NationStates Jolt Archive

So, what if anything should be done to the teacher? There is no need for something like this in High School. This does not promote debate but is clearly designed to promote his political bias.

Students:

Friday, November 25, 2005

BENNINGTON, Vt. — A high school teacher is facing questions from administrators after giving a vocabulary quiz that included digs at President Bush and the extreme right.

Bret Chenkin, a social studies and English teacher at Mount Anthony Union High School, said he gave the quiz to his students several months ago. The quiz asked students to pick the proper words to complete sentences.

One example: "I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes." "Coherent" is the right answer.

Principal Sue Maguire said she hoped to speak to whoever complained about the quiz and any students who might be concerned. She said she also would talk with Chenkin. School Superintendent Wesley Knapp said he was taking the situation seriously.

"It's absolutely unacceptable," Knapp said. "They (teachers) don't have a license to hold forth on a particular standpoint."

Chenkin, 36, a teacher for seven years, said he isn't shy about sharing his liberal views with students as a way of prompting debate, but said the quizzes are being taken out of context.

"The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak," he said. "They know it's tongue in cheek." But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned.

"I'll put in both sides," he said. "Especially if it's going to cause a lot of grief."

The school is in Bennington, a community of about 16,500 in the southwest corner of the state.

Heheheh - but could I have source plz?

Heheheh - but could I have source plz?
I think it may be from the Outofassington Press.

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.

Heheheh - but could I have source plz?

Sure it's from the AP and posted on Fox. Here; http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,176735,00.html

I think it may be from the Outofassington Press.
Is that the paper which rivals The Superfarcia Herald?

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.
Are you serious? Or are you being deliberately *****?

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.

Because he clearly needs Rehabilitation. He is also Poisoning the minds of his students.

Are you serious? Or are you being deliberately *****?
Not really. Most of your country seems to think that Bush is a lying incompetent idiot at the moment. Taking a teacher to task for suggesting as much seems a bit out of order.

Quagmus, I hope that was sarcasm.

Because he clearly needs Rehabilitation. He is also Poisoning the minds of his students.
Take him away to Room 101!

Not really. Most of your country seems to think that Bush is a lying incompetent idiot at the moment. Taking a teacher to task for suggesting as much seems a bit out of order.

Quagmus, I hope that was sarcasm.

I sure hope so too!

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.

For the same reason why you wouldn't want a history teacher talking about the Civil Rights period, and saying that the people who got hit with fire hoses deserved it. Or that the world was a better place back before we gave women the right to vote. Or that the Nazi's really had the right idea. Or a teacher in a Civics class suggesting that gay marriage should never be legal. Or a science teacher suggesting that the moon landing was faked. Or a math teacher suggesting that marijuana should be legalized.

Teachers are free to HAVE their own political opinions, regardless of how moderate or extreme they might be, but they also have something of a responsibility to teach in an unbiased fashion. In cases where current political opinions ARE the topic of discussion, it should be in a class where actual DISCUSSION of the subject could occur. Slipping your political opinions into a class that has nothing to do with politics is irresponsible at best, and attempting to indoctrinate at worst. The fact that it was a written test that did not allow for reasoned debate or discussion is a major part of WHY this is an issue.

To be honest, back when I was in high school, I would have called the teacher out on a spelling test like that. And, had he reduced my grade because of it (which is probably the most likely result of telling your teacher he's a biased ass), it would have gone up the chain until the teacher either got censured, fired, or I wound up taking it to court just to prove a point. And I'm not even a Republican - I'm more of a libertarian (small "L") who doesn't think EITHER party in the US accurately represents the beliefs and desires of the majority.

To put it simply, educational institutes, particularly government funded ones, shouldn't be pushing religious or political agendas, tongue in cheek or not.

As a history teacher, this hits close to home. While I realize it's hard not to be bias, a good teacher must at least try. In my class, when politics is brought up, I tend play devil's advocate to spark more debate... Taking a position only tunes students out and gets you angry parents on a conference day.. I've seen it happen, believe me, it isn't pretty.

For the same reason why you wouldn't want a history teacher talking about the Civil Rights period, and saying that the people who got hit with fire hoses deserved it. Or that the world was a better place back before we gave women the right to vote. Or that the Nazi's really had the right idea. Or a teacher in a Civics class suggesting that gay marriage should never be legal. Or a science teacher suggesting that the moon landing was faked. Or a math teacher suggesting that marijuana should be legalized.

Teachers are free to HAVE their own political opinions, regardless of how moderate or extreme they might be, but they also have something of a responsibility to teach in an unbiased fashion. In cases where current political opinions ARE the topic of discussion, it should be in a class where actual DISCUSSION of the subject could occur. Slipping your political opinions into a class that has nothing to do with politics is irresponsible at best, and attempting to indoctrinate at worst. The fact that it was a written test that did not allow for reasoned debate or discussion is a major part of WHY this is an issue.

To be honest, back when I was in high school, I would have called the teacher out on a spelling test like that. And, had he reduced my grade because of it (which is probably the most likely result of telling your teacher he's a biased ass), it would have gone up the chain until the teacher either got censured, fired, or I wound up taking it to court just to prove a point. And I'm not even a Republican - I'm more of a libertarian (small "L") who doesn't think EITHER party in the US accurately represents the beliefs and desires of the majority.
That's as maybe, but I doubt Fox would have any problem with this if one question out of a vocabulary test had made an unpleasant statement about Clinton.
I also find the cases you're offering as comparisons far more offensive than the suggestion that Bush made an effort to look dumber than he is because he (or his handlers) thought it struck the electorate as folksy. After watching Kerry make mincemeat out of him in the debates before the last election, I can't see anything inaccurate about that statement, and if you're implying somebody is biased, it needs to be demonstrable that they are distorting the facts.

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.
what a stupid thing to say...

Not really. Most of your country seems to think that Bush is a lying incompetent idiot at the moment. Taking a teacher to task for suggesting as much seems a bit out of order.

Quagmus, I hope that was sarcasm.
I love it when a (appearantly) lefty pushes that arguement "most of the country is XXX therefor it's ok".

Then I suppose you fought against the civil rights movement because at the time, the majority of america felt that "seperate but equal" was ok?

I suppose that you would have fought sufferage because the majority of america didn't feel that women should have had the right to vote?

I suppose you would have supported slavery because in the beginning, the majority of americans felt it was ok?

Stick your majority arguement somewhere else please.

That's as maybe, but I doubt Fox would have any problem with this if one question out of a vocabulary test had made an unpleasant statement about Clinton.
I also find the cases you're offering as comparisons far more offensive than the suggestion that Bush made an effort to look dumber than he is because he (or his handlers) thought it struck the electorate as folksy. After watching Kerry make mincemeat out of him in the debates before the last election, I can't see anything inaccurate about that statement, and if you're implying somebody is biased, it needs to be demonstrable that they are distorting the facts.
demonstration that they are distorting the facts? it has not been proven that president bush is stupid. he has graduated from yale, so yes, thats a distortion of the facts right there by calling him stupid. plus, you dont call any political person stupid in a school when you are a person of authority there.

To put it simply, educational institutes, particularly government funded ones, shouldn't be pushing religious or political agendas, tongue in cheek or not.

