23 states recieve an "F" in teaching history

[Ripsnort]

http://www.edexcellence.net/socialstudies/Standards.html

Only 6 states earned an "A": Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York.

One of the solutions in the report recommended is:
(that teachers) "Be balanced and free of overt or covert ideological agendas."...in other words, too much political correctness.

Gee, really?

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
...in other words, too much political correctness.

Gee, really?

That statement, with no other context could just as easliy mean that there is too little PC.

-Sik

[fd ski]

Originally posted by Ripsnort

Only 5 states earned an "A": Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York.
 

And Ripsnort gets an F in math

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Sikboy
That statement, with no other context could just as easliy mean that there is too little PC.

-Sik

Actually, on our local news, is *was* reported that  there was too much PC.

Read the report...
One of the weakest state US history standards characteristically is "Substitute wishful thinking or politically correct ideology for factual accuracy"

[AWMac]

Originally posted by Ripsnort

Only 5 states earned an "A": Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York.

Yo Riptard I counted 6 States.....  

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by fd ski
And Ripsnort gets an F in math

LOL yep! (big fingers)

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Ripsnort

Read the report...

wich is why I said "with no other context"

-Sik

[popeye]

"Substitute wishful thinking or politically correct ideology for factual accuracy"

23 states AND the District of Columbia.  

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by popeye
"Substitute wishful thinking or politically correct ideology for factual accuracy"

23 states AND the District of Columbia.  

Tsk tsk, no comment on the report though, eh  popeye?

[davidpt40]

Actually, on our local news, is *was* reported that there was too much PC.

This sentence made me laugh out loud because it makes no sense haha.

[Manedew]

so where is our education "at any cost"? or health care blah blah blah ... this country is fek'd up

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Manedew
so where is our education "at any cost"? or health care blah blah blah ... this country is fek'd up

Nor did this one David...

[Toad]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
One of the weakest state US history standards characteristically is "Substitute wishful thinking or politically correct ideology for factual accuracy"

LOL!

It's not a "state" problem, it's a world wide problem.

Just read this BBS!

[popeye]

Since I don't claim to be an expert in such matters, I can't comment on the study, but here's someone who did:

"The Fordham Foundation has produced system for rating states’ standards, the validity of which is not at all obvious. The procedures for determining the rankings are unclear and, therefore, difficult to replicate. The qualifications of the "experts" whose expertise was used in some unspecified way is questionable. If the system had some immediately obvious merit, these objections would be of no import. When one looks, however, at the most immediately obvious place for validating the system – the academic performance of the states – one finds absolutely no correlation. States with well received standards score low, states labeled as "irresponsible" because of their "lousy" standards score high. Taking this report seriously could well lead reformers down blind alleys or toward questionable ends."

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/CERAI/documents/archives/00/cerai-00-07.htm

Who's correct?  Dang if I know....

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by popeye
Since I don't claim to be an expert in such matters, I can't comment on the study, but here's someone who did:

"The Fordham Foundation has produced system for rating states’ standards, the validity of which is not at all obvious. The procedures for determining the rankings are unclear and, therefore, difficult to replicate. The qualifications of the "experts" whose expertise was used in some unspecified way is questionable. If the system had some immediately obvious merit, these objections would be of no import. When one looks, however, at the most immediately obvious place for validating the system – the academic performance of the states – one finds absolutely no correlation. States with well received standards score low, states labeled as "irresponsible" because of their "lousy" standards score high. Taking this report seriously could well lead reformers down blind alleys or toward questionable ends."

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/CERAI/documents/archives/00/cerai-00-07.htm

Who's correct?  Dang if I know....

Uh huh, discredit the report...thats a familiar tactic.