Wellyopolis

June 5, 2006

EdWatch

This article in the Star Tribune about opposition to the International Baccalaureate was interesting and frustrating. It was interesting because the opponents of the IB are right in a limited, general way; that the IB's externally graded examinations are a somewhat different approach to instruction and assessment than American education typically takes. But it was frustrating that the article sets up this even-handed conflict between opponents of IB and supporters.

When you read on, you find that the only people opposing it are some fruit loops in suburban Republican conventions, and that those notorious anti-American pinko terrorists Tim Pawlenty and major business leaders support it. This is the kind of faux-balance that gives American journalism a bad name. It would be fairer and more accurate to write that the opposition to IB is marginal.

Curious to find out more about the group opposing the IB, EdWatch, I checked out their website. You'd think if you were going to bemoan the faltering standards of American education as it falls prey to the centralizing grasp of the "Nanny State" you would want to give at least the appearance of competence with the English language. Apparently not ... Here on just one page I found the following spelling and grammatical errors in a minute's reading:


  • "This bill resurrects the Education Departments totally bogus ..." Notice anything missing here? Like an apostrophe in the first sentence?
  • "Nanny State backers like Art Rolnik ..." Wouldn't that actually be Art Rolnick
  • "against which Dr. Effrem testified ..." Perhaps split infinitives are back in fashion in conservative circles?
  • "untrained in mental health, to assess childrens socioemotional performance". Again, the apostrophe, the apostrophe!!
  • "This Governors Nanny State bill" Again!

It's hard to take people like this seriously when they can't even write proper English.

Posted by eroberts at June 5, 2006 12:48 PM