• 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!

Public K-12 Education: Conservative or Liberal?

Public K-12 Education: Conservative or Liberal?

  • Conservative

    Votes: 3 18.8%
  • Liberal

    Votes: 6 37.5%
  • Other, please explain

    Votes: 7 43.8%

  • Total voters
    16
I took both. my Econ was pretty basic; supply demand curve, what goes into GDP, etc. In my Poli Sci class I learned about federalism and the social contract. I also learned that Republicans wanted to control our personal lives, that our Republican Governor was anti-education, that George Bush was too stupid to be president, and that moving into a "living Constitution" society marked by a large and generous federal government was the logical conclusion of the Founders intent.

I think thats more of a teacher's touch and personal opinion. I took government last semester this year, and economics this semester. My teacher is pretty conservative, but he's a really good teacher, and only pokes fun at history from his perspective. My government class didn't teach a whole lot, it basically went over the way government is set up, how power is divided, the principles behind the various Founding Fathers, nothing too intense. I don't even know which type of economics I'm learning (it never even mentions Keynes, or any other notable economist and/or major schools of thinking), its just supply and demand like your class. Though it has a bit more emphasis on government regulation than free-market ideology, from what I can tell.

So...I guess the point of all that was that it depends on the teacher. I'd say you had a bad teacher who couldn't seperate the facts from his opinion and ideology.
 
oh, she was an excellent teacher. I learned alot from her class - probably my third favorite from high school. But yes, she had trouble dividing the line between "my beliefs" and "the school curriculum." the point was simply that the humanities make this sort of thing easy - it's hard to come up with a liberal math philosophy.
 
Since I am apparently not being clear, or since my personal experience over 15 years isn't enough

that's correct it is not. because you are arguing from the experience of yourself as a student - but that is an experience shared by everyone on this board. I'm 2/3rds through my masters degree - does this mean that i out weigh you by a couple of years? No, and I would be a fool to claim that it does. which is why we demand that you bring forth some kind of evidence which connects to your point in a logical manner.

instead what you presented were stories abouty your teachers failing to teach you the necessary material. that's not the fault of a testing format - that's the fault of the teacher.

A perfect counterexample would be AP exams, which function in the exact same way. I had an awesome AP US history teacher in 11th grade - easily the class I learned most from in school. If you could get an 80 or above on his final you were virtually guaranteed a 5 on the AP. How? Because he had us memorize US history. All of it. He taught, he taught brilliantly, he taught effectively, and he had us come in on Wednesday nights so that he could teach us to write. And you know what? I got an 80 on his final.... and I got a 5 on the exam. And I majored in history in college, and it's one of my greatest strengths today in my poli sci studies.... all because of a high school teacher whose mission it was to make sure that I absolutely dominated..... a test. A test of bubble sheet questions followed by essays.


oh wow, teachers complain because they are finally held to a metric? no way! :roll:

evidence, connected by logic, to your theisis.
 
Last edited:
:D see, now, why did you have to keep writing after you had already figured out the most important point?

Because, cp, I'm a stubborn twat! :D I was trying to get you to expand upon that thought of yours to get you to admit to everyone else that it's not so simple to say for sure whether or not everything was just messed up with FDR's intervention.
 
Back
Top Bottom