True but more and more they are. For instance the school board at my highschool is pushing for mandatory teaching of Intellegent Desighn as well as the Theroy of Evolution. I think if they can justify doing that then the teachers should be allowed to express thier political views to their students.

demonstration that they are distorting the facts? it has not been proven that president bush is stupid. he has graduated from yale, so yes, thats a distortion of the facts right there by calling him stupid.
It has been proven that he was being prompted during the last round of television debates, bankrupted an oil company in Texas, can't eat a pretzel without choking, and that his favourite book is the Very Hungry Caterpillar. Only circumstantial evidence that he has plenty of space in the loft, it's true, but evidence nonetheless.
plus, you dont call any political person stupid in a school when you are a person of authority there.
I suppose it depends on what you feel the function of the education system is: if it is to inspire unquestioning and uncritical obedience to anybody in a position of authority, then you're probably right. If not, you're entirely wrong.

As a student, I do not think it is appropriate for him or her to express their political views without any ability for debate.

But in this situation as a liberal, I tip my hat to this person! :p

It has been proven that he was being prompted during the last round of television debates, bankrupted an oil company in Texas, can't eat a pretzel without choking, and that his favourite book is the Very Hungry Caterpillar. Only circumstantial evidence that he has plenty of space in the loft, it's true, but evidence nonetheless.

I suppose it depends on what you feel the function of the education system is: if it is to inspire unquestioning and uncritical obedience to anybody in a position of authority, then you're probably right. If not, you're entirely wrong.
and Im sure that there is evidence that you can't dress yourself without outside help too. Perhaps a baby picture showing you with a diaper on your head?

How can you show yourself in public with a mind of a 2 year old, slobbering on yourself like you do?

and Im sure that there is evidence that you can't dress yourself without outside help too. Perhaps a baby picture showing you with a diaper on your head?

How can you show yourself in public with a mind of a 2 year old, slobbering on yourself like you do?

You have, indeed, made your point well. I see now that this teacher was entirely in the wrong and should be Punished along with his Dog.

if i were the principal id remind the teacher that such politcal content in vocabulary quizzes isnt appropriate and tell him to cut it out.

if he continues then he's more interested in politics than in teaching and he gets real disciplinary action.

and Im sure that there is evidence that you can't dress yourself without outside help too. Perhaps a baby picture showing you with a diaper on your head?

How can you show yourself in public with a mind of a 2 year old, slobbering on yourself like you do?


Quick, we need to heap personal attacks on Cahnt! Contrary (therefore evil and liberal) opinions must be squelched in random insults, and non-sensical anger!!!

Quick, we need to heap personal attacks on Cahnt! Contrary (therefore evil and liberal) opinions must be squelched in random insults, and non-sensical anger!!!
You have obviously missed my point. I appologize for not making it clearer. I am trying to point out (using an illogical extreme) exactly what Cahnt, and the teacher in question are doing.

A high school teacher is facing questions from administrators after giving a vocabulary quiz that included digs at President Bush and the extreme right.
All that goes to show is that being an asshole does not preclude being a teacher.

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.
Teachers are obligated to assume neutral political and religious stances every minute in the class room.

I assume that you would be angry if it was anti liberal propaganda? If so, that makes me even more sick than you not understanding the aforementioned fact.

i'll just leave politics to the politicians.

Quagmus, I hope that was sarcasm.
It was. The Sarcasm Master has spoken!

As to the topic, I really see no problem with people expressing their political views in the classroom. What will it do? Poison and corrupt the minds of the students with immoral commie pinko lefty tree-hugging Marxist propaganda? :rolleyes:

That's as maybe, but I doubt Fox would have any problem with this if one question out of a vocabulary test had made an unpleasant statement about Clinton.

Yeah, but in that case, someone else would pick up the rallying cry of how the right-wing conspiracy is attempting to brainwash America's youth. The fact that one side will tacitly accept bias that favors them doesn't mean the bias is RIGHT, no matter which side it supports.


I also find the cases you're offering as comparisons far more offensive than the suggestion that Bush made an effort to look dumber than he is because he (or his handlers) thought it struck the electorate as folksy. After watching Kerry make mincemeat out of him in the debates before the last election, I can't see anything inaccurate about that statement, and if you're implying somebody is biased, it needs to be demonstrable that they are distorting the facts.

I figured someone might call me out on the "extreme" nature of my examples, but I'd be just as annoyed if someone was using their educational position as a sounding board for more moderate issues, like their opinions on privatizing Social Security, or even something as dull as tort reform.

As for the rest, even if Bush was a drooling idiot who had to wear a hockey helmet and be kept on a leash, that doesn't justify the teacher basically preaching about it to the kids. I'd rather they decide for themselves what to think of Bush and his political stance, since these are the people who are going to be voting in the next election. I'd rather not simply have them parroting things their teacher told them, without THINKING about it, or being able to understand that biases are not always true.

For the record, I think it's a damned shame that it's become "cool" to hate Bush - people who can't tell you WHY they think he's a bad president will tell you quite energetically that he does indeed suck. And, when asked WHY he sucks, about the only reason you'll get is "Well, because, he sucks!" I have a hell of a lot more respect for people who disapprove of his stance, position, or behavior, and can EXPLAIN WHY. That, at least, shows intelligence. It doesn't take much intelligence just to repeat what a teacher told you, or what the "cool kids" in school say.

So yeah... I'd be just about as offended if this particular teacher was pro-Bush and mocking more prominent Democrats (something along the lines of "Howard Dean demonstrated how (intelligent/deranged) he was when he acted like a lunatic in the primaries" or "Ted Kennedy may soon develop (cirrhosis/unicycle) of the liver, since he hasn't stopped drinking in 40 years - not even after driving his car into a lake and killing that girl"). Both of those statements are as "true" as the ones about Bush, but the context is what makes them bad.

So, what if anything should be done to the teacher? There is no need for something like this in High School. This does not promote debate but is clearly designed to promote his political bias.

Students:

Friday, November 25, 2005

BENNINGTON, Vt. — A high school teacher is facing questions from administrators after giving a vocabulary quiz that included digs at President Bush and the extreme right.

Bret Chenkin, a social studies and English teacher at Mount Anthony Union High School, said he gave the quiz to his students several months ago. The quiz asked students to pick the proper words to complete sentences.

One example: "I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes." "Coherent" is the right answer.

Principal Sue Maguire said she hoped to speak to whoever complained about the quiz and any students who might be concerned. She said she also would talk with Chenkin. School Superintendent Wesley Knapp said he was taking the situation seriously.

"It's absolutely unacceptable," Knapp said. "They (teachers) don't have a license to hold forth on a particular standpoint."

Chenkin, 36, a teacher for seven years, said he isn't shy about sharing his liberal views with students as a way of prompting debate, but said the quizzes are being taken out of context.

"The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak," he said. "They know it's tongue in cheek." But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned.

"I'll put in both sides," he said. "Especially if it's going to cause a lot of grief."

The school is in Bennington, a community of about 16,500 in the southwest corner of the state.

While I am no fan of the current administration, I think this teacher was out of line. There is a large difference between a teacher making a comment to spark debate and making the answer to a question necessarily biased.

Still, in his defense, he did say that he would change his methods. And it's not as though I altogether disagree with him politically. I just think he picked the wrong venue to espouse said beliefs.

Teachers are obligated to assume neutral political and religious stances every minute in the class room.

I assume that you would be angry if it was anti liberal propaganda? If so, that makes me even more sick than you not understanding the aforementioned fact.
It's a bloody vocabulary test, for heaven's sake. Picking one sentence out of (presumably) twenty odd as proof that someone's grinding a political axe seems a little over the top.

In the context of a discussion/debate, a teacher should be free to express whatever viewpoint they wish.

But a vocab quiz is not a discussion or a political debate. What's next, test questions that ask 'Write a 5 Paragraph essay explainging why Bush is a bad President'?

It's wrong to politically preach to students outside of a forum that allows discussion of the issue. I don't care what political view is being preached.

