Subject:
|
Re: 'Lego Ban' at Seattle School Fueled by Anti-Private Property Crusaders
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:51:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3282 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Sid Dinsay wrote:
> You have to go in via http://www.techcentralstation.com to find this article.
> There is no direct link.
>
> L'Eggo My Lego
> By Maureen Martin
> 28 Feb 2007
>
> Some Seattle school children are being told to be skeptical of private property
> rights. This lesson is being taught by banning Legos.
>
> A ban was initiated at the Hilltop Children's Center in Seattle. According to an
> article in the winter 2006-07 issue of "Rethinking Schools" magazine, the
> teachers at the private school wanted their students to learn that private
> property ownership is evil.
>
> According to the article, the students had been building an elaborate
> "Legotown," but it was accidentally demolished. The teachers decided its
> destruction was an opportunity to explore "the inequities of private ownership."
> According to the teachers, "Our intention was to promote a contrasting set of
> values: collectivity, collaboration, resource-sharing, and full democratic
> participation."
>
> The children were allegedly incorporating into Legotown "their assumptions about
> ownership and the social power it conveys." These assumptions "mirrored those of
> a class-based, capitalist society -- a society that we teachers believe to be
> unjust and oppressive."
>
> They claimed as their role shaping the children's "social and political
> understandings of ownership and economic equity ... from a perspective of social
> justice."
>
> So they first explored with the children the issue of ownership. Not all of the
> students shared the teachers' anathema to private property ownership. "If I buy
> it, I own it," one child is quoted saying. The teachers then explored with the
> students concepts of fairness, equity, power, and other issues over a period of
> several months.
>
> At the end of that time, Legos returned to the classroom after the children
> agreed to several guiding principles framed by the teachers, including that "All
> structures are public structures" and "All structures will be standard sizes."
> The teachers quote the children:
>
> "A house is good because it is a community house."
>
> "We should have equal houses. They should be standard sizes."
>
> "It's important to have the same amount of power as other people over your
> building."
>
> Given some recent history in Washington state with respect to private property
> protections, perhaps this should not come as a surprise. Municipal officials in
> Washington have long known how to condemn one person's private property and sell
> it to another for the "public use" of private economic development. Even prior
> to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2005 ruling in Kelo v. City of New London,
> Connecticut, which sanctioned such a use of eminent domain, Washington state
> officials acting under their state constitution were already proceeding full
> speed ahead with such transactions.
>
> Officials in Bremerton, for example, condemned a house where a widow had lived
> for 55 years so her property could be used for a car lot, according to the
> Institute for Justice. And Seattle successfully condemned nine properties and
> turned them over to a private developer for retail shops and hotel parking, IJ
> reports. Attempts to do the same thing in Vancouver (for mixed use development)
> and Lakewood (for an amusement park) failed for reasons unrelated to property
> confiscation issues.
>
> The court's ruling in Kelo, however, whetted municipal condemnation appetites
> even further. The Institute for Justice reports 272 takings for private use are
> pending or threatened in the state as of last summer. It's unclear if Legos will
> be targeted. But given what's being taught in some schools, perhaps it's just a
> matter of time.
Good grief!
Somebody needs to go back and re-educate these teachers! As an educator myself,
I find it ridiculous that LEGO was banned. I don't see other building toys
banned here...and isn't it LEGO that has things like First LEGO League,
Mindstorms, Serious Play and the whole DACTA division?
Am I missing something here?
LEGO is a privately held company, I'll be the first to acknowledge that. But
come on...I have a hard time seeing a company that has as it's motto "Play Well"
as an evil empire, bent on creating self-absorbed little capitalists.
Social Justice is not what a child's toy is about. Education of the child,
remembering that "A child's job is to play", and it is through that play--not
taking the toy away from them--is how they will best learn.
Perhaps these teachers need to learn how to play with their toys again....
Matthew
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
