Not-So-Liberal Teachers

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Ah, Macbeth....

Impossible! Somebody on this thread above the level of reading comic books.

Shakespeare? Everyone and his mother has read or seen Macbeth.

As to comic books - clearly you've never read any Alan Moore.

[Amby 490]

do we need to make another thread on how to quote posts properly?

[jundp 191]

Ah, Macbeth....

Impossible! Somebody on this thread above the level of reading comic books.

Shakespeare? Everyone and his mother has read or seen Macbeth.

As to comic books - clearly you've never read any Alan Moore.

Well, I taught Brit Lit for 8 years...

And as for comic books (ahem...graphic novels) you should read Maus I and Maus II as well.

[Heracles 417]

Education is a universal concept in most countries isn't it?

Unless you're really suggesting that the US education system is so radically different from any other western country that no comparison can be made....

Blatant evasion on your part BTW - for the obvious purposes of shutting down discussion. Just to point that out.

So you have no first-hand experience with American classrooms but fancy yourself somewhat of an expert on the subject. What do you do for a living?

If all educational systems are the same, why aren't students' scores nearly identical? Do they all teach the same history and government classes?

Do try to explain where I'm evading and what I'm evading? C'mon 6, for guy who was taught the Queen's English you should include the object in a sentence.

Welcome to the world of #6 and PH. Jack of all trades, master of none.

[DeadPoolX 9]

It's probably been said already (given that this thread is about eight pages long according to my settings), but political leanings and personal preference don't have to go hand-in-hand. Even if they did, there are "conservative Democrats" and "liberal Republicans" out there as well.

One thing that needs to be addressed is that not all teachers instruct at the same level. I'm not commenting on their teaching abilities, but on grade level. An elementary school teacher would not be expected to teach the same course material (or speak as openly to his or her students) as a university professor would. It would be irresponsible on the part of the teacher to handle his or her classroom the same in all scenarios.

As for whatever a teacher does in his or her personal life, that's their business. If they attempt to keep that seperate from their work environment and not drag their own views (and perhaps whatever prejudices they may have, since we all have some) into the coursework, then the students won't be affected one way or the other. I realize that remaining completely objective is nearly impossible, but it might be healthy to aim for it -- unless the assignment dictates otherwise.

I often think the way we in the U.S. use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" is incorrect too. As I see it, conservative means to "conserve or hold onto what we have at the time" whereas liberal (or progressive) means "to try new things and be more open to different experiences." Neither one is inherently bad and in fact, siding with one too far is often a problem. The best solution is a mix of the two, since different situations require different solutions.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Education is a universal concept in most countries isn't it?

Unless you're really suggesting that the US education system is so radically different from any other western country that no comparison can be made....

Blatant evasion on your part BTW - for the obvious purposes of shutting down discussion. Just to point that out.

So you have no first-hand experience with American classrooms but fancy yourself somewhat of an expert on the subject. What do you do for a living?

If all educational systems are the same, why aren't students' scores nearly identical? Do they all teach the same history and government classes?

Do try to explain where I'm evading and what I'm evading? C'mon 6, for guy who was taught the Queen's English you should include the object in a sentence.

Welcome to the world of #6 and PH. Jack of all trades, master of none.

You didn't read the thread did you.

No reason to start now I guess.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's probably been said already (given that this thread is about eight pages long according to my settings), but political leanings and personal preference don't have to go hand-in-hand. Even if they did, there are "conservative Democrats" and "liberal Republicans" out there as well.

One thing that needs to be addressed is that not all teachers instruct at the same level. I'm not commenting on their teaching abilities, but on grade level. An elementary school teacher would not be expected to teach the same course material (or speak as openly to his or her students) as a university professor would. It would be irresponsible on the part of the teacher to handle his or her classroom the same in all scenarios.

As for whatever a teacher does in his or her personal life, that's their business. If they attempt to keep that seperate from their work environment and not drag their own views (and perhaps whatever prejudices they may have, since we all have some) into the coursework, then the students won't be affected one way or the other. I realize that remaining completely objective is nearly impossible, but it might be healthy to aim for it -- unless the assignment dictates otherwise.

I often think the way we in the U.S. use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" is incorrect too. As I see it, conservative means to "conserve or hold onto what we have at the time" whereas liberal (or progressive) means "to try new things and be more open to different experiences." Neither one is inherently bad and in fact, siding with one too far is often a problem. The best solution is a mix of the two, since different situations require different solutions.

I think some people see "extreme" politics in even the most mundane things. Its one of the frustrations of this country - in which respect I think the corporate media has done a pretty good job of making people approach political subjects in an adversarial way.

[Heracles 417]

You didn't read the thread did you.

No reason to start now I guess.

I did read the thread. Not to my surprise, as usual, you are full of it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You didn't read the thread did you.

No reason to start now I guess.

I did read the thread. Not to my surprise, as usual, you are full of it.

Maybe - but it beats being the forum equivalent of a prostitute. As long as someone is attacking the person/people you don't like it really doesn't matter to you whether their argument (or accusation in this case) holds water

[Heracles 417]

I often think the way we in the U.S. use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" is incorrect too. As I see it, conservative means to "conserve or hold onto what we have at the time" whereas liberal (or progressive) means "to try new things and be more open to different experiences." Neither one is inherently bad and in fact, siding with one too far is often a problem. The best solution is a mix of the two, since different situations require different solutions.

The other thing is that we are made to believe that change is always good. Therefore anyone against it must be stupid or ignorant. Change can be for the better or for the worse. America has numerous examples of this. For example, American cities becoming ghettoized. Or the ridiculous post 60's crime rate in America. Or the cultural / attitude change from look out for one another to every person for themselves. Or the number of kids living in single parent households etc. These changes are certainly not for the better of the people, the country or for humanity as a whole.

The irony is that I have met quite a few American liberals with a so-called conservative attitude. Whereas I have come across quite a few republicans who are actually progressive in views. The difference lies in the context of the two words. When I now think of progressive, in an American context, I relate it to a liberal American's obsession with rights. Not with actually advancing the human race, favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others, broad-minded etc. Which is what I defined as a liberal / progressive.

Maybe - but it beats being the forum equivalent of a prostitute. As long as someone is attacking the person/people you don't like it really doesn't matter to you whether their argument (or accusation in this case) holds water

That is quite hypocritical considering you have a history of doing this yourself. In numerous threads might I add

Edited July 20, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I often think the way we in the U.S. use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" is incorrect too. As I see it, conservative means to "conserve or hold onto what we have at the time" whereas liberal (or progressive) means "to try new things and be more open to different experiences." Neither one is inherently bad and in fact, siding with one too far is often a problem. The best solution is a mix of the two, since different situations require different solutions.

The other thing is that we are made to believe that change is always good. Therefore anyone against it must be stupid or ignorant. Change can be for the better or for the worse. America has numerous examples of this. For example, American cities becoming ghettoized. Or the ridiculous post 60's crime rate in America. Or the cultural / attitude change from look out for one another to every person for themselves. Or the number of kids living in single parent households etc. These changes are certainly not for the better of the people, the country or for humanity as a whole.

The irony is that I have met quite a few American liberals with a conservative attitude. Whereas I have come across quite a few republicans who are actually quite progressive. The difference lies in the context of the two words. When I think of progressive in an American context I relate it to a liberal American's obsession with rights. Not with actually advancing the human race, favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others, broad-minded etc.

Out of curiosity - by who, specifically...?

Maybe - but it beats being the forum equivalent of a prostitute. As long as someone is attacking the person/people you don't like it really doesn't matter to you whether their argument (or accusation in this case) holds water

That is quite hypocritical coming from you considering you have a history of doing it yourself. In many threads.

Yawn. I think you need to learn a different tune than "Wah-wah". Its very unbecoming

Edited July 20, 2008 by Number 6

[Heracles 417]

Yawn. I think you need to learn a different tune than "Wah-wah". Its very unbecoming

#6 you are hypocritical and highly predictable. You seem to pick the same arguments with various people who disagree with you. How funny to see someone get into an education debate with you and your clown ### buddies. Ring a bell. Where you talk a big game yet cannot walk the talk.

Out of curiosity - by who, specifically...?

A good number of liberals in the United States.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yawn. I think you need to learn a different tune than "Wah-wah". Its very unbecoming

#6 you are hypocritical and highly predictable. You seem to pick the same arguments with various people who disagree with you. How funny to see someone get into an education debate with you and your clown ### buddies. Ring a bell. Where you talk a big game yet cannot walk the talk.

I guess I must have missed where you came into the thread with a specific disagreement to specific postings. You'll correct me on that I'm sure...

Out of curiosity - by who, specifically...?

A good number of liberals in the United States.

Nice "here be dragons" non-answer. Note that I asked specifically (as in names) which people it is who specifically say this in relation to the examples you indicated.

Edited July 20, 2008 by Number 6

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It's probably been said already (given that this thread is about eight pages long according to my settings), but political leanings and personal preference don't have to go hand-in-hand. Even if they did, there are "conservative Democrats" and "liberal Republicans" out there as well.

One thing that needs to be addressed is that not all teachers instruct at the same level. I'm not commenting on their teaching abilities, but on grade level. An elementary school teacher would not be expected to teach the same course material (or speak as openly to his or her students) as a university professor would. It would be irresponsible on the part of the teacher to handle his or her classroom the same in all scenarios.

As for whatever a teacher does in his or her personal life, that's their business. If they attempt to keep that seperate from their work environment and not drag their own views (and perhaps whatever prejudices they may have, since we all have some) into the coursework, then the students won't be affected one way or the other. I realize that remaining completely objective is nearly impossible, but it might be healthy to aim for it -- unless the assignment dictates otherwise.

I often think the way we in the U.S. use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" is incorrect too. As I see it, conservative means to "conserve or hold onto what we have at the time" whereas liberal (or progressive) means "to try new things and be more open to different experiences." Neither one is inherently bad and in fact, siding with one too far is often a problem. The best solution is a mix of the two, since different situations require different solutions.

Thank you, DPX. Excellent post.

[Heracles 417]

Nice "here be dragons" non-answer. Note that I asked specifically (as in names) which people it is who specifically say this in relation to the examples you indicated.

I learned from the best.