Mav is not the only one unsatisfied with the methods of our schooling. In this connection reproduced below a pertinent Letter to the Editor of our local Fourth Estate in response to a solicitation requesting readers' opinions onthe “...influence educators have over children...such a politics and religion,”




I see the Victorville Daily News is still soliciting readers’ take upon the World’s problems. Obviously the main problem is: We simply need to be better people

Emphasis is sought for possible solutions, which I propose lie in the schools and the media.



As a start, I propose the grade-school kids get exposed to a smattering of the liberal arts before they become case-hardened teen-agers and it’s too late. The Conservative Camp would have hissy fits at the following approach because it knows these are matters best left up to the Parents. Since the wretched state of things clearly shows how unsuccessful they are, however, de facto it would seem to be up to the schools.



Each day, one quick classroom discussion of a single subject; with no grading:


1. Monday, religion and rudimentary metaphysics; sample topics: Who was Buddha? If there’s a God, where did She come from? Does She have a body? Does She do miracles, and if so how? Does She know exactly what’s going to happen, and if so, why would She bother doing whole thing? Does She always punish bad folks? Why not?



Is it all right not to believe? Why is She usually called “He”? How can you talk about these things without being censorious, judgmental or reproachful, as many editorials in some newspapers?



How do you feel about Mel Gibson?




2. Tuesday, elementary psychology or philosophy; How come people do things not good for them? Who was Freud and what did he say? Did he go too far? In what ways would Plato’s Republic be better than democracy? How come folks dislike others who don’t look the same or believe the same things?



How can you forgive your parents for being such klutzes? Even–some day–come to understand and tolerate, if not love, them?



Does humor have any place in politics? What are the subconscious implications of pushing organized gambling off onto the Indians? Will it make them like us better?



Would you want Dr. Phil to be your father?? Dr. Ruth your mother?



3. Wednesday, ethics, morals, and health; If you do the right thing, won’t you like yourself better? Is it all right to swear once in a while? When?



How can you psyche yourself to take better care of your teeth? Why should you want to?



Why do folks drink? Is a little alcohol really good for your heart? What happens if you drink too much? What’s the difference between depression and anxiety? Would you recognize either one if you had it?



How can you know what’s right? When they get old, don’t bad people wish they had been better? How does today’s subject tie into yesterday’s? Is it all right to castrate pigs without anesthetic? Why do 1 out of 5 Americans think it’s ok to cheat on their income tax?



4. Thursday, politics, economics, and the law; Why should you care who is President? Should legislators set their own salaries? What does it mean to be politically correct? Why should you read a newspaper if high Administration officials don’t?



Should you be allowed to do anything you want, so long as it doesn’t hurt somebody else? Why is organized gambling ok but drugs are not?



What is a scam and how do you know one when you see it? How do you shop for the best bargains? How much should you save up? Should you trust Merrill Lynch? Or anybody, for that matter.



It is it worthwhile to sue? When is it all right to shoot somebody?



What’s the difference between right and left? Between campaign contribution and bribery? How can we save oil? Why try? It is ok for the Government to support religious schools? Was it ok to bomb Iraq just because we thought they were dangerous but we weren’t sure? Or was that not it?



Who is Rush Limbaugh, and why?



5. Friday, manners and interpersonal relationships. Does it help to do the right thing? When is it all right to lie? Swear once in a while? Keep one’s mouth shut? How do you know when to be aggressive or when to back off? Should you tiptoe through life?



Shouldn’t boys respect, take care of, and protect girls? In later life, should the gals have to take care of the boys? How do you get the opposite sex to like you better?


How do you know when a relationship isn’t satisfactory? How can you break it off?


The New Age advises you to just “be yourself.” But what if you don’t like yourself? Wouldn’t it be better to emulate somebody you like?



In other words, teach them to live. Call it reality education. Kids are a lot more thoughtful than we imagine; and my approach would give them something to rap on besides movies and TV.



However, some adults are reachable too; but how? The media in general and especially the local press could do a lot more to address the many implied concerns. First, I encourage the media to directly educate us on political matters. For example, we need to be reminded from time to time how districting works so that we can be alert for stories candidates impinging our own interests–indeed, maps would help.



Lesser candidates deserve better coverage. I’m surely not the only voter who upon scanning his sample ballot, has never heard of many school-board judicial, or other non-partisan candidates. I can imagine a standard tag line: “Voters in the XXth congtressional district, which includes Victorville, Adelanto, …..may have to decide upon (insert subject’s name) a potential candidate for (some office).” Those of us who care enough, could clip such pieces for future reference.


Editorial pages tend to be grim and angry but always sanitary and politically correct. To stimulate readers’ interest, editorial columns should contain a much wider range of opinion; while letters of more original, innovative, offbeat, provocative, and even humorous style, should be encouraged.



No, there is not the slightest chance that any of this will come about and hence there can be no uplifting of mankind. But remember, you asked.

These are leading questions, but it's not clear whereto.

dale, may one ask why you seem to be determined to remake these forums into op ed pages?

Tsu: Sure you may

The single biggest and most easily-fixed hole in most curricula (imnsho) is the absence of structured philosophy for young children. There are several experimental programs I have encountered, all producing extraordinary results. I can't find my references now, but here's a sample mentioned The Grauniad.

mav: Thank you most kindly for that link

Insel: To the truth, as Stephen Colbert might say

To the background story of what pre-school formative years are currently giving kids it's worth noting this report:

USA: The Media
US Parents Fail to Control Toddlers' TV Viewing, Study Finds

A report released Wednesday by California-based Kaiser Family Foundation indicates that one-third of the nation's youngest children - babies through age six - live in homes where the television is on almost all the time.

The study - The Media Family: Electronic Media in the Lives of Infants, Toddlers, Preschoolers, and Their Parents - highlights the chasm between what pediatricians advise and what parents permit.

It found that 33% of children six and under have a TV set in their room, while nearly one child in five aged under two has a set - even though the American Academy of Pediatrics advises against any TV watching at that age.

Eight in ten children younger than six watch TV, play videogames or use a computer on a typical day. They average about two hours of screen time, compared with 48 minutes when being read to. [e.a.]

Admits lead researcher Victoria Rideout: "I had this sense of kids clamoring to use media and parents trying to keep their finger in the dam. I found that not to be a very accurate picture in most cases."

The reality is that a generation of parents raised on TV is largely encouraging the early use of television, videogames and computers by their own children, often starting in infancy.

Rideout continues: "These parents say TV teaches how to share and the ABCs when they don't have the time. [It] provides time for parents to cook or take a shower. They use screen time as a reward or, paradoxically, to help kids wind down at bedtime. There's this enthusiasm and tremendous lack of concern [about media use]."

The report admits, however, that the number of youngsters glued to the screen has changed very little since the foundation first reported on the topic in 2003.

But in the latest followup, Kaiser asked parents (in focus-group sessions as well as the survey) why they and their children use TV and other electronic media in the way they do.

"It's just background noise," said one Colorado mother who has a preschooler and who keeps the TV on most of the day.

There are (inevitably) mixed views as to whether this is a good or bad state of affairs. "People have made dinner for millenia, but we've only had television for fifty years," comments Dimitri Christakas of the University of Washington.

"Television's not inherently good or bad. The real goal now has to be not to de-technologize childhood, but how to optimize children's [technological] experiences."

But the AAP recommends no TV or other electronic media for kids younger than two (advice followed by only 26% of parents) and no more than two hours daily of total 'screen time' for older children.

The AAP is not anti-TV, assures Daniel Broughton of the Mayo Clinic, an academy member who co-wrote the recommendations. "But before age two is the time of the brain's most rapid development, and interaction - the live give-and-take that TV cannot provide -- is crucial during that period."

Data sourced from Wall Street Journal Online; additional content by WARC staff