General Discussion

IrishAyes

(6,151 posts)

90. So if someone adamantly opposes you, it's okay to call them that vilest of names, a conservative?

Sat Nov 23, 2013, 11:20 PM

Nov 2013

THAT in itself sounds like GOP Rovian technique. Shame on you! I see no reason to accept your opinion on anything if you're capable of such uncouth tactics.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

146 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Common Core teaches Gettysburg Address with no context or background. Unbelievable. [View all] madfloridian Nov 2013 OP

I would think close reading excercises would require context Adsos Letter Nov 2013 #1

That, mon ami, is a gargantuan "if" clause. WinkyDink Nov 2013 #5

Next chapter: Mein Kampf elehhhhna Nov 2013 #32

No--"close reading" does NOT. That's the POINT. Did no one else learn this in grad school? nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #52

If that's what's taught in grad school today, it doesn't necessarily validate it anyway. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #55

Perhaps not. But students should still be aware of the New Critics, and the foundation of modern msanthrope Nov 2013 #61

Not until they learn something of value FIRST. If there's time for trash later, fine. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #64

Hey--this is the 10th grade. If they haven't learned anything of substance by then, this is hardly msanthrope Nov 2013 #68

Trash? You certain you're not reading from the Texas State Republican Party platform? nt eqfan592 Nov 2013 #70

So if someone adamantly opposes you, it's okay to call them that vilest of names, a conservative? IrishAyes Nov 2013 #90

When somebody so vehimitly opposes a critical thinking exercise.... eqfan592 Nov 2013 #95

The very last paragraph looks like a Sarah Palin quote. lob1 Nov 2013 #2

Sarah word salad. madfloridian Nov 2013 #6

Complete gibberish. History is ABOUT context. DirkGently Nov 2013 #46

But they aren't teaching 'history.' They are teaching a literary technique that msanthrope Nov 2013 #54

Specific Contexts = Facts = The horror! THE HORROR! WinkyDink Nov 2013 #3

Everything we teach our kids in school needs to be taught in context. Math needs to be taught as RC Nov 2013 #4

Agreed. madfloridian Nov 2013 #13

I had a baseball coach for a math teacher in high school. Jackpine Radical Nov 2013 #36

Your's is an example of why Math has to be taught as applied math. RC Nov 2013 #40

I hit the math brick wall with calculus. That is, until the school principal took it upon himself IrishAyes Nov 2013 #74

That sort of thing's why my math grades were always 20% lower than my physics ones Posteritatis Nov 2013 #73

Perfect. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #62

You understand that exercises such as this do in fact encourage critical thinking, right? eqfan592 Nov 2013 #79

Math is already way too much "applied math". redgreenandblue Nov 2013 #144

Abstract math is what they teach in school. That is why so many people do not understand it and are RC Nov 2013 #145

That's acutally an interesting way to go about it bhikkhu Nov 2013 #7

I disagree. madfloridian Nov 2013 #8

Thinking is vital as well... bhikkhu Nov 2013 #9

Using context in no way affects thinking or learning. madfloridian Nov 2013 #11

Yet this is asking them to think bhikkhu Nov 2013 #14

Using context will not affect their ability to think. madfloridian Nov 2013 #44

You said it made no sense to you bhikkhu Nov 2013 #66

OMG I taught thinking skills to my primary students all the time. madfloridian Nov 2013 #101

So because it is a difficult task, it must be condemned? eqfan592 Nov 2013 #104

I think teachers are very capable of making the lesson in the OP a powerful one bhikkhu Nov 2013 #117

We have analyzed passages together for years. madfloridian Nov 2013 #124

The last paragraph means: the test questions ought relate STRICTLY to the given text. Thus, a WinkyDink Nov 2013 #10

Which is insulting to both teacher and student intelligence. Limits open discussion. madfloridian Nov 2013 #12

Right, it is teaching students to look for evidence in the text to support riversedge Nov 2013 #35

I would think that this MIGHT be an interesting assignment for an English/Writing class, Volaris Nov 2013 #15

I read the article and it looks like it IS for an English class gollygee Nov 2013 #16

It is for an English class. madfloridian Nov 2013 #20

It sounds like they want them to draw their information from the text gollygee Nov 2013 #22

