I learned my grammar/syntax from the kids in the stables I played in and chats I was in. its just natural for me.

I'm not hiding behind the word Marxism. You are. I would like to replace it with a definition that we can use to communicate. You have been unwilling to do that. Marxism by JP's account is VERY well defined. That means its a sincere and concrete reference that you can pick apart. You can say '**** jp i don't care' all you want. Your sentiments and feelings aren't a counter. I am referencing him as a well defined definition of marxism.

So I'm not hiding behind the word using it with no shared definition.

If you want to say 'no the schools aren't trending towards a marxist curriculum' you have to accept a definition or Marxism, otherwise what are they not trending towards?

You haven't put forth any of your opinions. You have just LOL's mine without referencing any definitions for the words being used.

Here's where we started:

And off you went into tangents about Marxism. Your latest post of course doesn't address "Why is the extra step needed? Why wouldn't we just discuss whether the curriculum is a bad thing or not? That was the original conversation until you jumped in with the 'this curriculum is Marxist, Marxism is bad, therefore the curriculum is bad' argument. It's a completely unnecessary layer.", nor the fact that you are interpreting curriculum while insisting you haven't. Not interested in playing your games any more, sorry.

That is how all conversations with randos like that end, sorry it took you so many posts where you put in effort to join me (and I see you put in a bonus after credits post as well). I admire your attempt, but it is a pointless grind. To use an example that will make you chuckle - people like that are the unusual casino bonuses from 2008 that actually had no expected return. Nobody should bother with them. This is actually one of the reasons I give credit to the elected local officials who have to deal with variants of that on a regular basis with whatever their personal weird happens to be at the time. They have patience and tolerance that I will never have!

When they teach indigenous knowledge, are you saying that they don't teach it in distinction from non-indigenous? I think they do and thats wrong (for short reference I call it Marxist, its not wrong because its Marxist).
Or do you think they don't teach indigenous knowledge as distinct from non-indigenous?

There is only knowledge.

You say you think that teaching the history and origin of knowledge is fine. I agreed. But I think thats not what they are doing.

You haven't been clear on which of this you disagree with.

I have only ever seen you backhandedly/underhandedly/indirectly etc participate like this in discussions and call urself smarter than others without eve rputting that claim on the line by participating.

How easy would that be to just walk around thinking ur smart and telling others its so while not actually engaging

All the best.

This seems like a potentially more productive conversation.

It depends. The idea, in general, is to weave teaching about indigenous people, their ways, knowledge we can learn from them, throughout students' school journeys. That said, there are times when a lesson, or a good part of a day, might be spent on indigenous learning. That might involve some outdoor experience, or an elder coming to the classroom to share knowledge, teach students to make a drum and use it, or a variety of other teachings. I've never known any of these teachings to be introduced as "sacred from non-indigenous knowledge". The most separate learning would come in the newly mandatory graduation requirement of an indigenous-focused class in Grade 12.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ment-1.6376515

Good luck with that potentially more productive conversation!

Big comeback win for the Ladies at the World Cup

2-1 over Ireland

Go Canada

I understand this sentiment and why it would seem obviously beneficial and the opposite of harmful. But I think that there is a different intent and that its not conspiracy, its stated intent you can see in the source.

"Learning involves recognizing that some knowledge is sacred and only shared with permission and/or in certain situations."

"Learning recognizes the role of Indigenous knowledge."

I traversed the materials that are posted for the teachers. Its like an hour of videos, talks by the indigenous administrators etc. Its specifically meant to highlight a difference so that it can be preserved as being sperate from non-indigenous knowledge. This isn't how we teach otherwise, there is no 'non-indigenous' category in contrast that tries to define itself as separate from indigenous knowledge (but their history and culture is important!).

I didn't find the sentiments from your source in the curriculum I didn't see mandatory 4 credits for native studies, but I'm going by the posted source. What I did find is an indigenous version of English 12 that students could choose to take. I think probably this course would cause students to perform worse in future writing courses.

