught in public schools. Especially so by the people who currently want to teach it.
Yes, exactly. Years ago I got into an argument with a sister-in-law over morality being "taught" in schools. She now sees the problem. Whose morality and what culture. Just teach the current skills needed educationally. Try teaching kids about our government again.
 

BigBlueFanGA

New member
Jun 14, 2005
26,435
23,455
0
So you object to teaching kids how to participate in society and interact and communicate with people of different backgrounds? Seems to me like those two things make up part of the bedrock of a functioning society.

Only a fourth of the population can name all three branches of government. Half the voting population doesn't vote. States with a civics class requirement for graduation have higher rates of youth community volunteering and youth voting. Seems to me like maybe we should start teaching civics again.
These indoctrination camps don't teach civics any longer.
 

BigBlueFanGA

New member
Jun 14, 2005
26,435
23,455
0
So you object to teaching kids how to participate in society and interact and communicate with people of different backgrounds? Seems to me like those two things make up part of the bedrock of a functioning society.

Only a fourth of the population can name all three branches of government. Half the voting population doesn't vote. States with a civics class requirement for graduation have higher rates of youth community volunteering and youth voting. Seems to me like maybe we should start teaching civics again.
It's a parents job to teach morality and culture, not a school. It has become so bad in the San Francisco area that they blatantly ignore parents and even refer to them as "caregivers" instead of parents. The government is trying to mold children into what they want. To say that is wrong and extremely dangerous is a gross understatement.
 

502 Wildcat

Active member
Sep 11, 2007
22,310
24,112
63
We have only ourselves to blame. That has become crystal clear to me over the past few years.

Generally speaking, people do not research candidates on the ballot beyond the big ticket races. School board members, city council, judges, county clerks, etc don't get the same level of scrutiny...and in many cases, not much information is out there on those candidates. But I would argue that those are the races that matter the most.

I was guilty of this until a few years ago. Not anymore. If I can't vet a candidate, I leave the race blank on my ballot.

The left is putting political activists all over the place, even in local races.

In fact, I encourage all of my fellow Jefferson County residents to look into the candidates for the various judicial races. I couldn't believe how many of them have left-wing, woke lingo all over their campaign websites, hiding in plain site. It's appalling. And these are nonpartisan JUDICIAL candidates.

One Dem County Clerk candidate in Jefferson County is running anti-Trump, "our voting rights are under attack" misinformation ads on social media. Do we really want an openly woke partisan to be our County Clerk in Jefferson County?

Don't even get me started on the School Boards.

People don't research these candidates, many times they pick a random name or a name they recall seeing on a yard sign they drive past.

THIS is the problem. The Woke Left is pumping insane money into infiltrating local elections on a mass scale and so many people are just oblivious.
 
Apr 13, 2002
44,001
97,142
0
So you object to teaching kids how to participate in society and interact and communicate with people of different backgrounds? Seems to me like those two things make up part of the bedrock of a functioning society.

Only a fourth of the population can name all three branches of government. Half the voting population doesn't vote. States with a civics class requirement for graduation have higher rates of youth community volunteering and youth voting. Seems to me like maybe we should start teaching civics again.

That's a strawman.

I have no problem at all with that being taught. I just have a problem with the schools teaching it especially in the current state of education.

Big difference
 

Ron Mehico

New member
Jan 4, 2008
15,473
33,054
0
Not going to lie, when I immigrated to the states as a 6 year old I didn’t speak a lick of English and it was rather anxiety inducing at first. My teacher had a whole day where my mom came in and we did a whole day about the country I was from and our language, etc. it was pretty awesome and hopefully the white kids got something out of it too. I got picked on a little less after that as well which was cool
 

Pickle_Rick

New member
Oct 8, 2017
4,358
6,636
0
Yeah if I didn’t have to work to put food on the table. I know many choose not to work these days but that’s not me. Any more grand ideas Rex?
Several families band together to form a home school. Obviously someone will have to support the one doing the schooling.
 

Pickle_Rick

New member
Oct 8, 2017
4,358
6,636
0
Semantics. You don't think that some kids need help with resources in order to have the same educational experience as others? I'll be sure to let our Special Ed. and ESL teachers know that they're out of a job. No need for small group settings, individualized learning, etc. Just put everyone in the same room and they'll get the same education. That's equity. Equality would be to just sit those kids in their homerooms and everyone gets the same instruction.

I'll let our inner-city school know that they don't need to stay open to help kids past the rest of the district's hours or that they should feed the kids before they go home. Equality would be to send those kids home at the usual time and hope that they have the same after school experience as everyone else in the district.
You are the one using semantics to hide your depravity. You would suppress a child to achieve your "racial" goals.
 

LineSkiCat14

Well-known member
Aug 5, 2015
37,306
57,119
113
Don't mind the equality stuff and providing resources to those of lesser means. Don't mind putting tax payer money into helping said people.

