Current Events > Yeah, CRT is absolutely much more toxic than teaching kids racial sensitivity

(+) Yeah! (+)

I was kinda on the fence on this one, but after reading an actual published abstract published by the government of a professor trying to explain it...yeah, no.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf

So here's a document by a fairly reputable professor published under ed.gov (government education) specifically trying to outline what CRT is, how to teach it, examples of how it would be taught, etc.

And yeah...there's some absolutely horrific stuff in here. If anyone can find me a more definitive article than an actual government published article written by a professor trying to explain and sell the concept...I am all ears.

If you feel like anything I say is out of context, do say so, but a lot of this might be even worse when read with the rest.

Educational policies and practices have also traditionally viewed low-income students and students of color from deficit points of view.

This is going to be a trend, but you will notice a very large implication (sometimes they pretty much just outright state it), that implies pretty much EVERYTHING about the educational system is stemmed in white supremacy...despite America using the same core school metrics used across the planet (school being competition based with grades, testing, and quantitative performance metrics mattering).

The wording "deficit" is odd, as if he's talking about actual funding, schools typically receive MORE money if they underperform and/or are public with a high number of POC.

This hidden curriculum flagrantly services white students. At worst it demonizes students of color; at best it inconveniences them.

Aaaaand here we go. Implying that literally all education in Western Society is inherently racist and favors white people...which is immediately debunked by the fact that most school systems have very similar curriculum across the world...AND many POC (eastern asian and indian) outperform white people pretty consistently... You could argue that history could be taught differently, but they imply that science, math, the concept of grades or testing, any objectivity, etc. are ALSO flagrantly designed to favor whites...despite white's not inventing some of the most important subjects taught in school, them being taught in non-white countries, non-whites performing the best, etc.

A popular educational practice is tracking Critical Race Theory 4 studentswhereby the curricula that students of color undergo inadequately prepare them for college.

Again, they are not attacking funding, they are outright attacking curricula, implying the same curricula undergone by POC inadequately prepares them for college yet somehow does for whites...which has absolutely no citation or makes any sense...and again, what about the all the non-black POC absolutely crushing it college? Or the fact that colleges are mostly woman dominated when earlier they directly state education is "male based" (more huge lies, it's been shown conventional teaching methods actually massively favor women, one of the reasons they are far more likely to go to college).

Another equally debilitating practice for students of color is the promotion of white students to take Advanced Placement (AP) courses in high school that may lead to receiving college credit for work completed in secondary school.

Last I checked, this is also offered to POC... If they think there are schools that don't have enough funding and they need more funding to get more people involved in this, they can say that, but this heavily implies that taking advanced courses for people who are ahead of the curricula, is racist because there's a larger percentage of POC who can't keep up...

American school systems are dumbed down enough, thank you very much. And we don't need to ALSO punish high performing POC because of the low performing ones. AP courses were a fantastic idea to save people money and keep America up to date with the rest of the world's education systems, as taking AP away furthers American educational progress compared to other powerful nations that much more.

It is accurate and justified to declare that the educational milieu for black and brown faces needs to be radically improved.

Yet no intelligent solution is provided. Basically just attacks on institutions being used world wide and blaming "bad grades" on racism when America teaches the same shit they teach worldwide, for the most part. I am all for teaching more non-white history, but you don't need to explicitly attack the foundations of education to simply revise how history class is taught.

This radical improvement will be made through critical research

ie, please throw money at us so we can fix a problem that will likely never be fixed through the school system but only through marginalized groups improving financially, which leads to more stable homes for children to learn in, which is main reason higher income people out perform lower income people.

---

You're delusional if you think I'm reading everything you wrote there.

---

There are five major components or tenets of CRT: (1) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (2) the idea of an interest convergence; (3) the social construction of race; (4) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (5) the notion that whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.

I take contention with the bolded and agree with the other tenets. I don't see any problem with the idea of interest convergence, especially considering it's not like America/"white people" pioneered these ideas single handedly and it's mostly an amalgamation of cultures around the world, many of which seem to share most of the same interests.

