• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Dumbing Down of America

Should basic history/economics as described in the OP be required:

  • For graduation from high school and college.

    Votes: 14 50.0%

  • For graduation from high school only.

    Votes: 9 32.1%

  • For graduation from college only.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Not be required for graduation from HS or college.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • Other and I will explain in my post.

    Votes: 3 10.7%
  • Total voters
    28
AlbqOwl said:
The Dumbing Down of America

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/gorillapigspage/videos/887671784663955/?pnref=story

youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history/economics as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not?
Click to expand...


I completely agree that economics and financial planning should be taught in highschool, and should be required. It's an important life skill. That said, I don't believe any particular skill should be mandatory to graduate college. College is not mandatory education and you shouldn't be expected to take courses outside of what is necessary for your degree.

The UK system is different to the USA, but in the UK degree courses are incredibly focussed (typically a max of 10% of classes a year can be taken outside of your chosen major (unless you specify a dual major) - and even then, that's not required). This means you complete your degree in a years less time, saving you money, allows you to enter the workforce sooner, and your knowledge of a subject is far more in depth and specific.

As for history, I stopped taking it when I was 16 and no issues. Some parts were fascinating and we can learn a lot from it but not my thing. My history education was of world history, I think in the US the term history simply means 'US history' which I think is detrimental to students.
 
JumpinJack said:
As far as I know, American History and Civics are still taught in our schools. ...
Click to expand...

In North Carolina, Civics and Economics are only taught to students getting a diploma that allows them to go on to college - IOW, not the majority of kids get civics and economics training. In fact, a kid only has to get 4 credits in that group, so they could take 4 credits worth of history courses and never crack a book in Civics or Economics. It's probably not that different in other states.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.
Click to expand...

What practical purpose would requiring the teaching of these things serve?

If someone with just a high school or basic collegiate liberal arts education is working three part time jobs in order to barely get through the month paycheck-to-paycheck and the only reason they have healthcare at all is because the government pulled an end run around what the Founding Fathers may have intended do you really think a solid foundation in Mill, Locke, and Wollstonecraft is going to cause them to vote more out of (largely antiquated) principal rather than immediate practicality?
 
JumpinJack said:
As far as I know, American History and Civics are still taught in our schools. The fact that young people don't know history doesn't mean they weren't taught it in school. It just means they didn't do their homework, or they didn't pay attention, which is a parenting problem. People are not required to attend good parenting classes before having children. Until they are, we will see this sort of thing.

I liked American History and Civics, but as I recall, not many other kids did. Of course, it's more interesting in documentaries, such as can be found on PBS (not those dramatic fictional so-called historical accounts you see on network stations).

Hopefully the govt will continue assisting PBS with funding, so that these programs can continue to be made, bought, and shown. They are free to the public. In urban areas, most need only have an antenna to get broadcast stations like PBS.

I would make it required viewing for ALL kids in the country to watch all nine segments of Ken Burns' The Civil War, for starters. Then they'd have to watch:

PBS American Experience episodes - The Pilgrims
PBS American Experience episodes - The Mine Wars
PBS American Experience episodes - War Letters
PBS American Experience episodes - Death and the Civil War
PBS American Experience episodes - The Triangle Fire
PBS American Experience episodes - The Crash of 1929
PBS American Experience episodes - Hoover Dam
PBS American Experience episodes - U. S. Grant, Warrior
PBS American Experience episodes - Robert E. Lee
PBS - The American Revolution
and many others.
Click to expand...

If it is not being learned, then it isn't being taught is it? (Splitting hairs on semantics there I know.) But the OP asked if the student should have COMMAND of those basics before they can graduate. In my opinion they should. So if the kids aren't learning it, the schools should get busy and see that they do or they can't graduate them.
 
soot said:
What practical purpose would requiring the teaching of these things serve?

If someone with just a high school or basic collegiate liberal arts education is working three part time jobs in order to barely get through the month paycheck-to-paycheck and the only reason they have healthcare at all is because the government pulled an end run around what the Founding Fathers may have intended do you really think a solid foundation in Mill, Locke, and Wollstonecraft is going to cause them to vote more out of (largely antiquated) principal rather than immediate practicality?
Click to expand...

Maybe just maybe they would have a chance to have a country where they wouldn't have to work three part time jobs to get by--or at least such would be a very temporary thing. Maybe just maybe they might see the benefits of what restoration of a Constitutional Republic and necessary limitations on the central government might offer--more opportunity, more choices, more options, more entreprenourship, more vision and thoughtful risk taking, etc. etc. etc. that would benefit pretty much everybody who chose to take advantage of it. Maybe it would affect the kind of people they would elect to public office and what they expected from the people they elect.
 