Just want my kids to learn things of VALUE. Not sexual orientation, heavy emphasis on gender studies and CRT, nor would I want them wasting time with far right teachings (they can go to private school for that I guess).. just teach them how to read and write. Math and science. A little less of history, a little more life skills (like personal finance), and kick them out of the classroom for an hour or two to get some physical activity in. Stuff that is useful. Why is that so difficult? Why anyone would want their kid to be in school for anything else is beyond me. You're doing them a disservice to focus on things that won't put food on the table later on in life.

Plus things like inclusion, serial orientation, etc can be taught by parents to their own liking
 

Dore95

New member
Mar 2, 2008
2,435
1,906
0
In the 80s there was a book called the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy that listed books you should read, ideas you should be familiar with, music you should listen to, etc., to be well educated. Maybe that was controversial then to some extent, because it was viewed as elitist, but not in the way it is now. Again and again in this thread, and others, posters say basically "teach my kid nothing but math and science" and I will teach them the rest at home so they don't get "indoctrinated". This attitude is going to produce a generation of kids who are completely unequipped to succeed in college or in life.
 

Ron Mehico

New member
Jan 4, 2008
15,473
33,054
0
In the 80s there was a book called the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy that listed books you should read, ideas you should be familiar with, music you should listen to, etc., to be well educated. Maybe that was controversial then to some extent, because it was viewed as elitist, but not in the way it is now. Again and again in this thread, and others, posters say basically "teach my kid nothing but math and science" and I will teach them the rest at home so they don't get "indoctrinated". This attitude is going to produce a generation of kids who are completely unequipped to succeed in college or in life.

There’s nothing wrong with a kid having social intelligence/street smarts/common sense whatever you want to call it. We’ve all met the non-socialized homeschool kids that are weird as hell and probably unable to get laid until they’re 30. Nobody wants a society of those people. And at one point I was surrounded by Asian/Indian people for a couple years in my education and they were generally awkward and terrible. I don’t know if it was a cultural thing or if they just weren’t taught social skills in school. There’s nothing wrong with a good, well BALANCED education
 

LineSkiCat14

Well-known member
Aug 5, 2015
37,306
57,119
113
In the 80s there was a book called the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy that listed books you should read, ideas you should be familiar with, music you should listen to, etc., to be well educated. Maybe that was controversial then to some extent, because it was viewed as elitist, but not in the way it is now. Again and again in this thread, and others, posters say basically "teach my kid nothing but math and science" and I will teach them the rest at home so they don't get "indoctrinated". This attitude is going to produce a generation of kids who are completely unequipped to succeed in college or in life.

I'd be fine with more music, more through provoking classes, even more art. I just rank those behind the basics, yet still ahead of the social inclusion stuff that many in this thread don't want. I don't think anyone wants to axe Music Class, but.. there's only so much time in the day, and so much a kids brain can adsorb (or choose to absorb). If you want to spend an hour on LGBTQ issues, that hour has to come from somewhere.

Personally, I find history to be useless in the grand scheme of things. I know many might not agree with that, but teach more about the functions of the government, maybe some social studies.. but I don't need to spend 2 weeks diving into the french and indian war. Although, maybe that is considered "finer" studies.. idk.
 

LineSkiCat14

Well-known member
Aug 5, 2015
37,306
57,119
113
Let's knock out two birds with one stone..

keep music class, play some Queen, and explain to the kids that Freddie Mercury was gay, had aids, and while you can love anyone you want, put a condom on it.

That's music, health studies and a little inclusion.. all in one.
 

Dore95

New member
Mar 2, 2008
2,435
1,906
0
I guess I just view education as different. Sure, the "basics" are important, but so is learning how to think and analyze problems and situations. I was an English major in college and am now a lawyer. In high school I remember reading books in English class like Fahrenheit 451, Grapes of Wrath, Catcher in the Rye, etc. The themes in those books could be viewed by some as "political" or controversial. In college, I took classes in all different sorts of periods of literature, including African American literature. The purpose of reading these texts, discussing them, thinking about them, etc. is to learn how to analyze and think creatively. It is not to "indoctrinate" students. But if you are an adult with no interest in literature or its value, you might think otherwise I guess.
 

CC_332_rivals113783

New member
May 6, 2007
3,585
957
0
Personally, I find history to be useless in the grand scheme of things. I know many might not agree with that, but teach more about the functions of the government, maybe some social studies.. but I don't need to spend 2 weeks diving into the french and indian war. Although, maybe that is considered "finer" studies.. idk.
Blasphemy
 
  • Like
Reactions: chroix

chroix

New member
Jul 22, 2013
10,018
25,203
0
I agreed with the premise of the thread I guess but then I read the actual link and have no clue WTF anyone is arguing about. That seemed like the most benign standard thing I’ve read.

