I was talking about if Bush asked the students what they could do for him as the President. I wasn’t referencing him speaking to students. Just to clarify. My problem is with the “agenda,” prior to revision.

Wine. Lots of wine.

“If the ed materials (which came out first) offered even a few questions a bit more obvious in the way of “let’s really listen to this and work this speech”, I honestly think there may have been a through the looking glass moment and possibly even some across line hugging. I think that.”

That is me trying to generate a plot to use this talk to turn children into liberal converts. Obama, no. Me? I’m nefarious.

The K-6 pre-questions are actually a little less nose-leading than the 7-12 questions. I do have a problem with the question that assumes that kids should listen to elected officials, well, just because they are elected official. I’m hoping there will be more in-school discussion as to what credentials any speaker offers that supports their authority to speak on a topic. “Because she’s President” is okay when talking about one person speaking on a specific topic, but I always dislike when glamour or novelty alone are the things that hit kids between the eyes first. I’d like to see more delving into questions as to how the speaker offers credentials (and Obama does) and to what effect. I absolutely think that elementary school kids can tackle this kind of discussion, and honestly, the younger the better when it comes to honing these skills.

I’d also love to see more questions as to how the President uses the media form, what effect it has on kids, and why. I like complete transparency and critical thinking when it comes to interfacing with media, and this speech would be a sort of “safe space” to introduce those skills as they pertain not only to political figures and media, but also “messages from higher up” altogether. Maybe they do this is 5th grade civics, or something. That’s where my oldest is now.

The after speech questions just need some tweaking. It may seem obvious to some kids that

“Does the speech make you want to do anything?”

has a possible “no” answer, but it’s a bit clumsy. Kids will know that the answer they are supposed to give is “of course!” Of course, it’s the President talking. Some kids might say “nope”, but with risk. A better question might be

Does the speech make you want to do anything? Why not or why? If not, how might the president written a speech that pertained more specifically to kids in your school or town?

or

What parts of the speech really caught your attention? How did they make you feel? Were there any parts that were difficult to understand? How could the speech have been better?

For “Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?” again, what kid is going to say “no” other than the smart aleck? It’s a bit…disingenuous.

For the 7-12

“Teachers may post in large print around the classroom notable quotes excerpted from President Obama’s speeches on education.” Mmmmmm…I’d rather have good quotes about education from other sources, too. (Especially, some women.) Absolutely no threat of then seeming to much like an advert. This one seemed like a no-brainer. The risk is that some will say, “Oh my goodness, that Obama is comparing himself to John Dewey! How dare he!” But I’ll risk self-aggrandizement via association over the appearance of a political commercial. Most people who complain already think he’s a bit egotistical. What they are looking for is “VOTE OBAMA”. The posted excerpts seem too close for comfort.

“Based on these excerpts, what can we infer that the president believes is important in order to be educationally successful?” Again, that’s what the whole coming speech is about. This seems like overkill. Better to talk about other leaders, too, and cover more bases to potentially catch more kids in the net.

Pre question: How will he inspire us?

My first thought was “Well, let me hear the speech first, and then I’ll decide for myself whether I’m inspired.” However, if some teacher wants to spin this as a study in classical persuasive rhetoric and later begin a discussion as to what forms were used and whether or not they were successful, etc. I’d be so happy, you couldn’t even stand me anymore.

For the 7-12 after-speech questions, there don’t seem to be many that offer the possibility that the speech didn’t succeed. Which okay, after reading it, it’s a fine speech. But, I don’t generally like bassackward reasoning for not thinking critically. The way most of the questions are worded, it’s going to be the brazen student who fesses up that they weren’t particularly inspired or that the speech as given had weaknesses. More questions like “As a persuasive speech, how did the speaker either succeed or miss the mark?”

“What are the three most important words in the speech? Rank them.” I’d rather tweak it as “What three words does the speaker think are important? What support does he give to convince you that these concepts are important? What different words would you add, and why?” Again, a bit more…probing.

Listen, I don’t think these questions were “vetted” well, and I don’t think that any teacher is going to go by the book on this. And mostly, I realize how picky a lot of my post, but that’s what I do instead of playing Sudoku: I’m a pill. However, with these questions out there first, yeah, I think people were going to slide pretty quickly – or more quickly – to wondering just how the speech might spin. And since Reagan did get political in his speech, well…it could happen.

The original question asking Kindys to write to themselves as to what they could do to help the President was possibly the most mouth-watering to those who were looking for a beef. And evidently, the question writers later agreed. For a speech focusing on internal locus of control being the key to success, that question was out of place. Also, looking to pick a fight for pretty much no good reason.

What else did you ask me? Oh…Sarah Palin. Well, I think people should have been outraged. I think we’re some of us too polite for our own good. Some of us too mouthy, but that’s a different problem. Maybe we’re too polite and then the venting builds up and we go ape nuts. There is a way to express a critique without getting all ugly about it. (I remind myself daily.) By the time Sarah Palin was two steps in the water, she was undergoing a complete character/personality slaughter. Maybe going after her speech seemed redundant? Obama’s speech is a nationwide in-school offering, so there’s also a larger direct audience being affected….there’s that. I can guarantee, if Palin were coming to a school near me – especially during a campaign year – I’d be rarin’ to go with the same questions and critiques.

Because, fact is, I am going to debrief my kids and teach them to question the questions. You will too. However, some kids don’t get that at home, and for, I will assume, good reasons that have a lot to do with basic physical and emotional survival. When you’re grasping for any stability, and the fortitude to question the questions takes a steady rock to stand on, well, one can sort of understand how “sure answers” are what one would look for first. That’s good when Obama is giving the speech he is giving; but maybe not so good when other people are giving a speech. However, to not question the questions just for consistency sake, just because it hasn’t been done before, doesn’t mean we can’t start here and set precedent. If kids learn the skill, who saying who they’ll use it on next. Ehem.

I know there are people who are tearing Obama’s speech apart and not Palin’s speech because those people actively dislike blacks and think that women trying to be politicians is just plain cute and who listens to a girl anyway? I mean, I know, I know, I know…..

But damn…could you imagine if some truly “let’s really analyze this” questions were in the ed materials? My cranky righty friends are emailing me telling me they think the speech is fine and possibly also dandy. If the ed materials (which came out first) offered even a few questions a bit more obvious in the way of “let’s really listen to this and work this speech”, I honestly think there may have been a through the looking glass moment and possibly even some across line hugging. I think that.

As I have read and sifted through the comments here and over at BlogHer on this issue, I keep wondering if this all isn’t much ado about nothing? Why should it be wrong for the President to talk to children. OK, maybe they made a blunder with the lesson plan — was that Obama or some well-meaning underling?

Let me know when the book club is, because I’ll be there with a bottle of wine, the book and a big hug — because I really do consider you to be my friend, Kristen.

One thing you are wrong on, though, is that I would not have seen RED if Bush II had done the same thing and PunditGirl had to watch. Yes, I opposed him with every ounce of my Democratic being, but I have always been careful to make sure that my daughter has respect for whoever the President is. And, yes, I would have had a talk with her after the speech to see what she had taken from it.

I really do believe part of this is about fear-mongering, though. Because, really, does anyone truly believe Obama is going to be sending subliminal signals to children to make sure they register as Democrats when they’re 18?

I didn’t hear any similar outrage when Sarah Palin talked to school children during the campaign and incorrectly told a bunch of elementary school children that if she was VP, she’d be in charge of the Senate and could use that position to introduce legislation.

As two girls from Central Pa, we agree that the Obama should encourage our children to be critical thinkers. That is one of the biggest goals I have for PunditGirl — to get from her education more than the ability to spout back facts (which is pretty much all we got back in “the day”) and be able to analyze and think for herself.

Seriously, George Bush was in an elementary school on 9/11/2001 promoting a literacy program when intelligence pulled him aside to inform him of the 1st plane going into the World Trade Center. Presidents talk to school children. Publicly elected officials and representatives go to schools all the time to talk about the importance of citizenship and basic Civics 101. This is NOT an unusual thing for a President to do. I have never seen such unwarranted fear, hysteria, or judgment among people. Do you think they ever write the networks letters of complaint when a junk food commercial is slipped into “vulnerable young minds” during children’s programing?

I am so fired up about this!

And I think Obama would have been smart enough to know this. However, I’m sure he’s not in charge of dotting every i on his education people’s work.

I think the original critiques of the questions were more than fair, and I think the new questions are…passable, if not overly energetic. All this could have been averted if the speech has been released earlier. There’s little to quibble with. It was the air of mystery and then asking people to “just believe” that became a problem.

http://www.veggiesign.blogspot.com
htto://www.zhibit.org/fullerartworks

Also, I like you format design, mine is space limiting, do you have to have a domain?
Thank you for your time!