Texas Republican 2012 agenda

[Athena]

The Texas Republican Party expressed their opposition to the teaching of certain HOTS by including the following item in their 2012 Party Platform^[3]:

 

"Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student's fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority."

 

 

This comes from a Wikipedia explanation of Higher Order Thinking Skills, and is about education for abstract thinking that opens a person mind and prepares a person for independent thinking. This Christian Republican stand against this education for independent thinking is also the strong Christian opposition to John Dewey. I am bringing him into this debate, so there is a better understanding of what the Republican stand is about.

 

Here is an explanation of how John Dewey overcame Christian opposition, but he did not win the hearts of many Christians who absolutely hated him and the result of education for independent thinking. http://quidditycirce.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/how-dewey-has-overcome-american-christianity-and-overthrown-america/

 

Are in favor of the Texas Republican agenda or against it?

 

 

Edited August 1, 2012 by Athena

[CharonY]

Apparently the Texas GOP is not quite certain about its own agenda:

Contacted by TPM on Thursday, Republican Party of Texas (RPT) Communications Director Chris Elam said the “critical thinking skills” language made it into the platform by mistake.“[The chairman of the Education Subcommittee] indicated that it was an oversight of the committee, that the plank should not have included ‘critical thinking skills’ after ‘values clarification,’” Elam said. “And it was not the intent of the subcommittee to present a plank that would have indicated that the RPT in any way opposed the development of critical thinking skills.”

 

Elam said the members of the subcommittee “regret” the oversight, but because the mistake was part of the platform approved by the convention, “it cannot be corrected until the next state convention in 2014.”

 

Mind you, that was after all the media coverage of it.

[ecoli]

I'm hoping that was taken out of context. Maybe they meant "rational, critical thinking skills" instead.

[iNow]

No, it's as bad as it sounds. We can't be interfering with what the parents want to teach their kids. Obviously, schools teaching kids to think critically interferes with the freedom of parents.

[Phi for All]

Obviously, schools teaching kids to think critically interferes with the freedom of parents.

Well, yeah, obviously. Look what happened to the Amish in Texas.

[Athena]

Can we be clear on the Texas Republican position? http://articles.bost...elligent-design

 

This is about the Republican Party's efforts to assure schools teach creationism as science. It was a nation wide controversy because Texas buys so many text books, text book makers cater to the Texas market.

 

We might call this culture wars. It also involves laws regarding abortion based on an interpretation of the bible.

But it does not stop here, because religion is autocratic, not democratic. It declares the man is the head of the household, and gives men a jealous, revengeful and fearsome God as a remodel. This God rewards humans who please him and punishes humans who do not.

 

Romney going to Israel and commenting about the difference culture makes, slamming the Palestinians, looks like potential trouble to me. The last thing we need is adding religious prejudices to our politics and the situation in the mid east. Going from Bush and the biblical references such as the "Power and Glory" when we invade Iraq, to Romney kissing up to Israel, may be like playing with dynamite. The man is Mormon, and someone with these beliefs, who acts on them as Romney just did, might not be a good thing.

Edited August 2, 2012 by Athena

[imatfaal]

It's an amazingly frightening document - in another thread a few weeks ago Jeskill spotted some other pretty abhorrent (well at least to me) points of policy. I read through the whole thing and was frankly astounded - I thought it read like a bad parody of southern conservative views; it was Poe's Corollary in action. The fact that there is a constant meme in the right wing press that liberals use the education of children to indoctrinate them with left-leaning ideas is an aid and comforter to the less rabid republicans and allows them to justify this form of dangerous action to their own conscience.

 

If this had been a town-councillor's manifesto printed off on his own laser-printer and distributed by hand it would have been scary and concerning; the fact that it is the policy document of a state party (and one of the most influential states) is downright terrifying. I hope that the backtracking is due to pressure from the moderate wing for the party to resile from these retrogressive and dangerous policies.

[Athena]

It's an amazingly frightening document - in another thread a few weeks ago Jeskill spotted some other pretty abhorrent (well at least to me) points of policy. I read through the whole thing and was frankly astounded - I thought it read like a bad parody of southern conservative views; it was Poe's Corollary in action. The fact that there is a constant meme in the right wing press that liberals use the education of children to indoctrinate them with left-leaning ideas is an aid and comforter to the less rabid republicans and allows them to justify this form of dangerous action to their own conscience.

 

If this had been a town-councillor's manifesto printed off on his own laser-printer and distributed by hand it would have been scary and concerning; the fact that it is the policy document of a state party (and one of the most influential states) is downright terrifying. I hope that the backtracking is due to pressure from the moderate wing for the party to resile from these retrogressive and dangerous policies.

 

Man, I don't want to take this off topic, but what is this left wing stuff? There has been an on going war over education since 1893 and I am struggling to figure out who is right and who is wrong. I think making Christianity the power behind our culture and civilization is a mistake, and that is surely what many Republicans are doing. On the other hand, Christianity is not all bad, and it is mistake to throughout the good with the bad.