Teachers are obligated to assume neutral political and religious stances every minute in the class room.
Your evidence backs you up fully and makes your argument uncontestable. I bow to your superior debating skills, oh great master.

In plain English: Please inform us what source you used to draw these brilliant conclusions.

That's as maybe, but I doubt Fox would have any problem with this if one question out of a vocabulary test had made an unpleasant statement about Clinton.

FOX does not have a problem with this. If you bothered to read the posts or the article you would see it is an AP story. Fox only posted it on their web site without comment.

FOX does not have a problem with this. If you bothered to read the posts or the article you would see it is an AP story. Fox only posted it on their web site without comment.
Which is where the original poster found it.

It's a bloody vocabulary test, for heaven's sake. Picking one sentence out of (presumably) twenty odd as proof that someone's grinding a political axe seems a little over the top.

The problem is, the impression that I get is that it WASN'T just one sentence, just that they only used one sentence as an example.

That's part of why I'm toasted about it - it sounds like this isn't just a one-time thing (since he himself has already mentioned being more "balanced" about political comments in the future). For all we know, every single one of the 20 words on that list was worked into a political dig in some way.

And, if someone feels the need to vent their political views THAT badly, maybe they should get a job in politics. NOT in teaching.

The problem is, the impression that I get is that it WASN'T just one sentence, just that they only used one sentence as an example.

That's part of why I'm toasted about it - it sounds like this isn't just a one-time thing (since he himself has already mentioned being more "balanced" about political comments in the future). For all we know, every single one of the 20 words on that list was worked into a political dig in some way.

And, if someone feels the need to vent their political views THAT badly, maybe they should get a job in politics. NOT in teaching.
We don't know that: if that was the only sentence quoted it was likely the only one that referred to Bush. This nonsense barely qualifies as a storm in a teacup.

We don't know that: if that was the only sentence quoted it was likely the only one that referred to Bush. This nonsense barely qualifies as a storm in a teacup.
It was just one example: to assume it was the only one is just being naive

Out of line? Yes. Motivating kids to learn? Definitely yes. I would not be suprized if the students were looking forward to the next vocabulary quiz to see what other politically incorrect statements appear.

If anything, it goes to show the standards that are set for teachers are rediculous, considering the amount of attention this received. People want to see teachers as paragons of virtue, guardians of the minds of the future when in reality, they are working stiffs like everyone else.

It's a bloody vocabulary test, for heaven's sake. Picking one sentence out of (presumably) twenty odd as proof that someone's grinding a political axe seems a little over the top.


The article picked only one example of the many biased questions that were on the test.

.....People want to see teachers as paragons of virtue, guardians of the minds of the future when in reality, they are working stiffs like everyone else.

Zombies? Everyone else? But that means....omg:eek:

Which is where the original poster found it.

Yes I found the AP story on the FOX web site. Perhaps you would prefer this http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=Anti-Bush+Vocab+Quiz&c= or this http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/5404001/detail.html?rss=den&psp=irresistible

I can understand that the source that wrote the story may influence the slant on the stroy but I never knew the site it is posted on would make a difference.

It's a bloody vocabulary test, for heaven's sake. Picking one sentence out of (presumably) twenty odd as proof that someone's grinding a political axe seems a little over the top.
Okay, so what if the one question was something like this?


The Fuhrer gassed the (verminous, veracious) Jews en masse and disposed of their wretched bodies.

or

Allah is the one true god, and the only way to (ascend, assemble) to heaven is through obeying the words of the holy Qua'ran and the prophet Mohammed.

Your evidence backs you up fully and makes your argument uncontestable. I bow to your superior debating skills, oh great master.

In plain English: Please inform us what source you used to draw these brilliant conclusions.
Every school district (in the US at least) has policies like that, for obvious reasons. If you can't understand why, or even worse, you don't care if it happens as long as the situation lines up with your politics, then I'm sorry for your ignorance.

The article picked only one example of the many biased questions that were on the test.


And you wanted to prove that statement to us... right?

Ok, that's quite ok, now let us see the other 19 ... since you KNOW they are also "biased", you must have access to them.

Looking forward to your next post which will UNDOUBTEDLY contain the remaining 19 biased liberal commie questions.

(questions... not good for students having to think in patterns that are beyond the control of the authorities... so much better when students are told that the US is the beacon of freedom and liberty in the world... that everything the US does, is for the betterment of the human race etc. no need to provide proof for such politically skewed statements...) :headbang:

As one who is studying to become a teacher, I think that this was out of line, even if it was only one sentence on a vocab quiz.

First off, it has been correctly said that teachers are assumed to be more or less neutral on a lot of issues, mainly because they are in front of impressionable young people who for the most part take what the teacher says at face value. How many of us would have questioned our 5th or 6th grade teacher (or younger) on something like this? My gut feeling is that that majority would have held our views to ourselves.

Secondly, a sentence of political nature (even if a lot of people think it could be the correct one) has no reason for being on an ENGLISH vocab quiz. English class is about learning what words mean, how to use the correctly, and the value of liturature on society and culture (though that's usually more high school or college based, I think). From the example given, there are a lot of better examples out there to define the word coherent than what the teacher put on the quiz.

Thirdly, I know that even teachers have their own views and they are more and more coming out in the classroom freely. I personally feel that such comments or topics should be reserved for the appropriate class time or subject, like history or political science, and ONLY when a students specically asks the teacher for their opinion. I've personally been taught that that is the only time a teacher should freely tell what they think, and even then some of my teachers will still say that sometimes as a teacher I should dodge those types of questions.


I would have these same types of problems if the quiz were promoting things I think to be true, mainly because of the reasons above. One side should not be given favoritism in such matters. However, I would like to know for sure if the example given was the only question on the quiz in question, and if this is a regular thing or not. Lastly, I'd really like to know if this quiz was actually graded or recorded, because I don't think its totally fair to have a question like that (with the teacher admitting hyperbole) and mark some people wrong and some write when it somewhat depends on the views of the students, which in turn could be based on what the teacher has previously explained in the classroom.

We don't know that: if that was the only sentence quoted it was likely the only one that referred to Bush. This nonsense barely qualifies as a storm in a teacup.

Perhaps you should re-read the article and pay attention to the phrase "One example." When I went to school that phrase meant there were others, but then again I went to school a long time ago. :eek:

If anything, it goes to show the standards that are set for teachers are rediculous, considering the amount of attention this received. People want to see teachers as paragons of virtue, guardians of the minds of the future when in reality, they are working stiffs like everyone else.
No, they aren't supposed to be paragons of virtue. They are supposed to leave their religious and political beliefs at the door during a period from about 9 AM to 3 PM for which they are paid to do a job. After hours, I couldn't care less if they're preaching radical Islam or getting gassed by police in protests. If they can't keep it out of the classroom, they shouldn't be teaching. Plenty of companies have codes of conduct about how people should comport themselves in the workplace; this is no different.

Teachers are free to HAVE their own political opinions, regardless of how moderate or extreme they might be, but they also have something of a responsibility to teach in an unbiased fashion. In cases where current political opinions ARE the topic of discussion, it should be in a class where actual DISCUSSION of the subject could occur. Slipping your political opinions into a class that has nothing to do with politics is irresponsible at best, and attempting to indoctrinate at worst. The fact that it was a written test that did not allow for reasoned debate or discussion is a major part of WHY this is an issue.


here here

Perhaps you should re-read the article and pay attention to the phrase "One example." When I went to school that phrase meant there were others, but then again I went to school a long time ago. :eek:
Did they also teach you to cite all of the relevant evidence when showing your working out? If they're only quoting one example in the article, it probably means that this was the only example in that test.

Okay, so what if the one question was something like this?


