NEA(largest teacher union) calls for nationwide teaching of CRT

[lfromnj]

I have regularly noted that you bring one of the least educated perspectives to this site. Your characterization of this issue, which is similar to others in this thread, could not make it more obvious that you have never and will never actually make a good faith effort to understand what's in the material.

You, Bismarck, Rfayette, DTC. Your misguided o
pinion sounds a lot like the "death panels" argument or something like that. Just invented out of whole cloth and designed to inflame your deep insecurities about systemic failures in American society.

Why isn't my name in this list

[GP270watch]

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1412447713149566981?s=20

You have a whole network in FoxNews that the majority of Americans watch just lying and putting out garbage like this that makes teaching actual history controversial.

[Torie]

This whole CRT discussion, here, there and everywhere, has been an utter fail for me, because next to no one defines just what CRT is, and out of the CRT "tool box" just what should or should not be taught, and at what age level, and by what method, and how often.

What we have is just a hot button politically laden "trigger" term that people react to, and that is that.

One thing I do know, however, I think. I would time being spent on CRT that on "teaching" me that I am a homo cis male.

That is all.

In general it was an obscure racial theory a few decades ago  with some ideas based on principles about inequity in our society. After this some snippets and parts of it have been placed in DiAngelo/Kendi/similar books in a very weird way. Now these books are going through DEI sessions all across the nation especially after George Floyd, and it has some really creepy teachings such as the myth of Yakub from the nation of Islam. It can either be harmful towards white children by making them self hating or teach black children that all white people are out to get them and they can't succeed. Either way there may be a narrow argument to teach CRT as a small part of a high level English Class in 11th/12th grade  but to use CRT to develop curriculum and teaching strategies for young children will be incredibly harmful.  I don't even think its really necessary to teach it in 11th/12th but its just something that I am fine with including with discretion up to to the school/teacher.

In a summary the CRT being referred to recently is mostly the woke Diversity sessions being borne out of the Floyd protests that have taken over the liberal cultural elite who are now trying to apply it to the entire nation. Actual pure CRT from a few decades ago is actually a bit similar to Marxist critical analysis except replacing class with race. The right has been fighting against this although at times they have gone too far.

Thank you. What specifically is in the drill for the kids at rather young ages that is designed to cause or results in both white kids and non white kids hating whites?  Some examples would be great.

[lfromnj]

This whole CRT discussion, here, there and everywhere, has been an utter fail for me, because next to no one defines just what CRT is, and out of the CRT "tool box" just what should or should not be taught, and at what age level, and by what method, and how often.

What we have is just a hot button politically laden "trigger" term that people react to, and that is that.

One thing I do know, however, I think. I would time being spent on CRT that on "teaching" me that I am a homo cis male.

That is all.

In general it was an obscure racial theory a few decades ago  with some ideas based on principles about inequity in our society. After this some snippets and parts of it have been placed in DiAngelo/Kendi/similar books in a very weird way. Now these books are going through DEI sessions all across the nation especially after George Floyd, and it has some really creepy teachings such as the myth of Yakub from the nation of Islam. It can either be harmful towards white children by making them self hating or teach black children that all white people are out to get them and they can't succeed. Either way there may be a narrow argument to teach CRT as a small part of a high level English Class in 11th/12th grade  but to use CRT to develop curriculum and teaching strategies for young children will be incredibly harmful.  I don't even think its really necessary to teach it in 11th/12th but its just something that I am fine with including with discretion up to to the school/teacher.

In a summary the CRT being referred to recently is mostly the woke Diversity sessions being borne out of the Floyd protests that have taken over the liberal cultural elite who are now trying to apply it to the entire nation. Actual pure CRT from a few decades ago is actually a bit similar to Marxist critical analysis except replacing class with race. The right has been fighting against this although at times they have gone too far.

Thank you. What specifically is in the drill for the kids at rather young ages that is designed to or results in both white kids and non white kids to hate whites?  Some examples would be great.

