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

[rjs330]

Yup, not surprised, it is not CRT you are objecting to, it is the social justice ideas of the last 50 years that have made it into school curriculums, your pile of PDFs demonstrates this. You are just piling on to the latest buzzwords. Further it demonstrates that you have little idea of how educational theories are integrated into teaching.

We are against CRT principles be taught in the classroom. Does your last sentence indicate admition that the CRT theory is integrated into teaching?

 

[rjs330]

A school board in southwest Missouri voted not to renew the contract of a teacher after parents accused her of using critical race theory.

Kim Morrison, an English teacher at Greenfield High School, said the vote in mid-March came shortly after allegations surfaced about a worksheet she used as part of teaching the book "Dear Martin."

This was her second year teaching the award-winning young adult novel about racism in an elective contemporary literature class. It was the first year students were assigned a 15-question worksheet called "How Racially Privileged Are You?"

"I said discussing racism is not CRT and she said she understood but that this is what she is hearing."

Morrison said she explained the worksheet — which she purchased from a database of instructional materials — was intended to help students examine their own experiences and vantage point. It was not meant to prompt class discussion.

"It was to prepare students for the conversation that was going to happen between two characters that we were about to read," she said.

In the letter, [Superintendent] Kell confirmed the board's decision not to rehire Morrison for the 2022-23 year. It stated this reason: "Your decision to incorporate the worksheet associated with the novel 'Dear Martin,' due to the content and subject matter."

[Morrison] said the school board did not directly ask her about the worksheet or allegations of critical race theory.

"I have to be the spokesperson now because most of the teachers at Greenfield are not tenured so they can't speak," she said. "If this is how they terminate teachers — without asking questions, without speaking to the teacher — then no one is secure."

Good, teachers should be very cautious about what they are teaching. If you are in a contract with a school you should be asking the school if what you are going to teach will be acceptable. Especially when you know it could be controversial. Teachers should know that teaching on racism and sexism, and gender issues are controversial subjects.

Teachers ought to be the most cautious people because they are responsible for educating our kids and their education is extremely influential over how kids think and view the world. They help instil values thinking and they need to be very worried about what they teach on these issues.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The story basically hits all the high points of my prediction.

Parents don't know what CRT is.
Parents complain about something.
School authorities agree the lesson is valuable and not CRT, but hey parents are complaining.
One person is let go, and other teachers are afraid to speak on the topic.
As intended, a chilling effect on discussing anything race-related in the classroom.

Privilege theory is a central component of CRT.

 

[stevil]

Did he ban all Muslims?
What countries did he ban people from?

He campaigned on banning all Muslims, that's a promise that many of his base got excited about. Including the various white supremacist groups.

Trump's inability to carryout that promise to the letter is because his admin knew it wouldn't be constitutional. What they initially tried was a compromise and was still seen by the courts as being racially motivated, bigoted and unconstitutional. After several retries, they were able to finally squeak something by the courts. His base were happy in any reduction of Muslims.

 

[NxNW]

Of course I did. Did you not read it?

There was no evidence of it ever being taught.

 

[stevil]

Teachers should know that teaching on racism and sexism, and gender issues are controversial subjects.

It seems that in USA tolerance is controversial and that a significant proportion of the predominantly white Christian republican supporters want to be able to discriminate and want to influence their children so that they will learn to discriminate too.

 

[NxNW]

Oh you mean like when you just claimed to provide evidence that 70% of the right believed Obama wasn’t a citizen because he is black

No other valid reason has been put forward by Republicans. He's the only President for whom such doubts have been raised, and he's the only black President.

What other possible reason could there be?

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Personally I think USA should:

• remove the Electorial college system
• Encourage more parties

If you pick up a more representative system such as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP)
What is MMP?
Then gerymandering becomes a thing of the past, and each vote is equal in weight. Your eventual government becomes a representation of the votes and votes for third parties are no longer wasted votes.

With USA only having two parties, your parties are very confusing.
Myself, I tend to be centre right. I like right leaning fiscal policies but left leaning social policies. I'm not religious so If I were a USA citizen I would really struggle to vote for the Republican party which seem to pander alot to Christians, anti science and are contrarian.
When a USA party wins the election, you don't know if the people voted for Far left, moderate left, centre, moderate right, far right. But if you had parties representing each of these positions then you would know what people want. e.g. if you had 10% far left, 5% progressive, 40% moderate left, 30% moderate right, 15% far right. Then you'd know that the country mostly wants left, and mostly wants moderate left, that they are not too fussed about progressive. This means your government would be made up of moderalte left, progressive and far left (if they combined into a coalition government) and that your moderate left would have the lion's share of the power and the president would come from the moderate left. The progressives would be in government, but more for support. At 5% they wouldn't have much leverage to negotiate on policy, but might get one or two things through.

No, we cannot constitutionally do one vote/one person. Then the exceedingly population-dense California and New York would generally control every election due to population, and the populations there tend to be exceedingly liberal, unlike much of the country. This has changed a bit in the last couple of years as Texas and Florida, also large states, have grown demonstrably in population, due to their reputation as "free" states. So maybe there is more of a balance now in the most populous states.

The Constitution was specifically crafted to avoid this result of population rule, because we are a republic, not a democracy.

I agree that two parties are a major problem. Neither represents me, but third parties cannot get any traction because of massive amounts of donor money purchasing air time for the two main candidates, as well as the media's myopic focus on only those two parties.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

It seems that in USA tolerance is controversial and that a significant proportion of the predominantly white Christian republican supporters want to be able to discriminate and want to influence their children so that they will learn to discriminate too.

That is the impression that the primarily left wing media outlets demonstrate, but it is not the truth. Christians are not actually discriminating against anyone, but some merely stand their ground on faith matters(which should be fine), but they do not silence other viewpoints or tell the other people what they can do or not do in their own lives and homes. You would get the impression that there is all out war because Florida passed a law that teachers are not to discuss gender identity and sexual orientation with KINDERGARTEN to THIRD GRADERS, which should be common sense. That's all. You'd think the governor declared war or something crazy. Who fights to talk to other people's very young children about these sensitive issues? Not the place of teachers to discuss these issues with really small children. That's a parental thing. Teach them to read and add and write at that level. Academics.

The parents awakened to classroom content during the pandemic when everyone was forced to stay home, as their kids were doing school at home.

 

[BNR32FAN]

No other valid reason has been put forward by Republicans. He's the only President for whom such doubts have been raised, and he's the only black President.

What other possible reason could there be?

The fact that he didn’t produce a valid birth certificate. Now I don’t know how long that went on for I do know that it was quite some time before he finally did produce one but that was the entire reason for the skepticism. It had nothing to do with the color of his skin because race has nothing to do with nationality or citizenship especially in a country as diverse as America.

 

[rjs330]

There was no evidence of it ever being taught.

Well if you want to cover your eyes that's on you.

 

[rjs330]

No other valid reason has been put forward by Republicans. He's the only President for whom such doubts have been raised, and he's the only black President.

What other possible reason could there be?

How about a political.motuve in order to cast doubt on your opponent. It happens all the time. The fact that it happened to a black man doesn't mean it's racially motivated.

 

[NxNW]

The fact that he didn’t produce a valid birth certificate.

Of course he produced a valid short firm birth certificate, well before the election. Then he produced the long form version, above and beyond reasonable expectations.

Now I don’t know how long that went on for

It didn't happen at all.

It had nothing to do with the color of his skin

Then why are you offering up false reasons?

 

[rjs330]

No, we cannot constitutionally do one vote/one person. Then the exceedingly population-dense California and New York would generally control every election due to population, and the populations there tend to be exceedingly liberal, unlike much of the country. This has changed a bit in the last couple of years as Texas and Florida, also large states, have grown demonstrably in population, due to their reputation as "free" states. So maybe there is more of a balance now in the most populous states.

The Constitution was specifically crafted to avoid this result of population rule, because we are a republic, not a democracy.

I agree that two parties are a major problem. Neither represents me, but third parties cannot get any traction because of massive amounts of donor money purchasing air time for the two main candidates, as well as the media's myopic focus on only those two parties.

I honestly would love a third party. But I just don't think it would work here. It would take years and years to actually make any traction. And Sonora do t want to put their money into consistent losers.

 

[rjs330]

It seems that in USA tolerance is controversial and that a significant proportion of the predominantly white Christian republican supporters want to be able to discriminate and want to influence their children so that they will learn to discriminate too.

Lol, you've been reading too much left wing media again haven't you.

Racism issues have been taught forever in school. We read and studied To Kill a Mockingbird. We watched the Roots series. We read about Jim Crow and the lynching of blacks. We had history on slavery and the underground railroad, Martin Luther King etc etc.

You know what we didn't hear? White people are all privileged nor did we have to do introspection on ourselves to see how we are biased against black people or how we might be racist. We didn't have to hear about how all the systems are currently rigged against black people how whites just want to retain their power. Nor did we hear about how we oppress black people etc ad nauseum.

You know we all hated what was done to blacks and we all were thrilled that civil rights were passed and that Jim Crow ended. We didn't feel like we had to bear the guilt of racism. We thought it was patently ridiculous that blacks had to ride at the back of the bus and we all thought how stupid and racist it was to make them drink out of separate drinking fountains.

We are very tolerant, far more tolerant than the left is. You want to be trans, go ahead, we've said nothing about it forever. At least not until we were told that men should be allowed to use women's restrooms and locker rooms. That children had to be taught in school that boys could be girls and girls could be boys. We never said a thing until the left started telling our kids that they were racist because they were white. And our school kids that they were part of a system that was oppressive towards back people and that they were oppressors.

We have been a live and let live group. The problem came when the left decided they didn't want that anymore and want us all to accept and believe their way and change our lives to fit their radicalized agenda.

The left started it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes. Once again, keep in mind that this was a reflection for the students for reading a particular section of this book. It was not graded.

Lol those are all "racial privileges".

Why no mention of female privilege? Height privilege? Beauty privilege?

Because this is an obvious attempt to sneak CRT in the door....

 

[stevil]

Lol, you've been reading too much left wing media again haven't you.

I don't seek out any politically biased media.

Racism issues have been taught forever in school. We read and studied To Kill a Mockingbird. We watched the Roots series. We read about Jim Crow and the lynching of blacks. We had history on slavery and the underground railroad, Martin Luther King etc etc.

I think it is important for USA folk to know the horrendous history of blacks in USA.

You know what we didn't hear? White people are all privileged nor did we have to do introspection on ourselves to see how we are biased against black people or how we might be racist.

Now that segregation has been outlawed and many racist rules or attitudes or hiring policies etc have been addressed, it is important to understand that blacks and minorities are still struggling.

Society needs to do more to address the balance.
Systemic racism is a thing, and it is keeping the incumbent in a position of priviledge. It needs to be addressed, even if some of those priviledged get all offended.

Progress is slow, but as old outdated ideas die out with the elderly, the new generations are coming with more balanced nuanced ideas that the elderly resist or struggle to understand.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

We are against CRT principles be taught in the classroom. Does your last sentence indicate admition that the CRT theory is integrated into teaching?

No, but your answer makes it obvious that you have no idea how ideas are integrated into teaching. All sciences are a conglomeration of many ideas. In this case CRT is one that is an expansion of some prior ideas, to the extent that it makes sense to some educators, some principles may be expressed, this is the way that it works in education and in fact in any field where knowledge is concerned.

 

[Arcangl86]

The fact that he didn’t produce a valid birth certificate. Now I don’t know how long that went on for I do know that it was quite some time before he finally did produce one but that was the entire reason for the skepticism. It had nothing to do with the color of his skin because race has nothing to do with nationality or citizenship especially in a country as diverse as America.

He produced one pretty quickly. But why was he expected to produce one and others weren't?

 

[Ana the Ist]

As I have said many times, I am left in the social sense, because I believe in freedom and diversity.
But I am right in the fiscal sense.
Because I like capitalism and market forces, I just think there needs to be some level of government oversight.


That is your opinion, but as I said, all online tests I have done, have told me I am centre right.


No, and that is a large failing of USA, you guys fight and bicker over these wedge issues. But don't really discuss policies or finances.


I would say it is pretty centerist for the majority of developed democratic western nations. USA is an extreme case. Not very representative of the western world.


I don't consider what Biden and Harris are doing is radical at all, they are going with the norm. Trump on the otherhand was extremely radical.


Bernie isn't the leader of the Democratic party.


This forum here is full of USA folk on the right being bigoted, racist, sexist, anti gay, anti trans.
Trump put a white nationalist as his adviser on immigration and the UAS right didn't even batter an eye at that.
Tucker Carlson had a white supremacist as his main script writer, and he was the most watched opinion show amongst the USA right.



Noone is pushing sex onto children. Well perhaps Matt Gaetz


Nothing wrong with telling kids its ok for people to be trans. We apparently need to nip discrimination in the bud at a young age.


If you are selling items to the public, you cannot choose to discriminate.
Noone is going to force you to attend any wedding.

You don't think there's anything extreme about Biden's agenda....assuming he's more than a rubber stamp and a hand at this point?