Emails Show MA High School Teachers Refusing to Hide Anti-Trump Bias

Posted by mminnick 6 years, 3 months ago to News
17 comments | Share | Flag

From article;
"Personally, I’m finding it really difficult in the current climate to teach kids to appreciate other perspectives. ... [T]he ‘other viewpoint’ might not really be an argument ‘about which reasonable people can disagree’ and might not lead to any kind of intellectual, policy debate; it might just be blatantly racist," Bedar said.

This is not a college class, this is a High School class. The teacher is supposed to teach the bacics of historical data and analysis, not the political agenda of a specific party. But then the left has controlled the schools for so long they don't even recognize the othe POVs as existing, much less valid.
Fire the jerk. No that's right, he is protected by the unions and the stupidity of the average person in Massachusetts.
Sorry for maligning the citizens of Massachusetts but if they let this stand, they are stupid.).
SOURCE URL: http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/08/13/anti-trump-teachers-conspired-reject-teaching-objectivity-students


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Eyecu2 6 years, 3 months ago
    Well while I dislike the Leftist agenda and it being pushed on impressionable young minds, I have to admit that I am guilty of doing the same thing but from the other side. I live and teach in Texas and I regularly shoot holes in the Leftist lunacy spouted by the students. I show utter contempt for Liberal policies and agenda. I occasionally get flak for my position. Though normally all I hear is how they support me but are afraid to be so vocal.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by mshupe 6 years, 3 months ago
    It's amazing they even give lip service to objectivity. I guess that's the real lesson, the definition of objectivity has also changed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Jstork 6 years, 3 months ago
    As government employees (in essence) we are obligated to teach the curriculum in accordance to their standards. I as an educator have to regognise and respect this agreement. What I can do though, is present the facts rationally and objectively regardless of my particular viewpoint, and urge the audience to objectively look at the facts/evidence and formulate their decision from there. Properly presented to an objective and rational audience, the truth can often go a long way. I practice this with many topics by asking or posing yes or no, a or b, black or white style questions. Even younger audiences can come to conclusions on some pretty good topics via logical reasoning.
    I am not there to preach (other than the curriculum), but to also make them think.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 6 years, 3 months ago
    High school teachers need to teach the basic academics, ot theory. When they tried the socialism junk on our duagher, I introduced her to Greek philosophy, and "Anthem", via books. She read, she understood, and she presented her own rebuttals in the classroom.Even though she went to a private college, she did run into one liberal professor who bashed the then Republican president, and she wrote a paper arguing how he was wrong.I know when i was in college, they tried to push the "women's studies" off on me, and I flat out refused to take them. Since kids are not learning what they need to work, either in HS or college, they need to get off the leftest agenda.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 6 years, 3 months ago
    Are we to teach our children to be blank slates until someone writes something on them. To be objectivist does not mean we pretend all philosophies and potential ruling governments are equal just because someone else has a different point of view. That idea teaches that the use of violence to enforce an idea is valid if you can convince the majority that it is ok. Shooting holes in a theory (socialism) is not failing to be objectivist by pretending the student has to have the systems equally presented then the student must decide. If you decide for the side of violence and evil that is what you have chosen and it is not objective to pretend that it isn't.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 6 years, 3 months ago
    Are we to teach our children to be blank slates until someone writes something on them. To be objectivist does not mean we pretend all philosophies and potential ruling governments are equal just because someone else has a different point of view. That idea teaches that the use of violence to enforce an idea is valid if you can convince the majority that it is ok. Shooting holes in a theory (socialism) is not failing to be objectivist by pretending the student has to have the systems equally presented then the student must decide. If you decide for the side of violence and evil that is what you have chosen and it is not objective to pretend that it isn't.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CTYankee 6 years, 3 months ago
    Massachusetts was the home and nurturer of Freedom from the 17th to the mid 20th centuries. What went wrong?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Flootus5 6 years, 3 months ago
      Oh, man you posed such a central question to my life.

      I grew up in Mass from birth in 1955 to leaving high school in 1973. In the public schools in Winchester there was such a huge confusing mass of contradictions, I pity the other poor souls that went through it with me.

