Conservative-friendly schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:probably not in so many words, I'll grant that

but I don't get the feeling that they're doing the opposite either, which is exposing kids to basic social anthropology (the different goals and behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US) - or broad differences between men and women in priorities and decision-making - and how all that interacts with external factors (of which prejudice is just one) to produce the unequal results we can all observe

you can barely even discuss things like that in polite company in DC, let alone teach them to children - but that's what I meant about real learning vs. catechism

But many of "the different goals of behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US" are worthy of criticism when they are inherently biased. My sense is that this is what the issue is: people now realize that many, but not all, of the the long-held traditions many people ascribed to just ten years ago were based on bigotry or flawed logic. This very idea scares many people because of the change/transformation that is inevitably happening in our society today.

Is it flawed logic though? I think a lot of recent changes defy common sense.

The way you use "common sense" sounds like you're saying "I think a lot of recent changes defy my longheld beliefs" or even "what society has conditioned me to think is a common sense way of thinking." Who decides what is common sense? Does common sense trump empiricism? What happens when scientific discoveries fly in the face of what you've held as common sense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:probably not in so many words, I'll grant that

but I don't get the feeling that they're doing the opposite either, which is exposing kids to basic social anthropology (the different goals and behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US) - or broad differences between men and women in priorities and decision-making - and how all that interacts with external factors (of which prejudice is just one) to produce the unequal results we can all observe

you can barely even discuss things like that in polite company in DC, let alone teach them to children - but that's what I meant about real learning vs. catechism

But many of "the different goals of behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US" are worthy of criticism when they are inherently biased. My sense is that this is what the issue is: people now realize that many, but not all, of the the long-held traditions many people ascribed to just ten years ago were based on bigotry or flawed logic. This very idea scares many people because of the change/transformation that is inevitably happening in our society today.

Is it flawed logic though? I think a lot of recent changes defy common sense.

The way you use "common sense" sounds like you're saying "I think a lot of recent changes defy my longheld beliefs" or even "what society has conditioned me to think is a common sense way of thinking." Who decides what is common sense? Does common sense trump empiricism? What happens when scientific discoveries fly in the face of what you've held as common sense?

What happens when what passes for common sense flies in the face of scientific discoveries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NCS teaches LGBTQ studies classes, just an FYI.

I was about to write that if OP has a daughter, NCS wouldn't be a fit. I know several moderate Democrat families that find it too liberal for their tastes.

[Anonymous]

PP here who wrote about "different goals and behaviors of different cultural groups"

my post seems to have been misinterpreted so I'll be more clear

what I meant is that people with certain cultural habits are more likely to succeed in our society than people with certain other cultural habits - doesn't matter which cultures we're talking about, just that the habits you pick up from your family and surroundings have something to do with how your life turns out

e.g. poor people do a lot of stuff that keeps them poor - not because they're bad people, and partly because their behavior signals that they came from a group about which many people make negative assumptions - call that prejudice - but also, growing up that way just doesn't build habits that work as well in school & jobs as the habits built growing up UMC

anyway, that's what I was referring to - it's all obviously very complex and doesn't mean anyone's a bad person for not succeeding - but it's also more nuanced & useful than "X inequality must be because prejudice"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are Catholic and my kids go to Catholic school. While catholic schools is prob what OP is looking for, their kids are probably going to grow up pretty insensitive and dense about racism and other social injustices.

As a non-white family at our Catholic school, we do a fair amount of trying to ensure that our kids are exposed to the realities of social injustices and think critically about those issues not because it is in “vogue” because it directly affects them and the school doesn’t do a sufficient job on it. The kids at the school are generally kind kids but personal experiences of racism, especially when it’s micro aggressions, are often met with an expectation that you just ignore and move past it or it’s really not a big deal.

I am an employment attorney and have counseled HRs regarding dealing with employees who have many complaints against them for racist, homophobic, etc. remarks. Remarks that weren’t intended to malicious but the employees were just so unaware and insensitive, or likely grew up in an environment where what they said was not considered offensive.

Honest question since you seem thoughtful

In your work, where do you think the line should be drawn between “shouldn’t have said it” and “shouldn’t have taken offense” (maybe in terms of what percent of average people you think would be offended???) - obviously some people are pretty hard to offend and some take offense at nearly anything - whether white, black, Catholic, Jewish, whatever

I certainly don’t have an answer in mind, just curious how you see it

That's a good question. There's not really a line as it's really fact-specific. A remark that leans more toward "shouldn't have taken offensive" will become an issue if it's repeated, or used even though there is knowledge that it can be considered offensive. On the other a remark that is clearly offensive is not going to be an issue if the offender was told that it was offensive and never ever uses it again. Repeated complaints from different employees about one person is also a sign that that person says things that are universally offensive. For example, one employee, in one day, offended a few coworkers, by making an incorrect assumption about a coworkers national origin, and later announcing their anti-transgender views before trying to discuss transgender issues.

