Church, Politics and State Education Systems

[denuseri]

I think part of the problem is that the current education system and the salaries it provides tend to select for left-wing ideologists. I don't think the education system is the way it is because of democrats actively pushing a political agenda, I think its actively the way it is because of the teachers pushing their own political agenda (in some cases the teachers unions own political agenda). One can probably test this by tracking student opinion on issues where the democrats and teachers union disagree, I suspect that students will bias towards the teachers union.

I don't believe its this way from an active agenda on the part of the current democratic party in the usa persay eaither; I never said that it was at any rate. It was an active agenda being pushed when they went from classical to Dewey, though I am sure those responsible felt as if they were improving the system as opposed to opening pandora's box.

Some courses are very hard to make apolitical. History for instance is near impossible. You can't promote make history interesting by teaching numbers and facts without providing a viewpoint or context. And that viewpoint or context is always subjective and open to bias. Something objective like Math or Science however, there is a legitimate argument for making apolitical.

I obviously 100% disagree, I teach history and make it interesting every time without anyone in class having any idea what-so-ever what my political affiliation is; its my humble yet learned opinion in this paticular case that promoting otherwise is just making excuses for those who wish to promote an agenda or not hold themselves to any kind of ethical standard in that regard.

As for holding teachers to the same standard as the military, I think that would be impossible. The soldiers aren't being told "You are required to educate people about these subjective situations in history". Studies have shown that people can't even agree on what neutral coverage is, because their view of what's neutral depends on their own political biases. So even asking teachers to be neutral and having the teachers genuinely try to do so doesn't result in politically unbiased coverage.

Attended any historical lectures given as part of an ROTC program lately or at a military academey? It is not only realisitic, its allready in place and not just recently, its been that way in a number of schools for a long long time.

Also, trying to reduce history to facts and numbers without a viewpoint or context is never going to connect with students in a way that promotes learning. Much of history at that level these days is about trying to get students to think "What would it be like to be growing up in these times, how is it different/similar to my own life?"

No one said anything about reducing anything down to just facts and numbers and one can get their students to think just fine without promoting any political agenda as part of one's lecture or be objective in presenting information while at the same time inspiring ones students to make up their own minds about what was what instead of trying to program them with ones own subjective opinion. In fact you can even get them to actually become active in class and have real thought provoking discussions instead of sitting like drones taking notes in bored tandem as they wonder how many more hoops they have to jump through to get their peerage stamped diploma.

Which us back to the main difference in perspectives between the "Dewey" way and its much harder to implement, but better overall results achieving "Classical" predessesor.

One tuaght students what and how they should think.

It says their is no way to be objective so lets not bother.

The other, tuaght students how to think for themselves.

It says a teacher can be objective if they are disiplined enough to put thier students needs before their own.