The Howard County Public School System respects the right of individuals to disagree with the words of the song and/or even the use of the song in this context. However, the idea that a public school system would have a “policy” to force students to “worship” the President is so ludicrous it deserves no response.
Oh, it deserves a response. Ms. Caplan only says that it doesn't because she can't possibly provide a response that doesn't lead to more questions.
For example: Caplan asserted earlier in her statement "The focus of the lesson was on the children and positive behavior, not the President. There was no intention or attempt to glorify or worship the President."
Uh huh.
Here's a sample of the lyrics to this song:
"Barack Obama--Oh yes he rates,
The first Black President in the United States!
He's smart and he's--so so good!
He'll lead this country as he should!
He wants us all to work together,
To make this country even better!
Prez' Obama says--'Yes We Can!'
Make the US better--hand in hand!"
The first Black President in the United States!
He's smart and he's--so so good!
He'll lead this country as he should!
He wants us all to work together,
To make this country even better!
Prez' Obama says--'Yes We Can!'
Make the US better--hand in hand!"
It apparently never occurred to the educators involved in approving this song that perhaps the parents of Longfellow Elementary students voted for John McCain, and don't share their enthusiasm for Obama's leadership. Well, they should have; Howard County election records show that of the 667 votes cast at the school on election night 2008, 166 were for the McCain/Palin ticket. At least 24.92% of the people who walked through the doors of Longfellow on election night -- that's nearly one-fourth, for you poor math students -- didn't vote for Obama. Nobody thought that some of those voters might have been parents of Longfellow pupils?
Perhaps the people who conceived of the song just didn't care what the parents think, or thought they could just get away with it because what happens in the classroom usually stays in the classroom. It's not without precedent. On October 9, 2003, the Wall Street Journal's James Taranto made note of an unintended glimpse into the ways some teachers introduce unsuspecting children to agitprop. The October 2003 issue of the journal Teacher described this scene at the U.S. Institute of Peace after a speech by pacifist educator Colman McCarthy to an audience of teachers (bold and emphasis mine):
McCarthy reluctantly wrapped up his speech at the 45-minute mark and was mobbed by several teachers who wanted to buy his books. Another group gathered in the back of the room to discuss what they'd just heard. While agreeing that McCarthy's in-your-face comments wouldn't fly with most school boards or parents, they excitedly talked about how radical pacifist ideas could enliven their own classes.
An elegant-looking teacher in her 40s wandered up and joined the conversation. The truth, she said conspiratorially, is that when you close your classroom door, you're in charge and there's a lot you can get away with. The others nodded in agreement.
Suddenly, the teacher registered with alarm that a reporter's tape recorder was running. She declared that her comments were off the record and abruptly walked away from the group. Reconsidering their candor, one by one other teachers in the circle requested that their comments, too, be considered off the record. Peace may have a chance in America's schools. But at least for now, the revolution will not be broadcast.
Once again, Taranto's chronicling of this attitude (which was not a surprise to many of us) was five years ago Friday. A lot has changed in those five years -- Obama was on nobody's radar back then, and now he's The Leader of The Free World. Maybe the broadcast of a revolution is in the works as we speak.
1 comment:
Unfortunately, this is a perfect example of how inappropriate liberal teachers can be. They confuse educating with indoctrinating and justify it because supposedly it's all for a good cause. I was an education grad student and have observed over 100 hours of classes in various urban public high schools. There was one class for supposedly "gifted" students (really, they were just the middle class white students in a working class black/hispanic district) wherein the teacher had a guest speaker who would drop in at least once a week. His job was to teach the predominantly white classroom "blackness." He spoke in black patois (which I suspect was not his natural dialect but one he adopted for classroom purposes) and talked endlessly about segregation and apartheid as if they were still burning issues. Just another dumb liberal stuck in the 70s of the previous decade, as opposed to a smart liberal of the 21st century.
Post a Comment