Mom in Va. who lived through Cultural Revolution addresses school board regarding Critical Race Theory

[Sneezyone]

Just now, Clemsondana said:

I read the quote in a discussion elsewhere, but when I searched it I came up with this...  https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87R/billtext/html/HB03979E.htm

So, basically, the preamble to the draft bill. The text of the bill on the governor’s desk doesn’t support those statements. At all. It significantly and meaningfully discourages civic engagement and knowledge.

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

I consider one of the best things we did in homeschooling to be that, during middle school years, I sourced high school textbooks, in English, from every country that I could find, and we read world history from that viewpoint. And yes, US texts were unusual because there was far less criticism and outright censure of beliefs and ideas. Even US high school texts that talked about events that have not held up to the test of time, like, say. The Trail of Tears mostly avoided censuring the actual people involved. In comparison, UK, Australian, Canadian, India, Singapore, South Africa, etc texts absolutely did point out that there were people who just plain were wrong and did bad things, and that some of them were leaders and officials. British history books, especially, were full of “well, this king was bad for this reason”. In a lot of ways, it was refreshing, because, after all, these countries that admit to having been under the leadership of less than ideal people who made decisions that are pretty appalling at times are still hanging in there and did pretty well. 

 

Much of what the 1619 project wanted included in US history was already there in texts from other countries. Both Canada and Australia, in particular, included a lot of detail on mistreatment of indigenous populations. South Africa had a LOT of discussion of Apartheid and the difficulties faced and problems made (and that one was significant in that, while most of the other texts I was able to source were designed for public schools and often published by government agencies or at least matched Government created syllabi and exams, the SA one I was able to get was explicitly for Christian schools). 
 

And, honestly, seeing what got covered of US history in other country’s World history textbooks was eye opening as well. Because it is really easy to get the impression, in US schools, that the whole world revolves around us, and that other countries are just sitting back waiting for us to do stuff. Nope. The entire US colonization and revolution rated about half a page in a UK history textbook, along with various other colonizations and revolutions. India was a lot more historically significant. Australian texts did a much better job of covering WWII, IMO, than the US ones. 
 

It was rather embarrassing to realize how little I knew. 

 

And, one thing I noted when we visited a municipal library in a suburb of Sydney that was pretty obviously designed for school reports and pleasure reading -it had a MUCH more detailed and in depth history section than I’m used to. In particular, the US history collection far outweighed what a good US university library would have on Australian history. 
 

It absolutely terrifies me that the answer in the US is that “kids are uncomfortable, so don’t talk about it at all”. Because going just by textbooks, a kid who is using a book published by Pearson or Holt is already getting a much more limited and glossed over view than one using one published by Cambridge or by the education office in Singapore or India. 
 

 

100% agreed! My sister used to bring home the world history text from the high school she was teaching at in Caen, France. She would find sections that she really wanted our sons to know about, translate it, and send to me in email attachments. The boys were always so amazed at how brutally honest they were about their own history, the insights were vital. When we spent time in Egypt, we tried to have open discussions - well, we just did a lot of listening - about history and current events. It was pretty amazing to hear the other side, to understand what the US, Russia, etc. have been up to in the region. It isn't pretty.

I sourced college texts for high school, and tried as much as possible to get them out of Oxford, Cambridge, etc. Pearson and friends produce propaganda. And don't start me on Christian curricula like A.C.E., Bob Jones, Veritas Press, etc. which teach that Columbus came to the Americas solely to spread the gospel and did a lot of good, that Native American souls were saved on the Trail of Tears because god works all things for good, and that most slave owners were wonderfully benevolent and the slave/owner relationship was beneficial. If this is going to be a nation that bans children from hearing crap, this is exactly the place to begin!

[Laura Corin]

2 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

Because it is really easy to get the impression, in US schools, that the whole world revolves around us, and that other countries are just sitting back waiting for us to do stuff. Nope. The entire US colonization and revolution rated about half a page in a UK history textbook, along with various other colonizations and revolutions. India was a lot more historically significant. 

I remember on these boards one poster suggesting that the reason that the loss of the American lands was lightly covered in UK school textbooks was national embarrassment. I did have a think about that, but actually the embarrassment, the horror is engendered by the creation of empire, not its loss. America was just one part of those old pink-shaded maps and what they represented. 