The CCSS LWolf Nov 2013 #33

That this IS for an English class is slightly more acceptable to me, Volaris Nov 2013 #26

I think it says that context is to be avoided by teachers. madfloridian Nov 2013 #28

It says initially...and a reason is given...to work for meaning from the text HereSince1628 Nov 2013 #34

It doesn't make any sense to me. Teachers have been combining English with other subjects for liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #98

It's a critical thinking exercise! eqfan592 Nov 2013 #107

What grade is that presented in? Tikki Nov 2013 #17

I think it said 9th or 10th grade gollygee Nov 2013 #19

They're wanting students to analyze the writing based only on the writing gollygee Nov 2013 #18

You don't think it restricts teacher and student input and discussion? I do. madfloridian Nov 2013 #23

I do think teachers should be able to use their own creativity gollygee Nov 2013 #24

Reminds me.... Wounded Bear Nov 2013 #21

Key word is "rote". madfloridian Nov 2013 #27

Actually, it is the exact opposite of that. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #56

Declaring something to be of a higher order does not necessarily make it so. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #82

Lol, whatever. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #83

You're more interested in insulting your opponents than defending your position. Very telling. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #94

Given that you opened with an insult, i really feel you are in exactly zero position to lecture... eqfan592 Nov 2013 #96

It feels strange to defend teaching Gettysburg Address in context. madfloridian Nov 2013 #25

It's because of the lesson they're using it for gollygee Nov 2013 #29

"Odd" is one way of putting it. LWolf Nov 2013 #30

"background knowledge is essential to comprehension" madfloridian Nov 2013 #31

Absolutely! RC Nov 2013 #42

But this lesson isn't teaching the GA...it's teaching a literary technique that the source, and the msanthrope Nov 2013 #51

I'm with you. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #63

Actually, this thread is GREAT-and let me tell you why--you would not believe the number of teachers msanthrope Nov 2013 #72

lol, true. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #76

It's been going on for thousands of years---I was taught it was Talmudic-based. It's a msanthrope Nov 2013 #78

Exactly. I just think it's both amusing and sad that so many people here are denouncing this... eqfan592 Nov 2013 #81

It's an attack on Common Core that fails because of lack of erudition. So, it's pretty funny and msanthrope Nov 2013 #84

The arguments being made here make me almost think some people here, deep down... eqfan592 Nov 2013 #85

Read the Education Forum here...you'd be surprised how many "Progressives" would be in line with msanthrope Nov 2013 #86

thank you LWolf. liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #100

You have overlooked the context. And the content of the text. Igel Nov 2013 #37

No, I did not overlook any of that. I simply don't know how teaching the background.... madfloridian Nov 2013 #38

Because you aren't teaching the speech. You are teaching a technique. Valerie Strauss, your source msanthrope Nov 2013 #49

Hell, misanthrope, I was only a teacher. Strauss is only a reporter. What do you expect? madfloridian Nov 2013 #102

You do understand you're not the only teacher here, right? eqfan592 Nov 2013 #110

Let's not get insulting now. madfloridian Nov 2013 #116

I'm no fan of privatization. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #121

Critical thinking is known by many names. Don't get hung up on terminology. madfloridian Nov 2013 #127

I expect, madfloridian, that you be able to identify "close reading" before you rail against it. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #114

It sounds like analyzing a passage. madfloridian Nov 2013 #120

120 posts, and that's what you've analyzed from the thread? All righty then! nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #130

Teaching the background first completely invalidates the exercise. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #67

You're obviously not an educator. And of course that is the problem with our new 'educational sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #39

Thanks for jumping in, Sabrina. madfloridian Nov 2013 #41

the democratic establishment will never go against a democratic administration about anything. liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #106

There are plenty of flaws to find in common core. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #112

This is teaching the Gettysburg Address the same way fundies teach the bible. kestrel91316 Nov 2013 #43

No--it's not teaching the GA. It's teaching a literary technique, "close reading." The source's msanthrope Nov 2013 #50

Load of BS. That's how you graduate kids who can't find the US on a world map. IrishAyes Nov 2013 #45

Well, it's how you teach "close reading" in Eng. Lit. It's not how you would teach History. The msanthrope Nov 2013 #48

As a former lit major and the daughter of a lit professor, IrishAyes Nov 2013 #53

Yes--but you identified that a technique was being taught. So far, neither the source, nor the OP msanthrope Nov 2013 #57

Anything I can understand, other people should be able to understand also. I don't set the bar IrishAyes Nov 2013 #88

No--it's pretty apparent that the OP and the source had no idea what "close reading" is. And it's msanthrope Nov 2013 #91

In this Christian world it is known as Lectio Divina, a very old technique of reading the Bible. kwassa Nov 2013 #103

Indeed. Try doing it with the Vulgate. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #108

Trendy methods come and go. Every year there are more and more of them. madfloridian Nov 2013 #113

You didn't teach English, did you? I did, and this is exactly how you teach "close reading." Sweet msanthrope Nov 2013 #47

I strongly agree. nt Crabby Appleton Nov 2013 #58

Damn, I'm concerned, elleng Nov 2013 #59

Don't be....the OP and the source have fundamentally misunderstood what they've read. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #65

Common Core burrowowl Nov 2013 #60

Common Core is a teacher evaluation program designed to break tenure and cut teacher pay by 1/2. CK_John Nov 2013 #69

I actually understand where they are coming from. It didn't say don't EVER explain context Pretzel_Warrior Nov 2013 #71

They aren't teaching the GA--they are teaching a literary technique. A literary technique of the msanthrope Nov 2013 #75

thanks. I figured it had to be something like this. people who jump to conclusions Pretzel_Warrior Nov 2013 #77

It's agenda-driven critique of the Obama administration that fails because it isn't erudite enough. msanthrope Nov 2013 #80

Don't be so anti-intellectual. Google "explication de texte" aikoaiko Nov 2013 #87

I told them to take it up with Derrida. No one got the reference. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #92

"I consider myself fairly intelligent and educated" Android3.14 Nov 2013 #89

Common Core is a replacement for the failed NCLB. Give it time. Failure will follow....because.... madfloridian Nov 2013 #105

We are going to have an entire lost generation when it comes to education. liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #93

The entire purpose of the lesson is to work on the giftedgirl77 Nov 2013 #97

when I was a teacher, I loved using close reading with students Godhumor Nov 2013 #99

THIS! eqfan592 Nov 2013 #109

And as the parent of two children who have suffered under the Common Core I want to bang my head liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #111

You understand that one is capable of being in favor of using cold reading... eqfan592 Nov 2013 #115

Every year they throw new terms at us. madfloridian Nov 2013 #118

"Close reading" isn't new. Your argument would benefit if you explored what it is. nt msanthrope Nov 2013 #133

That is just what I said. We have done it for years. madfloridian Nov 2013 #136

No--it's pretty obvious you've never done it. It's not 'new' --it's derived msanthrope Nov 2013 #138

close reading is not a tool Common Core can claim Godhumor Nov 2013 #119

Close reading definition madfloridian Nov 2013 #122

So are you in favor or opposed to the technique? nt eqfan592 Nov 2013 #126

Analyzing passages? Great idea. Forgetting context? Not so great. madfloridian Nov 2013 #128

You simply don't get it, if that is your comment Godhumor Nov 2013 #132

Forgetting context in the big picture, I agree. eqfan592 Nov 2013 #135

What do they do with kids that have context? They have spoilers. kwassa Nov 2013 #123

Interpretation is specific to what is in the text itself Godhumor Nov 2013 #129

Because this is part of English Language Arts curriculum, not the history frazzled Nov 2013 #125

I have done this before at various grade levels. Most teachers have and do so. madfloridian Nov 2013 #134

No--it's pretty obvious from your comments that you have never done "close reading" and I am betting msanthrope Nov 2013 #137

Huh? frazzled Nov 2013 #139

Context is additive. burnsei sensei Nov 2013 #131

This message was self-deleted by its author RobinA Nov 2013 #140

History is all about context. nt Deep13 Nov 2013 #141

I agree with this. In fact, history is the study of contexts burnsei sensei Nov 2013 #143

Common Core makes it easier for textbook companies emsimon33 Nov 2013 #142

I understand the point of the exercise here. And it is a very useful exercise. MineralMan Nov 2013 #146