I also disagree with the notion that "whites" inherently benefitted from most civil rights laws, most of which no longer exist anyways. White people that were IN POWER benefitted...but white people in power don't give a flying fuck about poor/working class white people. Also, I think the independent variable is the "power" and not the "whiteness" as we have examples of monsterously wealthy people abusing their working class from every skin color known to man... The Irish and Italians were treated like shit when they first arrived in this country and used as cheap labor for a time, and I absolutely agree people that people in power are looking for cheap labor sources to abuse, but a very, VERY large percentage of Americans, white included, very minutely benefitted from their power grab, if at all. There are more poor white people than all of the minority groups combined. They either arrived too late to the party or simply didn't benefit from the power grab. This could be true by simply adding the word "some" before whites, but that is the least of their white demonizing, so this isn't likely to happen.

Firstly, racism is ordinary: the overall ethos of majority culture promotes and promulgates a notion of color-blindness and meritocracy.

I agree to some degree of inherent racism present in most people subconsciously, but I really don't like the attack on "meritocracy." Yes, some people were born with money...an overwhelming percentage (majority, actually) were not, and this seems to heavily undermine a lot of their hardwork and imply that "hardwork" or "playing by the rules" is racist, because apparently everything is racist lol

Color-blindness and meritocratic rhetoric serve two primary functions: first, they allow whites to feel consciously irresponsible for the hardships people of color face and encounter daily

Literally directly stating that white people should feel consciously responsible/sorry for POC at all times, and anything that doesn't make them feel consciously responsible/sorry based on shit their ancestors may or may not have done is bad... Openly promoting white guilt, what many people have claimed has "nothing to do with CRT"...AND this an article advocating pushing this onto children.

and, secondly, they also maintain whites power and strongholds within society.

Again, implying white people are an inherent monolith in this country because a small handful of white people are rich (many of which didn't even become that way through generational wealth) while there are multiple demographics of POC that outearn white people at large quite effortlessly...

Basically, you should hate yourself because Jeff Bezos exists, I guess, nevermind eastern Asians, 1st gen Africans, and middle easterns will probably outearn you.

First, color-blindness legitimizes racisms need for an other in order to flourish and maintain its influence within the fabric of society.

I literally don't even know wtf they are talking about here. Just a bunch of verbose nonsense.

Second, meritocracy allows the empoweredthe status quoto feel good and have a clear conscience:

I'm massively clipping this segment, but there's pretty much a whole paragraph attacking the concept of meritocracy.

Given all of capitalism and SCHOOL is meritocracy based...wtf do you have to gain from teaching kids this, other than school is a joke, and that they shouldn't take getting good grades or working hard seriously?

Really, this shit has no place in a theory trying to push racial sensitivity and feels like they tried to sneak in a bunch of communist/anti-capitalist bullshit in.

Common sense beliefs are formulated by the majority status quo.

Too bad most common sense in America, with a few exceptions, is reciprocated worldwide by many non-white nations... In general, there being a world outside of America and American in this day and age sharing most of the good ideas from these countries debunks a majority of this "white monolith" nonsense.

And again, this guy provided zero examples of what "common sense" beliefs he thinks Americans possess that is problematic.


---

LOL @ TC thinks ppl will read

---

MajesticFerret posted...

I was kinda on the fence on this one, but after reading an actual published abstract published by the government of a professor trying to explain it...yeah, no.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf

So I'm still reading through this right now, but I want to point out that literally this first statement is incorrect. This is written by a Ph.D student, not a professor. It says so on the first page.

The beliefs created by the majoritythe havesoppress minority groupsthe have-nots and have-too-littles.

Perhaps these individuals laws or ideas should be scrutinized instead of attacking literally almost the entire "status quo" of what is at this point, the entire planet?

Stated more precisely, interest convergence is the notion that whites will allow and support racial justice/progress to the extent that there is something positive in it for them, or a convergence between the interests of whites and non-whites.

Even when whites are doing good, whites are doing bad. All those European countries and America taking in refugees that might hurt their economy and crime rate are just doing it for brownie points.

But not any POC nations...no siree. Totally not a massively biased anti-white hit piece of a theory, nope, not at all.

The Space Traders illustrates two things within its parable: (1) the whites had power (being politicians, and U.S. leaders) and (2) it was in the whites best interest to give all of the African Americans in order to get all of the aforementioned securities the aliens had promised.

Not only does this assume that the US would sell out black people (it arguably wouldn't), but it assumes black people no longer have enough power in the US to stop the majority or talk them out of exterminating an entire "race", AND it demonizes white people as the ones doing the deciding when there's millions of non-whites that would have a say in the matter as well.