Nilly said:
I completely agree that economics and financial planning should be taught in highschool, and should be required. It's an important life skill. That said, I don't believe any particular skill should be mandatory to graduate college. College is not mandatory education and you shouldn't be expected to take courses outside of what is necessary for your degree.

The UK system is different to the USA, but in the UK degree courses are incredibly focussed (typically a max of 10% of classes a year can be taken outside of your chosen major (unless you specify a dual major) - and even then, that's not required). This means you complete your degree in a years less time, saving you money, allows you to enter the workforce sooner, and your knowledge of a subject is far more in depth and specific.

As for history, I stopped taking it when I was 16 and no issues. Some parts were fascinating and we can learn a lot from it but not my thing. My history education was of world history, I think in the US the term history simply means 'US history' which I think is detrimental to students.
Click to expand...

I agree that a comprehensive education in history requires U.S. history and world history. But I will argue that those college grads are likely the ones to wind up in positions of power. Since every college has a core curriculum of math, English, etc. that all students are expected to master before they are worthy to have a degree, it would not be difficult to include basic history, economics, government/civics in that core curriculum. In fact is WAS there when I went to college. Those who found the basics really interesting would take more advanced courses that would be voluntary, and of course those who majored in those topics would go on to become experts. But I want those who are going to have the power later on in life and make decisions that affect us all to have a basic grounding in those subjects.
 
OFF TOPIC: I have to go cook dinner and take care of some other chores, but I shall return. Carry on. :)
 
Lets take america back--yadda yadda
Kids these days are smarter, and in general more well informed.
People who think otherwise should just start enjoying their retirement(if they have one since their own generation probably ruined it), and stop being so arrogant.
Does that mean we shouldn't strive to do better? No.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Maybe just maybe they would have a chance to have a country where they wouldn't have to work three part time jobs to get by--or at least such would be a very temporary thing. Maybe just maybe they might see the benefits of what restoration of a Constitutional Republic and necessary limitations on the central government might offer--more opportunity, more choices, more options, more entreprenourship, more vision and thoughtful risk taking, etc. etc. etc. that would benefit pretty much everybody who chose to take advantage of it. Maybe it would affect the kind of people they would elect to public office and what they expected from the people they elect.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.

People, by and large, don't think long-term.

They're not interested in what the consequences of today's actions might be two or three generations down the road.

Most folks are just interested in taking care of themselves and their kids.

I mean, I was a Boy Scout for several years, served in the Army, was a dual history/poly sci undergrad, I take an active interest in politics and am a regular participant here and in other military, history, and politics online communities, I'm active in my local offline community, heck, this is a picture of one small corner of one of the bookshelves behind my desk:

Capture.JPG

And I'm telling you that while I know as much about the history of Western political theory, with it's ultimate culmination in the foundation and development of the U.S. federal government, as anyone you're randomly likely to meet on the street, I just don't see the benefit of what you're proposing.

I think that we need to be teaching kids how to make a living and how to make a life and we need to be building an economy that allows them to take what they learned and put it in to practical application.

You can't just teach someone what the Founders intended through a basic high school or 101-level introduction to the Federalist Papers and then cut them loose in a society where jobs are being off-shored at a remarkable place, free trade agreements are being signed that allow foreign slave labor to manufacture the majority of American consumer goods which are then imported at no cost to the corporations raking in billion dollar revenues, wages have been stagnant for decades, wealth is becoming more and more concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and then expect them to vote on principal.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I agree that a comprehensive education in history requires U.S. history and world history. But I will argue that those college grads are likely the ones to wind up in positions of power. Since every college has a core curriculum of math, English, etc. that all students are expected to master before they are worthy to have a degree, it would not be difficult to include basic history, economics, government/civics in that core curriculum. In fact is WAS there when I went to college. Those who found the basics really interesting would take more advanced courses that would be voluntary, and of course those who majored in those topics would go on to become experts. But I want those who are going to have the power later on in life and make decisions that affect us all to have a basic grounding in those subjects.
Click to expand...

Essentially your argument is absed on this and I see it as moot.

You could equally argue that those college grads are likely to become our best scientists, so they should all take Physics 101, or they are likely to become our best authors, so they should all take Literature. I disagree with there being any core curriculum at a college level. College is about specialization. Let the scientists focus on science, the geographers focus on geography, and the artists focus on art.
 
AlbqOwl said:
If it is not being learned, then it isn't being taught is it? (Splitting hairs on semantics there I know.) But the OP asked if the student should have COMMAND of those basics before they can graduate. In my opinion they should. So if the kids aren't learning it, the schools should get busy and see that they do or they can't graduate them.
Click to expand...

"Learning" is the responsibility of parents. All a teacher can do is tell the kids to read this or that, discuss it in class, and test on it. It's up to parents to participate in their kids' education, but most don't, I think.

Too much is blamed on teachers. They aren't at the kids' homes at night, pushing them to read and do their homework, making the parents ask the kids questions about their subjects, seeing if the parents care about the kids' grades and knowledge, etc.

I think you can not do well in some courses and still graduate. That has always been the case. Some people just don't care about knowledge. Look at how people talk about college - that its only purpose is to get a job. No discussion of college as a benefit in and of itself, a broad exposure to different fields, class discussions, learning to listen to different viewpoints, learning to think and analyze...plus learning the facts of biology and the nuances of symbolism in literature. Some people don't care about that.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The OP did not address what other subjects should be part of the core curriculum. You have not provided an argument for why basic history and economics should not be part of the core curriculum unless you are saying they don't have time to teach it--that would be a rebuttal of sorts. In my opinion the federal government should not be involved in education in any way other than possibly being a central collection station to collect data from everywhere to share with all. And the OP intentionally avoided any reference to partisanship or partisan feuding. So I'm still waiting for a rebuttal to the points made in the OP.
Click to expand...
lol... OK then. Let me try again.

• Schools are already pretty busy with basic skills and special education, and not doing the one thing that might really improve school achievement (pushing for racial integration)

• There is obviously substantial resistance to any attempt to set national standards for education (including ones devised collaboratively by the states)

• It would create epic levels of partisan feuding

I do support teaching history and civics. I don't support conservatives turning it into an indoctrination method. Your refusal to recognize how this would immediately turn into a partisan mine field is noted... and does not make the problem go away.

On a side note, I do support the federal government getting involved in education. It's ridiculous that the US is so provincial in its thinking that it can't even handle a set of voluntary standards developed at the state level. Numerous nations that have national standards provide a better education, at a lower cost per student, than the US. Yet another example of the feudalism -- err, federalism -- that has yet again crippled the US.

Thus, even if it's a good idea, I really don't see how it can happen on a national level in the current environment.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The Dumbing Down of America

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/gorillapigspage/videos/887671784663955/?pnref=story

youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history/economics as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

The modern school system is not really designed to create an enlightened society, but to sustain a stable political economy.
You'd have to start from scratch, if you wanted to do what I think you're proposing.

Enlightened and truly educated societies create governmental instability, in my opinion.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The modern school system is not really designed to create an enlightened society, but to sustain a stable political economy.
You'd have to start from scratch, if you wanted to do what I think you're proposing.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is possible using a public education system. Any public educational system will try to instill in the children governmental loyalty and a belief in statism.
 
Henrin said:
I don't think that is possible using a public education system. Any public educational system will try to instill in the children governmental loyalty and a belief in statism.
Click to expand...

This is one issue were I'm a rather fundamental libertarian.
I think school should be detached from all levels of government.
If the government is good, it will be because of its merits, rather than indoctrination from a young age.
 
Visbek said:
lol... OK then. Let me try again.

• Schools are already pretty busy with basic skills and special education, and not doing the one thing that might really improve school achievement (pushing for racial integration)

• There is obviously substantial resistance to any attempt to set national standards for education (including ones devised collaboratively by the states)

• It would create epic levels of partisan feuding

I do support teaching history and civics. I don't support conservatives turning it into an indoctrination method. Your refusal to recognize how this would immediately turn into a partisan mine field is noted... and does not make the problem go away.

On a side note, I do support the federal government getting involved in education. It's ridiculous that the US is so provincial in its thinking that it can't even handle a set of voluntary standards developed at the state level. Numerous nations that have national standards provide a better education, at a lower cost per student, than the US. Yet another example of the feudalism -- err, federalism -- that has yet again crippled the US.

Thus, even if it's a good idea, I really don't see how it can happen on a national level in the current environment.
Click to expand...

Please understand that this is not intended to be argumentative or combative. But based on your comments here:

Are you good with liberals/progressives/leftists/etc. using the education system as an indoctrination method? Where in the OP do you see any suggestions that any school should be in the business of indoctrination? Or that any part of education should happen on a national level?

If your intent was to reject the concept of indoctrination or that it can't happen at a national level, then we're on the same page.
 
soot said:
Maybe, maybe not.

People, by and large, don't think long-term.

They're not interested in what the consequences of today's actions might be two or three generations down the road.

Most folks are just interested in taking care of themselves and their kids.