I try to hold my judgment when it comes to thinking that a person seems to take offense at nearly everything. If you think about in a different way, it can just be someone speaking up every time they experience a microaggression. I mean if I said something every time I experienced a microaggression, I would definitely have a reputation that I took offense at nearly everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the nonstop promotion of LGBTQ and also by history/social studies getting 90% swallowed up by lessons about racism, the civil rights movement, etc.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you speak in hyperbole. "Nonstop"? "90%" This might be why your post has received such negative responses. I call troll.

And if you're not, I recommend moving out of major metropolitan areas as your unfounded hostility toward minority communities is no longer socially acceptable.

100% of the 2022 Deal MS summer reading list for 8th grade were books about racism. 100%. My kids home room had BLM flag, trans flag, picture of RBG and two Obama pictures on the wall. That’s the definition of nonstop. Critical thinking is completely stifled at DCPS schools.

Or, it is opening kids of differening backgrounds to the idea of an inclusive society, something modern "conservatives" appear to oppose.

Yes. The kids at the most diverse MS school in DCPS in a city that is 95% Democrat can learn more about inclusivity by surrounding them with progressive icons and books 100% of the time. Got it. Sounds reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the nonstop promotion of LGBTQ and also by history/social studies getting 90% swallowed up by lessons about racism, the civil rights movement, etc.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you speak in hyperbole. "Nonstop"? "90%" This might be why your post has received such negative responses. I call troll.

And if you're not, I recommend moving out of major metropolitan areas as your unfounded hostility toward minority communities is no longer socially acceptable.

100% of the 2022 Deal MS summer reading list for 8th grade were books about racism. 100%. My kids home room had BLM flag, trans flag, picture of RBG and two Obama pictures on the wall. That’s the definition of nonstop. Critical thinking is completely stifled at DCPS schools.

Or, it is opening kids of differening backgrounds to the idea of an inclusive society, something modern "conservatives" appear to oppose.

Honest question here. Does “inclusive” have room for religion? Can we have flags in that room representing tons of faiths represented in that classroom? Is it okay to have a Republican elephant present?

And I ask these questions as a pretty liberal person, who is wondering where the line is.

There isn't enough room on the walls of the classrooms for "all" of the religions, thus I would prefer NONE of the religions be represented. YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:probably not in so many words, I'll grant that

but I don't get the feeling that they're doing the opposite either, which is exposing kids to basic social anthropology (the different goals and behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US) - or broad differences between men and women in priorities and decision-making - and how all that interacts with external factors (of which prejudice is just one) to produce the unequal results we can all observe

you can barely even discuss things like that in polite company in DC, let alone teach them to children - but that's what I meant about real learning vs. catechism

But many of "the different goals of behaviors different cultural groups may have even in the US" are worthy of criticism when they are inherently biased. My sense is that this is what the issue is: people now realize that many, but not all, of the the long-held traditions many people ascribed to just ten years ago were based on bigotry or flawed logic. This very idea scares many people because of the change/transformation that is inevitably happening in our society today.

Is it flawed logic though? I think a lot of recent changes defy common sense.

That is your privilege. Look at the world through someone else's lens, and it doesn't defy common sense. We live in a very heterogenus society - that is the beauty of the United States, but we can either cling to the white, christian as superior/manifest destiny myth, or we can be more inclusive of different perspectives and cultures within the country and have a stronger foundation for the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused as to what students in private schools are being indoctrinated into. So far, some posters have complained that their children talk too much about race and sexual orientation in classes. But how does studying race/racism/sexuality/identity or whatever indoctrinate children into a particular biased ideology?

I’m just upset they are not studying things holistically. Feel like they miss big picture bc they only study racial conflicts around the globe instead of world history. They don’t have a solid base beyond these very narrow topics, and have huge learning gaps.

I’m actually ok with some of this - as long as it’s not at the expense of teaching history.

Our kids went to Sidwell. What you are describing was not their experience. I can't speak to other schools, but since Sidwell is often cited as part of the woke left progressive schools (it is actually very traditional)

I thought I would chime in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused as to what students in private schools are being indoctrinated into. So far, some posters have complained that their children talk too much about race and sexual orientation in classes. But how does studying race/racism/sexuality/identity or whatever indoctrinate children into a particular biased ideology?

I’m just upset they are not studying things holistically. Feel like they miss big picture bc they only study racial conflicts around the globe instead of world history. They don’t have a solid base beyond these very narrow topics, and have huge learning gaps.

I’m actually ok with some of this - as long as it’s not at the expense of teaching history.

