Jump to content

Menu

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


Fritz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, Scarlett said:

So it is as I first thought.....all of this screaming about CRT taking away rights and making children hate themselves for being white has nothing to do with what CRT actually is.

 

CRT is the outline...upper level high school and college student could study CRT.

Within the outline of CRT, with CRT as guidance...K-12 districts and teachers are developing curriculum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Plum said:

From what I’ve read so far today there’s a lot of bad teaching here even with the best of intentions. I think this could be an elective for high school by a teacher that is well versed in all of this and can draw out the conversation. I don’t see how the average K-12 teacher will ever be able to address this properly, just as with math or science or history. I don’t think it appropriate to have little kids believe they are privileged or oppressors or victims and that seems to be what is happening a lot of these cases. It seems like it would do more damage than good at that age. 

Unskillful presentation of intersectionality will always be a problem. But mainly, especially K-8, children as individuals should always be foregrounded. Historically, Black children have been viewed stereotypically; one only has to look at data re suspension for Black children to see how pernicious this is. There 100% needs to be major change in education to remedy this. CRT education is probably appropriate for staff as part of broadening their understanding of the many ways in which racial inequity can be conceptualized. 

As presented to students? Idk. There must be some good programs out there...surely. 

Education suffers from being fad driven, and a wholesale embrace of the non-evidenced. 

If I were a parent, I'd think it reasonable to ask for copies of the teaching material, and a discussion of the goals of CRT style programming, and data showing an evidence base for achieving those goals. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

But this is not new.  Many public schools and many programs have always been terrible or taught terribly.  This just seems so political to me.  When I look at who is crying about this bad bad CRT.

I'm not crying about CRT. It's a valid way of theorizing about race and power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The videos are of real people who are responding to the CRT being taught in their school system. They are not foxnews employees speaking about CRT. 

Loudoun County, Va. is  a wealthy county that leans left. According to Wikipedia: "Democrats carried the county again in the 2016 presidential election, when Loudoun swung heavily towards Hillary Clinton, giving her 55.1% to Trump's 38.2%. In 2020, Joe Biden won over 60 percent of the vote". 

I haven't been in public schools, or private for that matter, in many years. Given what CRT claims to be about as Plum has posted, I do not think there is any place for this in public school. The factual history of our country about slavery, Tulsa, segregation, Jim Crow, etc.. .yes absolutely should be taught. This was taught when I was in school. The public schools are not doing a stellar job of just getting students on grade level in the basic subjects. IMO, that needs to be their focus especially after being out of the classroom for over a year now in most cases. If parents want to teach CRT at home, great do that. I don't trust public schools to do an adequate job with just teaching the basics. I think anything beyond that is too much to expect. Expecting them to teach this without pushing the oppressor/oppressed is dangerous territory IMO. I think there is too much wiggle room for interpretation as well as to what exactly can/will be included in the curriculum under the umbrella of CRT and how it will be taught.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WildflowerMom said:

I think it's important to discuss things like this.  

But I have to ask, what's your goal for being here, Fritz?  You seem to be trying your best to sew division and discord among the various members here who hold different beliefs.   Is that your end goal?    Do you do that in personal, irl relationships, as well?   

If you're looking for a group that only discusses politics and controversial topics, perhaps this board isn't for you.    

I think it is important hear all sides of an issue. I have no interest in "sewing discord or division". It does seem to me that many on this board want it to be an echo chamber. I prefer to read from several sources to get a better understanding of issues. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I think it is important hear all sides of an issue. I have no interest in "sewing discord or division". It does seem to me that many on this board want it to be an echo chamber. I prefer to read from several sources to get a better understanding of issues. 

This is a very unfair characterization of this forum. People here are not in complete agreement about everything. There are very respectful (and some respectful) discussions about all kinds of issues. People here generally appreciate hearing other points of view. 

But people don't have much tolerance for, "here's a link to a video and it's what CRT is." I mean...come on. Do better than that if you want people to engage you. There's obviously different opinions here because nuances have been expressed in this thread. 

And if you actually read from different sources, why not post them here? Everything that you've linked on this thread expresses the same opinion and comes from the same source. 

 

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I am not saying you are. 

My point is that a person can see value in CRT as an academic lens, AND feel concerned, say, when they hear about a biracial teen and his Black mom suing their school system* for clumsy, heavy-handed and harmful misapplication of CRT in the classroom.

