Are you okay with students learning abou CRT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) I actually studied CRT at the graduate level and that's not what's happening in schools here. Letting children know racism exists and has been an important part of our history is not CRT. Here's a reading list for those asking what it is: https://researchguides.library.vanderbilt.edu/c.php?g=414672&p=3327226. I recommend this article: https://harvardlawreview.org/1993/06/whiteness-as-property/

2) I am in favor of kids learning about the history and presence of racism in the US at grade appropriate levels (e.g. my first grader can't learn about legal history because he still doesn't have much understanding of the legal system, but he can learn in a fairly basic way about segregation, and we talk at home about how this influenced our city and school system).

Here's the answer.

In a nutshell, it's basically an analysis on white privilege and what it means. I think that's why a lot of people don't like it. They don't want to be told that they have "privilege" because when they are struggling to pay for food, rent, they don't feel like they have any privilege. What they cannot understand is that it's doubly hard when you are a POC and facing these struggles.

I think there's a bit of "walk a mile in my shoes" that needs to happen. Unfortunately, that's hard to do here.

I think that the problem is that simply that the term "white privilege" itself sounds super mean.

Of course, everything being equal white people tend to have it a lot easier than Black people. Systemic racism is obviously a thing. But the idea of saying a poor white 8-year-old boy who has cancer and autism has more "privilege' than Barack Obama's daughters, simply because he's a white male, implies that the little boy has a pony and a butler. The connotations are absurd.

The solution is to replace terms like those with some Greek.

Example: "Eleutheros" means "chained" in Greek. Maybe call members of the group linked to the discriminators "eleutherian" and the members of the discriminated against group "alisidan." The new terms would mean roughly what the old terms meaned, but without the absurd connotations.

You're a classics major? You'll be cancelled for favoring western civilization if you persist with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I need a definition of CRT before I can answer the question.

CRT: indoctrination by the LWNJ to teach White lemmings to hate themselves because of what White men did 200 years ago that was common and accepted across the globe.

Ewwwww

I am 47. My parents were adults when segregation was still legal in this country. We don't have to go back 200 years to see how racism has impacted our society. Our parents and grandparents were alive when this country allowed legal racism and continued de facto segregation and its effects after the civil Rights act.

Do you really believe that in 1965, the structural and institutional racism that existed in this country because of a law?

[Anonymous]

My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

fine, but you're talking about black history, not CRT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I'm totally fine with it. I guess I really don't get the uproar? I'm not saying that to be obtuse, I truly don't understand why it's so controversial to teach kids about redlining, racial covenants, three strikes you're out, etc. I learned about redlining and disproportionality in high school (in not particularly liberal part of Wisconsin, mind you) in the late 90s, it's not that new. Somehow we all survived.

+1

They aren't "now" saying that CRT will only be taught in colleges. It was always a legal theory about the ways in which facially race-neutral laws and policies could have racially discriminatory effects, even when the people administering those laws have no explicit racial animus.

But I also agree that I don't get the controversy. The sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine, for example -- nothing new. I don't get why people are so afraid of our actual history. If you think your kids, including your college-aged (meaning adult) kids, can only handle a children's book propaganda version of American history as perfect and racism as totally solved and racists as being only people who literally run around in white hoods burning crosses -- well, I think you're grossly underestimating them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

fine, but you're talking about black history, not CRT

Or, you know, just "American" history. Slavery isn't just black history, it's American history. Black people didn't enslave themselves. And the Civil War is not "black history," it's American history.

Also, many people who scream about the CRT bogeyman use it to mean any history in which white people aren't the heroes and protagonists, or which might make white people feel bad. (Which is nuts. When you learn about American slavery, you SHOULD feel bad. Guilty? No. But you should feel some empathy for the people who suffered under that abomination, and you should feel moved to help erase that stain from our country.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I need a definition of CRT before I can answer the question.

CRT: indoctrination by the LWNJ to teach White lemmings to hate themselves because of what White men did 200 years ago that was common and accepted across the globe.

Ewwwww

I am 47. My parents were adults when segregation was still legal in this country. We don't have to go back 200 years to see how racism has impacted our society. Our parents and grandparents were alive when this country allowed legal racism and continued de facto segregation and its effects after the civil Rights act.

Do you really believe that in 1965, the structural and institutional racism that existed in this country because of a law?

Yes. Remember what martin luther king said in Chicago...in the north...in 1966...not 200 year ago;

“I have never seen, even in Mississippi and Alabama, mobs as hateful as I've seen here in Chicago,”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

fine, but you're talking about black history, not CRT

Or, you know, just "American" history. Slavery isn't just black history, it's American history. Black people didn't enslave themselves. And the Civil War is not "black history," it's American history.

Also, many people who scream about the CRT bogeyman use it to mean any history in which white people aren't the heroes and protagonists, or which might make white people feel bad. (Which is nuts. When you learn about American slavery, you SHOULD feel bad. Guilty? No. But you should feel some empathy for the people who suffered under that abomination, and you should feel moved to help erase that stain from our country.)

This is the uncomfortable shift for some people.

Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

fine, but you're talking about black history, not CRT

Or, you know, just "American" history. Slavery isn't just black history, it's American history. Black people didn't enslave themselves. And the Civil War is not "black history," it's American history.

Also, many people who scream about the CRT bogeyman use it to mean any history in which white people aren't the heroes and protagonists, or which might make white people feel bad. (Which is nuts. When you learn about American slavery, you SHOULD feel bad. Guilty? No. But you should feel some empathy for the people who suffered under that abomination, and you should feel moved to help erase that stain from our country.)

