Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

It’s more complex than that and you know it. Centuries of oppression mean that fewer would-be black authors have been able to get published. Do you think Ezra Jack Keats would have been able to publish his books at that time if he had been black? That doesn’t mean our kids shouldn’t read his books.

But if you are looking for more diverse books to incorporate in your classroom, or your child’s classroom/library, check out suggestions from Here We Read and donate some books.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

So what you're telling me is it's racist not to select books by authors based on their race to fulfill a quota instead of selecting books based on their content and ideas?

You are the one bringing up quotas and suggesting that the only way to have a diverse curriculum is to artificially choose books based on race. That assumption upholds White supremacy because it assumes that a curriculum that aims to choose the most appropriate books for kids to read will result in a curriculum that is 88% White.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

So what you're telling me is it's racist not to select books by authors based on their race to fulfill a quota instead of selecting books based on their content and ideas?

Anonymous wrote:What does racial equity work look like when there is no proof that disparities in any particular measure means there is bias?

Why not just meet every child where they are and go from there?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

The whole point is a curriculum that is 88% White in a country that is 60% non-Hispanic White and a school system that is 25% White has been selected, whether you realize it or not, because of racism. If you don't think racism should determine which books your child reads, then you should be in favor of a diverse curriculum, not one that upholds White supremacy by asserting that all the "good" books or the ones that make a person "educated" just HAPPEN to be written by White authors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does racial equity work look like when there is no proof that disparities in any particular measure means there is bias?

Why not just meet every child where they are and go from there?

This is such a racist dog whistle. Any such disparities are due to systemic inquities in the classroom.

It isn't racist. It's intelligent inquiry. Association is not causation.

But if you build policy on association, you end up with unintended, and often harmful impacts. And no guarantee you actually fix anything.

Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids are born and remain in poverty when others come from outrageous wealth.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have robust health insurance coverage that pays for neuropsych exams and years of therapy when other kids have nothing.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids are homeless and others have stable homes, stable transportation, etc.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have parents with mental health or substance misuse disorders and other kids have parents with no additional medical needs.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have parents who can run to the store for the supplies they need for a last minute project and others can't.


If we ignore those systematic inequities outside of school, we have no hope of improving things within schools.

There is plenty of evidence nationally, and MCPS data is consistent with this though what they release is limited, that race by itself predicts outcomes (independent from class). When you break down the data by race and income, you see that Black children from high-income families do significantly worse than White children from high-income families. You insist that there's no proof, but you haven't even looked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Wouldn't it be better if they focused less on an author's race and more on a book's content?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

This was in reference to a PP's agreeing with "White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

The only people saying this needs to be an either/or decision are the people saying we should excise all white people from the curriculum. No one advocating that kids learn about Thomas Paine and John Locke are saying kids shouldn’t also learn about Frederick Douglass and Ralph Ellison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

I would like my kids to learn about things that made this country successful, but also about areas where it wasn't so successful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw PP, you are trying to argue that books with White authors should account for 88% of the MCPS curriculum in a school system that is 25% White. Do you not see how you are upholding White supremacy?

Yes, I am saying that this country, with its foundations in the Enlightenment and the English language, will by necessity need to teach from that heritage if it expects people to value the things that made it successful.

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does racial equity work look like when there is no proof that disparities in any particular measure means there is bias?

Why not just meet every child where they are and go from there?

This is such a racist dog whistle. Any such disparities are due to systemic inquities in the classroom.

It isn't racist. It's intelligent inquiry. Association is not causation.

But if you build policy on association, you end up with unintended, and often harmful impacts. And no guarantee you actually fix anything.

Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids are born and remain in poverty when others come from outrageous wealth.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have robust health insurance coverage that pays for neuropsych exams and years of therapy when other kids have nothing.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids are homeless and others have stable homes, stable transportation, etc.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have parents with mental health or substance misuse disorders and other kids have parents with no additional medical needs.
Schools can't equalize outcomes when some kids have parents who can run to the store for the supplies they need for a last minute project and others can't.


If we ignore those systematic inequities outside of school, we have no hope of improving things within schools.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think a goal of any school should be equalized outcomes. Equalized opportunities sure, but not outcomes.

If you read the comments in the audit report, it is clear that many do not perceive equalized opportunities.

Yes, this has been an ongoing issue with the USA but not something MCPS can correct. MCPS needs to focus on educating children and leave societal issues to soceity.

Obviously MCPS can't correct all the problems of society; no one is suggesting that they should. But I see nothing wrong with MCPS trying to correct the school-based problems cited in the report.

Unfortunately those problems stem from larger societal problems and are beyond mcps' pervue.

Sounds like you haven't read the report. There are plenty of issues within MCPS's purview.

I did and you're statement makes it clear you failed to grasp it. MCPS can't solve these problems. Their scope is global. MCPS job is to educate children and because it's so distracted, it is failing to do that.

Next, MCPS should fund a study on solving global warming!

It was proven that the globe is not warming, so we changed it to climate change.

Agree MCPS needs to fund a multi-million dollar study to prevent climate change and poverty too. Who needs to hire teachers when we face so many large global problems!

MCPS has been building LEED certified buildings for years to help address their part in climate change. Heck, I do stuff, too, even though I can't solve climate change.

If no one tackles their own part of an enormous problem but rather waits for someone else to take care of it, it never gets taken care of.

MCPS’s own part is to meet each kid where they’re at as an individual and teach them academic subjects, specials like music and art, and physical education. That’s what my taxpayer money is paying for.

So MCPS should sweep any implicit bias and systemic racism under the rug?

Systems level: If they used valid research to identify just exactly what parts of MCPD were systemically racist, then they should work to remove it.

Individual level: We all have implicit bias. You can't get rid of it You can only modify actions. MCPS needs to outline very clear guidance on appropriate behavior. And then hold people accountable if they violate it.

You're advocating for paralysis by analysis. You don't need expensive, never-ending studies at the local level to know that systemic racism exists in MCPS. MCPS is not some magical land that is different from every other school district in the country. You combine the information we have locally with rigorous studies from elsewhere to understand what the issues are.

I am not. Mcps has a history of implementing new programs, costing millions, with zero accountability. The don’t sufficiently train employees and/or fail to bring in true experts, and their feel-good ideas never amount to any improvement. If we (if the board would do its job) and require explicit identification of things we can change, then oversight to ensure it has the desired effect, that would be a different story. How are they measuring effectiveness of Leader in Me for example? They aren’t. They instead just take credit for all the bright shiny new programs they force on kids (and teachers).

And the truth is MCPS is light years ahead of most of the nation making schools inclusive. There are tested, evidence based ways to do that, and we have done much of it. My kid hasn’t read one work of fiction yet that’s part of the old school, traditional (white) canon. Last year he read Yoruba Girl Dancing and this year he’s reading The Book of Unknown Americans. And that’s great. Social Studies is absolutely fantastic, teaching from multiple perspectives, using primary and secondary sources, and teaching the different value of each.

The rest is interpersonal behavior within explicitly stated norms. They didn’t need an antiracist audit for that.

Why is it fantastic that kids do not read anything from the source of our culture? And a large group of kids are given the message that their own ancestors are shameful? Why do we abandon our own culture because people from around the world were drawn to live in it?

I said the social studies curriculum is fantastic. The books are from English class, and I do think it's great to read authors of color. But I never said we should exclude traditional white texts. I think they should read both. My anecdote was meant to illustrate that the school system has changed its curricula to be more inclusive and in the case of social studies, more honest.

So sorry, I guess you said, "it was great" that your child "hadn't read one work of fiction yet that's part of the old school, traditional (white) canon."