I have an interesting question for you tonight. Take a look at the image below. This was handed out as part of a vocabulary test recently to sixth graders. Do you think this is appropriate material to be giving them or not? Thoughts?
I will share my thoughts after you all have a chance to voice yours.
I will share my thoughts after you all have a chance to voice yours.
34 comments:
BTW, I wanted to jump out ahead on this one... a NASA rocket blew up in Virginia a few seconds after launch today.
1. It's clear that Obama did this to make NASA look bad so as to distract the public from how bad NASA has looked so people will turn to him to fix NASA.
2. Why would anyone launch a rocket from Virginia instead of Florida? They wouldn't! No scientist has answered that question, not that you could trust a so-called scientist now that I've exposed the truth! So clearly, there was no rocket. Hence, the explosion was really a secret test Obama ran to blow up an Ebola infected city. This is UNDENIABLE!
3. There was no explosion. The photograph was faked by the same company who once ran Obama's campaign. The reason they want you to believe a rocket blew up is so you don't pay attention to ____. (Fill in at your paranoid leisure.)
Take that Alex Jones! ;-D
Sixth-graders? I lean towards "No".
Andrew,
I went over to InfoWars, they are too busy talking about EBOLA COMING TO THE US!
KIT, EBOLA IS HERE! RUN AWAY!!! lol
In terms of leaning, why? And how strongly? Just leaning?
Leaning. A part of me is happy some kids get that message about how good this country is but that image is a bit too dark to be in a sixth-grade class. I mean…
JESUS!
It's not what you see it's what you don't see and what is implied. The gun to the back of the head. That is a pretty startling image because you know what happens next.
We read Anne Frank's diary back then. Pretty grim. Maybe they shouldstick with real photos and stories instead of drawing a cartoon though!
The news cycle has recently been dominated by talk of Ebola and the latest school shooting. The picture is tame compared to the nightmares the media tends to sell the public.
Well, my first thought was "WOW! that's harsh". But then my next thought is that the cartoon more clearly depicts "prosecuted" or "executed" more than "persecuted". As in:
It is a privilege to live in a country where citizens are not "prosecuted" or "executed" for their beliefs. Oh, but they can be "persecuted" for them at will."
But then I am guessing this was not so much a statement of fact as much as a vocabulary lesson.
If you have put this out for us to comment on the visual violence of it, then I have to agree with CrisD. By the 6th Grade we read Diary of Anne Frank and viewed the pictorial history of the Holocaust, Klan violence, nuclear fallout. And then there was the famous photos of the young man being executed by the Viet Cong in Life Magazine. And we were never exposed to a constant diet of violence as entertainment as kids are today. On a side note: we also did not have mass shootings even though we had guns around either...
In a world where chewing a Pop Tart into an "L" and shouting "pew pew" in the school cafeteria is grounds for expulsion, or coloring pictures of knights and soldiers engaged in battle earns a trip to the counselor's office, I say the picture is absolutely not appropriate. Young, delicate minds need to be sheltered. After all, children only learn violence because they are taught it.
*SNERK* Sorry. With three kids in the single-digits at home, I couldn't maintain a straight face.
Outside bubble wrap land, kids are not naïve to issues of violence. Virtually every person you meet has experienced some sort of minor or major hardship as a child and still grew into a balanced adult. It's the ones who are shelteredthe--trust-funded or home-schooled--who grow up lacking empathy. Kids can handle worse than a drawing of a gun.
What kids really struggle with are mixed-messages and double-standards. The way to really mess up a kid psychologically is to deal with him or her inconsistently on a regular basis. This one picture can't even do that, but if it's part of a larger pattern, it sure can. And even on its own, in the context of zero-tolerance, it still sends the clear message that authority is above the law rather than a stem from it.
I would be offended if this came home, unless the exercise was to ask the student what was wrong with the sentence.
Answer: living in a free society is not a privilege, it is a RIGHT that belongs to every human being.
Tryanmax - That is an angle to that drawing that I have not thought about. Very true - where kids can't wear pictures of guns on t-shirts or chew breakfast pastries into gun shapes, it does seem out of place.
