FCPS CRT or nah?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So are Asians considered privileged or not? Because they keep getting screwed by FCPS, but are not the right type of POC. I’m not Asian, BTW.

Maybe a better question is if they are an “underrepresented” minority?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While I'm sure that the people designing this had noble intentions, I think this is a poor way to construct the lesson (obviously, absent context. It's possible this slide was followed by a very nuanced discussion, but I'm guessing, for the purposes of this response anyways, that it wasn't.)

I think just about everyone on here agrees that in general, teaching kids that some of them may be more fortunate than others, or that some may face obstacles that others don't - that's a fine lesson.

I think that simply throwing out these labels and dividing people into 'privileged' and 'not privileged' camps isn't super helpful. Some have pointed out that the intent behind this is basically to teach the same as the above, but there's clearly a large segment of the population that isn't getting that message from this - even if you think they're wrong to take it that way, is a message getting successfully communicated if the recipients of the message instead feel like they're being labeled as a public enemy for things they can't change? If it causes the 'privileged' to feel defensive instead of empathetic, how is that helpful?

What's missing here is nuance in the discussion. Saying 'white people have it easier' isn't as helpful, for example, as sharing things like unconscious bias and statistics on disparities of how harsh prison sentences are, for example.

Anonymous wrote:Moreover, why do they single out Christians as a privilege? How many privileged Christians are on the FCPS School Board? And, what percentage do they represent?

This is a great example. There is such a thing as Christian privilege, but I'd argue that it's not simple things like people saying 'merry christmas' or the school system giving kids a break over Christmas or the fact that nothing is open on Sunday morning. Where we see Christian privilege in our society is where Christians can get passes or breaks, especially in the legal system, for being a Christian or holding Christian views. For example,
-Parole boards look more favorably at someone who has 'found jesus' in prison than someone who hasn't.
-Judges might make attendance at Christian religious programs a requirement for parole (like AA) and not allow alternative programs
-Christians often get legal rulings allowing them to 'opt out'/disregard laws they don't like (Little Sisters of the Poor, Hobby Lobby, everyone trying to opt out of covid vaccination, Bladensburg Cross) but other religions often cannot get courts to allow them to opt out of laws they don't like under the same statutes (TST members cannot opt out of pressure tactics around abortion
-Inmates scheduled for execution are told that they can only have a Christian priest there for their last rites.
-Towns/School boards will allow Christian proselytizing in government/school forums up until another religion asks for equal treatment, then the others are shut out. You see this a lot of time with invocations, handing out bibles in school, prayer at school, etc.
-Chrstians may be allowed to wear tokens of their faith (ie, cross necklace) but dress codes may expressly prohibit visual tokens of other faiths (ie, hijabs).

Instead of just saying 'Christians are privileged' I think it's important to explain exactly what that looks like, so that people understand the types of issues we have in our society, and have a better idea of how they might fix these things.

So misinformed, especially about the constitution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While I'm sure that the people designing this had noble intentions, I think this is a poor way to construct the lesson (obviously, absent context. It's possible this slide was followed by a very nuanced discussion, but I'm guessing, for the purposes of this response anyways, that it wasn't.)

I think just about everyone on here agrees that in general, teaching kids that some of them may be more fortunate than others, or that some may face obstacles that others don't - that's a fine lesson.

I think that simply throwing out these labels and dividing people into 'privileged' and 'not privileged' camps isn't super helpful. Some have pointed out that the intent behind this is basically to teach the same as the above, but there's clearly a large segment of the population that isn't getting that message from this - even if you think they're wrong to take it that way, is a message getting successfully communicated if the recipients of the message instead feel like they're being labeled as a public enemy for things they can't change? If it causes the 'privileged' to feel defensive instead of empathetic, how is that helpful?

What's missing here is nuance in the discussion. Saying 'white people have it easier' isn't as helpful, for example, as sharing things like unconscious bias and statistics on disparities of how harsh prison sentences are, for example.

Anonymous wrote:Moreover, why do they single out Christians as a privilege? How many privileged Christians are on the FCPS School Board? And, what percentage do they represent?

