CRT (now rebranded as Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion DEI) and DOJ involvement in school board meetings

[Melissa Louise]

5 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re TERF nonsense

Yeah, I've had limited visibility into that conflict, but from that limited vantage (much of it coming from you, on these boards) it appears (?) also to include some of that dynamic where *opponents* of a movement declare what the movement is/ should be "about."

Anyway. You definitely should not listen to a podcast you're not in the mood for! 

 

--

Separately: Totally agree re schools ideally being a 3-way partnership, student, family, school.  And the farther from those vested-parties you go -- state level, federal level -- the less responsive to on-the-ground needs of kids, and strengths of teachers, the policies can be. 

There is a place for state and federal policy in the sector -- I don't know if this played out in Australia, but in the US, kids with disabilities were simply turned away at the door of many public schools until the federal IDEA was passed; and -- appropos of this thread-- until Brown v BoE many states, as a matter of law, segregated by race into Separate and decidedly Unequal schools.  And etc.

But when state or federal government get into granular curricular decisions -- either through legislation, or via purchasing power for/against particular texts -- effects, unintended or no -- ensue.

It would be instructive to explore, as a case study of where the left behaves as badly as the authoritarian right.

Yes, of course, re government. 

But at a school level - I don't know why people don't get this and/or disagree with this - there ought to be no hierarchy of families. 

You don't look at the family coming in your door and put them into good and bad baskets depending on their politics or skin or bank balance or whatever. Each family is a support unit for their child, wanting what is in the best interests of their child. Sometimes you can't do what families want, but damn, you hear them out. 

Plenty of teachers speak on unskillful instruction and/or other issues - lots of them get sacked. 

So again, who gets to speak? 

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I think I took Pam's post in the opposite way, as I was thinking of the same issue, but in reverse. Under Pam's schema, the best people to articulate what radical feminists believe about trans people would be radical feminists themselves, not the people calling them TERFs.

 

Yes, but we both know that that principle is actively denied. 

 

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

It would be instructive to explore, as a case study of where the left behaves as badly as the authoritarian right.

Yes, of course, re government. 

But at a school level - I don't know why people don't get this and/or disagree with this - there ought to be no hierarchy of families. 

You don't look at the family coming in your door and put them into good and bad baskets depending on their politics or skin or bank balance or whatever. Each family is a support unit for their child, wanting what is in the best interests of their child. Sometimes you can't do what families want, but damn, you hear them out. 

Plenty of teachers speak on unskillful instruction and/or other issues - lots of them get sacked. 

So again, who gets to speak? 

I really don't get the point you're making here. In the U.S. anyway, the bulk of teachers 'speaking' are white women. The bulk of people speaking at school board meetings are white women and men. They're doing plenty of speaking. The voices that aren't being heard are the working class people who are actually WORKING during these events. perhaps Australia is different.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

What I don’t understand is why we can’t fund schools on per student basis across the state so no matter where you are or who you are, you get the same funding. I mean it’s a public school. If the only advantage of white schools is in the funding, this should be a relatively easy fix. 

[Sneezyone]

15 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

What I don’t understand is why we can’t fund schools on per student basis across the state so no matter where you are or who you are, you get the same funding. I mean it’s a public school. If the only advantage of white schools is in the funding, this should be a relatively easy fix. 

It's not just funding tho. It's also involvement. The people we see advocating so strongly have both the time and the resources to wait hours to speak, to sign up/plan in advance, to fund political action committees dedicated to advancing their causes. That plays out in district decision making as well WRT where the most skilled teachers are placed and which students they serve.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Pam in CT]

5 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

What I don’t understand is why we can’t fund schools on per student basis across the state so no matter where you are or who you are, you get the same funding. I mean it’s a public school. If the only advantage of white schools is in the funding, this should be a relatively easy fix. 

I have a Singaporean sister-in-law, and she and my brother moved here a few years ago with 3 school-aged kids.  She was *shocked* to learn that they really had to choose where they lived based on the schools.  In Singapore, the funding is centralized and each school gets the same amount per student (aside from special funds for special needs and so on).

The *curriculum* is also (more or less, there are schools with different language of instruction and some other tweaks) the same across schools (Singapore Math for All!), which would be a pretty hard sell here in the US.

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, Pam in CT said:

I have a Singaporean sister-in-law, and she and my brother moved here a few years ago with 3 school-aged kids.  She was *shocked* to learn that they really had to choose where they lived based on the schools.  In Singapore, the funding is centralized and each school gets the same amount per student (aside from special funds for special needs and so on).

The *curriculum* is also (more or less, there are schools with different language of instruction and some other tweaks) the same across schools (Singapore Math for All!), which would be a pretty hard sell here in the US.

That *AND* you have to balance the strength of the academic offerings with the community's opposition to diverse story telling in English classes and accurate history instruction. It's never one or the other. There's always a tipping point which is different for each family.