 

Mythologies have been behind the development of civilizations since the beginning of civilizations, and these seem to come to power struggles. The mythology behind democracy is the Greek gods, and is an imitation of them. Whereas, Christianity is about one god with favorite people, and inherited power, and it is all tangled up with Hellenism, and earning ones position on merit.

 

This is mixed with the right to exploit people or the need for government to protect individual rights including the right to a decent life. Athens created government jobs, so people could earn a decent wage and have the time and energy to participate in government, and Jews fought a terrible war with the Greeks because of this merit hiring that messed up their hierarchy of inherited power. Is God favoring people or does wealth and power have something to do with their social organization and perhaps protecting property rights, more than human rights? What is the role of government? What is right or left? I really don't know.

 

I think we must have rule by reason, but people keep saying this isn't what democracy is about, so I am really confused. But for sure, I do not like the Christian agenda that attacks the development of our ability to reason, and forces an unbelievable God on everyone, preventing us from understanding democracy is rule by reason. Reason says problems are caused by ignoring the needs all those who need economic opportunity, because doing so would reduce the wealth of those in power. Conservatives present this as a battle over the commons, and in Eugene, Oregon they have won, and have a down town exclusion zone, where those in power can exclude those do not want in the down town, including preventing St. Vincent de Paul from purchasing a building and operating a business that would attract undesirable people, the poor. I think Obama is right, that it is the president's job to consider the need of everyone's economic opportunity. A few getting rich, by excluding others, and by sending industry to China, or investing over seas, as the Christian evangelist Pat Robinson advised his flock to do, while the rest of us are paying taxes to protect this over seas economic interest, burns my soul. Right - left?

[iNow]

I hope that the backtracking is due to pressure from the moderate wing for the party

The what? I am unfamiliar with that group. Do you have a link or maybe a story to where I can read more about them?

Edited August 2, 2012 by iNow

[padren]

The what? I am unfamiliar with that group. Do you have a link or maybe a story to where I can read more about them?

I'm not sure, but I think this might be a documentary about them.

[iNow]

^+1

[Athena]

Okay, will independents do as as the moderate wing? I think people register as independents because they take pride in thinking for themselves. The problem with being an independent is you don't get to vote in primary elections.

 

I'm hoping that was taken out of context. Maybe they meant "rational, critical thinking skills" instead.

 

As was pointed out in another thread, the species that uses language (humans) is an abstract thinker. From the first time a cave man painted a picture a wall, this was an expression of abstract thinking. However, there are various abstract thinking skills. At the lower level, people willingly follow religious despots and do not question what everyone believes is true. Look at the Lion King movie, where all are dependent on a lion king. That is what most people want. They may reduce their political thinking to who is in favor of abortion and who is not. Who is right or who is left. Are just vote a party ticket with no thinking at all, because 200 years ago the leaders of this party were in the right.

 

There has been a fight over public education since 1893, one side wanting to teach people what to think and the other side wanting to teach them how to think. Yes, it is all abstract thinking, but those who are in favor of teaching our young how to think, teach the higher order abstract thinking skills. A person can become an engineer without much higher order thinking skills, but will not be a really good one. Get it? There are different levels of thinking skills, and for many reasons, like religion or budget cuts, children can learn technical skills without learning independent thinking skills. The fight is over the dangers of teaching children to think for themselves. In many school districts there is no fight, because the budget cuts have reduced education to the bare bones of learning technological skills. This is devastating to our country, and I can't talk it about here without a mod who understands nothing of the issue and what is at stake. threatening me about promoting my own agenda, and a many more jumping in to give me bad points. Must not mess with the accepted dogma, you know. If nothing else, it is bad for ones popularity to say things that the in crowd does not agree with, or to criticize the wrong people. You all can take this personally, or politically. I hope you understand the political meaning of what I am saying, because this is the important level of understanding, and today's politics is an expression of what happens when we function at this lower, reactionary level. I will leave it at, there are different levels of thinking, and reasons for many children are not learning the higher order skills. It is the Texas Republican agenda to prevent young children being taught to think for themselves, and questioning what their parents believe, but as long they don't mention God, those children should grow up to do well in these forums, they will not challenge authority nor question the dogma, and therefore, should be popular and avoid any problems.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Athena

[rigney]

This comes from a Wikipedia explanation of Higher Order Thinking Skills, and is about education for abstract thinking that opens a person mind and prepares a person for independent thinking. This Christian Republican stand against this education for independent thinking is also the strong Christian opposition to John Dewey. I am bringing him into this debate, so there is a better understanding of what the Republican stand is about.

 

Here is an explanation of how John Dewey overcame Christian opposition, but he did not win the hearts of many Christians who absolutely hated him and the result of education for independent thinking. http://quidditycirce.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/how-dewey-has-overcome-american-christianity-and-overthrown-america/

 

Are in favor of the Texas Republican agenda or against it?

 

 

Education is necessary for a civilized nations survival. But what happens when everyone has earned a Phd in Physics, Medical Science and Cosmology? Some day it may come to that. What then? Do we simply step to the next rung up the ladder of Zen? Then just swoop off into a dream world of exaulted accomplishments? I have spent a lifetime working with a few brilliant people, so-so folks like myself and some, pushing hard for an IQ of 70. But none of them should be declared as not having a place in society. I am no Philosopher, but to try equating the philosophical views of 2,000 years ago with today? I wish you luck. Regards Edited August 3, 2012 by rigney

[CharonY]

But what happens when everyone has earned a Phd in Physics, Medical Science and Cosmology? Some day it may come to that. What then?

The answer is fairly simple. We will have more PhDs driving taxis. Note that this already happening. A PhD does not mean that you have specific place in society. You are just given more options (although you will be late to the game).

 

What the Texas GOP means however, is to reduce the likelihood of challenging unfounded believes. The purpose for higher education in my mind is not really just to get a title or becoming an academic. Instead it should challenge things that you think that are true, but which are not necessarily so. In science it is often the way we perceive reality. The majority of the time you do not learn what reality is, but rather what it is not. You learn how solve generic problems, you learn (or should learn) to challenge your own viewpoint on a constant basis.

Higher education is there to tell you that there is more out there. You do not have the pursue an academic career (and in many cases you really should not) but you should know that there is so much more out there to look at and regardless of your job, social status and whatnot, it is there for you to explore.

In short, higher education is supposed to be there to expand your horizon not more, not less.

Edited August 3, 2012 by CharonY

[rigney]

The answer is fairly simple. We will have more PhDs driving taxis. Note that this already happening. A PhD does not mean that you have specific place in society. You are just given more options (although you will be late to the game).

 

What the Texas GOP means however, is to reduce the likelihood of challenging unfounded believes. The purpose for higher education in my mind is not really just to get a title or becoming an academic. Instead it should challenge things that you think that are true, but which are not necessarily so. In science it is often the way we perceive reality. The majority of the time you do not learn what reality is, but rather what it is not. You learn how solve generic problems, you learn (or should learn) to challenge your own viewpoint on a constant basis.

Higher education is there to tell you that there is more out there. You do not have the pursue an academic career (and in many cases you really should not) but you should know that there is so much more out there to look at and regardless of your job, social status and whatnot, it is there for you to explore.

In short, higher education is supposed to be there to expand your horizon not more, not less.

Wish I could expound on your statements further but you pretty well wrapped it up. In another post, I believe JohnB gave it the same assessment. If we could only see just a few short years down the road from now???

[padren]

To expound on the "everyone has a Ph.D" syndrome, there are two basic reasons for getting a Ph.D:

 

1) To learn something tangible and useful to yourself, your life, your career aspirations

 

2) To get a leg up on the competition who may not stick it out for a Ph.D.

 

People have both goals in mind when they plan their education, but it can be really hard to gauge the "leg up" part. It's more like a bell curve with no passing grade, just very smart people you have to out compete in the job market. By the time you've distinguished yourself with an exceptional education it may not be that exceptional anymore in terms of competition relative to how much everyone else stepped up their own game while you were doing the same.

 

Everyone benefits from the general "raising of the bar" that continuing competition produces, since the tangible baseline of acquired skills goes up the more education people get.

 

Where we get into trouble, is poor planning on the competition part because it's not only a moving target, but it moves entirely based on how you (and everyone else) moves in the struggle of job competition and career strategy. (Ironically, a basic understanding of calculus really does make it easier to asses these sorts of "moving target" situations, even if you never use calculus.)

 

Where I worry about college kids today, is they seem to plan to be able to pay college loans by making a "highly competitive wage" in a highly competitive field, despite the fact that they can't all end up at the top - half by definition will be average or less... still better qualified for lesser jobs but not likely to pay those loans.

 

 

 

To play devil's advocate on the Republican agenda point - I can understand how some people feel like they should be teaching their own kids how to think for themselves, even if I think many of those people just happen to be deluded. If you ask almost anyone if they want their child to be able to think critically they'll say "yes" but they'll take issue with you over what critical thinking means. None of those people consider themselves "intellectually crippled adults" simply because they didn't take some critical thinking classes - they feel in charge of their lives and like they know what they need to know and how to make sure their kids are well equipped to deal with the world.

 

As a result, I'd say parents need to be educated on the benefits of critical thinking skills because Republican or Democrat, most parents genuinely don't want their kids to have "less" skills than other kids - even kids in other countries. The only thing they are missing is that these skills actually do have a big impact - and (gosh) even help conservative kids excel as better conservative adults.

 

So in short - I don't think it's fair to say they want kids to be dumb, or want their kids to have faith in a lion king like leader... I think most just don't understand how these classes mattered when they were kids, and it's easy to play on their fears that "liberals are indoctrinating their youth with innocent sounded classes" if they are already concerned. I think that sort of fear mongering is both overplayed and deplorable, but it's a far cry from simply trying to dumb people down so they'll play follow the leader.

Edited August 4, 2012 by padren

[Janus]

I'm not sure, but I think this might be a documentary about them.

 

Maybe they mean the rare Northern White RhINO:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_white_rhino