The Fuhrer gassed the (verminous, veracious) Jews en masse and disposed of their wretched bodies.

or

Allah is the one true god, and the only way to (ascend, assemble) to heaven is through obeying the words of the holy Qua'ran and the prophet Mohammed.
To be honest, I remember being set a fair few texts that were more than a little didactic when I was studying English literature: Kipling, CS Lewis, all kinds of stuff. The purpose of the language is communicating, and most of what gets communicated is fairly partisan. It's going to be close to impossible to teach an English class without exposing any of the kids to opiniated twaddle of one flavour or another, in all likelihood.

What if the test were things like:

"If you teach a child to read, (he/her) will be able to pass a literacy test."
"Rarely is the question asked: '(Is/Are) our children learning?'"
"We have enough coal to last for 250 years, yet coal also (presents/prevents) an environmental challenge."
"They can get in line like those who have been here legally and have been working to become a (citizen/citizenship) in a legal manner."
"(This is/These are) historic times."
"Obviously, I pray every day there's less (casualty/casualties)."
"The law I sign today directs new funds and new focus to the task of collecting vital intelligence on terrorist threats and on weapons of mass (production/destruction)."

If anything, it goes to show the standards that are set for teachers are rediculous, considering the amount of attention this received. People want to see teachers as paragons of virtue, guardians of the minds of the future when in reality, they are working stiffs like everyone else.

I don't want the guy at McDonalds trying to convert me to Christianity/Islam/Judaism/Shintoism when I'm ordering a Big Mac. That's not his job. Part of his job is to be PROFESSIONAL, which means doing what he's supposed to do, and not doing what he's not.

If the people who work at McDonalds can understand that, someone who has the prerequisite education to become a teacher should be able to as well.

A teacher's job is to teach. It is not to vent political views. It is not to complain about his love life, or talk about any number of other things which have no bearing on education. If he can work his political views into an objective debate in a class that actually CALLS for it (a political, civics, or history class), it's one thing.

Inserting your political views into a spelling test is like having the guy at McDonalds explain to you why US foreign policy is not working. Yeah? Now shut up and give me my fries.

He may be "just another working stiff", but let him deal with things like that in the staff room, or after work.

To be honest, I remember being set a fair few texts that were more than a little didactic when I was studying English literature: Kipling, CS Lewis, all kinds of stuff. The purpose of the language is communicating, and most of what gets communicated is fairly partisan. It's going to be close to impossible to teach an English class without exposing any of the kids to opiniated twaddle of one flavour or another, in all likelihood.
Fictional literature is a whole different ballpark. Complaining about that sort of thing is like complaining about being forced to read books set in the slavery era.. it's silly, because both have a sense of detachment that blatant propaganda based on current political situations obviously does not have.

Having students read something like The Chronicles of Narnia is no more harmful for its underlying Christian message than having them read Robin Hood with some of its supposed Marxist ideological references. Once again, the literature is just a story, and you can take from it what you like.. and it's not hard to see the difference between that and indocrinating the students with your personal religious/political beliefs.

And I don't think you answered.. would you approve of those questions on a test?

Unethical, but funny.

Fictional literature is a whole different ballpark. Complaining about that sort of thing is like complaining about being forced to read books set in the slavery era.. it's silly, because both have a sense of detachment that blatant propaganda based on current political situations obviously does not have.
Haven't a few school boards yanked Huckleberry Finn for largely this reason?

Having students read something like The Chronicles of Narnia is no more harmful for its underlying Christian message than having them read Robin Hood with some of its supposed Marxist ideological references. Once again, the literature is just a story, and you can take from it what you like.. and it's not hard to see the difference between that and indocrinating the students with your personal religious/political beliefs.
That's a matter of opinion. It could equally be argued that ideology concealed inside fiction is harder to detect.

And I don't think you answered.. would you approve of those questions on a test?
So long as they weren't being persented as the whole of the truth, I wouldn't particularly have any objection with them being used as part of a vocabulary quiz. That's my problem with this whole argument: the assumption that one question in a written test (for comprehension of word meanings, rather than ideology) is proof that some Godless comsymp liberal is brainwashing kids to vote Democrat. The article doesn't prove any such thing was going on, it just quoted something out of context and made a few vague allegations.

Haven't a few school boards yanked Huckleberry Finn for largely this reason?

For depicting slave era America? That's not the reason, plenty of school books do that.. it's because the N-bomb is dropped over 200 times in that book. That seems to be pretty inappropriate to me.


That's a matter of opinion. It could equally be argued that ideology concealed inside fiction is harder to detect.
Well, it's my opinion, and the opinion of the US government, seeing as how they don't pull all the valuable literature in which the writer happens to present a personal opinion (like you said, damn near every book ever written). yet they don't allow teachers to push their personal politics on kids. And even beyond how much more blatant this teacher's opinion was than that of the stories we talked about, you also have to take into account that the teacher is a personal authority figure to all the students, and thus their opinions are much more likely to profoundly affect the students than just reading some opinions hidden in metaphor, by some person they've never met, often decades ago.


So long as they weren't being persented as the whole of the truth, I wouldn't particularly have any objection with them being used as part of a vocabulary quiz. That's my problem with this whole argument: the assumption that one question in a written test (for comprehension of word meanings, rather than ideology) is proof that some Godless comsymp liberal is brainwashing kids to vote Democrat. The article doesn't prove any such thing was going on, it just quoted something out of context and made a few vague allegations.
I have a hard time believing that. I believe that if you read an identical article, but instead one of the questions I listed was the one used as an example, you'd react in the same way as most of us here have.

I don't want the guy at McDonalds trying to convert me to Christianity/Islam/Judaism/Shintoism when I'm ordering a Big Mac. That's not his job. Part of his job is to be PROFESSIONAL, which means doing what he's supposed to do, and not doing what he's not.

If the people who work at McDonalds can understand that, someone who has the prerequisite education to become a teacher should be able to as well.

A teacher's job is to teach. It is not to vent political views. It is not to complain about his love life, or talk about any number of other things which have no bearing on education. If he can work his political views into an objective debate in a class that actually CALLS for it (a political, civics, or history class), it's one thing.

Inserting your political views into a spelling test is like having the guy at McDonalds explain to you why US foreign policy is not working. Yeah? Now shut up and give me my fries.

He may be "just another working stiff", but let him deal with things like that in the staff room, or after work.


Quote from the article:
"'The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak,' he said. 'They know it's tongue in cheek.' But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned."

This is not some rabid liberal that needs to be taken out and shot. This is someone that managed to grab the attention of his students (and alot of other people) in an unorthodox way. From the article, it is obvious that he respects the intelligence of his students, in that they should be able to distinguish between hyperbole and fact. I think it is also obvious that the administration has no respect for the intelligence of students.

Quote from the article:
"'The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak,' he said. 'They know it's tongue in cheek.' But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned."

This is not some rabid liberal that needs to be taken out and shot. This is someone that managed to grab the attention of his students (and alot of other people) in an unorthodox way. From the article, it is obvious that he respects the intelligence of his students, in that they should be able to distinguish between hyperbole and fact. I think it is also obvious that the administration has no respect for the intelligence of students.
No one said he needed to be shot. And it has nothing to do with 'respecting the intelligence of students'. It's just common sense. The administration is keeping in line with rules established to allow kids to get an education without being indoctrinated by the authority figures in the school. There's nothing hard to understand about that.

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.
It's a problem because school classes are best left without political or religious bias. It's the same reason as to why teaching creationism as science is a problem.

The teacher should be fired or at least disciplined.