[Pam in CT]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

It's not just funding tho. It's also involvement. The people we see advocating so strongly have both the time and the resources to wait hours to speak, to sign up/plan in advance, to fund political action committees dedicated to advancing their causes. That plays out in district decision making as well WRT where the most skilled teachers are placed and who they serve.

Absolutely.  Funding matters a LOT, though.

Quote

CT's per capita student expenditure by town

  (we don't do the state-allocation thing here, we have "home rule" which means rich towns fund their own schools and cities... fend for themselves)

and this understates the difference by an order of magnitude, as the rich towns have 501c3 parent organizations that fund entire (union) teacher salaries, entire computer labs, entire arts programs off-budget

[Sneezyone]

11 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

I have a Singaporean sister-in-law, and she and my brother moved here a few years ago with 3 school-aged kids.  She was *shocked* to learn that they really had to choose where they lived based on the schools.  In Singapore, the funding is centralized and each school gets the same amount per student (aside from special funds for special needs and so on).

The *curriculum* is also (more or less, there are schools with different language of instruction and some other tweaks) the same across schools (Singapore Math for All!), which would be a pretty hard sell here in the US.

ITA. It's why it's so difficult to draw direct parallels with other national systems. My Canadian friends have had issues with local LEOs and such but they are not on the scale that we have dealt with. One friend has multiple children enrolled in high-quality, well-funded, adequately-resourced tribal/band schools. That's not a reality most Americans can relate to.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Roadrunner]

12 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

I have a Singaporean sister-in-law, and she and my brother moved here a few years ago with 3 school-aged kids.  She was *shocked* to learn that they really had to choose where they lived based on the schools.  In Singapore, the funding is centralized and each school gets the same amount per student (aside from special funds for special needs and so on).

The *curriculum* is also (more or less, there are schools with different language of instruction and some other tweaks) the same across schools (Singapore Math for All!), which would be a pretty hard sell here in the US.

So I also come from a somewhat small homogenous culture and I get what Singaporean experience must be like. I grew up with a different national version of it. 

But here, I don’t think that is possible given just the way our system functions. APs are the closest we have come to a national curriculum and that is done by a private entity. I often wonder what modifications African American families who follow WTM make. Because I bet depending on American sub culture (Hispanic, Chinese….) there will be a significant modification to that. I see public schools the same way. I personally am very happy with dead white men, but I could see why others aren’t. How do we write one narrative? And do we need one narrative? I don’t know. 

I do know that in the meantime fixing public funding should be a no brainer. To make an argument that a certain amount of $ should be allocated per student no matter where you live could be an easy sell. This should at least take care of physical resources and teacher hiring.

 

 

[Sneezyone]

31 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

So I also come from a somewhat small homogenous culture and I get what Singaporean experience must be like. I grew up with a different national version of it. 

But here, I don’t think that is possible given just the way our system functions. APs are the closest we have come to a national curriculum and that is done by a private entity. I often wonder what modifications African American families who follow WTM make. Because I bet depending on American sub culture (Hispanic, Chinese….) there will be a significant modification to that. I see public schools the same way. I personally am very happy with dead white men, but I could see why others aren’t. How do we write one narrative? And do we need one narrative? I don’t know. 

I do know that in the meantime fixing public funding should be a no brainer. To make an argument that a certain amount of $ should be allocated per student no matter where you live could be an easy sell. This should at least take care of physical resources and teacher hiring.

The bolded makes so much sense it's almost too good to be true. I have these questions too. It's a conundrum. How much local control do you allow and how do you justify that decision? 

Particularly with the modern history book, we made A TON of  modifications. I want public schools to be able to make those modifications too, to respond to the needs of their students, but not at the expense of losing larger narratives.

[Pam in CT]

37 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

So I also come from a somewhat small homogenous culture and I get what Singaporean experience must be like. I grew up with a different national version of it. 

But here, I don’t think that is possible given just the way our system functions. APs are the closest we have come to a national curriculum and that is done by a private entity. I often wonder what modifications African American families who follow WTM make. Because I bet depending on American sub culture (Hispanic, Chinese….) there will be a significant modification to that. I see public schools the same way. I personally am very happy with dead white men, but I could see why others aren’t. How do we write one narrative? And do we need one narrative? I don’t know. 

I do know that in the meantime fixing public funding should be a no brainer. To make an argument that a certain amount of $ should be allocated per student no matter where you live could be an easy sell. This should at least take care of physical resources and teacher hiring.
 

(Sadly) I don't there really are any *no brainer* fixes to really *any* of our big problems -- they are messy and complicated and full of competing interests and in many cases state level legislation.  In CT, for example, public schools are funded almost entirely with town-level property taxes, and there is a state-level "home rule" legislation that provides for this.  And believe you me, richer towns (including my own) want Very Much to keep it that way.  And would throw every kind of resource to fight federal legislation that attempted to dislodge the current system.

So while I agree with you that in principle, if we were starting from a clean sheet of paper, there's a "simple" fix... we are not starting from a clean sheet of paper. We never are.

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Pam in CT
very relevant typo, LOL

[Roadrunner]

@Pam in CTThanks for the podcast. It’s excellent. 
 

Edited: can’t spell 😞 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Roadrunner

[Melissa Louise]

6 hours ago, WildflowerMom said:

This sounds crazy!   So I guess you have to write 'I am xxxxxx' on the top of the application?   I mean, how else would they know if someone is non-hetero?   Do they think they can tell based on what they wear or whatever else?   That's so invasive and yucky.  

Ha, nothing to do with education, but some poetry journals in AU now require an identity statement before you can submit - racial identity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability...it's wild. 

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Ha, nothing to do with education, but some poetry journals in AU now require an identity statement before you can submit - racial identity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability...it's wild. 

That's pretty strange. I read an article the other day with students advocating that sexual orientation become something standardly disclosed upon introduction, as with pronouns, and I am so not for that. It should be the very rare circumstance that someone's sexual orientation should be relevant, and certainly not in school or work circumstances. That's really only relevant for potential dating partners. I would be pretty upset if my minor child was prompted to state sexual preferences in school.

[SlowRiver]

4 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Ha, nothing to do with education, but some poetry journals in AU now require an identity statement before you can submit - racial identity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability...it's wild. 

 

Yes, I get emails at my work for job openings at a big literary organisation that runs retreats and has writers internships and things, mainly we are supposed to put them up as notices. They are often quite specific about not only being open to, but preferring or sometimes even requiring, what they call "diverse applicants".

It's similar at my university, though not quite so blatant. One way you can get around rules about asking people stuff is by using a self-declaration type model. If it's seen as advantageous people will use it, and even bend the meaning pretty significantly to qualify. 

[Melissa Louise]

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

That's pretty strange. I read an article the other day with students advocating that sexual orientation become something standardly disclosed upon introduction, as with pronouns, and I am so not for that. It should be the very rare circumstance that someone's sexual orientation should be relevant, and certainly not in school or work circumstances. That's really only relevant for potential dating partners. I would be pretty upset if my minor child was prompted to state sexual preferences in school.

It's just the fashion. 

I forgot they also ask age.

It does its job, in weeding out the work of undesirables, who don't believe that the text is to be judged on one's identity characteristics. 

[Sneezyone]

4 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

 

Yes, I get emails at my work for job openings at a big literary organisation that runs retreats and has writers internships and things, mainly we are supposed to put them up as notices. They are often quite specific about not only being open to, but preferring or sometimes even requiring, what they call "diverse applicants".

It's similar at my university, though not quite so blatant. One way you can get around rules about asking people stuff is by using a self-declaration type model. If it's seen as advantageous people will use it, and even bend the meaning pretty significantly to qualify. 

Where employment opportunities (and university admissions since that is such a hot topic) in the U.S. are concerned, that information may be requested, but it is not required to be provided.

Edited October 14, 2021 by Sneezyone

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, SlowRiver said:

 

Yes, I get emails at my work for job openings at a big literary organisation that runs retreats and has writers internships and things, mainly we are supposed to put them up as notices. They are often quite specific about not only being open to, but preferring or sometimes even requiring, what they call "diverse applicants".

It's similar at my university, though not quite so blatant. One way you can get around rules about asking people stuff is by using a self-declaration type model. If it's seen as advantageous people will use it, and even bend the meaning pretty significantly to qualify. 

Part of the reason my ex ('man of colour') started a literary journal.

I read poetry submissions for it blind.

[KSera]

9 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

They are often quite specific about not only being open to, but preferring or sometimes even requiring, what they call "diverse applicants".

 

This doesn't seem problematic in the same way to me. They want to try to make sure they are representing a diversity of voices. But requiring an identity statement like that is different.

[SlowRiver]

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

This doesn't seem problematic in the same way to me. They want to try to make sure they are representing a diversity of voices. But requiring an identity statement like that is different.

In practice that often isn't the effect, unfortunately, it's more like what Melissa is alluding to. Their "diversity" is also rather narrow. Chock full of queer women, not so many working class male poets, though.

[Melissa Louise]

20 minutes ago, SlowRiver said:

In practice that often isn't the effect, unfortunately, it's more like what Melissa is alluding to. Their "diversity" is also rather narrow. Chock full of queer women, not so many working class male poets, though.

It's about doing the wrong thing - replicating a narrow range of voices - for the 'right' reasons. 

Anyway. It doesn't matter much. Unlike schooling, poetry journals are not compulsory 😂

[Bootsie]

52 minutes ago, KSera said:

That's pretty strange. I read an article the other day with students advocating that sexual orientation become something standardly disclosed upon introduction, as with pronouns, and I am so not for that. It should be the very rare circumstance that someone's sexual orientation should be relevant, and certainly not in school or work circumstances. That's really only relevant for potential dating partners. I would be pretty upset if my minor child was prompted to state sexual preferences in school.