I would imagine that a banana is no longer a banana when held the right way. I often play "secret agent/SWAT team member" with my banana-gun. However, if they are teaching the letter "B", they could use a picture of a banana to illustrate...
Kinda lightweight (and late) when you consider the "Cindy Has Two Mommies" and other assorted S&M lunacy they shove into kids' brains in kindergarten.
Interesting comments, everyone!
My personal take on this was that I am leaning toward it being inappropriate. It struck me as rather a shocking image to include in a vocabulary primer for sixth graders. Had this been a social studies class, I don't think I would have blinked. But as "an aside" in an English class, this seemed a little much to dump on kids. At the same time, had this been a high school issue, again, it wouldn't have bothered me. But my recent experience with 6th graders is that they are remarkably naive compared to what we think.
That said, I know that others are very outraged by this or it wouldn't have come up. I see their point, though I don't share the outrage. It strikes me that (1) this is not nearly as bad as much of what they've seen on television, and (2) this does provide some valuable lessons.
For example, this does teach that not everyone lives in freedom as we do here, which I think is a lesson many more Americans need to learn. It also instills a healthy distrust of government and government power. It's hard to see this image and to come away thinking that you can always trust your government... or even more to the point, without realizing just how far a bad government can go.
Bev, The Vietnam image did come to mind as well, but I realized we didn't see that until 10th grade when I went to school. In 6th grade, we had two days on the Civil War and one day on WWII, and no pictures.
Ultimately, I think this was something it would have been smarter not to do, but it is more likely to upset parents than kids.
Tryanmax,
You really believe that homeschooled kids lack empathy? IMO it depends largely on the parents, whether homeschooled or not.
I reckon your experiences with homeschooled kids is much different than mine.
That is, most homeschooled children I have observed or known seem well adjusted and do have empathy.
So perhaps you are basing your opinion on the character of the homeschooled children you have observed.
Still, seems rather harsh to make a blanket statement like that.
As to the question, goid catch, Bev. What is depicted is an execution rather than persecution, therefor it is wrong and should either be changed or taken out on that basis alone.
As to the appropriateness, I concur with T-Max that it sends mixed messages on the idiotic zero tolerance thing.
Andrew, well said. Personally, I'm surprised that this was being taught in a public school, since most liberals love big govt. so I suspect it wasn't a liberal that created this image or what it infers.
Ben, Thanks!
The schools around here are a strange mix of conservative and liberal, with most erring on the side of being apolitical. I'm not sure about this particular teacher.
Ben and tryanmax, I've found homeschooled kids to be a mixed bag. Some are great. Others were sheltered to the point of being helpless. Some basically learn nothing beyond a very aggressive version of Sunday school. Others are homeschooled because their parents are weirdos and they tend not to teach their kids on the theory that life will teach them.
And I totally agree about the zero tolerance issue. This flies in the face of that. If kids need to be sheltered from Bev's banana gun or a Despicable Me fart gun, then how do you justify showing them this image?
Andrew,
On the topic of schools and Colorado, what is with the protests in Boulder over curriculum?
It doesn't seem appropriate for the class being taught. I'm not sure what image would have been better and perhaps that's the point. The fact that there is a picture indicates a younger mind set. You wouldn't need this picture for later high school or college students. A cartoon like this or a picture such as from the Holocaust during social studies would be appropriate because you are discussing the situation. This just seems weird and out of place for English.
Ben, lacking in empathy isn't necessarily being a bastard, which I'm guessing is what you think I meant. It's just being generally out-of-tune with other people. That makes for a lot of social awkwardness, space invasion, inappropriate comments, unfunny jokes and obliviousness to different points of view. That's about 90% of the home schoolers I've known.
Looking at Bev's post, she is right. The use of persecuted is too harsh for the picture. Executed is more appropriate.
Persecuted: to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief
He isn't causing suffering only death. Jim Crow laws would be a better example. And is the statement even accurate? There are plenty of examples of people persecuted for their beliefs in this country: Mormons, Native Americans, Republicans...
Or, if you want something historical, why not show a Pilgrim and mention that they came here to avoid religious persecution?