I recommend reading the fire article I linked earlier which is less biased than my own view I admit. I will even admit some of the reaction back to this wokeness has gone  too far which the fire article will point out.

Anyway the most extreme example at a public school is Evanston IL which is very woke but it still is an example and these ideas do seep through lesser degrees in other schools.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/black-lives-matter-curriculum-has-unintended-lesson/618501/

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/should-black-lives-matter-agenda-be-taught-school/618277/
https://www.thefire.org/13-important-points-in-the-campus-k-12-critical-race-theory-debate/

The book instructs a young white reader that she doesn’t need to “defend” racism, and it presents her with a stark decision. An illustration depicts a devil holding a “contract binding you to whiteness.” It reads:

You get:

✓stolen land

✓stolen riches

✓special favors†

WHITENESS gets:

✓to mess endlessly with the lives of your friends, neighbors, loved ones, and all fellow humans of COLOR

✓your soul

Sign below:

_____________

†Land, riches, and favors may be revoked at any time, for any reason.

Mboyayi: My children have always been so proud of who they are. Then all of a sudden they started to question themselves because of what they were taught after arriving here. My son has wanted to be a lawyer since he was 11. Then one day he came home and told me, “But Mommy, there are these systems put in place that prevent Black people from accomplishing anything.” That’s what they’re teaching Black kids: that all of this time for the past 400 years, this is what [white people have] done to you and your people. The narrative is, “You can’t get ahead.”

[Torie]

https://www.thefire.org/13-important-points-in-the-campus-k-12-critical-race-theory-debate/

Here's a fairly decent article. Some states like Idaho are targetting college classes. FIRE opposes certain colleges having mandatory diversity trainings with the desire for certain outcomes but overly regulating elective class speech is going far.

This isn’t the only part likely to cause anxiety for well-intentioned teachers. Many of the bills prohibit “making part of any course” that “any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex.” It is not hard to imagine a student feeling uncomfortable by learning true facts about historical racism, presented reasonably, coming home distraught and telling their parents. Under these bills, parents may argue that the teacher has done something unlawful. This is always an issue when speech restrictions focus on concepts characterized by a subjective reaction like discomfort or guilt, without making absolutely clear that the regulation is targeting behavior intended to create that response in students. Indeed, my book with Jon Haidt, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” emphasized the dangers of focusing on impact over intent.

I think it should be made clearer with the word should. Teaching about certain events may always cause guilt but the goal shouldn't be to cause guilt even if that is a side effect and bills should target clarify this a bit further.

Overall this article is fairly well written with a lot of nuance on all sides with good sourcing. It should also be a warning for the right when their. Ills do go too far .

That was an informative article that clarified some issues for me. Clarity in what terms mean is the first step in understanding the controversy in an intelligent way, at least for me. This issue has certainly gained salience in a hurry hasn't it? There must be a lot of action in states and school districts on this.

[Ferguson97]

We need more parents with the courage to reject the idea that their children should be watching commercial television at all.

All the kids who weren't allowed to watch TV turned out to be the most socially maladjusted kids in my school. Not sure what you think this is accomplishing.

[beaver2.0]

We need more parents with the courage to reject the idea that their children should be watching commercial television at all.

All the kids who weren't allowed to watch TV turned out to be the most socially maladjusted kids in my school. Not sure what you think this is accomplishing.

While I have made roughly the same observation, perhaps this has more to do with the fact that the families these children come from had other things going on.  If more normal families cut down on TV/video game/screen time I think we'd be better off.

I'd also mention that I was not allowed to watch TV (except for movies with my parents, and it wasn't like I was kept to just baby stuff, I watched mostly old Westerns) and while I am not going to call myself the most well-adjusted man in history, I think not watching hours of crap television was helpful.

[H. Ross Peron]

Honestly, one of the biggest long-term consequences of Hillary’s loss in 2016, and Trump’s win, is basically this conversation here—that a huge segment of leftists are now on board with the proposition that critical perspectives around racism shouldn’t be part of the situation because they can’t win elections. It’s basically an example of the left ceding ground on a very important issue to right-wingers because we’re okay with them holding the conversation hostage. I guess it’s a privilege that some people have, to hold this position.

