Common Core? Try rotten core
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Saturday, May 25, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Even parents who home-school their children cannot protect them from public schools' revisionist history, courtesy of the expanding Common Core Curriculum.
New workbooks for General Educational Development (GED) tests — administered to about 800,000 students annually — now include Common Core's liberal talking points, report Larissa and Oleg Atbashian for the American Thinker.
Common Core is the new federalized curriculum that's being administered or coming soon to a public school near you.
To call this tommyrot would be unrealistically kind:
• From a social studies text titled “Does Foreign Aid Really Help?”: “Poorer countries, because they have weak governments, often have areas that attract terrorist groups because no one is there to stop them from pursuing those types of activities.”
No, impoverished people typically suffer under unrestrained governments that steal their freedom and property.
• From the same text: “This is in fact what happened on 9/11 when terrorists from Afghanistan hijacked planes and carried out attacks on the United States.”
No, the majority of the hijackers came from wealthy Saudi Arabian families.
• And, naturally, a “scientific text” on global warming blames mankind and excludes any mention of cyclical world temperatures.
This centrally administered garbage that doesn't qualify as good fiction will continue to pile up until parents demand that their well-compensated school administrators take out the trash.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Un-American’? That’s Harry Reid, the Senate’s lowly smear artist
- Saturday essay: The gardeners’ etiquette
- Fixing Ford City’s water leaks: Time is money
- 2014 Greater Connellsville Chamber of Commerce Awards: In service to their community
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- The Adegbile nomination: Rejecting race-baiting
- Big Labor’s losses
- Sunday pops
- The IRS scandal: Compelling Lerner
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- More reefer sanity