I also found in the curriculum the infusion of indigenous content throughout the curriculum in general. I I think to people it seems like the moral thing to do, and then I guess that morality is there fore logic, and therefore its the logical thing.

But what happens when indians from india feel they aren't represented in the teachings? And so now we must preserve Indian knowledge, but again as separate from what?

Its just knowledge, and I think we need to teach that no group has special authority over any of it. Rather I think this is a backlash against a perceived agenda (pro white? pro western? I'm not sure what we would label it)

No Marxists were harmed in that victory!

You are welcome to participate, but it would mean putting yourself out there and getting over your own ego.

U aren't capable.

All the best.

Pass. Interaction with you is the definition of a complete waste of time. You are kind of like that dude I attempted to interact with a couple times in BFI named Teethswarmer or something during the derpy Covid days there (where many other posters were completely unintentionally entertaining). Zero value. Putting you (or "U" heh) on ignore, which is where you/U likely end up a lot of times. Happy adventures with your/ur marxist manifesto if you are able to keep others on the pointless ride with you/u for the weeks/months you/u would be more than happy to talk about it (without actually talking to the people who could do something about it).

All the best.

Didn't think so. You aren't capable. Ur intellect precludes you.

(and I'm not toothsayer)

So while I'm very much directly involved in the K-12 education system here in BC, I'm not an educator myself, so I'm not get into the weeds on this - I would do a poor job of explaining the details, compared to our educators. But I will comment on a couple of things:

In other words, elders, for example, aren't going to share every bit of knowledge they have in places and ways that others may desire. It's on us to respect that and understand that not everything is to be shared.

I'm not really sure why you've highlighted this one. Seems like a pretty straightforward acknowledgement that Indigenous knowledge has a role in our K-12 system. In the past, it didn't have much of a role, so this is recognizing that we are trying to do better in that regard.

A big hang up for you seems to be the idea that Indigenous learning would be treated uniquely. I think this passage is the best one for me to reply to and address this:

I don't expect this will be a problem, because people from India weren't here several thousands of years before European settlers. People from India weren't colonized by Europeans. People from India weren't sent off to residential schools.

So there is a moral element to this that you've alluded to - after centuries of mistreating indigenous people and virtually ignoring them in teaching, we're trying to rectify a lot of wrongs. But there is another reason why this learning justifies a different position than that of other cultures - it's relevant to us. This is part of our history, our province's and country's history. Indigenous teaching is about the place where we live, and the people we live with, and the natural environment around us. None of this is true of people from India, or any other country.

This passage, if you go thru the materials and the videos, it actually means that they are going to teach you some things in private, and you are to respect that the knowledge is sacred and not to be repeated or taught outside of the private environment in which it was taught in. So thats a claim of mine, you might not agree that is true, but I believe its in the materials explicitly. And if thats true and correct, I think its very wrong.

No secrets, no sacred knowledge like this, not for a cultural teaching indigenous or non-indigenous.

If I am mistaken and your interpretation is correct, then thats fine.
Again if you traverse the supporting materials I believe its clearly laid out, that the specific intent is to define and preserve Indigenous knowledge as special and independent of non-indigenous knowledge. This isn't how science or knowledge works. Science doesn't acknowledge that there is indigenous knowledge that is separate from non-indigenous. Again we would first have to decide if I am correct or not, that the curriculum is specifically making efforts to define a different type of knowledge. Then I would like to ask if you see a problem with that?

Yes that is the moral premise and it has become the logical basis.

The claim is they are teaching equality and inclusion. And the idea is its relevant content. But how does the Indian feel? If there is indigenous knowledge then is there not indian knowledge? And Chinese knowledge?

What about MY ancestors knowledge? We want to say my ancestors, I am non-indigenous, don't have a history of Canada?

There isn't enough room in the school curriculum for all these different types of knowledge. Do you see the framework?

Come on Folks lets get back to the important things

How crappy our PM is Ignored Alberta again in cabinet picks

Great Opinion Piece on how Trudeau has failed this country over and over .

