Tags for this video have been changed from 'geometry, alabama, teacher, president, assassination, angles, lines of sight' to 'geometry, alabama, teacher, president, assassination, angles, gregory harrison' - edited by kronosposeidon

Love that redneck lady at the end:

"I don't really think there's any big deal about it. I think there's much worse things going on in the schools today..."

And what are those? Sex education? Evolution being taught? STFU before you make yourself sound even dumber, if that's possible.

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.

At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?

Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

>> ^NordlichReiter:

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.


I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

>> ^IronDwarf:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.


Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

For a second I was like, Hmmmm, then I realized he's a teacher and naturally what he sas in his classroom is going to affect his job.

He should have exercised better judgement and not used a presidential assasination as a forum to teach geometry. That's stupid.

This High School brought to you by Cola-Cola...??

You have hired 8 prostitutes for a wild sex party and notice that you only have 10 ounces of crack. If every crack whore needs .5 ounces per hour, how many hours until your penis gets bitten off in a wild fit of crack rage?

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:

>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

She went on to say: "... like underpaid teachers who are not motivated enough to teach our children or all the outdated schoolbooks as well as a ridiculous curriculum. I have to school my children at home because about the only thing they seem to learn in school is not to judge a person by their looks..."

>> ^kronosposeidon:

Love that redneck lady at the end:
"I don't really think there's any big deal about it. I think there's much worse things going on in the schools today..."
And what are those? Sex education? Evolution being taught? STFU before you make yourself sound even dumber, if that's possible.

If she did say that, she is just as ignorant as the teacher>> ^GaussZ:

She went on to say: "... like underpaid teachers who are not motivated enough to teach our children or all the outdated schoolbooks as well as a ridiculous curriculum. I have to school my children at home because about the only thing they seem to learn in school is not to judge a person by their looks..."
>> ^kronosposeidon:
Love that redneck lady at the end:
"I don't really think there's any big deal about it. I think there's much worse things going on in the schools today..."
And what are those? Sex education? Evolution being taught? STFU before you make yourself sound even dumber, if that's possible.

>> ^longde:

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:
>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!



Yes. It would be. I don't let hypothetical statements bother me... there are a lot more stuff to be bothered by in real life. And if it works and the students learn (more than they would have otherwise)... I say go for it.

You're missing the point. To you, Hypotheticals may just be a string of words. But those words hold meaning.

Words represent pictures that pop into your head. Those pictures trigger emotional responses which in turn effect our attitudes and actions.

If it's okay to talk about presidential assasination in hypotheticals, it's okay to talk about rape and robbery and homocide of fellow students and teachers in hypotheticals.

They're just hypotheticals, right?

>> ^LarsaruS:

Yes. It would be. I don't let hypothetical statements bother me... there are a lot more stuff to be bothered by in real life. And if it works and the students learn (more than they would have otherwise)... I say go for it.

Pretty dumb...if you would've just said "Head of State" or "VIP" or even "President" I think it would've been fine. Heck even choose some random point in time where a president gave a speech and you have to use the measurements of the buildings around that area in order to get it right. Don't see a problem with that.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

You're missing the point. To you, Hypotheticals may just be a string of words. But those words hold meaning.
Words represent pictures that pop into your head. Those pictures trigger emotional responses which in turn effect our attitudes and actions.
If it's okay to talk about presidential assasination in hypotheticals, it's okay to talk about rape and robbery and homocide of fellow students and teachers in hypotheticals.
They're just hypotheticals, right?
>> ^LarsaruS:
Yes. It would be. I don't let hypothetical statements bother me... there are a lot more stuff to be bothered by in real life. And if it works and the students learn (more than they would have otherwise)... I say go for it.



First up: Yes they are just hypotheticals. As long as you use them to trigger meaningful debate and clearly define the actions as abhorrent I don't see a problem with it, rapes happen and so do murders. Students kill and rape other students and teachers get raped and murdered too, shit happens as life is not fluffy pink clouds and unicorns farting rainbows! (school shootings anyone?). To ignore facts do not make them go away it only allows these things to sit undisturbed and fester. Or are you a subscriber to the idea that if you don't talk about horrible things they don't happen? "Out of sight, out of mind" or as Aldous Huxley so succinctly put it: "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

To use murders and rapes and other criminal actions to discuss and bring up the values we as a society have on these issues and contrast them with the students own views on these things can bring about meaningful insights on these issues. And it is not something to be done lightly of with a flippant attitude as they are people with emotions, I agree with you on that.

