Teaching Our Children (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Kirata -> Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 8:23:44 AM)


According to reports, some educators are making use of textbooks that feature rather curious "facts".

As a program of the Virginia Department of Education, Virtual Virginia (VVa) offers online Advanced Placement (AP®), world language, core academic, and elective courses to students across the Commonwealth and nation. Virtual Virginia is committed to providing high-quality, rigorous course content with the flexibility to meet schools’ and students’ varied schedules. Our program strives to provide instruction that meets the individual needs of students. ~Virtual Virginia

For Advanced Placement in History two course texts are listed, one of which is this one from Amsco School Publications:

United States History—Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination

On page 102, the text summarizes the first ten amendments to the Constitution.

K.

[image]local://upfiles/235229/D02CAF00F0484E5DB183B7A28D1CFD13.jpg[/image]



hlen5 -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 8:32:56 AM)

Are you pointing out the exclusion of "a well-regulated militia"?



DesideriScuri -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 8:53:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
Are you pointing out the exclusion of "a well-regulated militia"?


The 2nd Amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

That is not the same as stating that "the people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia."

The latter allows firearms solely to the use in a state militia, and in activities that support that (ie. firearms training and practice). If that interpretation was true, there would be no allowance for firearms for sporting purposes, self-defense, hunting (for food and defense, as opposed to sport-hunting), etc.



hlen5 -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 9:04:04 AM)

I discounted the older prose because none of the others in the textbook are written that way either.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 9:16:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
I discounted the older prose because none of the others in the textbook are written that way either.


The prose isn't the issue. It's the interpretation that is the problem. Paraphrasing the Amendment without changing the meaning is fine, as was done in for the First, Third and Fourth (I didn't go further, so this is not to imply there was anything negative done to any amendment that beyond those).



FelineRanger -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 9:21:36 AM)

Actually, DesideriScuri quoted the Second Amendment as it's written in the Bill of Rights, not merely some "older translation."



Yachtie -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 9:39:32 AM)

Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination





[image]local://upfiles/1352141/902DAF2F2B4F4FA49D0E868D55F51E08.jpg[/image]



slavekate80 -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 9:47:31 AM)

It may have been unintentional. Still inaccurate and hardly high quality. Separation of church and state isn't specifically part of the Bill of Rights, either, though some degree of it is implied. The third amendment not only prohibits forced quarter of soldiers in peacetime, but also restricts it in times of war. This looks like sloppy summarizing and too much simplification for a high school AP class meant to count as college credit. I'm assuming that the students who would take the class are teenagers, and above average. They can handle the original text.



metamorfosis -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 10:30:15 AM)

quote:

The prose isn't the issue. It's the interpretation that is the problem. Paraphrasing the Amendment without changing the meaning is fine, as was done in for the First, Third and Fourth (I didn't go further, so this is not to imply there was anything negative done to any amendment that beyond those).


Absolutely.



mnottertail -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 10:36:42 AM)

According to no credible reports that have been evidenced here, there is nothing credible that leads me to believe that bit of asswipe in the OP, and nothing to believe that is a real book. And the according to some is a felch right off of Faux Nuze for a way to inflame the feeble-minded which turns out not to be true in the least upon the most superficial examination.



PeonForHer -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 10:50:55 AM)

I smelled a hoax myself, but there's a .pdf of the book online at

http://www.conejo.k12.ca.us/Portals/49/Departments/Social%20Science/Palotay/Amsco.pdf

That wording of the 2nd Amendment is on p 134.



Kirata -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:03:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

I smelled a hoax myself, but there's a .pdf of the book online at

http://www.conejo.k12.ca.us/Portals/49/Departments/Social%20Science/Palotay/Amsco.pdf

That wording of the 2nd Amendment is on p 134.

Also worth noting, conejo.k12.ca.us is the Conejo Valley Unified School District in Thousand Oaks, California.

K.