* Nevada, from memory. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

My point is that a person can see value in CRT as an academic lens, AND feel concerned, say, when they hear about a biracial teen and his Black mom suing their school system* for clumsy, heavy-handed and harmful misapplication of CRT in the classroom.

* Nevada, from memory. 

 

I guess I am not hearing that side of the complaints.  What I am hearing is whit people complaining. 

Edited by Scarlett
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I think it is important hear all sides of an issue. I have no interest in "sewing discord or division". It does seem to me that many on this board want it to be an echo chamber. I prefer to read from several sources to get a better understanding of issues. 

As an outsider, it seems to me that US posters are heavily polarized in a partisan pattern. Issues on both sides are seen as 'good' or 'bad' depending on party alignment. There's not a lot of room for the heterodox on either side of the aisle. I wonder if WTM is more polarized than the general population? Not sure. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

As an outsider, it seems to me that US posters are heavily polarized in a partisan pattern. Issues on both sides are seen as 'good' or 'bad' depending on party alignment. There's not a lot of room for the heterodox on either side of the aisle. I wonder if WTM is more polarized than the general population? Not sure. 

No, it is not.  I don’t think. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't like Fox News, don't have a problem with CRT (as far as I understand it, which is not well), but, man, you guys are being really hard on Fritz. I know I've thrown things up with a link and an excerpt for discussion and no one jumped all over me. 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I guess I am not hearing that side of the complaints.  What I am hearing is whit people complaining. 

Well, I'm talking to you. I'm saying that educational programming which takes its cue from CRT is similar to all other programming. It should have clearly defined goals, respect the individual student as a person with dignity and a capable learner, and be evidence based. 

Plenty of parents seem to consider the CRT  programs in their children's schools not to meet this criteria. Some teachers too. 

For fans of CRT approaches in schools, it shouldn't be difficult to show that it does, in fact, meet this criteria. 

Edited by Melissa Louise
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Don't like Fox News, don't have a problem with CRT (as far as I understand it, which is not well), but, man, you guys are being really hard on Fritz. I know I've thrown things up with a link and an excerpt for discussion and no one jumped all over me. 

 

No worries, I have to come to expect it here. If some don't like what is posted they choose to attack the source and/or me.  Happily I have discovered the ignore feature.

Edited by Fritz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Well, I'm talking to you. I'm saying that educational programming which takes its cue from CRT is similar to all other programming. It should have clearly defined goals, respect the individual student as a person with dignity and a capable learner, and be evidence based. 

Plenty of parents seem to consider the CRT  programs in their children's schools not to meet this criteria. Some teachers too. 

For fans of CRT approaches in schools, it shouldn't be difficult to show that it does, in fact, meet this criteria. 

I meant things I am reading elsewhere.  Like those links.  And comments from acquaintances. Of course I often hear intelligent and thoughtful comments here.  
 

I agree that the concept is sound but the execution in not likely to translate across the board.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Don't like Fox News, don't have a problem with CRT (as far as I understand it, which is not well), but, man, you guys are being really hard on Fritz. I know I've thrown things up with a link and an excerpt for discussion and no one jumped all over me. 

 

You don't get the reaction that Fritz does because you don't post things like the post I quote below. You always interact with people politely even when you disagree. 

Do you see any attempt from Fritz to actually interact with anyone on this thread? She hasn't even bothered to respond to questions about how she defines CRT. 

I asked her what other sources she read about CRT and she didn't respond. That's not how you interact with people when you want them to respect you. 

7 minutes ago, Fritz said:

No worries, I have to come to expect it here. If some don't like what is posted they choose to attack the source and/or me. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Don't like Fox News, don't have a problem with CRT (as far as I understand it, which is not well), but, man, you guys are being really hard on Fritz. I know I've thrown things up with a link and an excerpt for discussion and no one jumped all over me. 

 

You're a long time member. We all "know" you. And you post threads about various stuff, not just ones about contentious issues.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the link from the teacher:

New Jersey prep school teacher Dana Stangel-Plowe resigned this week over her school's curriculum, which she argued is causing White and male students to believe they are "oppressors."

"The school’s ideology requires students to see themselves not as individuals, but as representatives of a group, forcing them to adopt the status of privilege or victimhood," Stangel-Plowe wrote in her letter, adding that students arrive in her classroom believing that "people born with less melanin in their skin are oppressors, and people born with more melanin in their skin are oppressed."

That does not sound like a curriculum that belongs in public school.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I meant things I am reading elsewhere.  Like those links.  And comments from acquaintances. Of course I often hear intelligent and thoughtful comments here.  
 

I agree that the concept is sound but the execution in not likely to translate across the board.  

I would not expect to see actual Critical Race Theory taught in most K-12 settings for the same reason we don’t teach Bayesian analysis or quantum mechanics in k-12.  The kids don’t have the prerequisites.  Which means attempts are going to end up teaching the vocabulary of CRT which people will proceed to misuse.
 

I feel the same way about most critical thinking curriculum, including that popular with homeschoolers.  They teach the jargon of critical thinking without actually requiring anyone to think critically.

  • Like 15
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fritz said:

From the link from the teacher:

New Jersey prep school teacher Dana Stangel-Plowe resigned this week over her school's curriculum, which she argued is causing White and male students to believe they are "oppressors."

"The school’s ideology requires students to see themselves not as individuals, but as representatives of a group, forcing them to adopt the status of privilege or victimhood," Stangel-Plowe wrote in her letter, adding that students arrive in her classroom believing that "people born with less melanin in their skin are oppressors, and people born with more melanin in their skin are oppressed."

That does not sound like a curriculum that belongs in public school.

To make that assessment, I think we need to know more about the curriculum. 

Again, you're not engaging with anyone and you haven't posted any alternative links even though you claim that you read both sides. 

ETA that these links are also from Fox News which means *every* source you've cited on this thread is from Fox News. 

Edited by Ordinary Shoes
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I guess I am not hearing that side of the complaints.  What I am hearing is whit people complaining. 

I read the court papers for the family I think this is about — a mixed ethnicity teen boy who is very light skinned and as they say passes for white, is being sued by his black/biracial mother, whose name is Gabrielle Clark. Almost all searches lead to conservative sources, but this seems to have links to the court documents. In his class, where all other students were black, he was supposed to basically apologize for being white, which he isn’t even anyway, and he ended up getting a D or F in this stupid class. (Apparently he’s since had the grade expunged and the requirement to take the class waived.) It sounds like an extremely clumsy attempt to discuss race. And his teacher was white.

I heard this interview recently with Kimberlee Crenshaw, who coined the term “interesctionality.” It’s really not meant to be anything like what some people say it is, or how some people are framing discussions.

Edited by stripe
forgot link URL
  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are any of these schools regular public schools? I’m seeing private schools, charter schools, no public schools.  I know chatter schools are technically public but they do all kinds of things that would never work in a regular public school. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

To make that assessment, I think we need to know more about the curriculum. 

Again, you're not engaging with anyone and you haven't posted any alternative links even though you claim that you read both sides. 

ETA that these links are also from Fox News which means *every* source you've cited on this thread is from Fox News. 

Are people not capable of watching the videos and judging the content of the video for themselves? The videos are not Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson talking...they videos are of parents and teachers addressing this topic.

And if anyone feels a certain way about a topic, and wants to talk about it,  why should they provide “both sides?” 

If I hate factory farming, I’m not going to post “both sides” of factory farming.

No one is having a problem coming up with the “other side” of what @Fritz is saying. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pinball said:

Are people not capable of watching the videos and judging the content of the video for themselves? The videos are not Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson talking...they videos are of parents and teachers addressing this topic.

And if anyone feels a certain way about a topic, and wants to talk about it,  why should they provide “both sides?” 

If I hate factory farming, I’m not going to post “both sides” of factory farming.

No one is having a problem coming up with the “other side” of what @Fritz is saying. 

I asked for other sides because Fritz claimed to read multiple sources. If she's read other sources, why doesn't she link them? 

The videos don't have useful content. They provide the perspective of some teachers and parents. I wrote on the last page, that there's nothing wrong with discussing what is happening in the classroom and how it's being perceived. These links would be relevant for that discussion. 

Fritz provided the links as proof of what CRT is. They don't show that so they're useless. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, pinball said:

Are people not capable of watching the videos and judging the content of the video for themselves? The videos are not Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson talking...they videos are of parents and teachers addressing this topic.

And if anyone feels a certain way about a topic, and wants to talk about it,  why should they provide “both sides?” 

If I hate factory farming, I’m not going to post “both sides” of factory farming.

No one is having a problem coming up with the “other side” of what @Fritz is saying. 

I watched the videos and mainly they just left me wanting more information, to see the curriculum and some actual concrete examples of what is being taught. I didn’t find three videos of people being very upset and limited to one minute of speaking very informative. I’d love to see a thorough factual article about what exactly is being taught in the district. Are there any out there?

I do have to add that I find it amusing someone would not want to be criticized for the source of the article posted. I truly hope everyone on the WTM board can spot the glaring issues with the article. It would actually make a very good assignment for a high school or even middle school student to critique the article for bias, slant, loaded language, injecting opinions, editorializing, etc.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

You don't get the reaction that Fritz does because you don't post things like the post I quote below. You always interact with people politely even when you disagree. 

Do you see any attempt from Fritz to actually interact with anyone on this thread? She hasn't even bothered to respond to questions about how she defines CRT. 

I asked her what other sources she read about CRT and she didn't respond. That's not how you interact with people when you want them to respect you. 

 

2 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

You're a long time member. We all "know" you. And you post threads about various stuff, not just ones about contentious issues.

I do get what you're both saying and appreciate your responses.

It does seem like sometimes posters are held to higher standards based on their positions (or when they are new, perhaps?). Maybe this is a misperception on my part. Correlation is not always causation, right? 😉 

I will say that being on this board and being called to task on sources and arguments has been good for me personally. It causes us to dig deeper, think harder, and sometimes--if necessary--change our position entirely. 

Edited by MercyA
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, pinball said:

Are people not capable of watching the videos and judging the content of the video for themselves? The videos are not Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson talking...they videos are of parents and teachers addressing this topic.

And if anyone feels a certain way about a topic, and wants to talk about it,  why should they provide “both sides?” 

If I hate factory farming, I’m not going to post “both sides” of factory farming.

No one is having a problem coming up with the “other side” of what @Fritz is saying. 

I agree with most of your post, but I don't usually have time to watch videos (exception for cute cat videos). I'm much more likely to click on articles I can quickly skim.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MercyA said:

 

I do get what you're both saying and appreciate your responses.

It does seem like sometimes posters are held to higher standards based on their positions (or when they are new, perhaps?). Maybe this is a misperception on my part. Correlation is not always causation, right? 😉 

I will say that being on this board and being called to task on sources and arguments has been good for me personally. It causes us to dig deeper, think harder, and sometimes--if necessary--change. 

Nah, look at me. Far from new. 😂

  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

"Students, you are on the front lines of these indoctrination camps. Challenge the staff when you are presented with a ludicrous statement, and do not allow anybody to tell you that you cannot accomplish anything because of your skin color, or to hate yourself because of your skin color," Vanetsyan intoned. "Students, it is up to you to be the next generation of victims, or victors."

 

Anybody who will, with an apparently straight face, assert that people have to "choose" between being "victims" or "victors" has utterly lost the plot.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Plum said:

Is the 1619 Project considered CRT? That was being taught in 4500 schools according to one article from June 2020. 
I know my state just passed a bill requiring additional multicultural subjects to be taught K-12 that includes Black, AAPI (we’re the 9th island) and LGBTQ along with civics. If I put 2 and 2 together I’d say that equals CRT. 🤷🏻‍♀️

That is what I mean about too much wiggle room for what is included in the "CRT curriculum". This has no place in K-12 setting. They have enough material they aren't effectively teaching now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fritz said:

That is what I mean about too much wiggle room for what is included in the "CRT curriculum". This has no place in K-12 setting. They have enough material they aren't effectively teaching now.

What is "this?" Who are "they?" 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

As an outsider, it seems to me that US posters are heavily polarized in a partisan pattern. Issues on both sides are seen as 'good' or 'bad' depending on party alignment. There's not a lot of room for the heterodox on either side of the aisle. I wonder if WTM is more polarized than the general population? Not sure. 

Absolutely right. As soon as one party picks a side the other finds a way to be against it. Even on the flimsiest of arguments. It’s pathetic. We used to be better than this as a nation. The WTM is less polarized in general compared to people I know IRL. However, there are a few posters who are glaringly partisan. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Plum said:

Is the 1619 Project considered CRT? That was being taught in 4500 schools according to one article from June 2020. 
I know my state just passed a bill requiring additional multicultural subjects to be taught K-12 that includes Black, AAPI (we’re the 9th island) and LGBTQ along with civics. If I put 2 and 2 together I’d say that equals CRT. 🤷🏻‍♀️
 

ETA If it is Newsweek says all of the Chicago Public School system was teaching it. 

