Black educators at Blair push back on MCPS's ham-fisted antiracist PD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

This quote typifies the stupidity of the current DEI movement. I don’t care who you are - I care about the strength of your ideas.

It's way too much personal information. I don't need or want to know all that. Your private life needs to stay private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

Why should her race be the sole reason she is allowed to present. And, forcing kids to identify is horrible and uncomfortable for some as if they say they wrong thing they are attacked.

They should just be clear some people due to their skin color or religion are not welcome.

No one is forcing kids to identify. However, if someone is setting themselves out as an authority on the specific experiences of kids of color in public schools, it is normal for them to also state their own position so that the audience can better understand how that person's lived experience has shaped their perspective.

You don't have to agree with the practice, but I'm telling you as someone who spends a lot of time in these spaces that it is normal and expected for someone to make it clear how their own background relates to the subject matter that they are claiming expertise on.

DP, and I think maybe you’re spending too much time in “these spaces” and not enough outside the echo chamber. How do you know whether someone’s heritage impacted their lived experience or not? Can a childless pediatrician not study and practice medicine effectively due to lived experience? There are ways people can become knowledgeable on things outside of simply being born into a group.

I think the point is that it is possible to critique this presentation from multiple angles.

There's the perspective that some people on this thread have brought to the discussion, which is that MCPS should focus on education and that these sorts of anti-racist trainings are an unnecessary distraction.

But there's also the perspective that anti-racist training is good and necessary, but needs to be delivered by trusted messengers and cannot shift responsibility to individual educators for issues that are societal, institutional, and systemic.

In this case, the lived experience of the messenger matters because she is purporting to explain racism to teachers of color. If you haven't lived with racism, you are not a trusted messenger to tell Black and brown educators about it.

There have been so many anti-racism things in MCPS, few of the students care or take them seriously. How the adults behave and model behavior is far more important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

Huh?

About 35 minutes into the video, Blair Black teacher Marshall Collier – a member of PISAB, a national antiracist alliance – stood up and critiqued the training’s lack of authenticity. He and many other teachers of color were aggravated since Shalaby, a White-passing woman, was teaching them about racism. “So I’m thinking to myself, 'What does she know about racism?' I found that illogical and it doesn’t flow well with what we’re actually seeing and experiencing outside of the school,” Collier says.

https://silverchips.mbhs.edu/content/county-wide-antiracism-professional-development-training-stirs-controversy-at-blair-36250/

I don't see anywhere where they said "white-presenting". "White-passing" is used twice. And her not using positionality statements is not an excuse to commit a microaggression which is what the "white-passing" statement clearly is.

[Anonymous]

My HS children tell me the same thing about RJ, and all the stuff they are supposed to talk about during advisory.. no one pays attention to it, and they all think it's BS.

I swear.. these so called experts who put these things together know nothing about teenagers, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It's outrageous that Central Office is wasting their time on these virtue-signaling productions instead of actually directing children's learning and education.

Focus on academics.

Racism will never go away, but it can be addressed and managed by decreasing poverty in target populations - which you do by increasing their level of education! Not the other way round.

Get your priorities straight, MCPS.

+1

+1 you know what's the great equalizer? Education. Focus on on that, and poverty. I fully support helping low income families. I come from a lower income household.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

Oh my god. This sounds like religion or an AA meeting. Declaring your positionality?!? GTFOH

People have lost their damn minds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It's outrageous that Central Office is wasting their time on these virtue-signaling productions instead of actually directing children's learning and education.

Focus on academics.

Racism will never go away, but it can be addressed and managed by decreasing poverty in target populations - which you do by increasing their level of education! Not the other way round.

Get your priorities straight, MCPS.

+1

+1 you know what's the great equalizer? Education. Focus on on that, and poverty. I fully support helping low income families. I come from a lower income household.

Imagine how much good could be done taking the money they spend on this stuff and buying school supplies, snacks, and other things for the low-income families. Pay for their field trips and school trips (our school-sponsored trip for a few days is almost $1K which prohibits many families). Or, rebuild the schools that desperately need replacing. Hire more teachers and school staff, especially reading and math specials for elementary school to get any kid struggling on target. More speech therapies, more special education teachers and paraprofessionals. And, free lunch for those borderline income kids whose parents don't qualify for free lunch but money/food is still an issue. Or, providing bus service to families whose kids have unsafe walks to school. Or, free or subsidized before/after school care for families that don't qualify for vouchers but again, that income that is just above benefits but not enough to live on.

Or, textbooks...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My HS children tell me the same thing about RJ, and all the stuff they are supposed to talk about during advisory.. no one pays attention to it, and they all think it's BS.

I swear.. these so called experts who put these things together know nothing about teenagers, either.

And, the kids run wild at the HS level as there is no accountability or consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

Why should her race be the sole reason she is allowed to present. And, forcing kids to identify is horrible and uncomfortable for some as if they say they wrong thing they are attacked.

They should just be clear some people due to their skin color or religion are not welcome.

No one is forcing kids to identify. However, if someone is setting themselves out as an authority on the specific experiences of kids of color in public schools, it is normal for them to also state their own position so that the audience can better understand how that person's lived experience has shaped their perspective.

You don't have to agree with the practice, but I'm telling you as someone who spends a lot of time in these spaces that it is normal and expected for someone to make it clear how their own background relates to the subject matter that they are claiming expertise on.

DP, and I think maybe you’re spending too much time in “these spaces” and not enough outside the echo chamber. How do you know whether someone’s heritage impacted their lived experience or not? Can a childless pediatrician not study and practice medicine effectively due to lived experience? There are ways people can become knowledgeable on things outside of simply being born into a group.

I think the point is that it is possible to critique this presentation from multiple angles.

There's the perspective that some people on this thread have brought to the discussion, which is that MCPS should focus on education and that these sorts of anti-racist trainings are an unnecessary distraction.

But there's also the perspective that anti-racist training is good and necessary, but needs to be delivered by trusted messengers and cannot shift responsibility to individual educators for issues that are societal, institutional, and systemic.

In this case, the lived experience of the messenger matters because she is purporting to explain racism to teachers of color. If you haven't lived with racism, you are not a trusted messenger to tell Black and brown educators about it.

There have been so many anti-racism things in MCPS, few of the students care or take them seriously. How the adults behave and model behavior is far more important.

This is all great and all but kind of wish they'd get back to teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My HS children tell me the same thing about RJ, and all the stuff they are supposed to talk about during advisory.. no one pays attention to it, and they all think it's BS.

I swear.. these so called experts who put these things together know nothing about teenagers, either.

And, the kids run wild at the HS level as there is no accountability or consequences.

They said consequences!DCUM bingo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people are still using the term white passing. It implies the person is trying to pass themselves off as white. White presenting is a more neutral term that doesn't imply the person is trying to be something they are not.

To be fair, the SCO article used "white presenting" and they did so becuase Dr. Shalaby never did the sort of standard positionality statements that we would normally see in these sorts of presentations.

Normally, she would say something like "By way of positionality, I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, woman of European and Arab-American descent." That allows the other people in the discussion to better understand where she is coming from. Because Dr. Shalaby didn't do that, the SCO authors are hedging their bets and going with "white presenting" since they haven't heard from Dr. Shalaby herself on how she identifies.

Oh my god. This sounds like religion or an AA meeting. Declaring your positionality?!? GTFOH

People have lost their damn minds.

lol

[Anonymous]

If that bad presentation is the worst trauma these adults have faced, consider themselves lucky. How would they deal with real ptsd and trauma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach at a different high school and we all thought it was a terrible PD. Complete waste of time. Thinking of how much money is wasted by MCPS on stuff like this PD + Leader in Me literally makes me want to cry.
When I ask my school to go to a highly regarded content PD that costs money, I’m told that sorry, we don’t have the money to cover stuff like that

+1,000 - MCPS has the worst PD in general, and Shalaby was a real puker. I used to teach in PGCPS and we had much better PD and teacher training support. The fact that MCPS spends truckloads of money for its PD nonsense, but can't find a dime for worthwhile outside PD for teachers is one more sign of the arrogance of central office in assuming that only it knows best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It's outrageous that Central Office is wasting their time on these virtue-signaling productions instead of actually directing children's learning and education.

Focus on academics.

Racism will never go away, but it can be addressed and managed by decreasing poverty in target populations - which you do by increasing their level of education! Not the other way round.

Get your priorities straight, MCPS.

+1

+1 you know what's the great equalizer? Education. Focus on on that, and poverty. I fully support helping low income families. I come from a lower income household.

Imagine how much good could be done taking the money they spend on this stuff and buying school supplies, snacks, and other things for the low-income families. Pay for their field trips and school trips (our school-sponsored trip for a few days is almost $1K which prohibits many families). Or, rebuild the schools that desperately need replacing. Hire more teachers and school staff, especially reading and math specials for elementary school to get any kid struggling on target. More speech therapies, more special education teachers and paraprofessionals. And, free lunch for those borderline income kids whose parents don't qualify for free lunch but money/food is still an issue. Or, providing bus service to families whose kids have unsafe walks to school. Or, free or subsidized before/after school care for families that don't qualify for vouchers but again, that income that is just above benefits but not enough to live on.

Or, textbooks...

Amen to this. A lot of the high schools don't even have enough functioning toilets. I remember when I studied education policy 25-30 years ago, the focus was all on insufficient resources for schools serving communities of color, and the impact that has on society/equity. I think at some point people figured out how expensive it is to fix these real equity problems, and just decided to spend money on meaningless crap instead. I suspect they could fire at least half of central office staff, and actually *improve* the state of the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It's outrageous that Central Office is wasting their time on these virtue-signaling productions instead of actually directing children's learning and education.

Focus on academics.

Racism will never go away, but it can be addressed and managed by decreasing poverty in target populations - which you do by increasing their level of education! Not the other way round.

Get your priorities straight, MCPS.

+1

+1 you know what's the great equalizer? Education. Focus on on that, and poverty. I fully support helping low income families. I come from a lower income household.

Imagine how much good could be done taking the money they spend on this stuff and buying school supplies, snacks, and other things for the low-income families. Pay for their field trips and school trips (our school-sponsored trip for a few days is almost $1K which prohibits many families). Or, rebuild the schools that desperately need replacing. Hire more teachers and school staff, especially reading and math specials for elementary school to get any kid struggling on target. More speech therapies, more special education teachers and paraprofessionals. And, free lunch for those borderline income kids whose parents don't qualify for free lunch but money/food is still an issue. Or, providing bus service to families whose kids have unsafe walks to school. Or, free or subsidized before/after school care for families that don't qualify for vouchers but again, that income that is just above benefits but not enough to live on.

Or, textbooks...

Amen to this. A lot of the high schools don't even have enough functioning toilets. I remember when I studied education policy 25-30 years ago, the focus was all on insufficient resources for schools serving communities of color, and the impact that has on society/equity. I think at some point people figured out how expensive it is to fix these real equity problems, and just decided to spend money on meaningless crap instead. I suspect they could fire at least half of central office staff, and actually *improve* the state of the system.

Our school regularly locks the bathrooms. Functioning toilets mean nothing when you cannot use them.