Long story short, they want to teach fictional stories to demonize white people for stuff there is ZERO evidence we would do... Why would they not use historical examples? Simple, because people could say it happened in the past and wouldn't happen now. You need to make up hypothetical future racism for the demonizing to really stick.

The social construction thesis or declaration that race is a social construct has been one of CRTs hallmark mantras and core issues.

No contention here. This stuff is pretty much factual and well cited. If this was all it was teaching, and make it clear most of it is in the past (and not literally making up fictional stories of extreme racism that don't exist specifically designed to demonize white people...), I would be ok with CRT.

Fourthly, the idea of storytelling comes from its powerful, persuasive, and explanatory ability to unlearn beliefs that are commonly believed to be true.

This is quite the burden, and two biases do not make non-biased story, and they kinda lost all credibility in non-bias when they openly admitted they want to reference a fictional story where white people sell out the entirety of the African American population with zero basis this is the case in modern society, and the completely ignored the millions of non white and non black people would definitely have something to say in the matter.

This dichotomystorytelling and counter-storytellingis predicated upon the belief that schools are neutral spaces that treat everyone justly; however, close examination refutes this: simply evaluating graduation rates accomplishes this.

Again, blaming school systems for problems that are the parents fault. School systems already do everything in their power to try to make people go to school... Plus, no solution provided.

School curricula continue to be structured around mainstream white, middle-class values.

We can restructure history classes all they want, but I wasn't aware mathematics, science, art, etc. are "white values" when they are taught and utilized literally everywhere on the planet...

I wouldn't mind they teach classes on financial responsibility, stock trading, residual income, etc. but this is something that dicks over whites and many non-whites just as much as it does blacks...also, they aren't teaching this shit in any public schools ANYWHERE on the planet, so it's pretty obvious elitists' of all skin colors don't want people to know this shit.


---

Oh god there was more

---

I think a simple way to end this topic is to simply ask if TC has ever been worried about being able to eat dinner.

---

Hackman and Rauscher (2004) draw attention to the fact that under the guise of mainstream curriculum certain enclaves of students become marginalized through curriculum and praxis that are insensitive and inequitable.

Again, implying the entire basis of schooling (grades, testing, competition) is "insensitive and inequitable," when everyone knows school is pretty much preparing you to COMPETE in the real world...because that is reality.

More Marxist/Communist utopia propaganda that really should have no damn place in a theory about just teaching people about more racial awareness.

Fifthly, whites have actually been recipients of civil rights legislation.

Agree with most of the stuff stated here, but it's much accurate and less debunkable when you say "some". "Some white people directly benefitted from civil rights legislation" is more factually correct than blindly acting like 100% did, which leaves the statement more open to being debunked.

it has also been verified that affirmative action, too, best serves whites

More evidence that it's basically a white bashing manifesto: white people can literally do nothing right lol. This statement is also MASSIVELY contentious and wasn't well defended other than referencing a few scholars that word is far from law or fact. If affirmative action is truly helping white people more than POC, we should cancel it, yet the same people pushing this certainly push AA...so what the hell do these people actually believe, or are they willing to change their mind like a chameleon to do anything to villainize white people?

we should demystify, interrogate, and destabilize affirmative action.

The words of pseudo-intellectuals, folks. WTF does "destablize" AA mean?? They do this shit on purpose. They use unclear wording because they aren't actually saying anything. Do you want it funded or defunded? Is it a net positive or negative? Instead they say shit like "interrogate it"...it's a fucking concept, you can't interrogate it lol

The dismantling of affirmative action is segregation. Its purpose and meaning are the same as the Jim Crow laws

I'm only quoting this because of how stupid this statement is. And this statement is apparently "quote worthy" for reference in a government document meant to sell this to school systems.

Brown failed to substantively improve the education of African American students because it represented a restrictive rather than expansive view of equality. What was needed was a vision of education that challenged the fundamental structure of schools that reproduced the same inequitable social hierarchies that existed in society.

Assumes that school systems are the cause for inequity in society, which is only very partially true, but mostly false.

And again, is weaponizing race to imply that the free market/capitalism/meritocracy/individualism is inherently flawed, which is an excuse to push communism...and is actively teaching kids that the entire school system is wrong, racist, shouldn't be taken seriously, etc. which without an extremely clear and concise gameplan to fix these problems (they have absolutely none to speak of) just creates mass hysteria.