It probably is by the people who are upset about it.  I’m not sure if it should be, one way or the other.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scholastica said:

Absolutely right. As soon as one party picks a side the other finds a way to be against it. Even on the flimsiest of arguments. It’s pathetic. We used to be better than this as a nation. The WTM is less polarized in general compared to people I know IRL. However, there are a few posters who are glaringly partisan. 

When we were better than this as a nation? When women couldn't vote? When African Americans were kept from the polls? When the Jim Crow laws were in place? When women needed their husband's approval to get a credit card? 

Yes, people are polarized and there are many reasons for that. One reason is that people are becoming more aware or inequities and trying to work through them. That will be uncomfortable. It actually should be uncomfortable. A discussion about race should be uncomfortable. If it's not uncomfortable then you're not doing it right. 

Polarization is to be expected when one side is opposed to racism and another side is opposed to removing any of its privileges. 

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fritz said:

That is what I mean about too much wiggle room for what is included in the "CRT curriculum". This has no place in K-12 setting. They have enough material they aren't effectively teaching now.

Lots of rhetoric, but not much substance here. What "CRT curriculum" do you mean? This like talking about "the common core math" - there's no such thing. If you want to criticize a specific teaching methodology, or a specific curriculum, then you need to do that rather than being vague.

What material, specifically, are "they" not effectively teaching right now - and where is your data that you can't effectively teach this AND that at the same time?

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve circled back to this piece from the American Bar Association a few times. It’s been helpful to me as I attempt to wrap my brain around this idea that has become so controversial. I am certainly not an expert on race, the law, or sociology. However, it seems to me that this controversy has been largely manufactured by people who don’t want to lose control over the narrative because they a) fear change b) want to maintain power over others and c) want to pretend everything is fine and people are just stirring things up. People have fought over what students should be taught about our country’s history with racism since the days of Reconstruction.  This argument has also permeated some American churches and this same unnecessary (IMO) debate about CRT is currently underway in some US churches as well. 
 

My bottom line is that if we teach students how to think, then they can evaluate & synthesize information on their own. We have no idea what the prevailing controversy will be next year, in five years or in fifty years. An understanding of history, literature, science and math along with the ability to think and communicate prepares people to grapple with ideas they are presented with  the future, not concentrating solely on random facts dictated by whoever is in charge of curriculum decisions at any given time. IOW, classical education. 
 

Anyhow - enough of my opinion - here are some tidbits from the article that I find helpful. If you’re interested in the educational aspects, there is a section on that in the article. 
 

“CRT is not a diversity and inclusion “training” but a practice of interrogating the role of race and racism in society that emerged in the legal academy and spread to other fields of scholarship. Crenshaw—who coined the term “CRT”—notes that CRT is not a noun, but a verb. It cannot be confined to a static and narrow definition but is considered to be an evolving and malleable practice. It critiques how the social construction of race and institutionalized racism perpetuate a racial caste system that relegates people of color to the bottom tiers. CRT also recognizes that race intersects with other identities, including sexuality, gender identity, and others. CRT recognizes that racism is not a bygone relic of the past. Instead, it acknowledges that the legacy of slavery, segregation, and the imposition of second-class citizenship on Black Americans and other people of color continue to permeate the social fabric of this nation. 
 

While recognizing the evolving and malleable nature of CRT, scholar Khiara Bridges outlines a few key tenets of CRT, including:

  • Recognition that race is not biologically real but is socially constructed and socially significant. It recognizes that science (as demonstrated in the Human Genome Project) refutes the idea of biological racial differences. According to scholars Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, race is the product of social thought and is not connected to biological reality.
  • Acknowledgement that racism is a normal feature of society and is embedded within systems and institutions, like the legal system, that replicate racial inequality. This dismisses the idea that racist incidents are aberrations but instead are manifestations of structural and systemic racism.
  • Rejection of popular understandings about racism, such as arguments that confine racism to a few “bad apples.” CRT recognizes that racism is codified in law, embedded in structures, and woven into public policy. CRT rejects claims of meritocracy or “colorblindness.” CRT recognizes that it is the systemic nature of racism that bears primary responsibility for reproducing racial inequality.
  • Recognition of the relevance of people’s everyday lives to scholarship. This includes embracing the lived experiences of people of color, including those preserved through storytelling, and rejecting deficit-informed research that excludes the epistemologies of people of color.