Eta when I was at school we were not taught much about Empire and slavery. Even though I grew up in Bristol, a port city founded on slave-trade wealth. Thankfully curricula have changed.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Laura Corin

[SKL]

6 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

 

Oklahoma’s new law, http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22 ENR/hB/HB1775 ENR.PDF says: 

"No enrolled student of an institution of higher education within The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education shall be required to engage in any form of mandatory gender or sexual diversity training or counseling; provided, voluntary counseling shall not be prohibited. Any orientation or requirement that presents any form of race or sex stereotyping or a bias on the basis of race or sex shall be prohibited"

It also says WRT K-12 that no teachers should be required to have professional development training, or teach any class where:

"any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex, or"

• Does this permit the university to require a course in culturally responsive teaching as part of its teacher licensing programs? I think the answer to that is no.
• "Presents" You cannot even discuss the topic because then it's presented in class.
• Does this mean that university disciplinary boards cannot require any form of inclusion workshop as part of its recommendations when student codes of conduct are violated like, say, nooses are hung in dorm rooms? Probably. Is the unintended consequence that more students will simply be suspended or expelled if 'rehabilitation' isn't an option? Maybe.
• Further, how does one prevent all students from having these feelings? I provided my own example with Mr. Twain so out he goes. The previous example in art class is also a good one. Seeing the art and hearing other students' commentary may also engender feelings of distress and anguish. Out it goes too.
• Teachers aren't going to wait to be challenged or sued, risk their jobs and/or license over this. They're going to expunge anything even remotely challenging from their courses. Private schools are going to ignore the whole thing and keep doing what they do, teaching all of the things, leaving public students even more in the dark.

I could go on with the other states...maybe someone else can pick one or two. I have a few more classes to teach this morning. These laws are written to prohibit feelings, not just statements or content, but explicitly prohibit feelings from emerging. Tell me how that's compatible with education?

I'm just gonna focus on the race part of this.  It does sound really vague and confusing in the single partial sentence you included above.  It also isn't clear (to me) whether they are saying the teachers are not required to teach such a class, or not allowed to teach such a class.

So this is Oklahoma, and the snippet you included related to race sounds confusing and possibly unworkable.  I don't feel like I know enough to comment though.  I suspect there is more language that would clarify the partial sentence above.

[Sneezyone]

16 minutes ago, SKL said:

I'm just gonna focus on the race part of this.  It does sound really vague and confusing in the single partial sentence you included above.  It also isn't clear (to me) whether they are saying the teachers are not required to teach such a class, or not allowed to teach such a class.

So this is Oklahoma, and the snippet you included related to race sounds confusing and possibly unworkable.  I don't feel like I know enough to comment though.  I suspect there is more language that would clarify the partial sentence above.

You don’t need to read the snippet, you can follow the link and read the whole thing in context. It is a ban. It prohibits content. It’s less than two pages, double spaced, 12 pt. TNR so it’s hard to select more than I did without copying the entire law. 🙄 The plain language is there. It is prohibited to require future teachers to learn about or engage in culturally responsive teaching.

ETA: for a moment, let’s game out what this could mean. A state could, theoretically, say that structural engineers don’t need to know about material strength and ban instruction in the subject. Crazy, right? It’s compelled learning, compelled speech. That’s the equivalent. Something necessary and critical to doing the job skillfully is being banned.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

5 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Question about the bolded for the non-Americans - I dated a Canadian guy abut 15 years ago and he told me that only Americans were taught that our country was the best. Before he said that to me, I'd never considered before that I'd been taught that. I remember pushing back. Surely every kid in the world learns that their country is the best and their system of government is ideal, right? According to him - no. 

Why do our kids start their day with the Pledge of Allegiance? Is that still a thing everywhere in the USA? 

I think you're right - the way we do civics and history in the USA is weird. On one hand, "we're the best!" and then the next day, more history about terrible things done in the USA. Obviously we're not the best. We're not better at democracy than everyone else. Why do we feel like we need to teach our kids that our system of government is the best?

Do most American adults actually believe that the USA is better than other countries? IDK. I find that hard to believe but it's not something that I would discuss with most people. 

When adults complain about something related to children, it often means that they're uncomfortable with some social change and it's not actually about the specific thing they're complaining about. 

1) I don't think it was expressly taught in my school experience that the US is the "best," but I do think that kids are naturally wired to think "we [our family, our community, our sports team, our country] are the best."  Back during the space race, I think this was a bigger thing, and it stemmed from a fear of the growing power of communist countries in those days.

2) Those friends of mine born outside the US, whom I have known well enough to discuss this with, definitely came out of school believing that either their country was the best (China) or the USSR was the best (India, who was under a lot of Russian influence for decades).  Can't say too much about other countries.  I would note that if you're talking to people from Europe, there are a couple differences there - for one, there is a lot more intercourse among individuals in/from other European countries, due to the size/proximity, the relatively open borders for travel and economy, etc.  Two, the borders in Europe have been changing significantly even in the past 100 years.  So it does not surprise me that the sense of national identity would develop somewhat differently.

3) The only time I really ever hear anyone talking about how the US is better is in reaction to others talking about how the US sucks.  It seems a primitive but not unexpected response.

[SKL]

4 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I was born in the 1970s and was always taught that the Civil War was about slavery. I grew up in a conservative school district. We skipped the evolution chapter in high school Biology. My parents say they were taught the same thing in their segregated Texas schools. 

But when DD was in the 1st grade, she comes home from school and tells me that the Civil War wasn't about slavery. Huh? I constantly see that claim today. 

I think things are actually worse today than when I was in school. We skipped the evolution chapter in 9th grade biology. Does the current textbook have an evolution chapter? IDK. 

Slavery was only one factor in the Civil War.

I have no idea what they are teaching in primary school.  I feel like they could just skip the whole science and social studies curriculum through 4th or 5th grade and kids would come out knowing just as much.

[Wheres Toto]

One of the few things I've always remembered from history in school was Manifest Destiny - that the US had the God-given right to expand.  I feel like that definitely projects a vibe of "rah rah USA is the best".   I didn't get a truer understanding of history until college.

My always homeschooled 13 year old is way more aware of the issues and problems with the US and the world than I was until well into my 30's.  Today's kids definitely have a very different way of looking at things and are way more civically minded and involved.  IMO/IME.   They also seem way more likely to call BS on things, even to their teachers/adults/authority figures. 

[Laura Corin]

No,  I was not taught that the UK was the best country. A politician will occasionally say something like that,  but I think the sentiment causes most people to cringe. 

It seems like an odd way to think. Best in what sense? And how could one know? 

I do feel very lucky to have experienced what the UK can offer - some - residents. 

[SKL]

So back to the bans ... from what I can gather from the quotes here and what little I've heard elsewhere (I am working on a big work deadline these days), there are badly written laws being proposed/passed in response to badly written laws/proposals.  Not really anything new IMO.

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

So back to the bans ... from what I can gather from the quotes here and what little I've heard elsewhere (I am working on a big work deadline these days), there are badly written laws being proposed/passed in response to badly written laws/proposals.  Not really anything new IMO.

Unfortunately, the consequences are a generation of educators more poorly equipped to teach their diverse learners and a nation of dying old people with fewer competent replacements. Winning!

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

8 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

One of the few things I've always remembered from history in school was Manifest Destiny - that the US had the God-given right to expand.  I feel like that definitely projects a vibe of "rah rah USA is the best".   I didn't get a truer understanding of history until college.

My always homeschooled 13 year old is way more aware of the issues and problems with the US and the world than I was until well into my 30's.  Today's kids definitely have a very different way of looking at things and are way more civically minded and involved.  IMO/IME.   They also seem way more likely to call BS on things, even to their teachers/adults/authority figures. 

We learned that "manifest destiny" was a principal that was applied at a certain time in past history, not during modern times.

I am not saying the way they taught us was best.  It definitely glossed over important things, either because the writers/teachers were also ignorant, or to avoid going into uncomfortable territory.  I think it's a little better now, but not a ton better.  I have always made efforts to provide age-appropriate info/context at home.

[SKL]

6 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Unfortunately, the consequences are a generation of educators more poorly equipped to teach their diverse learners and a nation of dying old people with fewer competent replacements. Winning!

Well if it's any comfort, most young people entering teacher education programs are less culturally ignorant than the average education students of past generations, thanks to the internet, more natural integration in schools, more culturally sensitive modern literature, and so on.  So I really think things will get better regardless of those reactionary laws (which probably won't last long).

And there are still tons of wonderful teachers who will do the right thing some way or other.

Edited June 15, 2021 by SKL

[Sneezyone]

Just now, SKL said:

Well if it's any comfort, most young people entering teacher education programs are less culturally ignorant than the average education students of past generations (on average), thanks to the internet, more natural integration in schools, more culturally sensitive modern literature, and so on.  So I really think things will get better regardless of those reactionary laws (which probably won't last long).

And there are still tons of wonderful teachers who will do the right thing some way or other.

From your brain to God’s ears. I’m not holding my breath tho. I think we’re likely to see it stick in K-12.

[Paige]

19 minutes ago, SKL said:

Slavery was only one factor in the Civil War.

I have no idea what they are teaching in primary school.  I feel like they could just skip the whole science and social studies curriculum through 4th or 5th grade and kids would come out knowing just as much.

Slavery and the resentment and anger that disputes about it had raised between slave/free states for years was the primary reason for the Civil War. It is evident in each of their Declarations of Independence from the Union, although some say it more directly than others. I had to relearn this as an adult, however. I was taught in a KY HS that it was about states' rights, but that was a distortion of the truth. My teacher, who in most other ways was a good teacher, impressed upon us all that slavery was actually not the main cause at all! It's a shame. I'm not all that old, we weren't a confederate state, and there's no excuse for it to have been the reason given for the war in an AP class! And you know what? My DS was taught exactly the same thing in his APUSH class a couple years ago. States' Rights? The right of states to do what.....

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

As for the bolded- I completely agree. The only use early social studies and science have is for instilling a love of those subjects, IMO. I think that's a worthy goal, but the focus on facts seems to be a waste of time- kids will 100% forget which is why they learn it again in middle and high school. I think for bright kids who actually remember, it does some harm as they feel it is dull and repetitive and they tend to tune out in HS, when they're actually really ready to think about it, because they think they know it all already.

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

Do you have any context for this quote? A link? The law, currently on the Gov’s desk, doesn’t support this statement. How do you teach ‘morality’ to middle and high school students without discussion of the ways people have been sorted and marginalized? It’s ironic that this quote includes ‘civic knowledge’ too when the proposed law specifically discourages hands-on civic engagement.

