Utah Charter School allowing students to opt out of Black History Month curriculum

[Badger]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

But surely you understand the fact that African American contributions and involvement in American history has been downplayed enormously, and Black History Month was an is a not only laudable, but necessary teaching tool to remedy that misinformation?

[Badger]

ah yes, Black History, that part of American history that is totally separate from everything else.   how will they ever learn about it if doesn't have its own month?

Absolutely pathetic post, even from someone whose whole shtick is trolling, bad faith sh!tposts. Try a LOT harder if you're going to keep that up.

sorry you feel that way m8, not sure what your deal is.

Downplaying and belittling Black History Month is waaaaaay over the line, even for a trollpost.

Morgan Freeman has the same views on Black history month.  Is he "waaaaaaay over the line, even for a troll"?

Crazy idea, stop assuming the worst from everyone.

Rather apparent that Morgan Freeman's views on the subject versus shua's are markedly different. The former seems to want to expand teaching a black history to 12 months a year, whereas the latter is clearly bothered by it being even one month of the year.

[John Dule]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month, nor should people be able to "opt out" of it.

Would you support making a more thorough effort to incorporate black history into and throughout the broader American history curriculum?

Yes of course. I also think that schools should pay more attention to post-Civil War issues in black history. This is probably not true in the South, but in California I think the public schools place far more emphasis on slavery than any other event in black history. If things like redlining or Jim Crow aren't given their due, you end up raising ignorant kids who think that the 13th Amendment solved everything.

Slight unrelated, but as a California atheist, what are your views on the Spanish mission models that middle schoolers usually build in your state? I didn't know they were a thing until last year and even as a Christian I'm frankly disgusted that those missions are celebrated for their colonist roots, and the ensuing destruction of the Native way of life.

I agree tbh, though expunging this particular element of California life from the public sphere could open a real can of worms. Half the cities in this state are named for saints and missions, including my home (San Francisco). Should they all be renamed? Perhaps this is next on the woke itinerary.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but unless you live in Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York or Massachusetts, not much class time needs to be devoted to your particular state. Sure, kids should learn about national events (like slavery) in terms of how they relate to their local areas, but doing things like building those missions or making clay topographical maps of California are just not good uses of class time. That time is better spent on learning about international history, something that Americans remain woefully ignorant about.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month, nor should people be able to "opt out" of it.

Would you support making a more thorough effort to incorporate black history into and throughout the broader American history curriculum?

Yes of course. I also think that schools should pay more attention to post-Civil War issues in black history. This is probably not true in the South, but in California I think the public schools place far more emphasis on slavery than any other event in black history. If things like redlining or Jim Crow aren't given their due, you end up raising ignorant kids who think that the 13th Amendment solved everything.

Slight unrelated, but as a California atheist, what are your views on the Spanish mission models that middle schoolers usually build in your state? I didn't know they were a thing until last year and even as a Christian I'm frankly disgusted that those missions are celebrated for their colonist roots, and the ensuing destruction of the Native way of life.

I agree tbh, though expunging this particular element of California life from the public sphere could open a real can of worms. Half the cities in this state are named for saints and missions, including my home (San Francisco). Should they all be renamed? Perhaps this is next on the woke itinerary.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but unless you live in Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York or Massachusetts, not much class time needs to be devoted to your particular state. Sure, kids should learn about national events (like slavery) in terms of how they relate to their local areas, but doing things like building those missions or making clay topographical maps of California are just not good uses of class time. That time is better spent on learning about international history, something that Americans remain woefully ignorant about.

You don't need to expunge it from the public sphere, but history can and should be taught differently. I'm not in favor of renaming cities (though I do support renaming Columbus to Flavortown, because... come on), but schools in Germany don't build model concentration camps to learn about the bad parts of their history.

I wasn't cheering on the folks vandalizing Confederate statues even though I believe there are too damn many of them and even Robert E. Lee himself would be totally opposed to the way the South venerates him and other Confederate generals and leaders. Not everything needs to be canceled or renamed, though.

But I suppose there isn't much disagreement here. International history and current events are totally neglected in most public schools; even the public schools I went to were very good compared to others in the state and country, but international history was a footnote. My mom's high school had a mandatory current events class for every student, but that wasn't even offered as an elective at my own.

Overall I think civic education in the US has declined considerably, and as a result we have a population that is politically mis- or uninformed and uninvolved.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

You give us a break.

[7,052,770]

You give us a break.

[Person Man]

The simplest explanation that isn't naive about this topic is that the school was trying to make an "anti-anti racist" safe space. You can't normally opt out of a subject in school unless you have a compelling reason to do so. For example, your family is unable resolve comprehensive sex education with its theology or church membership. The question then becomes whether there are any compelling reasons to not learn Black History. The only compelling reason most us understand is that there is some sort of racist sentiment amongst students and families that leads students and families to find Black History to be inappropriate. On the other hand, there is this question as to why Black History is its own discrete subject. Would integrating Black History into a general History curriculum make it harder to "opt out" of make it harder to teach?

Am I caught up?

[Frodo]

And the only reason Black History Month exists is because black contributions to American History were overlooked in regular history. American History was and is still seen as White History by many people.