Secondly: Would you prefer it if we censor what teachers are able to bring up in classrooms and/or start to self-censor ourselves the way people in oppressive regimes do? Only happy things are allowed to be discussed or else you disappear/become a pariah? In almost all repressive regimes the teachers are the first to be murdered/sent to be "re-educated" about the grandeur of the new ways. Knowledge is power and the people who give other people knowledge are the most dangerous of all. They define how we see the world and ourselves in relation to it.

*Disclaimer, written when tipsy/drunk, grammar and spelling might be a bit off. And I don't mean to flame.

>> ^kronosposeidon:

Love that redneck lady at the end:
"I don't really think there's any big deal about it. I think there's much worse things going on in the schools today..."
And what are those? Sex education? Evolution being taught? STFU before you make yourself sound even dumber, if that's possible.


The problem is that we're only seeing a small portion of the school's curriculum out of context. As Ms. Hughes points out, this wasn't really suprising and there's a lot worse going in in the school. Here's a typical day:
Geometry - how to use angles and geometry to hypothetically assasinate the president.
Chemistry - how to use bunsen burners and test tubes to hypothetically create a fertilizer bomb to blow up the IRS.
English - how to use pursuasive writing to hypothetically write a terrorist bomb threat.
Biology - how to use petri dishes to hypothetically smuggle explosives past bomb-sniffing dogs.
Drivers ed - how to use proper signaling to hypothetically drive a truck filled with explosives through a government checkpoint.

LarsaruS, you are ignoring context. This was a geometry lesson, not a socio-politcal discussion. It was not intended to raise a topic for thoughtful debate. When you put together a word problem for a math lesson, you are implying that the content of the problem is something you might have to consider in real life, and in a fairly trivial manner. It is not appropriate to use immoral acts as the content of school lessons, no matter what the specific act may be. For instance, you would not want a teacher who used an example of how much children eat daily, and how much less they would need if you drowned some of them. You would not want to use the example of how many slaves you would need to buy to get a certain amount of acreage harvested. GeeSussFreeK's example above is funny because of how totally inappropriate it would be in school.

It doesn't matter whether it is a hypothetical. The context implies approval of the activities specified.

Alright kids.. For next week, we'll look at the geometric magic at work in the Kennedy Assassination.

>> ^Trancecoach:

Alright kids.. For next week, we'll look at the geometric magic at work in the Kennedy Assassination.


That was my assumption going into this video, that it was about Kennedy, then I read the tags!

What person in their right mind would make a Math topic about assassinating the current president (who has to worry about assassination enough as it is). This isn't an example of someone exercising their freedom of speech.

>> ^MaxWilder:

LarsaruS, you are ignoring context. This was a geometry lesson, not a socio-politcal discussion. It was not intended to raise a topic for thoughtful debate. When you put together a word problem for a math lesson, you are implying that the content of the problem is something you might have to consider in real life, and in a fairly trivial manner. It is not appropriate to use immoral acts as the content of school lessons, no matter what the specific act may be. For instance, you would not want a teacher who used an example of how much children eat daily, and how much less they would need if you drowned some of them. You would not want to use the example of how many slaves you would need to buy to get a certain amount of acreage harvested. GeeSussFreeK's example above is funny because of how totally inappropriate it would be in school.
It doesn't matter whether it is a hypothetical. The context implies approval of the activities specified.


Ok, I have a couple of issues with your post.

1: "When you put together a word problem for a math lesson, you are implying that the content of the problem is something you might have to consider in real life, and in a fairly trivial manner".
1.1: No, that does not have to be the case. I never considered word problems in any lesson as something I might have to do in real life (anecdotal evidence but still). There is a skill called critical thinking, you use it to see what the lesson is about, here angles and probably Pythagoras, and learn that not just what the problem's solution is. That way you can apply what you have learnt on many things as you get the principle for how to solve all similar problems.


2: "It is not appropriate to use immoral acts as the content of school lessons, no matter what the specific act may be"
2.1: Umm, what? Not being able to use immoral acts as content of school lessons at all? Seriously? And who decides what these immoral acts are? (Hint: lobby groups) For some being homosexual is an immoral act as it is a choice/lifestyle, ergo no teachers are allowed to talk about HBTQ rights. Equality is therefore gone in school education. For some talking about evolution is immoral so good bye science. The list goes on. If you have an "Immoral list" you can always add more things to it as you see fit until only the things that the people in power wants to be taught can be taught and in a couple of generations all other knowledge will have vanished as the people who learnt it die off.

