Related Posts
Conversation Starter
More Posts
Hi fishes,
Me along with a few friends is building something to help people specially when they are stuck in career and need some guidance.
Here is the prototype : growceed.com (mobile)
Guys please share your reviews if you feel it helpful else ignore. Your feedback matters a lot to us.
Mobile link : Growceed.com
Survey form : https://forms.gle/bYqJMVJJw8ZgU1sD9
To the extent this is allowed, could some EY NY folks DM me photos of the new EY office space in NY? Recently got an offer and plan on talking to more folks soon, so I definitely hope to hear their perspective, even though many have gone in a few times. Ultimately, I’m just curious as to what it looks like (and get a sneak peek of the view :0) Thanks all! EY
Happy New Years.
Which firms are handling the FTX restructuring?
Best startups in the utility space?
Chief
Because the people who are so quick to label others as “snowflakes” are actually the delicate ones who have trouble with teaching what actually occurred, the good and the god awful.
slavers*
Every person is flawed. My concern comes when there are those who want to vilify historical figures because of those flaws. George Washington was a slave owner. Very true. So were many others of that time. Culturally, that was accepted at that time. It didn't start with Europeans. They didn't arrive in Africa and propose the idea to the African Tribes. Slavery has been a horrible practice for ALL of human history. To judge and condemn people from the past for what was an evil that still needed to be rooted out, at the expense of minimizing the good that they did, is what worries me. I hope that people will be patient with my faults and recognize that I tried to do good, instead of focusing on my faults. Acknowledge they were imperfect in an imperfect society, but let's not judge them from our 21st century standards. We know better now and can expect more from each other now. I hope that in 200 years, our culture is better than today, but please don't judge me by those standards. I am doing the best that I can in the society I live in today.
No you cannot wipe away the good that individuals such as George Washington did. However we must not minimize history, not choose what history will be taught in the schools. Our children must learn the truth of the four fathers and beyond Wars, British Tea Party, Christopher Columbus etc. and learn that Black history is “History”. Just as much as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, WWI, WWII, Civil War etc., students should also know that yes these individuals were slave owners. That the Declaration of Independence was written, and slaves were still owned and not free. We are not doing our children good by sugar coating history.
The form of your question makes clear you don't want to understand. Because THERE ISN'T ONE PERSON thinks white male history is the only history we should care about. People do care if white male history or any history has to be portrayed as "evil" without perspective to make some other type of history be "good." All history happened and should be studied.
What anti-America posts are you referring to?
Chief
What is it about "diversity" that you're trying to teach that is being rejected? Where is "African American" history not being taught? Who said "white male" history is all we care about? Who said anything about white men's feelings?
Oh, you mean the AP course that was rejected because they tried to sneak "queer theory" into a black history course? Yeah, I kind of agree with that. Besides, we already teach the history of slavery, segregation, and the many other forms of oppression experienced by black Americans throughout history. So, what's the problem again?
Illinois MS1 But then we need to change the narrative. Instead of pushing the 'white people bad' lets start to raise EVERYONE up. Even this darn week at the Grammy's, Beyonce had a great night and then they still call it a snub.
It's not a bad thing until it's mandated by the state and includes such vitriol as vilifying one race while exalting another.
Those who bend wildly to one side or the other of the debate hold to the Dickinsonian approach to the matter: "Tell all the truth but tell it slant."
Too many in our profession have lost the ability to tell the truth without an agenda.
In addition, there were white people who were abolitionists, Christians such as the Quakers, and others who despised slavery.
We teach about Native Americans, Slavery, Holocaust, etc. we are teaching diversity. What else do you want us to add? We celebrate black history month, all kinds of diversity are celebrated here.
If you mean why aren’t we teaching about LGBTQ in the classroom….? Public schools are not the place for teaching that. I am a Christian and stand behind my beliefs 110%, but do not teach anything regarding Christianity in schools. That’s for church.
Curriculum in jr high has catholicism and the protestant movement. Teaching is not conversion. Most righties don't want anything taught that makes white guys look bad. I recall learning how we treated the native americans back in the day and felt sad about it. Not guilty, but sad. I think empathy could be helpful to students so we don't repeat bad things. But the idea that the US is perfect and that "the worst day here is the best day anywhere else" is bogus and harmful. Other countries have freedom, and actually have better systems for people that allow for parent rights, higher pay, more vacation, and better standards of living. But no, the patriots here gotta talk about FRRRRREEEEEEEDDDDDOOOOOOMMMMMMMM.
There is no way to teach history "objectively." The story of our past is as varies as there are viewpoints. For years, what we mistook at "objective" history were the "facts" as told by the conquerors. In our collective attempt to add more voices to history - to show the perspectives of more people including those who had been oppressed, the traditional "history" is seen in a new light. There are many who do not want the traditional history to change - to shine a light on some of the faults of those who came before us. The problem is that we've simplified our perspectives of people to simply "all good" or "all bad" and have a great deal of difficulty respecting the complexity of humans. We need to do better. Still, I remember my elementary/middle/high school history training and cringe when I remember all the racist ideas I got about other cultures as viewed through my extremely ethnocentric education.
Did you know with the 15th Amendment Black men got the right to vote before women?
Well, it's a bad thing because the more people know, the less THOSE people can't control and enslave others. What would they do if they couldn't be dictators over everyone not like them?
MHS1 The history has to be accurate, though. This was not. Plus they were throwing in gender issues
How about teaching the curriculum first. Then worry about justice issues after students can show mastery in SOMETHING.
There is no problem at all with that, and it has always been taught. I am 56 and remember learning about the civil rights movement and the contributions of black Americans in the 70s and 80s. It was factual and unbiased. We were moving in the right direction, but all of the identity politics that are occuring has set ethnic minorities and women's rights back decades. To say that any people group is a victim or an oppressor, as a whole, immediately halts the ability to grow and progress. That is what people are pushing back about. It is very interesting how the voices of those who are successful in so many ways in the black community are not held up as mentors because they do not fit the narrative of the oppressed. Why does the media and the administration avoid giving positive attention to those individuals as a means of hope to their respective communities? Instead, they are deemed to be not really black or the absurd notion of black white supremacists.
You mean like Obama? I remember people calling his wife and children monkey, as well as saying Michelle Obama was a man. I remember them being torn down by certain groups of people.
If only there were an easy way to understand why people fight this so hard. It's exhausting. Covering current events means getting phone calls or emails from parents no matter how unbiased and to the facts you keep things. Plus, kids have questions, and they are trying to figure out the world around them. We have been working on changing out the books we cover to include a variety of perspectives because at least we can stick to the content in the book and branch out a little on diverse stories without as many angry parents. The people making the decisions in our district struggle with the parents fighting back, but truthfully, I don't think most of them even understand why they are arguing and what they are fighting to avoid being taught in schools. You aren't alone in your opinion.
I personally LOVE the question! Why, because history is not one-sided! Hear me out, please! The governor of Florida has this notion that "history uncovered" would harm the minds of young white kids and possibly cause them to fell guilty concerning acts of the past that they had nothing to do with. When I was in elementary school in the 60s, politicians didn't care one lick about the feelings of Black kids as pictures were shown of hangings, dog biting, water hose spraying and the gathering of white families with joy on their faces looking on while a black person was hanging. I've been teaching for 37 years and I share with my students the BEAUTY of ALL cultures, good and bad!
It's not really about history, it's about sexuality and exposing young children to it. That's something the parents should be in charge of - not the schools. There's a time and place for everything and it's definitely not in an elementary classroom.
There is nothing wrong with it and nobody cares. The problem arises when you start to teach stuff like "patriarchy", "white supremacy", "white people are inherently bad and should arone for their sins", and similar stuff. Also, the whole identity politics thing doesn't go over too well.
No NJ, I am saying that nobody has any issue with the teaching of diversity, They have issues with other teachings that are often bundled in.