I am expected to tell the kids that if they study hard and stay out of trouble, they can become a law professor like me. That, however, is a very big lie: a whopper. When I started teaching law sixteen years ago, there were about thirty-five Hispanic law professors, approximately twenty-five of which were Chicano. Today, the numbers are only slightly improved. In the interim, however, a nearly complete turnover has occurred. The faces are new, but the numbers have remained the same from year to year. Gonzalez leaves teaching; Velasquez is hired somewhere else. Despite this, I am expected to tell forty kids in a crowded inner city classroom that if they work hard, they can each be among the chosen twenty-five. Fortunately, most kids are smart enough to figure out that the system does not work this way. If I were honest, I would advise them to become major league baseball players, or to practice their hook shots. As Michael Olivas points out, the odds, pay, and working conditions are much better in these other lines of work.

Here, a law professor gives literally the most stupid piece of advice humanly possible and says that you have better odds being a professional baseball player or NBA player than a professor, which is mathematically and categorically false...

He also implies his profession is "super exclusive" despite there being MANY alternative career paths if you try to be a law professor and fail, while there isn't a whole lot of options for a failed baller who can't make pro.

So can all the kids that strive to be a professor become one? No, but many will go on to alternative career paths that probably pay BETTER than this arrogant bum is getting paid. If you want to be a pro baller, you either make the cut or you do not and if we're being real, a lot pros have obscene genetic privledge where hardwork alone will never get you there, while a majority of reasonably intelligent people can become a working professional through hardwork. Also, our school system already prepares people to be professional athletes quite rigorously with most of its athletic programs.

---

Who is this for, TC?

---

However, the important question to raise is: how can quantitative studies emancipate hegemonic populations when the very metrics it employs (e.g., culturally biased and ethnocentric testing practices and pedagogical practices and policies) serve to legitimate white supremacy through sidelining people of color, while uplifting and privileging whites?

Again...totally teaching people about racial inequality and not making up a bunch of ridiculous goalposts to bully white people over... Not to mention it's all wrong and doesn't even mention the fact that the entire non-white planet is also teaching largely the same shit.

But imperical hard sciences with right or wrong answers that asian people dominate are totally teaching "white surpremacy."

Knowing what we know, where do we go from here? Propositions for future research: Looking Forward with Hope

So after saying the entire system is racist and flawed (despite being overwhelmingly used pretty much everywhere), their answer is GIVE US MORE MONEY and we might find solutions to problems that are only problems because we said so.

Critics of CRT refuse to acknowledge its arguments, alleging CRT is overly-subjective. LadsonBillings (2006) counters these beliefs when she states, "This [storytelling] is often seen as problematic because it is regarded as unscientific and subjective, but CRT never makes claims of objectivity or rationality.

Openly acknowledging something isn't objective is ok...but openly acknowledging your theory isn't rational...means it is irrational. And given the underlying hateful message...insane over the top victimizing of POC and pedestalizing of ALL white people...deflecting from any culture outside of America because it high key destroys like 90% of their narrative...

So long story short, the main contentions (pretty sizeable ones, given a majority of the article was pretty clearly shitting on school systems and the system at large):

-The entire educational system is racist and meritocracy is bullshit and the theory provides zero solution (gives us more money though). Not only that, but it's advocating we teach teach kids this, because this totally isn't going to create people who become massively disenfranchised and start massively underperforming at school and most will predominately be POC, which then creates a bigger divide in grades and even higher drop out rates...
-it is undeniably pushing a pretty heavy communist/marxist agenda. You can't attack meritocracy and the entire system all the way down to schools and grading as not equitable enough without ultimately arriving at the conclusion that individualism/competing with others is the problem and we should all "share everything." This shit really has no place in simply talking about racial sensitivity and will create immense problems, especially considering school is very much part of this system of competition/individuality.
-gives white people/America WAAAAY too much credit even though last I checked, most of the world is being taught very similar curriculum outside of variations in history and language.
-I don't really see the need for the pretty explicit white bashing when several white minorities (jew, irish, italians) have been screwed despite being categorically white (especially irish/jews) and most of the statistics of POC performing bad in todays society and getting screwed in the past almost entirely applies to black people... "POC" if you include Asians, including dark skinned middle easterners/Indians, are absolutely crushing it, and America has taken most of its laws, religions, ideas from many countries, including non-white ones.