Warning Warning warning for Monteroy This is an Opinion Piece

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other...09b9dfc2&ei=10

Lol yes Trudeau and his huge bench of great choices of MPs from Alberta. Glad to see that lozen is team representation in cabinet ministers and must be THRILLED he kept it gender balanced.

How does that tie into Marxism?

He did have one but that one had a ethics breach like the leader and another cabinet member. HE could have selected all women and if they were qualified I be happy . I believe in having skills to be selected but some of those folks packed it in

I haven't across an example of this, but I suppose it's possible. The only thing I recall I've been witness to that is similar is the ceremony for welcome poles in our schools. During the ceremony, someone is there to brush the welcome pole with cedar boughs, as a sort of blessing. The entire ceremony can be videotaped and photographed, except for the brushing of the poles. That is sacred to their people, and we honour that request. Might there be the occasional knowledge or wisdom passed on that they wish to be shared only in very specific ways? Definitely could be, and I'm not sure why that would be a big concern.

You get hung up on some strange things IMO.

I know there are efforts being made to ensure that Indigenous language and culture are preserved, as there is a danger of both being lost over time, especially since much of this wisdom is passed on orally. I have no problem with that.

This is perhaps the oddest hangup of all. You seem to have completely ignored my explanation of this in my last post, so I'll try a different approach. Indigenous content is Canadian content. It's content about Canadian history, Canadian people, the Canadian natural environment, Canadian land. Of course there will be more focus spent on that than there is on Chinese, Indian, or American people. That's not to say the latter is ignored - Canada is a land of immigrants, and there is also teaching about people who have come here from other countries, but it's only natural there will be more focus on those who have been here for thousands of years, before any other humans.

I'm sincerely quite puzzled by what your point is, unless it was to support uke's post. Alberta has two Liberal MPs, you point out that one had an ethics breach, and the only other AB Liberal MP is a cabinet minister. What am I missing?

He should have appointed the other one as well. Its clear he has appointed other cabinet individuals with ethics violations and he himself has 3 . I think the Alberta one was for going up to houses and removing conservative brochures


Its amazing that this is not an issue in the American Education System . Residential Schooling was disgusting how the Catholic Church skated on this under a certain PM's leadership is beyond me. I think any PM before Harper that this occurred under should have their names stripped off any Federal Building

Oh, I see. Yeah, I've read arguments made that he's "served his time" and should have been considered for a spot. I suppose it was a relatively minor violation, but also a rather pathetic one that doesn't speak especially well to his character IMO. I'd just as soon see Mary Ng out of cabinet with him, rather than both of them in.

I agree with you 100% but when he appoints Ng than appoint the Alberta MP as well . Sadly its difficult to preach about ethics when as a leader your piling up the ethics violations

It's a concern because its intended to alter the structure of our educational system as if the teachings are worthy in their uniqueness.

An example... there might be that the natives have found medicinal properties to a plant. This would be taught in a science class as science and in regard to the biological and molecular makeup blah blah of the plant etc. I say blah blah to refer to science jargon that is above my head, I'm terrible at biology and chemistry. The program that I'm citing disagrees. It means to have that 'wisdom' classified and taught as 'indigenous knowledge'.

Again you haven't really clarified if you think this is true of the intent of the curriculum, versus whether you think its ok or not.

I think I could convince you easier that teaching there is such thing as specialized knowledge is bad faster than I can get you to believe they are intending to do this in the school curriculum we are citing.

Of course not, but there is no sense in mandating into the public education system for that purpose, especially over any other culture.

My claim in regard to the source I cited, is that they are intending to pervade the entire curriculum with indigenous content. So for example math class will use examples for word problems that reference indigenous culture. And there is for example the high school indigenous English class if I understand correctly infuses indigenous culture. Does it make sense to be a multi cultural country of equality when one group gets such special treatment?

I don't think this scales...I think it opens a door that immigration fuels.