Showing posts with label False Controversy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label False Controversy. Show all posts

There is now a Brazen Quality to the Lies

Americans were once notorious in their cynical views about politicians, and for good reasons. We complain that they all lie to us to get elected. Most politicians were too smart to tell outright lies. They may have exaggerated or distort the truth or used a quote out of context in order to mislead you without actually lying

Smart politicians made sure there was some small truth behind what they said so they couldn’t be nailed for lying to us. It use to be rare for a politician to tell an outright lie –  not so much any more.

It is a Trait,
Not A Skill

I admit with open arms that I might not get everything right. That's why I have all of these notes, and make links to everything and make sure I have citations. And-- if it a complicated issue with mashing journal papers... I write and wait a day. There's hardly ever anything "Breaking" in the blog world. A day between often shows things in a different light. Put it this way-- I've never thought it was a waste to wait.

But I don't lie and I pray I don't hold on to false beliefs.

Deceit is a trait, not a skill. People put it down as a skill, or an event, or a necessity of a moment, but it isn't. It is a trait. If you do it, and do it often, you have ... done it before and often as well.

Jon Stewart of the Daily Show: Slams the Koch Brothers

Daily Show viewers are likely to be the most -- moderately informed, if not best informed -- viewers (viewers being the people who still bother to watch the tripe produced for cable TV these days). This is because, Jon Stewart (and Stephen Colbert on his show), will slam anyone who is acting stupid, or trying to gloss over a heinous activity. Historically, these two shows don't really care if their targets are Democrat or Republican, or Tea Party or in the seat of the White House ... or advertising on the time slot of their show, as the Koch brothers found out this week. Basically the message is, "we care about our viewers, and if you are going to imply that we condone your actions, you are leading with your chin."  





Thank you Jon Stewart for Doing It Right!

If you would like answers to baffling questions like these:

Why is America 83% in favor of health insurance companies being required to accept pre-existing conditions, yet only 43% in favor of Obamacare?

Why after six years of growth on Wall Street, lowering Unemployment, bringing healthcare reform and encouraging public schools with unprecedented resources for teachers which will minimize the unpaid "at home" hours they are required to engage in, is Obama's acceptance level only 43%?

Why, even after the Speaker of the House has admitted to the public that it is Congress who is holding up Immigration Reform (for the last six years) and even after the elections in November will continue to hold up Immigration Reform for another two years -- is the News Industry still pointing their finger at Obama?

Why, after Obama wrote an executive order directing activities which will insure the proper adoption of ACA by companies who have between  50 and 100 employees, which is well within his job description, and historically not even close to being a over-reach -- did Congress (while blocking, and fighting to make ACA fail) sue Obama with cheers coming from across the Internet?

Why, with only an 8% approval rating for their performance for the last two years, and the culture of obstruction they have created, do any of the Congressmen coming up for election in November have any chance of wining? Let alone, in some states, an edge in winning?

For answers to these and other troubling questions tumbling around in the educated minds of America, the Koch Brothers are a good place to start.

The goals of the Koch brothers, truly, do not have your best interests in mind. Here's a list that has been complied and researched.

Idiocracy

How many teen pregnancies are there in your country? Nope, wrong. What percentage of people are immigrants? Sorry, that's incorrect. How many Muslims live where you live? Whoa, way off. Let's spell it out Jeopardy-style. Hint: This person is wrong. Answer: Who is
you? A recent study of public perception in 14 countries came to this basic conclusion: 

Everything you think you know about the news is probably wrong.
The Guardian: Mistaken perceptions can shape political opinion.
Also see an earlier blog of mine: Basically the News isn't News anymore.

Teachers and Parents need to Stop listening to Secondary Sources

Remember in school, when we learned the difference between Primary sources of information and Secondary sources of information -- and why the two are not the same? 
  1. primary source is a document or physical object which was written or created during the time under study. These sources were present during an experience or time period and offer an inside view of a particular event. Some types of primary sources include:
  2. Primary vs Secondary Sources

    www.princeton.edu/~refdesk/primary2.html
    Princeton University
A parent just asked me if I had answers for the problems with Common Core. Apparently the teachers in her district are looking for ways out of using CCSS. The problem is, the answers are in the Core. 

See, as soon as they succeed in removing CCSS from their school system, then life becomes seriously difficult, because as soon as Common Core is gone, then they are back to 10 years ago under ESEA and the No Child Left Behind hell of 2002. Since every school failed that impossible thing, and the 12 years are up, this means that the schools will be closed, until a new plan can be presented to the Dept of ED, and approved. Most of the teachers will be fired and likely the principal as well. Probably what will happen is the school will be sold to a charter corporation and then re-opned. ESEA and NCLB are laws, not suggestions. Moving into the Race to the TOP program using as a standard CCSS, allowed Obama to give your school an out, and get you from under that mess of a law, since Congress won't fix it.