This is a great example. There is such a thing as Christian privilege, but I'd argue that it's not simple things like people saying 'merry christmas' or the school system giving kids a break over Christmas or the fact that nothing is open on Sunday morning. Where we see Christian privilege in our society is where Christians can get passes or breaks, especially in the legal system, for being a Christian or holding Christian views. For example,
-Parole boards look more favorably at someone who has 'found jesus' in prison than someone who hasn't.
-Judges might make attendance at Christian religious programs a requirement for parole (like AA) and not allow alternative programs
-Christians often get legal rulings allowing them to 'opt out'/disregard laws they don't like (Little Sisters of the Poor, Hobby Lobby, everyone trying to opt out of covid vaccination, Bladensburg Cross) but other religions often cannot get courts to allow them to opt out of laws they don't like under the same statutes (TST members cannot opt out of pressure tactics around abortion
-Inmates scheduled for execution are told that they can only have a Christian priest there for their last rites.
-Towns/School boards will allow Christian proselytizing in government/school forums up until another religion asks for equal treatment, then the others are shut out. You see this a lot of time with invocations, handing out bibles in school, prayer at school, etc.
-Chrstians may be allowed to wear tokens of their faith (ie, cross necklace) but dress codes may expressly prohibit visual tokens of other faiths (ie, hijabs).

Instead of just saying 'Christians are privileged' I think it's important to explain exactly what that looks like, so that people understand the types of issues we have in our society, and have a better idea of how they might fix these things.

Well said - as I was playing privilege bingo, I was thinking about my white father who managed to make his way in the world after failing a grade in high school coming from a household with a sick father and drunk mother.

Things are not as they seem sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they hadn't dinged the military, it most likely never would have been reported by the left news sources.

“Dinged”?

How is saying that being in the military is a privilege “dinging” the military?

It’s not a negative.

Discussions of privilege never seem to mention any positives.

Some people think that being in the military gives you an advantage in life. That may or may not be correct, but it’s not a “ding”.

Think of it as being in a good/lucky position.

If they meant lucky or blessed then the activity would have said lucky or blessed.

But it said "privileged" which has become a pejorative slur that is synonymous with entitled and undeserving, particularly in public education.

No, it says “Identifying Your Privilege” which isn’t describing a person as much as it’s describing their situation/environment. Things beyond your control.

It’s a poor choice of language because it can be misconstrued.

Nice try but you are really stretching to find an excuse for fcps.

They meant what they wrote. Look at the other words on that list. White. Male. Christian.

This was a slur by someone like the acronym poster who is resentful towards the military.

That person should not be allowed to design curriculum, nor should anyone at Gatehouse who approved this lesson.

Military issue aside, this fcps document also disparaged the Christian faith. No public school should disparage anyone's religion, and certainly not in a lesson plan.

Nor should they disparage a student's race.

It’s not “disparaging” anyone to say that certain things tend to make life a little easier. It’s just a fact.

It is a fact that in our country it is a little easier to be a Christian. A man. A kid who gets dropped at school. Etc.

Hysteria about military aside, these are not “dings”. These are generally things that make your life easier. Why is that such a touchy subject for some people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem having my kids recognize the privileges they have in life. Yes, some of those are due to us having worked hard, but others are due to the color of our skin, sexual identity, religion. No control over those. I teach my kids to have empathy towards classmates/ peers who have to overcome more obstacles to “make it” in this society. I also point out that most people on this planet are way worse off than we are here. I agree with this kind of lesson. I hope it teaches my kids to be more grateful for what they have been given in life. Would Jesus say, “Too bad, so sad, you got stuck living with a poor, brown/black, single parent.”?

But this is you, a parent, teaching a lesson. That is how is should be. This is not a lesson the schools should be teaching.

Why not?

Should they teach about anything related to "being a good person"?

Honesty? Responsibility? Empathy? etc.?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that there are lessons about being a good person. It's about developing critical thinking skills and understanding multiple points of view. The best way I can understand what an author has written, whether it's a novel or a primary source from an historical event or a textbook IS to understand that everyone comes with a point of view made up of their experiences. My world view is just that--MY view. It's really okay to teach kids that people have different experiences from them. It makes them better thinkers and problem solvers. I truly don't understand why people are so afraid and upset around this.

I don’t see how that “identify your privilege” bingo card is about an author’s point of view. It seems clearly directed at students themselves - “Drive/Get driven to school”, “Have your own bedroom”, “Military kid”.

People who were born on third base have a vested interest in making others believe they hit a triple, otherwise we would all need to take a long hard look at the way that we have been doing things. Why does a 6’5” white, moderately good looking son of privilege get to run a hedge fund and rule the Commonwealth over someone smarter and better qualified? Why do people consider Donald Trump a “successful businessman”, when he has shown zero aptitude for anything other than selling himself and who would have been a destitute loser if he was born to anyone other than a millionaire investment mogul?

America is not a meritocracy. Britain has surpassed us on class mobility. The phrase “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” was intended to be a mockery of the system, not a rallying cry and goal. I’m sorry if this makes you feel guilty, but facts are facts. Our kids need to know what’s what if they are going to lead this country into a new era of diminished American influence and increased global and internal strife. Waving the flag pretending all is good is delusional thinking.

Yes let's teach children to have a negative view of their country and that they will never see the fruits of their labor so why bother? That's a recipe for well-adjusted, successful kids. Youngkin's lunatics will be embraced over this philosophical garbage, that's for sure.

Or, you know, you could put it in their hands to make a better country, like the Founders intended. As a secure people, we should always aspire to a more perfect Union. But I’m pretty sure Youngkin’s MAGA people know they are losing out big time, otherwise they wouldn’t be so damn insecure about everything.

I wish liberals would make up their minds. One minute the founders are racist while evil slave owning males who founded the country on slavery so we should dismiss and disparage them and the next minute we are supposed to put our hands over our hearts and think of them and what they built with reverence.
Make

Up

Your

Goddamn

Mind

[Anonymous]

It's possible this slide was followed by a very nuanced discussion, but I'm guessing, for the purposes of this response anyways, that it wasn't

I think it’s difficult/impossible to meaningfully evaluate this assignment without seeing the full details.

What if the instructions were to identify areas where they felt they personally had benefited? So not saying that all kids who were heterosexual check that box. Only those who felt upon reflection that it applied to them.

Hard to judge without context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem having my kids recognize the privileges they have in life. Yes, some of those are due to us having worked hard, but others are due to the color of our skin, sexual identity, religion. No control over those. I teach my kids to have empathy towards classmates/ peers who have to overcome more obstacles to “make it” in this society. I also point out that most people on this planet are way worse off than we are here. I agree with this kind of lesson. I hope it teaches my kids to be more grateful for what they have been given in life. Would Jesus say, “Too bad, so sad, you got stuck living with a poor, brown/black, single parent.”?

But this is you, a parent, teaching a lesson. That is how is should be. This is not a lesson the schools should be teaching.

Why not?

Should they teach about anything related to "being a good person"?

Honesty? Responsibility? Empathy? etc.?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that there are lessons about being a good person. It's about developing critical thinking skills and understanding multiple points of view. The best way I can understand what an author has written, whether it's a novel or a primary source from an historical event or a textbook IS to understand that everyone comes with a point of view made up of their experiences. My world view is just that--MY view. It's really okay to teach kids that people have different experiences from them. It makes them better thinkers and problem solvers. I truly don't understand why people are so afraid and upset around this.

I don’t see how that “identify your privilege” bingo card is about an author’s point of view. It seems clearly directed at students themselves - “Drive/Get driven to school”, “Have your own bedroom”, “Military kid”.

People who were born on third base have a vested interest in making others believe they hit a triple, otherwise we would all need to take a long hard look at the way that we have been doing things. Why does a 6’5” white, moderately good looking son of privilege get to run a hedge fund and rule the Commonwealth over someone smarter and better qualified? Why do people consider Donald Trump a “successful businessman”, when he has shown zero aptitude for anything other than selling himself and who would have been a destitute loser if he was born to anyone other than a millionaire investment mogul?

America is not a meritocracy. Britain has surpassed us on class mobility. The phrase “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” was intended to be a mockery of the system, not a rallying cry and goal. I’m sorry if this makes you feel guilty, but facts are facts. Our kids need to know what’s what if they are going to lead this country into a new era of diminished American influence and increased global and internal strife. Waving the flag pretending all is good is delusional thinking.

Yes let's teach children to have a negative view of their country and that they will never see the fruits of their labor so why bother? That's a recipe for well-adjusted, successful kids. Youngkin's lunatics will be embraced over this philosophical garbage, that's for sure.

Or, you know, you could put it in their hands to make a better country, like the Founders intended. As a secure people, we should always aspire to a more perfect Union. But I’m pretty sure Youngkin’s MAGA people know they are losing out big time, otherwise they wouldn’t be so damn insecure about everything.

I wish liberals would make up their minds. One minute the founders are racist while evil slave owning males who founded the country on slavery so we should dismiss and disparage them and the next minute we are supposed to put our hands over our hearts and think of them and what they built with reverence.
Make

Up

Your

Goddamn

Mind

Life is not so binary.

We can appreciate positive contributions while also acknowledging negative behaviors. We can treat them like humans they are instead of infallible gods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So is this the root of the “CRT” issue for Republicans?

They don’t want schools to teach anything related “being a good person”?

Empathy
Gratitude
Honesty
Responsibility
Respecting others
Etc

I guess they don’t want their own kids to realize they are a-holes.

They are not teaching gratitude. They are creating guilt. There is a big difference.

It is also not helpful to the less privileged. Being told you are a victim is self=-fulfilling.

And recognizing privilege is not “guilt”.

It clearly is for a lot of white people on this thread, which means they are completely missing the point of the lessons. You're (the general you) choosing to feel guilty for something that is an inherent privilege is keeping you from opening up to the sort of discourse and dialogue that could actually lead to progress

Abrar omeish had entered the thread to inform you all that you are “too dumb and too white” to get it. Guess it’s not just Barbrand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is indoctrination, pure and simple. I am embarrassed and saddened by this as I once taught in this once great school system.

The whole concept of "privilege" is ridiculous. Each person has strengths and challenges and those are not based on race, religion, occupation, or anything else that people want to assign to them.
I don't understand the goal of such an activity. To make people feel guilt? To make people feel "less than?" To somehow imply or, outright state, that people of certain races or religions or <fill in the blank> have an "easier" life than others? This is ludicrous.

This type of crap is exactly why Youngkin won. And, the more we see crap like this, the further people are going to turn away from public schools.

FCPS— homeschool and private schooling’s biggest booster the last two years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem having my kids recognize the privileges they have in life. Yes, some of those are due to us having worked hard, but others are due to the color of our skin, sexual identity, religion. No control over those. I teach my kids to have empathy towards classmates/ peers who have to overcome more obstacles to “make it” in this society. I also point out that most people on this planet are way worse off than we are here. I agree with this kind of lesson. I hope it teaches my kids to be more grateful for what they have been given in life. Would Jesus say, “Too bad, so sad, you got stuck living with a poor, brown/black, single parent.”?

But this is you, a parent, teaching a lesson. That is how is should be. This is not a lesson the schools should be teaching.

Why not?

Should they teach about anything related to "being a good person"?

Honesty? Responsibility? Empathy? etc.?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that there are lessons about being a good person. It's about developing critical thinking skills and understanding multiple points of view. The best way I can understand what an author has written, whether it's a novel or a primary source from an historical event or a textbook IS to understand that everyone comes with a point of view made up of their experiences. My world view is just that--MY view. It's really okay to teach kids that people have different experiences from them. It makes them better thinkers and problem solvers. I truly don't understand why people are so afraid and upset around this.

I don’t see how that “identify your privilege” bingo card is about an author’s point of view. It seems clearly directed at students themselves - “Drive/Get driven to school”, “Have your own bedroom”, “Military kid”.

People who were born on third base have a vested interest in making others believe they hit a triple, otherwise we would all need to take a long hard look at the way that we have been doing things. Why does a 6’5” white, moderately good looking son of privilege get to run a hedge fund and rule the Commonwealth over someone smarter and better qualified? Why do people consider Donald Trump a “successful businessman”, when he has shown zero aptitude for anything other than selling himself and who would have been a destitute loser if he was born to anyone other than a millionaire investment mogul?

America is not a meritocracy. Britain has surpassed us on class mobility. The phrase “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” was intended to be a mockery of the system, not a rallying cry and goal. I’m sorry if this makes you feel guilty, but facts are facts. Our kids need to know what’s what if they are going to lead this country into a new era of diminished American influence and increased global and internal strife. Waving the flag pretending all is good is delusional thinking.

Yes let's teach children to have a negative view of their country and that they will never see the fruits of their labor so why bother? That's a recipe for well-adjusted, successful kids. Youngkin's lunatics will be embraced over this philosophical garbage, that's for sure.

Or, you know, you could put it in their hands to make a better country, like the Founders intended. As a secure people, we should always aspire to a more perfect Union. But I’m pretty sure Youngkin’s MAGA people know they are losing out big time, otherwise they wouldn’t be so damn insecure about everything.