---

tc keep going i promise i'm reading it all...

---

is this joenumber's main?

---

tag a usual suspect for some support @TC

---

Proto_Spark posted...

So I'm still reading through this right now, but I want to point out that literally this first statement is incorrect. This is written by a Ph.D student, not a professor. It says so on the first page

Lmao
https://www.thecut.com/2019/05/naomi-wolf-interview-book-error-bbc-interview.html

---

Lol tag

really good example ITT of how CE gets irrationally hostile when shown any information that might contradict their initial opinion on an issue

Bruh lmfao no one is going to read that nonsense.

---

The footnotes is the last post where I summarized it.

---

Critical Race Theory is correct and should be taught in schools as part of the curriculum. It teaches white students empathy towards other races and forces the white students to view their own faults and realize white supremacism is a myth. The reason it angers people so much is because it is true and forces people to see that america is racist to it's very core and was built on white supremacy. The only people who get mad about it are bigots who are afraid to face the truth.

Doom_Art posted...

Who is this for, TC?

Whoever needs it.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

really good example ITT of how CE gets irrationally hostile when shown any information that might contradict their initial opinion on an issue

It's cute that you think we don't know who TC is.

---

What a terrible interpretation of the article

Broseph_Stalin posted...

really good example ITT of how CE gets irrationally hostile when shown any information that might contradict their initial opinion on an issue

You're either smoking crack or just really stupid if you think anybody is gonna read that tldr bullshit when the very first thing TC said was incorrect

Also for all of the "if you include asians" blah blah blah did TC even check the authors background. But I'm sure rando CE poster's take is somehow informative

---

MajesticFerret posted...

I was kinda on the fence on this one

Somehow I doubt that
---

I think an important part that TC is missing here is that this is a Literature review. Therefore certain things (such as general statements that TC is trying to argue by saying "not everyone" or "this applies to POC too!") are missing some of the context that is skipped over as this is written with the idea that the people reading it have at least a general understanding of the underlying topics.

This is however a general issue with academia as a whole, because a fairly significant part of academia tends to be using specific vernacular that not everybody knows unless they are somewhat affiliated with the topic.

Doom_Art posted...

You're delusional if you think I'm reading everything you wrote there.

this, especially since you told on yourself after the 1st quote

---

I dont want an in depth analysis of CRT. I want bullet points to make me feel superior and agrees with my point of view

---

people on this board will spend hours arguing about a subject but if you ask them if they even know anything about the subject they're like "lol nah tl;dr"

Doom_Art posted...

Who is this for, TC?

Actually, let me correct this statement: It's for this guy.

PizzaPatty posted...

Critical Race Theory is correct

Which parts?

and should be taught in schools as part of the curriculum.

Before or after the part where it implies everything about the school systems is inherently racist and flawed?

If anything, you should just fail the class on CRT and say the fact that they want to give a letter grade or any objective metric on your performance is racist and stems in white supremacy.

It teaches white students empathy towards other races

Nah, teaching a bit more POC history would probably be enough there. As the 19 age article written by someone 10x more knowledgeable than you about the subject matter states, that is not what it is trying to accomplish.

---

For all these walls of text, TC is literally just responding to part of CRT with wildly hyperbolic misinterpretations

Its just the long form of "CRT teaches white kids to hate themselves and black kids that they're worthless!" Its not even new

---

jeffhardyb0yz posted...

seriously! WHO THE FUCK GONNA READ ALL THIS SHIT FAM

I've known tc for nearly as long as I've had my account, and I know him to be generally upstanding and not (totally) a loon, so I'm reading.

I don't have the energy to respond in kind, but a few notesnotes.

-From what is quoted of the article, they're not actually saying how what they're saying is true, just that it is.
-I don't understand the topic title in relation to the arguments at hand. Not everything described is CRT.
-Capitalism does not run on meritocracy. Peter Principle runs on full effect.

---

BeantownHero posted...

part of CRT with wildly hyperbolic misinterpretations

This is literally the reason I made this topic.

No, there is no hyperbole, please refute what you found to be hyperbole if you believe this is the case.

99.9% of people don't even know what this shit is, which is why they defend it.

