Alright here you go...
Could care less on this. I don't mind moving towards what's generally academically used, while at the same time I have no issue with B.C. and A.D. as they are the more commonly used words for it. As such I think either of them would be a benefit to kids learning the times and thus I don't really care either way. Whichever one isn't used should be mentioned and made known to the kids so they're not confused.In final edits leading up to the vote, conservatives rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D.
In high school I have no issue with this, if its not the ONLY stance they speak about. I have no issue with them speaking of both the critics and the supporters of the UN when talking about it to high schoolers, there's no reason they should ONLY present one opinion when there's a second opinion that has very large support.They also required that public school students in Texas evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty.
McLeroy offered the amendment requiring students to evaluate efforts by global organizations including the U.N. to undermine U.S. sovereignty, saying they threatened individual liberty and freedom.
In elementary school and even middle school I see no reason why the UN should really be discussed, either positively or negatively, in any way other than simply speaking about what caused its creation and what it does in a broad, general sense.
I have no problem with them talking about the judeo-christian influences on SOME of the nations founding fathers. Its impossible to say that there was not any influences from it. At the same time, I disagree with them potentially over inflating how much that influence was, and/or down playing the more generalized deist views of many of the Founding Fathers and the notion that while many of the principles were FOUNDED in christian principles the overall feel for how government should function was secular.During the monthslong process of creating the guidelines, conservatives successfully strengthened the requirements on teaching the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers and attempted to water down rationale for the separation of church and state.
Absolutely no issue hereThe standards will refer to the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic,"
Eh, this is absolutely ridiculous in anything but a high school class, and even then it'd have to be looked at very closely if its giving an accurate view. Liberal slanted teaching only is bad....Conservative slanted teaching only is ALSO bad. IF you're going to try to "balance" something you better actually BALANCE it, not just tilt it the other way.and students will be required to study the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.