Southwest Missouri high school teacher accused of using critical race theory loses job

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

THis is another lie. There was an entire thread on this subject and there were actual proofs presented including lesson plans. You should look at it.

Buffalo Public Schools’ Critical Race Theory Curriculum | City Journal

Fact Check: Are Buffalo schools teaching students that all whites perpetuate racism?

As your fact check indicates, they are not actually teaching it, but the words do exist in a piece of material used for discussion purposes. A mention of Phlogiston in a Chemistry textbook does not mean they are teaching it as a theory nor does a quote from Hitler in a History book mean they are teaching Naziism.
That said, I would probably agree that they have been overzealous in some of their programs.

 

[Ria23]

These are high school students. I don’t see the problem with challenging them with the concept of privilege and opening a discussion.

I wouldn't have a problem with that either, if the students felt free to actually do that and the teachers felt free to let them. but I believe that both students and teachers either believe in CRT doctrine or feel compelled to pretend that they believe it.

 

[essentialsaltes]

anyway, the actual point of the exercise had to do with reinforcing to students that if they gave the "wrong" answers that they would face bad consequences and to have them give the "right" answers. a white student can only say, "yes, I benefit" and a non-white student can only say, "no, I don't benefit but black people have it worse", etc.

The actual point of the exercise was to prepare the students for the next section of the book they were reading. No answers were given by anybody.

 

[Ria23]

The actual point of the exercise was to prepare the students for the next section of the book they were reading. No answers were given by anybody.

at the very least, the question utilized what psychologists call "priming" and it did in terms of CRT assumptions about the world.

apart from that, if the question asked that, I have to figure that the section dispensed more CRT dogma. either that or a brilliant IDW-style denunciation of CRT dogma. but I think that the former seems just a little more likely.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

or... perhaps they do.



critical theory permeates American education. the majority of school officials belong to the two camps at this point: one, the group that believes in CRT. two, the group that pretends to believe in it to protect themselves.

if you can't see "How Do I Benefit from Racial Privilege?" as based on CRT, then I think you buy into the ideas of CRT far enough that you don't see it any more. anyway, the actual point of the exercise had to do with reinforcing to students that if they gave the "wrong" answers that they would face bad consequences and to have them give the "right" answers. a white student can only say, "yes, I benefit" and a non-white student can only say, "no, I don't benefit but black people have it worse", etc.

And if you don't see that racial priviledge is still often operable in this country, you are one of the people who needs to be educated about it.
CRT theory however is just one of many academic theories to make sense of the problem, it is not taught at the grade school level and it doesn't say what you think it does either.
for example:
One tenet of CRT is that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing, and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices of individuals.
Also CRT is ... to challenge mainstream American liberal approaches to racial justice.

 

[essentialsaltes]

apart from that, if the question asked that, I have to figure that the section dispensed more CRT dogma.

Maybe you can use Google to search inside for the dogma.

 

[Ria23]

@Ponderous Curmudgeon: I spent the '90s through early 2000s immersed in leftist circles. you do not have to explain principles of CRT to me. really.

and, yes, I know of CT (Critical Theory's) contempt for liberalism. why else would have taken over liberal institutions and made them into CT institution? (this did not happen overnight.) although, as early as the early '90s, CT-adherent teachers taught works like The Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paolo Freire.

you present academia as an intellectual environment in which many fish can cavort and gambol and play. when really, one big fat fish has eaten up the little fish and scared the survivors away.

if you can only make sense of race in the US (and western world) except via CRT (unless you wish to speak on Fox News) then we have a problem. intellectual sterility leads to inability to come up with new approaches. if you only allow people to parrot orthodoxies at each other, nothing will progress. but, hey, CRT never does and doesn't now, have any practical plan of moving forward.

finally, nope, disagree. CT does get taught at grade school level. my local library had "Story Time for Social Justice" (the actual name of the event, except that they spelled it "Storytime") for children ages 4 to 8. so, yeah...

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

if you can only make sense of race in the US (and western world) except via CRT (unless you wish to speak on Fox News) then we have a problem.

I'll agree with this, especially in the social sciences but I don't think that is really what this (as argued on this board) is about. CRT as an academic subject may be to powerful and these types of excessive focus problems have been common in the Social Sciences for years, but the argument that teachers are really promoting a white bad repressed good which isn't CRT either is just window dressing for attempting to cover up the reality of our history.

Anyhow, welcome and as my high school history teacher said in Berkeley in 1970, I am not really a conservative, I think of myself as an 18th century liberal.

 

[Ria23]

CRT as an academic subject may be to powerful and these types of excessive focus problems have been common in the Social Sciences for years, but the argument that teachers are really promoting a white bad repressed good which isn't CRT either is just window dressing for attempting to cover up the reality of our history.

CRT does, in fact, mean "white bad repressed good" in 2022. it may have started off as an attempt to "dismantle whiteness", which you can find fault with or not, but that part of the agenda got put aside sometime along the way. CRT in its current form makes it clear that nobody can ever abandon their whiteness, which acts as more or less an ineradicable stain. CRT has gone from anti-essentialism (in terms of race) to essentialist.

Anyhow, welcome and as my high school history teacher said in Berkeley in 1970, I am not really a conservative, I think of myself as an 18th century liberal.

thanks! I just finished a novel called Too Like the Lightning which takes place in the 25th century (CE) but which invokes 18th century thinkers a lot. (the narrator also tells the story in an old-timey 18th century style.) you might like the book. warning that it includes explicit sex and blasphemy, in case that bothers you.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

CRT does, in fact, mean "white bad repressed good" in 2022. it may have started off as an attempt to "dismantle whiteness", which you can find fault with or not, but that part of the agenda got put aside sometime along the way. CRT in its current form makes it clear that nobody can ever abandon their whiteness, really.

This sounds a bit like Darwin's theory is racist. Is it actually CRT, or a "Social CRT" invented by people with an agenda and using this creation to argue against progress?

As for the book, library doesn't have it, but I'll read the preview.
Thanks

 

[Ria23]

This sounds a bit like Darwin's theory is racist.

you can test Darwin's theories empirically. not so with CRT. you have, in the end, to accept it (CRT) as true by faith, or not believe. (I say CRT but I really mean Critical Theory, which CRT grows out of.) Darwin's theory also ties into many other fields such as paleoanthropology, genetics, arguably sociobiology (which I believe in but others may not), which also deal with empirical science.

As for the book, library doesn't have it, but I'll read the preview.
Thanks

you could get it via interlibrary loan. the preview will give you a flavor for the novel at any rate.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

you can test Darwin's theories empirically. not so with CRT. you have, in the end, to accept it (CRT) as true by faith, or not believe. (I say CRT but I really mean Critical Theory, which CRT grows out of.) Darwin's theory also ties into many other fields such as paleoanthropology, genetics, arguably sociobiology (which I believe in but others may not), which also deal with empirical science.



you could get it via interlibrary loan. the preview will give you a flavor for the novel at any rate.

Darwin's theory was not really any more empirical in 1860 than CT is today, and I recognize the difference between CT and CRT though you are obviously far more familiar with the C subjects than I as a "hard scientist", doesn't make the theories bad, just lacking in solid evidence and well grounded hypotheses. The social sciences will make progress, and I don't mean Endor, but this debate over CRT in schools is not a scientific debate, it is a political cultural debate.

Anyhow dinner time and I'll read the preview in bed.

 

[Ria23]

Darwin's theory was not really any more empirical in 1860 than CT is today, and I recognize the difference between CT and CRT though you are obviously far more familiar with the C subjects than I as a "hard scientist", doesn't make the theories bad, just lacking in solid evidence and well grounded hypotheses. The social sciences will make progress, and I don't mean Endor, but this debate over CRT in schools is not a scientific debate, it is a political cultural debate.

you said "Darwin's theory". you didn't specify "Darwin's theory in 1860". as far as CRT (never mind CT) I would like to know how, even in theory, you could prove it empirically. I don't think you could, even in theory.

 

[NxNW]

Can you provide a link to your source?

"Poll: Persistent Partisan Divide Over 'Birther' Question" Poll: Persistent Partisan Divide Over 'Birther' Question

Seventy-two percent of registered Republican voters still doubt President Obama’s citizenship, according to a recent NBC News|SurveyMonkey poll.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

you said "Darwin's theory". you didn't specify "Darwin's theory in 1860". as far as CRT (never mind CT) I would like to know how, even in theory, you could prove it empirically. I don't think you could, even in theory.

Well the current version is called the theory of evolution and it is much more empirical as for CRT I would consider it at best a hypothesis with a little bit of evidence, but that unfortunately describes much of the social sciences. They are young and have a long way to go put themselves on solid ground mostly because of the difficulties with experimental control and understanding variables.

Oh, BTW you don't prove theories, you support them or modify them.

 

[NxNW]

THis is another lie. There was an entire thread on this subject and there were actual proofs presented including lesson plans. You should look at it.

Buffalo Public Schools’ Critical Race Theory Curriculum | City Journal

Fact Check: Are Buffalo schools teaching students that all whites perpetuate racism?

You were implying there was evidence of this actually being taught. So far I haven't seen any. Certainly not the above links.

 

[NxNW]

you said "Darwin's theory". you didn't specify "Darwin's theory in 1860". as far as CRT (never mind CT) I would like to know how, even in theory, you could prove it empirically. I don't think you could, even in theory.

Theories are never proved; only disproved.

 

[rjs330]

It's not a left vs right thing. However in USA there is a difference between the Biden Democrat administration and the Trump Republican administration.

Yes it is. Trump's administration fit much more what the right wants. Which is secure borders and not allow anyone one in that has not been properly vetted first. We also do not want one single person released into the country who has not already been found to meet asylum requirements. They don't get released until their hearings and final judgement has been made in their case.

The left wants to keep allowing what is happening. People get Infor what ever reason, then claim asylum then get released into the populace to disappear. And/or illegals get to be granted citizenship by virtue of avoiding being caught. The right is against that now.

What a crock.

Obama separated families too, kept people in cages. Biden kept people in shipping containers of which no one was allowed to see and inspect.

As it turns out a lot of drugs and dealers, mules were coming across the border with the caravans and illegals.

The ban on certain Muslim countries was the right thing to do and liberal courts stopped it for political reasons.

The border wall works where it is place.

Under Trump we had far fewer illegals crossing the border. He was doing something that hadn't been done in years.

So yes it is a right vs left thing. And Trump was right. Only leftists consider it race motivated and religiously motivated.

Just more evidence you are left center.

 

[rjs330]

You were implying there was evidence of this actually being taught. So far I haven't seen any. Certainly not the above links.

Yeah I know the ole leftist trope. Basically if you don't get video tape or an actual lesson plan that says "CRT lesson plan". It doesnt happen. Its a joke now.

There are teachers saying it, and school officials defending it, parents and kids talking about it, but none of that is evidence. Nope, you have to have a lesson plan that decliars "This is a crt lesson plan".

 

[NxNW]

There are teachers saying it

If that was true, you'd have evidence.