UNI88 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 2:33 pm
kalm wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 1:21 pm
YOU would not be required to teach it. If the school included it in its curriculum you could offer a dissenting version of history at home. Same could be said for the theory of evolution.
I refused to accept the new math my kids were taught. I was prepared to start a Revolution over it too.
Teach a dissenting opinion at home ...
I've already addressed that fallacious argument.
UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 07, 2022 10:45 am
Supplement my child's education at home? Really? I agree that slavery and racism have played a major role in our country's history. I disagree with CRT in that I don't think they are the foundation upon which the country was built. If CRT is being taught, it's being taught as fact, not theory and I have a major problem with that. How do you think it would go if my child were being taught CRT as history and I supplemented their education at home? Do you really think that the teacher is going to give my child credit for independent thinking? No, they're going to get bad grades because their answers and papers will contradict what is being taught in class.
I’d say that’s a tremendous opportunity for a discussion of critical thinking skills.
I’d honestly like to see a breakdown of what’s actually being taught, at what age, and its prevalence rather than just anecdotal evidence and opinion.
Here’s a brief primer from an admittedly likely biased source.
Critical race theory is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.
The basic tenets of critical race theory, or CRT, emerged out of a framework for legal analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s created by legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado, among others.
A good example is when, in the 1930s, government officials literally drew lines around areas deemed poor financial risks, often explicitly due to the racial composition of inhabitants. Banks subsequently refused to offer mortgages to Black people in those areas.
Today, those same patterns of discrimination live on through facially race-blind policies, like single-family zoning that prevents the building of affordable housing in advantaged, majority-white neighborhoods and, thus, stymies racial desegregation efforts.
CRT also has ties to other intellectual currents, including the work of sociologists and literary theorists who studied links between political power, social organization, and language. And its ideas have since informed other fields, like the humanities, the social sciences, and teacher education.
This academic understanding of critical race theory differs from representation in recent popular books and, especially, from its portrayal by critics—often, though not exclusively, conservative Republicans. Critics charge that the theory leads to negative dynamics, such as a focus on group identity over universal, shared traits; divides people into “oppressed” and “oppressor” groups; and urges intolerance.
Thus, there is a good deal of confusion over what CRT means, as well as its relationship to other terms, like “anti-racism” and “social justice,” with which it is often conflated.
To an extent, the term “critical race theory” is now cited as the basis of all diversity and inclusion efforts regardless of how much it’s actually informed those programs.
https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what- ... ck/2021/05
Your turn.