I think the distinction is that teaching about the KKK, slavery, and racism, as unfortunate artifacts of the past is ok. Teaching about how it still affects society today is the problem because it opens many cans of worms. How can we have problems today without discussing the causes, what factors contribute to its continuance, who benefits, etc? 

Teaching morality without those discussions is also easy. It's like the character traits of the month for elementary school. They will talk about honesty, integrity, compassion, great American heroes, and all of that will be taught on a micro level without touching on any macro/systemic issues. 

[SKL]

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

You don’t need to read the snippet, you can follow the link and read the whole thing in context. It is a ban. It prohibits content. It’s less than two pages, double spaced, 12 pt. TNR so it’s hard to select more than I did without copying the entire law. 🙄 The plain language is there. It is prohibited to require future teachers to learn about or engage in culturally responsive teaching.

ETA: for a moment, let’s game out what this could mean. A state could, theoretically, say that structural engineers don’t need to know about material strength and ban instruction in the subject. Crazy, right? It’s compelled learning, compelled speech. That’s the equivalent. Something necessary and critical to doing the job skillfully is being banned.

I haven't had time to go to the link (I am gonna get in trouble for not finishing some legal documents as it is).  But most of what you quoted was not a ban on teaching, but a requirement that those who don't want to participate in certain activities be allowed to opt out without being punished.

[Dmmetler]

I am wondering if this is going to limit general Ed options for those going for teacher Ed as well. The class my teen took DE was in the sociology department, but a majority of the kids taking it were either planning for careers in education or in social work. I know that the exceptional education class my teen took last semester included discussion of similar issues and how they can impact special education and diagnosis of same. Children's an adolescent lit classes often involve reading and discussing literature that explicitly focuses on such issues. Would it be possible to read "Roll of Thunder, Hear Me Cry" or "The Hate U Give" in a literature class in a state with such a ban, either for prospective teachers, or in their future classroom? The Hate U Give was the single book named as most influential by incoming students at the private college my kid is attending in the fall, which has a major social justice focus,  and almost all the kids read it at school. 

 

I'm also concerned about potential fall out at the college level, like, say, for state HBCUs. There have already been situations where restrictions that were supposed to reduce discrimination limit funding for such institutions, to the detriment of their students. 

[SKL]

I think if I were presented with a book banning, I would inform the students on day one "these are some banned books that I'm not allowed to assign.  Nobody can stop you from reading them on your own though.  Or discussing them amongst yourselves outside of assigned classwork."

[Sneezyone]

23 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

I am wondering if this is going to limit general Ed options for those going for teacher Ed as well. The class my teen took DE was in the sociology department, but a majority of the kids taking it were either planning for careers in education or in social work. I know that the exceptional education class my teen took last semester included discussion of similar issues and how they can impact special education and diagnosis of same. Children's an adolescent lit classes often involve reading and discussing literature that explicitly focuses on such issues. Would it be possible to read "Roll of Thunder, Hear Me Cry" or "The Hate U Give" in a literature class in a state with such a ban, either for prospective teachers, or in their future classroom? The Hate U Give was the single book named as most influential by incoming students at the private college my kid is attending in the fall, which has a major social justice focus,  and almost all the kids read it at school. 

 

I'm also concerned about potential fall out at the college level, like, say, for state HBCUs. There have already been situations where restrictions that were supposed to reduce discrimination limit funding for such institutions, to the detriment of their students. 

Same. As you know, my daughter is strongly considering attending an HBCU to feel less ‘on the spot’ and more ‘normal’, also to have a more nurturing and supportive learning environment. My collegiate friends have children who are considering this option as well. They’ve long been underfunded but I’d hate to see the curriculum also circumscribed by malign actors.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

7 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think if I were presented with a book banning, I would inform the students on day one "these are some banned books that I'm not allowed to assign.  Nobody can stop you from reading them on your own though.  Or discussing them amongst yourselves outside of assigned classwork."

C’mon, you know that’s not a thing. Most kids hate to read and barely get through the assigned content.

[Pen]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

Slavery was only one factor in the Civil War.

I have no idea what they are teaching in primary school.  I feel like they could just skip the whole science and social studies curriculum through 4th or 5th grade and kids would come out knowing just as much.

before we homeschooled we tried two different brick and mortar schools, at each of which my ds was the most obviously PoC child in the class...  the biggest problem imo was not what was said or taught as curriculum, but what was done. Particularly at his Waldorf school, there were some actual discrimination issues going on very different than the espoused words.  I would rather have a Dont teach “about” racism, and rather actually treat all the children as equally deserving regardless of external skin, eye, and hair color (and also as equally deserving whether or not their parents drive a Mercedes and are presumed likely to donate $$$) 

[Pam in CT]

re legislative bans superseding...

1 hour ago, SKL said:

So back to the bans ... from what I can gather from the quotes here and what little I've heard elsewhere (I am working on a big work deadline these days), there are badly written laws being proposed/passed in response to badly written laws/proposals.  Not really anything new IMO.