LOL. I see exactly what you are doing here, which is to say to promote the Big Lie that it is "leftists" who are opposed to discussing race for electoral reasons when we see in this very thread that anybody who responded who can be remotely considered a leftist (SWE, CraneHusband, Sestak, PSOL) are defending the NEA's position here. Unless you think being a Democrat=leftist (which is doubtful), you are purposely and dishonestly saying leftist to further smear the left when of course the Democrats/red avatars attacking CRT here are former Republicans like yourself such as DaleCooper and the kkondae former Log Cabinite Torie.

[Torie]

Honestly, one of the biggest long-term consequences of Hillary’s loss in 2016, and Trump’s win, is basically this conversation here—that a huge segment of leftists are now on board with the proposition that critical perspectives around racism shouldn’t be part of the situation because they can’t win elections. It’s basically an example of the left ceding ground on a very important issue to right-wingers because we’re okay with them holding the conversation hostage. I guess it’s a privilege that some people have, to hold this position.

LOL. I see exactly what you are doing here, which is to say to promote the Big Lie that it is "leftists" who are opposed to discussing race for electoral reasons when we see in this very thread that anybody who responded who can be remotely considered a leftist (SWE, CraneHusband, Sestak, PSOL) are defending the NEA's position here. Unless you think being a Democrat=leftist (which is doubtful), you are purposely and dishonestly saying leftist to further smear the left when of course the Democrats/red avatars attacking CRT here are former Republicans like yourself such as DaleCooper and the kkondae former Log Cabinite Torie.

Hi there. I am just dropping in to thank you for teaching me a new word, which of course as to this particular kkondae is a quite rare and exciting event these days.  Oh, btw, given that you consider my prose above "attacking" CRT, I can only imagine what verb you might use if I really went after something hammer and tongs, smashing it to bits and then putting salt over it, ala what Rome did to Carthage.

Cheers.

[Devout Centrist]

We need more parents with the courage to reject the idea that their children should be watching commercial television at all.

Wouldn't mind if we extended this idea to all television tbh

[Mr. Smith]

Wow, this thread is a disaster.

No wonder Motorcity, Xing, Nathan, and all the other posters that are actual educators here have said nothing.  As there is clearly nothing that can be done, except point it out and hope for better later, I'll continue this tradition

'K bye.

[dead0man]

Wow, this thread is a disaster.

No wonder Motorcity, Xing, Nathan, and all the other posters that are actual educators here have said nothing.  As there is clearly nothing that can be done, except point it out and hope for better later, I'll continue this tradition

'K bye.

well thank Og you didn't lower yourself and try to ....ahem.....educate us about something.  The last thing professional educators want to do is fight ignorance.  We should be thankful you rode by on your white multicolored horse to let us know that there was no way someone who might have some insight would be stopping by to add to the conversation!

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/AFTunion/status/1404453904738242560

https://twitter.com/rweingarten/status/1412537365529300992

This is gaslighting and nothing else.

[Badger]

CRT needs to be banned in all public K12 schools nationwide.  The vile racism and America hatred promoted by it is repugnant.

I have yet to find even 1 in 10 frothing at the mouth critics of crt who have more than bullsh**t level understanding of what it actually entails.

I say that as someone who's not entirely convinced on the merits of CRT myself. I do know however that the disingenuousness and know nothing of its opponents are ten times more divisive and demagogue-ish.

[Torie]

CRT needs to be banned in all public K12 schools nationwide.  The vile racism and America hatred promoted by it is repugnant.

I have yet to find even 1 in 10 frothing at the mouth critics of crt who have more than bullsh**t level understanding of what it actually entails.

I say that as someone who's not entirely convinced on the merits of CRT myself. I do know however that the disingenuousness and know nothing of its opponents are ten times more divisive and demagogue-ish.