Obama came up with the "patch" solution of Race to the Top, but to satisfy the requirements of ESEA and NCLB each state is required to have in place a set of standards which demonstrate an ability to "ready students for College ..."  The Gov.'s of each state, seeing that ESEA was going to cut their throats (the changes made by NCLB are simply impossible to achieve. They sounded good when they were adopted, even reasonable, but they didn't take into account the many realities of  education. Too many realities were ignored. In fact, so many that I do not believe a single public school district made the minimum goal once in the 12 year period given to them.) The Gov's came up with CCSS back in 2007, starting development in 2008. At 2010 they had it ready when Obama came up with his waivers and Race to the Top.

It is important to remember here that ESEA and NCLB are not policies or suggestions, they are laws. It falls to the Executive branch to enforce those two laws. Obama has no choice in this. But he also understood that it was impossible to achieve the dictates. 

NCLB -- since the schools were all at "Failure" for more than four years -- dictates that 1) all the teachers, plus the principal should now be fired and replaced with teachers capable of making the goals. (which is impossible for two reasons, 1) all of the teachers are fired, there are not enough to hire available and 2) all the goals are impossible to meet no matter who is teaching the kids) Next the State should take over the school directly OR the school should be sold to a private corporation -- wish I was making this up, but you can verify this here on my blog where I pulled out these amazingly daft dictates.

You'll notice this part --   Institute and fully implement a new curriculum, including providing appropriate professional development for all relevant staff, that is based on scientifically based research and offers substantial promise of improving educational achievement for low-achieving students and enabling the school to make adequate yearly progress.

That there is where Race to the Top comes in, and the need for a fully developed, heavily researched set of standards is needed to satisfy the law. The states had this, developed by the National Governors Association (NGA) The Dept of Education read over the CCSS, and gave their nod to Obama as being acceptable. 

That is and was Obama's only interaction with CCSS -- Simply to accept the DOE's assessment. I'll point out here too that it is against federal law for any Federal Office, including Obama as President, to involve itself with the schools directly at the local level... which is why he could not develop CCSS himself or have it created or suggest that it be created or anything else. The states had to do this themselves. 

So much for Federal plans of Indoctrination. All of this stuff about CCSS is BS. It is a very simple, unoffending, non-dictating set of standards. 


Paul Krugman Sums Obama Up

Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize winning Economist took a second look at Obama in an article published in Rolling Stones, and then a follow up with ABC News. His conclusion? Obama is likely to be the most effective, and certainly the most successful president we have ever had. 
“Bill Clinton is an incredibly gifted politician,” Krugman told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl. “But, in fact, Bill Clinton was not a consequential president. And Obama, although clearly not the natural politician, is a consequential president.”
With his polls so low right now, it's difficult to get behind this kind of arithmetic, but Krugman shows that the economy is on the rise, unemployment is down, health care has been reformed and significant financial reform is in place. The environmental issues are being addressed.  No, he admits, it might not be everything you wanted, but it is more than any president has accomplished in decades.

Reading this, I felt a bit vindicated. Though I would never have claimed Obama was 'the most successful', he was doing much better than his press. What has always bothered me about his press though, was the amount of it, the shear mass of the machine.

You expect Fox News, and some jabs from the main stream editorials. Then there are the web papers on the far-right like Town Hall, National Association of Scholars, the NRA main sight,
The usual suspects. Also, the republicans in congress, just like the democrats with Bush (expected, and accepted). The Koch brothers were more active, not liking things going the way they were, especially with Obama going directly at the environment and health care.

Likely, Obama was the Koch's worst nightmare - between 1998 and now Koch has been an environmental terror (with one of the few companies I have ever heard of being tried and convicted for double homicide). Obama not only wants EPA powers to increase, he was making it happen. It wasn't going to be a few $10 million dollar fines any longer. Likely, shut downs were on the horizon. So, we also expect some flack from that area.

Some flack. Sure. .. but sweet mercy...

The girl friend video coming out of the Koch, from  Americans for Shared Prosperity should have been the real clue. That was the point the shadows were pulled back. Whether that was a purposeful move or not, it was the beacon that caught my attention. The ad, which I'm sure you have seen, has a woman who is acting like Obama is an abusive boyfriend -- and is warning us to drop him, not to vote for him again. Again? This was published on Sep 21, 2014.