This is where some of the problems of implementing these policies come in and where I see so many inconsistencies.  When my university moved online for COVID, part of the process was having our course syllabi reviewed by the distance education specialists.  One of the questions I had to answer was which of the readings for my courses (finance and economics) were written by various groups.  I really do not know the sexual orientation, practices, preferences of many of the authors (or even gender in some instances).  I know that they are Nobel prize winners, authors of seminal articles in the field, experts on a particular topic, etc.  I had traditionally had a reading by Donald McCloskey because of the quality of the article; once Donald McCloskey became Dierdre McCloskey the content and value of that article did not increase at all.  The value of another article by Walter Oi did not change at all once I met him and realized he was blind.  Sexual orientation or blindness had no impact on the quality or usefulness of their work.

I was working with one of the biggest proponents of DEI on my campus to organize a summer camp for high school students.  We were assigning roommates (and she was adamant that males and females could NOT be on the same floor of the dorm); I asked how we knew whether Jordan was male or female because the application for did not ask that.  Her response was "oh you just go back to the counselor and teacher's recommendations and se if they use 'he' or 'she'".  I don't know what she will do when a counselor uses "they" or some other pronoun.

 

[SlowRiver]

With schools, isn't the fundamental problem that no one wants their kids being taught stuff that is really contrary to their family views, be they religious, political, cultural, whatever? No one wants their kids learning that their family has views or values that are lesser or backwards or deserving of ridicule. 

So when you have state funded schools that are meant to be for everyone, there is a line to be walked. There will likely always be some people on the outskirts of society who will never feel their views are respected, but generally, school's teaching has to fall more or less within the public consensus. On other issues they need to be agnostic.

The more homogeneous a society is, the more they can teach things like values and political philosophies. The more diverse social views are, the less they'll be able to do that. That's the trade off of intellectual, religious, and cultural diversity. 

Right now there is an increasing political divide, increasing social fragmentation, at the same time as specific teachings on values and controversial ideas are being doubled down on in a lot of public schools. It's a bad combination.

[felicity]

3 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

What I don’t understand is why we can’t fund schools on per student basis across the state so no matter where you are or who you are, you get the same funding. I mean it’s a public school. If the only advantage of white schools is in the funding, this should be a relatively easy fix. 

Hi, I'm going to join in a bit even though I rarely post and even then mostly on Scout-related things. Full disclosure, I homeschooled until my boys were in high school and then, out of necessity, went back into teaching. I have CA credentials in both Social Studies and Science. I taught middle-school Social Studies for about 4 years and now teach middle-school Science. 

I also live in a very divided district. Literally one side of the freeway has a very nice, new school and the other side has a 50-year old school with "portable" trailers for many classes. My kids go to the older school which is fairly nice because it receives Title 1 money and we never have to fundraise. But...that means that things are still pretty basic. Much of our population are English-learners whose parents work under the table and many times several jobs. The newer school fundraises but has a completely different population and things are very nice there. (I happen to know first hand with my kids going to the older school and I worked at the newer school.) Same district, school money goes with the student and it's the same amount but completely different experiences. I can go down a list starting with science labs and ending with 8th-grade parties. So even if it seems like an easy fix, it's not really. As long as individual schools are allowed to fundraise strictly for that school, they will never be equal.

And as far as Charter Schools and reasons teachers aren't fans. There are several and I feel kind of hypocritical in my feelings about charters since I used one to homeschool originally. Over time my thoughts have changed. School choice sounds like a great thing until you end up gutting the neighborhood school and the only kids that are left are in the marginalized groups because they have no transportation to the nicer school across town so funding drops and the school gets a bad reputation so fewer people move in and it's a cycle. School choice sounds so "fair:" everyone chooses which school they would like to attend. Except if your parents work four jobs between them, you are a kindergartner, and the school you would like to attend is 3 bus rides away. How will you get there? There is no transportation to the fabulous school across town. So again, you're stuck at the increasingly crappy older school that teachers don't want to touch with a ten-foot pole, except for the first-year teacher that takes the job because she has to, but leaves as soon as something better comes by. 

There is a lot that needs to be fixed with public schools but calling everything under the sun CRT and telling us that diversity shouldn't be taught is not going to help. And yes, money will help. It can build schools so they aren't overcrowded. It can pay for chemistry labs so kids realize how cool science really is so they want to go to college or whatever and get a better job. It can help teachers be seen as the humans they are and gain respect because of that and not because they are or should be martyrs giving their time and their pay to their students. There is a lot that could be fixed but banning the strawman of "CRT" isn't going to get it done. 

That's my two or probably, 50 cents worth. 

Also, I ask my students to fill out an "about-me" card at the beginning of the year. It asks for name, preferred name, pronouns, and favorite tv shows, treats, books, etc. I don't announce it at all because it's personal and private, But I think that at most schools, especially secondary schools, students really don't care that much.

[Dmmetler]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

That's pretty strange. I read an article the other day with students advocating that sexual orientation become something standardly disclosed upon introduction, as with pronouns, and I am so not for that. It should be the very rare circumstance that someone's sexual orientation should be relevant, and certainly not in school or work circumstances. That's really only relevant for potential dating partners. I would be pretty upset if my minor child was prompted to state sexual preferences in school.