I suspect there is no consensus as to what CRT means as applied for the consumption of the masses, outside hallowed academic halls (which I might add I think at an academic level is a fascinating topic to explore, and bought a couple of books on the subject, e.g. Caste because the free teaser chapters were so well written, much to the shock of my partner).  It depends on who you ask as to what it means, thereby making it fertile ground for a sh*t show of a debate/discussion.

[7,052,770]

"Critical race theory" means whatever the person saying wants it to mean at that moment.

However, the idea that students are being taught that white people are bad and evil is a myth in the vast, vast majority of cases.

[DaleCooper]

This is gaslighting and nothing else.

Oh no! That term you have, one might say, appropriated from these woke types. They won't be happy.

He stole it from a classic Ingrid Bergman film.

[GALeftist]

You know, it's really weird how the American status quo, which is obviously unambiguously good, logically sound, morally impregnable, responsible for this being the greatest nation which ever has or will exist, and overall closer to perfect than anything else ever devised by mankind, has this one fairly basic critique which is so incredibly damaging that we must cut it away like a tumor, shielding the minds of the populace from its evils lest it spread like a plague and bring our civilization crashing down on our heads.

I mean, come on, you can't have it both ways. If the critique is wrong, it, like the countless critiques which have come before and the countless critiques yet to come, will be largely rejected and fade into obscurity. If it sticks around unless we censor it, well, perhaps it's getting at something and we ought not to censor it in the first place.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

If the critique is wrong, it, like the countless critiques which have come before and the countless critiques yet to come, will be largely rejected and fade into obscurity.

I agree that a lot of this stuff strikes me as a fad (a type of pop sociology that has transcended Malcolm Gladwell-tier books) but this prediction seems teleological and there isn't really any guarantee that this will come true. The modern era is riddled with remnants if not the whole of out of date ideological movements.

If it sticks around unless we censor it, well, perhaps it's getting at something and we ought not to censor it in the first place.

I think if this logic was applied to other ideologies that are... popular in... certain circles, we'd see a lot of outcry and proliferation of bad ideas. There are probably good arguments to be made for adhering to preaching this gospel in public schools but this doesn't seem like one of them.

A frustrating part of this discourse is a lot of defenders of this broad ideological movement seem to be making the assumption that there is no pre-existing ideology that acknowledges racism or its role in US history, which is very obviously wrong. People didn't suddenly realize that racism existed last year - they changed they way they think about it, talk about it, and the ways they think it is properly dispelled.

I'd entertain an argument that the framework we've had for thinking about racism and civil rights since the 1960s is limited and needs a modern tune-up (although I don't think the fact that racism still exists is an acceptable way to say the framework failed), but so far nobody is really trying to make that argument. They most common argument seems to be that if you disagree with any of this stuff, you don't think racism is real or important, and even though some people are too cowardly to stand up to that assertion, very few of them are actually stupid enough to believe it.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

There are definitely people out there who are way too into what we might call race reductionism as a lens to filter all humanities and social sciences subjects through, but that's generally not what rightists mean when they moan about ~critical race theory~. It's the same sort of scare term as "cultural Marxism", right down to denoting essentially the same intellectual tradition. The vast majority of the time what ~critical race theory~ as taught in school districts other than, say, San Francisco actually amounts to is basically just advancing the standard (and difficult to seriously dispute) systemic racism narrative that most Americans agreed with as recently as ten or eleven months ago, plus maybe throwing up a few Puerto Rican flags or something.

[dead0man]

There are definitely people out there who are way too into what we might call race reductionism as a lens to filter all humanities and social sciences subjects through, but that's generally not what rightists mean when they moan about ~critical race theory~. It's the same sort of scare term as "cultural Marxism", right down to denoting essentially the same intellectual tradition. The vast majority of the time what ~critical race theory~ as taught in school districts other than, say, San Francisco actually amounts to is basically just advancing the standard (and difficult to seriously dispute) systemic racism narrative that most Americans agreed with as recently as ten or eleven months ago, plus maybe throwing up a few Puerto Rican flags or something.

indeed, which is why it's extra weird that the NEA seems to be calling for us to teach CRT as described by its enemies and not what it's defenders have been saying about it for years.  It's also weird that we're on page 4 and no one (on either side of the issue) has bothered to point that out.

[lfromnj]

You know, it's really weird how the American status quo, which is obviously unambiguously good, logically sound, morally impregnable, responsible for this being the greatest nation which ever has or will exist, and overall closer to perfect than anything else ever devised by mankind, has this one fairly basic critique which is so incredibly damaging that we must cut it away like a tumor, shielding the minds of the populace from its evils lest it spread like a plague and bring our civilization crashing down on our heads.

I mean, come on, you can't have it both ways. If the critique is wrong, it, like the countless critiques which have come before and the countless critiques yet to come, will be largely rejected and fade into obscurity. If it sticks around unless we censor it, well, perhaps it's getting at something and we ought not to censor it in the first place.

Where exactly do you debate this?

Does the 6 year old learning about whiteness debate the teacher?
Or do you debate at the school boards or at the state legislatures which is literally what is happening right now.
Teaching  has a time limited construct. Why is it so bad to restrict curriculum in K-12 education? Its always been done for many different subjects.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Repeating what I posted in the other CRT thread,
The engineered conservative panic over critical race theory, explained

Spare a thought for critical race theory. It wasn't always a conservative bogeyman.

Especially over the past several months, Republicans have distorted CRT -- an academic frame that scholars such as Kimberlé Crenshaw have been using in graduate-level courses for decades to interrogate how the legal system entrenches racism -- into a catchall to describe things they don't like.

In this bastardized telling, CRT is whatever Republicans want it to be; it comes in many guises. "Black Lives Matter" is one name for CRT. "Social justice" is another. "Identity," yet another. "Reparations." "Ally-ship." "Diversity."

Because so many Americans don't know what CRT is, it's the perfect tool for scaring White conservative voters with made-up problems -- for mobilizing them against the racial awakening of the past year.

Everyone complaining about CRT is either a willing propagandist or an ignorant muppet for the  increasingly vile and shameless "conservative" movement.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

There are definitely people out there who are way too into what we might call race reductionism as a lens to filter all humanities and social sciences subjects through, but that's generally not what rightists mean when they moan about ~critical race theory~. It's the same sort of scare term as "cultural Marxism", right down to denoting essentially the same intellectual tradition. The vast majority of the time what ~critical race theory~ as taught in school districts other than, say, San Francisco actually amounts to is basically just advancing the standard (and difficult to seriously dispute) systemic racism narrative that most Americans agreed with as recently as ten or eleven months ago, plus maybe throwing up a few Puerto Rican flags or something.

indeed, which is why it's extra weird that the NEA seems to be calling for us to teach CRT as described by its enemies and not what it's defenders have been saying about it for years.  It's also weird that we're on page 4 and no one (on either side of the issue) has bothered to point that out.

You're right, that's been an oversight in this conversation; thank you for bringing it up.

It's increasingly obvious that the teaching profession is developing a tendency to double and triple down on this sort of curriculum-wars polarization in a very reactive way, even if, as in this case, the original pedagogical orthodoxy wasn't really that far from general polite opinion. I'm fortunate enough not to work with anybody who consciously, openly thinks that way, but teaching is left-leaning enough as a profession that some amount of subconscious/knee-jerk deplorable-owning inevitably seeps in.

[Motorcity]

Question

Biden proposed a 6 trillion dollar budget, that doesn't inculde mandatory spending or interest payments

(The FY 2019 budget was 4.4 trillion. 2.73 trillion was mandatory spending and 350 billion was on interest payments)

Biden is asking for 1.5 discretionary funding, a big boost from Trump's 1.3 discretionary funding.

But Biden is also asking for a one time 1.8 trillion for families and 2.3 trillion for infrastrucutre, which would be spent over the next 5-10 years


Here is my question:

Biden has negioated with republicans to make the job plan to be 1.2 trillion, 579 billion is new funding. Where does the other 600 billion come from?

Thanks