Also school is to prepare children for adult life. Adult life is filled with "immoral" actions and people. Sending kids out into the real world with a distorted world view is the most immoral act I could ever think of as they will be completely unprepared for real life and hit a lot of pitfalls that otherwise could have been avoided. "Everybody in the world is super nice and you are super special too!" so go with the man who has a rabbit in his cellar that he wants you to see...

2.2: What about classes about law or history? Lessons where criminals, or criminal acts, are discussed would have to go. For instance, lessons about the eradication of the Native Americans would have to go, No Nürnberg trials, no Pearl Harbour or nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki... the list of things which can be considered immoral or that contains immoral acts is endless. We are a violent species.


3: "For instance, you would not want a teacher who used an example of how much children eat daily, and how much less they would need if you drowned some of them. You would not want to use the example of how many slaves you would need to buy to get a certain amount of acreage harvested."
3.1: Kids and food problem: See this.
Also it is simple arithmetic. Example: "You have X food and Y people. Every person Needs Z food per day and you can add F food per day that can be harvested from your farms. How many people can you have without them starving?" What is the problem with a problem like this? Basic civilization survival is based on this formula. Natural resources - consumption/person = Sustainability/Starvation

3.2: Slave problem: Obsolete as slaves are inefficient compared to modern automated machines. Who would use slave labour when you could use a robot that never fucks up (unless you use Windows ofc.), never needs to sleep, never demands pay and never complains? Technological progress FTE (For The Emancipation )


4: "The context implies approval of the activities specified"
4.1: What context and why would it imply approval? That it was a lesson in a school? So if I bring up the attack on WTC in a lesson and how it was executed it means that I approve of the actions? (I guess that Nicolas Cage and a lot of other people who were in the movies about the attacks all support it then?) If I let my students calculate the forces that were subjected on the buildings from the planes mass M and its speed V + the force of the fuel exploding or the McVeigh bombing and the force that X amount of explosives generate I approve what they did? I abhor all use of violence but if I use these examples I approve of them? That makes no sense to me.

One of the best things you can do as a teacher is to ground your lessons in reality and real life events as that increases the motivation and curiosity of the students IMHO.


5: "This was a geometry lesson, not a socio-politcal discussion. It was not intended to raise a topic for thoughtful debate."
5.1: As a teacher, no matter what your subject is, you have to be able to lead discussions on tough subjects as students can come in from recess and something horrible has happened and they need to process it and be "debriefed", think every classroom in the US the hours after 9/11 or after Columbine. If a student is assaulted/gets hit by a car/whatever you have to be able to have a discussion about it.

5.2: If a meaningful debate emerges from any lesson that interests your students you run with it. Simple as that. Learning and developing a lust for learning is the main goal of any teacher worthy of that title in my book.

Wow, that was a serious wall of text. Congrats on getting through it!

*edit for getting the + to show... forgot to put in extra blank spaces...

@LarsaruS you went into wall of text mode to defend a teacher who wanted to give a geometry lesson about how to assassinate the President.

Here's a list of reasons why there's a fuss, since you think this is totally defensible.

1. Killing people is bad
   
2. Using violence to influence politics is bad
   
3. Teaching a bunch of kids that 1 and 2 are actually okay by implication is bad
   

1.1.1 You are correct, some word problems are completely generic and are simply translations of math into English. But the kind we are talking about relate math to the real world. Here is an example:



If you have never had a word problem like this, you had a really lousy education.

2.2.2 We are talking about a math class. Say it with me: MATH. Specifically, geometry. GEOMETRY. This is not the forum to discuss law, history, HBTQ rights, Native Americans, Nürnberg, Pearl Harbour, etc. Those topics are excellent for their appropriate classes, such as history and sociology, not in a math class.

3.1.1 Your example supports my point. You took an immoral topic (the deliberate murder of children), and changed into a moral topic (how much food needed to prevent starvation). You see, killing children is bad, preventing starvation is good. Easy to tell the difference, right?

3.2.1 I'm going to assume you are joking now.

4.1.1 The examples you provided are also completely inappropriate for math class. Those are not "interesting topics", they are traumatic tragedies. They would distract from the lesson rather than encouraging focus.

5.1.1 That is simply not true. A good teacher keeps the class on-topic, or nothing would get done. If a student recently suffered a trauma and was not able to focus on work, they should go to the school nurse or counselor.

