Consider it rhetorical, then.
An interesting takeâŚ
1 Like
Nonetheless, please try not to judge the idea based on how edgy it sounds, but based on a clear understanding of how the world actually works.
Based on my limited understanding of how the world actually works, getting taxpayer funding for private schools which by definition are not supported primarily with taxpayer money seems ⌠unlikely? Or at least, if they do, itâs presumably going to make them less âresponsive to the needs and preferences of those they serveâ.
Also, and this is off topic, Iâm honestly not sure what he means about Asian Americans being a âmade-up census categoryâ. Can someone explain?
Things will really start to get fun when standardized testing is eliminated from professional sports and equal outcomes are mandated instead.
Probably best for all involved if we donât deconstruct that particular argument too far âŚ
You may not have noticed but gymnastics is a bastion of white supremacy.
Canadian provinces such as Ontario have a parallel Catholic system which is taxpayer funded, I have graded lesson plans for those teachers and they are teaching dogma (Catholic, not Current Year).
The US has seen a rise in charter schools; I seem to remember this was Jeb Bushâs signature issue, and then Betsy Devos. Greater demand for school choice from parents who want their children to learn actual mathematics isnât difficult to imagine here. Some will cry that this is conservatives defunding education, but really I see the far left delegitimizing it.
I went to see if that category included South Asians, which it does, and in that case I can see how one could consider it too diverse and arbitrary. While looking it up I saw Wikipedia has a section on debates and criticism if you want more details.
2 Likes
Sad she has to go through the motions of suing and itâs come to this , now The Legal Aid Society has to defend why Robin Diangeloâs book needs to be taken as factually accurate as something like Newtonâs laws of motion, justify publicly defaming her and deal with the obvious conclusions that writers like Matt Taibbi have come to, which is the remarkable similarity to racist ideologies of actual white supremacists such as Richard Spencer. Not sure this has been posted before but light hearted.
2 Likes
Thatâs a 3-peat for this video on the forum (maybe this thread, and/or peak woke) as JD and I have already shared. Anyways, worth another round since the lessons still havenât been learned and some of our fellow Forumosans might benefit from a non-textual and less serious method of conveying the information.
2 Likes
That is pretty funny 
1 Like
Sure, but in return they follow a curriculum defined by the MoE. Which is my point: the writer of that article imagines a school system that gets government money without government oversight. That doesnât seem plausible to me.
Well, except for all the Jesus stuff. Which was my point: having a different system funded by taxpayers that accommodates different dogmas is totally conceivable.
Much of the woke dogma is at odds with Catholic dogma (not race so much as gender/sexuality). I have not followed the issue closely, but here is a masters thesis from 2014
and something more recent
So, a separate taxpayer system that caters to special interest groups. Not hard to see how this could apply to the voucher/charter systems already existing in the US. In fact, in Ontario non-Catholic parents try to get their children into the Catholic schools when possible because the quality of education is considered to be better, and because not all parents want their children exposed to the woke dogma.
Also, do you know anything about how individual teachers use those Ontario curriculum documents to plan lessons? Basically, they have to tie every lesson to as much of the curricular materials as possible, but it isnât possible to cover everything and teachers are able to pick and choose, or highlight and gloss over. They have a lot of leeway, and more of their training -in Ontario, to be sure- these days is on critical pedagogy than on lesson planning. I know this, because I was there, in Ontario, in a faculty of education, working with these people.
2 Likes
I have no problem with any of that, but negotiating a compromise system with the government isnât what heâs suggesting. His position is âwe canât find a middle ground so we should give up trying and make schools that teach exactly what we want. Oh but the government should pay for itâ.
That wasnât my takeaway, and going back I see the following:
So it seems to me that his position is actually that parents should be allowed to have more choice in how their tax dollars are used for education than they currently do. And that seems reasonable to me, especially given how much the woke dogma has infected influenced the public system.
If a middle ground were possible, we wouldnât be at the point where legislators are stepping in and enacting laws. There is no middle ground on this issue, you either accept the dogma or you are accused of being racist for questioning it.
2 Likes
Seems reasonable to me too, but he specifically says âprivate schoolsâ over and over again. My point here isnât complicated or even based on any particular position. If you want government money, the government is gonna want something in return. So you still have to engage with the government. Cakes and eating.
For what itâs worth, my actual position is that he knows this perfectly well. His idea is that people with money should send their kids to private schools. The stuff about vouchers is a half-hearted afterthought to make it seem like this plan includes less well-off people. But that part is obviously based on my own biases.
That wouldnât be much of an idea (itâs been happening forever).
I donât think so, itâs a long-standing argument based on taxation (whether one agrees with it or not).
2 Likes
There is a system for this already in the US, I mentioned charter schools
Yes, they use vouchers
This is how it is entirely possible to have a system such as he describes, but as he points out this will result in less funding for the massive public system (which is already collapsing under its own weight, as complex systems like this are wont).
And thatâs fine, because the public system is beginning to fail despite how expensive it is (and how underpaid the teachers are), for example, see:
- COE - Education Expenditures by Country
- https://hechingerreport.org/u-s-education-achievement-slides-backwards/
- https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_USA.pdf
No, his idea (and not very original, as he points out) is that everyone should have the same opportunity to have more school choice
2 Likes
Indeed, and I imagine if he meant charter schools, which are not the same thing as private schools, heâd have said so. They arenât mentioned once. The reason seems obvious to me: charter schools are still ultimately accountable to the government.
I have no problem with the idea of expanding the charter system, because that would involve oversight of their charters, and therefore a negotiated middle ground.