There are two states which have an outsized influence on our textbooks -California and Texas.

If you are a liberal, Texas is the more problematic of the two given how politicized the process of writing textbooks already is.  And as long as it remains a conservative Republican state, we should expect this state of affairs to continue for at least another decade.  I hope Texas Democrats pay close attention (if they aren't already) to who is elected to the Texas State Board of Education, for they decide what should be taught to future generations.  

[DrScholl]

American History was and is still seen as White History by many people.

I think the only way to to fix this is integrating the curriculums. Otherwise "black history" will forever be independent from the rest of American history, and American history will be white by default.

That means teaching about slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow exactly as it was. For example, if  you are going to teach about Harriet Tubman and Martin Luther King Jr. you need to teach about the lead up and after effects of the achievements. Lots white people prefer sanitized history and truly integrating curriculum means not sanitizing it. Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, but he also had racist views and that doesn't isn't much taught.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

[Former President tack50]

And the only reason Black History Month exists is because black contributions to American History were overlooked in regular history. American History was and is still seen as White History by many people.

There are two states which have an outsized influence on our textbooks -California and Texas.

If you are a liberal, Texas is the more problematic of the two given how politicized the process of writing textbooks already is.  And as long as it remains a conservative Republican state, we should expect this state of affairs to continue for at least another decade.  I hope Texas Democrats pay close attention (if they aren't already) to who is elected to the Texas State Board of Education, for they decide what should be taught to future generations. 

Couldn't states simply mandate that books for use in say, Wyoming schools, be approved by the Wyoming department of education or whatever?

Which then simply refuses to approve any textbook that doesn't have contents reflecting the state's history and particularities and what not?

The end goal of that would be 50 state textbooks and curriculums of course.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

There are different ways of putting emphasis on Black history.  Ignoring the presence of black people for most of the curriculum and then focusing on it obsessively for one month is unavoidably distortionary.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

There are different ways of putting emphasis on Black history.  Ignoring the presence of black people for most of the curriculum and then focusing on it obsessively for one month is unavoidably distortionary.

No one wants anyone to "ignore the presence of Black people for most the curriculum," the point is that, more often than not, this is happening to at least some extent. Thus, we established a period within which to bring more attention to it because the regular curriculum probably is not doing a sufficient job. The purpose of Black History Month was not for schools to ignore Black history every other month of the year, the purpose was for it to be a supplement.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

There are different ways of putting emphasis on Black history.  Ignoring the presence of black people for most of the curriculum and then focusing on it obsessively for one month is unavoidably distortionary.

No one wants anyone to "ignore the presence of Black people for most the curriculum," the point is that, more often than not, this is happening to at least some extent. Thus, we established a period within which to bring more attention to it because the regular curriculum probably is not doing a sufficient job. The purpose of Black History Month was not for schools to ignore Black history every other month of the year, the purpose was for it to be a supplement.

THEN  CHANGE      THE      CURRICULUM .

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

My only problem with these Black History Month curriculums is that they pretty much only talk about slavery and Jim Crow/Civil Rights Movement. There is much more to Black history here in America than those things. There needs to be more highlighting of the achievements that Black people have made in this country despite the hardships we have faced.

More attention needs to be put on people like Bessie Coleman, Jesse LeRoy Brown, Matthew Henson, William H. Hastie, A. Philip Randolph, Eugene Jacques Bullard, Madam C. J. Walker, George Washington Carver, James Banning, Willa Brown, Robert Lawrence, Guy Bluford, Mae Jemison, Patricia Roberts Harris, etc.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

isn't this a Montessori school? Why wouldn't they let children opt out, given the kind of ideal that undergirds Montessori schools altogether?

[Kingpoleon]

If they're able to "opt out" of learning Black history, then it's no longer American history.

To the contrary - that’s exactly what American history textbooks showed until the 1980s.

[jimrtex]

Anyhow, back in Utah, the school has backed out of sending the opt-out-form

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/537677-utah-school-allowing-parents-to-opt-students-out-of-black-history-month

It appears that the controversy was that the school had sent out a formal opt-out form. It is unknown what the original parent objection was. It appears that the school would have worked with the parent. Perhaps the parent said something like "you should have let parents know when there is something controversial", and the principal said, "I agree", seeking consensus and understanding of other viewpoints.

Perhaps the wording of the form was awkward. Perhaps it said, "We know that many parents ...", and other parents freaked.

Given that the school is under a charter, it might be subject to state dictates that require rigid adherence that is antithetical to Montessori Methods.

I tried to find out what the role of the parent involvement was in Montessori schools. I did find one school that pointed out that Maria Montessori was a clinician, and she might have discouraged parents from interfering with her studies, in effect contaminating the data. But it went on to say that she also spent a lifetime studying educational methods, and would not have rigidly clung to a particular orthodoxy, and that Montessori school encouraged parental involvement in their children's education.

This has an interesting perspective:

https://guidepostmontessori.com/blog/approaching-black-history-month-montessori-perspective

If I understand correctly it suggests that Black History should not be compartmentalized in a "month".

[Badger]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

There are different ways of putting emphasis on Black history.  Ignoring the presence of black people for most of the curriculum and then focusing on it obsessively for one month is unavoidably distortionary.

No one wants anyone to "ignore the presence of Black people for most the curriculum," the point is that, more often than not, this is happening to at least some extent. Thus, we established a period within which to bring more attention to it because the regular curriculum probably is not doing a sufficient job. The purpose of Black History Month was not for schools to ignore Black history every other month of the year, the purpose was for it to be a supplement.

THEN  CHANGE      THE      CURRICULUM .

As previously noted, the setting of curriculum is almost entirely local. It's much harder for any school district no matter how isolated or white bread to completely ignore a nationally recognized learning. Such as Black History Month. Simply spouting off about changing the curriculum didn't work before and wouldn't work again.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Black history isn't different from American history, so it shouldn't have its own month

Kinda confused by what's going on here. Do you think the arguments in favor of Black History Month are based on the premise that Black history is 100% distinct from American history?

That is the subconscious motivation, yes.

Even if it isn't, it is the message that it sends, which is more relevant.

If that's your big takeaway, that's really on you. I've always found it pretty obvious that putting emphasis on Black history does not innately suggest it is completely independent of general American history, it simply is addressing that fact that the experience of Black Americans throughout that general history has not been duly recognized.

There are different ways of putting emphasis on Black history.  Ignoring the presence of black people for most of the curriculum and then focusing on it obsessively for one month is unavoidably distortionary.

No one wants anyone to "ignore the presence of Black people for most the curriculum," the point is that, more often than not, this is happening to at least some extent. Thus, we established a period within which to bring more attention to it because the regular curriculum probably is not doing a sufficient job. The purpose of Black History Month was not for schools to ignore Black history every other month of the year, the purpose was for it to be a supplement.

THEN  CHANGE      THE      CURRICULUM .

As previously noted, the setting of curriculum is almost entirely local. It's much harder for any school district no matter how isolated or white bread to completely ignore a nationally recognized learning. Such as Black History Month. Simply spouting off about changing the curriculum didn't work before and wouldn't work again.

The setting of curriculum is local therefore they can't ignore "a nationally recognized learning"? 

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

Black History Month is essential because racist textbook/curriculum writers overlook black history.

[Del Tachi]

This thread is a disaster, but I just want to ask what parts of "Black history" do posters feel are overlooked or omitted from mainstream history curricula?  I felt, as a public school student in Mississippi, the contributions/situations of Black Americans were pretty talked about and discussed throughout my American history classes, and not just in the context of slavery, Jim Crow or the Civil Rights era.  What Black people/events need do you feel need to be added to the American history canon?

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

I'm genuinely baffled as to what the issue was with a Black History Month curriculum in the first place. Isn't it just a specific module within the history course dedicated to discussion a specific subcurrent of U.S. history? Just adding more emphasis?

We had specific modules on Indiana history, pre-Columbian America, the Civil War, Reconstruction, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Modern Era throughout courses growing up. And in 2012, we did an election special module in APUSH. Would having a Black History Month special module just have a concentrated curriculum and then relate everything back to what was previously taught? I don't see an issue in that; there's more than one way to divide up learning history, whether it's continuous or in dedicated block segments.

Why was there an opt-out in the first place? Just teach the kids the curriculum without asking the parents! They don't need to micromanage it!

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

This thread is a disaster, but I just want to ask what parts of "Black history" do posters feel are overlooked or omitted from mainstream history curricula?  I felt, as a public school student in Mississippi, the contributions/situations of Black Americans were pretty talked about and discussed throughout my American history classes, and not just in the context of slavery, Jim Crow or the Civil Rights era.  What Black people/events need do you feel need to be added to the American history canon?

I'm not a trained historian by any means but off the top of my head, just from the 20th century (with a couple of exceptions):

- The experience of the Black war soldier and veteran (in recruitment, service incl. overseas service, and upon return and reintegration to society)

- Racial violence and social control (lynching and state/local authority's complicity or inaction therein, the Red Summer of 1919, anti-miscegenation laws, house bombings to enforce segregation, race riots in NYC, Memphis, Chicago, Tulsa, Detroit, Los Angeles, others)

- The Great Migration

- Black contributions to and relationships with American music (the banjo and guitar, minstrel shows, gospel choirs, Delta blues, electric blues, jazz, Mo-town, race records, co-option by white artists, hip hop)

- Segregation in housing (prevention of Black accumulation of inter-generational wealth, red-lining, blockbusting, restrictive housing covenants, urban "blight" removal, school segregation, federal state and local involvement therein)

- Racial politics (FDR Re-alignment, 1948 Democratic convention, Massive Resistance and explicitly-pro segregation candidates in public office, Nixon's Southern Strategy, to say nothing of widespread Black disenfranchisement both before and after the Voting Right's Act)

- Mass incarceration, the War on Drugs, and "tough on crime"

I went to school in one of the best public school systems in the country, with an outstanding and very socially-conscious US History teacher, and still didn't learn about most of the above in any meaningful way until college at the earliest, and there wasn't any serious effort to draw through-lines to the present day.