Comments about ‘Political sentiment is far from reason’

"It is very hard to believe that any of Alpine's concerned parents actually think that a conservative school district in the most conservative state in the union is a secret vanguard for socialist (or communist) ideology."

Not hard to believe if you consider what kind of 'news-tainment' they regularly consume. These types will believe ANYTHING. Some of these mccarthyites would make mccarthy blush.

@Thomas Jefferson. Your screen name is ironic. Why don't you go beyond Wikipedia and research this: Is the U.S. a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic? If you say a Democracy, show me documented evidence of the same. The FACT is we are a Constitutional Republic and democracies are nothing more than tyrannical rule of the majority and/or the elite that manipulate the majority via lies and newsspeak. Venezuela is a democracy.

We are a constitutional republic. So?

There's the People's Republic of China...:-)

Sooo 49er....did you have a point? Or are you like the real 49ers and cant seem to score? Its because you are running the wrong way.

49er: You totally miss the mark. Yes, USA is a republic...but so is the People's Republic of China, the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea, the French Republic and all the countries of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Most of those countries also have some form of constitution. The difference between the USA and those other countries is the way in which the people are involved as part of the government--and that is DEMOCRACY! It's our democracy that protects our freedoms, not our republic.

To Harvey: The French will get pretty upset if you tell them they don't have a democracy.

Utah County is a well-known hotbed of socialist thought. That's a fact. You can look it up.

Don't have time for more - gotta scoot - I'm having lunch with Elvis, Lenin, Marx and Alf at the UVU cafeteria - right after Rush's program. (I never miss a broadcast of his, not even for Elvis.)

@ sf1849er

I had always thought that we were a democratic republic. That is, representatives legislate and the president executes the laws but those folks are all elected democratically.

Isn't this really just part of the war of words about big D Democrats and big R Republicans? Sort of like calling the Democratic Party the "Democrat Party"? It’s just political posturing and gamesmanship.

As to democracies being "nothing more than tyrannical rule of the majority and/or the elite". Our current constitution enshrines majority rule in how our president and legislators are chosen and, in turn, how they legislate.

As to Venezuela being a democracy? No. It’s actually the “Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela”. So it’s a republic (one that, at one time, did have democratically elected leaders).

These are just names folks. Like so much in politics, they do not represent reality. The meanings are fluid and are based on who wants what — not reality.

sf1849er would actually be funny if there weren't so many of them, and if they were not so detrimental to America's democracy and social fabric.

Mr. Jackson, have you spoken with any of the ASD parents, or read any of Goodlad's books? I spoke with parents and ASD board members, and did some digging myself. Here is what I found:

1) Parents are not talking conspiracy. They are asking legitimate questions about why ASD celebrates and implements John Goodlad’s doctrine of social change over academic excellence.

2) Goodlad believes: “Parents do not own their children. They have no ‘natural right’ to control their education fully.” (Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 164.)

3) Goodlad states: “Most youth still hold the same values of their parents…if we do not alter this pattern, if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.” (Education Innovation, Issue 9.)

4) Goodlad warns: “If parents control the education of their children, many children will be deprived of the legitimate choices offered in a liberal society.” He further states: “Public education has served as a check on the power of parents” (Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 165.)

If this is what the current ASD board stands for, it is only natural that there would be friction between them and the parents who elected them.

It is important to understand that us university professors create and speak an academic language that the "ordinary folk" do not understand. Only the initiates speak our language. Look up the word "enculturating" in the dictionary. It is not here. This gives "initiates" the right to give it any meaning or context they choose. At my university "enculturating" means "indoctrinate into socialism." At my university "Social Democracy" means socialism. (At BYU the foundational philosophy of many departments is now socialism.)

Parents of Alpine School District should read the writings of Dewey and Goodlad. So some research. Google NNER, BYU, Baugh, Young, Henshaw and see what NNER philosophy pops up. Make up your own mind if their point of view is socialist in nature.

John Dewey, a socialist, spent 15 years at Columbia University changing American education. They threw out the Bible to teach reading, phonetics to teach language and key curriculum. The drop in student achievement parallels the integration of the Columbia/Dewey approach to education in America.

Parents of ASD, don't let professors intimidate you. Research. Stand up. Speak. Shout. It is your children, not ASD's, not BYU's.

Mr. Jackson, here are a few more timeless Goodlad quotes (BTW if you read Goodlad's books, you'll find a lot more):

John Goodlad, on morals and patriotism:

“Educators must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would be no scientific advancement. So it is with morals and patriotism.” (Education for Everyone, p. 6.)

Goodlad on social engineering:

“Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now.” (John Goodlad preface to James Becker: Schooling in a Global Age.)

Goodlad on humanistic curriculum:

“The curriculum of the future ‘will be what one might call the humanistic curriculum.’”
(Samuel L. Blumenfeld, NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education.)

