I don't believe that curriculum choices are always narrow technical question that can't be questioned by regular people.
and like I said if she trusts them that's cool, but framing it the way she framed it I don't think helps teachers.
hence why I said even if you believe it, id keep it to myself.
I don't think I'm ****ting on anyone's qualifications,
but I'm against credentialism and the inflation of experts
maybe im reading it differently from you but I did not get that impression.
She makes an exception for like the most extreme teacher behavior that causes "emotional harm",
but beyond that says that parental concerns over curriculum should be ignored
and teachers and curriculum should be insulated from parental influence.
What parental influence do you think people should have that they currently don't?
Because the power parents are demanding is for them to throw out anything they don't like. With thousands of parents, who could such a policy even work.
Like you are kinda painting teachers as unreasonable, but what is the reasonable compromise they are ignoring?
The author thinks teachers should build the curriculum, and schools boards should back them. That exposes the fact that teachers don't currently operate with impunity. Parents have power, school board meetings happen, parent-teacher conferences happen. I taught at the K-12 and university level, parents have input. Teachers' decisions are called into question at they oftentimes don't get their way. They certainly don't where I live, which has one of the worse school districts in America. Or the many conservative areas where they pretty much try to indoctrinate kids with conservative BS. Or in much of the country where parents **** up school systems in all sorts of ways with funding
Like I agree with this argument in a narrow sense, but parents are not completely helpless. Especially not white suburban ones
It is not about giving parents a voice or giving them some power. This issue seems more like giving certain groups that have a disproportionate about of political power their way
There are thousands upon of households with kids in K-12 schools, there is not really about addressing a strong consensus among parents more that it is about appeasing a certain group
i was using that example as response to general "trust the experts" attitude
again maybe im crazy, but I reard it as.
other than extreme cases of emotional harm caused by teachers, parents complaints about curriculum should be mostly ignored.
Really, this is where you posted it the first time...
I went to all white schools, my parents had to come in their on more than one occasion
and scream at my principle over racist / discriminatory teacher behavior.
im pretty happy the principle didn't respond with " you don't have the right to control teaching and learning "
You were not quoting anyone, so I assume you were referring to the article, but you didn't mention she addressed racist behavior directly in here article.
Seems like a bad faith way to deploy that example from your life. Because given what was said in the article, the author would agree with your mother's actions.
You clearly made it seem like it was the opposite.
like i said, I don't think it's manufactured moral panic,
I think CRT is being used as a catch all term to capture some real and imagined anxieties and resentments people have with schools.
I mean the right has a propaganda machine and the left doesn't,
so naturally left wing people have to be more sensitive to what the propaganda machine will do.
First, it is funny how you take such issue with the imprecision of "Defund the Police", openly mocking it, but you say with about how the term CRT is being deployed.
I think the frustration with school is much more narrow than the current CRT debate is actually about
It certainly doesn't require conservative state legislatures passing those stupid anti-crt laws, banning even more books, misrepresenting what CRT actually is to include basic stuff about civil rights, and all the right-wing nonsense going on.
There are a lot of other frustrations with public schools that go well beyond the curriculum that the CRT debate doesn't cover.
So yeah, I think it is a manufactured moral panic because of the clear lies, the clear propaganda campaign fueling it, the actions being taken to stop the "threat", and how many other issues with schools it ignores.
The more narrow reasonable objection people have to some of the additions of material from a few progressive sources should not equate to the type of backlash we are seeing now.
America has a history of this.
If you are on the left, you are by definition farther left that the average person
and I think you need to convince people, I think this article is extremely unconvincing unless you already agree.
the cherry on top is that it makes great propaganda.
Since you like to bring up Obama as having great insights into communicating to the marginal voter, maybe you should listen consider his words on stuff like this
That you can't expect a politician to sound like certain people (activist, academic, etc.)
And vice versa
Not every person has to or can live their life calculating everything they say to make sure they don't piss off the reactionary tendencies of the marginal voter. I will take it further with you, and say you can't expect everyone to be on high alert about not pissing off Tucker Carlson.
So many of your arguments operation the assumption that any and everyone on the left must see themselves as a representative of the Democratic Party, and de facto member of the DNC.
it is a unreasonable demand IMO.
Teachers are public employees, so if you want to support teachers,
doing it in a way that pisses off the electorate is unhelpful.
until we have government sponsored comedians, i think the comparison is a stretch.
Cops are public employees, their actions piss off members of the electorate
People support them in ways that piss off parts of the electorate
And you seem perfectly fine with this
And of course, you are because it is not about some principled concern about the electorate generally
It is about the feeling of the marginal white voter.
I don't think my comparisons were a stretch. You make these constant complaints about progressive speech codes and the effect they have on society. The comedian thing was another example of that. You have also done it in regards to newsrooms, workplaces, and universities
But here you are trying to enforce your own speech codes because you think it would be more helpful, you are pro-self-censoring and the defense of this is public vs. private.
Which is the very libertarian defense for conflicting positions.
But I guess do you
)