Was there actual legislation or proposed legislation that actually required.... these programs that have been rhetorically labeled "CRT"... in any of the states now legislatively restricting the programs along with a vastly wider set of content?

Or just individual schools implementing clunky / ill-advised programs that -- after Rufo & Tucker & Co started beating the drumbeat -- parents started complaining about?

I didn't follow all the links, but all the ones I did follow spoke to *particular schools* implementing clunky-programs-mislabeled-as-CRT.  No state legislation that *required* them.

 

A town or district BoE decision to change curriculum in response to parent feedback in a particular district is a very different thing than these statewide bans that -- weirdly -- have popped up in thirty states, all at the same time, in the six months since Rufo started whispering in his buddies' ears and a swansong Executive Order was issued.

[MercyA]

On 6/11/2021 at 1:33 PM, Plum said:

America is known as the land of opportunity. Everyone has a shot here. Are there no minorities that have come from nothing and become successful?

But not everyone has the *same* shot.

[Deleted the rest; didn't express myself well!]

Edited June 16, 2021 by MercyA

[MercyA]

On 6/11/2021 at 4:25 PM, Pam in CT said:

(whose participants, it seems relevant to note now that the thread has moved on to questioning whether white supremacy really is a threat today, toted Confederate flags along with their Camp Auschwitz hoodies and swastikas.)

Right? If anyone thinks white supremacy isn't rearing its ugly head right now, they need to come to my neck of the woods. I see Confederate flags everywhere. On car bumpers, hats, and t-shirts, flying from the back of trucks, hanging in people's garages. And the idea that's it's "Southern pride" is a bit ridiculous, since I live in northern Indiana.

Actually, every year at our town's fair there is a vendor selling (among other things) Confederate merchandise. I'm going to try to get pictures this year. Debating whether I want to raise a stink. I'm all for free speech, but I'm sure vendors need to be approved by the town and I hardly think it makes for a welcoming environment for all. 😠 Honestly I think it's disgusting.

[Carol in Cal.]

2 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

C’mon, you know that’s not a thing. Most kids hate to read and barely get through the assigned content.

This is patently false.  Lots of kids love to read, and having suggestions that sound like a dare are enticing.  That would have totally worked for me and most of my good friends in high school and college, despite majoring in a STEM field.  We would totally have wanted to know what the fuss was about.

[MercyA]

On 6/11/2021 at 5:39 PM, Frances said:

Unfortunately I don’t have a hard time believing much of what is done in some elementary schools is not age appropriate. And not just assignments and lessons, but things like very little recess, lots of seat time, and no talking at lunch.

WTH? This is a thing? What in the world. 😞 

[Carol in Cal.]

3 hours ago, SKL said:

Slavery was only one factor in the Civil War.

I have no idea what they are teaching in primary school.  I feel like they could just skip the whole science and social studies curriculum through 4th or 5th grade and kids would come out knowing just as much.

While the first paragraph is technically true, slavery was the dominant and precipitating factor in the Civil War.  

The issue of states rights is interesting.  It goes back to whether the US is a nation or a confederation of mostly independent countries called states.  But the precipitating issue of the question being raised at the time of the Civil War was whether the states had a mutual aid obligation to consider ‘foreign’ slaves to be property or not, and the overall morality of considering people to be property at all.  

 

[Pam in CT]

re symbols of white supremacy, and "distress" to students based on their race

7 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Right? If anyone thinks white supremacy isn't rearing its ugly head right now, they need to come to my neck of the woods. I see Confederate flags everywhere. On car bumpers, hats, and t-shirts, flying from the back of trucks, hanging in people's garages. And the idea that's it's "Southern pride" is a bit ridiculous, since I live in northern Indiana.

Actually, every year at our town's fair there is a vendor selling (among other things) Confederate merchandise. I'm going to try to get pictures this year. Debating whether I want to raise a stink. I'm all for free speech, but I'm sure vendors need to be approved by the town and I hardly think it makes for a welcoming environment for all. 😠 Honestly I think it's disgusting.

Well, I dunno if Indiana has yet instituted a CRT ban, but if so you might try appealing, on the grounds that a symbol used consistently since the 1860s to promote the "superiority" of one race and instill "distress" on another is illegal under the ban.

Just.Sayin'.

 

 

 

 

 

[For realz, I mostly support the 1A right of white supremacists to tote their vile supremacist symbols in most spaces. I'd argue about school spaces, though.  If we're going to ban 1619 material in K-12 spaces, I'd make the case we can ban Confederate material too.

Consistent principles and all that.]

[Sneezyone]

15 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

This is patently false.  Lots of kids love to read, and having suggestions that sound like a dare are enticing.  That would have totally worked for me and most of my good friends in high school and college, despite majoring in a STEM field.  We would totally have wanted to know what the fuss was about.

*We*, on this forum, do not represent the vast majority of Americans, let alone American youth in public schools.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Catwoman]

24 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Right? If anyone thinks white supremacy isn't rearing its ugly head right now, they need to come to my neck of the woods. I see Confederate flags everywhere. On car bumpers, hats, and t-shirts, flying from the back of trucks, hanging in people's garages. And the idea that's it's "Southern pride" is a bit ridiculous, since I live in northern Indiana.

Actually, every year at our town's fair there is a vendor selling (among other things) Confederate merchandise. I'm going to try to get pictures this year. Debating whether I want to raise a stink. I'm all for free speech, but I'm sure vendors need to be approved by the town and I hardly think it makes for a welcoming environment for all. 😠 Honestly I think it's disgusting.

If you raise a stink, they might threaten to shoot you.

I’m only half kidding.

I think it’s disgusting, too, but you could be setting yourself up for trouble if you protest, unless you think a lot of the other residents will back you up.

 I know that protesting that vendor is the right thing to do,  but I would be concerned for your safety. 

[Melissa Louise]

3 hours ago, SKL said:

Well if it's any comfort, most young people entering teacher education programs are less culturally ignorant than the average education students of past generations, thanks to the internet, more natural integration in schools, more culturally sensitive modern literature, and so on.  So I really think things will get better regardless of those reactionary laws (which probably won't last long).

And there are still tons of wonderful teachers who will do the right thing some way or other.

I think this is not necessarily true.

While no generation can be stereotyped as a whole, more recent generations are less enthusiastic about democracy, and more likely to endorse authoritarian attitudes than the generations preceding them. 

That leads me to think the risk of more illiberal  teaching is present. 

 

Edited June 15, 2021 by Melissa Louise
Changed reactionary to illiberal

[Carol in Cal.]

14 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re symbols of white supremacy, and "distress" to students based on their race

Well, I dunno if Indiana has yet instituted a CRT ban, but if so you might try appealing, on the grounds that a symbol used consistently since the 1860s to promote the "superiority" of one race and instill "distress" on another is illegal under the ban.

Just.Sayin'.

 

 

 

 

 

[For realz, I mostly support the 1A right of white supremacists to tote their vile supremacist symbols in most spaces. I'd argue about school spaces, though.  If we're going to ban 1619 material in K-12 spaces, I'd make the case we can ban Confederate material too.

Consistent principles and all that.]

Particularly since the Confederacy essentially declared themselves a foreign power and proceeded to lose a war against the US.  I have no sympathy whatsoever for glorifying it in any school.  

[Sneezyone]

31 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I think this is not necessarily true.

While no generation can be stereotyped as a whole, more recent generations are less enthusiastic about democracy, and more likely to endorse authoritarian attitudes than the generations preceding them. 

That leads me to think the risk of more illiberal  teaching is present. 

 

I agree with this too, not WRT to the teachers but to the youth. The lack of democratic (small D) progress on their priorities is leading to more authoritarian ideas. The kids do lean left  and what they’re watching is right-leaning cohorts behave in illiberal ways. If folks think that won’t be turned around when they have power, well, I don’t know what to say. ://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/03/01/the-generation-gap-in-american-politics/. It makes it that much more crazy to stunt their knowledge and participation in the institutions of democracy now when they could be learning very different lessons about discussion and compromise. In so many, many ways, these proposals/rules/laws are all about short-term gain, long-term pain b/c but they’re demonstrating a willful disregard for public sentiment (no one here is supporting blanket bans) that will not be so comfy on the other foot.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[MercyA]

27 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

If you raise a stink, they might threaten to shoot you.

I’m only half kidding.

I think it’s disgusting, too, but you could be setting yourself up for trouble if you protest, unless you think a lot of the other residents will back you up.

 I know that protesting that vendor is the right thing to do,  but I would be concerned for your safety. 

You are so sweet, Cat. I appreciate your concern. ❤️

I know it could lead to trouble and if my DD wasn't still living at home I wouldn't care as much. Before I do anything I'll make sure to have a serious discussion with my DH. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by MercyA

[SKL]

39 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re symbols of white supremacy, and "distress" to students based on their race

Well, I dunno if Indiana has yet instituted a CRT ban, but if so you might try appealing, on the grounds that a symbol used consistently since the 1860s to promote the "superiority" of one race and instill "distress" on another is illegal under the ban.

Just.Sayin'.

 

 

 

 

 

[For realz, I mostly support the 1A right of white supremacists to tote their vile supremacist symbols in most spaces. I'd argue about school spaces, though.  If we're going to ban 1619 material in K-12 spaces, I'd make the case we can ban Confederate material too.

Consistent principles and all that.]

I agree that, while the legislative language I've seen isn't great, a lot of it could work both ways.  To the extent this language does pass / has passed into law, people of all persuasions should look at whether it creates opportunities for their causes.

[SKL]

41 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

*We*, on this forum, do not represent the vast majority of Americans, let alone American youth in public schools.

We may read more on average than the median American, but lots of young people do enjoy reading and do read beyond the curriculum.  In fact, it is not unlikely that a "banned book" read by some kids would make a bigger impact than the same book assigned to the whole class.  Because even readers may pay less attention to books their teachers assign vs. their own reading choices.

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, MercyA said:

Right? If anyone thinks white supremacy isn't rearing its ugly head right now, they need to come to my neck of the woods. I see Confederate flags everywhere. On car bumpers, hats, and t-shirts, flying from the back of trucks, hanging in people's garages. And the idea that's it's "Southern pride" is a bit ridiculous, since I live in northern Indiana.

Actually, every year at our town's fair there is a vendor selling (among other things) Confederate merchandise. I'm going to try to get pictures this year. Debating whether I want to raise a stink. I'm all for free speech, but I'm sure vendors need to be approved by the town and I hardly think it makes for a welcoming environment for all. 😠 Honestly I think it's disgusting.

Agreed! Come to my neck of the woods too. Michigan has a ton of this crap everywhere and very dangerous militia to back it up.

[Sneezyone]

11 minutes ago, SKL said:

We may read more on average than the median American, but lots of young people do enjoy reading and do read beyond the curriculum.  In fact, it is not unlikely that a "banned book" read by some kids would make a bigger impact than the same book assigned to the whole class.  Because even readers may pay less attention to books their teachers assign vs. their own reading choices.

Sure, I’m just very skeptical that pleasure reading is an effective national substitute for classroom instruction where history and civics are concerned.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Dmmetler]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

Sure, I’m just very skeptical that pleasure reading an effective substitute for classroom instruction where history and civics are concerned.

Not to mention that there is limited time, and if you are doing heavy academics, you're likely less likely to pick up a book for pleasure reading that is pretty heavy and thought provoking. 

 

The "read a banned book" campaigns are common in libraries, etc, and can be effective, but especially in K-12 schools can also have the effect of parents going to the school and requesting that such books be a) restricted such that they can only be checked out to students with parent permission b)removed from open stacks such that they will not be found by a student, but only available on request, or c)removed entirely. And, since funds are finite, few librarians are going to put their money into purchasing books that parents are likely to challenge. Public libraries usually have fewer restrictions, but again, funds are limited. 

 

 

[SKL]

8 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Sure, I’m just very skeptical that pleasure reading is an effective national substitute for classroom instruction where history and civics are concerned.

Personally I think it's probably about 50/50.  My high school history teacher's only goal was to get through the material he was given.  There was absolutely no discussion about anything.  He read summaries of the text off an overhead projector.  My civics teacher taught us about voting and tax returns and writing a check.  Actual discussion about serious issues occurred in the jr/sr optional courses.  I would also note that teachers in a lot of districts are conservative, so even if they did go outside the bare basics, it might not be in the direction you would prefer.

[Pam in CT]

re national dark money groups parachuting into small towns to whip up "CRT" panics so as to take control of school boards

30 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Forgive me if this link has already been shared here. 

This article talks about an advocacy group called No Left Turn in Education which appears to be involved in all of the examples cited in this thread. 

Critical race theory battle invades school boards - with the help from conservative groups

IIRC, the parents who testified at the school board hearing were in Loudon County, Virginia. 

In wealthy Loudoun County, Virginia, parents face threats in battle over equity in schools

This Twitter threads provides some additional details. 

 

 

Yeah, not surprised. That was what it looked like what Rufo and Tucker were laying the outraged "grass roots" groundwork for. 

For those who prefer linear articles (inc video clip) > twitter threads,

https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/conservative-dark-money-groups-disrupt-critical-race-theory-debate-114823237818

[Wheres Toto]

The younger people I know aren't necessarily less enthusiastic about democracy.  What I see is more cynicism about how democratic a nation we really are.   And a lot of that cynicism seems to stem from a real dislike and distrust of capitalism.  THAT is definitely where I see a lot of disdain.  

[Frances]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Agreed! Come to my neck of the woods too. Michigan has a ton of this crap everywhere and very dangerous militia to back it up.

Sadly, add my state to the list. 
https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2020/11/oregon-among-5-states-at-high-risk-for-militia-activity-around-the-elections.html

And also potentially significant silent supporters.

https://www.oregoncapitalinsider.com/news/white-extremist-views-rising-in-oregon-despite-majority-opposition-poll-finds/article_4a0c2f04-ca19-11eb-9d59-e33b1bdfc7f2.html

 

[Sneezyone]

The Texas legislation was just signed into law complete with a ban on class credit for civic engagement assignments.

[LucyStoner]

3 hours ago, MercyA said:

But not everyone has the *same* shot.

For example, America prioritized the immigration of highly educated people from Asia. Of course when you have engineers and doctors coming in, that's going to give them (and their future families) a huge advantage. And while Asians do and have faced prejudice, I'm not aware of data suggesting they are treated differently from whites in our court systems, for example.

ETA: Sorry, I know I'm way behind in this thread!

Immigration from Asia was historically quite restricted.  The very first immigration law to restrict immigration by nationality was specifically to exclude Chinese immigrants.  It almost entirely banned Chinese immigration from 1882 forwards. For quite sometime, we would allow some Chinese workers tacitly but we wouldn't allow them to bring their families.  Further, we specifically precluded first Chinese immigrants from becoming naturalized citizens and then Asians as a whole.  There was a lot of tension Asian immigration in the western United States - because mine owners and railroad barons wanted ever cheaper labor.  When Chinese immigration was banned, more Japanese and Indian laborers arrived. There were lynchings of Asian immigrants in the 19th century.  Wyoming, Colorado, California and Washington State had organized groups pressing to limit employment for Asians.  There were race riots targeting Asians in San Francisco and Washington State.  Around WW I, the exclusion act was expanded and basically applied to all of Asia.  Some states and territories, just as some tried to ban black people, tried to ban Asians.  Chinatowns and International Districts exist in part because Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and other Asians were just precluded from operating businesses in other parts of town.  The SCOTUS repeatedly upheld that they weren't eligible for citizenship. I could write a whole lot more but I'll cut it off here, lol.  

I have observed a subtle but real erasure of the experiences faced by Asian Americans.  10% of Asian Americans live in poverty.  While median household income in higher, in some cases that isn't a function of high wage jobs but extended family living and more wage earners per household.  A few of my clients serve the AAPI community in the Seattle area.  The challenges that Asian Americans have faced are seriously downplayed.  Of course not everyone has the same shot, not denying that but I would as gently as possible push back on the idea that Asians in the US are all educationally and economically advantaged or are advantaged in such a way that erases the racism and history of discrimination they have faced.  

Edited June 16, 2021 by LucyStoner

[KSera]

3 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Forgive me if this link has already been shared here. 

This article talks about an advocacy group called No Left Turn in Education which appears to be involved in all of the examples cited in this thread. 

Critical race theory battle invades school boards - with the help from conservative groups

 

 

 

The NBC story gives a good rundown of how this isn't what it might appear to be to those outside the US (as did the Courant link shared yesterday). That article was also the first place I saw some additional details added about William Clark, the boy whose diploma was held up because of objections to the Social Change class. I figured the school wasn't commenting due to student privacy, but the article shares that his low grade was due to not completing assignments, not due to refusal to disclose personal characteristics to the class, which it says was not required. I actually wasn't one of the ones suggesting that the case wasn't what it seemed (I thought it was equally likely that this particular school was just doing a lousy job with application), but now it does appear that could be the case.

20 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

I have observed a subtle but real erasure of the experiences faced by Asian Americans.  10% of Asian Americans live in poverty.  While median household income in higher, in some cases that isn't a function of high wage jobs but extended family living and more wage earners per household.  A few of my clients serve the AAPI community in the Seattle area.  The challenges that Asian Americans have faced are seriously downplayed.  Of course not everyone has the same shot, not denying that but I would as gently as possible push back on the idea that Asians in the US are all educationally and economically advantaged or are advantaged in such a way that erases the racism and history of discrimination they have faced.  

I agree Asians in the US are certainly not all educationally or economically advantaged, and there is a long history of serious racism and discrimination. I don't agree with lumping them in with other groups with high level of economic disadvantages, though, The levels of poverty among Asians is equivalent to that of whites in the US. The whites have not faced the same racism, but overall, levels of achievement are not lower. Racism against Asians affects my family, so I'm trying to make clear I'm not erasing that, but the challenges affect Asians differently than some other racial groups. 

 

[MercyA]

48 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

 Of course not everyone has the same shot, not denying that but I would as gently as possible push back on the idea that Asians in the US are all educationally and economically advantaged or are advantaged in such a way that erases the racism and history of discrimination they have faced.  

Oh, absolutely, and I didn't mean to imply that at all. I was actually--clumsily--trying to challenge the idea that since some minorities have been (or are perceived to be) tremendously successful, they all should be and it's their fault if they aren't. 

I should have gone further with my post. You are right that Asians have faced tremendous challenges and prejudice. Right now refugees in particular have a very hard time and many do live in poverty. The playing field isn't equal for them either.

What I was trying to say is that not everyone can just pull themselves up by their bootstraps, because, hey, it's America. 

Thanks for responding and adding needed context!

Edited June 16, 2021 by MercyA

[Laura Corin]

4 hours ago, MercyA said:

 

What I was trying to say is that not everyone can just pull themselves up by their bootstraps, because, hey, it's America. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Social_Mobility_Index

The global social mobility index is also interesting.  Here's another discussion -

https://www.businessinsider.com/countries-where-intergenerational-income-mobility-is-better-than-us-2020-2

Edited June 16, 2021 by Laura Corin

[Spy Car]

Now it comes out that Faux "News" has mentioned (and falsified its characterizations of) critical race theory 1,300 times in the past 3.5 months.

And has done so with the explicit aim of conferring political advantage on people who'd prefer to whitewash American history and cover up systemic racism.

Why is none of this surprising?

It is a pure propaganda tactic to deliberately misinform a low-information segment of American society that they have been grooming for decades.

What a shame.

Bill

 

 

[Melissa Louise]

Thought provoking article on understandings of American history. 

History as End -- 1619, 1776, and the politics of the past.

https://harpers.org/archive/2021/07/history-as-end-politics-of-the-past-matthew-karp/