I was with you until you said "erase the stain." And how would you propose to do that? Specifically

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

Actually there is very little "critical thinking" going on in colleges right now (I have three in three different schools.) There is an approved narrative that each person must agree with or be 1) socially shunned; 2) shouted down; 3) graded down. Even things that have little to do with race, like support of labor unions. My DS was warned by a professor that in his major, it is an assumption that unions are positive, productive and necessary, and no criticism is allowed. Don't even ask about history classes, anthropology classes, etc. They have taken to assigning whole books written by journalists and other non professionals or memoirs rather than multiple peer reviewed articles coming from a variety of positions.

Frankly, it is shocking to me as someone who attended a top university where professors would challenge every idea and demand that you be able to argue your position with evidence. Instead, it is... read a book about how racist society was or is, then write a "critique" where you "agree" with the author, then discuss in a class where anyone who dares to disagree is silenced.

That is definitely NOT critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

Actually there is very little "critical thinking" going on in colleges right now (I have three in three different schools.) There is an approved narrative that each person must agree with or be 1) socially shunned; 2) shouted down; 3) graded down. Even things that have little to do with race, like support of labor unions. My DS was warned by a professor that in his major, it is an assumption that unions are positive, productive and necessary, and no criticism is allowed. Don't even ask about history classes, anthropology classes, etc. They have taken to assigning whole books written by journalists and other non professionals or memoirs rather than multiple peer reviewed articles coming from a variety of positions.

Frankly, it is shocking to me as someone who attended a top university where professors would challenge every idea and demand that you be able to argue your position with evidence. Instead, it is... read a book about how racist society was or is, then write a "critique" where you "agree" with the author, then discuss in a class where anyone who dares to disagree is silenced.

That is definitely NOT critical thinking.

I agree. What's going on is exactly the opposite of critical thinking. You must follow a political/ideological orthodoxy or else! And feckless college administrators put up with it. Even creeped into Math of all places. I assume the physical sciences are not as subject to this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Frankly, it is shocking to me as someone who attended a top university where professors would challenge every idea and demand that you be able to argue your position with evidence. Instead, it is... read a book about how racist society was or is, then write a "critique" where you "agree" with the author, then discuss in a class where anyone who dares to disagree is silenced.
That is definitely NOT critical thinking.

That's because all that debate didn't bring about any change, and more let same misconceptions sneak it, studies that ignore realities but show that other minorities somehow fair better despite obstacles. So, at some point, you have to say 'stop all that, these are the things that actually mater to the discussion'; there was enough debate, the conclusion is there is still institutional racism and are still many systematic racist policies, so they need to be changed".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

fine, but you're talking about black history, not CRT

But the first part of my response answered your question. I wouldn't mind if he goes to law school and learns actual CRT. Whatever convoluted version of CRT you are thinking of is also fine with me in college because he will be an adult getting a higher education and it will not be job, nor would it be appropriate, for me to interfere in a college curriculum. Yes...even if I am paying. Why send a kid to college if they are only going t? learn the stuff their increasingly irrelevant parents are comfortable with?

[Anonymous]

I need a uniform definition of CRT. What I believe people who are not in favor of CRT are concerned with is viewing everything through a racial lens and divisive identity politics. The press keeps saying CRT is not taught in schools except for law school but they fail to state what CRT is. What the layman is calling CRT is, what I believe I have explained above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My "kid" will be in 18, in college, and learning critical thinking. It won't matter what I think because it's not my job to shelter him at that point.

Even at 14, he had a teacher tell him LAST MONTH that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. I didn't put up a fuss because he is old enough already to use his brain and begin filtering bs.

You want to shield your kids forever, fine. But I'll teach mine to take in information and examine it critically.

Actually there is very little "critical thinking" going on in colleges right now (I have three in three different schools.) There is an approved narrative that each person must agree with or be 1) socially shunned; 2) shouted down; 3) graded down. Even things that have little to do with race, like support of labor unions. My DS was warned by a professor that in his major, it is an assumption that unions are positive, productive and necessary, and no criticism is allowed. Don't even ask about history classes, anthropology classes, etc. They have taken to assigning whole books written by journalists and other non professionals or memoirs rather than multiple peer reviewed articles coming from a variety of positions.

Frankly, it is shocking to me as someone who attended a top university where professors would challenge every idea and demand that you be able to argue your position with evidence. Instead, it is... read a book about how racist society was or is, then write a "critique" where you "agree" with the author, then discuss in a class where anyone who dares to disagree is silenced.

That is definitely NOT critical thinking.

I agree. What's going on is exactly the opposite of critical thinking. You must follow a political/ideological orthodoxy or else! And feckless college administrators put up with it. Even creeped into Math of all places. I assume the physical sciences are not as subject to this

Good lord, you are so full of it. I teach at university, and this is just a false narrative. In fact, it is NO DIFFERENT than the same bullspit I heard when I started teaching in the 90s about colleges being "liberal indoctrination" farms. The terminology has changed over the decades...first it was about economic liberalism (post Reagan), then anti-military USA hating elites," then came "the gay agenda." Now the boogeyman is "CRT." The playbook and the whining has never changed, though.

You would have been the parent of the kid who said he had to drop my Persuasion and Rhetoric class in 2014 because we were reading articles about gay marriage and his parents said it went against his religion. Or the kid in 2006 who objected to learning different things about the iraq war through reading, or the kid in my first class as a TA who told me that he thought college was going to try to teach him what to think, not how to think, because his parents had drilled it into him to be wary of his liberal, Clinton voting professors.

Nothing changes.