This is the second term. Right? This is Anti-Obama, like two years
too late. Isn't it?

No. Not at all. They just don't appear to care any more that you notice.

I'm not capable of doing the amount of document research that would be required for a true analysis -- I'm just going to put that up front -- but I believe, just from the amount I've been able to do, that no President has been against the continuous demagoguery Obama has over his two terms. There is the slams and the mud during the election, but then people get down to doing their jobs. The sensationalist go back to writing real news, and waiting for someone, normally a Congressman, to do something extremely silly. But that didn't happen with Obama.

  • Crowds of mudslingers continued
  • Torrents of false controversies were created
  • Demagoguery was shouted at every Presidential move
  • Congress took on a culture of obstruction

For example -- despite Obama's pre-election release of his official Hawaiian birth certificate in 2008;[1] confirmation, based on the original documents, by the Hawaii Department of Health;[6] the April 2011 release of a certified copy of Obama's original Certificate of Live Birth (or long-form birth certificate); and contemporaneous birth announcements published in two Hawaii newspapers.[7] Polls conducted in 2010 suggested that at least one quarter of adult Americans said that they doubted Obama's U.S. birth,[8][9] while a May 2011 Gallup poll found that 13% of American adults (23% of Republicans) continued to express such doubts. -- Wikipedia

Hundreds of lawsuits, some filed by GOP leaders, some from Congressman, Senators, and Tea Party members. In 2009 and 2010 the numbers in the South and in the Tea Party are so high, that they are seen as useful to many of the GOP. They under mind anything Obama does, inciting angst toward any decision he makes. A few Republicans openly gaff at the claims that Obama's Presidency is not legitimate, but most do not. Colorado GOP Senate candidate Ken Buck is caught on tape complaining about walking the line between openly agreeing with the "Birthers" and denying the legitimacy of their claim to keep them going.
"Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates while I'm on the camera," Buck said to the worker while laughing. "God, what am I supposed to do?"

Pundits Pund and Yap but Common Core Successful

This years stats on Common Core off the Scholastic Web site show good, even great reviews.

A majority of teachers (68%) who say implementation has started in their school agree it is going well, up six points from 2013. As one teacher noted, “I feel that within my district, efforts are being made to help teachers understand and implement the Common Core State Standards, and I feel comfortable and enjoy learning about new ways to do things.”
When focusing on student outcomes, teachers remain optimistic that the Common Core State Standards will improve:
  • students’ ability to think critically and use reasoning skills (74% in 2013, 72% in 2014).
  • students’ ability to effectively present their ideas based on evidence (71% in 2013, 70% in 2014).
  • students’ ability to read and comprehend informational texts(68% in 2013, 66% in 2014).
To that end, many teachers are already seeing a positive impact on their students’ abilities to:
  • think critically and use reasoning skills (53%),
  • effectively present their ideas based on evidence (53%),
  • read and comprehend informational texts (50%),
  • use real-world tools and resources (46%), and
  • work collaboratively with peers (46%).
A study done on Common Core A Progress Report on the Common Core by the Brown Center gives good reviews as well. It also shows that the states that didn't move over to Common Core did less well. Not much less, only a "1.27 gap between strong implementers and non-adopters" So, not huge growth in the testing area yet. Which is to be expected, since we are likely using the same curriculum as we were last year and the year before. -- because Common Core doesn't have its own Curriculum. Right? We know that, yes?

Pundits have thrown up all kinds of garbage about Common Core and it is a little depressing how much of it is believed before checking and find out that 80% of the meme's are flat out fiction.

My favorite is the math one:


To which anyone n my age group says ARG! Make it STOP! Cause we have no idea about what is going on there. Well First off, that gibberish on the bottom (the new way) really is a way of doing subtraction,  I know,Right? I didn't believe it either, but it is and I'll let this guy explain it on his blog page.

What is a fib.. well.. a flat out lie actually, is that Common Core has anything to do with this change. Common Core has nothing to do with this. This would only come into the classroom because the Teacher or the State curriculum brought it there.

Myth: The standards tell teachers what to teach.
Fact: Teachers know best about what works in the classroom. That is why these standards establish what students need to learn but do not dictate how teachers should teach. Instead, schools and teachers will decide how best to help students reach the standards.
-- Common Core Myths and Facts  

What that means is, the student needs to know how to subtract, and add and read, but you can teach him how to do that anyway you want to.