This exactly. People upset about a generic bunt of a PowerPoint probably just want to be upset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: funKYcat75

KYExtemper

New member
Mar 6, 2013
4,471
4,618
0
These have zero business being taught in public schools. Especially so by the people who currently want to teach it.
Civically engaged simply means having a knowledge of the constitution and how the government works. That's not worthwhile? Keep in mind our state requires students pass a civics test to graduate so this is required.

Culturally competent also typically means learning about other cultures. That is basically included in every world history class worth its weight. Again, what's wrong with that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ukcatz12 and stuway

KYExtemper

New member
Mar 6, 2013
4,471
4,618
0
I'd be fine with more music, more through provoking classes, even more art. I just rank those behind the basics, yet still ahead of the social inclusion stuff that many in this thread don't want. I don't think anyone wants to axe Music Class, but.. there's only so much time in the day, and so much a kids brain can adsorb (or choose to absorb). If you want to spend an hour on LGBTQ issues, that hour has to come from somewhere.

Personally, I find history to be useless in the grand scheme of things. I know many might not agree with that, but teach more about the functions of the government, maybe some social studies.. but I don't need to spend 2 weeks diving into the french and indian war. Although, maybe that is considered "finer" studies.. idk.
The French & Indian War is critical to understanding the formation of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It's also important for understanding why the American Revolution happened, something that everyone should have a good knowledge base on to know upon what ideals the country was founded. So yes, it is important.

Civics should be a required course IMO. The state already requires a civics test for graduation but never required a civics class. That is just dumb.
 
Apr 13, 2002
44,001
97,142
0
Civically engaged simply means having a knowledge of the constitution and how the government works. That's not worthwhile? Keep in mind our state requires students pass a civics test to graduate so this is required.

Culturally competent also typically means learning about other cultures. That is basically included in every world history class worth its weight. Again, what's wrong with that?

Wrong. You're talking about civics which badly needs taught.

"Civically engaged" is something else and is the very type of "something else" that has no business in public schools
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018

ukcatz12

New member
Mar 27, 2009
5,199
12,325
0
It's a parents job to teach morality and culture, not a school. It has become so bad in the San Francisco area that they blatantly ignore parents and even refer to them as "caregivers" instead of parents. The government is trying to mold children into what they want. To say that is wrong and extremely dangerous is a gross understatement.
When did this turn into a discussion about teaching morality? No one said anything about that and it's no where in the linked PowerPoint. The bullet about being culturally competent is not about teaching morality. That phrase has a legitimate definition. It just means being able to effectively communicate with people of different cultures and backgrounds.
 

KYExtemper

New member
Mar 6, 2013
4,471
4,618
0
Wrong. You're talking about civics which badly needs taught.

"Civically engaged" is something else and is the very type of "something else" that has no business in public schools

Civically engaged can mean learning about the system and forming opinions about it. It doesn't mean turning kids into activists. Could it turn that way? Possibly and I wouldn't support that but engagement doesn't always mean there's something sinister afoot.

(Edit) Case in point: The current social studies standards for the state are built on an inquiry model and ask students to "Take Informed Action." But that could simply mean writing an op-ed on an issue with evidence or writing their member of Congress about an issue.
 

BigBlueFanGA

New member
Jun 14, 2005
26,435
23,455
0
When did this turn into a discussion about teaching morality? No one said anything about that and it's no where in the linked PowerPoint. The bullet about being culturally competent is not about teaching morality. That phrase has a legitimate definition. It just means being able to effectively communicate with people of different cultures and backgrounds.
Once you get into "progressive" and "inclusive" and "equity", you are dealing with aspects of moral positions. I'll stick with my statement, thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beatle Bum
Apr 13, 2002
44,001
97,142
0
Civically engaged can mean learning about the system and forming opinions about it. It doesn't mean turning kids into activists. Could it turn that way? Possibly and I wouldn't support that but engagement doesn't always mean there's something sinister afoot.

(Edit) Case in point: The current social studies standards for the state are built on an inquiry model and ask students to "Take Informed Action." But that could simply mean writing an op-ed on an issue with evidence or writing their member of Congress about an issue.

Words like can and could in your answer are exactly how we got where we are. Teach kids about civics. "Take informed action" is just nonsense codewords that give us more of what we got the last decade or so.

In a classroom noone should know a teacher's politics, sexuality, romance life, etc.
 

LineSkiCat14

Well-known member
Aug 5, 2015
37,306
57,119
113
The French & Indian War is critical to understanding the formation of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It's also important for understanding why the American Revolution happened, something that everyone should have a good knowledge base on to know upon what ideals the country was founded. So yes, it is important.

Civics should be a required course IMO. The state already requires a civics test for graduation but never required a civics class. That is just dumb.

Well history of this or that might be important to one state, and almost not relevant to another. I'm fine teaching SOME history, but at some point, you just don't need to know some details from the 1700's, unless you want to go down that path of education.

You need to know how to read, write, do math to get a job and provide for yourself, while also keeping society going. I guess for me, the French and Indian war (or rather, pick a random event 200 years ago), is something I could literally know nothing about, and still be a functioning member of society.
 

CC_332_rivals113783

New member
May 6, 2007
3,585
957
0
Well history of this or that might be important to one state, and almost not relevant to another. I'm fine teaching SOME history, but at some point, you just don't need to know some details from the 1700's, unless you want to go down that path of education.

You need to know how to read, write, do math to get a job and provide for yourself, while also keeping society going. I guess for me, the French and Indian war (or rather, pick a random event 200 years ago), is something I could literally know nothing about, and still be a functioning member of society.
You know, as a history teacher, I actually agree with you. The system we teach under now is based around facts/events/people with a few ideas scattered in. It would be much more effective if our system was thematically based, teaching kids historic ideas and how those ideas influenced historic events, eventually spiraling into how those ideas and events effect today's world. It would (hopefully) lead to actual understanding of historic events and their place in the world rather than regurgitation of facts. It would require a complete overhaul that will never happen.
 

KYExtemper

New member
Mar 6, 2013
4,471
4,618
0
Well history of this or that might be important to one state, and almost not relevant to another. I'm fine teaching SOME history, but at some point, you just don't need to know some details from the 1700's, unless you want to go down that path of education.

You need to know how to read, write, do math to get a job and provide for yourself, while also keeping society going. I guess for me, the French and Indian war (or rather, pick a random event 200 years ago), is something I could literally know nothing about, and still be a functioning member of society.
The thing is, learning about that stuff, looking at sources from the time, and making an argument with them does teach writing. Like, you can't teach writing in isolation. Something has to go with it. And school should more than train society's functions. Schools definitely should have the basics but giving a sampling of the liberal arts and other subjects is not bad when K-12 is supposed to be a time of exploration.
Words like can and could in your answer are exactly how we got where we are. Teach kids about civics. "Take informed action" is just nonsense codewords that give us more of what we got the last decade or so.

In a classroom noone should know a teacher's politics, sexuality, romance life, etc.
Well, I hate to tell you this but if this is how you feel about it you need to contact your legislator and demand a repeal of the existing social studies standards. Fayette County's document on the points you are complaining about is in keeping with state law, which is requiring that a certain teaching modality/outcome be used. There's nothing they can do about it.
 
Apr 13, 2002
44,001
97,142
0
Well, I hate to tell you this but if this is how you feel about it you need to contact your legislator and demand a repeal of the existing social studies standards. Fayette County's document on the points you are complaining about is in keeping with state law, which is requiring that a certain teaching modality/outcome be used. There's nothing they can do about it.

That's why earlier in this thread I encouraged people to vote out every one that thinks like this and take back control of public education.

Even so, these aren't the Nuremberg trials. Teachers who love kids and truly love teaching can speak up and speak out about the nonsense that's going on. I understand why they might not do that; but it is totally possible to do
 

vhcat70

New member
Feb 5, 2003
57,418
38,482
0
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018

Ukbrassowtipin

New member
Aug 12, 2011
82,109
89,931
0
That is your definition. And it is inaccurate. Nothing is being taken away from "the haves". You clearly have no idea what you're going on about, but you feel like you just have to say something. Take off your political glasses for a minute and think a little on your own. I gave you two exact examples of equity programs.

I'm not sure why I bother. People like you are going to be so set in your ways that nothing will ever satisfy.

Anyway, here's a cartoon.

That cartoon is weird...what do you call the picture of the people who bought a ticket to see the game
 

Ron Mehico

New member
Jan 4, 2008
15,473
33,054
0
That cartoon is weird...what do you call the picture of the people who bought a ticket to see the game

I don’t know what the hell is going on in that picture. Seems like it’s saying the short kid gets double the resources and the tall kid gets nothing but I’m not sure how that exactly is done in reality or practice.
 

rudd1

New member
Oct 3, 2007
14,419
21,101
0
Re: Equity

How are some FCPS students systematically being kept from the same opportunity to learn that all other students have?

-bingo.

-it's the parents...I respect the hell out of good/dedicated teachers...but if the parents aren't pulling their weight it's nigh impossible for teachers to make much of a difference...throwing cash/reorganization of methods is a complete waste of time and treasure.

^so it is, so it has always been.
 
Aug 14, 2001
37,578
60,327
0
Single parent homes. I don’t mean divorced couples. A couple can be divorced and still provide a two parent “family”

I’d bet that a missing or uninvolved parent is more than likely the largest predictor of a child’s academic prospects/achievment.