For depicting slave era America? That's not the reason, plenty of school books do that.. it's because the N-bomb is dropped over 200 times in that book. That seems to be pretty inappropriate to me.
I hate to spring this one on you, but the term "African American" wasn't widely used back then. "******" was. It's a term that is now (quite rightly) seen as unacceptable, but reading it I never got the impression that Twain was a racist.

Well, it's my opinion, and the opinion of the US government, seeing as how they don't pull all the valuable literature in which the writer happens to present a personal opinion (like you said, damn near every book ever written). yet they don't allow teachers to push their personal politics on kids. And even beyond how much more blatant this teacher's opinion was than that of the stories we talked about, you also have to take into account that the teacher is a personal authority figure to all the students, and thus their opinions are much more likely to profoundly affect the students than just reading some opinions hidden in metaphor, by some person they've never met, often decades ago.
And if it's one question out of twenty (or however many they have on these things) the kids are immediately going to recognise this as the teacher's opinion?

I have a hard time believing that. I believe that if you read an identical article, but instead one of the questions I listed was the one used as an example, you'd react in the same way as most of us here have.
No, I definitely wouldn't be assuming that the teacher had no business holding his job down and needed tarring and feathering in that case.

It's a problem because school classes are best left without political or religious bias. It's the same reason as to why teaching creationism as science is a problem.

The teacher should be fired or at least disciplined.
Disproportionate response. He's been told to knock it off. That's adequete.

Students in the US are still not being tought about how the US firebombed civilians in cities all over Japan, killing hundreds of thousands. They are not told of how 8000 drowning Japanese soldiers were shot while begging for help. The captain of the ship who ordered the shoothing to take place, was not accused of warcrimes, even though his actions were clearly illegal. Isn't it political bias when such disgusting facts from recent history are kept in the dark, and only the "good" stories are tought?

When people are brainwashed by their system, they become dependant on getting more brainwashing, such as not having anyone breaking the ranks and suggesting that Bush is a moron.... which he of course is... but that's not important.

Still we haven't been shown the remaining 19 questions which were "presumably" equally damning.... I wonder why...

... If they're only quoting one example in the article, it probably means that this was the only example in that test.

Or are you showing your bias?

Or are you showing your bias?
No, I'm just assuming that if they could find any more instances of Bush bashing, they'd have quoted those as well.

I hate to spring this one on you, but the term "African American" wasn't widely used back then. "******" was. It's a term that is now (quite rightly) seen as unacceptable, but reading it I never got the impression that Twain was a racist.
I'm quite aware of that. It doesn't change the fact that kids don't need that word drilled into their head.


And if it's one question out of twenty (or however many they have on these things) the kids are immediately going to recognise this as the teacher's opinion?
Man, give it a rest. Listening to you go on, you'd think that the question on the test was subtle. Did you even read the question? Of course it's his opinion.


No, I definitely wouldn't be assuming that the teacher had no business holding his job down and needed tarring and feathering in that case.

say what?

Students in the US are still not being tought about how the US firebombed civilians in cities all over Japan, killing hundreds of thousands. They are not told of how 8000 drowning Japanese soldiers were shot while begging for help. The captain of the ship who ordered the shoothing to take place, was not accused of warcrimes, even though his actions were clearly illegal. Isn't it political bias when such disgusting facts from recent history are kept in the dark, and only the "good" stories are tought?


Um, I don't know where you're from, but every time I've ever taken anything other than elementary school history courses that cover WWII, my teachers have always mentioned the firebombings. Never heard of your drowning story, but I need to think about that a little more and look around before I decide whether or not that is bs or not.

I'm quite aware of that. It doesn't change the fact that kids don't need that word drilled into their head.
No they don't. It could be considered relevant to show them how people spoke back then, and that nobody saw anything wrong with using that sort of language at the time.

Man, give it a rest. Listening to you go on, you'd think that the question on the test was subtle. Did you even read the question? Of course it's his opinion.
A test of this nature is composed of a series of sentences, many of which will show one form of bias or another. Said bias is far more conspicuous if you don't agree with it. Without seeing the rest of it, there's no point pissing and moaning about this one.

say what?
The teacher should be fired or at least disciplined.
And there's been a few more instances of talk like that.

It has been proven that he was being prompted during the last round of television debates, bankrupted an oil company in Texas, can't eat a pretzel without choking, and that his favourite book is the Very Hungry Caterpillar.
Ah, yes, the lefty's version of "proof". Where facts are irrelevant, and it's all about personal attacks.

No wonder HOward Dean was given the DNC Chair after expressing that he HATES "Republicans and all they stand for."

The American left... Hatred personified. And that's what they're promoting teaching in schools.

Disproportionate response. He's been told to knock it off. That's adequete.
Not really. His class also needs to be audited to make sure he follows directions.

Ah, yes, the lefty's version of "proof". Where facts are irrelevant, and it's all about personal attacks.

No wonder HOward Dean was given the DNC Chair after expressing that he HATES "Republicans and all they stand for."

The American left... Hatred personified. And that's what they're promoting teaching in schools.
Perhaps you could explain how Ann Coulter comes out with rational and cool-headed arguments which never resort to name calling or bile, then?

The teacher should be fired or at least disciplined.

I agree that the teacher was out of line here. A test is not the place for political statements because of the intimidation factor. A student is less likely to challenge something like this on a test because of the fear of getting a lower grade on their test.

But what purpose would firing this teacher serve? In a time where teachers are in short supply, and good teachers in even shorter supply, do we want to send the message to teachers that if they voice their opinions on anything that they'll be fired? This teacher will be disciplined and will most likely not repeat this offense in the future, but if he were fired, what good would that do? We do not need to be frightening off more potential educators than we already do.

No they don't. It could be considered relevant to show them how people spoke back then, and that nobody saw anything wrong with using that sort of language at the time.
It could be, sure. I can see both sides of the argument. It's a very inappropriate word, used way too many times, but looking at the historical context, it might be deemed appropriate for schools, I guess that's up to them. Either way, Huckleberry Finn wasn't a good example, because that's a matter of obscene language, not pushing ideologies on someone. If it had appropriate word usage but the same story line in Slave-era America, it wouldn't be subject of debate. It's a story book telling a tale within an assumed context. The detachment is there, whether you would acknowledge it or not. It's not nearly the same as a teacher right there, giving you your points on a test when you fill in an answer in such a way that it alligns with his political stance.


A test of this nature is composed of a series of sentences, many of which will show one form of bias or another. Said bias is far more conspicuous if you don't agree with it. Without seeing the rest of it, there's no point pissing and moaning about this one.
I'd be the same way if it was an attack on Clinton. My political stance doesn't play into this at all. It could be an attack on one of the extremists who I personally would like to see fall off a cliff.. extremists on either side of the spectrum.. Michael Moore or Ann Coulter.. But I still would be angry about him attacking them through a vocabulary test for his students. It doesn't matter how much I agree or disagree with the opinion, it's the fact that the children are clearly being indoctrinated. And I think the reason why you refuse to acknowledge this is because you agree with his stance.

Biases in a lot of things can be tolerated, like if the teacher made it clear that they thought Italian food was the best, or it was their opinion that the Lakers were the purpose for the existence of the NBA... yeah, you're right, there are little biases just about everywhere, but when it comes to things like politics and religion, part of a teacher's job is to leave their opinions at the door, because those things are much more important and potentially life-altering, and those impressionable young people are there to get an education, and nothing else. When that barrier is breached, it's not to be brushed off. Does the guy need to get fired? I don't think so, but he definitely should be admonished. It's not his place to push his politics on those kids. I'm sorry that you're one of the few who doesn't understand that.