A pundit (sometimes called a talking head) is a person who offers to mass media their opinion or commentary on a particular subject area (most typically political analysis, the social sciences, technology or sport) on which they are knowledgeable (or can at least appear to be knowledgeable), or considered a scholar in said area. The term has been increasingly applied to popular media personalities. In certain cases, it may be used in a derogatory manner as well, as the political equivalent of ideologue. -- Wikipedia 


The Falsified Controversies Surrounding AP History

I've been posting this message all morning to editors, school board members and any place else I can find. The falsifications and misinformation around the AP History course have spread far and wide over the Internet, with people buying into the claims and propagating the same fictitious information without ever checking the AP US History course to see if any of it is accurate.

None of it is... 



Q: Does AP US History Teach about our Country's Heroes?
A: I don't know. Does your School Teach about our Country's Heroes?
Q: Of COURSE WE DO!
A: Then of course the AP US History teaches about them... since it is taught with your  curriculum. 
Q: (?) oh...but...
A: He lied.
Q: oh...

This whole mess in Colorado with the High School and the Censorship.. it is all based on the false information given to Julie Williams about the AP US History program and framework. Not just her. It was also given to News Week, and it was very convincing, I mean.. why would anyone lie about something like that?

Then... things weren't adding up, and I went to the College Board website and looked the program over. What I discovered in only a few short minutes was that Larry Krieger has mislead everyone, with the intent of forcing the AP to go back to the old format.
Here is why...

Larry Krieger, owner and designer of InsiderPrep, and former AP History teacher, is the influence behind  Julie Williams in Colorado-- who, as she told  Breitbart Texas ..  the proposal they are trying to pass is to preserve US history from the progressive APUSH and it is similar to actions taken by the Texas SBOE.

"Texas passed its resolution against AP US History. In Colorado, people are talking about that," she said. "What does it hurt to look into this? Our students deserve to have the best, appropriate education possible," she added. "Without looking into this, we could be harming our students," she said. She indicated that over the past year "APUSH and a new fifth grade Sex Ed curriculum were slipped into the schools with little public knowledge."

Julie's claim that it was "slipped in" isn't correct, On Sept 10, 2014, the Colorado State Board of Education already discussed the issues that Larry Kieger has been fabricating and propagating regarding the 2014 AP History program. Larry Kieger invited himself into that meeting via telephone conference. The board  listened to arguments for over 90 minutes, and decided it was still acceptable for the State Schools. You can listen to that part of the Board meeting (here)

Texas dropped the AP on the testimony of Larry Krieger
Larry has been doing quite a bit of talking and writing.
Newsweek Interview with Larry Kieger
(my first encounter with this man)

By Krieger's own admission, there is nothing false or misleading or untrue inside the AP material. The College Board has said over and over that this is a Framework design and as such it negates all of these complaints against the AP History program. So let's pull some sheets shall we?

Let's look at the orchestrator of these complaints.

Larry Krieger owns InsiderPrep, which is a business that creates and sells books and materials to help a student prep for the AP classes and tests. -- Well, it did help up until this year. See, Larry's Prep course is based on the old study methods, where memorizing is more important than critical thinking.

The AP History program has changed drastically, in that it is only a Framework now, not a full course like it was in the past. So, there is no ..."series of chronological chapters that match the sequence of topics in the College Board’s official APUSH Course Description booklet." ... Which is how Larry Krieger's program is developed. AP is now a comprehensive, adaptable Framework.

Quote right off the AP Web site :
A new Curriculum Framework Evidence Planner helps teachers customize the framework by specifying the historical content selected for student focus. It can also be provided to students to track the historical evidence examined for each concept and as review for the AP Exam.
Schools and teachers develop their own curriculum for AP courses. Submitting a syllabus to the AP Course Audit ensures teachers have a thorough understanding of AP U.S. History course requirements and are authorized to teach AP.

See that one line? "Schools and teachers develop their own curriculum ..."

Meaning that the framework Can Be fully Right Wing Conservative, going over each of the founding fathers in detail and focusing on the deeds of courageous people... OR ... it could be middle of the road, focusing on the growth of the nation, or it could be both, or neither.

The idea behind this interesting change is -- There are simply too many areas of Local State History (which have been left out of the AP classes) to cover them all. Also, every district assigns a different value of importance to Local State History. There are over 14,000 School Districts in the United States.

David Coleman, now president of the College Board, came up with an idea which addressed this issue, and solved the problem. For 2014, AP created a Framework, instead of a static text design. This new design allows the teachers and districts to create a program suitable for their own use.