      But, I had the benefit of having independently found and nurtured my own intellectual development based upon Ayn Rand in that era. I subscribed to her newsletter in the day. I learned how to think, thanks to her. No thanks to the public schools, but the curriculum provided a fertile ground to apply the principles.

      I wrote an English paper on why the god concept is flawed. The old teacher angrily threw it back in my face with such a look of hatred. I had a current events teacher that encouraged a principled, objective approach to reading the news every day - by bringing today's paper into class and asking the students - what do you think? And then supporting the multiple hypothesis theory even politically - without humiliating anybody. It was about how to think and how to listen. They fired him.

      And then I took a "college development" course called Environmental Science. My thought was "Hah?" "What is this?" My thought at the end of the semester was "Hah?" "What is this?"

      Hence I became a geologist.

      But through this Massachusetts public education system, there were so many things left out. So many questions, so many issues of direct relevance to who we are as Massachusetts descendants and what happened in history. And a history that is so fundamental to the core of the questions of individual identity, liberty, and responsibility as citizens. There was a huge gap that really bothered me.

      And so, I spent hours on my ten speed bicycle going over to the Lexington Green, the Concord Bridge, and into Boston to the Old North Church, the old cemeteries dating back to those eras.

      I saw an old bullet hole in the frame of an old door on the Lexington Green that was fired on that day. People died.

      The schools did nothing to answer my questions of why would somebody risk their very life in defiance of such odds? What is life worth if it is lived within chains of any sort? But, when do you arrive at the clear delineation in soul and mind that the ultimate sacrifice is absolutely worth it?

      Sitting on the Concord Bridge contemplating these deep, fundamental soul searching questions is when I realized that they cannot be arrived at without these very questions being clearly framed - and answered.

      These questions were not even on the radar in the Massachusetts public education system of the 1960's and 1970's. Despite all this readily visible history in the very neighborhood.

      I resolved to leave. In my lifetime I went west early, only to find the same problems descending upon and encircling the perceived freedoms of the people of the Western US. And even worse with unconstitutional federal ownership of 87% of my now home state.

      I have since learned that an old ancestor of my mine was integrally involved in those events of the late 1700's. Job Shattuck was his name from Pepperell, Massachusetts. He fought in the French-Indian Wars, he rousted out to the call to Lexington, he was at Bunker Hill, and at Saratoga. He survived the War of Independence. And then came the time between the Treaty of Paris and 1787. In Massachusetts, the rurals were facing taxation proposals from a distant government (in Boston). Thus began Shay's Rebellion. My old ancestor was pivotal to this until being chased down by (government goons) seriously wounded by saber in the leg and captured. He was thrown in prison without medical aid for months and then sentenced to hang. Daniel Shay went on to lose the rebellion near Springfield and fled Massachusetts.

      Things were changing. Then Mass governor John Hancock pardoned old Job Shattuck and played a hand in introducing the cruel and unusual punishment concepts to the Bill of Rights.

      I would so much like to set down with my old ancestor and discuss - What went wrong?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 6 years, 3 months ago
    Ask a leftie to define "racism" and they trip over their own tongue trying to stretch the definition to match the wildest claim they've heard. I even had one respond when I suggested he look it up in a dictionary that dictionaries are assembled by "right wing fascists" and can't be trusted. Tragic that they don't know the meaning of a word until told by their political hierarchy what the latest meaning is.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeangalvinFL 6 years, 3 months ago
    Scary shit.
    First they came for the . . .
    Any relatively normal person who applies to be a teacher will run into a Mr. Bedar in a position of power. Many will not make it past him.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 3 months ago
    From the article: "Teacher David Bedar accused the president and his supporters of “nativism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc.” and wrote that he found it difficult to teach other perspectives in early 2017." Really? What proof of these so called accusations was offered? Empty accusations are just hot air and it's too bad the students have to be subjected to this blather. Perhaps David Bedar needs further education on freedom of thought instead of parrot regurgitation of leftist propaganda.

    Also from the article is the line: “I am concerned that the call for ‘objectivity’ may just inadvertently become the most effective destructive weapon against social justice.” I say 'objectivity' won't be "inadvertent", but will be a directly destructive weapon against the idiocy known as "social justice", which is no more than the inculcation of the New Jim Crow on Americans.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo