The Republican War on Public Schools (vouchers, religion, graft, testing, etc.)

[AWRTR]

Who is this mysterious and malevolent "they"?

Far left ideologues.

 

[81usaf92]

I saw this and this it angers me.
Idaho teachers had been teaching Critical Race Theory in their classrooms (never mind that CRT is Marxoid garbage and should not be taught anywhere, including in a college setting, except to mock CRT as the Marxoid garbage that it is) but in a public high school or middle school, the students are minors and the teachers are public servants. If you do not like what the master orders, then do not take the job, quit, retire, or move to another state.

So, Idaho passed H 377, which declared the following tenets forbidden.
(a) No public institution of higher education, school district, or public school, including a public charter school, shall direct or other wise compel students to personally affirm, adopt, or adhere to any of the following tenets:
(i) That any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin is inherently superior or inferior.
(ii) That individuals should be adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin; or
(iii) That individuals, by virtue of sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin, are inherently responsible for actions committed in the past by other members of the same sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin.

Teachers in Idaho did not like this so, rather than being obedient public servants, they decided to continue teaching their Marxoid garbage, but call it something else, and then lie about doing so.

Investigative journalists undercover caught these public servants lying. "Change the labels, same stuff. So it's kind of brilliant."

I am not convinced that "Social-Emotional Learning" is something a public high school or middle school should be teaching. Why are public high schools even talking about that and why are they using it as a subterfuge for teaching Marxoid racist garbage that they have been ordered not to?
Not every teacher has this attitude, but those that do should be fired and, if possible, prosecuted.

The problem is that the term CRT has migrated so much because Republicans have stoked fear into everyone that every history teacher in public schools is teaching some Marxist doctrine to your children. CRT is actually a law school study that explores why African Americans have not progressed socially since the Civil Rights Era. It explores mostly crime data, housing, test scores, and poverty rates. It has very little to do with how we teach history in public schools. But the right has combined CRT with Project 1619 (which has been heavily scrutinized by many historians) and made the narrative “public education is designed to make your kid hate America and hate being a white straight male”. Which IS NOT HAPPENING…. At least not on the scale that it’s being reported. Yes there are rogue teachers and administrators but most of us are too focused on whether Tina is going to smack Makayla in 1st period because of some post over the weekend, or if 7th period is going to be a damn circus because the guidance counselor only worried about placing the advanced and honors students so I’m stuck with 13 tenth grade standards boys at the last class of the day. Point is we normally don’t have the time some university professor does to preach about his/her version of history or politics. We do good to survive the day.

Out of my years teaching the greatest controversy comes out of subjects involving religion. Many parents have reservations about even a broad stroke of history. It’s understandable

 

[81usaf92]

Our district has had a few teachers over the years fired for going rogue in the classroom and teaching something that wasn't on the "agenda". Thank goodness for cell phones and video or it would have just been the teacher's word against the student. As much as I hate the impact cell phones have had on kids and our society overall, they do have good aspects about them.

im glad Alabama banned them in public schools. Causes way too many fights and other crap.

 

[JDCrimson]

Thank you for your service to America by making a career commitment to teach our youth. No sarcasm intended.

The problem is that the term CRT has migrated so much because Republicans have stoked fear into everyone that every history teacher in public schools is teaching some Marxist doctrine to your children. CRT is actually a law school study that explores why African Americans have not progressed socially since the Civil Rights Era. It explores mostly crime data, housing, test scores, and poverty rates. It has very little to do with how we teach history in public schools. But the right has combined CRT with Project 1619 (which has been heavily scrutinized by many historians) and made the narrative “public education is designed to make your kid hate America and hate being a white straight male”. Which IS NOT HAPPENING…. At least not on the scale that it’s being reported. Yes there are rogue teachers and administrators but most of us are too focused on whether Tina is going to smack Makayla in 1st period because of some post over the weekend, or if 7th period is going to be a damn circus because the guidance counselor only worried about placing the advanced and honors students so I’m stuck with 13 tenth grade standards boys at the last class of the day. Point is we normally don’t have the time some university professor does to preach about his/her version of history or politics. We do good to survive the day.

Out of my years teaching the greatest controversy comes out of subjects involving religion. Many parents have reservations about even a broad stroke of history. It’s understandable

 

[Tidewater]

The problem is that the term CRT has migrated so much because Republicans have stoked fear into everyone that every history teacher in public schools is teaching some Marxist doctrine to your children. CRT is actually a law school study that explores why African Americans have not progressed socially since the Civil Rights Era. It explores mostly crime data, housing, test scores, and poverty rates. It has very little to do with how we teach history in public schools. But the right has combined CRT with Project 1619 (which has been heavily scrutinized by many historians) and made the narrative “public education is designed to make your kid hate America and hate being a white straight male”. Which IS NOT HAPPENING…. At least not on the scale that it’s being reported. Yes there are rogue teachers and administrators but most of us are too focused on whether Tina is going to smack Makayla in 1st period because of some post over the weekend, or if 7th period is going to be a damn circus because the guidance counselor only worried about placing the advanced and honors students so I’m stuck with 13 tenth grade standards boys at the last class of the day. Point is we normally don’t have the time some university professor does to preach about his/her version of history or politics. We do good to survive the day.

Out of my years teaching the greatest controversy comes out of subjects involving religion. Many parents have reservations about even a broad stroke of history. It’s understandable

In this case, Idaho sidestepped the label and said, "Do not teach these bigoted ideas to school kids."
Some teachers did it anyway.
The right answer was "Of course I will not teach that one race is superior or that all members of one race bear the guilt of past people who look like them who wronged another group of other people. That would be ridiculous to teach that."

 

[81usaf92]

In this case, Idaho sidestepped the label and said, "Do not teach these bigoted ideas to school kids."
Some teachers did it anyway.
The right answer was "Of course I will not teach that one race is superior or that all members of one race bear the guilt of past people who look like them who wronged another group of other people. That would be ridiculous to teach that."

Well it goes back to my number #1 point… “is this an epidemic or an isolated situation”. I lean heavily towards the latter based on my professional experiences in the classroom. Plus actually watching the video and doing research on who is reporting I seriously question the context and content of the reporting. Heck most teachers don’t even fully know what it is so how can you accurately say what it is without defining your interpretation of it?

Most teachers in my experience either define CRT as a “woke ideology that West Coast teachers are introducing to the classroom” or “the correction of the Lost Cause Myth in Public Education”. Again neither of these statements are what CRT actually is, but of the two the latter happens more and the former is only done by rogue educators. But leave it to the right to combine both extremes of incorrect interpretations of a college level “Theory” and convince so many people that teachers are indoctrinating their kids into becoming Marxist anti Americans… Please…. If we had that kinda power then we wouldn’t have to constantly tell them to pull up their pants, stop talking during a lecture, stop picking their nose, stop passing gas, and stop making kindergartener noises everyday.

in short

1) Should CRT be taught… No. mostly because it’s too complicated for the age group involved. It really is a college study

2) Is CRT being taught… No. only teachers who are too untouchable or stupid do it.

3) Should Republican bills that are targeting CRT be ignored… That’s far more complicated because what people don’t realize is that most of these CRT bills are so half cocked that they don’t take existing course of study and their own DOEd into account to make the changes. And many of these CRT bills have blanket terms like “Marxist” “racial superiority” etc that don’t specifically outline what is banned. So at best it’s confusing on what they are actually targeting and mostly a product of “I got to get votes”.

4) Should teachers actively cover more diversity… Within reason.

 

[jthomas666]

Who is this mysterious and malevolent "they"?

You know...THEM!

 

[jthomas666]

Most teachers in my experience either define CRT as a “woke ideology that West Coast teachers are introducing to the classroom” or “the correction of the Lost Cause Myth in Public Education”. Again neither of these statements are what CRT actually is, but of the two the latter happens more and the former is only done by rogue educators. But leave it to the right to combine both extremes of incorrect interpretations of a college level “Theory” and convince so many people that teachers are indoctrinating their kids into becoming Marxist anti Americans… Please…. If we had that kinda power then we wouldn’t have to constantly tell them to pull up their pants, stop talking during a lecture, stop picking their nose, stop passing gas, and stop making kindergartener noises everyday.

Thank you.

And just for the record, while CRT is based on Marxism, it is not in a "we must adopt communism or else" sense--what Tidewater was deriding as "Marxoid" earlier. Marxist theory defines class struggles as political struggles. Marxist readings of history tend to focus on societal stresses as catalysts for political change.

When applied to literature, it focuses how the work operates within the prevailing power structures. It's a great way to approach a lot of authors. It can be particularly useful for Renaissance writers such as Shakespeare, who wrote in the era that the idea of legal authorship really took hold. Plays had to be registered with the government--not because authors wanted to get paid, but because the crown wanted to know who wrote what in case someone wrote something that ****ed the crown off. People who wrote things clearly critical of the ruler often found themselves in prison. One can read Hamlet as a critique/warning regarding the imminent end of Elizabeth I's rule--there was a general fear that the lack of a clear heir would result in another civil war. By setting the play in another country, Shakespeare had plausible deniability.

In legal theory--which is where CRT initially developed, it is the idea that the political system has developed in a way that favors one race over another. It's not difficult to see how one could reach that conclusion.

Similarly, there is an approach to feminist criticism that could be termed Critical Gender Theory. One only need look at the Catholic Church to see a system designed to keep women on the outside looking in.

 

[81usaf92]

Thank you.

And just for the record, while CRT is based on Marxism, it is not in a "we must adopt communism or else" sense--what Tidewater was deriding as "Marxoid" earlier. Marxist theory defines class struggles as political struggles. Marxist readings of history tend to focus on societal stresses as catalysts for political change.

When applied to literature, it focuses how the work operates within the prevailing power structures. It's a great way to approach a lot of authors. It can be particularly useful for Renaissance writers such as Shakespeare, who wrote in the era that the idea of legal authorship really took hold. Plays had to be registered with the government--not because authors wanted to get paid, but because the crown wanted to know who wrote what in case someone wrote something that ****ed the crown off. People who wrote things clearly critical of the ruler often found themselves in prison. One can read Hamlet as a critique/warning regarding the imminent end of Elizabeth I's rule--there was a general fear that the lack of a clear heir would result in another civil war. By setting the play in another country, Shakespeare had plausible deniability.

In legal theory--which is where CRT initially developed, it is the idea that the political system has developed in a way that favors one race over another. It's not difficult to see how one could reach that conclusion.

Similarly, there is an approach to feminist criticism that could be termed Critical Gender Theory. One only need look at the Catholic Church to see a system designed to keep women on the outside looking in.

I struggle with the idea that CRT is “Marxist” because it’s really not a call to action nor is it a widely accepted belief system amongst the lower class. I think it’s far more skeptical that change is possible than a call to action. In its base form it is a “possible” explanation to the question “why have African Americans not reached social and economic equality since the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. It’s more a scholarly theory than an actual movement.

But my biggest issue is that too many people act like they actually know what goes on in classrooms but they don’t have a clue. If teachers wore body cameras I doubt anyone would seriously be complaining about “controversial topics” that aren’t happening in 95% of the classrooms across the country and would probably be questioning parents.

But let’s go after teachers, and get kids out of public schools. Or if we have public schools let’s put bible classes in them.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

New Jersey lawmakers are considering 2 bills to heavily regulate homeschooling

Under the bills, homeschooling curricula would have to meet state learning standards and students would be required to complete annual wellness checks.

reason.com

In June, Assemblyman Sterley S. Stanley (D–East Brunswick) introduced Assembly Bill 5825, which would require all homeschooling parents at the beginning of the school year to send a letter to the local school district's superintendent that includes the name and age of the student and the name of the instructor administering the home education program. Parents will also be mandated to share a copy of the homeschooling curriculum, "which shall be aligned with the New Jersey Student Learning Standards." In addition to setting requirements for mathematics and science, state learning standards require lesson plans to cover issues such as climate change and diversity, equity, and inclusion in K-12 classrooms.

 

[Tidewater]

I struggle with the idea that CRT is “Marxist” because it’s really not a call to action nor is it a widely accepted belief system amongst the lower class. I think it’s far more skeptical that change is possible than a call to action. In its base form it is a “possible” explanation to the question “why have African Americans not reached social and economic equality since the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. It’s more a scholarly theory than an actual movement.

But my biggest issue is that too many people act like they actually know what goes on in classrooms but they don’t have a clue. If teachers wore body cameras I doubt anyone would seriously be complaining about “controversial topics” that aren’t happening in 95% of the classrooms across the country and would probably be questioning parents.

But let’s go after teachers, and get kids out of public schools. Or if we have public schools let’s put bible classes in them.

I called it Marxoid for two reasons:
(A) "Marxism" gives more credibility to the evolution of Marx and his ideological descendants than they deserve. Whatever relevance Marxism had died with the Revolutions of 1848. The entire school is so evil and stupid that it is amazing it has survived this long. 100 million deaths in the last century will earn a lot of disrespect. "Marxoid" is intended to be dismissive.
(B) Marxism emphasizes class over other more relevant criteria for analysis. It emphasizes membership in a group. As the fictional character Sergeant Buster Killrain said in the film Gettysburg, "Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit." While the speaker was fictional, the sentiment is exactly right. "You take men one at a time."

Here is the scene I was picturing in my mind.

(Go to the 4 minute mark.)

 

[Bamabuzzard]

The problem is that the term CRT has migrated so much because Republicans have stoked fear into everyone that every history teacher in public schools is teaching some Marxist doctrine to your children. CRT is actually a law school study that explores why African Americans have not progressed socially since the Civil Rights Era. It explores mostly crime data, housing, test scores, and poverty rates. It has very little to do with how we teach history in public schools. But the right has combined CRT with Project 1619 (which has been heavily scrutinized by many historians) and made the narrative “public education is designed to make your kid hate America and hate being a white straight male”. Which IS NOT HAPPENING…. At least not on the scale that it’s being reported. Yes there are rogue teachers and administrators but most of us are too focused on whether Tina is going to smack Makayla in 1st period because of some post over the weekend, or if 7th period is going to be a damn circus because the guidance counselor only worried about placing the advanced and honors students so I’m stuck with 13 tenth grade standards boys at the last class of the day. Point is we normally don’t have the time some university professor does to preach about his/her version of history or politics. We do good to survive the day.

Out of my years teaching the greatest controversy comes out of subjects involving religion. Many parents have reservations about even a broad stroke of history. It’s understandable

I think what happens is the average person finds out or "hears" the personal beliefs of someone in the school system or on the school board, and automatically projects it on the current system as if it's being carried out systematically, when it isn't. I know personally, there are individual school teachers and school board members who have openly said things in public that didn't align with what was going on in the classroom. And sometimes, you have teachers (thinking they won't get caught) start incorporating those personal beliefs into their classroom teaching. We've had a few that have done this and ended up being reprimanded or fired. One teacher was one of my daughter's HS teachers. I won't go into all the details (to not derail the thread), but her views about race, the history of the country, and what should be done about it, etc., didn't fall into the approved curriculum. As long as you have kids who are open enough with their parents to say something and parents brave enough to report it, then it normally doesn't last very long.

 

[Tidewater]

I struggle with the idea that CRT is “Marxist” because it’s really not a call to action nor is it a widely accepted belief system amongst the lower class. I think it’s far more skeptical that change is possible than a call to action. In its base form it is a “possible” explanation to the question “why have African Americans not reached social and economic equality since the Civil Rights Act of 1964”. It’s more a scholarly theory than an actual movement.

But my biggest issue is that too many people act like they actually know what goes on in classrooms but they don’t have a clue. If teachers wore body cameras I doubt anyone would seriously be complaining about “controversial topics” that aren’t happening in 95% of the classrooms across the country and would probably be questioning parents.

But let’s go after teachers, and get kids out of public schools. Or if we have public schools let’s put bible classes in them.

You know that public service comes with public oversight.
Ever TDY voucher you filed and every fitness report you got testifies to that. It just comes with the territory of public service.
I am inclined to give professional latitude to teachers in the classroom, but within limits.

The results in general, however, are not good, either for individuals or the country at large.
These data crom from the Institute for Citizens and Scholars (citing a poll by Lincoln Park)

• Seventy-two percent of respondents either incorrectly identified or were unsure of which states were part of the 13 original states;
• Only 24 percent could correctly identify one thing Benjamin Franklin was famous for, with 37 percent believing he invented the lightbulb;
• Only 24 percent knew the correct answer as to why the colonists fought the British;
• Twelve percent incorrectly thought WWII General Dwight Eisenhower led troops in the Civil War; 6 percent thought he was a Vietnam War general.

Big age gap as well:
Those 65 years and older scored the best, with 74 percent answering at least six in 10 questions correctly.
For those under the age of 45, only 19 percent passed with the exam.

Data like that make me want to ask, "Why is that?"

 

[jthomas666]

(B) Marxism emphasizes class over other more relevant criteria for analysis. It emphasizes membership in a group. As the fictional character Sergeant Buster Killrain said in the film Gettysburg, "Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit." While the speaker was fictional, the sentiment is exactly right. "You take men one at a time."

In one-on-one interactions, sure you focus on the individual. But when you have a larger scope, not so much. That's why we have demographics, no?

ANY critical theory focuses on one set of criteria at the expense of the others. The key thing to remember is that these critical theories are not intended as a means to uncover Truth with a capital T. They're intended as interpretive tools. The fact that Marxism doesn't work as a political movement doesn't automatically undermine its use in analysis. Freud's theories have largely been debunked in psychology, yet Freudian criticism is still being used in literature.

 

[Tidewater]

In one-on-one interactions, sure you focus on the individual. But when you have a larger scope, not so much. That's why we have demographics, no?

ANY critical theory focuses on one set of criteria at the expense of the others. The key thing to remember is that these critical theories are not intended as a means to uncover Truth with a capital T. They're intended as interpretive tools. The fact that Marxism doesn't work as a political movement doesn't automatically undermine its use in analysis. Freud's theories have largely been debunked in psychology, yet Freudian criticism is still being used in literature.

A fair point.
For me, again, it comes back to the fact that students in high school are minors. They have almost zero life experience to judge theories by. They are likely less critical in judgiung what the teacher says. If you went into class and announced "NASA has discovered the moon is made of Swiss cheese," some would buy it by virtue of the teacher's p[osition and NASA's generally conceded authrotiy. If a teacher declares that "all white people today bear responsibility for the sin of slavery and all black people today are owed deference on account of their skin color," it would be both dangerous in the long term to the republic and very satisfying to some of the students.
The genius of America is that you get what you earn, not how rich your father was or what group you belong to. Sometimes more honored in the breach than the observance, the ideal remains and is worth instilling in the next generation if we wish to keep it as an ideal.

 

[81usaf92]

You know that public service comes with public oversight.
Ever TDY voucher you filed and every fitness report you got testifies to that. It just comes with the territory of public service.
I am inclined to give professional latitude to teachers in the classroom, but within limits.

The results in general, however, are not good, either for individuals or the country at large.
These data crom from the Institute for Citizens and Scholars (citing a poll by Lincoln Park)

• Seventy-two percent of respondents either incorrectly identified or were unsure of which states were part of the 13 original states;
• Only 24 percent could correctly identify one thing Benjamin Franklin was famous for, with 37 percent believing he invented the lightbulb;
• Only 24 percent knew the correct answer as to why the colonists fought the British;
• Twelve percent incorrectly thought WWII General Dwight Eisenhower led troops in the Civil War; 6 percent thought he was a Vietnam War general.

Big age gap as well:
Those 65 years and older scored the best, with 74 percent answering at least six in 10 questions correctly.
For those under the age of 45, only 19 percent passed with the exam.

Data like that make me want to ask, "Why is that?"

not to be snarky or rude, but what is your understanding of a public school history teacher’s responsibilities in a big picture sense. I’m asking to see your understanding of it because I’m very sure they aren’t what you think they should be.

 

[AWRTR]

In one-on-one interactions, sure you focus on the individual. But when you have a larger scope, not so much. That's why we have demographics, no?

ANY critical theory focuses on one set of criteria at the expense of the others. The key thing to remember is that these critical theories are not intended as a means to uncover Truth with a capital T. They're intended as interpretive tools. The fact that Marxism doesn't work as a political movement doesn't automatically undermine its use in analysis. Freud's theories have largely been debunked in psychology, yet Freudian criticism is still being used in literature.

Marxism works as a political movement. It plays to the to the worst aspects of human nature. A Marxist is most likely going to be mayor of New York City. it just ends with piles of dead bodies stacked so high you can't see the top of the pile.

 

[jthomas666]

The genius of America is that you get what you earn, not how rich your father was or what group you belong to. Sometimes more honored in the breach than the observance, the ideal remains and is worth instilling in the next generation if we wish to keep it as an ideal.

That's the theory at least. One need look no further than the White House to see a much different example.

 

[AWRTR]

That's the theory at least. One need look no further than the White House to see a much different example.

80% of millionaires are first generation millionaires. This is still by far the land of opportunity. You make good decisions and work hard you will win if your health holds up.

We have rich families that pass down wealth. Trump is an example and so are the trash pile Kennedy's. I received absolutely nothing in inheritance, and I'm doing better than I ever thought I would. I will be able to hand an inheritance to my children, and I'm proud to do it. What Tidewater is talking about isn't a theory I'm living it.

 

[81usaf92]

Cultural Marxism happening on a large or significant basis in public education is on the same level as vaccination leading to autism. There is little to no evidence that it is happening but the right continues to spit it out.

But then again the Republican Party now is the party of fear and the Democratic Party is the party of losing the argument . So misinformation is just honey on the ears.