CRT does not define racism in the traditional manner as solely the consequence of discrete irrational bad acts perpetrated by individuals but is usually the unintended (but often foreseeable) consequence of choices. It exposes the ways that racism is often cloaked in terminology regarding “mainstream,” “normal,” or “traditional” values or “neutral” policies, principles, or practices. And, as scholar Tara Yosso asserts, CRT can be an approach used to theorize, examine, and challenge the ways which race and racism implicitly and explicitly impact social structures, practices, and discourses. CRT observes that scholarship that ignores race is not demonstrating “neutrality” but adherence to the existing racial hierarchy.”

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/

 

Edited by TechWife
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a link to the mother’s address to the school board, if anyone wants to engage in the discussion topic without the connection to Fox News:

 

“I’ve been very alarmed by what’s going on in our schools. You are now training our children to be social justice warriors and to loathe our country and our history. Growing up in Mao’s China, all of this seems very familiar. The Communist regime used the same critical theory to divide people; the only difference is they used class instead of race.”

“During the Cultural Revolution, I witnessed students and teachers turn against each other.  We changed school names to be politically correct. We were taught to denounce our heritage. The Red Guards destroyed anything that is not Communist: old statues, books, and anything else.”

 “We were also encouraged to report on each other, just like the Student Equity Ambassador program and the Bias Reporting System.”

 “This is, indeed, the American version of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. The Critical Race Theory has its roots in cultural Marxism. It should have no place in our schools.”

Edited by Condessa
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

 

Polarization is to be expected when one side is opposed to racism and another side is opposed to removing any of its privileges. 

I’ve been on these boards for over 20 years, and have never ever seen anyone express or suspected anyone here of holding to the latter. 

Way to use a straw man to excuse/justify unkindness.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, MercyA said:

I agree with most of your post, but I don't usually have time to watch videos (exception for cute cat videos). I'm much more likely to click on articles I can quickly skim.

I’m the same. Videos take too long. I can read & comprehend info faster. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Carol in Cal. said:

I’ve been on these boards for over 20 years, and have never ever seen anyone express or suspected anyone here of holding to the latter. 

Way to use a straw man to excuse/justify unkindness.

I wasn't talking about people on this forum. I was responding to a post that discussed "the nation." 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Here’s a link to the mother’s address to the school board, if anyone wants to engage in the discussion topic without the connection to Fox News:

 

 

I don’t think anyone was objecting to the fact that the videos were from Fox News. The article on the other hand…

 I’m not sure what can be discussed without more information. For example, towards the end of her speech she mentions two things by name that are like what happened in China, but doesn’t explain them (understandably so with a one minute time limit). But since I don’t have kids in the district and no one has posted actual information, I have no idea what they are, so how can I evaluate her comparisons? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we were still homeschooling, my boys both got a very in-depth US history education.  We used a wide range of materials including Zinn’s People’s History of the United States, the Teaching Tolerance materials from SPL and a lot of stuff focused on the history of the Civil Rights movement, including Eyes on the Prize.  Hakim’s History of Us was the spine for my older son in middle school.  I’m absolutely not opposed an unvarnished look at American history or current events.  I do have some accuracy concerns with the 1619 project- I’m not for banning it in schools (there’s not a whole lot I am in favor of banning in school).  But if we were still homeschooling I don’t know that I with use the material without including writings from historians who reject some of its claims or perhaps side by side as a lesson in how interpretation affects our historical understanding.  

I also know that over the last couple of years, I’ve heard some really off-base takeaways about history coming from my kids and nieces and nephew, who all attend 3 different regular public school districts in and around Seattle.  It’s hard to condense to a short post and I don’t want to turn this into a long essay but I have come to see how some kids have some pretty simplistic takeaways from school about these topics right now.  This is nothing new (it’s not like US schools have tended to do a bang up job in history education, lol). I also think that young students and students who tend to be quite literal thinkers may walk away from some materials about race and identity with a feeling that they are wrong/bad or that they are doomed to fail.  My 12 year old son (white) and my 15 year old nephew (black and Latino) have both articulated some things that have convinced me that badly implemented content can give students a sense that white = bad and brown = helpless/pitiable.  Also, male = bad and female = helpless.  That is troubling.  


