The copyright cartel's plot to indoctrinate California kindergartens
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
So basically, a group of corporations can't get people to behave the way they want them to. So their idea is to literally influence the educational curriculum in the hopes that future generations will behave exactly the way they want them to.
This is probably just the tip of the iceberg on our already extremely broken education system. This is what we publicly know. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if oil companies are inserting into geology class that global warming is a hoax.
In much the same way we have separation of church and state, perhaps we should consider having a separation of corporation and state. The government's interest should solely rest with the electorate. Although we legally consider corporations people, they most certainly cannot vote and therefore they should have no influence whatsoever on government.
I know I am speaking from an idealist point of view, but the government's interests should never be aligned with corporations at the expense of the voting electorate. Which is exactly the problem with what the copyright cartel is doing.
The government point of view of schools is hardly ideal. There are plenty of examples of those in power in government using the schools to push their own agenda.
Not only that, even the notion of a common curriculum can be injustice. One good for one group of people can be injustice for another.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_assimilation_of_Native...
We don't even have a mechanism to restrict the Church from interfering with the state besides taking away a privilege of tax-exempt status. I am not restriction is a bad idea. I am just not sure how it is achievable.
This is a protection from an official state religion. Lobbying for near-monopoly positions, favored status, and regulatory capture might be a sort of "establishment" of special corporate status over the people.
[Select two students who are outgoing and will be able to enjoy this activity. Send the students on a quick (30 seconds) errand before they start drawing. Example: “Please run this note to the library.” When the students leave, tell the class you want them to all copy one of the pictures being drawn on the white board. Remind the class to copy the artwork without telling the volunteer artists.]
What.
I personally think that teachers who can't/won't draft their own lesson plans need to be fired. I still can't get over the fact that American textbooks also come in teacher editions with the answers to exercises provided so that the teacher doesn't have to work them out.
The grade 5 materials are more reasonable, suggesting reliance on resources like creative commons or voluntary sharing, and using real-world examples of people who work in the arts not getting paid. These are just factual; a lot of indie movies only get made because the cast & crew workf or free in exchange for an ownership interest. As pointed out below though, they don't include any discussion of fair use or the notion that copyright should exist for limited times.
Pointless busywork is pointless. If they can't find the answers, you're better off addressing the root cause, not driving anyone semi-skilled away from teaching. And just how many times have you graded 50 1st grade math tests, anyhow? Especially when they come up with a new edition every year.
Very sad when we should be able to do more in the way of open source textbooks (and exercise generators), but your gripe is not well-thought out and insulting to decent teachers, of whom I have known many.
It sounds like you've had bad teachers, for which I pity you. I had many good ones, as my mother was a teacher and my parents made sure we got a good education, both at home and at school. Perhaps you've only known people who were made to teach subjects they were unqualified to teach. That is sad, then, if you haven't known good teachers.
But that says more about you than teachers in general. You have something against teachers, as I've seen this axe ground before.
Some other examples of rather finely defined lesson plans nearly to the point of reading a teleprompter are "human growth and development" which is finely crafted to keep the religious nutcases under control, and "nutrition" which is pretty much whatever the farm lobby wants to sell and anything related to illegal drugs/tobacco/alcohol.
There is very little point in firing a teacher for teaching to a lesson plan if the board that hired the teacher very nearly dictated exactly what to say. Any replacement would simply be somewhat less rebellious and more authoritarian, not exactly an improvement.
One interesting thing rarely discussed about "classes over the internet" is its always assumed it'll be Americans taking classes from Americans. I think it interesting to contemplate that since local USA .edu is bottom of the barrel, "going to school online" to almost any other country in the world would be a net win. Perhaps the end result of online .edu, is my kids will graduate from a Canadian high school.
By encouraging children to go off and research and create I hypothesis that they will naturally lean towards simple, creative commons and other "free" or "libre" licenses and start to actively seek these out in favour of more tightly controlled, restrictive, corporate licensing schemes.
Teaching them how to cite, what fair use is and how to ask seek permission from content authors gives them the tools to fight overly restrictive copyright laws - and hopefully, one day, abolish them in favour of sane, time bounded licenses
http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/03/dare-americas-most-famous-...
Copyright is not a topic for small children. Adults are barely grown up enough to discuss it.
EDIT: Forgot to mention the also controversial subtopic of expiration and lack thereof.
They didn't seem to see anything strange about that.
It's possible they used a slightly different word, but I am probably more than 90% sure that at the time I thought they had just said indoctrinate.
(note:I am only a senior in highschool, just in case that is useful in explaining why I think things or why I don't have as much experience with things, etc.)
>Artists are “graded” or valued by how many people buy their work.
>We hope others will respect our work ... And we ‘play fair’ with their work too.
No mention of Melchior Rietveldt, Patrick Robin, of course. And certainly nothing like Courtney Love Does The Math.
To all of the authors, photographers, and publishers of the many magazines and newspapers that I defaced and stole from: I am so, so sorry. I never realized that it was your work, your life blood, and your property that I was so recklessly and wantonly stealing from. My teachers never even mentioned the word "copyright" and I had no idea I had to ask your permission, individually. Of course, ignorance of the law is no excuse, even for a young child, and now I have to live with the shame and the guilt every day.
There are many ways that America's schoolchildren have wronged the members of the RIAA and the MPAA. But record companies and the movie industry aren't the only ones victimized by school children. Literally millions of school papers are written every year, containing billions of quotations and materials, some quoted at length, and virtually none of those papers asked the original creator for permission.
What have we become?
A nation of thieves. Actually, seems we started that way.
America started as land of religious zealots.
Stop with the "Australia is a penal colony" bullshit.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_colony
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarcerat...
I'm confused by your asking to stop spreading ... truths? Sure, people don't mention that America was also a penal colony, but that doesn't mean Australia wasn't, too.
And, Australia was sort of the British replacement for their American penal colonies.
America started as a bunch of vaguely Asiatic foragers crossed over more or less in Alaska a couple thousand years ago. The noob bible thumpers arriving a couple centuries ago wiped out the first wave pretty effectively but they hardly "started it".
It was more like 18,000 - 12,000 years ago, and perhaps earlier, well before civilizations, or even their agricultural precursors appeared anywhere on the planet. You're talking about walking across the Bering Straits a solid 10,000 years after the last ice age ended.
But thanks for the explainer.
You think OP was calling American Indians thieves?
Is it stealing to exchange a grain of sand for your quarter? The Dutch bought Manhattan for around $1000 adjusted.
Religious indoctrination (like Creationism) comes from the community, and only exists in schools in places where the community enables it (like the South). Lobbying has no boundaries.
The organization seeks to rip apart secular school communities or convert all children, specifically ages 4-14 because they know children of those ages are least able to reason about what they're told (they would phrase it: "most easily saved"). They are prohibited from trying to brainwash kids during school, but the distinction between normal school clubs and Good News Clubs is essentially non-existent. They try to blur the lines between school and Good News Clubs, in some cases setting up for the club during classes, so that students associate the adults running the clubs with school. They use food, candy, games, and other fun activities to lure kids in. Kids who get indoctrinated end up pressuring other kids, outside of and even during school. This is acknowledged by the organizers of these clubs, and they're thrilled. Paraphrasing, "we can't reach kids who don't join the club, but we can't stop kids from reaching other kids."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04gTo31uLiw (Interview with the author of a book about these clubs)
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13132235-the-good-news-cl...
Because it's not abuse.
Since when did it become socially acceptable to be bigoted in public? If you want to be intolerant at least keep your nastiness to yourself.
Religions that push rules based on those appeals to authority into the political realm, and attempt to force others to live by them...
Believers who seek to proselytize under the flag of a false/unverifiable authority (typically explicitly supernatural) to non-believers...
Parents who pass down the mind-virus of such religions to poor defenseless children...
Labeling criticism of any of those bigotry is a panicked attempt to invoke the strong cultural taboo against narrow-minded discrimination, but the criticism and discrimination against those is hardly narrow-minded.
Don't you dare say that it doesn't happen or that it doesn't matter. Don't you dare.
Not all religions/versions of a religion are the same.
I acknowledge that an analogy is not always a particularly strong argument, but it was the first responce I thought of, and it seemed an acceptable responce to me.
Also, it might have made more sense to respond a few levels up, not sure what would have made the most sense to reply to.
My point is that religions seem prone to demonizing people as a quick and easy way to define themselves and maintain cohesion. Look at all the really nasty doctrinal splits through history.
http://www.music-rules.com/pdf/MusicRulesElemActivities.pdf
Part 2 is particularly egregious: "Now find out if songlifting is a real problem in your community. Use this chart to interview family members and friends about where they get their music. Bring your findings back to class and combine them with those of your classmates."
Really?!! You want our children to compile a list of family and friends (identified by age only, but still...) that you believe are breaking the law and hand it in as signed homework? I complained immediately about this not-so-subtle indoctrination and provided the teacher with a link to the EFF's more balanced and accurate Teaching Copyright site at http://www.teachingcopyright.org/.
Songlifting. Give me a break...