That's my problem with this whole argument: the assumption that one question in a written test (for comprehension of word meanings, rather than ideology) is proof that some Godless comsymp liberal is brainwashing kids to vote Democrat. The article doesn't prove any such thing was going on, it just quoted something out of context and made a few vague allegations.

Some people are just blind while others just keep their eyes closed...vague allegations...out of context. Did we read the same article or are you so blinded by your ideology you can not understand what the article does and does not say?

Some people are just blind while others just keep their eyes closed...vague allegations...out of context. Did we read the same article or are you so blinded by your ideology you can not understand what the article does and does not say?
I'm more interested in what the test the article is whining about says, and how little the article actually says about that.

Um, I don't know where you're from, but every time I've ever taken anything other than elementary school history courses that cover WWII, my teachers have always mentioned the firebombings. Never heard of your drowning story, but I need to think about that a little more and look around before I decide whether or not that is bs or not.

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be) the poster is referring to an incident in which a US submarine sank a Japanese transport ship. Obviously, the sub could not pick up the survivors so the Capt. had them shot rather than let them drown in shark-infested waters. I don’t think the number was 8,000 though. Doesn't mean it was right, but it might have been humane then that's another thread.

Curious? Are the Japanese students taught about what the Japanese military did before and during WW II?

It could be, sure. I can see both sides of the argument. It's a very inappropriate word, used way too many times, but looking at the historical context, it might be deemed appropriate for schools, I guess that's up to them. Either way, Huckleberry Finn wasn't a good example, because that's a matter of obscene language, not pushing ideologies on someone. If it had appropriate word usage but the same story line in Slave-era America, it wouldn't be subject of debate. It's a story book telling a tale within an assumed context. The detachment is there, whether you would acknowledge it or not. It's not nearly the same as a teacher right there, giving you your points on a test when you fill in an answer in such a way that it alligns with his political stance.


I'd be the same way if it was an attack on Clinton. My political stance doesn't play into this at all. It could be an attack on one of the extremists who I personally would like to see fall off a cliff.. extremists on either side of the spectrum.. Michael Moore or Ann Coulter.. But I still would be angry about him attacking them through a vocabulary test for his students. It doesn't matter how much I agree or disagree with the opinion, it's the fact that the children are clearly being indoctrinated. And I think the reason why you refuse to acknowledge this is because you agree with his stance.

Biases in a lot of things can be tolerated, like if the teacher made it clear that they thought Italian food was the best, or it was their opinion that the Lakers were the purpose for the existence of the NBA... yeah, you're right, there are little biases just about everywhere, but when it comes to things like politics and religion, part of a teacher's job is to leave their opinions at the door, because those things are much more important and potentially life-altering, and those impressionable young people are there to get an education, and nothing else. When that barrier is breached, it's not to be brushed off. Does the guy need to get fired? I don't think so, but he definitely should be admonished. It's not his place to push his politics on those kids. I'm sorry that you're one of the few who doesn't understand that.
I fear we may have to agree to differ on this. Indoctrination requires rather more effort than one question on a test paper, for a start. All normalising elements and different viewpoints would have to be eliminated for a start, which would be rather tricky, to say the least. Kids are far more likely to absorb bias from their parents than their teachers.

Well, it's only fair, given that the right wants to teach creationism in school. Maybe we can learn about God in biology class while reading the Communist manifesto in English class. A bit extreme, but it would surely satisfy everyone.:D

I think it may be from the Outofassington Press.

Sure it's from the AP and posted on Fox. Here; http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,176735,00.html

Kervoskia called it first, he gets the prize. :)

I fear we may have to agree to differ on this. Indoctrination requires rather more effort than one question on a test paper, for a start. All normalising elements and different viewpoints would have to be eliminated for a start, which would be rather tricky, to say the least. Kids are far more likely to absorb bias from their parents than their teachers.

True. If you go eliminating liberal messages, then you're actually creating "conservative" indoctrination.

Well, it's only fair, given that the right wants to teach creationism in school. Maybe we can learn about God in biology class while reading the Communist manifesto in English class. A bit extreme, but it would surely satisfy everyone.:D
Along with Atlas Shrugged in order to not upset the libertarians, of course...

Perhaps you could explain how Ann Coulter comes out with rational and cool-headed arguments which never resort to name calling or bile, then?

Ann is not a teacher. What is very interesting about this whole debate to me is I have taken many English, History, Government, etc. courses in High School, college, and graduate school with many different teachers. With the exception of one instructor in graduate school, I could not tell you what the politics of those instructors was. Even the one whose politics I knew, never, ever pushed his opinions on the students and he respected everyone in the class regardless of their political leanings. And that folks is what education should be about.

A teacher should never try to indoctrinate students to believe what he/she believes. A teacher should stimulate debate, ask questions to make students think and make up their own minds, but this should only be done in the appropriate venue. An English class is not the proper venue for political debate. All hail to the teacher that keeps his or her own personal agenda out of the classroom and shame on those who cannot or will not do so.

I agree that the teacher was out of line here. A test is not the place for political statements because of the intimidation factor. A student is less likely to challenge something like this on a test because of the fear of getting a lower grade on their test.

But what purpose would firing this teacher serve? In a time where teachers are in short supply, and good teachers in even shorter supply, do we want to send the message to teachers that if they voice their opinions on anything that they'll be fired? This teacher will be disciplined and will most likely not repeat this offense in the future, but if he were fired, what good would that do? We do not need to be frightening off more potential educators than we already do.

I agree with everything you have said.

I don't see a problem. He didn't exactly hold a whole class discussion on this. It was one, maybe more, questions on a test that related to something political. Someone gave a few example questions about hitler and allah, but I didn't even find a problem with those. The test was made to pick the right word, and for me, it worked better than questions I've gotten in high school.

I could understand if he was over-doing it, but a few questions on a test isn't going to indoctrinate anybody, much less kill them. If anything, it will make them more interested in politics. Maybe if this was a 2nd grade class, I could understand the outrage.

I've had much worse offenses at my school. I've had my chemistry teacher tell the class she was going to a republican party(this was during election year), and telling us how she wasn't going to vote for kerry, as she just couldn't "see him being president". I've had my world civ teacher tell us how terrorists hate us for our freedoms as a matter of fact statement.

At my school at least, it seems the most liberal teachers are the ones who talk least about politics. Strange, you would think, living in the most liberal area of the world(well, in america for sure, world, its harder to say). We all knew that my last year english and US history teachers were against bush, though they never said it, and never pushed anything on us. The english teacher, one of the heaviest liberals I could find(though I think of him now more as a libertarian than anything, he really didn't like bush), even hosted the school's republican club. I argued with him about gun control in class sometimes, though we both wanted it gone, we had different reasons.

I don't like when people of the opposite beliefs of me teach me things that I disagree with, but thats because I don't like what they say. Its not because I am vehemently against them teaching it.

The American left... Hatred personified. And that's what they're promoting teaching in schools.

Sure, that only happens with the American "left"... it's not as if the American rightwing fascists try and personify hatred is there? Noone on the right mentions Osama Bin Laden or Kim Jung Il or Saddam Hussein... or Noriega or Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez or anyone who "dares" to hold opinions which are not in line with the official Fascistic US propaganda machine.

Only the lefties would do such things.


.... sorry, I have definately got it wrong... :(

Well, it's only fair, given that the right wants to teach creationism in school. Maybe we can learn about God in biology class while reading the Communist manifesto in English class. A bit extreme, but it would surely satisfy everyone.:D

You forgot about sex education in the class that teaches the Tora, Bible, and Koran. :D

Kervoskia called it first, he gets the prize. :)

Two cookies for him. :fluffle: :fluffle: (we need a cookie icon on NS)

Um, I don't know where you're from, but every time I've ever taken anything other than elementary school history courses that cover WWII, my teachers have always mentioned the firebombings. Good!