Kit, I haven't followed Boulder, so I'm not sure. Like everywhere else, there are a lot of people trying to politicize the education curricula out here. Some are on the left, others are on the right, some are just out there in loony land. And Boulderites love to protest everything.
Koshcat - One could have used:
It is a privilege to live in a household where little brothers can be "persecuted" for being the little brother.
or in the alternative;
It is not a privilege to live in a household where little brothers are "persecuted" for being the little brother.
Every 6th grader could relate to that in some way and no drawing of a gun need be involved.
Bev - I like it.
Kit -
It wasn't Boulder County School district, it was Jefferson County which covers mostly the western part of Metro-Denver. This is all a liberal's wet dream getting far more coverage than it deserves. The board, which tends to be conservative, proposed (not voted or decided) that the history courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strike or disregard of the law."
The students didn't like their history "censored" so they organized a walk out. After all the liberals had a collective orgasm, they rushed out to interview these poor students standing up against the evil board members.
So here's a topic to discuss. The board members answer to the voting public, which in general are the parents of these students. The board had not decided on the curriculum modification so therefore the students were protesting an idea. In addition, the rights of minors are somewhat limited compared to adults and I doubt they obtained a permit for the protest.
Questions:
1. Should law enforcement have allowed the protest or should they have arrested the students as truants and sent them back to school?
2. Should the schools count the students who were gone as unexcused absent and punish according to their rules?
It would be a nightmare, but the students should be punished as a lesson to how the system works. Members of the board and the community are allowed to present new ideas to change or modify the curriculum. The board should discuss and debate and allow for public and teacher input. Then the board would vote and if passed the schools are expected to follow. Flash protests to strong arm the board is illegal (not protected by the constitution).
Your are right Andrew! As a vocabulary word illustration, this would not be carefully discussed like Anne Frank. But Bev, you are spot on, it is an execution as pictured.
Koshcat - The first issue in your discussion is the definition of "censorship". To me "censorship" means to remove all access to a an idea in print, in speech, and in thought. Changing the curriculum is NOT "censorship" to me. As long as one can find access, then it is NOT censorship. We still have libraries, newspapers, free thought, free speech, free and unfettered internet access. book stores (for now) so that just because you are not access in a school curriculum does not mean you do not have access.
Koshcat, I don't think law enforcement should be involved because it is a free speech issue. That said, the schools should count them as unexcused because "free speech" does not mean "consequence free."
In terms of the issue, I'm remembering it more now and your presentation is right -- they are protesting a change that hasn't even been given any substance yet.
Thanks Cris! I think it would have made more sense to reach for a famous American example.
As an aside, the teacher has said she won't use the image again.
T-Max - "It's just being generally out-of-tune with other people. That makes for a lot of social awkwardness, space invasion, inappropriate comments, unfunny jokes and obliviousness to different points of view. That's about 90% of the home schoolers I've known."
Working in my church youth programs and as a scout leader, I'd say all those criticisms apply to 90% of the kids I've known - home-schooled, public-schooled, private-schooled. That's just the turmoil of youth. I've seen no variance of social skills or attitudes among these kids that I might trace to schooling. But I do acknowledge that the the home- and private-schooled kids seem to edge out the public-schooled ones for raw knowledge. This tendency seems to assert itself when we're working on academic loops, pins and badges.
All of us are working on anecdotal information, of course, which is uninformative and tends to stereotyping (like I just did!), which is also unfair.
I will add this: in these settings, I can usually pick out the kids whose dads are not sufficiently involved in their lives. And, especially in scouting, the effect is very sad.
KRS, I'm referring specifically to adults who I know to have been home schooled. Granted, that's still anecdotal. I can see how you'd assume kids, given that the topic is school, but by definition, I didn't meet many homeschool kids when I was in school. For the record, some of those who I have in mind I've known for years, and most have gotten much better. But they are still lagging and cling to some very sheltered thinking.
I stand corrected.
Most of the the people in my age bracket who possess some social dysfunction were educated by nuns.
We exhibit irrational fears of yardsticks and handbells.
Post a Comment