![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
First, another post on Speak
And from the same blog "Can Censoring a Children's Book Remove its Prejudices?"
Now, the latter is what actually (sorta) has to do with Ana's homework. As you know, I sometimes like to read Amazon reviews in hopes of finding an amusingly negative one. (The positive ones, no matter how inane, are rarely as funny - although there are some gems in there.) A common reply to negative comments (the good ones and the bad ones!) is "It doesn't matter, it's just a children's book, I doubt your kid even notices, you're reading too hard". Whether or not I agree with the original review, this comment always gets under my skin.
A book that loudly proclaims whatever offensive message it is? That's easy to deal with - you see it, you roll your eyes, and you put the book down. End of problem! But a funny and mostly great book with a disturbing subtext that you don't quite get? That's the message that's going to sneak up on you! (Maybe. Remember, I had no idea until I was grown that Narnia had anything to do with being Christian, and the message I got from the Ayn-Rand-for-kids book "The Girl Who Owned a City" was "Let's pull together!" Then again, maybe I was just a bit inept.)
With that in mind, let's go back to Ana's homework. She had two reading assignments for two different days where she's supposed to read it and then answer comprehension questions... to prove she actually read the passage. If this keeps up, I might cave and show her how to answer them WITHOUT reading. It's a useful skill! (No, it really is. They actually taught it to us in school, though they didn't call it that.)
The first story raised my eyebrows even before I read the second, but I didn't say anything. (Critical thinking is NOT what she's being asked to do on these assignments.) Maybe I should've, I don't know:
A boy in upstate New York (we're not told if this story is true or not) decides to start a business selling worms. He works hard, and sells a lot of worms, and in the next year is able to expand his business. When he's asked to pay income tax ("There's a law that if you make money you have to pay the government", no other explanation for taxes is given) he's confused and upset. There is a lot of media attention, people protest, and the law is changed so that kids under 12 don't have to pay taxes.
This whole thing bugs me because, of course, if you're making enough money to come to the attention of the tax people in the first place, and you have no expenses, shouldn't you be paying taxes? Taxes don't just exist because "there's a law", they pay for valuable services, like this boy's schooling. What age is too young to be educated about your civic responsibility?
So maybe I should've said something.
But then we have the second assignment, which isn't so bad at all:
An 8 year old girl is given a small ear of corn. She's impressed with how teeny it is, so she saves the kernels and plants them. However, she planted them too near some regular corn and they grow too big. So she tries again the next year and she gets small ears, which she sells. Like the boy in the first story she continues to expand her business, and now she spends "some of her money on clothes" and also puts some away for college.
(I don't remember if the first kid spent any of his money, I'll check when Ana gets home.)
Putting these two stories back to back, as they were, gives me a chance to stare and go "My goodness, what a lot of propaganda!" Certain parties like to accuse textbooks* of being full of socialist or liberal stuff to "brainwash" kids, but what do you call this? The underlying message seems to be that the proper activity of young children is to try to earn money (on their own merits, though, not through employment), and that it's not enough to earn money, you must INCREASE how much you earn. Also, girls like to shop and we should save money for college, because (I guess) taxes shouldn't help pay for that.
It's not that either assignment bothers me so much (well, except for the part about how kids who earn a lot of money still shouldn't pay taxes), we ARE living in a capitalist society after all, I just thought it was funny to see them RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
*I actually don't know if these stories came out of the textbook or if they were printed out separately, and whether or not they go together or if the teacher just put them together.
And from the same blog "Can Censoring a Children's Book Remove its Prejudices?"
Now, the latter is what actually (sorta) has to do with Ana's homework. As you know, I sometimes like to read Amazon reviews in hopes of finding an amusingly negative one. (The positive ones, no matter how inane, are rarely as funny - although there are some gems in there.) A common reply to negative comments (the good ones and the bad ones!) is "It doesn't matter, it's just a children's book, I doubt your kid even notices, you're reading too hard". Whether or not I agree with the original review, this comment always gets under my skin.
A book that loudly proclaims whatever offensive message it is? That's easy to deal with - you see it, you roll your eyes, and you put the book down. End of problem! But a funny and mostly great book with a disturbing subtext that you don't quite get? That's the message that's going to sneak up on you! (Maybe. Remember, I had no idea until I was grown that Narnia had anything to do with being Christian, and the message I got from the Ayn-Rand-for-kids book "The Girl Who Owned a City" was "Let's pull together!" Then again, maybe I was just a bit inept.)
With that in mind, let's go back to Ana's homework. She had two reading assignments for two different days where she's supposed to read it and then answer comprehension questions... to prove she actually read the passage. If this keeps up, I might cave and show her how to answer them WITHOUT reading. It's a useful skill! (No, it really is. They actually taught it to us in school, though they didn't call it that.)
The first story raised my eyebrows even before I read the second, but I didn't say anything. (Critical thinking is NOT what she's being asked to do on these assignments.) Maybe I should've, I don't know:
A boy in upstate New York (we're not told if this story is true or not) decides to start a business selling worms. He works hard, and sells a lot of worms, and in the next year is able to expand his business. When he's asked to pay income tax ("There's a law that if you make money you have to pay the government", no other explanation for taxes is given) he's confused and upset. There is a lot of media attention, people protest, and the law is changed so that kids under 12 don't have to pay taxes.
This whole thing bugs me because, of course, if you're making enough money to come to the attention of the tax people in the first place, and you have no expenses, shouldn't you be paying taxes? Taxes don't just exist because "there's a law", they pay for valuable services, like this boy's schooling. What age is too young to be educated about your civic responsibility?
So maybe I should've said something.
But then we have the second assignment, which isn't so bad at all:
An 8 year old girl is given a small ear of corn. She's impressed with how teeny it is, so she saves the kernels and plants them. However, she planted them too near some regular corn and they grow too big. So she tries again the next year and she gets small ears, which she sells. Like the boy in the first story she continues to expand her business, and now she spends "some of her money on clothes" and also puts some away for college.
(I don't remember if the first kid spent any of his money, I'll check when Ana gets home.)
Putting these two stories back to back, as they were, gives me a chance to stare and go "My goodness, what a lot of propaganda!" Certain parties like to accuse textbooks* of being full of socialist or liberal stuff to "brainwash" kids, but what do you call this? The underlying message seems to be that the proper activity of young children is to try to earn money (on their own merits, though, not through employment), and that it's not enough to earn money, you must INCREASE how much you earn. Also, girls like to shop and we should save money for college, because (I guess) taxes shouldn't help pay for that.
It's not that either assignment bothers me so much (well, except for the part about how kids who earn a lot of money still shouldn't pay taxes), we ARE living in a capitalist society after all, I just thought it was funny to see them RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
*I actually don't know if these stories came out of the textbook or if they were printed out separately, and whether or not they go together or if the teacher just put them together.
