Is Shakespeare not taught in DCPS?

[Anonymous]

What is taught in public school affects everyone even those w out children? Kansas kids not learning real science in the 90s enables the pandemic we all live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is taught in public school affects everyone even those w out children? Kansas kids not learning real science in the 90s enables the pandemic we all live in.

I'm trying to understand what you wanted to say, I'm guessing it's some irrefutable proof of a bad Republican policy in Kansas (?) that resulted in the covid pandemic... anti intellectualism much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Hello. I am here today to cast my first vote ever for a Republican. One time a troll lady on a mommy forum posted a list of anti-racist books. So, I am here to save Shakespeare, even though this is really not a part of the Republican agenda, but I really wanted to spite this one lady on the internet."

Phychological analysis is not your strong point.

I'll vote Repulican because the Democrats have turned into a party of anti intellectualism, and the posts on this thread are representative of that trend.

Why does is bother you so much how people chose to vote?

Dude, I would LOVE it if you vote Republican in DC. You may even meet new friends at the primary! There's at least a dozen Rs living in Wards 2, 3, and 6, at least one of them probably likes Shakespeare.

[Anonymous]

Democrats are anti-intellectual because they say "read things besides the 300 pages of written work by a dead early modern writer." This is the argument of an 'intellectual?'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Hello. I am here today to cast my first vote ever for a Republican. One time a troll lady on a mommy forum posted a list of anti-racist books. So, I am here to save Shakespeare, even though this is really not a part of the Republican agenda, but I really wanted to spite this one lady on the internet."

Phychological analysis is not your strong point.

I'll vote Repulican because the Democrats have turned into a party of anti intellectualism, and the posts on this thread are representative of that trend.

Why does is bother you so much how people chose to vote?

Dude, I would LOVE it if you vote Republican in DC. You may even meet new friends at the primary! There's at least a dozen Rs living in Wards 2, 3, and 6, at least one of them probably likes Shakespeare.

Brah, I dont vote to be more popular and to meet new friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Democrats are anti-intellectual because they say "read things besides the 300 pages of written work by a dead early modern writer." This is the argument of an 'intellectual?'

Whats up with you re-casting my supposed position in some silly phrase put in quotes? I said earlier, you don't do it well. You could answer with a more substantial argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is taught in public school affects everyone even those w out children? Kansas kids not learning real science in the 90s enables the pandemic we all live in.

I'm trying to understand what you wanted to say, I'm guessing it's some irrefutable proof of a bad Republican policy in Kansas (?) that resulted in the covid pandemic... anti intellectualism much?

So you have aged yourself or are clueless on education policy or both.

In the late 1990s Kansas decided to teach creationism is Science class. The country looked in horror. Kids in Kansas couldn’t get into college because real colleges knew their education was bogus. Eventually they switched back.

Do you want a doctor whose educational foundation was creationism? I’m a woman of faith, my husbands a doctor but no thank you.

No idea what my husband thinks of Shakespeare but he’s a medical doctor and reads book when he can so not bothered.

[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:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Sure they would have sampled a diverse work, but you don’t find it odd at all?

In past decades, whole classes of students were admitted who worked on the canon of dead white men. So us white people don't get ONE SINGLE class of Chicago lit PhDs and that's a problem?

So the PhD's are given to us white people? No, the problem is the narowing on what passes on as acceptable scholarship.

Okay you don't understand how this is a broadening. There will be like 20 more scholars who focus on AA literature on the job market in 7 years. Apparently that is too much for you.

You are the one who is not understanding. I want people to be able to chose the topic of their PhD themselves as they always had and I think it's wrong for the English Department at a university to refer to English as an instrument of oppression.

It's a good thing there are other schools and other years. And yeah, you're totally more knowledgeable about the social position of English literature than a bunch of faculty from Chicago. Why don't you go tell them? I'm sure they'd love to hear the opinion of a lady with a BA in business or something.

FYI, MIT Physics PhD.

Okay, so really, really unqualified to talk about literature. I'm going to pretend that you totally do have a very real physics PhD from MIT. Given that, you should be even more aware of extent of your expertise. Being the hardest thing you could think up at the moment really doesn't equate to knowledge about literature.

[Anonymous]

So yeah even in the early 2000s and a google search shows still “discussing”

Public school affects everyone

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4490224

[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:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Sure they would have sampled a diverse work, but you don’t find it odd at all?

In past decades, whole classes of students were admitted who worked on the canon of dead white men. So us white people don't get ONE SINGLE class of Chicago lit PhDs and that's a problem?

So the PhD's are given to us white people? No, the problem is the narowing on what passes on as acceptable scholarship.

Okay you don't understand how this is a broadening. There will be like 20 more scholars who focus on AA literature on the job market in 7 years. Apparently that is too much for you.

You are the one who is not understanding. I want people to be able to chose the topic of their PhD themselves as they always had and I think it's wrong for the English Department at a university to refer to English as an instrument of oppression.

It's a good thing there are other schools and other years. And yeah, you're totally more knowledgeable about the social position of English literature than a bunch of faculty from Chicago. Why don't you go tell them? I'm sure they'd love to hear the opinion of a lady with a BA in business or something.

FYI, MIT Physics PhD.

Okay, so really, really unqualified to talk about literature. I'm going to pretend that you totally do have a very real physics PhD from MIT. Given that, you should be even more aware of extent of your expertise. Being the hardest thing you could think up at the moment really doesn't equate to knowledge about literature.

+1

And probably not qualified to talk about physics education either. Just because you do it doesn’t mean you understand what it took to make your education.

So many scientists who moan they never use algebra or calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Hello. I am here today to cast my first vote ever for a Republican. One time a troll lady on a mommy forum posted a list of anti-racist books. So, I am here to save Shakespeare, even though this is really not a part of the Republican agenda, but I really wanted to spite this one lady on the internet."

Phychological analysis is not your strong point.

I'll vote Repulican because the Democrats have turned into a party of anti intellectualism, and the posts on this thread are representative of that trend.

Why does is bother you so much how people chose to vote?

Okay, so then it wasn't the list of books which caused you to make this decision. That was just a useless statement made for shock value, and as I said, you were already going to vote Republican. We can go back and quote you on that if you'd like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is taught in public school affects everyone even those w out children? Kansas kids not learning real science in the 90s enables the pandemic we all live in.

I'm trying to understand what you wanted to say, I'm guessing it's some irrefutable proof of a bad Republican policy in Kansas (?) that resulted in the covid pandemic... anti intellectualism much?

While I'm not sure there's a direct causal link, yeah there was a whole debacle in Kansas in the 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Hello. I am here today to cast my first vote ever for a Republican. One time a troll lady on a mommy forum posted a list of anti-racist books. So, I am here to save Shakespeare, even though this is really not a part of the Republican agenda, but I really wanted to spite this one lady on the internet."

Phychological analysis is not your strong point.

I'll vote Repulican because the Democrats have turned into a party of anti intellectualism, and the posts on this thread are representative of that trend.

Why does is bother you so much how people chose to vote?

Dude, I would LOVE it if you vote Republican in DC. You may even meet new friends at the primary! There's at least a dozen Rs living in Wards 2, 3, and 6, at least one of them probably likes Shakespeare.

Brah, I dont vote to be more popular and to meet new friends.

Brosef, i think she means that's about all you could accomplish

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats are anti-intellectual because they say "read things besides the 300 pages of written work by a dead early modern writer." This is the argument of an 'intellectual?'

Whats up with you re-casting my supposed position in some silly phrase put in quotes? I said earlier, you don't do it well. You could answer with a more substantial argument.

More than one person is mocking you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is taught in public school affects everyone even those w out children? Kansas kids not learning real science in the 90s enables the pandemic we all live in.

I'm trying to understand what you wanted to say, I'm guessing it's some irrefutable proof of a bad Republican policy in Kansas (?) that resulted in the covid pandemic... anti intellectualism much?

So you have aged yourself or are clueless on education policy or both.

In the late 1990s Kansas decided to teach creationism is Science class. The country looked in horror. Kids in Kansas couldn’t get into college because real colleges knew their education was bogus. Eventually they switched back.

Do you want a doctor whose educational foundation was creationism? I’m a woman of faith, my husbands a doctor but no thank you.

No idea what my husband thinks of Shakespeare but he’s a medical doctor and reads book when he can so not bothered.

Great, you are using your husbands career as proof that you know what you are talking about. Let him speak for himself about Shakespeare, as you aptly put it, you have no idea.

I absolutely agree with a rigurous scientific education. If you are arguing against creationism taught in school, that has been settled a while ago in Kitzmiller v. Dover and I support that decision. If you are arguing against using the Bible to teach English literature motifs, as some previous posters advocated, then I'm not on your side and I pointed this is an example of anti intellectualism.