“NY State cancels literacy test for teachers: it’s racist” By Jon Rappoport

March 14, 2017 NoMoreFakeNews.com

I was going to post an article today about the empty-headed propaganda called “social sciences.” It’s part of my ongoing exposure of the destruction of the American education system.

But then I came across this from the NY Times: “The [New York] Board of Regents eliminated a requirement that aspiring teachers pass a literacy test after the test proved controversial because black and Hispanic candidates passed it at significantly lower rates than white candidates.”

Bad enough that only 64% of white candidates passed the test on the first try in 2014; 46% of Hispanic candidates passed it; and 41% of black candidates passed it.

The logic here is stunning. Horrible test scores? Eliminate the test.

The next step: reading is too difficult; don’t teach reading.

And/or: reading is racist.

It’s, of course, the students who suffer. How can they be taught literacy when the teachers aren’t literate?

And these illiterate aspiring teachers? Who taught them?

It’s obvious that the New York State education system is rotten at the core. Fixing it would be like trying to turn around an oil tanker in a small space. This latest move by NY Regents officials proves there is no will and determination to undertake a comprehensive fix. They just want more teachers, no matter what. And they will get them. Why don’t they just hire teachers off the street? Anyone who can breathe and walk will do.

There’s really no need for classrooms, either. A great deal of money could be saved by holding classes in parks and empty lots.

Here is the “social sciences” article. It’s a hustle at a whole different level:

The rise of the “social sciences”: one long scam

Yet another vector has produced generations of empty-headed college students: the social sciences that aren’t sciences.

Anthropology, sociology.

Their practitioners study groups. National groups, ethnic groups, tribal groups, clans, religious groups, groups defined by gender, nomads, farmers, office workers; any way you can slice people up into groups, somebody is there with a notebook and a camera and a hot journal paper waiting to be published.

The focus is on traditions, practices, rituals, ceremonies, customs, rules, hierarchies.

The key is what is omitted.

The individual.

The last thing these minds want to acknowledge is the unique individual. That would be heresy.

Also, there are no useful “individual common denominators” to be found—and the social sciences are all about common denominators. Without them, the whole enterprise falls apart.

Individual-ology? No such thing.

By focusing on the group, the student is taught, by inference and osmosis, that the individual doesn’t count. Doesn’t count in society, in civilization, in history, in the future.

This is good, if you’re a collectivist. Quite good.

That’s why you can attend a college and obtain a degree in group-ology, but you can’t graduate with a diploma in “individual studies.” The latter curriculum doesn’t exist.

It’s quite interesting when you stop and think about it. You have all these students (individuals) attending colleges, and they can’t study themselves.

Professor: “Today, we’re beginning our investigation of the 16th-century XYZ Islanders, who lived for centuries off the coast of QRS.”

Student: “Were they all the same? Were there any individuals within XYZ who pursued their own unique and separate objectives?”

Professor: “Excuse me? I don’t even know what that means. I suggest you listen to my lectures and read the studies. Hopefully, you’ll be disabused of asking such questions.”

And after a few years, it’s likely the student will forget his initial objection. He’ll float with the tide. He’ll learn that the group is all.

Here’s a lesson in contemporary sociology: watch television for a year and find a drama series that features an individual who refuses to belong to any group or team (and isn’t a criminal). Writers wouldn’t have a clue about how to build story lines on that basis.

Colleges batter the minds of the young until they give in and submit to the proposition that the world is the group.

And this is considered a sign of maturity.

I have seen many of those students’ faces. If they exhibit maturity, it’s a state of mind to be avoided at all costs.