Criticism of Pedagogy

Well, it's their own children (supposing they want to brainwash their kids, never knew it though) so they're free to do whatever they want. Also, unlike the state, they don't have the monopoly or power to rule over other people.

I mean, why don't people fight back against the system?

History textbooks are full of lies and propaganda. I don't even need to talk about subjects like civics. Even at science class teachers have blatant liberal agendas.

I'm starting to suspect that most people here are the same kind of teachers I'm talking about here.

It isn't ONLY a brainwashing scheme but it certainly does have that effect in addition to its more benign purpose. Teaching unions are radically biased to the left, politically, so obviously teachers as a class must likewise be strongly biased, politically, and it is inevitable that they will pass these biases on in their teaching, even if they try not to (and most don't even try). There is also the problem that most teachers are female, which has negative outcomes for young boys, but that isn't a problem with state education so much as it is a problem of underfunding and out-of-control pedopanic.

>I mean, why don't people fight back against the system?
Not that fag but he answered your question. They have been brainwashed.

For starter, is mass education still relevant in our current postindustrial society? It's like most of the actually important stuff for society are taught by companies or affiliated trade schools. So why still bother with public schools?

The internet will replace mass education at some point, but some things need to taught hands-on, like trades, and you will always need some kind of curriculum and examinations system to ensure a certain standard.

>History textbooks are full of lies and propaganda. I don't even need to talk about subjects like civics. Even at science class teachers have blatant liberal agendas.

These statements are quite true but that certainly doesn't make public education a "blatant gigantic brainwashing scheme". No more than the occurrence of fouls in a soccer makes soccer a gigantic melee free for all.

If teachers, who are generally exercising in good faith, are brainwashing children, then so are parents and privately employed teachers.
Parents, also, have no special right to do anything detrimental to their children. If education is bad it is equally bad from either side.

As for taxes, education doesn't become free once it's private. Rich parents might pay less, but then that means poor parents can't afford a good education for their kids.

You have no argument beyond irrational hate of public institutions.

And on that point you should know that homeshooling and private schools are authorised by most states.

>reading, writing, maths etc need to be taught by companies

>private brainwashing is okay

Education IS, in essence, brainwashing. You are filling a young and impressionable mind with your views and opinions, even if you're striving for impartiality. You seem to be upset that public education's brainwashing has a left-leaning flavour to it as opposed to a more right-wing brainwashing you'd prefer.

>History TEXTBOOKS
no really you do have to be 18 to post here

Funny, I can also accuse you for deliberately ignoring all my arguments, despite all your arguments being full of bias and unfounded assumptions, likely from the very same institution that has nurture your vile brainwashing career where you got all of them from.

Poor snowflake did Obama hurt your fee fees?

Parents have a natural right to brainwash their kids.
>As for taxes, education doesn't become free once it's private
It's not "free" when it's public, either. Private provisions would cost a lot less, and you could even ensure access by providing vouchers as a form of welfare.
>You have no argument beyond irrational hate of public institutions.
This is because you are willfully ignoring his argument.

Because it's bad at brainwashing children in a uniform manner, not everyone agrees it's brainwashing (and this will vary a lot depending on your own personal ideology and philosophy) and most people know that it was certainly never INTENDED to be like that, unless you wanna entertain conspiratorial notions.

I hope to be a history teacher, and even if I have to do some retarded shit here and there I do want to give kids at least a better understanding of history than is the current average here in burgerstan.

Why would you think the fact he mentioned textbooks in the context of SCHOOLS means he is underage? You think schools are using peer reviewed academic journals?

The only thing schools should teach is literacy, math and natural sciences. History, ethics and literature curriculums in public school curriculums are basically ideological propaganda. 99% of what I know about history I didn't learn in school,

What the fuck is the problem of political cartoonists and trying to use children as mouthpieces to further their own agendas, at least have the balls to stand for what you believe in. No child cares about Obama or Trump or any of this political shitshow

>not everyone agrees it's brainwashing (and this will vary a lot depending on your own personal ideology and philosophy)
If you're leftwing then you won't think inculcating leftwing values is brainwashing, no.

because the brainwashing would be an incoherent mess, making it ineffective. None would receive a coordinated brainwashing that could maintain itself

All education and art is a kind of propaganda.

