This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I think both are definitely possible if you are teaching gifted kids who could ace the standards without even trying. And the analysis standards are impossible to teach to below average kids anyway. So, why even bother trying?
The only real issue is trying to teach to a mixed proficiency group or teaching mildly above average children who could maybe learn a bit of the analysis standards at the cost of their test scores.
As in general, below average kids will show lower levels of proficiency re the analysis standards than will above average kids. But that does not mean that they will show zero proficiency. And, in fact, because below average kids are below average, they are unlikely to have innately picked up any of those skills, so it is actually easier to get them improve their skills in those areas. Moreover, every student, yes , even the ones you write off, have the right to be given the opportunity to reach their potential, no matter how low that potential might be. That is why bother trying.
I am not sure how a student can ace a test on content he or she has never been exposed to. Anyhow, I was talking about the impossibility of covering all of both the content standards and the analysis standards, and as it happens, it is impossible to entirely cover just the content standards. For example, in CA, American Government is a one semester course. That is 17 weeks of instructional time (18 weeks minus finals week). The state standards for the course have ten sections, and within those a total of 51 specific standards. That is three per week. Standard 12.9.1 reads:
Can you see where it is not possible to cover all of the content standards, let alone the content standards plus the analysis standards? Every teacher has to choose how much of the standards to cover, and how to address the "depth versus breadth" issue, a perennial dilemma in all areas of education, not just social studies
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link