Skip to comments.Ignorant Teachers Who See Obama as a King
Posted on 05/23/2012 10:15:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
It was while I was driving from Florida, where I gave a presentation on education to citizens, that I heard from talk show hosts about the abuse by North Carolina High School social studies teacher Tanya Dixon-Neely towards a student who dared to challenge her diatribe about Mitt Romneys alleged bullying incident from 1965. In response to the students reference to Barack Obamas own admission in his book of having shoved a girl, the teacher yelled that students can be arrested for disrespecting President Obama. President (King?) Obama was beyond criticism to Dixon-Neely, unlike candidate Mitt Romney.
The confusion of Stalinist practices with our own reveals the profound ignorance that reigns among teachers.
As I drove back, hearing snippets of the tape over and over, I also, admittedly, felt disappointed that my video of a Georgia State University education professor, at a school-sponsored Teach-In, pledging to give students extra points for lobbying legislators to vote against immigration enforcement bills, did not go viral. Although the professor does not sound out-of-control crazy like Dixon-Neely, her promise to bribe students shows us where the problem begins.
As in the case of Dixon-Neely, this teacher apparently did not suffer any meaningful punishment. Dixon-Neely received a suspension, with pay. Jennifer Esposito was given a memo by the Dean, the same dean who was the prime sponsor of the Teach-Ina daylong session on lobbying against immigration enforcement laws and workshops on incorporating Marxist and subversive curriculum materials banned in Arizona.
And thats what the educrats want to happen. They haughtily expect that such punishments will quiet the populace.
The recording of Dixon-Neelys diatribe may be added to the list of incidents in future articles, as Bryan Preston did in reminding us of Diawatha Harris, who browbeat her young charges for daring to think that John McCain was the better candidate.
Will outrage over such incidents change anything?
Yes, talk show ratings.
The shouts on the radio, the blustering about indoctrination at a townhall meeting, the withdrawal of occasional students from schools are mere annoyances to educrats skilled in the obfuscations of policies and procedures, quasi admissions of errors in judgment, and academic jargon. Ive heard from many a parent who has gone to the principal of a public or Catholic school complaining about how social studies is taught only to be treated with contempt or indifference. A questioning of the sex-race-gender syllabi is likely to bring a rush of postmodernist babble.
The problem is systematic. It begins in colleges of education, where future teachers are taught things like Race, Class, and Gender in Education, the name of the course the Georgia State University professor pledged to make the letter-writing assignment in.
Such classes take up most of the time in education schools, while education majors take a minimal number of watered-down classes in their subject areas.
Yet, studies consistently show that students whose teachers are well-versed in their subject areas (that would include social studies teachers who understand the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and U.S. history) outperform those whose teachers take a lot of courses on radical pedagogy.
Will such evidence make a difference?
No, unless citizens know about it, learn the language of assessments and outcomes, and know how to expose the false data that educrats routinely employ (studies done by the same people setting the new standards). My testimony about the Teach-In did bring a good response from State Representative Rich Golick, the chancellor, and the governor. But not much will happen unless citizens demand long-lasting reforms.
First, people need to know that while Dixon-Neelys delivery of her lesson on Obama might not have been typical, the content was. The problem stems from the dominant decidedly anti-intellectual method called constructivism, in which a student presumably constructs or discovers knowledge. Contemplation, study, and reasoned debate give way to loud activity and freewheeling discussions based on feelings. Students do social studies or do democracy rather than learn about it.
What does such a classroom look like? I described a demonstration at a 2009 social studies conference where eleventh-graders sat around and discussed feelings after hearing the song, Home on the Range.
During my presentation this weekend, I referred to the United States Institute of Peaces new curriculum on peacebuilding. I quote from one of the many classroom activities, this one for middle school:
Explain to students that you are going to share a list of words that can be associated with conflict. Share that each statement will begin with When I say conflict, you think of . . . and then a word. Each time you finish a sentence with a new word, they should clap if students think of that word very often; snap if they think of the word sometimes; and stay silent if they do not think of it much at all. Encourage students to look around the room and listen with each word to be aware of their classmates responses.
There is a whole lot of clapping and snapping going on in such a classroom, but precious little learning.
Teachers have a plethora of such ready-made lessons that presumably meet state standards, from lessons on Christopher Columbuss history of genocide at the [Howard] Zinn Education Project to lessons on police brutality by Van Jones at the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights.
Teachers are offered such materials routinely. They welcome them, for they allow teachers to make subjective evaluations.
The curriculum writers at the United States Institute of Peace admit that lessons involving clapping and snapping, running around, and dialoguing do not allow for traditional forms of test-like assessment. They admit, assessment often takes a more subjective form, for example, through a teachers observation of a students participation in activities, small group, and whole class discussions, as well as individual growth.
So those like Dixon-Neely can determine grades, not by tests that parents and citizens can review, but by observing participation and individual growth.
Hence, ignorant ideologues like Dixon-Neely use hit pieces, like the one on Romneys alleged bullying in the Washington Post as a legitimate topic of discussion in class, with the approval of superiors. Dixon-Neely is not an aberration. Recognizing that is the first step in reform.
It is time to go beyond outrage. It must begin with a citizenry educated in the strategies and versed in the terminology. They need to begin making the assessments.
Teachers with such fascist like attitudes shouldn’t be allowed to indoctrinate public school students.
Two words: Home School
I prefer DE FUND.
(But oblivious american families will never accept the elimination of their ‘free’ national baby sitting service.)
When and how did the word “disrespecting” come into the English language? It is not in my vocabulary and never will be.
These “open minded” liberal teachers are the epitome of hypocrisy. They yak on about exposing the kids to new ideas and yearn for discussion. As long as that discussion tows the liberal line. Deviate in any way and the open minded free flow of ideas is shut down at lightening speed.
Worse still are those at the college level. Talk about Orwellian in nature!
In the case of the in-your-face racist, Tanya Dixon-Neely, she undoubtedly is ignorant, but the crux of the matter is quite simply, that she hates whites.
It is time that European Americans make a dispassionate reappraisal of the battlefield and recognize that this is the predominant feeling, if not motivating factor among a majority of blacks, and has been for decades.
When it became an Ebonics word....
“I heard the exchange yesterday afternoon. She was a caricature of an undesirable stereotype.”
“Stereotypes” exist because human beings have observational powers, can apply logic and notice patterns of behavior, and then form reasoned, intelligent, sometimes life-saving conclusions.
Along with Communist, Judgmental and Dogma, another one of the forbidden words, due to decades of brainwashing from the morality destroying, Media Marxists.
Her whole demeanor and speech were not exactly exemplary. No one responsible for teaching young people ought to be seen or heard behaving or speaking in that way.
IMHO, "Dissed" is worse yet. Another pet peeve is "Busted" in place of "Arrested".
I dislike "journalists" who can't be bothered to at least pretend to sound educated.
Ignorant blacks started using it, then ignorant whites not wanting to offend ignorant blacks began pandering to them and began using the words.
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.