If They Don't Like Red On Their Paper They Should Do Better Work--posted by Tony Garcia on 4/03/2005
This story drives me insane. I do not know what is worse, the fact that there are adults that buy into this nonsense or that the nonsense is growing like the bubonic plague. But then again, if they are right about the subliminal effects then this may be good for the GOP.
...The Good Old Days...
Remember having your school papers "painted" in red? I do. It was embarrassing. And it made me as well as my classmates strive to do better to avoid that horrible experience. Red stood out. That is the purpose of using...so that the student could easily see what needed rectification.
"The color has become so symbolic of negativity that some principals and teachers will not touch it." That is good. If you see a bunch of negativity on your paper you should try harder in the future.
The kids today are coddled. That is doing more harm than good. Joseph Foriska, principal of Thaddeus Stevens Elementary in Pittsburgh has instructed his teachers to grade with colors featuring more "pleasant-feeling tones" so that their instructional messages do not come across as derogatory or demeaning.
Give me a break. The purpose of using red is to make the mistakes stand out...make it eye-catching. That is all. All of the negativity that may be associated with it is a bonus to the effectiveness of grading a paper.
...The Real Motivation Of Teachers...
There is something deeper in this entire discussion, quite possibly. This is a new phenomenon (at least I have not heard of this before 2003). So is the entire blue-state/red-state crap. Given the dedication to the far left that the teachers generally hold and given the constant barrage of indoctrination of the kids to socialist ideals (global warming, GLBT acceptance, etc) I would posit that this is an effort to remove "red" from the subconscious of the classrooms.
You see, if the teachers really believe in the subliminal abilities of color (the whole 'purple is more pleasant-feeling' premise) then why would they also not think that the removal of "red" entirely might make children less conscience of "red"? Without the red influence at all in the class children may be less inclined to pay attention to the red side of a blue-state/red-state discussion. They may be more inclined to tune out all things "red".
Sounds like a stretch of a good premise? Possibly. I would further posit that while the far-left teachers attempt to remove all things "red" from existence in schools they are actually thinking too deeply on this.
...The Actual Subliminal Message...
Let's accept the premise that there is a subtle connection between "red" ink in the classroom and acceptance of "red" ideas (when so labeled in the general public). I think that the red-ink-is-negative actually leads kids to detest whatever is labeled "red"...including ideas labeled as "red-state" philosophy.
Therefore by not allowing red ink to be used when correcting papers in school will actually diminish the connection between "red" and "negativity" (if it actually exists). Thus when kids hear a discussion between "blue-state" ideas and "red-state" ideas they will not be predisposed to associate "negativity" with "red".
So as I see it banning the red ink will help the Conservative movement...assuming that there really is a deeper meaning to the ink used to tell a student that they suck.