The Irony of Education

So today (Tuesday, right?) at noon EST, President Barry is all set to give a little speech that will be broadcast over C-SPAN and beamed directly to schools to show to their students as President Barry's speech is directed at the them, the students, on what the White House seems to think is the typical first day of school for most kids around the country. He clearly has not heard of the lengthened school year that is quite popular these days. Most of the kids that I know have been back to school for at least a week. Fortunately, his goal of speaking to the nation's students isn't to convey how in touch he is with the inner workings of every day life amongst the minions.

He is going to be talking to them for reasons that aren't totally clear, but they seem reasonable. There was something about being responsible for themselves and what they learn in school. Something about how important education is. Something about setting goals. Oh, and how succeeding is hard sometimes, but you just have to stick with it. Stuff like that. So you can see why parents are all in an uproar. Wait. What now?

Correct. An uproar. It would seem that there is a certain segment of the general population of the United States that is crazier than Paula Abdul. A bunch of parents, but fortunately not the majority, are flipping out because they think that President Barry is out to indoctrinate our schoolchildren. And before I go any further, can I ask once again that all of the references to Hitler cease and desist? President Barry isn't Hitler! He's not! He's not a secret Muslim! He wasn't born in Kenya! And he's not Hitler! What is wrong with you people!?

To find out what is wrong with people, let's go to Nixa, Missouri. The Christian Science Monitor describes Nixa as being "a socially conservative “Evangelical Epicenter.” " Hoo-boy! This oughta be good! One of the "concerns" that was expressed was that "...Obama would be portrayed as someone of great character who might say something that contradicts the words of a parent. Now you have a very conflicted child who’s trying to find out who’s right." Um, he's speaking to them about the benefits of getting an education. He's speaking to them to give them encouragement and support on what he believes is the first day of school. He's trying to convey to them that if you want to get a good job, you're going to need to have a good education. What in the hell would that "contradict"?! All of the parents out there who are telling their children every morning, "I know. I know. School is stupid. But it's the law, children. Just go and show up and get it over with. In a few years, you may graduate. Or you may not. Either way, you won't be required by law to show up every day any more and you can get about your life of either hard physical labor or welfare to get by. Now hurry up and don't forget to sag those pants!" I don't think that's happening!

Next, we're off to see what the softheads in Montgomery, Alabama are worried about. From WSFA News we hear things like "There's a lot of issues that he's in favor of that I'm not, and I don't want that shoved down my kid's throat." Ma'am, what exactly do you think he's going to be talking to the kids about? Health care reform? The stimulus package? TARP funds? Why Nancy Pelosi's face is stretched so tight? I don't think he's going to be talking about any of those things and I am utterly perplexed as to why you would think that he would! What is wrong with you?!

And it was the conclusions that President Barry was out to brainwash every student in America (on the first day of school no less!) that led the White House to release the entire text of his speech on Monday so that it could be viewed by people who were concerned that there would be swastika armbands handed out afterwards alongside some juice and cookies. After folks had a chance to read it, here's what a one Priscilla Vinson of Montgomery had to say about it: "I can see exactly what he's saying. That's a little strong, but it's necessary." WHAT?!?!

A little strong?! It's a "little strong" to be straight up talking to kids and telling them that your life was no picnic and that you screwed up more than once, but the knowledge that an education was important helped get you back on track?! Do you have anything else to add to that? "I don't see it as a political ploy. I see it as a great investment with our children, because the children are the future." I should have been more specific. Do you have anything else to add that is not a Whitney Houston song lyric?

If this sort of fake outrage was coming just from softheaded people in the private sector, that would be one thing. But when you have state Senators blowing this sort of hot air out of their blowhole that's when you realize that they're everywhere. (It's also when you call the contractor and instruct him to build the walls around your walled-off compound just a little higher. No telling when complete insanity will break loose.) Senators like Steve Russell from Oklahoma only further the fakerage (fake + outrage = fakerage) by spewing things like "As far as I am concerned, this is not civics education - it gives the appearance of creating a cult of personality. This is something you'd expect to see in North Korea or Saddam Hussein's Iraq." Um, people of Oklahoma? You elected this guy...why? Seeing the President give a speech to school kids is probably about the last thing I'd expect to see in North Korea. Is that one of the telltale signs that the President is up to something sinister? If he gives an encouraging speech to students on the first day of school? You're right, Senator! How could I have missed that?!

Here's what I just do not understand: If you hear that the President of the United States wants to give a little talk to the students in the country, why do you automatically assume that it is going to be political? Why does it have to be sinister and evil? That was absolutely the LAST thing that popped into my head when I heard about this. According to the San Jose Mercury News, blogger Michelle Malkin "...anticipates the speech will create a K-12 army of "political guinea pigs" being used by "out-of-control activists" in "pro-illegal immigration protests, gay marriage ceremonies." ::: blink ::: ::: blink ::: For reals??

You can read the text of his speech here. Or, instead you can go make some posters claiming that President Barry is a secret Muslim Hitler and go picket in traffic. Given those two choices, it would seem a fair number of people wouldn't have any problem make a decision between the two rather quickly (and they won't be choosing all of the reading, either).

And in the ultimate irony, a lot of parents are going to keep their kids at home on Tuesday so that they won't have to hear President Barry tell them about how important it is to go to school. Sure, that seems perfectly reasonable.

Sphere: Related Content

msgs u snd shd B IN ENGLISH

So the fine folks across the pond there in London are slowly, but surely, losing their minds. And I'm not saying that because of the occasional haggis eating contest. (OK, I AM saying that's not normal, but I'm not saying it right now.) No, they seem to be going in a direction in which I'm not quite sure which way is up. Here's the scoop:

According to the fine folks over there at the Mail Online, the London Grid for Learning (known by them as the LGfL. Why the little "f", I have no idea. Then again, I don't know what a "learning grid" is either.) has created a poster that is currently being displayed in over 2,000 secondary schools in London. The poster is titled "Top Tips For Pupils - Safe surfing at home and at school". Well, that sounds like a good thing, doesn't it? Of course it does. Of course it sounds like a good thing. But does it read like a good thing? Behold! A poster that is supposed to convey something about something to someone!

Oh, what the hell is that? (If you click the image above, the monstrosity should get bigger.)That would be the poster that gives guidelines to students on how to stay safe when online or when using their cell phone (known across the pond to those wacky Brits as their mobile, which is often pronounced mow-BILE). It gives those guidelines to those students in the form of TEXT MESSAGE LINGO. According to the Mail Online, over 5,000 of the posters are "...written in a mind-boggling array of numbers and unlikely combinations of letters, in an attempt to connect with children who are more comfortable writing and reading in the abbreviated language used in mobile phone text messages than formal English." Oh, well, that explains it. What could possibly go wrong?

Are you freaking kidding me? What is that crap? Don't get me wrong, I am an extremely adept texter. But as anyone who has ever received a text from me will tell you, I don't abbreviate squat. Every word is typed out. I even use punctuation. There's just something so...so....not OK about using "u" in place of "you". I don't like it. It's all very Prince. (before he wasn't Prince and was just that symbol thing and then was Prince again and then...is he still Prince? Regardless, it was before all of that stuff started happening.) No, that's not totally it. It's just a mess is what it is.

The LGfL folks explained it/tried to justify this nonsense by saying that they "believe text language is the best way to get through to children today." A one Brian Durrant, who is the chief executive of the LGfL, said: ‘We think it would raise their interest by using “textese”. It does take some translating, but we want to connect with the pupils." SOME translating? Dude, do I look like an archaeologist, intensely trained and highly skilled at deciphering hieroglyphics? No? Good, because I'm not. And that's why it's going to take a little bit more than SOME translating to figure that out. This is better than English written as English...why? Again?

Allow me to translate a little bit of this crap for you. Number nine reads: "nvr agree 2 mEt an on9 pal IRL w/o chekin W a responsible XXX." That line of crap is supposed to mean: "Never agree to meet an online friend in real life without checking with a responsible adult." So, let me get this straight....they feel the need to abbreviate words like "never" and "to" and "with", but they do not feel the need to abbreviate "responsible"?? They're doing it backwards! You don't abbreviate the already brief! They're already brief! Why must they make them briefer?! Why not brief the elongated instead?! It makes even less sense to me now than it did when I started making fun of it.

And what is with "adult" being abbreviated as "XXX"? Doesn't "XXX" usually stand for the really porn-y porn? Like goat rapist porn? As an adult who is not a goat rapist, I'm a bit offended that all "adults" are grouped under the "XXX" label in this seedy text underworld.

Number one read like this: "u av d ryt 2 feel safe ll d tym, includN wen UzN ICT or yr mob ph." This is supposed to translate into English as "You have the right to feel safe all the time, including when using information communications technology or your mobile phone." All right, that's just crap. It read like: "You have dry teetoo feels a fell deetyem, includ enwin uzi en ickt or your mobfuh." Sure. That's going to help. Oh, and these posters are up in the classrooms and hallways of the schools over there, are they? Yeah, that will really speed up the learning process for sure!

Now, in Scotland, "....text messaging, social networking websites and blogs will be studied alongside books, plays and poetry in schools in future under new curriculum guidelines that were published earlier this year." Oh, sweet mother of God, I need to find out who is in charge of this little experiment in Scotland and contact them immediately! They must study this blog! (Perhaps they can find out what is wrong with me!) It'd be like Internet psychoanalysis for me. Only with kilts and bagpipes and little golf hats with pom-pons on top of them (because that's how everyone looks in Scotland, right?).

The Scots can justify this because they say that, "The idea is to use modern methods of communication to engage children and prepare them with the skills necessary for the workplace." And I suppose all of that would be fine and good if they were entering the workplace as children. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that they're not entering the workplace as children. (I'm assuming all of this, of course. For all I know, the Scottish pom-pon factories could have sweatshops that are recruiting child labor left and right over there.)

I was glad to read that not everyone over there thinks that this is a good idea. Nick Seaton, who is with the Campaign for Real Education (I like real education!), said, "To use text language is to pass on entirely the wrong message and encourage lower standards. The people behind this really should have known better." But they didn't, Nick, because they're not for "Real Education". No, they seem to be for "RL EdUc8tn". And "RL EdUc8tn" has very low standards indeed.

Well, this should be interesting. If they're going to start publishing educational materials in "text message-ese" one of two things is going to happen. They're either going to end up with a whole bunch of people who will be walking around like human Rosetta Stones or they're going to have a whole bunch of people who are just morons.

Hello, Vegas? Yes, I'd like to place a hundred dollars on the morons, please.

Sphere: Related Content