One of the questions that persisted recently is whether to mine public sentiments over current events that affect the education community in Houston and the greater world. Recently I mined the affect of covid-19, and the decision to go online versus staying in schools and teaching methodologies (the article can be found at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276511), and this proved to be an essential scientific journey as it found that there were several contentions at play. The sentiment also indicated emotional divisions between groups as well.
But is such an exercise important, and what does it mean to do it? With the recent push in politics to have parental voices push back on the curriculum, there has not been a more important time in vox populi as it affects what might be included and excluded in the curriculum. Parental voices have reached a tipping point in what goes on in some states. While this blog and its writer stay neutral on what side of the politics the result has achieved, it is believed that the very phenomenon of parental voice and movement into the public education sector has almost required taking a pulse of what is happening in the hearts and minds of people's sentiments on ideas that have reached critical mass in the public eye.
One recent example is the issue of teaching about Michelangelo's David. The lesson has brought many different voices to the fore and raised the issue of parents and their voices in the curriculum outrightly. It poignantly asks: What is the role of parents in the curriculum? How much pull does a small cadre of agents have in deciding what gets taught and what gets omitted in the education of a large group of students? And should some voices carry the decision for others? What is the reactionary fallout?
A preliminary view of scraped tweets between March and May 2023 reveals 10+ frequently tweeted words below: