Conservative confusion over schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Some of you may be bothered by conservative concerns but their concerns are just as valid and important as yours.

I mean, "no" to the bolded. If their concerns are that kids shouldn't be required to get vaccinated because they believe hokum about vaccines causing autism or making people magnetic or something about Bill Gates, and my concerns are that evolution should be taught as accepted science and young earth theories should be rejected, then conservative concerns "aren't just as valid and important as mine."

Maybe you'll say not *those* conservative concerns and not *those* liberal concerns. But, even so, that means you can't really use a broad brush to say which concerns are "just as valid and important" as the other.

There are people that believe that gender ideology is as much hokum as the idea that vaccines cause autism, yet there are books for young children that teach the tenets of gender identity to young kids in some public schools. You can’t say, oh MY side is the science-based one but then ignore the outright mythology that passes for fact by a lot of leftists.

I think that, eventually, a lot of the sex and gender essentialism we see these days will be held in the same regard as the race essentialism we saw back in the 19th century.

That would be nice but I think you mean "the race essentialism we're seeing today"

Point taken. I think there's too much of that. But really if you read stuff from the late 19th century, we have made a ton of progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Rather, it's when lessons about those issues draw a harder ideological edge that parents start having problems. The idea that white Americans should devalue the real achievements that have been made in and by the United States over time. The idea that one is racist by merely existing in the U.S. because of structural racism. The idea that all acts are either racist or anti-racist and there is no in between. The idea that white Americans should walk around with hair shirts as penance for the acts of their predecessors.

Now, I realize that the messenger can sometimes be clumsy, but that is not at all the message of CRT or of any equity lessons.

It is, however, oftentimes the takeaway by white people who are struggling with the cognitive dissonance these conversations force. You hear this in their complaints that it makes them -- or their children -- feel uncomfortable. They internalize it. They thing, "wait, I'm not a racist! I've never enslaved people! I'm a good person! And here you are, telling me about all these horrible things that black people or people have color have endured, and that makes me feel bad about myself!" They take it as a personal attack.

The brighter people -- or at least those who keep an open mind -- get past this first reaction/cognitive dissonance and are able to see a different perspective and engage the conversation in good faith -- and begin to understand. But a good number of white people -- who actually usually ARE good people -- shut down. They can't NOT internalize it. Or get past that feeling of being attacked. And to some degree, that's because the beneficiaries of these discussions sometimes DO attack -- hence the "check your privilege" comments when a white person tries to enter the conversation in good faith. Sometimes it's because the person of color has so much pent up frustration that they overreach in this newly reacted "safe space" that they can't suppress some urge to retaliate, thinking the power dynamics have shifted.

At least that's my take. I'm a white man and I remember taking classes of "gender, race and class" back in 1989 at my university. I remember those initial feelings that I was being attacked. But I also had skilled professors who facilitated a dialogue. And everyone came to a better understanding. Not that we solved everything -- but I better understand where people of color come from and am not in the least bit threatened by conversations about equity, even in our schools, assuming the lessons are age-appropriate.

YMMV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Rather, it's when lessons about those issues draw a harder ideological edge that parents start having problems. The idea that white Americans should devalue the real achievements that have been made in and by the United States over time. The idea that one is racist by merely existing in the U.S. because of structural racism. The idea that all acts are either racist or anti-racist and there is no in between. The idea that white Americans should walk around with hair shirts as penance for the acts of their predecessors.

Now, I realize that the messenger can sometimes be clumsy, but that is not at all the message of CRT or of any equity lessons.

It is, however, oftentimes the takeaway by white people who are struggling with the cognitive dissonance these conversations force. You hear this in their complaints that it makes them -- or their children -- feel uncomfortable. They internalize it. They thing, "wait, I'm not a racist! I've never enslaved people! I'm a good person! And here you are, telling me about all these horrible things that black people or people have color have endured, and that makes me feel bad about myself!" They take it as a personal attack.

The brighter people -- or at least those who keep an open mind -- get past this first reaction/cognitive dissonance and are able to see a different perspective and engage the conversation in good faith -- and begin to understand. But a good number of white people -- who actually usually ARE good people -- shut down. They can't NOT internalize it. Or get past that feeling of being attacked. And to some degree, that's because the beneficiaries of these discussions sometimes DO attack -- hence the "check your privilege" comments when a white person tries to enter the conversation in good faith. Sometimes it's because the person of color has so much pent up frustration that they overreach in this newly reacted "safe space" that they can't suppress some urge to retaliate, thinking the power dynamics have shifted.

At least that's my take. I'm a white man and I remember taking classes of "gender, race and class" back in 1989 at my university. I remember those initial feelings that I was being attacked. But I also had skilled professors who facilitated a dialogue. And everyone came to a better understanding. Not that we solved everything -- but I better understand where people of color come from and am not in the least bit threatened by conversations about equity, even in our schools, assuming the lessons are age-appropriate.

YMMV.

It's a mix, I think. Sometimes the messenger is clumsy. Sometimes the listener feels attacked when they aren't. But I think the content is enough of a kludged together mess at times that it's tough to say what the correct message is. I've seen what looked like legitimate critiques dismissed as "signs of discomfort" which is irritating. In popular culture, anti-racism was framed in such a way that it was non-falsifiable. Any criticism was merely a sign that the critic had internalized racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Ugh, run along, troll. One doesn't have to be "pro-racist" to reject the fanatical focus on equity/social justice above all else. So glad my youngest is almost done with this nonsense.

Really, above all else? I don't see where they say equity/social justice is more important than math or reading or science...

Please show us where FCPS has spent thousands of dollars on contracts to improve math, reading, science, or history curriculums. You won't find anything. OTOH, there is plenty of documentation (posted several times already) to show what they DO spend money on - redundant social justice/equity programs, teacher trainings, and anti-racism "curriculum". Sorry, I want my kids to receive an actual education - not indoctrination in the latest feel-good virtue signaling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Some of you may be bothered by conservative concerns but their concerns are just as valid and important as yours.

I mean, "no" to the bolded. If their concerns are that kids shouldn't be required to get vaccinated because they believe hokum about vaccines causing autism or making people magnetic or something about Bill Gates, and my concerns are that evolution should be taught as accepted science and young earth theories should be rejected, then conservative concerns "aren't just as valid and important as mine."

Maybe you'll say not *those* conservative concerns and not *those* liberal concerns. But, even so, that means you can't really use a broad brush to say which concerns are "just as valid and important" as the other.

There are people that believe that gender ideology is as much hokum as the idea that vaccines cause autism, yet there are books for young children that teach the tenets of gender identity to young kids in some public schools. You can’t say, oh MY side is the science-based one but then ignore the outright mythology that passes for fact by a lot of leftists.

I think that, eventually, a lot of the sex and gender essentialism we see these days will be held in the same regard as the race essentialism we saw back in the 19th century.

That would be nice but I think you mean "the race essentialism we're seeing today"

Point taken. I think there's too much of that. But really if you read stuff from the late 19th century, we have made a ton of progress.

true, at least phrenology bit the dust at some point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Who is saying equity should be taught instead of academics, math, writing and reading? Do you have an actual citation you can provide?

DP, but just a few responses up, someone discussed teaching "anti racism." That is political activism. It's not academics.

Where did anyone say "anti racism" should be taught instead of, and at the expense of academics?

Be specific.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math. So when a pp said that anti-racism should be taught in school, it is logical to conclude that the pp favors teaching that political ideology in schools at the cost of academics.

Come on, now.

All I see is a PP who said "how dare they emphasize anti-racism?" in response to another PP who was critical of that FCPS document, which has "Anti-Racism" in its title. And that slide deck does not advocate taking time away from math to specifically teach anti-racism. It's professional development for teachers to incorporate anti-racist principles into their existing curriculum.

DP. Excuse me while I vomit. Someone has clearly not bothered to actually read the linked FCPS document. So typical. I wasn't able to copy all of the rest of the idiocy, so this will have to suffice.

1. Expand and Deepen Efforts Across All Content Areas: Design Principles for Cultural Responsiveness and Social Justice Standards
2. Topical Anti-Bias Lessons: Explore requiring specific lessons on topics such as race, religion, ability, class, immigration, gender and sexuality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Rather, it's when lessons about those issues draw a harder ideological edge that parents start having problems. The idea that white Americans should devalue the real achievements that have been made in and by the United States over time. The idea that one is racist by merely existing in the U.S. because of structural racism. The idea that all acts are either racist or anti-racist and there is no in between. The idea that white Americans should walk around with hair shirts as penance for the acts of their predecessors.

Now, I realize that the messenger can sometimes be clumsy, but that is not at all the message of CRT or of any equity lessons.

It is, however, oftentimes the takeaway by white people who are struggling with the cognitive dissonance these conversations force. You hear this in their complaints that it makes them -- or their children -- feel uncomfortable. They internalize it. They thing, "wait, I'm not a racist! I've never enslaved people! I'm a good person! And here you are, telling me about all these horrible things that black people or people have color have endured, and that makes me feel bad about myself!" They take it as a personal attack.

The brighter people -- or at least those who keep an open mind -- get past this first reaction/cognitive dissonance and are able to see a different perspective and engage the conversation in good faith -- and begin to understand. But a good number of white people -- who actually usually ARE good people -- shut down. They can't NOT internalize it. Or get past that feeling of being attacked. And to some degree, that's because the beneficiaries of these discussions sometimes DO attack -- hence the "check your privilege" comments when a white person tries to enter the conversation in good faith. Sometimes it's because the person of color has so much pent up frustration that they overreach in this newly reacted "safe space" that they can't suppress some urge to retaliate, thinking the power dynamics have shifted.

At least that's my take. I'm a white man and I remember taking classes of "gender, race and class" back in 1989 at my university. I remember those initial feelings that I was being attacked. But I also had skilled professors who facilitated a dialogue. And everyone came to a better understanding. Not that we solved everything -- but I better understand where people of color come from and am not in the least bit threatened by conversations about equity, even in our schools, assuming the lessons are age-appropriate.

YMMV.

It's a mix, I think. Sometimes the messenger is clumsy. Sometimes the listener feels attacked when they aren't. But I think the content is enough of a kludged together mess at times that it's tough to say what the correct message is. I've seen what looked like legitimate critiques dismissed as "signs of discomfort" which is irritating. In popular culture, anti-racism was framed in such a way that it was non-falsifiable. Any criticism was merely a sign that the critic had internalized racism.

See, personally I think the over-the-top reactionary response in the Fox News echo chamber has done a lot more to poison the dialogue. They want to shut the entire conversation down. The difference is who is acting in good faith. The people who screech loudest in objection often are usually the biggest offenders of bad-faith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Your use of the word “obsessive” is ridiculous.

Can we return to talking about how Ron DeSantis wants to ban AP curriculum from Florida schools because they’re too “woke?” What do you think of that? Personally I think that’s “hold my beer” territory.

The use of the word "obsessive" is right on target, which you would know if you bothered to read any of the links from FCPS provided throughout this thread. Teacher trainings and professional development days are devoted to "anti-bias/racism," and social justice initiatives. Not to, say, beefing up academic instruction. Nope. That's entirely secondary (if that) to FCPS and so many other public school systems. The focus now is on making sure "anti-bias" training is front and center in all aspects of school. Forget about emphasizing reading, spelling, writing, grammar, math skills.

As for Ron DeSantis, I like much of what he's doing and think it's long overdue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And also, Asian Americans are the most harmed by equity.

Asian americans are hugely overrepresented in many areas of privilege. That's pretty much the opposite of being harmed.

They are over-represented because they EARNED the right to be there. They WORKED for it. And are being penalized by public schools and colleges because of that.

Well, no. Your value system places different emphasis on what constitutes “accomplishment.”

Believe it or not, real achievement in education isn’t just GPAs and test scores. The 4.4 / 1550 SAT kid isn’t owed a spot at VT because of those statistics, especially if he can’t listen to what VT values and demonstrate service and put some time into expressing himself clearly in the supplemental essays, with VT says are highly important.

I am so tired of this “well we earned it because our grades are better.”

No, you aren’t. You aren’t necessarily the better candidate. Deal with it. And saying that isn’t racial discrimination.

What do you consider accomplishment? How do you know that the essays are not just a way to filter out "undesirable" asians?

DP. OMG. Give it up. The PP is right - no one's kid is entitled to admission, anywhere. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Who is saying equity should be taught instead of academics, math, writing and reading? Do you have an actual citation you can provide?

DP, but just a few responses up, someone discussed teaching "anti racism." That is political activism. It's not academics.

Where did anyone say "anti racism" should be taught instead of, and at the expense of academics?

Be specific.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math. So when a pp said that anti-racism should be taught in school, it is logical to conclude that the pp favors teaching that political ideology in schools at the cost of academics.

Come on, now.

Not an answer, try again. Show us a school curriculum that has directly replaced the math class with anti-tacism class. If you can't probe the claim, then stop making the claim.

No one is claiming that there is an actual class called "equity" or "CRT". We are saying it is in the messaging, the discussions, the activities.

You're eventually going to shift your argument from "it's not happening" to "it's good and right that it is happening." The left generally no longer denies teaching "restorative justice" etc.

DP.

"Equity" is another ridiculous concept drummed up by the left to further divide the nation. The idea of reaching "equal outcomes" is ludicrous.

The emphasis should be on equality. Individuals should all have equal opportunities to achieve/excel.

+100
This is so obviously the correct answer, it amazes me that anyone is still arguing students should all have "equal outcomes" (Kamala Harris, I'm looking at you).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

You clearly have never been in a position of being in someone else's shoes. Maybe read up a little on what it is like to be black in this country. Or hispanic. Or Asian.

You may not want to admit it, or perhaps you are being willfully ignorant, but your entitlement is showing.

DP, Asian American. it's your entitlement showing, white limo liberal.

So what happens if it’s black people beating on Asians, like recently in NYC?

We don't speak of that.
DP

+2.

That's an Inconvenient Truth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Who is saying equity should be taught instead of academics, math, writing and reading? Do you have an actual citation you can provide?

DP, but just a few responses up, someone discussed teaching "anti racism." That is political activism. It's not academics.

Where did anyone say "anti racism" should be taught instead of, and at the expense of academics?

Be specific.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math. So when a pp said that anti-racism should be taught in school, it is logical to conclude that the pp favors teaching that political ideology in schools at the cost of academics.

Come on, now.

Not an answer, try again. Show us a school curriculum that has directly replaced the math class with anti-tacism class. If you can't probe the claim, then stop making the claim.

No one is claiming that there is an actual class called "equity" or "CRT". We are saying it is in the messaging, the discussions, the activities.

You're eventually going to shift your argument from "it's not happening" to "it's good and right that it is happening." The left generally no longer denies teaching "restorative justice" etc.

LMAO! You're the one backpedaling. Above it was directly claimed that anti-racism was being taught in place of math.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math.

And now you're backpedaling. Please stop embarrasing yourself.

DP. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together would recognize that the PP was not being literal. JFC. If a school curriculum is making room for "equity studies/anti-racism, etc" then they are in effect taking time out of the day that should be used for ACTUAL ACADEMICS. It is YOU who should be embarrassed for your obvious lack of critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Who is saying equity should be taught instead of academics, math, writing and reading? Do you have an actual citation you can provide?

DP, but just a few responses up, someone discussed teaching "anti racism." That is political activism. It's not academics.

Where did anyone say "anti racism" should be taught instead of, and at the expense of academics?

Be specific.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math. So when a pp said that anti-racism should be taught in school, it is logical to conclude that the pp favors teaching that political ideology in schools at the cost of academics.

Come on, now.

Not an answer, try again. Show us a school curriculum that has directly replaced the math class with anti-tacism class. If you can't probe the claim, then stop making the claim.

No one is claiming that there is an actual class called "equity" or "CRT". We are saying it is in the messaging, the discussions, the activities.

You're eventually going to shift your argument from "it's not happening" to "it's good and right that it is happening." The left generally no longer denies teaching "restorative justice" etc.

LMAO! You're the one backpedaling. Above it was directly claimed that anti-racism was being taught in place of math.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math.

And now you're backpedaling. Please stop embarrasing yourself.

I cant tell if you are dumb or trying to box me in to make the argument easier for you to tackle.

You did just fine boxing yourself in, bruh. Don't make claims that you can't back up.

So are you fine if we dont teach about anti racism in schools?

I'm TOTALLY fine with that

Teach people not to discriminate themselves. Don't teach them that every inequality stems from racism and that even though they can't identify who's being racist or how, they should still assume it's there and then "do something" to be "anti-racist" which is a term invented 5 minutes ago to sell books.

100% THIS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conservatives aren't at all confused over schools. We know that our schools are in need of major reform and we have students who have fallen back in learning over the past two years.

Schools were not in great shape prior to the pandemic, but now we find having students out of school erased 2 decades of progress.....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2022/09/01/pandemic-set-students-reading-levels-back-two-decades-heres-where-it-dropped-the-most/?sh=1b4a5fc17dcd

You would think with this kind of news, schools would double down on working on the core academic areas and finding ways to help struggling learners achieve. Instead, they are focusing on "equity" and gender issues.

Exactly. Liberals can't see the forest for the trees. Can't wait until my kids are out of public school for good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line: equity is a political loser.

I didn’t vote for Youngkin, but I will be supporting republicans as long as dems keep pushing this nonsense.

Equity is a loser
Equity is nonsense

Wow. Look at you. You likely completely lack any ability to consider what things would be like if the roles were reversed and you were on the losing end instead of being on the winning end.

Not that PP, but I believe the point is that this obsessive focus on "equity," rather than academics, is a losing proposition. I would agree with that. Just take a look at what's been going on in FCPS, and no doubt other public school systems across the US. Enough already. Stop spending gobs of money and resources on this nonsense and maybe instead, beef up the actual ACADEMICS.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BTFRCZ6CA62E/$file/Final%20Anti-Racism%20Anti-Bias%20Curriculum%20Work%20Session%20Sept%2014%202020.pdf

Who is saying equity should be taught instead of academics, math, writing and reading? Do you have an actual citation you can provide?

DP, but just a few responses up, someone discussed teaching "anti racism." That is political activism. It's not academics.

Where did anyone say "anti racism" should be taught instead of, and at the expense of academics?

Be specific.

Schedules are a zero sum game. If you talk about anti racism in class. You are not teaching math. So when a pp said that anti-racism should be taught in school, it is logical to conclude that the pp favors teaching that political ideology in schools at the cost of academics.

Come on, now.

All I see is a PP who said "how dare they emphasize anti-racism?" in response to another PP who was critical of that FCPS document, which has "Anti-Racism" in its title. And that slide deck does not advocate taking time away from math to specifically teach anti-racism. It's professional development for teachers to incorporate anti-racist principles into their existing curriculum.

DP. Excuse me while I vomit. Someone has clearly not bothered to actually read the linked FCPS document. So typical. I wasn't able to copy all of the rest of the idiocy, so this will have to suffice.

1. Expand and Deepen Efforts Across All Content Areas: Design Principles for Cultural Responsiveness and Social Justice Standards
2. Topical Anti-Bias Lessons: Explore requiring specific lessons on topics such as race, religion, ability, class, immigration, gender and sexuality

and?

Where is this taking away from reading, writing and 'rithmatic? What is the problem here?