Holding a child back is not easy for parents

Houston Chronicle ^ | August 18, 2003 | JO ANN ZUÑIGA

[Aquinasfan]

...and it's been interesting to see that their peers in private school haven't even come close to their level, despite the mega bucks their parents have spent on tuition.

Sad and pathetic, isn't it?

I don't get it.

It's all about free babysitting. It's as simple as that.

[Aquinasfan]

I wonder if math curricula is developed for the same purpose?

You're right about "whole language." Dewey developed it as a way to prevent children from reading. That's not a typo. As a socialist, Dewey believed that the purpose of schooling was to promote children working collectively. If children couldn't read, they would be forced to work together to guess at the meaning of words. This method of instruction had the additional benefit of preventing children from reading and therefore learning independently. Intellectually defenseless children are easy to manipulate.

The purpose of mass, forced schooling, which we imported from Germany, has always been the regimentation of society.

Math is now anathema because it represents objective, eternal truths. But to the socialist mind, truth is a social construct, not objective and eternal. Therefore, it must be "deconstructed." You can guess the rest.

[ladylib]

I probably wouldn't be too far off base if I said it is an evil system.

Particularly evil is a school superintendent who puts into place a reading program that he KNOWS will fail one quarter of his students.