Are you racist? Black history is taught. History is history it isn't going to change only the perspective one has will change over time. Teaching diversity from whose perspective? I never knew we had only white male history.
NY, you've completely missed the point. As I said in a previous post, you could easily spend an entire grading period, if not a semester, on just the Civil War alone. Every political decision on the local, state, and national level in the lead up to war, to the individual battles and strategies, to the covert operations on both sides (including slaves escaping the South), to the cultural and political ramifications of the war, to the countless individual stories that coincided with the war, there is just not enough time to cover the entirety of American history to that level of depth and specificity.
Also, to be completely honest, even the most knowledgeable experts do not yet know *everything*. Even if they did, how would you expect a kid to be able to remember it all? This is not to say that you never do a deep-dive into a particular topic. That's necessary too, but practically speaking, you have to prioritize in order to make sure they have a functional knowledge of what happened.
Hi NCHS, it's not a bad thing. I think your question triggers some people because, as I understand your question, by not allowing other studies we are saying we only care about white, male perspective. And, that's what a lot of us learned in our own history lessons -- especially if we might be white. I don't think your question is personally triggering. I think, "okay, it's kind of true, and I'm not all white people; I don't have to be offended. And also, what am I doing to understand or be open to this perspective? Why would someone have this perspective?" Just trying to utilize all the critical thinking skills we have all been taught and what we require of our students.
I do want to address something that I noticed coming up in the thread a lot -- I.E. the bad stuff was in the past, and we should not judge the present by it. And I think that 1, teaching CRT or AA studies or Indigenous studies, etc., are not a judgment. And 2, if we say let that history be was it was: in the past, and we DON'T let other voices in, then history just is what it is, as it has always been, end of story -- which has been predominantly written by white men -- even the "good stuff". But history has multiple crossroads and divergences, and it happened to other people who did NOT write our history books. Those voices also have stories and a say about what happened, too. Denying other studies in our history lessons and curriculum is literally stifling other voices from our collective history.
Thank you for this thoughtful response, C1. I agree that it isn't a judgment of the present when we learn about the past. But doesn't it simply help us learn so we can do better? That's always been my opinion, which I why I feel so frustrated with eliminating other perspectives and voices. It begins to come across as though SOME white men truly only want THEIR voices/perspectives to be heard. And they only want to see their "good side" reflected in history. It's not okay for students only to learn about history from one vantage point, and I know they've gotten away with teaching it that way for a long time. But all perspectives matter.
At the end of the day, you are under a contract to teach state standards, not your own personal agenda. Don't like that, tough. Be a professional not a politician. If teachers continue to push their own personal agendas there will be more public backlash up to the point where homeschooling/private-ed/vouchers will become the normal and you won't have a job anymore.
Think very carefully about the long game.
Yes! This ^^^^^^^^^^^
This is pretty much how America has been since the beginning of it's existence. It's always been about white males.
Did you learn that from a teacher ? Interesting .
simple: white supremacy/white nationalism
Also, white fragility
It is not a bad thing if done factually and age appropriately. There should be no bias in teaching factual history. History is facts from the past. Teach them as facts and there should not be a problem.
How are you not equal? Anyone for that matter.?
If you want to really understand, here it is…
Nobody likes change. That’s it.
I do not disagree with you. I simply meant people do not like change. As in Parents don’t want xyz because ____. Teachers don’t want to change their lesson plan because ______. The board doesn’t want to adopt a new _____ because it will affect______. That’s what I meant by not liking change.
Oh please. This is the problem. I don't think diversity and inclusion is bad, but HOW it is taught. I was in a staff training and there were discussions of pulling peach crayons so white kids couldn't color their skin color. All in the name of inclusion. Instead...how about we just add more skin tone colors. There was the intonation that if we are white, we should apologize for our skin color to anyone that is NOT white. Now I need to be embarrassed and submit? No, let's build EVERYONE up. It's not ok to bring down one race to bring one up.