5.2.1 If the students are eager to discuss a topic that can be worked into a lesson appropriate to the class, then great, run with it. If it is not appropriate to the class and the teacher runs with it, the students will start to manipulate the teacher into class discussions rather than the necessary lessons. I have seen this happen on a number of occasions, but fortunately the teacher was intelligent enough to recognize what was happening and bring the class back to the lesson.

I apologize if I seem rude, but you seem to lack the fundamental sense of appropriateness for a school lesson. Though it is certainly appropriate to discuss emotionally charged topics in history, sociology, or ethics classes, topics in math classes should be emotionally and politically neutral so that the students will stay focused on the math.

@NetRunner this wall of text of mine was not to defend that teacher but rather to get some answers for some questions I had about MaxWilder's post. But to clarify my stance, using your numbers:

1. Completely agree with you.
2. Completely agree with you again, that is called terrorism iirc.
3. In principle you are absolutely correct. Here though I don't see the implied notion that it is ok as there is not enough context to know how the lesson was and what words were used. If there is a source that I have missed regarding this that shows that he, the teacher, advocates it I will then of course condemn the man/his actions.

I am pro-Obama for the record, I believe he was the best president you could get at the time. If he was assasinated it would be a great loss for not only the US but the world as he has brought the US away from being so isolationistic. If McCain had won you would probably be in 3 wars now and since he is old and frail he might have died in office and I shudder in fear at the notion of Sarah Palin with nuclear launch codes. But then again global warming would probably not be a threat anymore as we would have a nuclear winter to worry about instead but that is off topic...

*edit for trying to get a fubar'ed quote to work. Doesn't seem to work for some reason... maybe it is the @ above that does it?

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/LarsaruS" title="member since December 27th, 2009" class="profilelink">LarsaruS you went into wall of text mode to defend a teacher who wanted to give a geometry lesson about how to assassinate the President.
Here's a list of reasons why there's a fuss, since you think this is totally defensible.

1. Killing people is bad
   
2. Using violence to influence politics is bad
   
3. Teaching a bunch of kids that 1 and 2 are actually okay by implication is bad
   

@MaxWilder
In your post you were talking in generic terms about what should and should not be allowed to be taught in school, not just in a math class. That was what I reacted against and how I answered your post. As you said "It is not appropriate to use immoral acts as the content of school lessons, no matter what the specific act may be" Using broad generalisations is a dangerous thing to do.
On to the rebuttals/clarifications:

1.1.1 Thank you and I agree.

2.1.1 No answer here?

2.2.2 In the video up top it is, I was not discussing that but rather the things you claimed in you post. As my post began: "Ok, I have a couple of issues with your post." emphasis here is on your post. Not what happened in a school lesson somewhere else.

3.1.1 Actually I believe I proved your point was faulty. You claimed that "you would not want a teacher who used an example of how much children eat daily, and how much less they would need if you drowned some of them." and then you agree that there is nothing wrong with a problem like that. Or maybe it has to do with the wording of the problem? So you might have a point here.

3.2.1 Yes, I was. All work and no play makes people go postal... Also it is true. Robots > Humans

4.1.1 Yes, they would be better in a physics class, I agree. Perhaps it is still too fresh in the memories of some so it would be a distraction but it is up to the teacher to know his/her class and what they can handle. It is not up to a mandate somewhere banning the mentioning of these events in school which I interpret is what you want based on your post.

5.1.1 I guess we have a difference of opinion there. It happens. Not only the student who had an accident can be affected by it (Damn you empathy! Damn you to hell! ) so would you send an entire school or an entire class to the counsellor? There is only so much space in one office and 24 hours in a day.

5.2.1 You have a point here, yes. If you always go off the books then your students will fail once finals/national tests happen as you will not have done anything in the topic they were supposed to be learning in. If you go off on an important discussion once in a while I don't see the harm in it. People are lazy and don't want to do stuff unless it interests them in some way and not all students love all subjects. However I said: "Learning and developing a lust for learning is the main goal of any teacher worthy of that title in my book." and I stand by it. If you can plant that seed in a student they will continue to learn new things until the day they die even if they flunk out.


Also: Thank you for the link to the yourteacher.com site. Very good stuff. And I don't see you as rude. We are having an open and public debate and are having some problems with miscommunications and misunderstandings. In a forum like this it is hard to self-correct/explain more if someone misunderstands something or if someone is not clear enough as you can't answer questions instantly. It happens.

>> ^IronDwarf:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.


I'm saying it's not OK to use anyone.