Never heard of your drowning story, but I need to think about that a little more and look around before I decide whether or not that is bs or not.

Hint: "seiwa maru" and "USS Wahoo" and "LCdr. Dudley W. "Mush" Morton ". After finding your own info on this, you are welcome to decide if reality is what you have been told.

In the meantime:

http://www.warfish.com/warpatrolfrm3.html

Ann is not a teacher.
Maclavia wasn't actually talking about teaching in this case:
Ah, yes, the lefty's version of "proof". Where facts are irrelevant, and it's all about personal attacks.

No wonder HOward Dean was given the DNC Chair after expressing that he HATES "Republicans and all they stand for."

The American left... Hatred personified. And that's what they're promoting teaching in schools.
If he's going to come out with statements like that, it'd be nice if he could explain how Coulter's any better than Howard Dean.



What is very interesting about this whole debate to me is I have taken many English, History, Government, etc. courses in High School, college, and graduate school with many different teachers. With the exception of one instructor in graduate school, I could not tell you what the politics of those instructors was. Even the one whose politics I knew, never, ever pushed his opinions on the students and he respected everyone in the class regardless of their political leanings. And that folks is what education should be about.
Y'see (and this is what's pissing me off about this whole debate) I have yet to see any evidence that the teacher in question was trying to indoctrinate anybody into the evils of Bush hating liberalism: just one question from a vocabulary test taken out of context and used to suggest that he was. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. It's impossible to say based on no more evidence than that.

A teacher should never try to indoctrinate students to believe what he/she believes. A teacher should stimulate debate, ask questions to make students think and make up their own minds, but this should only be done in the appropriate venue. An English class is not the proper venue for political debate. All hail to the teacher that keeps his or her own personal agenda out of the classroom and shame on those who cannot or will not do so.
I have no argument with most of that, but I wonder why you feel an English class is an inappropiate venue for political debate: do they no longer give kids 1984 or To Kill A Mockingbird as part of their English courses? (I know they no longer teach Huckleberry Finn or Puddinghead Wilson...)

just one question from a vocabulary test taken out of context and used to suggest that he was. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. It's impossible to say based on no more evidence than that.

Don't worry, there is more evidence... Celtlund has stated the following:

The article picked only one example of the many biased questions that were on the test.

I am still waiting for him to provide that very info, but... for some reason he isn't showing up with anything at all. Some people think they can throw up claims, and not have to provide any supportive info.

HONORABLE people may claim something that is wrong, but in that case, they will beg for forgiveness and admit they were wrong.

Celtlund will of course provide the "many biased questions" he claims to exist. I guess we just have to be patient.

Perhaps you could explain how Ann Coulter comes out with rational and cool-headed arguments which never resort to name calling or bile, then?


I didn't know Ann Coulter was the RNC head, or even an important member of the GOP?

Interesting .... so .... if the majority of the nation wants to abolish homosexuals, then we must accept the will of the majority; but if the majority of the nation thinks the President is an incompetent boob, we must protect the minority from mind poisoning teachers.

So that's how it works.

I'll remember that.

Hint: "seiwa maru" and "USS Wahoo" and "LCdr. Dudley W. "Mush" Morton ". After finding your own info on this, you are welcome to decide if reality is what you have been told.

In the meantime:

http://www.warfish.com/warpatrolfrm3.html

Yep, just as I thought. http://www.warfish.com/

Don't worry, there is more evidence... Celtlund has stated the following:



I am still waiting for him to provide that very info, but... for some reason he isn't showing up with anything at all. Some people think they can throw up claims, and not have to provide any supportive info.

HONORABLE people may claim something that is wrong, but in that case, they will beg for forgiveness and admit they were wrong.

Celtlund will of course provide the "many biased questions" he claims to exist. I guess we just have to be patient.

It's called reading comprehension. Did you even read the AP article? According to the AP there were others as well, and let's just say the AP is no friend of W.

It's called reading comprehension. Did you even read the AP article? According to the AP there were others as well, and let's just say the AP is no friend of W.

Yes, and most people understand the term "one example" means there is more than one. I pointed this out earlier but for some reason some people can not understand that. Maybe they need to take a reading comprehension class. :rolleyes:

what arn't you guys used to things like this in america?

you expect teachers to be imparsial

I didn't know Ann Coulter was the RNC head, or even an important member of the GOP?
She was the first right winger who sprang to mind who operates on hatred, bile and abuse of anybody who disagrees with her, to be honest.

It's called reading comprehension. Did you even read the AP article? According to the AP there were others as well, and let's just say the AP is no friend of W.
They're claiming that, but in the absence of any other evidence, they could be fibbing and that was all they could find. For all anybody knows looking at that article, the rest of the test could have been quotations from Mein Kampf.

Okay, so we all know that Bush is an [insert insulting word of choice here]. I mean, how many posts have you seen in the last... year, claiming that Bush is a good president?

Now, we have 1 person making a fun session of a quiz by scapegoating Bush, and BAM! we have the press all over him, when it is just what everybody else is thinking. Please raise your hand if you believe that this is fair.

I have no argument with most of that, but I wonder why you feel an English class is an inappropiate venue for political debate: do they no longer give kids 1984 or To Kill A Mockingbird as part of their English courses? (I know they no longer teach Huckleberry Finn or Puddinghead Wilson...)

No, they teach 1984(though I never got blessed with a teacher whom taught it), TKAM, Huckleberry Finn(not in some schools, but in mine, we sure did.) Never heard of puddinghead wilson though.

It's called reading comprehension. Did you even read the AP article? According to the AP there were others as well, and let's just say the AP is no friend of W.

So... you believe everything you read. No need for proof. No need to question anyone or anything? ...well... unless it is against your officially programmed mind.

That serves you and like minded well .... I guess. :(

Like: Iraq has WMD's... and everyone who wanted to believe it did just that: Believed it! Anyone heard of mental blindness? Ever thought it might hit close to your own home?

Yep, just as I thought. http://www.warfish.com/

Ok, you are obviously in posession of some higher knowledge... want to share it?

ah.....yes....share

No, they teach 1984(though I never got blessed with a teacher whom taught it), TKAM, Huckleberry Finn(not in some schools, but in mine, we sure did.) Never heard of puddinghead wilson though.
Another Twain novel. (One of his better ones, in fact.) It makes a number of points about why slavery wasn't an ideal social system, and is often very funny.
Yes, and most people understand the term "one example" means there is more than one. I pointed this out earlier but for some reason some people can not understand that. Maybe they need to take a reading comprehension class.
Actually, they're claiming that there are further examples but refusing to cite any, rather in the manner of Avalon II insisting that the theory of evolution is a big swizz. If they can only be bothered to quote one example, then there's only one example.

what arn't you guys used to things like this in america?

you expect teachers to be imparsial

Yes. Most of mine have been. How about the teachers in your county are they impartial?

Ok, you are obviously in posession of some higher knowledge... want to share it?

Yes. I am old. I have heard about this before, but was not sure if it was the same incident. I was pleased to see that at my advanced age, senility had not set in and I was right on my first assumption. I'm happy that I don't have to go to the doctor to be checked for Alzheimer or dementia. :D

It has nothing to do with politics; it has everything to do with education remaining relevant and au courant. Kudos to the teacher who was able to infuse a little of both and a dash of humouur to what would otherwise be just another mind-numbing exercise.

I wouldn't have had trouble with a Canadian english teacher using former PM Chretien's abysmal command of the language as a reference point in a similar test question for the kids up here, I don't see how Mr. Bush ranks as a sacred cow.

I don't see how Mr. Bush ranks as a sacred cow.

Because if we make fun of him, then we're providing aid and comfort to the enemy and we're traitors, and then the terrorists win!

According to Bush Theory that is.

According to Bush Theory that is.
If yer not wit' him, then yer agin him...

this is a terrible world where no one is allowed to have his own opinion. In high school, we contstantly debated about things and shared our viewpoints. The teachers did too. No one was "changed" by the debates unless someone struck a great point that made us think. Sure, that point may have come from the teacher himself, but our classes were smart enough to have a strong belief structure so we couldnt be "changed" by this teacher in our whole ora of beliefs. So, that is to say that if our teacher blurted out "the Nazi's had something goin there..." we would all know hes an incompetent moron. So, if your afraid this guy is going to change your children by putting at political belief on paper (HOW DARE HE!!) then i say educate your damn kids so they have a sense of what is correct before you get to high school. (Im not saying that bush is a good president, bcuz HES NOT!! just google "failure") The kids are in high school! Theyre not 4 year olds.

Hint: "seiwa maru" and "USS Wahoo" and "LCdr. Dudley W. "Mush" Morton ". After finding your own info on this, you are welcome to decide if reality is what you have been told.

In the meantime:

http://www.warfish.com/warpatrolfrm3.html


Meh, its not that I didn't believe you. I remember now what your talking about. Didn't mean to come off as I thought of you as a liar, I was just a little pissed from reading another thread.

If yer not wit' him, then yer agin him...

You'd think approval ratings would tell us that!

So, what if anything should be done to the teacher? There is no need for something like this in High School. This does not promote debate but is clearly designed to promote his political bias.

Students:

Friday, November 25, 2005

BENNINGTON, Vt. — A high school teacher is facing questions from administrators after giving a vocabulary quiz that included digs at President Bush and the extreme right.

Bret Chenkin, a social studies and English teacher at Mount Anthony Union High School, said he gave the quiz to his students several months ago. The quiz asked students to pick the proper words to complete sentences.

One example: "I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his everyday diction charms the below-average mind, hence insuring him Republican votes." "Coherent" is the right answer.

Principal Sue Maguire said she hoped to speak to whoever complained about the quiz and any students who might be concerned. She said she also would talk with Chenkin. School Superintendent Wesley Knapp said he was taking the situation seriously.

"It's absolutely unacceptable," Knapp said. "They (teachers) don't have a license to hold forth on a particular standpoint."

Chenkin, 36, a teacher for seven years, said he isn't shy about sharing his liberal views with students as a way of prompting debate, but said the quizzes are being taken out of context.

"The kids know it's hyperbolic, so-to-speak," he said. "They know it's tongue in cheek." But he said he would change his teaching methods if some are concerned.
"I'll put in both sides," he said. "Especially if it's going to cause a lot of grief."

The school is in Bennington, a community of about 16,500 in the southwest corner of the state.

This could almost be a datelinehollywood.com article...

And an explanation of why this is a problem and why any action needs to be taken against the teacher? Can't see that one myself.

I'm sure you would if one of the questions was;

Can you name one good reason why John Kerry should not be considered a indecisive, gold digging, and immoral Purple Heart collector?

I don't see how Mr. Bush ranks as a sacred cow.
Because sacred cow makes the best hamburger.
Thank you Mark Twain.

This is bushanomics here. I'm bush like. Teachers should be teaching good stuff. Which is why the president created the "No Child Left Behind Act" which was the best domestic act next to the Patriot Act. The President should be supported, because he is the president. We have already had an election and the president won by a land slide. Just like how in the last approval ratting President Bush is liked by most Americans. So uh ... this laberal teacher needs to recognize that the election is over and that this is the best president ever. He has set forth both the acts I just talked about, liberated afganistan and is winning the war in Iriq. Growing the economy and lowering the price of earl. What more could you want from a President?

True but more and more they are. For instance the school board at my highschool is pushing for mandatory teaching of Intellegent Desighn as well as the Theroy of Evolution. I think if they can justify doing that then the teachers should be allowed to express thier political views to their students.

Push back. Tell them that they'd have to teach Pastafarinism (sp), if they tried to teach Intelligent Design. Or better yet, that crazy story that Scientologists try to sell others about how the world came into being. That would be fair since Intelligent Design doesn't rely on evidence, thus, those two would also work.

Either way, its a waste of taxpayers money and could be argued to be an unconstitutional use of government resources.

That's as maybe, but I doubt Fox would have any problem with this if one question out of a vocabulary test had made an unpleasant statement about Clinton.
I saw it on CNN.

I think it may be from the Outofassington Press.I am sure its FOX something...

usually FOX whinnes about this kind of quiz.
haha...FOX Crybabies :D :D :p :D

I am sure its FOX something...

usually FOX whinnes about this kind of quiz.
haha...FOX Crybabies :D :D :p :D
I saw it on CNN.
...

I saw it on CNN.then you can probably find it on their website too.

then you can probably find it on their website too.
If I felt like it mattered.

But I've promised myself not to argue with political extremists (on either end), because no matter how wrong they always are (on either end), they're always completely certain they're always right.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/25/liberal.quiz.ap/index.html

If I felt like it mattered.

But I've promised myself not to argue with political extremists (on either end), because no matter how wrong they always are (on either end), they're always completely certain they're always right.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/25/liberal.quiz.ap/index.html

see? what did I tell you?

CNN/AP are rigth wing...less than FOX...but still Righ Wing...

Thanks GOD for BBC/AFP/EFE , etc

FOX > CNN = AP = Bushite Crybabies

When did reporting all the news become inherently single-winged?

I'm sure you would if one of the questions was;

Can you name one good reason why John Kerry should not be considered a indecisive, gold digging, and immoral Purple Heart collector?

I sure would, because its a loaded political question, not a vocabulary question.

If the question was: There are no good reasons why John Kerry should not be considered a/an (indecisive/indictive), gold digging, and immoral Purple Heart collector.

I bet Cahnt feels the same way.

When did reporting all the news become inherently single-winged?in 1791 :D

see? what did I tell you?

CNN/AP are rigth wing...less than FOX...but still Righ Wing...

Thanks GOD for BBC/AFP/EFE , etc

FOX > CNN = AP = Bushite Crybabies

Isn't BBC considered single-winged?

Isn't BBC considered single-winged?
There are plenty of websites dedicated to exposing BBC Bias

Isn't BBC considered single-winged?
No. Whichever Government's in power, they always feel that the Beeb are picking on them, whoever they are. If the libdems were to win the next general election they'd probably be whining about the BBC showing bias before the last of the election reports were finished.

Firstly, I am going to admit that I only read the first page of replies here as I am short on time.

Secondly; seems like a typically American overreaction to me. I am from the UK, and many of our teachers openly voice their opinions on Blair, Bush, Chirac, God and anyone else, in classes. This is not frowned upon, and can often lead to ordered debates or discussion (well, not the God issue, that tends to be avoided).

A prime example is the statement by my history teacher that "the scary thing is, America is being led by a man for whom the past three hundred years never happened. He still acts on instinct without due thought, without looking at the evidence." - or words to that effect. This was during a lesson regarding the Enlightenment, and the birth of reasoned thoughts and actions.

I also had three different teachers comment on Bush's apparant ability to converse with God in a single day.

Teachers can voice their opinions in lessons. Students are not forced to agree. Its just another excuse for the PTA and the other "I'm much more holy than thou" parents to get on their high horses.

But I've promised myself not to argue with political extremists (on either end), because no matter how wrong they always are (on either end), they're always completely certain they're always right.

see? what did I tell you?

:D