Yes!! 💯

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here who wrote about "different goals and behaviors of different cultural groups"

my post seems to have been misinterpreted so I'll be more clear

what I meant is that people with certain cultural habits are more likely to succeed in our society than people with certain other cultural habits - doesn't matter which cultures we're talking about, just that the habits you pick up from your family and surroundings have something to do with how your life turns out

e.g. poor people do a lot of stuff that keeps them poor - not because they're bad people, and partly because their behavior signals that they came from a group about which many people make negative assumptions - call that prejudice - but also, growing up that way just doesn't build habits that work as well in school & jobs as the habits built growing up UMC

anyway, that's what I was referring to - it's all obviously very complex and doesn't mean anyone's a bad person for not succeeding - but it's also more nuanced & useful than "X inequality must be because prejudice"

Poor people are also poor because of structural issues in our country that keep them poor and historically so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the nonstop promotion of LGBTQ and also by history/social studies getting 90% swallowed up by lessons about racism, the civil rights movement, etc.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you speak in hyperbole. "Nonstop"? "90%" This might be why your post has received such negative responses. I call troll.

And if you're not, I recommend moving out of major metropolitan areas as your unfounded hostility toward minority communities is no longer socially acceptable.

100% of the 2022 Deal MS summer reading list for 8th grade were books about racism. 100%. My kids home room had BLM flag, trans flag, picture of RBG and two Obama pictures on the wall. That’s the definition of nonstop. Critical thinking is completely stifled at DCPS schools.

Or, it is opening kids of differening backgrounds to the idea of an inclusive society, something modern "conservatives" appear to oppose.

Honest question here. Does “inclusive” have room for religion? Can we have flags in that room representing tons of faiths represented in that classroom? Is it okay to have a Republican elephant present?

And I ask these questions as a pretty liberal person, who is wondering where the line is.

There isn't enough room on the walls of the classrooms for "all" of the religions, thus I would prefer NONE of the religions be represented. YMMV.

There are too many, so better to post none at all?

Perhaps a Math room can have Math posters. And English room can have posters about lit devices and grammar. Aren’t those appropriate posters?

I’m all for inclusivity, but you’ll always push one group out by promoting another. There isn’t enough wall space. You will always exclude some child within the room, which is what (I believe) we are trying to avoid.

It isn’t groundbreaking. Can’t teachers and students promote a welcoming atmosphere through kindness and mutual respect, and then focus on academics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here who wrote about "different goals and behaviors of different cultural groups"

my post seems to have been misinterpreted so I'll be more clear

what I meant is that people with certain cultural habits are more likely to succeed in our society than people with certain other cultural habits - doesn't matter which cultures we're talking about, just that the habits you pick up from your family and surroundings have something to do with how your life turns out

e.g. poor people do a lot of stuff that keeps them poor - not because they're bad people, and partly because their behavior signals that they came from a group about which many people make negative assumptions - call that prejudice - but also, growing up that way just doesn't build habits that work as well in school & jobs as the habits built growing up UMC

anyway, that's what I was referring to - it's all obviously very complex and doesn't mean anyone's a bad person for not succeeding - but it's also more nuanced & useful than "X inequality must be because prejudice"

Poor people are also poor because of structural issues in our country that keep them poor and historically so.

You might want to learn some history and/ or travel a bit more. Our country, as flawed as it is, is as meritocratic as they come. Ask any immigrant, of any skin color and religion and SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

the nonstop promotion of LGBTQ and also by history/social studies getting 90% swallowed up by lessons about racism, the civil rights movement, etc.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you speak in hyperbole. "Nonstop"? "90%" This might be why your post has received such negative responses. I call troll.

And if you're not, I recommend moving out of major metropolitan areas as your unfounded hostility toward minority communities is no longer socially acceptable.

100% of the 2022 Deal MS summer reading list for 8th grade were books about racism. 100%. My kids home room had BLM flag, trans flag, picture of RBG and two Obama pictures on the wall. That’s the definition of nonstop. Critical thinking is completely stifled at DCPS schools.

Or, it is opening kids of differening backgrounds to the idea of an inclusive society, something modern "conservatives" appear to oppose.

The Chinese have built an educational system that has created a multi generational pipeline of scientists and engineers. The US educational system has built a pipeline of gender and ethnic studies majors who are taught to hate our country just a bit more every day. This is becoming a national security issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here who wrote about "different goals and behaviors of different cultural groups"

my post seems to have been misinterpreted so I'll be more clear

what I meant is that people with certain cultural habits are more likely to succeed in our society than people with certain other cultural habits - doesn't matter which cultures we're talking about, just that the habits you pick up from your family and surroundings have something to do with how your life turns out

e.g. poor people do a lot of stuff that keeps them poor - not because they're bad people, and partly because their behavior signals that they came from a group about which many people make negative assumptions - call that prejudice - but also, growing up that way just doesn't build habits that work as well in school & jobs as the habits built growing up UMC

anyway, that's what I was referring to - it's all obviously very complex and doesn't mean anyone's a bad person for not succeeding - but it's also more nuanced & useful than "X inequality must be because prejudice"

Poor people are also poor because of structural issues in our country that keep them poor and historically so.

You might want to learn some history and/ or travel a bit more. Our country, as flawed as it is, is as meritocratic as they come. Ask any immigrant, of any skin color and religion and SES.

Yes, those poor immigrants with PhDs in their home country who could afford the thousands of dollars in plane tickets to come here.