Living in Seattle, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion trainings implemented or deployed by nearly clueless (and mostly white) people to mediocre or shitty results is nothing new.  The lingo has changed but trainings and course material around race and identity were part of my high school work back in the 1990s here.  And it’s not uncommon for a sound or solid academic concept for older students/adults to be implemented and deployed in a less than stellar manner that confuses the flip out of younger students.  Heck, we see this in math education all the time - solid expert designed curriculum that the district spends eleventy jillion dollars on, shitty implementation that leads to less than great results.  

Thanks to Zoom school I have had the opportunity to overhear much of my son’s US history this year and I am very underwhelmed by the quality of the lessons + straining everything through an unnuanced and very modern viewpoint.  Nothing I found particularly objectionable but it was lackluster and I felt he could have taught the class at times.  Actually, he often chimed in with more details or nuance in class.  

I do think it is possible for people to be ambivalent or concerned about how history, race and identity topics are covered in school without being opposed to accurate, in-depth and at times hard topics.  I dislike how this has become a politically polarized topic or even an ideological purity test.  
 

Edited by LucyStoner
  • Like 18
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Here’s a link to the mother’s address to the school board, if anyone wants to engage in the discussion topic without the connection to Fox News:

 

 

I think the issue is that a parent complaining about something like this is not really evidence, wether the video comes from FoxNews or not.  I would like pictures from the curriculum, video or something from the classroom, some objective thing to look at besides a parents opinion, or even a teachers opinion.  I’d like to see the troublesome requirements in writing some how.  All this video tells me is parents are unhappy.  Parents are unhappy about lots of things, some I agree with, some I don’t.  That a parent is unhappy is not evidence by itself of something being wrong 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Frances said:

I don’t think anyone was objecting to the fact that the videos were from Fox News. The article on the other hand…

 I’m not sure what can be discussed without more information. For example, towards the end of her speech she mentions two things by name that are like what happened in China, but doesn’t explain them (understandably so with a one minute time limit). But since I don’t have kids in the district and no one has posted actual information, I have no idea what they are, so how can I evaluate her comparisons? 

Relating to this statement from the statement of the mother that inspired this thread: 

“We were also encouraged to report on each other, just like the Student Equity Ambassador program and the Bias Reporting System.”

The Loudoun school district is currently under a law suit from parents over these two programs.

https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/06/equity-programs-in-loudoun-co-schools-lead-to-lawsuit-from-parents/
 

It apparently involves having students report on each other.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also prefer articles to videos, but I did watch the one of the mother speaking. I don’t think I have a very good grasp of what CRT is, but I certainly didn’t find anything she said to be newsworthy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting about the SBC from the New Yorker. It discusses the debate over CRT in the context of larger discussions about race. 

The Fight for the Heart of the Southern Baptist Convention

Quote

In Texas, McKissic read the statement with dismay. “It’s putting lipstick on racism,” he told me. As he saw it, the fight over C.R.T. was also the fight for the future of the S.B.C. A cabal of reactionary, aging white men was trying to maintain control of the organization, and, in order to hold on to power, those men were stoking people’s fears of creeping liberalism. (A spokesperson for the S.B.C. said that it was a sprawling organization whose members held a wide range of viewpoints.) In January, 2021, McKissic wrote an article titled “We Are Getting Off The Bus,” denouncing the rejection of C.R.T. in the November statement and explaining that he was leaving a Texas chapter of the S.B.C. “I am not willing to allow them to dictate what the belief systems, definitions and authoritative binding, academic and ecclesiastical decisions [are] regarding how race is to be communicated in the local church,” he wrote.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the above linked local news article on the law suit:

“Under the ambassador program, schools select a handful of students who meet with principals and other school leaders to discuss [incidents of racist behavior in their school communities], while the reporting system urges students to anonymously report observations using a form online.”

Edited by Condessa
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Condessa said:

Relating to this statement from the statement of the mother that inspired this thread: 

“We were also encouraged to report on each other, just like the Student Equity Ambassador program and the Bias Reporting System.”

The Loudoun school district is currently under a law suit from parents over these two programs.

https://wtop.com/loudoun-county/2021/06/equity-programs-in-loudoun-co-schools-lead-to-lawsuit-from-parents/
 

It apparently involves having students report on each other.

Thank you for posting. This contains far more information (including links to other sources) than is in the videos and unlike the Fox News article/editorial, at least presents information from both the school district and those critical of the policies and programs.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...