I wish liberals would make up their minds. One minute the founders are racist while evil slave owning males who founded the country on slavery so we should dismiss and disparage them and the next minute we are supposed to put our hands over our hearts and think of them and what they built with reverence.
Make

Up

Your

Goddamn

Mind

Life is not so binary.

We can appreciate positive contributions while also acknowledging negative behaviors. We can treat them like humans they are instead of infallible gods.

Nope they are “too dumb and too white”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that’s a pretty absurd lesson. It reminds me of Buzzfeed quizzes. And if isn’t “critical race theory.”

The whole "it's not CRT" response is pedantic. No, it's not a college-level grievance studies course. Yes, it springs directly from CRT. "Identifying privilege" is CRT implementation step one, because the next step is privilege shaming.

Anonymous wrote:Privilege is just saying you have a benefit that others don’t. It’s not you shouldn’t have that benefit. Lots of people here acknowledge they have privilege but they use different language. Maybe are nicer to them because they’re beautiful. Maybe their parents helped them buy a house. Etc. The response isn’t “you shouldn’t be pretty” or “your presents shouldn’t have helped you.”

That's not it at all. CRT adherents (which include the entirety of the FCPS board and 90% of administrators and teachers) it's assumed that so-called privilege has granted some people things that others don't have at the expense of those other people. To them, life is a zero-sum game and it's the place of government to make people who they identify as having privilege give something up - money, community, good schools, a nice quiet neighborhood, etc. - in order to make the world "fair". And the people who have to give something up are always, always white and middle-class. See Kendi, DiAngelo et al.

Anonymous wrote: It’s that in an ideal world, everyone would be treated with dignity and everybody would have equal access to buying a home.

The government already treats everybody with the same level of dignity (or lack thereof). Everybody already has equal access to buy a home. Sure, you can find individual instances where it doesn't happen, because sometimes people suck and there is no such thing as an ideal world, and in those instances, there are laws that can be enforced. CRT and all of its downstream implementations are not about making sure everybody is treated equally by the government, they're about government-mandated equality of outcomes that take away from some and give to others based on immutable characteristics. That's what makes it racist. The end goal is to teach children to feel bad about advantages they may have, given, inherited, earned, or natural, so that they don't fight back when the government comes for them and their stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is wrong with it?

Wow. I am so very grateful Youngkin won.

[Anonymous]

What possible good can come of a lesson such as this? None.

And it has no educational value.

Get this crap out of the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that resentful, anti military poster has rose colored glasses on what deployments actually do to a family.

Deployments are HARD, but often, the reunification is even harder and sometimes traumatic. Parents don't return the same person who left, and sometimes that new parent is very disruptive or destructive to the family unit.

Kids spend the deployment trying to be the second "adult" in the house, particularly if they have younger siblings. That carries a unique level of sacrifice for the country, particularly if the kid is trying to be "brave" through the deployment.

Deployment reunifications are not just uniformed parent jumping out of the float at the high school football game while everyone cheers and cries like you see on TV. They are hard, and very disruptive to the family unit.

Also, military kids and families serve the country and military too. That is drilled into families at every assignment.

Command spouses are actually sent to a week of training by the military, starting at squadron commander level, at least in the Air Force. The military flies the spouses to a single base (probably done by zoom now) prior to the change of command, and spends a week training them on all of their unpaid duties and expectations as a command spouse. I have done this twice. The classes range from everything from helping other families navigate the military support systems to aiding young airman families to providing support for families of deployed members to the best practices of supporting squadron members families who just learned that their servicemember was killed or wounded in action. Command spouses are trained on the mortuary system and the notification process. They are told that everything they do and say reflects on the military and are expected to act accordingly.

All of this training makes it clear that spouses of active duty do indeed serve too.

Additionally, children of command families have a litany of events that they are strongly volun-told to attend throughout the assignments. They are dressed up, paraded around, and expected to be on their best behavior, to provide the perception of a nice welcoming, family centered environment to help make junior service members feel more confortable when the young parents can't find or can't afford sitters and have to bring their kids along with them to various events.

These are all parts of family service in the military that those like the acronym poster might be completely unaware of.

The kids serve too. Anyone who says otherwise is grossly misinformed.

Cry me a river. Military kids don't go hungry and have free health care. They are more privileged than most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is wrong with it?

Wow. I am so very grateful Youngkin won.

This lesson is being taught in a Youngkin administration. So there!