In spite of all this coming to light, ASD board members have refused to address parents’ concerns. And why should they? They’ve been trained by Goodlad that parents have “no natural right” to control their children’s education. (Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 164.)

No wonder ASD board members are feeling the heat.

More gems from Goodlad’s paper Education for Everyone: Agenda for Education in a Democracy (Google this with Woods Learning Center):

On Moral Relativism: “There is a belief by some that there exists… a ‘correct’ view of the world. This view is incorrect. There is no single worldview that deserves complete acceptance.”

On Academics: “A standardized curriculum of basic skills such as reading, writing and arithmetic cannot prepare people to participate in a democracy.”

On Patriotism: “Schools cannot be tools to instill Pavlovian patriotism…”

On politics in school: “The [ASD/Goodlad] Agenda has been developed to address the political and content issues of school.”

School should “address political issues?” Really? No wonder Alpine parents are upset.

Brian, teaching morals in school is laudable, if they are indeed morals. This was done in the early days of America, back when you could say things like "in God we trust."

What parents take issue with is the "new" morality of people like Goodlad, who declare that there are no moral certainties, that morals should be defined "democratically", and that above all else, parents should not influence their children's values--that should be left up to "trained educators." Those are the kinds of "morals" that parents are (rightly) indignant about.

We have some great thinkers in our schools and universities. Do we really need to hitch our wagon to the Goodlad star?

Brian,

Moral teaching in school is laudable as fhayekfan said. Education in the United States once used the Bible to teach reading. From the beginning of our first schools. Later the Northwest Ordinance prescribed that the Bible be taught in schools. The concept was that while they were learning to read they would learn ethical and moral behavior. Progressive socialists such as Dewey helped to take the Bible out of our schools. As a result reading skills and morality have declined in direct proportion. Moral code was replaced with the morality of relativism, which Goodlad subscribes to. According to Goodland, "There is no single wold view that deserves acceptance." What about Christ's world view of "Do unto others" or "care for the poor" or his "gospel of peace" or "don't judge unrighteously" or the concept of "atonement" or "forgiveness?" Christ has been exorcised from our school. Thus the moral glue that held this nation together has been replaced with the Dewey/Goodlad gospel of relativism. I am a teacher and relativism is the religious moral code that is being taught at both my university and in our K12 public schools.

Hayek Fan, I appreciate the homework you've done on Goodlad, and I concede that some of those quotes are worth discussion, but I don't read them the same way you do. And I don't see the point of academic excellence if it doesn't benefit the society that pays to build the schools. We don't need to hitch the wagon to Goodlad's star, but his perspective, I think, helps us see schooling in the context of community and moral development beyond simply mastering facts and data, which helps us little in the end.

I didn't use the word "conspiracy," and you're right to criticize those who do. But the critique still stands. In some of the speeches from the meeting (you can find snippets on YouTube), parents drop the names Hitler, Marx, Lenin, and Stalin, and they point to language in an ASD brochure and call it "code words for socialism." One parent mentioned The Communist Manifesto. Conspiracy is a strong word, but what would you call that kind of reasoning?

BrianJ, agree with "I don't see the point of academic excellence if it doesn't benefit the society that pays to build the schools." And the meeting was pretty wild. And much of what Goodlad says makes sense.

Here's the problem as I see it: Goodlad mixes some good ideas with some really disturbing beliefs. How do we trust the moralist who says that there are no moral absolutes? How do we trust (much less celebrate) the guy who thinks government, not parents, should shape the values of the young? Goodlad is a sweet bowl of ice cream with a cockroach in the middle.

I challenge anyone who wants to really understand Goodlad to read more than just isolated, feel-good quotes on school or department brochures. He is a prolific writer, you can find Education for Everyone online, in searchable pdf format. He may be well-intentioned (I've heard him speak), but he has strong anti-family, anti-Christian philosophies. Surely we can do better. In fact, this community has PLENTY of education experts to call on for inspiration. Time to be a light to the rest of the world.

These blogs are packed with actual quotes and facts on Goodlad. He is a verified socialist. Brian J resorts to labeling the parents "McCartheyites," while omitting reference to Goodlad's actual socialist, anti-family statements. Even BrianJ's blog response steers from addressing Goodlad's actual teachings, which are contrary to the views of a majority of ASD parents. Once again, the parents have more meat and proof in their research than does the BYU professor/writer.

Goodlad aside, why would a district use a word "enculturating" that is not found in dictionaries? That has associations with the word "indoctrination"? Why use language that is confusing, controversial, imprecise? Shouldn't an education mission statement be the very essence of clarity? Shouldn't it be about something as simple and old-fashioned as "academic excellence"?

Professor,

Are you saying that parents are incapable of teaching Christian values at home, and that government schools must teach Christianity?

It sounds like you should be teaching at a private Christian school.