Відео

@@sharonwilkerson1402 Agreed, the credentialing programs have become very divorced from reality and don't prepare anyone for the classroom.

@@lauracollins3451 The issue isn't the subject matter being taught, rather ensuring that you can teach at all.

​@KevinTheID I'm a mother of three and worked in daycare/preschool with a class of 16 four and five year olds. Im not suggesting teaching core subjects but I could easily teach art class, or elective classes or early years of gradeschool. My own children are now 23, 18 and 13.

It's a tricky thing because having a teaching credential also reduces risk since you've had training on how to educate/manage students, and have gone through background checks as well. It's not a foolproof system of course and having parental involvement - especially at such a young age - is good, but for legal purposes, it's better to have someone licensed by the state.

@KevinTheID I've had background checks at any childcare facility I've worked, also had to have a background check just to be a parent volunteer at my children's schools in the state of Wisconsin. Sounds like it's made into a bigger deal then it needs to be. The States should be required to background anyone working or volunteering in school systems. Licensing for non core subjects could be made much simpler. Im sorry but no one should need a four year degree to teach preschool, or art to kindergarten thru 5th graders. The same for older grades. Working adults in occupations could be teaching high school aged students welding, electrical, plumbing, cosmetology, trade occupations without needing a college degree. The United States as a whole is beyond disrespectful to anyone not wanting to go in debt for college which is why there's a lack of kids who actually want to work for a living. It's been bore into them that you need to go to school 4 years at least with the belief they can then make $200,000 to sit in a office.

Though I agree that licensing for non-core subjects could be easier, saying that you shouldn't need a full degree and credential to teach younger grades diminishes the challenges in both behavior and content that educators have to manage at those grades.

Trump's ability to change any of these issues is unfortunately rather limited since education is mainly funded and regulated at the state level. However, it does show yet another reason why people voted for him as you said - they want an outsider who will just say it as it is and make changes that help every day people instead of just the elites.

It needs to be completely reimagined for sure. My partner likewise quit after her student teaching too after she came out of her program so completely unhappy.

Thanks!

Not sure I follow on the last half of what you said there when it comes to "story hours" or "porn hour." Could you explain what you mean by this?

Kevin I think sexual stuff should be left in private. Not given months and parades. I. Have no problem with anatomy or reproduction being covered in schools,at an appropriate age. As for lgbq ,the way a person feels should not be stomped on.I don't communicate very well other then verbally Anyways I thought you did a great job with your video .

@@jaysmith6255 Ah, I understand now. That makes sense and is a reasonable point of view.

@@KevinTheID I will look to see your other videos .Thank you

I'm confused by your comment. Why should teaching be a mid-career change? Why would lessons by out of context? Why can we only play trivial pursuit games? Why/how are the wrong people attracted to the profession? It's true that most things in education these days lack relevance to the real world, but the rest of your argument doesn't make much sense to me.

@ - for reference: I’m a chemist. I have experienced for myself, and through the training of others, that ideas “click” better once trainees step into a lab and engage in real research that’s attached to a real world application. Textbook memorization and lab exercises do not cut it. People who can follow a recipe can do fairly well, but they don’t know how to come up with procedures when none are given. That’s the real trick in science, not memorizing lots of stuff that doesn’t click. Our middle school and high school science teachers don’t have this background. Neither do most PhDs, by the way… they were given questions as a portion of their advisor’s grant, and then told how to answer those questions. And, these people get into postdocs where they continue to work the same way until they become faculty members (which is a saturated field anyway). Here’s my point: academia is full of people who jumped through the right hoops to get the fancy degrees, but they are not seasoned professionals who really have a grasp of the subject… even our PhD holders. The way students memorize terms, names, dates, etc., is disconnected from real-world productivity and, increasingly, the teachers can’t do much better. Become a seasoned professional, gain some insights, then bring those insights into the classroom. Don’t just lecture from the book and give standardized tests… a diligent student can study that way without a teacher. Have more learning labs, modules, simulators, etc., in K-12, so kids actually know what they’re looking at. Otherwise, it’s just words in a nebula. Other fields are the same, but are more prone to intellectual hobbies being presented as necessities. Reading is important, but a mere storybook consumer isn’t the best example for kids. Do these English teachers really help you organize your thoughts and communicate clearly? Mine didn’t. Do your history teachers emphasize how historical claims are justified, or do they just enjoy memorizing tedious lists of kings and assertions of cultural changes? Which of those is a more productive skillset? I would say making a case that justifies a historical claim is the more useful and transferable skillset; excellent for pre-law, journalism, basic documentation skills in any field. School teachers rarely, if ever, teach the productive side. It’s probably because they themselves don’t know the productive side. So, students have to endure 13-17 years of dubious prerequisites before doing real work. This should be a scandal. K-12 stretching until age 18 successfully kept kids from being exploited factory and farm workers, but it also keeps them infantilized and ignorant of what the economy actually needs. Arguably, they’re taught by brats who read books divorced from real productivity. If this perspective is accepted, then school teachers are weird, pseudo-professionals who took an easy path through technical requirements instead of doing “the real thing.” This makes them, quite literally, bad examples for kids. They’re false professionals and super-uppity about their gatekeeping power all while wasting everyone’s formative years. Kids need exposure to the real thing.