Yachtie -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:07:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

I smelled a hoax myself, but there's a .pdf of the book online at

http://www.conejo.k12.ca.us/Portals/49/Departments/Social%20Science/Palotay/Amsco.pdf

That wording of the 2nd Amendment is on p 134.



Your link is to the 2010 revision and the wording is on book P.102 and is exactly as K posted -

Second Amendment. The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia



lovmuffin -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:12:01 AM)

FR
There was a text book I read about years ago that had "(Police and Military)" after the second amendment.



mnottertail -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:19:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

I smelled a hoax myself, but there's a .pdf of the book online at

http://www.conejo.k12.ca.us/Portals/49/Departments/Social%20Science/Palotay/Amsco.pdf

That wording of the 2nd Amendment is on p 134.

Also worth noting, conejo.k12.ca.us is the Conejo Valley Unified School District in Thousand Oaks, California.

K.



Rabbit valley, Still there is no causal link between the three cites in the OP.



Gauge -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:21:13 AM)

From page 134:

Here is a summary of the rights guaranteed in each amendment

It is a summary, not an exhaustive verbatim quotation from the Bill of Rights.

My guess is that it is an encapsulation of the essential bits of the individual items that the student of History should already know. Therefore it serves as reference only and not an exact representation.

While I do not agree that this is the way to go with education, this is a test preparation book, not a textbook for the purposes of education.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:26:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge
From page 134:
Here is a summary of the rights guaranteed in each amendment
It is a summary, not an exhaustive verbatim quotation from the Bill of Rights.
My guess is that it is an encapsulation of the essential bits of the individual items that the student of History should already know. Therefore it serves as reference only and not an exact representation.
While I do not agree that this is the way to go with education, this is a test preparation book, not a textbook for the purposes of education.


Shouldn't a summary summarize the actual meaning?



Kirata -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:26:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

My guess is that it is an encapsulation of the essential bits...

Given such a blatant misrepresentation of fact, the question is: Essential to what?

K.







BamaD -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:27:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

From page 134:

Here is a summary of the rights guaranteed in each amendment

It is a summary, not an exhaustive verbatim quotation from the Bill of Rights.

My guess is that it is an encapsulation of the essential bits of the individual items that the student of History should already know. Therefore it serves as reference only and not an exact representation.

While I do not agree that this is the way to go with education, this is a test preparation book, not a textbook for the purposes of education.

However it is a misrepresentation of the 2nd.



Gauge -> RE: Teaching Our Children (9/18/2013 11:54:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


Shouldn't a summary summarize the actual meaning?



Isn't this splitting hairs a little bit? If you hit the highlights of something and lose a bit of the original meaning, is that not what a summary is?

I am not certain what the problem that people are having with the understanding of a condensed version serving to bring to mind the very basic essence of something that a student should already know. For instance, ROY G. BIV is a condensing of the order of the colors in the rainbow. Now, if they only taught ROY G. BIV to children and left out the essential meaning of it, then I can see your point, but obviously they do not.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Given such a blatant misrepresentation of fact, the question is: Essential to what?

K.


So this is a government conspiracy of disinformation in order to dumb down our young people so they are subservient and ignorant of their rights? That is a bit of a reach.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

However it is a misrepresentation of the 2nd.


If you read any other part of the book, some essential facts are left out too. This is not an exhaustive treatise on History, it never claims to be nor does it represent itself in any way to be anything but preparation for a History exam.

No one has ever heard of Cliff Notes? Those books condense literature into its most basic essence. In the process they leave out gigantic parts of the book which in turn leaves out some of the overall meaning and point of the book. Cliff Notes never represents itself to be the book, it only serves as a guide. If you want to know what the book actually says, you have to go and read the book.

Come on folks, you have got to be able to distinguish between something that is presented to be an exact representation of something, and something only serving to be a summary. If this appeared in a textbook that was teaching the Constitution I could understand your ire, and I would be upset too, not once does this book state that it is anything than what it is.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.859375E-02