The difference is that state run services brainwash people into being loyal to the public system as something to be contributed towards, while the alternative brainwashes people into seeing the public good as a spoil, to be pilfered and robbed at the expense of people you don’t like.

I’m sorry that you think everyone should be a backwoods nigger who hates their own country and actively roots for its downfall, but that is no firm foundation for a major power, you’ll only be left in the dust by countries like China which invest heavily in education

China's education is extremely inefficient, unequal and corrupt, not exactly the kind of example you'd want to go for (actually it could be argued in support of not having public education). Not to mention the society China is right now, where everyone is expected to obsess over ranks and hierarchy, in a dog eats dog world where any resemblance of human dignity doesn't exist. You may have to wonder where it went wrong, and one of them certainly had something to do with the Party totalitarian system that hampers them. China is growing despite the existence of public schooling, not because of them.

Cause home schooling makes you even dumber.

>brainwashing scheme is entirely unfounded

hmmm

>The Edina school district’s All for All plan mandated that henceforth “all teaching and learning experiences” would be viewed through the “lens of racial equity,” and that only “racially conscious” teachers and administrators should be hired.
>A course description of an 11th-grade U.S. Literature and Composition course puts it this way: “By the end of the year, you will have . . . learned how to apply marxist [sic], feminist, post-colonial [and] psychoanalytical . . .lenses to literature.”

weeklystandard.com/inside-a-public-school-social-justice-factory/article/2011402

except it's left wingers who are the ones who have maintained the largest criticisms of schooling throughout the last century

I don't know fuck all about America but aren't school district authorities elected? Blame democracy.

>as children grow they become more rebellious against their parents, who they previously agreed with, and can have mental problems.
I think Rolo's on to something here

Seems like there's some pretty stupid people in that school district.
How does that mean that public education is fundamentally a brainwashing scheme?

I remembered when i saw test question talked about how dinosaurs coexisted with humans

Are public schools really just minoritiy thunder domes of constant fights and chimp outs?

The ones full of minorities are either hellscapes, or they're run according to different rules than other public schools, in which case they can be pretty good. Black young men, in particular, do not do well in our ultra-permissive low-discipline schools, they need a firm hand to make the most of their talents. Hispanic young men do fine, but female teachers trigger them and cause them to act out, they tend to come from ultra-macho cultures that don't teach respect for women.

Parents have a "right" to brainwash their children, but that doesn't mean that it IS right to brainwash their children. Educational institutions are biased, but much less so than a singular or dual influence on a child. If children having unbiased education is what you want then public schools are the way to go. There will always be bias, but it is more difficult for intense bias to be forced upon a student in a governmental institution. This is because public schools have more teachers with more diverse opinions than homeschools and also because a moral focus in many districts is to not influence students politically. i.e What student is going to be the least biased: the student who only reads Marx, or the student who reads both Marx and Rand?

>Parents have a "right" to brainwash their children, but that doesn't mean that it IS right to brainwash their children
No, but it is in fact right for them to do so, as well. Passing on your memes is as important as passing on your genes, and is a parents right.
>Educational institutions are biased, but much less so than a singular or dual influence on a child.
Irrelevant since you agree parents have the right to pass on their biases, and I would argue they have a duty to do so, too.
>If children having unbiased education is what you want then public schools are the way to go.
Eh, no. Our state might not seek to actively brainwash our kids (they do, but I'll assume they aren't for the sake of argument), but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to give them the power to do so.
> There will always be bias, but it is more difficult for intense bias to be forced upon a student in a governmental institution. This is because public schools have more teachers with more diverse opinions than homeschools
Again, no. Teachers are OVERWHELMINGLY left wing, to an insane degree. With homeschooling, you can select a tutor who shares your views, or of course you can teach your kid yourself, of course you have greater choice of what bias you want your kids teacher to have if you are the one choosing the teacher, and not the school board.
>because a moral focus in many districts is to not influence students politically.
What? Literally, what? Even if such a thing exists, it is ignored.
>i.e What student is going to be the least biased: the student who only reads Marx, or the student who reads both Marx and Rand?
Please show me the public school that has Marx and Rand on its curriculum.

>The only thing schools should teach is literacy, math and natural sciences

Why? So everyone in society can be a bunch of STEMautist drones like you?

Are you a moron?

Because people who are standardized or more predictable and easier t control. Next question.

I'm a practicum student teacher (adolescent social studies) in NYS ask me anything. Not An expert by any means but might be able to provide some insights.

How many openly Republican teachers do you know?

>Republicans having morals, fighting fair or generally just not being scumbags

Have you been living under a rock for the last 4 decades?

>How many openly Republican teachers do you know?
8

>they tend to come from ultra-macho cultures that don't teach respect for women.

So the spics had it right all along..

No, respecting women is the white thing to do. Listening to their political opinions, on the other hand...

None 'openly', nor any democrats. I assume you mean school teachers and not my professors .

I promise you public school teachers aren't nearly as heavily liberal as you might think. One teacher in my practicum a couple semesters ago unironically defended and painted Nicholas II as a martyr figure. When I was in high school our PIG teacher was openly a conservative republican. This is all in the wastelands of upstate NY though mind you.

>I promise you public school teachers aren't nearly as heavily liberal as you might think
Your promises are meaningless when we have the data. 80/20 left / right is pretty heavy.
>upstate NY
One of the most Republican parts of the country and two anecdotes are all you have. I wont ask for liberal anecdotes, because we both know you would be here all day.

Don't ask me questions if you don't want the answers jesus.

What answers? Your pathetic lie that "schools really aren't THAT biased!" Or your TWO anecdotes? Fuck you, you are exactly the kind of dimwitted retard who thinks there is no problem because he's too stupid to see what is obvious, no wonder you ended up teaching you moron.

The only reason conservatives think liberals try to brainwash people is because that's exactly what conservatives would do if the situation was reversed.

>80/20 left / right is pretty heavy.

I'd like to know where you got these numbers. I can see 80/20 dem/rep because one of those two parties at least occasionally looks out for the interests of the occupation, and it isn't the republicans. That isn't the same thing as teachers being a bunch of Marxists.

>I'd like to know where you got these numbers.
verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/index.html

Teachers is general are not Marxists, agreed, but there are Marxist teachers and they don't get fired like a Nazi teacher would.
>I can see 80/20 dem/rep because one of those two parties at least occasionally looks out for the interests of the occupation, and it isn't the republicans.
The profession is unionized, this draws it strongly to the left and aligns it firmly with "the pro-union party", it's not so much about govts giving them stuff because NEITHER party generally gives them shit.

>What answers?

To the questions (you) asked me about my personal experience.

>Your pathetic lie that "schools really aren't THAT biased!"

I said not as liberal as you MIGHT think.

>Or your TWO anecdotes?

I was literally asked for anecdotes.

I see I'm going to have work extra hard on focusing on reading comprehension with students going forward.

Should have said, the entry for Teaching is quite far down, just control+f it. Also you can click on an entry to get a more detailed breakdown.

>I said not as liberal as you MIGHT think.
Then you shouldn't assume everyone is as ignorant as you are. Also, that's not what you meant, you yourself had no clue how divided the profession was and tried to palm me off with a platitude, making yourself look ridiculous in the process. Again, I'm not surprised you ended up in teaching.

>Marxist teachers and they don't get fired like a Nazi teacher would

Depends on where your school district is.

Marxism and Nazism aren't equivalent either by the way.

>Marxism and Nazism aren't equivalent either by the way.
You're right, Marxists have murdered far more.

>Then you shouldn't assume
Didn't assume a damn thing, bucko. Get the chip off your shoulder and practice calmly reading and responding in civil and rational dialog.

So you assumed I knew the facts, you simply thought I wouldn't consider an 80/20 split to be significant?

I don't believe Marx killed a single person in his life or wrote anywhere that any person or group of people should be murdered.

Guess what dipshit, neither did Hitler. But that's irrelevant since I was talking about MarxISTS, ie, followers of Marx. Want to tell me THEY never killed anyone?

Parents do have a right to brainwash their children, as they have been given a power-right to do so. To quote the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy,
>Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.
Now this idea gives ability to the right holder. The moral idea behind this is for systems or people to give benefits to others. Parents are given rights because society has deemed it immoral to deny autonomy to parental instruction. This is okay, and is morally correct. This does not, however, indicate that the teachings or actions of parents are morally correct, only that society should not interfere (to an extent.) Now consider what Aristotle said about the truth in his metaphysics-
>The investigation of truth is in one way hard, in another easy... ... no one is able to obtain the truth adequately, while, on the other hand, we do not collectively fail, but every one says something true about the nature of things, and while individually we contribute little or nothing to the truth, by the union of all a considerable amount is amassed.
Aristotle is correct here; truth is found from many sources- the more diverse the better. You have to understand, I don't disagree with many of your ideas. Public school IS left leaning and it SHOULD be unbiased. Parents SHOULD retain autonomy over their dependents. But if the best an individual can be is closest to the truth, and truth and can only be found in a group effort, then home-school (characterized by one to two instructors and little to no classmates) is not the solution to the problem. Public school, while retaining a systemic bias, are still going to be a better option, unless we can figure out how to sterilize social institutions. The Marx/Rand is an example of diverse opinions affecting a bias, not of the current situation.

>Guess what dipshit, neither did Hitler.

I suppose by "annihilation" and "extermination" he just meant "train ride to Madagascar". He was known for his poetic language.

>But that's irrelevant since I was talking about MarxISTS, ie, followers of Marx. Want to tell me THEY never killed anyone?

It's irrelevant. A Marxist is a follower of Marx, not a follower of Marx's followers.

>But if the best an individual can be is closest to the truth
I profoundly disagree, truth is a snape hunt.
>and truth and can only be found in a group effort, then home-school (characterized by one to two instructors and little to no classmates) is not the solution to the problem.
If this is true, why do homeschooled kids outperform state schooled ones?
>Public school, while retaining a systemic bias, are still going to be a better option, unless we can figure out how to sterilize social institutions
Better in what sense? Why is it better to be biased to the left than not to be?

I suppose by "proletariat revolution" and "smash the chains of oppression", Marx meant re-education camps and a stern talking to?
>It's irrelevant. A Marxist is a follower of Marx, not a follower of Marx's followers.
Read a book you fucking retard.

>I suppose by "proletariat revolution" and "smash the chains of oppression", Marx meant re-education camps and a stern talking to?

Extermination and annihilation ostensibly mean "mass killing"

Proletariat revolution and smashing chains of oppression ostensibly mean taking back power from a corrupt system.

Are you seriously just equivocating the two like I'm not going to notice that?

My arguments aren't in order, but they are here.
There is more that one way to be biased than left/right, authoritarian/libertarian. I don't like the idea of having to work in a left leaning education system, but I'll do it so long as I can get perspective from outside sources.

From the Greek ethic, the good is what humanity should strive for. This is characterized by the virtues (Truth, Honor, Justice, ect.) If the truth is a part of the good, we should seek it out. If the search for the truth is a snipe hunt, then what point is there to politics and education period? Read some Socratic dialogues if you want to understand more of these principles.

One can have a biased opinion and still be intelligent and well educated. Home-schooled kids are often in a better environment for learning than many public schools. This does not prove that they are more morally correct and unbiased than children in other institutions. A lack of diverse education does not pronounce itself through test scores. My point also wasn't about the children during their school years, but rather about after they leave for college. It can be difficult to remove biases.

I'm practically ancap and I'm making light of the fact that the whole "school is just brainwashing" meme was made by left libertarians

What you've said can just as easily be applied to the rightwing

>weeklystandard

Tell me more about that pizza parlor pedo ring. Actually don't because this isn't Veeky Forums and you must be 18 to be on this site.

>being this much of a brainlet.

>If this is true why do homeschooled kida outperform state schooled ones?

Because there's some really poorly funded state schools and no such thing as a poorly funded homeschool.

Mass education is an invention of the industrial era to create more drones to work with the machines (yes, it includes the technicians, mechanics, etc). It doesn't cares about "enlightening" the human race. It just cares about creating slaves

That's why retards (aka Veeky Forums average poster) glorify it so much

See, I don't mind this meme being spread around.

I think it's correct. Plus you might want to add that mass control is somewhat 'evil' and applicable to public institutions.

John Stuart Mill, the utilitarian, was a thinker who loved the idea of private education. Although he said that education should be relegated to public institutions in his book on Political Economy, he did however concede that privatization in education might not be such a bad idea if affordably done. In other words, education could be done kind of like how law is done right now. With the individual practitioners owning their own schools and giving much closer, more private lessons to the pupils.

Also, was this not what Jean-Jacques Rousseau was trying to say in Emile? That a one-on-one education was immeasurably better than any sort of public institutional teaching.

So why do people still disagree about anything? Public education has been the norm for over a century and you retards still argue about everything.

Why is this a bad thing? A more educated populace is more productive, creating more value, raising the standard of living for everyone, even if it disproportionately helps some more than others.

>dude iPhones lmao

> Why is this a bad thing? A more educated populace is more productive, creating more value, raising the standard of living for everyone, even if it disproportionately helps some more than others.

Because this is one of those things that can be easily changed, but because of moneyed interests it might not be.

This, inheritance, the bloated financial services industry, and the idea of landed proprietors being able to get sums of money for just owning land, are some of the greatest ills in our society.

Read some more. I suggest Progress and Poverty, Emile, maybe even The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money if you've read enough economics.

These are the things that matter. If you can be a morally upright person while examining things intelligently, it is surprising what you might be able to accomplish.

lmao i was supposed to read those in school

> I'm starting to suspect that most people here are the same kind of teachers I'm talking about here.
Actually this board is mostly made up by actual retards with no education of any kind besides /pol/ memes and """"STEM""""fags who think they understand history and philosophy after reading an infograph with a 2006 Blogspot's article as a source

In the modern profit-motivated globalized world yes. Because knowledge by itself has no value. Only pragmatic, """productive""", industry oriented knowledge is "useful".

Not that this is a good thing btw

This is true but it's fading. The old guard of education, the obedient worker drone disciplinarians, are gradually dying and retiring and people with more focus on critical engagement and content literacy are replacing them. It'll improve.

This is an example of what I meant here Also about brainwashing

>practiCUM

>99% of what I know about history I didn't learn in school
Figures

Although I have a lot of criticisms against the education system, especially the American one there really isn't a better alternative.

Home schooled kids are spergs and pic related is how children live in a nation where hardly anyone gets an education and the majority are illiterate. There is not one country in which the economic situation is good when its people are illiterate and ignorant

Education obviously has an element of indoctrination, but what do you expect? Every single child has to be socialized into society for society even to continue existing, but maybe the reason you are so critical is because you don't really want society to continue existing?

this

if we let every kid get fully indoctrinated by their idiot parents, society would collapse

>Well it's their own children so they're free to do whatever they want
Should I legally be able to be the acting doctor for my own children then?

You're just an "alternative" retard who hates the fact that educated people reject your creationist/homeopathy/racialist/whatever pet theories. 99% of criticism against "academia" comes down to some bullshit like this.

> natural right

SPOOKY

>children spend time thinking about politics
Have you ever met a child, user?

Nice projection you got there, m8. Why you so mad?

Because the state doesn't want itself to fall apart and devolve back into iron age.

Here's the problem - even literacy is brainwashing. Prescribing to people how to write and speak (in an artificial language made up by committees, sometimes radically different from the natural language the people hear from their family) is literal brainwashing with the purpose of building national cohesion. Without that, and without forcing historical narratives down kids' throats, many European countries would, over time, fall apart.

Literally how is he projecting...