Hmm, I see your points and there is certainly an argument to be made about education's lack of relevance to the real world (as I mentioned in my earlier comment), along with the ridiculous amount of standardization that removes the ability to actually achieve such relevance. It's actually one of the major contributing factors to why educators are quitting the profession. That being said, I think you make a lot of generalizations here that need to be addressed. Just because middle and high school Science teachers don't necessarily have hands-on corporate lab experience in the way you describe doesn't mean they cannot educate students about science. I've never seen a biology teacher who can't teach a lab or coach students through a dissection, just for instance. Just because English teachers aren't published authors doesn't mean they cannot teach reading or how to organize one's thoughts into a coherent argument. That's fundamental to writing essays and your unfortunately negative experience with your English teachers is anecdotal rather than something you could apply to every English teacher. Just because a History teacher hasn't worked in a museum doesn't mean they cannot teach students how to research primary and secondary sources and to critically analyze historical events. The old "names and dates" perspective in history has long since fallen out of favor due to how useless it is from a humanities perspective. You say that: "academia is full of people who jumped through the right hoops to get the fancy degrees, but they are not seasoned professionals who really have a grasp of the subject…Become a seasoned professional, gain some insights, then bring those insights into the classroom" - but the problem this is a flawed perspective. Just because academia has a lot of people who've obtained high level degrees doesn't mean that they have no grasp of the subject matter. On the contrary, I would argue the opposite and I've rarely seen one that isn't a SME to some degree. Also, the idea that a seasoned professional in the field can come into the classroom and relate what they know to students in a meaningful way is completely inaccurate. That person may be a SME, but is completely unversed in learning theory or in how to manage a classroom effectively with a multitude of students with differing perspectives, backgrounds, and developmental or social issues. Plus, just because they know the content doesn't mean they can teach it. To your last point: "Arguably, they’re taught by brats who read books divorced from real productivity. If this perspective is accepted, then school teachers are weird, pseudo-professionals who took an easy path through technical requirements instead of doing “the real thing.” This makes them, quite literally, bad examples for kids. They’re false professionals and super-uppity about their gatekeeping power all while wasting everyone’s formative years. Kids need exposure to the real thing." This is entirely conjecture and I've already addressed a number of these points. Calling teachers "brats" is incredibly insulting and demeaning considering the education and experience we have to gain to become teachers in the first place. Also, we aren't "uppity" or "gatekeeping" of anything beyond making sure kids receive a good education. Calling teachers "pseudo/false professionals" just because they haven't been "doing the real thing" is seriously elitist and only contributes to the continuing de-professionalization of educators that has is also driving good teachers out of the classroom. I'd recommend you reevaluate this perspective because it is actively hurting education.

@ - They literally can’t educate about science or anything else. They can only parrot the textbook narrative.

@@KevinTheID - They literally can’t… they can only parrot the textbook. We are used to a certain appearance of education, so that’s why people think teachers can teach.

Yeah, tell me about it. Plus, babysitters these days legitimately make more than teachers, so if you want teachers to act like babysitters, then pay us like them too.

Teachers would definitely agree with the absurdity of the one-size-fits-all model for sure. The increasing level of standardization is one of the main reasons why educators have left the profession - we can't teach the way we want or the way all kids really need. Administrators, policymakers, and testing companies keep forcing educators to only do one thing and it clearly isn't working. Not to mention we hate it. I think understanding that one person's perspective isn't supreme over another is an important one to say there, as I did in the video too. I also don't think most teachers reinforce any specific idea like that (at least they shouldn't reinforce a single narrative about anything), rather that we accommodate everyone, no matter of their feelings or backgrounds. People misinterpret this as "indoctrinating their kids" when all we're doing is creating a place that is conducive to learning content and social skills. The kids then take that and use it wherever they go in life.

People who think the job is an easy paycheck and those who've bought into the moronic expression of "those who can't teach" and that they get summers off - even though ironically they clearly couldn't teach either and we don't really get summers off anyway contrary to popular belief.

All true, particularly about drawing in people who think teaching is easy because of the moronic "those who can't, teach" expression. They are woefully unprepared to manage a classroom or the rigors inherent with being an educator in today's culture and climate. Being a teacher is actually very difficult and most make more minute-by-minute decisions than neurosurgeons - something that few are ever effectively prepared for.

Sounds pretty similar to most student teaching these days where they farm as much work onto you as they possibly can. What's worse is that the youngest and most impressionable teachers rarely can stand up like you did because they're worried about being cut from the program.

More and more people are choosing to not finish their programs (or even enter them) because of how bad education is now. Student teaching fails new educators almost entirely and fills people with a lot of theory and idealized ways of doing things that don't translate to every day classrooms. Classrooms, mind you, that are growing increasingly violent and impossible to manage, even for veteran educators with great classroom management skills. Not to mention that there is no such thing as onboarding for teachers and you're just thrown into the deep end when you're given keys after being hired with little tangible support. Education clearly has more problems than just student teaching failing to adequately prepare people, but if we have such little care for the mental, physical, and financial wellbeing of our youngest teachers, imagine how bad it is for teachers who've been there longer. The old guidepost was 5 years as the make or break it point for new teachers, but now it is 2 at the most, and many (including my partner) burn out during their student teaching itself before ever securing a fulltime position. Since January, 2020, somewhere around 1.5-2 million teachers have quit or retired early. That's roughly between 15-20% of all teachers in the country. I would never tell you what to do, and I'm admittedly biased for sure due to my experiences, but I just can't recommend education to anyone these days and is partly why I started this channel and cohost a podcast on issues in education. I want to be here for those who need advice about either entering the profession or those who are stuck and are desperately trying to get out. In the end, I always say that teaching is a great career but a terrible job. I loved my students and I loved teaching - but that was such a tiny part of my actual job toward the end that I completely burned out and could no longer be the teacher I wanted to be anymore.

@ I have 5+ years in education. And I work in a childcare center as a teacher assistant floater. And I’m always exhausted, being a teacher isn’t easy. Also I’ve been watching UA-cam and TikTok videos of teachers leaving the profession because they are always burned out.

Exhaustion is a constant state for educators and sounds like you're already well-acquainted with it unfortunately. After I got out of teaching, I realized how little time for myself or anyone else that I had since I spent so much of my own time beyond contract hours working. Now, I can actually shut off at the end of the day and there's just no way to put a price on that. I'm so much happier and more relaxed now - and the story is being repeated over a million times now as you've seen all over social media.

@ In this generation, teaching is very dangerous and toxic. And these kids are very violent. I was watching this document based on a student that killed a Spanish teacher because the student didn’t study and failed his test. And the student told his Spanish teacher to change my grade, etc.

Credentials are issues by state licensing boards, they aren't the same as college degrees.

@truthisland56 Indeed, and educators are often kept in a cycle of debt they can't get out of because they aren't paid enough to cover what it took to obtain their degrees and certifications.

@@KevinTheID You have to be careful, because if you lower the barriers of entry for the profession, you will end up with even more exploitation. Take Charter schools for example. They will hire people straight out of college with only a bachelors degree (no education degree, no student teaching) and these teachers are put through a meat grinder and are lucky to survive six months. High standards keeps the profession a bit more walled off, which should give us better leverage for salary, but sadly teachers and teacher union's never bother mentioning any of these things when they are sitting at the negotiation table.

Agreed, and I actually made a video on the dangers of lowering teacher qualification quite a while ago now. Only seems to be more relevant than ever: ua-cam.com/video/40IQzroZTrg/v-deo.html

@agnils5429 There are so many things throughout history that people have made that claim about and yet life went on and new issues cropped up for us to deal with. This is no different and thus shows that we can still have conversations if we really want to.

That or for verbal abuse.

Thanks! I've already felt more appreciation and respect in my jobs following teaching than I ever did in all of my years as an educator. The environment is desperately toxic now and unless we do a serious course correction through fundamental reforms, I don't see education getting any better. It's why somewhere around 1.5 million teachers have quit in the last 5 years.

I'm glad you got out of there! Education has reached a level of toxicity that few can really understand unless they've walked a day in our shoes. My mental health began improving within 2 days of leaving the classroom and you couldn't pay me enough to go back. Way too much trauma - plus, I experienced more appreciation a week into my current job than I did in all my years as an educator. I'm far happier now than I ever was as a teacher.

@KevinTheID same lol. I dropped over 100 pounds after retiring, no more blood pressure, anxiety, or depression medicines. My doctor told me it was the best decision. Make more money now and travel. Never again..keep telling people why we left and will not return.

@@MsSparky123456 Same here. I actually managed to quit a month before the end of the school year because I got out on a stress leave for depression from my doctor. Health rapidly improved after that lol.

Yes, absolutely. When teaching has already reached a point where most aren't really interested in entering the profession, all the thought of working a year for free does is ensure that new people will look elsewhere instead of choosing education as a career choice.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the video. Also, from a percentage standpoint, there are far more teachers than Catholic priests, so comparatively speaking, yes there would be more. Doesn't mean that it's some massively pervasive thing that you'll find most teachers doing obviously.

@KevinTheID get a grip on reality. There's more construction workers than teachers. We don't touch kids do we? No. What you said makes absolutely no sense. It's like you think people are pre programmed to touch kids or something. That's not normal. Stop making excuses for your people constantly proving they are nothing but mentally insane child predators. Stop it. That makes you no better than a predator. All good though, you deplorable filths will be dealt with soon enough.

Your arguments take seriously wild leaps off a cliff to reach their conclusions and assume facts not in evidence. 1. What I said makes perfect sense and I never claimed nor implied that people are preprogrammed to touch children. No, that's not normal and should always be dealt with when uncovered. 2. I'm not defending teachers who assault children nor making excuses for them. Again, I never said this at any point - you assumed it. That's indefensible behavior, but if you assume that teachers have some underground cabal in place to protect such educators then you are woefully misinformed. Why would we want teachers around like that who harm our profession? What I said was that though there are unfortunately teachers who do this, not all do, and to assume they all do is completely illogical. We should be working together to deal with that rather than instituting an "us vs. them mentality" as you did when you said "your people." 3. As for your construction worker point, I am fairly certain there are construction workers out there who touch children inappropriately and it's bold of you to not only assume that they don't but to speak for every single one in the country. Your concerns are valid and everyone should be concerned for the wellbeing of their children. Your reasons and response to the situation are not valid though and only serve to further divide us and make it seem that all teachers are closeted sexual predators which is just absurd. Your comments more speak to the deep societal distrust of educators that now exists rather than the mutual respect that we used to have.

@KevinTheID you need to learn comprehension. There are far more construction workers than teachers. The child abuse rates among construction workers is non existent when placed next to teachers. Teachers have the highest rates of child SA. what side of politics do majority of teachers and college professors stem from? Exactly, the left. I'm sorry to waste your time but you're fool. You're simply making excuses for data.

@KevinTheID I also never said " all teachers" it's only you lot saying " all men" and " all priest's"

So your solution would be to just ignore those kids who are Trump supporters, not give them a proper education, nor even attempt to have a civil discussion about topics they find important? Great plan to continue the cycle of disrespect.

@KevinTheID my initial comment refutes everything you just stated. You can't have a conversation with people who don't accept facts. Stop responding like a NPC and keep up with the reality of the situation

On the contrary, your comment only reinforces that you yourself are the one unable to have a conversation because of your prejudice against Trump supporters. You also seem to be unable to separate someone's politics from the person themselves, which is a very limiting point of view when it comes to beginning any type of discussion.

@KevinTheID again, you're talking like a NPC and not saying ANYTHING new. people are are MAGA are LIARS and lack critical thinking. That mentality is needed for them to believe the BS MAGA spews, so no.. I don't separate people from their political views when it comes to MAGA, because they have a fundamental flaw of not understanding reality. And their views are fueled by hate. There is no empathy for MAGAts. You cant reason with them as long as they have TDS

The fact that you keep falling back on the "you're talking like an NPC" point only makes you sound like an NPC yourself. You're trapped in your own viewpoint and are not understanding the reality of how people actually have discussions.

They've been hiring a lot of foreign teachers to fill gaps for years now, yes.

To put it mildly, yes!

I mostly agree with you here. Classroom management is barely covered in credentialing classes and they expect that you'll learn how to do it just through osmosis during student teaching. I had only one single course where we were really able to share our student teaching experiences and talk about our challenges as you mentioned you tried to do. All of my other ones were so ridiculously theoretical that it was hard to relate any of it to what I was doing - especially seeing as our professors were mostly in their 70s and hadn't taught in a K-12 classroom in decades - thus making them incredibly out of touch. I think you'll like my "Student Teaching is a Scam" video. I'll link it here for you: ua-cam.com/video/n2bcT9ntK7A/v-deo.html

I basically agree. I had no problem passing the Praxis Math exam, but the teacher cert program was a ridiculous amount of endless projects and essays (400 hours) which I never finished.

@@MikeDunn Yeah, I think my summative teacher certification exams alone (not including any attachments or other work/class assignment) were a combined 200 pages of single spaced text.

@@MikeDunn Yeah, I had to take that "What kind of learner are you?" quiz in three different classes. HUGE waste of time, especially as all that visual learner/hands-on learner/toenail learner stuff had already been debunked. Also got tired of being asked to summarize Brown v. Board of Education just to prove I'd read it. 😠

@@KevinTheID Thanks! Will def check it out. I did the paid internship in lieu of student teaching, because I wanted to damn TEACH SCHOOL. Again, the ed courses were just an annoying hurdle I had to jump.

Depends on the context. Teachers need to have both to educate effectively while other jobs may only need only one or the other.

Completely agree with you. It got to the point where I felt I was spending more time managing that than actually teaching.

That's generally the policy in most schools. As long as it fits with the dress code, kids can wear whatever they want. Generally teachers don't even bother with enforcing it anymore either since it often creates more problems than it solves - as in this case.

She's already resigned. There are two other teachers near me in SoCal that are on administrative leave pending investigations though.

what law do you think she committed? does she lose her first amendment rights because shes a teacher? its a job, she would be fired not executed bozo

Correct, it would just be a dismissal. Only if she made direct threats to someone could there potentially be some legal issues but it was more threats in a very general way.

I just don't understand how she thought that video wouldn't get spread around or land her in trouble. She isn't a political pundit who routinely talks about such things on then news or social media. She's a teacher who is there to create an effective and inclusive learning environment - which is impossible when you say these things.

Unfortunately, a lot of teachers do that and I never agreed with them on those perspectives. Now, does the curriculum inherently need updates? Oh yeah, especially in History and English, and I taught both courses so I was exposed to all of it. I've noticed that History is prone to teacher outbursts and impartiality which skews student understanding about our past, while English teachers are more likely to push Young Adult novels written by ethnically diverse people on everyone and ignore anything classical because they're both forced to by the state and inherently think they aren't relevant anymore - notions that aren't true. Also, as someone who taught those YA novels since they're so integral to the curriculum in CA now, I would say most of them aren't very good quality and boil life lessons down into incredibly simplistic terms instead of challenging students to think about them. I'm sorry you had to experience that and I was definitely one of those who constantly pushed back against it. Unfortunately, the teachers like me have left the profession due to all of the other issues plaguing the school system, thus leaving us mostly with the ones in this video and those you experienced during your own schooling.

Hmmm, interesting questions. I would say there are things you can express you believe in or support, such as your favorite sports teams, your hobbies, and your goals in life. But expressing your political beliefs shouldn't be one of them since you'll inevitably sway your students in a specific direction, whether that be to reinforce one students' viewpoint or push another farther away from you, thus making them less likely to listen to you since they know you aren't objective. Even if they never liked that teacher to begin with, being impartial makes them respect you to some degree - because liking someone and respecting them are not mutually exclusive. As for making a mistake, that happens and yes, I think most kids can forgive and forget that. In my last year in the classroom I was so overworked, stressed, and frustrated with students screwing around when they were banging on my door I accidentally dropped the F-word in class for the first time ever, and I profusely apologized to the kids for that behavior immediately (also made me realize that maybe I didn't want to be in the classroom anymore). But, going on political rants, cursing out your own students without any remorse like this, and making them feel small for not liking what you like is dictatorial and petty. It has no place in the classroom.

@@KevinTheID Thank you for your reply. I understand and mostly support your position. But I still feel it would be ]difficult to hold once you start talking about different topics in class. And I feel it could break trust if you talk about decisive issues in the classroom and ask your students about their position on them but won't reveal yours if they ask. I think just maybe the kids who protest know better then us people online who saw a short video. I'm happy they don't show these video's on the news here. These are internal issues that need to be resolved within the school.

I think you're getting a little hung up on the idea that kids will distrust teachers for not expressing their views in class - a problem I've never seen or heard them having. Most value our neutrality in those discussions.

I'm not sure if that would inherently solve the issue. Cheating on exams started long before they went digital, it would just force them to be more creative.

With how bad the teacher retention crisis has become over the last 5 years, how many cost saving layoffs have happened, and how desperate districts have become to fill positions, I'm sure this problem is more widespread than it appears too.

Oh, excellent question. From a history teacher's perspective, what we would need to do as we cover that is give both the factual evidence, but specifically the context, and let them draw their own conclusions. Let's just use January 6th as an example of how to do this. I would show them video footage of what happened, the details about how people felt there was election fraud (and the subsequent documents that came form investigations pertaining to it), any quotes Trump made on that day both before and after the protestors stormed the capital, and finally have the students decide for themselves from both the primary and secondary sources available to us who was to "blame" for the events of the day. I might use a Socratic Seminar to have students freely discuss their opinions about all of it and then follow that up with writing an essay using the sources and any refutations gained from the class discussion where they take a stance on that point. You'll end up with wildly different responses for people who blame Trump for it, don't blame him and just the protestors, or students who blame both to varying degrees.

​Seams like your simply arguing for the removal of teacher morality from the classroom. Which I'm not sure I'm for or against. Your argument allows for an open discussion on specifically bad things, like slavery, even the founding of the United states. The taxes levied do have a legal argument, and could be argued as just, making the formation of the country suspect. In addition to this; your opinion on young adult novels, why do you think varied perspective a bad thing, and other than your own bias, what evidence do you have that they are poor teaching material? And to factor in as well you perhaps were teaching in one of the many many states that has absolutely atrocious public School systems; perhaps it's simply an argument of the system, or your training that is poor. At what point does it become less an open ground for formation of ideology and more and a breeding ground for indoctrination to bad things? I'm sure more than one intellectual individual could make arguments that would sway a less intelligent individual to believing something heinous. ​@@KevinTheID

Okay, there's a lot to unpack in your comment. Let me go through each point one at a time. 1. I'm not arguing for teachers to remove all morality, rather realize that their own morality cannot inherently substitute or supersede that of anyone else's. And yes, I often had class discussions about the founding of the United States from the taxation perspective while going over Colonialism and the Revolutionary War. One such activity is where I would have half the class take on the roles of the Continental Congress and the other half would be the King and Parliament where they would hash out their grievances. That doesn't call the formation of the country into suspect, but rather shows that both sides had valid arguments; not to mention that it clearly represents how multifaceted history is. 2. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I don't want varied perspectives from. My entire argument in this video was advocating against teachers enforcing a singular perspective. I also never said YA novels were poor teaching materials - rather that most inherently have very simplistic themes and thus make having class discussions using them rather difficult. I'm all for using YA novels which are more complex and make students reflect on broader themes, ideologies, and life experiences. 3. Most school systems are in a poor state these days, hence why somewhere 1.5 million teachers have quit the profession in the last 5 years. Also, my training as an educator in CA was higher quality than anywhere else in the country so I'm not sure where this argument is coming from either. Refer to my video on the idea of lowering teacher qualifications for an explanation of my training: ua-cam.com/video/40IQzroZTrg/v-deo.html 4. To your last point: "At what point does it become less an open ground for formation of ideology and more and a breeding ground for indoctrination to bad things? I'm sure more than one intellectual individual could make arguments that would sway a less intelligent individual to believing something heinous." You literally just proved the points I made in this video. A single teacher could make students believe incorrect or subversive things if allowed to spout their political beliefs in class - because most students are comparatively less intelligent (due to still receiving their formative education). By having actual discussions about difficult topics and getting students to research and back up their own opinions using primary and secondary sources, you prevent indoctrination from happening because they will be exposed to competing viewpoints. Indoctrination, by definition, is education of a singular narrative - which doesn't exist if you have multiple narratives being discussed at the same time.

Oh definitely, some courses make it a bit easier for sure. I taught primarily History, but also English, and these kinds of things came up constantly because they were so integral to the curriculum. I still remember covering both the 2016 and 2020 elections in class and explaining how voting, the electoral college, and inaugurations work. The kids had a lot of questions too, but I answered them from a point of educating them about it, not telling them how I felt about it.

Speaking as a former teacher myself, I honestly have to agree. I'm not for just blindly firing teachers, but as with any job, there are repercussions when you do something egregious. How would any corporate HR department respond when you threaten a coworker with violence? They'd fire you.

@@SoulSeeker2025 I think a lot of us do, unfortunately. It never really goes away. We learn to deal with it but the trauma is always there.

Much appreciated! Hope things continue to go well for you too!

Yep! That's why there's not only a significant teacher retention crisis, but also teacher recruitment crisis. Credentialing programs around the country are virtually empty.

Yep, mine was a year long, which is becoming more and more common these days.

@ Wow. I’ve been teaching for 40 years and all of my student teachers have been semester assignments. Maybe it’s a regional thing, but an entire school year is too long for student teaching.

@@Offsides09 I agree wholeheartedly. What's becoming common now is a semester of observations and a semester of direct classroom instruction where we take over from the mentor teacher.

And yet you still chose to spend so much time commenting on this video. 🤷‍♂️

@@KevinTheID Well, I realized after commenting that it should not be in my feed. i went from having little interest in the Public School system to being completely shocked by the whole CRT and "gender" stuff which led to a 4 year deep dive that was absolutely fascinating and very eye opening.

1. Just because it isn't easy doesn't mean it can't be or isn't done. Your assessment of what I said doesn't stack up. 2. Read the other dozen comments I responded to about this. Or the pinned comment I left. Or watch this video I did on the topic a while back: ua-cam.com/video/bWiBem_QWAg/v-deo.html Not sure what else to tell you.

​@KevinTheID thanks for the considered reply. On point 1 (1:15).. you're saying that a test for teachers with >50% pass mark can fairly be described s 'hard'. I would concede that this is a subjective point, but would personally reserve the description of 'hard' for tests with e.g. a 20% pass rate. On 2 (3:00), you really don't make a credible summary argument, and then move on. You say that teachers don't have time to indoctrinate kids, claim the argument is 'tired', then move on. And no, I'm not going to research your other content, if that is your summary rebuttal. It's false, and it's weak.

1. I'm not sure where you're getting those percentages from, unless you're just using them anecdotally because tenure isn't a "test." It's something you get after a certain amount of time with the same school site/district and favorable evaluations. (i.e. 2-5 years with 2 evaluations per year by an administrator.) That's why it's not hard to get per se - you just have to beat the odds and not get let go or move around to other districts. Hence, most teachers get it, but some don't who move around frequently, as I did. 2. I'll just copy and paste my other arguments then if you're not willing to read them on your own. Here are two different definitions of indoctrination: - The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. - The process of repeating an idea or belief to someone until they accept it without criticism or question. Neither of these things are occurring in schools around the country. Not only due to time constraints as I mentioned, but also because it wouldn't be practical. Sure, there are teachers and schools which spout their political beliefs, as I also said in this video, but there is not an underground cabal of educators who are out there pushing a single narrative to stop kids from thinking critically or trying to get them to accept one idea without question. The actions of the few do not equate to the actions of the many. I've noticed from this comment section that most people don't seem to understand what indoctrination actually is and just equate the mere existence of ideas or thoughts contrary to their own opinions in schools as indoctrination.

​@KevinTheID Thanks On 1. Yes I'm saying a test's 'hardness' is subjective, so my indicative pass mark figures are there to bring some objectivityb to what otherwise is loose language. In analytical parlance, a 'test' is a broader logical idea than e.g. a test in a school. E.g. making a certain rank in the military can be seen as a test of a soldier's progress, although there is no written exam. I was zeroing in on the disconnect (as in see it) in you saying that getting tenure is 'not easy' only to then say that most do achieve this. On 2. I take your point that not all teachers are indoctrinating kids, but I do feel that you're ducking the issue by saying that we can disregard the notion because some test of magnitude or requirement for formal organization is not met. I'd pose that the issue at hand is that some teachers are very much bought into CRT ideology, (which does actually address your 'single narrative' test), and that in a classroom setting, there's a sliding scale against which teachers can 'authoritatively' impart this ideology. I feel that to discount this reality outright does concerned parents a disservice.

I mainly want to zero in on the last part of what you said here: "I'd pose that the issue at hand is that some teachers are very much bought into CRT ideology, (which does actually address your 'single narrative' test), and that in a classroom setting, there's a sliding scale against which teachers can 'authoritatively' impart this ideology. I feel that to discount this reality outright does concerned parents a disservice." You pose that "some" teachers have bought into CRT ideology, yet claim that satisfies a "single narrative test." A single narrative would require all to have bought into such a narrative, which by your own admission has not occurred by saying that only some have. As for your claim that there's a "sliding scale against which teachers can 'authoritatively' impart this ideology," I don't understand your logic. What scale has been set which would determine this, and furthermore, I have yet to see any irrefutable evidence that such ideology is being imparted on a national scale. I feel that this line of thinking actually does concerned teachers a disservice by assuming we all contribute to some ideological crusade to corrupt children when the vast majority went into the profession out of a sense of altruism and desire to give students opportunities and content knowledge. Your arguments only reinforce the growing notion that teachers and education can't be trusted with the professional growth of your children without any real evidence. This type of witch hunt and it's accompanying lack of societal support for the labors we put in on a daily basis is one of the major contributing factors to why so many educators have left the profession in the last 5 years. Which, ironically, leaves only the poor quality teachers who have the potential to push these kinds of narratives that you somehow claim we all do. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

That's a funny point that I hadn't considered - you're basically right. He wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to regulate what schools do, but not financially. Rather, Trump wants to pass new laws or executive orders that regulate the curriculum and educators instead.

Are you referring to the Department of Education? If so, then I generally agree. Completely doing away with it is not a viable solution - but it does need to be reformed.

@ yes I agree 💯

Alright, let's talk about that. Do I think that there should only be those two flags in class? No, I don't, and it paints a bad picture when they can have those up but I was legitimately told by my last administration to take down my Gadsden Flag (Don't Tread on Me). So on the one hand, there is some lopsided treatment of different political or ideological points of view in our school system. However, I would ask, is the sheer existence of a pride and BLM flag in a classroom indoctrination? Well, the answer is no, because it does not inherently repeat an idea or belief to someone until they accept it without criticism or question, as is the definition of indoctrination. If that was true, then every billboard along the freeway could be considered indoctrination as well - which they aren't.

@@KevinTheID define it then. Go on.

Sure, I'll give you two definitions: 1. The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. 2. The process of repeating an idea or belief to someone until they accept it without criticism or question.

@KevinTheID Close; To instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view. This definition is litterally the goal of ATN with CRT. It's an ideology they are propagating.

Okay, then define who this ubiquitous "they" is. There is no national conspiracy to push CRT - if anything there is a national effort to push against it - especially from a group which I've already cited has less than 5 members with virtually no political capital.

@@KevinTheID Yep, i've witnessed that in Public Schools. The silver lining is that the indoctrination program overplayed it's hand with the Rainbow Woke religion and came up against the Gen X'ers, the first generation to have their parents pulled from them en masse and put into offices. Pushing weird stuff on vulnerable children hits a certain nerve with them and they think the racism being openly pushed in Public School now is sickening. Since the indoctrination program is now out in the open it's easier for the children that went through it to see it withoutbeing blinded and in denial due to shame or people denying their reality. So, the best thing is to keep getting the word out, the Public School system failed them, the people running it failed them but all is not lost....the smartest most accomplished people in this world did not go through Public Education and many brag they did not even complete college.

"1958 Pres. Eisenhower signed an agreement with the USSR (communist) to bring their ed system to USA Public Ed." What in the world are you talking about? Are you referring to The National Defense Education Act (NDEA) in 1958? That was a college loan program in response to the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik. It had nothing to do with "bringing the USSR education system to the United States." Just because many children can't read at grade level doesn't mean they're indoctrinating kids either; that argument is a non sequitur. As for the "woke" stuff you're referring to, schools don't inherently push it onto students for the most part, rather they just allow students to from organizations and promote tolerance. Do some push it? Sure, of course they do, but most do not. Violence in schools has nothing to do with SEL - if anything, SEL would reduce violence since it promotes more sensitivity to the social and emotional development of children rather than just dictating things to them that make no sense. So, your own argument contradicts itself, especially in regards to the indoctrination piece. Teachers are blamed for everything as it is when the vast majority of it is beyond our control because we are at the whim of whatever policymakers and administrators want to do - we have no political capital. Of course we blame admin and politicians for most things...because they are to blame for most things.

@@KevinTheID If you do not want to take the blame for not teaching children that are sent to you for the sole purpose of being taught then get out. Read the tea leaves....parents are done with the excuses and blame shifting. Do not participate in ANY psychological or emotional programs with children on any level. Parents do not send their children to Public School to go through psychological programs....and it's not just SEL, the MAP testing is insane. All you have to do is take a look at the Board and staff that design the test to easily know it's not really about acedemics. You've been normalized to the insanity like a frog in a pot of water on a burner. And you are being used. You are told that you are a "good" teacher for giving these MAP tests and allowing/participating in SEL. They know that for you being seen as a "good" person is far more important than actually being a "good" person. This is why you made it through the selection process to be a teacher in a Public School. You will do anything as long as you are seen to be "good." Hence you will not question the absurdity of the MAP testing or exactly what the SEL is really about. In the 1980's the Acedemic Program was replaced with the Behavioral Management Progam (right under Parents noses) and by 1991 Columbine happened, which was then followed by many more similar events. The fault of the violence in these schools lies in the programs that the schools are running. Uneducated children emerging from these public schools after 15,000+ hours of instruction is the fault of the program being run. Who is running the program? YOU ARE.

I never had anything to do with MAP testing my entire career so the basis of your ad hominem attacks against me are not only fallacious but baseless. Also, you do realize that the act and process of education itself is inherently a psychological and emotional exercise, whether it's done in a public school or at home, right? You make it seem that learning has nothing to do with your brain or other people, which is a wildly illogical argument. As for your assertion that I will do anything as long as I'm seen to be "good," I find that laughable because it is entirely based on your own opinions without any concrete evidence. Plus, you know the only people I wanted to be seen as "good" to? The STUDENTS, not some "Big Brother" type testing service, policymaker, administrator, or textbook manufacturer - and any teacher worth their weight would say the same. in the end: Does education fail some students? Sure. Do some parents fail their children? Sure. I feel you lack perspective.

Good questions! Let me go through those for you: The NEA and DOE are not the same thing. The NEA is basically the national union for teachers while the Department of Education is the federal government's manager of federal education and loan funds. Trump wants to get rid of the DOE because he wants to send the money they spend back to the states, but the federal government is responsible for less than 10% of overall education spending. States are mostly responsible for funding their school systems through local tax dollars. The amount of money they would get from getting rid of the DOE really wouldn't amount to much or make a significant difference on student outcomes - especially when states can waste the money just as much as the federal government does. As for the admin bloat, it would and wouldn't reduce it. On the federal side, it technically would because you would have fewer people being paid salaries since the DOE is gone, but in the long run, states have far more bloat and continue to add more positions that suck up more and more of their funding every year. District Superintendents, for instance, sometimes make more than large business CEOs while teachers only get tiny raises (like $50) each year that never keep pace with the standard of living. Education at both the national and state levels needs fundamental reform and deleting the DOE wouldn't solve most of those issues. As for the federal government overseeing education, it doesn't really as it is. Like I said, most funds and directives come from the state level already and the DOE mainly provides guidelines that are left open to interpretation - hence why Common Core has been applied so haphazardly across the country (it isn't really "common" ironically). The most they do is dictate specific boundaries for what would disqualify schools from receiving federal grant money or students from receiving loans.

@@KevinTheID The DOE does push programs into schools by threatening to withhold money elsewhere. They pushed the Behavioral Modification Program in the 1980's which allowed the current mayhem, they pushed the Common Core which has seen a downfall in overall education, they push the psychological programs SEL, CRT....they allow the MAP testing. The Teachers Union allows Pedo's to be moved around by threatening parents with long drawn out litigation over cases and tey make parents sign NDA's. Both, DOE and NEA, need to be shut down ASAP.

The DOE can threaten to withhold funding yes, I just said that in the previous comment. You also are really hung up on the Behavioral Modification Program, even though it was only applied to I believe 20 schools in New Jersey 40 years ago - it's not a recent thing nor was it introduced on a national level. Anyway, they haven't pushed for any specific programs, but yes, they do have some sway over the way grant and loan money is applied so there is pressure to some degree. However, states fund the majority of their education programs, not the federal government, so very little of that sway actually pushes states in the direction they want. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of teacher unions across the country and not all operate the same way, so saying they all protect pedophiles is a bit of an exaggeration - plus they don't inherently protect teachers, rather just uphold the contract. The NEA can't just be "shut down" either like the DOE technically can, because it isn't run by the government. It's a national association that advocates for educators and students.

The sheer level of ignorance and incorrect information in this comment took me a while to unpack. 1. How did COVID expose teachers as self serving lunatics? This statement is patently false. The teacher retention crisis began when we went into distance learning because we realized how our selflessness was being taken advantage by a system that didn't care about us. 2.Charter schools have not proven they outperform any other mode of education. Many routinely close due to extreme fiscal mismanagement alone. It's another option for parents to choose that comes with both positives and negatives. 3. Please provide data that shows 45 minutes is enough to indoctrinate students for a lifetime. Citation needed. 4. So what if many teachers are democrats? I never pretended that all teachers were neutral and said so in the video, but that doesn't mean they all push liberal agendas either. There are many who are conservative and do the same. 5. Please tell me how we supported ANTIFA or BLM or had parents arrested at PTA meetings. Not only are those arguments generalizations, but they have no basis in fact. The changing attitudes and trends in regards to parenting have been heavily researched and supported. The reason why many kids are violent at school is that we give them boundaries that many parents rarely do these days so they naturally chafe against them since they're not reinforced at home. Also, the fact that around 1.5 million educators have left teaching partly due to the violence we have been subjected to (literally do a simple Google search to prove me right) should tell you that I'm not making this up. 6. How is school choice not a moot point? Parents have access to homeschooling, charter schools, religious schools, private schools, and online schools for their children already. What more choice do you want? Also, taxes pay for more than just public schools, including your utilities, roads, and garbage services. If you have a problem with the way your tax dollars are allocated, then get a proposition on the ballot that changes that. States are the primary funding source for education as it is - not the federal government. 7. None of what you said has shown me out of touch or that I'm gaslighting. Also, I left teaching 2 and a half years ago - I'm not towing the line of any union and am speaking from my personal experience, as well as that of hundreds of thousands of other educators who have said the same thing. You seem very ignorant about how education actually operates and have a strong bias against teachers which is very unfounded. Also, you seem very angry over something that I'm trying to have civil discourse about, which only proves my point about how we are teaching people to debate rather than have conversations. I recommend some therapy to deal with your latent trauma from your catholic and public school experiences.

@@KevinTheID It was the teachers union and its members who wanted to keep the schools closed and caused this almost irreparable harm. 2..Actually in New York of all places charter schools have raised the grade point averages of minorities several levels...maybe not every charter school but the idea is relatively new and it is still tied far too much to the public school system. 3...I may not have been clear but I figured you could at least grasp what I said. No.... there is no class that is a one time 45 minute class... not even drag queen tuesday... but 45 min a day per class is plenty and you know it. I don't think you are ignorant on this so you must just be dishonest. 4... So what? the party of total whack jobs? look at journalism and tell me an echo chamber of 90some odd percent is not pushing lefty agendas I consider myself liberal in the old sense so calling dem ideas these days 'liberal' is insulting They are leftists not liberals. I bet you have never NEVER protested a whack job policy like drag queen day or whatever have you? 5... You may have me on this one. It is not just gut tho... the protests by those disgusting groups contained a hell of a lot of teachers. But... no parents were arrested at PTA meetings? Oh I get it... it wasn't exactly the teachers themselves who stood up for.... for what? could you not see that was wrong? disgusting... what about keeping secret from parents things like little kids fantasies of gender identity? no? Ok... how do you feel about it? And if you are against it what did you do? coward. 6.. School choice is a moot point if no matter how many choices you have...........YOU CANT AFFORD ANY OF EM in caps because you might have missed that the first time. 7.. really? and in conclussion I have been mad in the past about the cowardice and self serving crap teachers have done fo the last say .. 10 years? Now I am just disgusted. And to be honest? in the distant past I used to respect teachers...not just a few but in general. You have our children. you know you have lost the respect of most Americans at this point. and I have explained why. I think mostly that you are cowards and Americans can not afford to leave their children with cowards. you are entrusted with helping them grow... you have crapped on that.

1. Unions wanted to ensure that both teachers and students were safe prior to returning to in-person instruction. You know what would have been worse? Having students or teachers die from an illness we didn't take seriously. It's why we shut down schools if there is an active TB outbreak, for instance. 2. I'm glad to hear that New York charter schools have seen improvement, but there's two things to point out. First, it's anecdotal evidence and not able to be applied on a broader scale. Second, just because someone has a high GPA doesn't mean that they're learning. Sometimes it just means they're good at rote memorization and passing tests. There's a lot of data that needs to be sifted through prior to any further conclusions on that. 3. I grasped that you didn't provide any evidence, yes. Also, your "Drag Queen Tuesday" comment is completely nonsensical to the conversation and is actually incredibly offensive. Please provide citation of this occurring on a national level too. 4. However you want to define it, "leftist" or "liberal," is irrelevant. The point was that just because they are left-leaning doesn't mean there is a national conspiracy to make all students the same way. 5. I'm honestly confused about what you're trying to say here. Teachers are in loco parentis while kids are at school, which means we serve not only their educational development but also their emotional development. We have to look out for both. I see myself standing up for kids on all ends of the political, emotional, and social spectrums as brave, not cowardly. 6. We can't afford to keep public schools running the way they are either. No one can afford anything right now (kind of why Trump got elected in the first place), so what's your point? 7. Really what? Your definition of coward seems oddly cowardly. Refer back to #5.

@@KevinTheID So what you are saying is that "yeah I am gaslighting but I got nothing so.." did I correctly sum up what you were saying?

Nope, and that's the second ad hominem attack someone has tried to make today - still isn't going to work either.