I mean, I was a Boy Scout for several years, served in the Army, was a dual history/poly sci undergrad, I take an active interest in politics and am a regular participant here and in other military, history, and politics online communities, I'm active in my local offline community, heck, this is a picture of one small corner of one of the bookshelves behind my desk:

View attachment 67196596

And I'm telling you that while I know as much about the history of Western political theory, with it's ultimate culmination in the foundation and development of the U.S. federal government, as anyone you're randomly likely to meet on the street, I just don't see the benefit of what you're proposing.

I think that we need to be teaching kids how to make a living and how to make a life and we need to be building an economy that allows them to take what they learned and put it in to practical application.

You can't just teach someone what the Founders intended through a basic high school or 101-level introduction to the Federalist Papers and then cut them loose in a society where jobs are being off-shored at a remarkable place, free trade agreements are being signed that allow foreign slave labor to manufacture the majority of American consumer goods which are then imported at no cost to the corporations raking in billion dollar revenues, wages have been stagnant for decades, wealth is becoming more and more concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and then expect them to vote on principal.
Click to expand...

Unless people understand the dynamics of how real prosperity happens, how real jobs are created, or what compels commerce and industry to move off shore, or the ramifications of tariffs versus free trade and the pros and cons of each, etc., they won't be voting on principle. They will vote on bad information spoon fed to them in sound bites and on message boards, etc. and via poorly understood partisan loyalties.

The purpose of teaching kids the basics of our history--what happened and how it happened and why it happened--each generation is doomed to have to learn from scratch. Which is how it has been going lately and it is not going all that well is it.

The purpose of teaching kids the basics of economics is so that partisan opportunists can't bamboozle them with slick slogans and speeches designed to influence and make the uneducated believe in unicorns and fairy farts or whatever.

The purpose of teaching kids how government works and how it was intended to work through the eyes of the Founders provides a strong basis for critical thinking and analysis and might prevent us from electing some of the disastrous people we have elected to high office lately. If the people had understood and supported the Founder's concept, the self gratifying and self perpetuating political class would never have developed and entrenched itself to our detriment, and we would not have a government that swallows up more resources just to sustain itself than most other countries have to live on.

In my opinion, the only people who discourage such education are those who want government to be able to control the people in every way instead of the other way around.
 
Nilly said:
Essentially your argument is absed on this and I see it as moot.

You could equally argue that those college grads are likely to become our best scientists, so they should all take Physics 101, or they are likely to become our best authors, so they should all take Literature. I disagree with there being any core curriculum at a college level. College is about specialization. Let the scientists focus on science, the geographers focus on geography, and the artists focus on art.
Click to expand...

Those students who aspire to be scientists should take courses necessary for their education to be scientists. Those students who aspire to be doctors or lawyers or engineers or teachers of course should take coursework that helps prepare them for success in those fields.

But all of us, the janitor, the scientist, the lawyer, the engineer, the teacher, the housewife--ALL of us--are affected by and have an interest in what sort of government is in charge of the public resources and the laws that we all live under. And for that reason every citizen should have a solid grounding in the basics--history, economics, civics, government--in order to be sufficiently informed to choose elected leaders who will do the best job for the people. Without that grounding, the people are at the mercy of those who feed them information that is beneficial to those doing the feeding.
 
Visbek said:
Yes. Since you missed it:

• Schools are already pretty busy with basic skills and special education, and not doing the one thing that might really improve school achievement (pushing for racial integration)

• There is obviously substantial resistance to any attempt to set national standards for education (including ones devised collaboratively by the states)

• It would create epic levels of partisan feuding
Click to expand...
• Have "basic skills" become so complex that we can't also teach history and economics? In the 80s we had to learn all of the above AND the new math/language that was the computer (though I think they got this last at least partly wrong back in the day).
• Why is it we can push health care whether people want it or not but we can't push education...oh wait, its because neither face of the Bipartisan Empire wants educated citizens...now I remember. I don't care about resistance or partisanship, they shouldn't have a stake in it. Just get it done or get out of the way and let someone who can do it.
• For the last see the second. Why do we care so much about either of the would be slaver parties when it comes to educating our children?

AlbqOwl said:
Please understand that this is not intended to be argumentative or combative. But based on your comments here:
Are you good with liberals/progressives/leftists/etc. using the education system as an indoctrination method? Where in the OP do you see any suggestions that any school should be in the business of indoctrination? Or that any part of education should happen on a national level?
If your intent was to reject the concept of indoctrination or that it can't happen at a national level, then we're on the same page.
Click to expand...
This is the same problem I noted above.
Let me put it another way. Schools should be nonpartisan. Period. Education is education. Education is based on facts. Not on ethics, not on civic goods and bads...for chrissakes that's what parents are for. Education is a system of knowledge, unbiased, passed on to the uneducated. It needs not be more than that. And the fact that it is more than that is why we fail. Hard.
When I was in school, the history teacher didn't teach morality, just historical fact. But then, we were smart enough to know that slavery was bad, ending it was good, and so on and so forth.
 
Last edited:
AlbqOwl said:
The Dumbing Down of America

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/gorillapigspage/videos/887671784663955/?pnref=story

youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history/economics as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Yes it should be required teaching because it one of basics required for someone to be fully educated Citizen. I went with High School only because College should be more devoted to a persons specialty and if they got it in High School then they have met the goal.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Those students who aspire to be scientists should take courses necessary for their education to be scientists. Those students who aspire to be doctors or lawyers or engineers or teachers of course should take coursework that helps prepare them for success in those fields.

But all of us, the janitor, the scientist, the lawyer, the engineer, the teacher, the housewife--ALL of us--are affected by and have an interest in what sort of government is in charge of the public resources and the laws that we all live under. And for that reason every citizen should have a solid grounding in the basics--history, economics, civics, government--in order to be sufficiently informed to choose elected leaders who will do the best job for the people. Without that grounding, the people are at the mercy of those who feed them information that is beneficial to those doing the feeding.
Click to expand...


You know, that's a great point and I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'm still hesitant/uneasy about making courses mandatory in college. I really feel that college should be only what you want to study/whats required for your course, and nothing else. I feel that the historical/economic/civic/government background should be instilled at high school. A much larger population goes to high school than college, and if there's more of that going on at college you end up with two classes of voters.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The Dumbing Down of America

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/gorillapigspage/videos/887671784663955/?pnref=story

youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history/economics as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Over the Holidays, I had a chance to speak with a couple kids born between 1999 and 2001. I was appalled at their ignorance on things related to civics, government, history and economics. It's not like I expected much either. A basic idea of how things work and clear understanding of fundamental principles of capitalism would have been fine. These kids were clueless. They knew nothing about how laws came to be, for example, and the concept that supply and demand establishes prices and wages totally escaped them.

We're doomed.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The Dumbing Down of America

Proposed:

The modern generations are not being taught our history, our Constitution, or basic civics. They aren't being taught the reasoning of the Founders or about the great philosophers who informed them. Modern day students are not being required to study the Founding Documents or the circumstance that encouraged people to risk everything to come here and then to form a new nation.

They are not being taught basic economics, the principles of supply and demand in a free market system, the pros and cons of economic systems, or all the effect of government programs. The are not exposed to or encouraged to hear all points of view or use critical thinking to evaluate them.

They are spoon fed sound bites and slogans and the politically correct dogma of the day. Or what they know is gleaned from bits and pieces of internet sources or sounds bites from television or message boards. In short, too often they are being indoctrinated and effectively brainwashed instead of educated.

Some anecdotal evidence:

https://www.facebook.com/gorillapigspage/videos/887671784663955/?pnref=story

youtube watters world interviews - Bing video

youtube people can't answer political questions - Bing video

QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Should basic history/economics as described here be core curriculum, and should students have a reasonable command of it before graduating high school and college? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

My two sons learned the basic economics, including supply and demand, in 8th grade. I taught them critical thinking. We have frequent spirited discussions about politics.

Why should I rely on the school system?
 
Casper said:
Yes it should be required teaching because it one of basics required for someone to be fully educated Citizen. I went with High School only because College should be more devoted to a persons specialty and if they got it in High School then they have met the goal.
Click to expand...

Students who took every advanced algebra class offered in high school can usually CLEP out of basic algebra in college. Ditto for some other courses. So I would consider it reasonable to give students an opportunity to CLEP out on basic history, economics, government, civics. But if they don't pass the test, they should have to take it and pass it in college. Let's encourage an educated electorate, not an indoctrinated, brainwashed, trained one.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Students who took every advanced algebra class offered in high school can usually CLEP out of basic algebra in college. Ditto for some other courses. So I would consider it reasonable to give students an opportunity to CLEP out on basic history, economics, government, civics. But if they don't pass the test, they should have to take it and pass it in college. Let's encourage an educated electorate, not an indoctrinated, brainwashed, trained one.
Click to expand...
If they cannot pass their own High School Exams they should not have graduated in the first place, plus they already have to take SAT's to go to college and have a good GPA. Nope for me High School should be enough, besides many do not go to college and do not actually need to if they have a different skill set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom