Good point, maybe I'm wrong on this issue. My degree is EE from UTSA (it's no MIT I know) and I now remember that when I worked as an engineer and later as a software developer I would sometimes struggle with problems and think to myself "I don't need more knowledge I just need to be better at crossword puzzles".
Sarcasm aside, hey what do I know. I oppose programs that claim to teach critical thinking skills but don't work therefore I must oppose critical thinking.
You started the thread and you are clearly (imo) playing the blue team card in this thread. Just as you are in the "Activist Judges" thread you started. But I know your an independent just as I am, and Randomguy, and Wild Cobra, and DarrinS, and El Nono, and..........
I've started threads where I played the red team card even though I'm not really on the red team. Then I decided such stupid and dishonest threads really make this forum suck.
I'm disgusted with the no child left behind policy ins uted by W.
How was I playing the Blue Team card? I think I'm playing the "opposing critical thinking is a bad move" card.
And you realized I started the "Activist Judges" thread before the SCOTUS ruling right?
No you are playing the Texas GOP Platform Explicitly Opposes Critical Thinking card.
I don't believe these programs work. This has been confirmed in this thread by a professional educator. So I oppose these programs. Does this mean I oppose critical thinking?
um, who?
Ok. I got lost when you conflated critical thinking with "those programs"/
scott where do you teach bro? i'm looking for a good economics program for grad school (not immediately)
I don't know where he teaches but let me tell you something young man. Choosing which program you should pursue because an instructor in that program posts on an internet forum that you also post on is definitely the way to go. Hey, have you taken any of these critical thinking programs?
There is a really good list and ranking on the web. Let me track it down for you.
First 5 pages of Google search isn't finding the list I was looking for, so I would basically recommend you focus your search on ins utions that have a PhD program, and not consider anything without one (UTSA doesn't have one).
From there it obviously depends on your desired area of concentration and whether you prefer a more research or teaching-focused career.
Which it does. So cool.
You may or may not oppose critical thinking, but you definitely aren't very good at it if this thread is any indication. I said our current education system isn't working, not the things that the GOP Platform say they oppose aren't working.I don't believe these programs work. This has been confirmed in this thread by a professional educator. So I oppose these programs. Does this mean I oppose critical thinking?
Because undoubtedly he was going to roll immediately upon my response.
Yeah scott this guy's re ed and has some sort of problem with me, pay him no mind.
The question was actually 2 fold, one I was curious which school he taught at, and 2 i figured an economics professor could tell me all about which programs were the best and maybe a recommended plan of action.
I'm taking intermediate macroeconomics right now just as an elective, aced the first test i'm thinking it might be worth pursuing later on it's at least interesting.
Somebody posted other nuggets from this "platform"...
We affirm that the practice of sexuality tears at the fabric of society and contributes to the breakdown of the family unit. sexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.
sexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle, in public policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include sexual “couples.” We believe there should be no granting of special legal en lements or creation of special status for sexual behavior, regardless of state of origin. Additionally, we oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose sexuality out of faith, conviction or belief in traditional values.Voter Rights Act – We urge that the Voter Rights Act of 1965 codified and updated in 1973 be repealed and not reauthorized.We urge amendment of the Internal Revenue Code to allow a religious organization to address issues without fear of losing its tax-exempt status. We call for repeal of requirements that religious organizations send the government any personal information about their contributors.We support adoption of American English as the official language of Texas and of the United States.
The Terrifying Texas GOP Platform
by John T. Harvey at Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnthar...-gop-platform/
"SNIP.....................................
The do ent (available here) has already made headlines with the portion that opposes the “teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills” and “critical thinking skills.” Although a partial retraction followed, this was in terms of the wording, not the general meaning. It appears that their fear is that these “focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.” Think about that for a moment. First off, do they really and truly believe that teachers and school boards across the State of Texas are designing curricula specifically aimed at training children to challenge their parents? Second, do you know which values and concepts are rejected in the absence of higher order and critical thinking? None! Therefore, depending on the time and place when we decide to stop challenging ideas and meekly accept what we are told, we might thereafter and forever be racists, sexists, communists, fascists, democrats, capitalists, Christians, Buddhists, Lutherans, geocentrists, pacifists, Wiccans, or whatever the prevailing views of that day were. Nothing would ever again be questioned. Were we to implement such a policy, we’d have to be certain that we had already identified the concepts and values that were “correct” (whatever that really means). Even a cursory reading of their platform makes it very clear that this is precisely what Texas Republicans believe and what those concepts and values are. This begs the question, who is really aiming to force their beliefs on our children, Texas schools or Texas Republicans? Personally, I prefer what I learned during my twelve years of Catholic school and eight years of public higher education: if a belief cannot stand up to scrutiny, then we shouldn’t believe it; and if it does, we will hold it all the more strongly for the very reason that it withstood our challenge.
Another disturbing feature of the do ent is that while they “urge the Legislature to direct expenditures to academics as the first priority,” they also contend that “Since data is (sic) clear that additional money does not translate into educational achievement, and higher education costs are out of control, we support reducing taxpayer funding to all levels of education ins utions” (emphasis added). Not only is the second statement inconsistent with the first (not to mention rather frightening), it isn’t true. The implications of the data are far from clear. In point of fact, economists have found that–not surprisingly–it matters how the money is spent (see here for a survey of the relevant literature). For example, reducing class sizes and adding remedial help appear to be particularly cost effective. Thus, contrary to the Texas GOP’s assertion, there are programs that both add to costs AND increase educational achievement. Furthermore, the most significant finding in the literature over the years has been that teacher quality is the absolute, number one factor driving student attainment. Surely the Texas GOP is not arguing that higher salaries would not tend to attract higher quality teachers or that funds for training and apprenticeship would not be well spent? The bottom line is, the actual evidence flies in the face of their claim that the research shows unequivocally that there is no connection between funding and outcomes. It simply isn’t true. A cynic might be tempted to conclude that the real goal of the Texas Republican Party is simply to find a means of cir venting Article VII of the Texas Cons ution, requiring the State to “establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools” (wherein, according to the Texas Supreme Court in Edgewood ISD vs. Kirby, efficient is not equivalent to “economical,” “inexpensive,” or “cheap”). I hope that’s not the case.
The economic policies recommended by the do ent are equally impractical and ill-considered. Bearing in mind that the fundamental problem faced in an advanced capitalist economy is insufficient demand to generate employment for all those willing to work (see Why Do Recessions Happen?), the following recommendations would operate to make this problem even worse:
......................................SNIP"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote