Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Playing politics, with students as pawns - BCTF defends anti-pipeline teaching materials


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#31 gurn

gurn

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,332 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 04 October 2012 - 12:49 PM

I've heard people call teachers nothing but babysitters.
So just pay them as babysitters and I'd guess you would not live long enough to hear a teacher complain about their wage.
$ 5 per hour x 30 kids = $150 per hour x 7 hrs = $1,050 per day

Anyone out there pay their non relative baby sitter less than $ 5 per hour?
  • 1

#32 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:13 PM

And religion is part of charter and private schools already. Politics absolutely should be and is taught in secondary school. I don't know what kind of school you go to or what electives you took, but it's already there.

What shouldn't be taught in schools is propaganda information from profiteering companies such as in the case of companies in the oil industry. What next? Should we teach about the benefits of high-fructose corn syrup in Home Economics?


When I learned about politics in school I learned about all ends of the political spectrum, from Communism to Fascism and everything in between. Not just a select view. We were also encouraged to voice our own opinion on political issues, and not just take what our teacher told us as fact.
Religion is a part of private schools... so? Parents sign their kids up for those schools for that reason. If someone wanted to make a private school that only taught liberal ideologies I wouldn't have any issues with that. The issue is that they are doing this in public schools.
And again, another ludicrous comparison. But I guess I shouldn't expect anything more from you :rolleyes:
Like it or not, some people have things to gain from the pipeline, and if schools are going to educate students about it, they shouldn't ignore some of the information.
So of course they should educate about the risks and hazards of the pipeline, but they should also educate about possible economic benefits for Canada.

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 01:20 PM.

  • 3
Posted Image

#33 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,721 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:14 PM

"There is a huge difference between teaching scientific facts and political issues."

Scientific fact is that a ruptured pipeline will harm the environment and pose a threat to the wildlife shown.

I do think the comments here are valid and that both pros and cons need to be presented so students can decide for themselves. I also see nothing wrong with bringing current issues and events into the classroom for discussion and commend teachers who go beyond the books to do so. This is a pretty sensitive issue in BC and there's a lot more at stake here than politics and money. To ONLY focus on those aspects in a bid to keep this out of classrooms is equally wrong, as there are environmental issues that tie in to classroom learning.


Absolutely agree with the bolded statement - one reason that I was very interested in worldly affairs was with my socials 10 teacher in 2004-05 who constantly brought up key issues such as SARS, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, Paul Martin and Harper, and the 2010 Games.

Again, what I have issue is that on a divisive topic like this, the union isn't providing teachers with the appropriate materials needed to teach this in a critical manner - the union is only providing the anti-pipeline portion of the argument.

There is so much we can cover with this pipelines - issues of oil spills, First Nations rights, Canadian-Chinese relations, the role of corporations in government/society, the science of fracking and extraction - all this is gone simply because the BCTF did not present two sides of the argument and allow students to understand the spectrum of the arguments.
  • 1

#34 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:36 PM

When I learned about politics in school I learned about all ends of the political spectrum, from Communism to Fascism and everything in between. Not just a select view. We were also encouraged to voice our own opinion on political issues, and not just take what our teacher told us as fact.
Religion is a part of private schools... so? Parents sign their kids up for those schools for that reason. If someone wanted to make a private school that only taught liberal ideologies I wouldn't have any issues with that. The issue is that they are doing this in public schools.
And again, another ludicrous comparison. But I guess I shouldn't expect anything more from you :rolleyes:
Like it or not, some people have things to gain from the pipeline, and if schools are going to educate students about it, they shouldn't ignore some of the information.
So of course they should educate about the risks and hazards of the pipeline, but they should also educate about possible economic benefits for Canada.


Who said that teachers would be mandated to not open the discussion up to the economic benefits should they want to??

What's ludicrous is a myopic view that the BCTF are forcing anti-oil or BC jobs information without the ability to open the discussion to them as well in the classroom. But I shouldn't expect anything less from the the myopic, i suppose.

There's no question that some people have something to gain from the pipeline. Was that ever being questioned??

And when you learned about politics in school, did you learn about the principles and fundamentals of Anarchy, along with democracy and Communism and Fascism?? No? Well, you should be outraged that you didn't get to learn all about that political paradigm and its benefits for society. I mean, you should really write a letter to the BCTF and the Education Minister for depriving you of that necessary and important piece of educational curriculum. Why, you could have been an anarchist this whole time. You poor thing. My heart goes out to your lack of knowledge and the betrayal of our education system towards you.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#35 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:53 PM

Who said that teachers would be mandated to not open the discussion up to the economic benefits should they want to??


What's ludicrous is a myopic view that the BCTF are forcing anti-oil or BC jobs information without the ability to open the discussion to them as well in the classroom. But I shouldn't expect anything less from the the myopic, i suppose.


Has this not been the entire point of this discussion?
You brought up issue with teachers bringing up any benefits.

There's no question that some people have something to gain from the pipeline. Was that ever being questioned??


Well you were the one who compared teaching the benefits to teaching Creationism or Alchemy.
"Hocus Pocus" right?

And when you learned about politics in school, did you learn about the principles and fundamentals of Anarchy, along with democracy and Communism and Fascism?? No? Well, you should be outraged that you didn't get to learn all about that political paradigm and its benefits for society. I mean, you should really write a letter to the BCTF and the Education Minister for depriving you of that necessary and important piece of educational curriculum. Why, you could have been an anarchist this whole time. You poor thing. My heart goes out to your lack of knowledge and the betrayal of our education system towards you.


I'll take a page out of your book here...
"Oh you assumed something blah blah blah, see look how smart I look now"
Yeah, I've learned about Anarchy. So...

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 01:53 PM.

  • 2
Posted Image

#36 Armada

Armada

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:57 PM

Who said that teachers would be mandated to not open the discussion up to the economic benefits should they want to??

What's ludicrous is a myopic view that the BCTF are forcing anti-oil or BC jobs information without the ability to open the discussion to them as well in the classroom. But I shouldn't expect anything less from the the myopic, i suppose.

There's no question that some people have something to gain from the pipeline. Was that ever being questioned??

And when you learned about politics in school, did you learn about the principles and fundamentals of Anarchy, along with democracy and Communism and Fascism?? No? Well, you should be outraged that you didn't get to learn all about that political paradigm and its benefits for society. I mean, you should really write a letter to the BCTF and the Education Minister for depriving you of that necessary and important piece of educational curriculum. Why, you could have been an anarchist this whole time. You poor thing. My heart goes out to your lack of knowledge and the betrayal of our education system towards you.


Has anyone ever told you that you're a bit crazy?

Posted Image

Edited by Armada, 04 October 2012 - 11:04 PM.

  • 2
Posted Image
______________Eat, Sleep,Posted ImageRave, Repeat

#37 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:03 PM

Has this not been the entire point of this discussion?
You brought up issue with teachers bringing up any benefits.



Well you were the one who compared teaching the benefits to teaching Creationism or Alchemy.
"Hocus Pocus" right?



I'll take a page out of your book here...
"Oh you assumed something blah blah blah, see look how smart I look now"
Yeah, I've learned about Anarchy. So...



What I said was, that information from the oil companies purporting the benefits of the pipeline is not on the same footing as the risks associated with an oil spill as researched and concluded by the those that work in the natural sciences.

Big difference. Again, it went whoosh, because of your myopia.


Yep, the benefits are as 'hocus pocus' as the benefits touted by suggesting that one can turn lead into gold. Both which fly farcically in the face of the facts of reality, but that still doesn't mean I or anyone was suggesting that someone or some group wouldn't benefit. You're loony if you think any one here was suggesting that.


You learned about Anarchy is secondary school? Pray tell, which grade did you learn that in? and which chapter of your Social Studies or Poli-Sci textbook was that knowledge contained in??
  • 1

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#38 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:40 PM

What I said was, that information from the oil companies purporting the benefits of the pipeline is not on the same footing as the risks associated with an oil spill as researched and concluded by the those that work in the natural sciences.

Big difference. Again, it went whoosh, because of your myopia.


Yep, the benefits are as 'hocus pocus' as the benefits touted by suggesting that one can turn lead into gold. Both which fly farcically in the face of the facts of reality, but that still doesn't mean I or anyone was suggesting that someone or some group wouldn't benefit. You're loony if you think any one here was suggesting that.


So please enlighten me as to what I am being myopic about. The fact that I saw you comparing pipeline benefits to Alchemy or Creationism as absurd?
When you compare the benefits of something to the benefits of Alchemy or Creationism (especially coming from you) it really paints the picture that you don't see any benefits in it.
You calling anyone loony is a laugh all by itself.

You learned about Anarchy is secondary school? Pray tell, which grade did you learn that in? and which chapter of your Social Studies or Poli-Sci textbook was that knowledge contained in??


I could give you an answer, but I think I'd rather give you this:

You're in no position to make demands of how I answer a question and you never will be, nor will I ever be obligated to give you what you want. Let's get that cleared away first..


  • 0
Posted Image

#39 stawns

stawns

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,906 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:48 PM

Absolutely agree with the bolded statement - one reason that I was very interested in worldly affairs was with my socials 10 teacher in 2004-05 who constantly brought up key issues such as SARS, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, Paul Martin and Harper, and the 2010 Games.

Again, what I have issue is that on a divisive topic like this, the union isn't providing teachers with the appropriate materials needed to teach this in a critical manner - the union is only providing the anti-pipeline portion of the argument.

There is so much we can cover with this pipelines - issues of oil spills, First Nations rights, Canadian-Chinese relations, the role of corporations in government/society, the science of fracking and extraction - all this is gone simply because the BCTF did not present two sides of the argument and allow students to understand the spectrum of the arguments.


pretty much sums up your ignorance on the subject........the BCTF does't provide teachers with any curriculum or mandate about materials to support the curriculum. I'm no union guy, but people on the outside have a very skewed idea of what the BCTF is and does for it's members, kids and schools.
  • 0

#40 stawns

stawns

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,906 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:49 PM

What I said was, that information from the oil companies purporting the benefits of the pipeline is not on the same footing as the risks associated with an oil spill as researched and concluded by the those that work in the natural sciences.

Big difference. Again, it went whoosh, because of your myopia.


Yep, the benefits are as 'hocus pocus' as the benefits touted by suggesting that one can turn lead into gold. Both which fly farcically in the face of the facts of reality, but that still doesn't mean I or anyone was suggesting that someone or some group wouldn't benefit. You're loony if you think any one here was suggesting that.


You learned about Anarchy is secondary school? Pray tell, which grade did you learn that in? and which chapter of your Social Studies or Poli-Sci textbook was that knowledge contained in??


to be fair SS, I teach about anarchy when we study various political systems in grade 6
  • 0

#41 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,721 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:50 PM

So please enlighten me as to what I am being myopic about. The fact that I saw you comparing pipeline benefits to Alchemy or Creationism as absurd?
When you compare the benefits of something to the benefits of Alchemy or Creationism (especially coming from you) it really paints the picture that you don't see any benefits in it.


Because there's very few benefits for actual Canadians. The only tangible one being jobs that due to a lack of proper planning and execution (and will) of the government (federal and Alberta) are small amounts of low-value, short term jobs rather than lots of high-value and long term jobs.

Their short sighted thinking in that regard doesn't come close to offsetting the inherent risks and future costs (both financially and environmentally) of having the pipeline. Not even close. If they can reconsider that aspect of it you'd have yourself a valid argument of pros vs cons. Until then it's a great big CONS vs itty bitty pros argument. In other words, not much of an argument in your case.

The only winners in the current scenario are a couple politicians, foreign owned oil companies and a very small group of short term Canadian jobs. I'm sorry but a few short term jobs should never trump long term risks or benefits.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#42 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:55 PM

Because there's very few benefits for actual Canadians. The only tangible one being jobs that due to a lack of proper planning and execution (and will) of the government (federal and Alberta) are small amounts of low-value, short term jobs rather than lots of high-value and long term jobs.

Their short sighted thinking in that regard doesn't come close to offsetting the inherent risks and future costs (both financially and environmentally) of having the pipeline. Not even close. If they can reconsider that aspect of it you'd have yourself a valid argument of pros vs cons. Until then it's a great big CONS vs itty bitty pros argument. In other words, not much of an argument in your case.

The only winners in the current scenario are a couple politicians, foreign owned oil companies and a very small group of short term Canadian jobs. I'm sorry but a few short term jobs should never trump long term risks or benefits.


Well, I've never said I was pro-pipeline, and as a matter of fact I don't think it is a good plan.
However I was able to make that educated decision for myself because I have learned about both sides of the matter.
So like I've said before, if they are going to teach it in the classroom, go ahead and teach about all the negatives and all of the risks, but don't ignore the fact that it does have potential benefits.

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 02:55 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#43 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 02:57 PM

So please enlighten me as to what I am being myopic about. The fact that I saw you comparing pipeline benefits to Alchemy or Creationism as absurd?
When you compare the benefits of something to the benefits of Alchemy or Creationism (especially coming from you) it really paints the picture that you don't see any benefits in it.
You calling anyone loony is a laugh all by itself.



I could give you an answer, but I think I'd rather give you this:



You're being myopic towards thinking that the benefits, being forwarded by propaganda, are on an equal credible informational footing as the science behind the risks to the pipeline.

You don't seem to take the precedent of Michigan into factor in your thoughts about the benefits of pipelines running through sensitive environments. You clearly don't have a clue about anarchy, since you can't even bring yourself to support your claim that you do by telling me where and when you learned about it in secondary school, as you alluded that you did.

And it's obvious that I don't see many benefits to Alchemy or Creationism, especially me, since I don't support fairytales being taught in general....but you obviously didn't comprehend my usage of sarcasm by comparing the benefits of those two things with this pipeline. Another example of myopic understanding.

Right, i'm the epitome of lunacy, so it totally hilarious that I should call anyone loony. (That was sarcasm, in case your myopia flared up again)

It's funny that you quoted me, because you didn't comprehend that I didn't refuse to answer you in that quote. I actually went on to answer your question, but the quote you used referred to my unwillingness to bend to your demand to answer either yes or no. I answered the question you put forth more wholely than a simple minded yes or no. Nice try, but ouch, that's as big a fail at a gotcha as I've seen in a very long time.
  • 1

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#44 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:03 PM

to be fair SS, I teach about anarchy when we study various political systems in grade 6


That's because you're an anarchist. :P

I made the point in order to expose Jager's bs...and his non-answer and quote mining failure was sufficient enough to show that he's full of it.

If you teach it on your own accord, then that's great. Perhaps Jagermeister can repeat that grade with you as his teacher? I'm overly concerned that he wasn't given an ample ability to learn everything opposing that he should have as equally learned as that which he did learn through the curriculum he was exposed to.
  • 1

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#45 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,721 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:06 PM

Well, I've never said I was pro-pipeline, and as a matter of fact I don't think it is a good plan.
However I was able to make that educated decision for myself because I have learned about both sides of the matter.
So like I've said before, if they are going to teach it in the classroom, go ahead and teach about all the negatives and all of the risks, but don't ignore the fact that it does have potential benefits.


What "both sides"? You still have yet to actually illustrate what all the ACTUAL wonderful benefits to this pipeline are exactly. And not the made up propaganda ones made by the invested parties.

As far as I can tell the only tangible benefit to Canadians is a small amount of low-value, short term jobs. That's pretty damned easy for teachers to sum up in under thirty seconds and give the students the "balanced information" you're looking for. I'd be QUITE surprised if teachers weren't in fact mentioning that very fact. So what exactly is your problem then?

Edited by J.R., 04 October 2012 - 03:07 PM.

  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#46 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,190 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

Oil sands also equals a pretty freaking small sector of the work force...so how "most of those students" (being all the ones in BC who are being taught this?) will be working there is a bit of a mystery.


They'll be collecting welfare or working for minimum wage most likely.
  • 0

#47 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,721 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:17 PM

They'll be collecting welfare or working for minimum wage most likely.


WTF are you talking about?
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#48 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:18 PM

You're being myopic towards thinking that the benefits, being forwarded by propaganda, are on an equal credible informational footing as the science behind the risks to the pipeline.

You don't seem to take the precedent of Michigan into factor in your thoughts about the benefits of pipelines running through sensitive environments. You clearly don't have a clue about anarchy, since you can't even bring yourself to support your claim that you do by telling me where and when you learned about it in secondary school, as you alluded that you did.

And it's obvious that I don't see many benefits to Alchemy or Creationism, especially me, since I don't support fairytales being taught in general....but you obviously didn't comprehend my usage of sarcasm by comparing the benefits of those two things with this pipeline. Another example of myopic understanding.

Right, i'm the epitome of lunacy, so it totally hilarious that I should call anyone loony. (That was sarcasm, in case your myopia flared up again)

It's funny that you quoted me, because you didn't comprehend that I didn't refuse to answer you in that quote. I actually went on to answer your question, but the quote you used referred to my unwillingness to bend to your demand to answer either yes or no. I answered the question you put forth more wholely than a simple minded yes or no. Nice try, but ouch, that's as big a fail at a gotcha as I've seen in a very long time.


Funny you should bring up reading comprehension :rolleyes:
When have I ever stated that the benefits were equal to the risks? Please do go back and try to support that claim.
I don't take precedent into fact? Where did you ever come up with that idea? Have I ever said that the pipeline didn't have risks? Have I ever said that that the pipeline was a good idea?
I don't know what Anarchy is? Another assumption.
Poli-Sci and Social Studies courses both covered the topic in High School, and further Post-Secondary Poli-Sci courses have also had content on the subject.

Honestly, with all the ludicrous things you say how is anybody ever supposed to know if you are being sarcastic or not? I doubt you even were being sarcastic as you still seemed to argue to attempt to support your initial comment.

And as for the quote, I honestly couldn't care less about whether you answered my question eventually or not. Note how I also answered your question eventually too.
Funny how you really read into that non-answer so much, when in previous instances you have attempted to accuse people of jumping to untrue conclusions when they read into your non-answers. But I guess if hypocrisy serves you well...

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 03:44 PM.

  • 2
Posted Image

#49 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:28 PM

What "both sides"? You still have yet to actually illustrate what all the ACTUAL wonderful benefits to this pipeline are exactly. And not the made up propaganda ones made by the invested parties.

As far as I can tell the only tangible benefit to Canadians is a small amount of low-value, short term jobs. That's pretty damned easy for teachers to sum up in under thirty seconds and give the students the "balanced information" you're looking for. I'd be QUITE surprised if teachers weren't in fact mentioning that very fact. So what exactly is your problem then?

What "both sides"? You still have yet to actually illustrate what all the ACTUAL wonderful benefits to this pipeline are exactly. And not the made up propaganda ones made by the invested parties.

As far as I can tell the only tangible benefit to Canadians is a small amount of low-value, short term jobs. That's pretty damned easy for teachers to sum up in under thirty seconds and give the students the "balanced information" you're looking for. I'd be QUITE surprised if teachers weren't in fact mentioning that very fact. So what exactly is your problem then?


Opening up trade to the Asian Market would be a great economic boost. The plan also does include full-time work.
Again, I'm not pro-pipeline, I don't think that the benefits outweigh the negatives. But just because we may not see the benefits as worth it, doesn't mean that some students may not think that they are.
My problem is the people stating these even these facts would be a pointless endeavour.

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 03:29 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#50 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,721 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:05 PM

pretty much sums up your ignorance on the subject........the BCTF does't provide teachers with any curriculum or mandate about materials to support the curriculum. I'm no union guy, but people on the outside have a very skewed idea of what the BCTF is and does for it's members, kids and schools.


Of course the BCTF doesn't provide curriculum; the BC Ministry of Education does. However, teachers are taking unvetted materials found on the BCTF site, and adding that into curriculum.
  • 1

#51 stawns

stawns

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,906 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 03

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:12 PM

Of course the BCTF doesn't provide curriculum; the BC Ministry of Education does. However, teachers are taking unvetted materials found on the BCTF site, and adding that into curriculum.


I can go onto, iterally, tens of thousands of websites for lesson plans, none of which are "vetted" by the ministry........the BCTF site is no different. In fact, I would trust material from the BCTF lesson plan page more than 99.9% of the sites offering lesson plans or ideas.

I'm unclear about what it is you think the BCTF does that makes it so evil? Again, I have no use for them, or the government, I just want to do my job, but I certainly don't see this evil entity that people on the right see.
  • 0

#52 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,773 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:22 PM

Man oh man, but it is too easy to pick out the folks here who "missed the bus" on the whole idea of "No Child Left Behind" .. :lol:
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#53 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,721 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 04:27 PM

Opening up trade to the Asian Market would be a great economic boost. The plan also does include full-time work.
Again, I'm not pro-pipeline, I don't think that the benefits outweigh the negatives. But just because we may not see the benefits as worth it, doesn't mean that some students may not think that they are.
My problem is the people stating these even these facts would be a pointless endeavour.


"Opening up trade to the Asian market" is a pretty vague and ambiguous statement. It's also something that is already "open". So how much is it going to open (presumably more) and in what specific ways?

How many full time jobs? What quality are those jobs? How long term are those jobs?

Propaganda spouting "job growth" and empty buzzwords about Asian markets don't actually mean a whole lot when you dig deeper to the truth.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#54 Dral

Dral

    Puts the Dr in Drunk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,363 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:08 PM

Would you rather have teachers telling students what absolutely is or is not factual/moral/just/true/right or would you rather have teachers teaching students how to think critically for themselves? The quote at the end of the article is nice - “I don’t think it’s wrong for teachers to tell kids what their views are, but the danger comes when those views are presented as fact,”


Also, comparing this to teaching Creationism in biology class is silly. There are actually are two sides to the pipeline issue (admittedly, one side isn't very good), but there aren't two sides to biology. It's more like refusing to teach trigonometry in math.
  • 0

Fruits?

Lord Peaches' gut is telling him that the drunken fool, aka Dral, is 100% mafia.

 MVP?

Dral is 100% mafia or I will masteb_ _ _ _ a cow and like it

GOATis?

Vig kill dral he never talks like this when he's not mafia.

 


#55 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 06:54 PM

Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles.
I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda.
If teachers really want students to better prepare for life after school they will allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts.
University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school is the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one.

Edited by Jagermeister, 04 October 2012 - 08:10 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#56 JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 09

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:04 PM

Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles.
I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda.
If these teachers really wanted students to better prepare for life after school they would allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts.
University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school should be the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one.


I think its getting worse.

What teachers are you speaking of? By using past tense it sounds like you have evidence that this has already happened. This is how anti-teacher rhetoric gets started. You have offered nothing but assumptions and conjecture yet the way it is phrased it seems like you are trying to pass them off as fact.
  • 2
Posted Image

#57 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,769 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:10 PM

I think its getting worse.

What teachers are you speaking of? By using past tense it sounds like you have evidence that this has already happened. This is how anti-teacher rhetoric gets started. You have offered nothing but assumptions and conjecture yet the way it is phrased it seems like you are trying to pass them off as fact.


Not my intention.
  • 0
Posted Image

#58 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,171 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 01:00 AM

I think its getting worse.

What teachers are you speaking of? By using past tense it sounds like you have evidence that this has already happened. This is how anti-teacher rhetoric gets started. You have offered nothing but assumptions and conjecture yet the way it is phrased it seems like you are trying to pass them off as fact.



You know what amazes me? I've read some of your posts from the various religious threads, and you've been a voice of reason. Then, in this thread, I see you acting as a voice of reason yet again. It's almost as though there's something to it, you know? Where reasonable, logical people see eye to eye on multiple issues. It's a beautiful thing, honestly.

I chalk up anti-teacher sentiment to anger and frustration, generally stemming from some non-teacher related issue. By and large, the hard-working students will get good grades, and the slackers will fail. We try, as teachers, to help all of our students, but we have far less say in the matter than we'd like. Occasionally, we have an effect. It can be rare, but it's what makes the job worthwhile for many of us. The funny thing about it, is the notion that any teacher goes to work out of greed. Trust me, I've seen the paycheques ... if teachers are greedy, they are waaaaaay off in their choice of profession.

Edited by Remy, 05 October 2012 - 01:01 AM.

  • 0

#59 Dazzle

Dazzle

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,941 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 05 October 2012 - 09:40 AM

You know what amazes me? I've read some of your posts from the various religious threads, and you've been a voice of reason. Then, in this thread, I see you acting as a voice of reason yet again. It's almost as though there's something to it, you know? Where reasonable, logical people see eye to eye on multiple issues. It's a beautiful thing, honestly.

I chalk up anti-teacher sentiment to anger and frustration, generally stemming from some non-teacher related issue. By and large, the hard-working students will get good grades, and the slackers will fail. We try, as teachers, to help all of our students, but we have far less say in the matter than we'd like. Occasionally, we have an effect. It can be rare, but it's what makes the job worthwhile for many of us. The funny thing about it, is the notion that any teacher goes to work out of greed. Trust me, I've seen the paycheques ... if teachers are greedy, they are waaaaaay off in their choice of profession.


That's only because you agree with his points - not necessarily because his points are more valid than another person's. It's not rocket science.

It is absolutely folly to side with one side. Teachers are not more angelic than the government as a whole. Governments cut benefits and go back on their word, while teachers unions force teachers to renege on their duties that made them teachers to begin with. It is really interesting how many students 'side' with the teachers when really the teachers are the ones that cause the massive disruption in classrooms. Not the government because they haven't locked teachers out of buildings, or cut electrical bills - not yet anyway. That being said, the teachers union believes it always has no choice but to threaten strikes which is very ineffective because the government simply doesn't care. Also, not all teachers are represented properly by the teachers' union. They are handcuffed sometimes.

Regardless, neither 'side' are negotiating in good faith. Why is that the students are ALWAYS the losers?
I am not supportive of either one. Neither side really cares about the students, despite the advertisements that both of them throw out. It's all propaganda.

Actions speak louder than words.

Edited by Dazzle, 05 October 2012 - 09:44 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image --> THANKS EGATTI.

I have to say Dazzle's was the coolest. ROTFLOL


#60 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,721 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:42 AM

Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles.
I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda.
If teachers really want students to better prepare for life after school they will allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts.
University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school is the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one.


No, it's what happens when the opposition has a weak (at best) argument.

If anything, teachers helping to point out the absolute garbage propaganda the oil companies, federal and Alberta governments are spewing out as facts and benefits ARE helping to illustrate the need to use critical thinking to wade through that torrent of bull crape to the truth and not simply take the information given to you as "fact".

Question authority, question governments, question self serving corporations and look in to the REAL data where you will discover that the pipeline is a shat-tacular idea for Canadians and will benefit very few. That if there is to be a pipeline, there are FAR better ways to do it that WILL benefit MANY Canadians over a couple politicians, foreign oil and a very small amount of citizens.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.