A Framework is exactly what it sounds like -- a list of guides regarding what will be on the AP Test -- areas which need to be addressed  by the curriculum. Then there is a Demonstration Curriculum, to guide the teacher in creating her own. This Demonstration Curriculum, is titled very clearly Sample Data, and then SAMPLE Curriculum. For a Demonstration to be useful, a Sample, filed in with Sample Data was required, otherwise you would be looking at blank pages.

Both Larry Kieger's claim and Julie's parroting out into the wind tunnels -- that something is missing -- is silly. It isn't missing ANYTHING. If it has a Left or Right or Conservative or Liberal bend, then it was put there by the school or the teacher, not AP. -- Think of it as Object Programming if you know something about that.

Except, there is a problem... a problem for Larry, anyway. See Larry's Prep and Study course no longer fit the AP History program, because there is no way of telling what the district is going to focus on ahead of time. So there is no Chapter to Chapter.. so basically his Prep courses are useless and no one is going to buy them. So... Larry is out of a job. Apparently he's not that happy about it either (and I have to admit I wouldn't be happy myself... but I wouldn't go around doing what he is doing).

Since Every school, indeed every teacher can create her own syllabi, paying attention to areas and focuses of history which are most in line with the state and local focus-- Larry has nothing to sell and his publications are no longer marketable. -- Unless he talks you into believing that the new AP Framework design is somehow bad.

This is very difficult to do, because there is nothing false, misleading or wrong with the facts or the framework. So, he has to go after something with a lot of emotion behind it, something that will cut through logic and distract you away from the very cool idea of putting together your own AP classes -- teaching the AP like you always thought it should be taught.

Thus begins Larry's impassioned propaganda campaign against AP History, where he takes out bits from the examples of the New AP, (A technique known as Cherry Picking), twists some things up to show bias (A technique known as Appeal to fear: exploitation of anxieties or concerns), while presenting Sample Data as the Real Data (A technique known as Disinformation), it is all up to the teacher and the school what to build with the Framework -- and then he begins screaming Leftist Democrat Indoctrination(A technique known as Labeling: use of dysphemistic terms to promote negative reaction), and banging on tables.
If you have the Facts, then negotiate with the facts. If you have the Law, then negotiate with the law. If you have neither, then bang on the tables and scream.
Larry has found new friends. People who are professional propaganda workers, like Jane Robbins, who joins him because she is attempting to discredit Common Core, and David Coleman was the Lead for the Common Core Project. Through Robbins, Larry meets others who are also working to stop Common Core and he bands up with them. Now he is coming to your School to spread these false claims.

The claims are very specific. They are not random. They are from a script which obviously Jane Robbins wrote for him. They are not just a list of items, they are a part of a propaganda method, which, in his book 'Mein Kampf', Adolf Hitler called "The Big Lie." So this is not just Larry coming to tell you a few things at the Board meeting. This is an attack, and it should be greeted like one. Because the Truth is, the AP History Course is exactly what you always wanted it to be.

Again... from the AP History area of the Web Site where you put together your State's AP Curriculum.

The AP® Program unequivocally supports the principle that each individual school must develop its own curriculum for courses labeled “AP.” Rather than mandating any one curriculum for AP courses, the AP Course Audit instead provides each AP teacher with a set of expectations that college and secondary school faculty nationwide have established for college-level courses.

AP teachers are encouraged to develop or maintain their own curriculum that either includes or exceeds each of these expectations; such courses will be authorized to use the “AP” designation. Credit for the success of AP courses belongs to the individual schools and teachers that create powerful, locally designed AP curricula.

The AP U.S. History course should be designed by your school to provide students with a learning experience equivalent to that of an introductory college course sequence in United States history. Your course should provide students with the analytic skills and factual knowledge necessary to deal critically with the topics and materials in U.S. history.

There are no specific curricular prerequisites for students taking AP U.S. History.

All students who are willing and academically prepared to accept the challenge of a rigorous academic curriculum should be considered for admission to AP courses. The College Board encourages the elimination of barriers that restrict access to AP courses for students from ethnic, racial and socioeconomic groups that have been traditionally underrepresented in the AP Program. Schools should make every effort to ensure that their AP classes reflect the diversity of their student population.

High schools offering this exam must provide the exam administration resources described in the AP Coordinator’s Manual.


http://www.collegeboard.com/html/apcourseaudit/courses/us_history.html



I hope this helps you to avoid all of the confusion and fabricated controversy so that you don't wind up like Texas. -- Glenn Hefley










Where the Wild Things Are...

Chess is a Wild game I've only been playing for a short time, but I've gained enough understanding to realize that the angles of ...