I've seen a lot of kids do it fairly soon in, though. And, realistically, I've been around teens who seem to start sizing each other up as potential dating partners, so introducing themselves in English class as "I'm Jordan, my pronouns are She/They, and I'm Bi" might send a message to partners and avoid ackwardness later. Not really sure it belongs in class, but it does seem to be becoming more normal. It definitely came up quite a bit in the "getting to know you phase" with college students this summer. 

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

I've seen a lot of kids do it fairly soon in, though. And, realistically, I've been around teens who seem to start sizing each other up as potential dating partners, so introducing themselves in English class as "I'm Jordan, my pronouns are She/They, and I'm Bi" might send a message to partners and avoid ackwardness later. Not really sure it belongs in class, but it does seem to be becoming more normal. It definitely came up quite a bit in the "getting to know you phase" with college students this summer. 

Yeah, what I'm seeing is the same, in that many kids don't think it's any big deal, I'm just still not sure that's a good thing or doing them any favors in the long run. On the younger end of the spectrum, I think it sexualizes them too young. I also see that kids currently have a tendency to rotate through trying out different orientations, and if they have had to publicly announce when younger, that makes it more awkward to change, and I also think it doesn't prepare them for the adult world, particularly at work. Do we want to teach kids in school that announcing sexual preferences is a normal thing to do in casual conversation, and then have them need to unlearn that in the work place where that's not always going to be appropriate? I'm coming at this as a parent with a couple non-straight kids (at least one of which is still in flux), and I think this dynamic would have made things worse for them. Pronouns are different than sexuality to me, as they really have nothing to do with that, and there is nothing "inappropriate" about them in any setting.

[Roadrunner]

50 minutes ago, KSera said:

Yeah, what I'm seeing is the same, in that many kids don't think it's any big deal, I'm just still not sure that's a good thing or doing them any favors in the long run. On the younger end of the spectrum, I think it sexualizes them too young. I also see that kids currently have a tendency to rotate through trying out different orientations, and if they have had to publicly announce when younger, that makes it more awkward to change, and I also think it doesn't prepare them for the adult world, particularly at work. Do we want to teach kids in school that announcing sexual preferences is a normal thing to do in casual conversation, and then have them need to unlearn that in the work place where that's not always going to be appropriate? I'm coming at this as a parent with a couple non-straight kids (at least one of which is still in flux), and I think this dynamic would have made things worse for them. Pronouns are different than sexuality to me, as they really have nothing to do with that, and there is nothing "inappropriate" about them in any setting.

I am old. 
I had to read this couple of times. 

[KSera]

9 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

I am old. 
I had to read this couple of times. 

Lol, because I ramble and am confusing, or because of something strange I said?

[Roadrunner]

I think national dialogue is also so difficult because experience is so vary different geographically. Having lived in the south, the reality and needs in Mississippi Delta are just not even comparable to Bay Area even among disenfranchised communities. I could be wrong, but it feels like two completely different worlds. 

[Roadrunner]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

Lol, because I ramble and am confusing, or because of something strange I said?

I am just remembering my experience in high school and college and thinking how that conversation would have gone. I mean I know this is a different century, but boy have I been living either under ground or the world has just changed without me noticing. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I just feel old. Like I don’t belong in this world anymore. 

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Yeah, what I'm seeing is the same, in that many kids don't think it's any big deal, I'm just still not sure that's a good thing or doing them any favors in the long run. On the younger end of the spectrum, I think it sexualizes them too young. I also see that kids currently have a tendency to rotate through trying out different orientations, and if they have had to publicly announce when younger, that makes it more awkward to change, and I also think it doesn't prepare them for the adult world, particularly at work. Do we want to teach kids in school that announcing sexual preferences is a normal thing to do in casual conversation, and then have them need to unlearn that in the work place where that's not always going to be appropriate? I'm coming at this as a parent with a couple non-straight kids (at least one of which is still in flux), and I think this dynamic would have made things worse for them. Pronouns are different than sexuality to me, as they really have nothing to do with that, and there is nothing "inappropriate" about them in any setting.

My oldest has reported that many of her teachers are, for the first time, asking about pronouns and name preferences and DD was thrilled. It’s not something I’ve ever done or routinely done but, for her and her peers, this was a welcome change. This isn’t a think in ES/MS here. 

Edited October 14, 2021 by Sneezyone

[KSera]

8 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

My oldest has reported that many of her teachers are, for the first time, asking about pronouns and name preferences and DD was thrilled. It’s not something I’ve ever done or routinely done but, for her and her peers, this was a welcome change. This isn’t a think in ES/MS here. 

I’m in a weekly group (think something like a book club) where we are supposed to give our name and pronouns the first time we speak each week. Honestly, it feels performative. No one has changed their pronouns over this time and not once has anyone given a preferred pronoun that was anything other than what people would naturally default to on instinct. I understand if someone joined the group where that was more ambiguous, it could help them be more comfortable, but that seems easily addressed by the leader asking everyone that week to introduce themselves with names and pronouns. For everyone to do it every week feels, like I said, performative. I can understand college classes having people do it the first day, especially as changing pronouns is super common in middle school through college students where I am. 

[Fritz]

5 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

What I don’t understand is why we can’t fund schools on per student basis across the state so no matter where you are or who you are, you get the same funding. I mean it’s a public school. If the only advantage of white schools is in the funding, this should be a relatively easy fix. 

I would add that that money should go with each child to the school chosen by their parents with school choice.

[Dmmetler]

9 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

My oldest has reported that many of her teachers are, for the first time, asking about pronouns and name preferences and DD was thrilled. It’s not something I’ve ever done or routinely done but, for her and her peers, this was a welcome change. This isn’t a think in ES/MS here. 

 

9 hours ago, KSera said:

I’m in a weekly group (think something like a book club) where we are supposed to give our name and pronouns the first time we speak each week. Honestly, it feels performative. No one has changed their pronouns over this time and not once has anyone given a preferred pronoun that was anything other than what people would naturally default to on instinct. I understand if someone joined the group where that was more ambiguous, it could help them be more comfortable, but that seems easily addressed by the leader asking everyone that week to introduce themselves with names and pronouns. For everyone to do it every week feels, like I said, performative. I can understand college classes having people do it the first day, especially as changing pronouns is super common in middle school through college students where I am. 

I can see it at the beginning of the semester, but yeah, especially in a small group, it's not likely many folks will be changing their name and pronouns, and it would get annoying and a waste of time. 

 

My kid has complained that some of the required first year seminars and hall meetings end up spending so much time making sure everyone feels seen and heard that they never really get to content-but at least it isn't happening in, say, Spanish or Biology. 

[historically accurate]

9 hours ago, Fritz said:

I would add that that money should go with each child to the school chosen by their parents with school choice.

I don't know about school choice. We tried it out one year when it was new here in IL - DD received $ that she could use at any private school. We chose one about 15 minutes from our house. I wasn't working at the time; I was homeschooling her little sister and shuffling her older sister to DE (about 10 minutes beyond the private school). So much driving. I don't know how someone who has less money than us would've been able to do it. The timing was such that I couldn't have worked full-time, and the cost in gas was pretty high too. So, in theory, yes, school choice for everyone sounds good, but many, many kids can't use $ if the transportation isn't a part of it.

[goldberry]

12 hours ago, felicity said:

And as far as Charter Schools and reasons teachers aren't fans. There are several and I feel kind of hypocritical in my feelings about charters since I used one to homeschool originally. Over time my thoughts have changed. School choice sounds like a great thing until you end up gutting the neighborhood school and the only kids that are left are in the marginalized groups because they have no transportation to the nicer school across town so funding drops and the school gets a bad reputation so fewer people move in and it's a cycle. School choice sounds so "fair:" everyone chooses which school they would like to attend. Except if your parents work four jobs between them, you are a kindergartner, and the school you would like to attend is 3 bus rides away. How will you get there? There is no transportation to the fabulous school across town. So again, you're stuck at the increasingly crappy older school that teachers don't want to touch with a ten-foot pole, except for the first-year teacher that takes the job because she has to, but leaves as soon as something better comes by. 

 

Thanks for sharing that, great perspective.  Personally I'm conflicted about charter schools, because I see the advantages, but the points you make are real.  I wonder if the person asking why would people be against charter schools takes time to read that.  It's kind of the same perspective I have about "let states do whatever they want and if people don't like it they can move".  That's so clueless about lower income life.  

Edited October 14, 2021 by goldberry

[goldberry]

On 10/10/2021 at 12:36 PM, Fritz said:

These same people pushing "equity" will NOT allow for school choice. Why is that?

 

12 hours ago, felicity said:

 

And as far as Charter Schools and reasons teachers aren't fans. There are several and I feel kind of hypocritical in my feelings about charters since I used one to homeschool originally. Over time my thoughts have changed. School choice sounds like a great thing until you end up gutting the neighborhood school and the only kids that are left are in the marginalized groups because they have no transportation to the nicer school across town so funding drops and the school gets a bad reputation so fewer people move in and it's a cycle. School choice sounds so "fair:" everyone chooses which school they would like to attend. Except if your parents work four jobs between them, you are a kindergartner, and the school you would like to attend is 3 bus rides away. How will you get there? There is no transportation to the fabulous school across town. So again, you're stuck at the increasingly crappy older school that teachers don't want to touch with a ten-foot pole, except for the first-year teacher that takes the job because she has to, but leaves as soon as something better comes by. 

 

Fritz what's your take on the points that Felicity raises?

[QueenCat]

On 10/11/2021 at 2:44 PM, wathe said:

Public schools, in their essence, are the very definition of social justice.  Free, equitable schooling for all, regardless of race, religion, socioeconomic status, or ability to pay.  Public schools are "The bulldozer that levels the playing fields of opportunities in America" - to quote from interview upthread.  Of course social justice belongs in public schools.  Social justice belongs everywhere!  But it especially belongs in public schools.

Exactly! Additionally, academics are not the only thing that should be considered educational. Schools are about education and far more. 

[Fritz]

3 hours ago, historically accurate said:

I don't know about school choice. We tried it out one year when it was new here in IL - DD received $ that she could use at any private school. We chose one about 15 minutes from our house. I wasn't working at the time; I was homeschooling her little sister and shuffling her older sister to DE (about 10 minutes beyond the private school). So much driving. I don't know how someone who has less money than us would've been able to do it. The timing was such that I couldn't have worked full-time, and the cost in gas was pretty high too. So, in theory, yes, school choice for everyone sounds good, but many, many kids can't use $ if the transportation isn't a part of it.

Just spitballing here, but how about more than one school offered on each campus. Being that everyone would not be choosing the same school maybe there would be more room to divide a school into 2 schools each with a different focus. That won't completely fix the issue I realize. Maybe the travel issue could be lessened somewhat by grouping a couple of schools on each campus.

I don't think it is possible to address every possible scenario to make everything work perfectly for everyone. I do think part of parenting is deciding what the major things are for your family and finding away to make them happen. If school choice is a major thing then it is up to the parents to find a way to make it happen (ride sharing etc). I was raised by a single mom with no extended family in the area so I get how challenging that can be.

With the current system if you live in an area with a crappy public school you are stuck with it. Having a choice to take your child's money to the school of your choice at least allows for the option of leaving the crappy school. I think you should be allowed to take that money and use it for private school, a different public school, charter school, and possibly for homeschooling. Not sure about the homeschooling thing though. I like the idea myself, but that could open a can of worms.

Edited October 14, 2021 by Fritz

[Fritz]

3 hours ago, Dmmetler said:

 

I can see it at the beginning of the semester, but yeah, especially in a small group, it's not likely many folks will be changing their name and pronouns, and it would get annoying and a waste of time. 

 

My kid has complained that some of the required first year seminars and hall meetings end up spending so much time making sure everyone feels seen and heard that they never really get to content-but at least it isn't happening in, say, Spanish or Biology. 

This is my concern with social justice in the public schools. This becomes the focus and academics suffers.

[Fritz]

1 hour ago, goldberry said:

 

Fritz what's your take on the points that Felicity raises?

I addressed this in another post above.

 

[goldberry]

24 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I don't think it is possible to address every possible scenario to make everything work perfectly for everyone. I do think part of parenting is deciding what the major things are for your family and finding away to make them happen. If school choice is a major thing then it is up to the parents to find a way to make it happen (ride sharing etc). I was raised by a single mom with no extended family in the area so I get how challenging that can be.

With the current system if you live in an area with a crappy public school you are stuck with it. Having a choice to take your child's money to the school of your choice at least allows for the option of leaving the crappy school. 

 

7 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I addressed this in another post above.

 

But part of Felicity's point was that the crappy school will become even crappier and the people stuck there will become even worse off than they are currently.  There have to be options that don't make things *worse* for some while making things better for others.

[goldberry]

13 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

My oldest has reported that many of her teachers are, for the first time, asking about pronouns and name preferences and DD was thrilled. It’s not something I’ve ever done or routinely done but, for her and her peers, this was a welcome change. This isn’t a think in ES/MS here. 

I don't think anything about pronouns or name preferences, but someone mentioned sexual orientation.  Is that really happening?  I mean, if someone wants to announce it as part of introducing themselves, that's fine of course, but is anyone being *expected* to announce it?

Editing to add, I get the current generation is very *out* about sharing things.  When I meet my daughter's friends from college, they very often announce personal things during our first meeting, including mental health diagnoses, etc.  But it shouldn't be *asked* I don't think.

Edited October 14, 2021 by goldberry

[Fritz]

On 10/11/2021 at 12:45 PM, Pam in CT said:

 

 

 

To lay my own cards on the table:

I do NOT deny that potentially well-intended efforts can result in unintended bad effects (whether the effort is to address racism, or open "school choice").

I do NOT condone classroom exercises,  particularly *public* exercises, that sort kids by characteristics of birth and demand that they speak "for," or "defend," their race/sex/ethnic group etc., some of which were outlined in one of the other threads.  Whatever the original intention, that is not appropriate.

I think it is not only appropriate, but affirmatively good, to assign kids work that asks them to consider multiple perspectives.  (ie "Write a letter back to the Old Country from the POV of an indentured servant who made the journey).

I think it is not only appropriate, but affirmatively NECESSARY, to study historical facts like Ruby Bridges (=WTM "grammar" stage); Tulsa Massacre and its before/after context (=WTM "logic" stage); and Case for Reparations (= WTM "rhetoric" stage); and to assign kids work that asks them to respond in developmentally appropriate ways ("grammar" - draw a picture and write a few sentences; "logic" - 2-4 paragraphs comparing what the Greenwood district looked like before and after; "rhetoric" - essay on what/when/where/why "redlining" was important, why, when & how it was changed, and what are some residual effects).

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with this. Unfortunately, as we saw in the old CRT thread, is not at all what is/was being presented in the public schools and some private schools as well.

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, Fritz said:

I agree with this. Unfortunately, as we saw in the old CRT thread, is not at all what is/was being presented in the public schools and some private schools as well.

Then how about the energy currently being focused on eliminating any discussion of race in the schools be instead shifted to focus on making sure it’s done appropriately. This is not a case where it works to throw the baby out with the bathwater

[Fritz]

11 minutes ago, goldberry said:

 

But part of Felicity's point was that the crappy school will become even crappier and the people stuck there will become even worse off than they are currently.  There have to be options that don't make things *worse* for some while making things better for others.

As I said I just don't think we can fix everything for everyone without the parents having to make sacrifices for what is most important for them. 

The charter school closest to my home requires parents to volunteer a certain number of hours. There are weekend projects they can help with etc, so not necessarily during school hours. I don't see this as a bad thing. Parents need to be involved.

This school has been able to remain open throughout the pandemic. I am sure this has helped the working parents. 

[goldberry]

15 hours ago, SlowRiver said:

With schools, isn't the fundamental problem that no one wants their kids being taught stuff that is really contrary to their family views, be they religious, political, cultural, whatever? No one wants their kids learning that their family has views or values that are lesser or backwards or deserving of ridicule. 

So when you have state funded schools that are meant to be for everyone, there is a line to be walked. There will likely always be some people on the outskirts of society who will never feel their views are respected, but generally, school's teaching has to fall more or less within the public consensus. On other issues they need to be agnostic.

This is an interesting perspective. Public schools have always been about what is beneficial for *society as a whole* not what is beneficial for individual kids or families.  That's part of why we chose to homeschool, but the reasoning makes sense.  If you have a publicly funded school, it has to benefit the majority.  In our country now, we are just about evenly split about what exactly is beneficial.  So what you are saying is a reality.

The problem I see is that the same people who don't want a teacher supporting BLM in the classroom also want to bring back patriotism and prayer in the classroom.  History can't be taught neutrally it seems, because even basic facts are being touted as anti-American.  People who want "leftist propaganda" out of the classroom, seem to be okay with their own values in the classroom, because to *them* those aren't propaganda. Those are "American values".  How is that gap ever bridged?  

(Can't seem to correct my weird font, sorry.  I haven't been on the board in awhile, where is the font size option??)

 

[Fritz]

8 minutes ago, KSera said:

Then how about the energy currently being focused on eliminating any discussion of race in the schools be instead shifted to focus on making sure it’s done appropriately. This is not a case where it works to throw the baby out with the bathwater

As was noted upthread, we did not see ONE example of this being done in the previous CRT thread. We did see multiple examples of it being done inappropriately. When schools have people like this woman involved I think we can be sure it will be inappropriately done.

https://mynorthwest.com/3182734/rantz-school-equity-leader-racist-tiktok/

A local school district’s equity team leader is no longer in her role after parents discovered her racist and vulgar TikTok videos. But the school has known about her conduct for months.

On her social media channel, Alicia Busch routinely attacks and mocks white people. She labels them “amoral colonizers” and explains she wants to make them uncomfortable. Though she threatens people with physical violence in some videos, she also says, “there is no safe place for BIPOC to exist when whiteness is present.” She also claims that the “American dream is white supremacy.”

 

[Roadrunner]

32 minutes ago, goldberry said:

 

But part of Felicity's point was that the crappy school will become even crappier and the people stuck there will become even worse off than they are currently.  There have to be options that don't make things *worse* for some while making things better for others.

So I always ask this question - what makes a school crappy? 
I think for every school we need the basics - clean and well maintained facility, good teachers, basics school supplies, Chromebooks (since this is a new century). And hot meals. You can’t learn if you are hungry. That we could buy with funds.

What makes a school good beyond that? I don’t know. 

I can tell you that we looked at private schools, and besides an incredible cost, I didn’t think putting my kids among super rich who can charter flights for private parties and have valet parking for birthdays was going to be psychologically a good thing for my rural kids in 1k sf house. I would much prefer a well funded school where my kids go with members of their community. Now this breaks down if you live among gangs and super high crime. In that situation I want kids on the bus to a safe place, because you can’t learn if you are afraid for your safety either. 
 

I am for school choice for a number of reason. At least in a town closest to us that has plenty of charter schools, the segregation hasn’t been racial but more along the value lines - some rushed to super academic IB school, some are at Waldorf, some went to “no homework” charter, some to dual language program. I think that has been very good for kids. And considering massive lotteries families play for those options, they are in high demand. However again, in a small community where distance isn’t as big of an issue, it works. In a city where you have to negotiate several bus stops, it might not. 
So I think in some ways communities need to be involved in sorting through this and supported by fair distribution of funds.