Mediaboss Marketing

From a California law that mandates textbooks mention the significance of President Obamas election to a Virginia textbook that claims thousands of black soldiers fought for the Confederacy to another that teaches creationism, textbooks have long been a source of controversy in America.

The latest example of textbook politics brings us to Texas, where a panel of experts commissioned by a liberal advocacy groupfound a batch of new history books that were up for review by the states Board of Education promoted pro-Christian religious and conservative political views.

Among the dozens of lessons the group highlighted as biased are passages suggesting segregated schools werent too bad, Affirmative Action recipients are un-American, taxes for social programs havent improved society, and that Moses inspired American democracy.

"In all fairness, it's clear that the publishers struggled with these flawed standards and still managed to do a good job in some areas," Kathy Miller, president of the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, which oversaw the review, in a statement. "On the other hand, a number of textbook passages essentially reflect the ideological beliefs of politicians on the state board rather than sound scholarship and factual history."

Some 104 new textbooks on subjects ranging from geography to history to US government are up for review by the Texas Board of Education, which must approve new textbooks for the states 5-plus million public school students in November. Texas textbooks have long been a source of contention, and this time both liberals and conservatives complained about perceived biases in the books, with some liberals crying foul over pro-Christian lessons and conservatives complaining of anti-American and pro-Muslim biases.

Among the complaints from both parties were passages that depicted minimum wage as a controversial legacy of the New Deal, marginalized or lionized Reagan, downplayed the achievements of Hispanics, presented pro-Israeli arguments on Middle East conflicts, incorrectly depicted jihad, and overemphasized the influence of the Ten Commandments and other Christian tenets on the American Revolution.

"We do our students a disservice when we scrub history clean of unpleasant truths," Jacqueline Jones, chairwoman of the University of Texas History Department, told the AP,"and when we present an inaccurate view of the past that promotes a simple-minded, ideologically driven point of view."

Conservatives lashed back, saying textbooks shouldnt be held to artificial standards of political correctness.

I think our students deserve textbooks that are historically accurate and not politically correct," Amy Jo Baker, a retired history teacher and former social studies director for the San Antonio Independent School District, told the AP, adding that she wants textbooks that "reflect not America as the bad guy, but America as an exceptional nation.

While debates over Texas textbooks are nothing new, the fight highlights a larger political battle Texans are engaging in over academic standards and the shaping of statewide curricula.

Read the original post:
Liberals and conservatives both object to new Texas textbooks

Teaching moral development is a process, the lessons more complex as the child grows up. "You can teach the little ones right and wrong pretty easily. As they get older, the areas of gray become more complex. We believe that besides being intentional, it needs to be systematic," said Sipos of her organization, a national nonprofit that works primarily with schools on character education.

istockphoto.com/mediaphotos

While parents take seriously the task of teaching children values, a new Pew Research Center survey released Thursday shows a gulf between how conservatives and liberals, women and men, young and old and different races order the values they believe children should be taught.

The report, "Teaching the Children: Sharp Ideological Differences, Some Common Ground," looked at 12 different qualities parents might try to inculcate in children. It found chasms between liberals and conservatives, but also near universal agreement despite ideological differences.

"We found a remarkable amount of consensus about certain traits responsibility, hard work, helping others," said Jocelyn Kiley, Pew associate director of research and one of the report's authors. "There are also some rather striking differences across ideological groups."

People categorized as "consistent conservatives," for example, tended to place a high premium on teaching children religious faith, while "consistent liberals" did not. The consistent liberals found great value in teaching tolerance, which was much lower on the conservatives' priority list. Curiosity ranks high on liberal rankings, but low for conservatives. Obedience comes in last on the consistent liberal list and was ranked fifth among consistent conservatives.

The report noted that women and men had similar priorities, although women listed helping others and empathy as important more often than men did. Women put a "somewhat higher priority" on teaching religious faith.

Breaking the priorities down by age showed differences in valuing obedience 68 percent of those 65 and older prioritize it, compared to 56 percent for those younger than 30.

World as classroom

Numerous surveys, studies and organizations have looked at how kids learn character and values.

Read this article:
Liberals teach kids tolerance over faith; conservatives teach kids faith over tolerance, new survey finds

Teaching moral development is a process, the lessons more complex as the child grows up. "You can teach the little ones right and wrong pretty easily. As they get older, the areas of gray become more complex. We believe that besides being intentional, it needs to be systematic," said Sipos of her organization, a national nonprofit that works primarily with schools on character education.

istockphoto.com/mediaphotos

While parents take seriously the task of teaching children values, a new Pew Research Center survey released Thursday shows a gulf between how conservatives and liberals, women and men, young and old and different races order the values they believe children should be taught.

The report, "Teaching the Children: Sharp Ideological Differences, Some Common Ground," looked at 12 different qualities parents might try to inculcate in children. It found chasms between liberals and conservatives, but also near universal agreement despite ideological differences.

"We found a remarkable amount of consensus about certain traits responsibility, hard work, helping others," said Jocelyn Kiley, Pew associate director of research and one of the report's authors. "There are also some rather striking differences across ideological groups."

People categorized as "consistent conservatives," for example, tended to place a high premium on teaching children religious faith, while "consistent liberals" did not. The consistent liberals found great value in teaching tolerance, which was much lower on the conservatives' priority list. Curiosity ranks high on liberal rankings, but low for conservatives. Obedience comes in last on the consistent liberal list and was ranked fifth among consistent conservatives.

The report noted that women and men had similar priorities, although women listed helping others and empathy as important more often than men did. Women put a "somewhat higher priority" on teaching religious faith.

Breaking the priorities down by age showed differences in valuing obedience 68 percent of those 65 and older prioritize it, compared to 56 percent for those younger than 30.

World as classroom

Numerous surveys, studies and organizations have looked at how kids learn character and values.

Visit link:
Liberals teach kids tolerance over faith; conservatives teach kids faith over tolerance, according to new Pew survey

Are these men sniffing? (REUTERS/Jim Bourg)

We have long known that liberals are more likely to choose other liberals as romantic partners and that conservatives alsotend to prefermates with similar political viewpoints. Indeed, other than religion, ideology is a strongercorrelate than other traits in the selection of long-term partners. But how does this work?

A new article in the American Journal of Political Science by Rose McDermott (Brown), Dustin Tingley (Harvard), and Peter Hatemi (Penn State)suggests that the explanation could be that liberals and conservatives smell differently and that each prefers the smell of ideologically similar persons. That body odor influences attractionis well-established. The authors argue that smell signals alsoserve other functions, such asdisease avoidance, cheater detection, defense against outgroups,and social cohesion. These may be related to political ideology. For example, they note:

[..] greater disgust sensitivity, which is intimately interconnected with the neural substrates of smell, predicts more conservative positions, particularly around issues involving morality and sexual reproduction. These underlying, physically experienced predilections can come to be expressed as opinions on such topics as abortion, homosexuality, gay marriage, and a host of other ideological topics

They then claim:

If social attitudes are linked to odor[..]then one mechanism that odor preferencestransfer from parents to children may operate throughtheir mothers choice of mate. In this way, social processesmay drive some of the pathways by which individualscome to prefer those whose ideological smellmatches their own.

The researchers askeda group of ideologically diverse people to rate the body scent of both liberals and conservatives (without seeing them in person). On average, ideologically similar people appreciated the scent of similarly disposed people more. So, scent could be a way in which we subconsciously select mates of similar dispositions.

Before the more creative among us go outand create perfumes for liberals and conservatives, I should note that the effect is very small and teeters on the edge of what we would normally call statistically significant. That is: we are not as certain as we would ideally like to be that the finding isnt a consequence of mere chance. There are probably other more important mechanisms that produce sorting on ideology than smell. Still, its an innovative new study on the link between biology and politics.

Erik Voeten is the Peter F. Krogh Associate Professor of Geopolitics and Justice in World Affairs at Georgetown University's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and the Department of Government.

Visit link:
Monkey Cage: Liberals smell better to other liberals than to conservatives

The federal Liberals are riding a wave of popularity, according to a new Nanos poll, with the party showing gains in B.C., Quebec and among Canadians over 60 years of age.

According to results of the weekly Nanos Party Power Index, 58.5 per cent of Canadians would consider voting for the Liberals, which is a 12-month high for the party. The NDP is in second place with 45.1 per cent, while the Conservatives have 40.2 per cent and 27.8 per cent would consider voting for the Green Party.

The Liberals also gained strength on the Canada Party Power Index, which considers first and second vote preferences; whether the respondent would consider voting for the party; first and second preferences for prime minister; and whether the respondent believes the current leader has the quality to be a good leader.

This week, the Liberals stand at 59.1 points out of 100, which is a new 12-month high, followed by the Conservatives at 48.4 points, the NDP at 47.6 points, and the Green Party at 30.7 points.

Nik Nanos, president of Nanos Research, said it was a good summer for Trudeau.

He has cruised through the barbecue circuit and is trending up, even though he hasnt put a lot in the window on the public policy front, Nanos said on CTVs Power Play.

When asked about preferred prime minister, 34 per cent of those surveyed said Justin Trudeau is their preferred choice for Canadas next prime minister, which is a 12-month high for the Liberal leader.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is trailing behind with 27.7 per cent of support, while NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair is at 16.9 per cent, and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May holds 4.8 per cent.

But despite it being pretty clear that Canadians are favouring Trudeau, Nanos said those numbers could change closer to election time.

The reality is, when you dont put out platform ideas, there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to repel voters, he said. In a way, this is almost an artificial honeymoon. Harper is basically shadowboxing with Justin Trudeau, theres no policies or platform for him to take a punch at.

See the rest here:
Liberal strength climbs in all measures of Nanos power index