No, because people retain almost nothing from their education that they don’t use everyday. I trust parents to pick out curriculums for their kids because they are the ones who care the most. If we give the power to decide things to the people who care the most then the right decision will usually be made. Not every parent will make the correct decision but overall a much higher percentage will then if we let busybodies with no skin in the game make decisions.
I disagree pretty strongly with this sentiment. This is how we got the unfortunately common modern ahistorical misrepresentation of, for example, the Confederate motivation states’ rights, rather than white supremacism and slavery. And this is how we get widespread misunderstanding of science, most notably evolution and climate science. And much more. These things have greatly harmed the country.
Firstly, because it’s almost never “one issue”. When a school gets an issue wrong, in a way that is so fundamentally wrong-headed, it’s typically indicative of intellectual rot that goes a fair bit deeper.
Secondly, a school getting one issue wrong can and should be disqualifying, if that issue is significant enough. If a school teaches, for example, that Apartheid was not a horrible injustice, I do not care what else the school teaches - that school cannot be trusted with a child’s mind. I see this as equally disqualifying to a school notorious for its heroin problem, or a school that needs metal detectors because it’s had multiple shootings in the last year.
If both partners are abstinent until marriage, and don’t use IV drugs, it’s extremely unlikely for them to get AIDS.
Do you disagree?
If only that was the claim that was made by ACE…but it isn’t even close to their claim. Sorry.
No.
Teaching that there is more than one gender seems quite correct. It would be rather odd to teach that there are fewer than two regardless of how Christian they might be.
Interesting things about apartheid is it is apparently effective in creating a modern society on the backs of the blacks. But then the US did the same thing for their time. the difference is that the US did a gradual leveling of equality which worked well, while South Africa made the leveling of equality much faster and is basically falling apart. Which is better? I think they have a point to look at it over what other countries have done (such as the US), looking objectively and as to the moral issues that created it and how to correct it. Sounds like a opening to free thinking and not knee jerk reaction as the OP states.
Czarcasm, I’d like to inject a modicum of hope to this discussion. Even though religious schools teach bullshit, some students can rise above it. Kids are smarter than you think.
I attended a Lutheran school for 5th & 6th grades, complete with Noah’s Ark taught as science, the earth watered by a mist pre-Adamic fall and gentle dinosaurs eating only plants. But when I entered public school starting in 7th grade, I quickly saw how stupid that was and began to learn real science. I also learned that rock 'n roll wasn’t evil, dancing wasn’t devil worship, and sex was guiltless fun. Although it took a few years, with the help of puberty, I was able to discard the Lutheran bull without a problem. I’m sure I wasn’t the only one.
My 7th grade science teacher in PUBLIC school taught us that all rivers run north to south. Yes, that is what we were taught. I guess he forgot about the Nile.
Oh well, public school teachers are ALWAYS right.
As I said, what are the schools outcomes? My sons christian school has NEVER needed the police. Had NO metal detectors. And their graduation rate, collage acceptance, and ACT scores were better than the public schools.
Once again, unless your son went to a school that used the ACE curriculum, what did or did not happen with your son at his school is another topic. This isn’t some broad brush attack against all religious schools, despite the efforts of some to steer the conversation that way.
I doubt if your science teacher was religiously motivated. I doubt that he would continue to make that river claim if it was pointed out that he was wrong. But religious beliefs aren’t subject to proof or contrary evidence.
Well to me, a textbook is just that - a book. I dont think there has ever been a textbook written that some teacher has not disagreed with something in it.
So to me, an opinion from a textbook like on South Africa could lead to a discussion with the class. The textbook is not the entire curriculum.
This totally misunderstands the issues. The reason people don’t understand evolution, climate science, and history is that these issues are complex and understanding them takes time and effort. The people who have the aptitude and interest in them can understand them and there has never been an easier time to get access to high quality information. The rest of the people forget the information as soon as they write it on the test and never think about it again. Adults are as educated as they want to be, changing the curriculum would do nothing.
Look at any communist country, kids are literally indoctrinated with how great the government is and how evil capitalists are in every class, every day. Yet as soon as they get to be adults they all want to flee and live in a capitalist country.
The still very strong influence of literal interpretations of the Bible explains why Americans believe in evolution and climate change at far, far lower rates than Europeans. And the ahistorical teachings about American history in the South explains why, when polled, southerners get the facts wrong about the Civil War more often than other Americans.
MY old public high school also had all of those things, and as far as I know, still does. My anecdotal evidence trumps your anecdotal evidence.
:dubious:
(I’m guessing ACE is a Protestant thing, since I’ve never heard of that kind of thing being taught in Catholic schools. We certainly weren’t)
Gave to not been reading any of this? In ACE (what the thread is about) the students read through workbooks in little cubicles at their own pace, then test themselves. There is no discussion with the class, and the textbook *is *the entire curriculum.
Wow. There’s a Lutheran parochial school in my town that does not teach things like that. I know the secretary, and she wouldn’t work there if it did.
The Catholic high school for our city is just down the street from that school, and like every Catholic high school in every city I’ve ever lived in, it had the biggest drug problem because that’s where the money was.
Collage acceptance? Must have had a top-notch art program. 
The only school I’ve personally encountered that was on permanent lockdown, with metal detectors and a probably-armed guard at the door was a K-3 school in a quiet middle-class neighborhood in the small Midwestern city where I used to live. The guard was a contracted employee of the local domestic violence agency, and this setup was because this was where the kids that age who lived at the shelter attended school. Apparently they’d had issues to the point where they felt this was warranted.
The premises are just not stated fully but it means neither of you have sex before you get married, and neither of you turn promiscuous after. Less controllable things like rape or dirty needles don’t detract from the main point.
Oh yes, but it’s a good base, and will make kids understand advice in a more consistent manner.