Posted on 06/29/2004 9:47:52 AM PDT by TeenageConservative
John Dewey's PROGRESSIVE EDUCATION is one of the three philosophies that has plagued American culture ever since the 1930's. (The other two are Sigmund Freud's PHYCHOANALYSIS and Charles Darwin's EVOLUTION.) It has taken over public schools, and has grown to such an extent that people don't even think about it anymore, it's just accepted. But has it really worked?
Progressive Education main points are: Everybody is a contributer to society, the child is the main focus, independence is crucial to education, frequent use of hands-on activities, and diversity in the classroom, to name a few.
Dewey believed that the purpose of education was to change society."Education is the funamental method of social prgress and reform... The adjustment of individual activity on the basis of this social consciousness is the only sure method of social reconstruction." as quoted by Dewey. So again, liberalism has destroyed true liberty by training young minds and turining them into a mold of their own.
Dewey himself was an athiest. He once said "God is the work of human nature, imagination and will." So by training young minds, liberals can brainwash students into believing there is not God. Because of this fact, a Christian school movement started in the 1960's on into now.
By the 1960's Progressive Education was accepted into almost every public school system and ever since we have had a decline in grades, discipline, and morality.
Bump for later.
Bump
Welcome little FReeper! Very good first post!
Okay. John Dewey was a professor at Chicago and Columbia University for education. He believed the un-scriptual philosophy that the universe is in a constant flux and there is no fixed laws or values. He turned away from TRADITIONAL education which prevailed in Western civilzation, and on back to the Protestant Reformation.
A bit off subject but... it has taken me a number of years to admit this since my child has been teaching at an elementary public school for more than a decade and I work for a school union (The state I now live in is a "right-to-work" state; I'd love to be fired because of my political beliefs - I'd become wealthy overnight) BUT...
public education in America is a Federally mandated..., taxpayer funded..., union controlled... JOBS PROGRAM. Education of children is a 'by-product' of the "goal" which is to provide jobs for workers.
Frankly... it is my personal opinion that you simply do not love your children enough ...if you send them to public school.
We have many "highly qualified" teachers who put forth 100% each and every day. I imagine you will find some in most schools. Dedicated teachers who advance thru merit admit that 'tenure' never protects a teacher who does his/her job. 'Tenure' only protects those contracts that the administration wishes to terminate.
From my prospective most union members are more concerned with personal rights and benefits than job performance. Having said this... I'd be the first to admit that approximately 10% of our members require 100% of union time and expense.
Frankly... as a taxpayer I'm not concerned with providing lifelong positions with retirement benefits to janitors, cooks and bus drivers. I had much rather my tax dollar be spent on "highly qualified" teacher salaries and books rather than benefits for support personnel and school board administrators/lawyers and plant facilities to house school boards. Many of those jobs/tasks could be provided by parent and PTA organizations IF the unions would permit it AND the parents REALLY valued public education.
But... who really values something that is free?
IMO, you could fix public schools by eliminating teachers as direct district employees, and hiring them on as contractors (at very competitive salary), then eliminating public education as a right. If a student is a screw off, and their parents refuse to parent, they can home school.
Welcome to Free Republic. I've been looking for a quote like this from Dewey, one that shows his atheism. Please cite the exact source (chapter and verse, so to speak) so I can show my friends in education. Thank you.
I see a problem or two... in my state, and most others that I'm aware, each teacher has an individual contract with the school system. Therefore any changes along this line... the union would require a separate hearing/lawsuit for each teacher/employee. Without getting indepth... this has been done many times in the past when attempts are made by school administration to re-constitute schools (in otherwords fire all tenured teachers in order to get rid of one or two who are considered incompentent by administration and then re-hire the others). In my area we are talking about more than 5,000 lawsuits (which requires a lawyer to represent the system at 3 to 8 hours for each case... depending on how long the union lawyer wants to drag it out). This would bankrupt any school system in North America... many times over.
...then eliminating public education as a right.
Now you've trespassed into the Federal domain. No way will this ever happen. Even if it were proposed by a congressman the NEA and state unions would pump millions of $$$ to see that this bill never saw the light of day.
Any changes that will improve or fix what is broken must be at the social/cultural level. I see church schools and home schooling as the only fix for the many problems within public education. As long as 'public' education is not valued by those who need it the most... those changes will never be made. Also, there is no motivation by congress critters to take on the most powerful labor union in North America... without a social revolt.
Unions are like cement... they have 'mixed' education up with labor being the main concern to the point where we are forever 'set' with a failed "public" school system.
Still awaiting your reply to my post #11, supra, new Freeper. If you're going to write about education, you certainly should know how to attribute sources. Just where exactly will we find the quote you attribute to John Dewey? Thanking you in advance. Hibernius Druid
Only the very best would hang around, however they amount of pay is needed to compensate for lack of benifits and security, it would also help pull talent from industry.The Union Pimps (my wife and I pay $130 a month in Union dues, she's a teacher) can go rot.
I am not a member of the union although I work for the union. Nor is my child who has been teaching for more than 13 years now. This explains my comment about tenure protecting poor, non-performing, incompetent teachers.
My liberal co-workers would disagree but "no child left behind" is the only time the educational bar has been raised since LBJ embraced the NEA as being positive for education. LBJ's 'Great Society' has almost destroyed real education in America.
Without really trying I can name a dozen or more teachers who refuse to send their children to public school because of its poor results. IMHO... the number one problem with union management/leadership is intellectual dishonesty; the second problem is that unions committee members are 100% democrat/want-a-be Marxist idealogs who are looking out for #1 and don't give a hoot about children. (These are not PTA enlightened individuals. Volunteer work to aid schools WITHOUT pay is a curse to them.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.