Its just the long form of "CRT teaches white kids to hate themselves and black kids that they're worthless!" Its not even new

That's not even the worst part of it. If every institution is racist, including school curriculum, it pretty openly incentivizes you to be disenfrancised. How is that healthy for society? You're basically telling people, especially POC, that the whole system (grading, testing, there's separate articles attacking how math and science is taught) is inherently racist and against you...how does this help a demographic of people already struggling in school systems? Especially when the article openly acknowledges they don't have an alternative to schools current system or curriculum.


---

like I said, just a text dump version of the same nonsense

---

Why are people suddenly hating Cathode Ray Tubes?

---

Guide posted...

-I don't understand the topic title in relation to the arguments at hand. Not everything described is CRT.

It's all CRT. The title of the document is quite literally "Critical Race Theory: An Examination of its Past, Present, and Future Implications" and every thing referenced goes under one of the 5 principles in some shape or form when the writer deep dives into said principles.

-Capitalism does not run on meritocracy. Peter Principle runs on full effect.

Capitalism CAN run on some degree of meritocracy. Still, attacking the concept of meritocracy at large in school systems is quite dangerous. This is a point in your life where you are disproportionately more likely to succeed through hard work and intelligence with it all going downhill after that.

For example: the best combination of smarts and hardwork does usually yield the best grades, while the smartest/hardest working person doesn't inherently make the most money.

And overwhelmingly, education is the highest probability indicator of success. The last thing anything should suggest is that school meritocracy is racist, the concept of grading, testing, or competition is racist (we do it literally everywhere on the planet), because succeeding at school is many lower income people's last bastion of hope to becoming middle class or above.

---

TC actually didn't write that much. It's more commenting on quotes. If you're a proponent of CRT then you really should educate yourself about what it teaches.

With that said, there are legit issues that CRT brings up and I believe those should definitely be brought up in schools. Systemic racism and other racism based factors in America should definitely be brought to everyone's attention. That's a very good thing. It promotes a culture of people working towards solutions.

I have issues with things that TC brought up like:

-it is undeniably pushing a pretty heavy communist/marxist agenda. You can't attack meritocracy and the entire system all the way down to schools and grading as not equitable enough without ultimately arriving at the conclusion that individualism/competing with others is the problem and we should all "share everything." This shit really has no place in simply talking about racial sensitivity and will create immense problems, especially considering school is very much part of this system of competition/individuality.

Get this type of shit out of teaching me to identify aspects of my behavior that perpetuate racism and how I can help put an end to that cycle.

---

As for the credibility of the article:

The article is published by the Education Resources Information Center, a government institute that props up what it considers to be educationally relevant material, and the "student" in question is now a professor, and I don't know a whole lot of PhD students that completely change their mind after becoming a professor and articles published by PhD students are usually taken quite seriously. This ain't some scrubby undergrad.

If anyone can find me an educational article that goes into the same depth this one does that disagrees with the man who wrote this article, I would be free to read it. I referenced this article because, quite frankly, this was the most indepth article I could find without having to literally spend money.

If someone has something better...I'm all ears.

---

MajesticFerret posted...

schools typically receive MORE money if they underperform and/or are public with a high number of POC.

As a POC who went to a high school that underperformed and had a high number of POC this sounds like some straight up bullshit.

The rich white schools in my area had swimming pools and Chick-fil-A in the lunch room. Physical Education class would be regular gym class one day and a trip to the bowling alley across the street the next.

My physical ed was run a mile and shoot hoops. No swimming pool, no home ec, no wood shop, none of that shit. It was reading math and for the smart kids you got some AP classes (only because the math/history teachers could double up)

---

MacDaMurderer posted...

As a POC who went to a high school that underperformed and had a high number of POC this sounds like some straight up bullshit.

The rich white schools in my area had swimming pools and Chick-fil-A in the lunch room. Physical Education class would be regular gym class one day and a trip to the bowling alley across the street the next.

My physical ed was run a mile and shoot hoops. No swimming pool, no home ec, no wood shop, none of that shit. It was reading math and for the smart kids you got some AP classes (only because the math/history teachers could double up)

Was this school private? Public schools receive government assistance typically based on "need" with underperforming or having a high POC count factoring heavily into this.

---

MajesticFerret posted...

Was this school private? Public schools receive government assistance typically based on "need" with underperforming or having a high POC count factoring heavily into this.

These were all Public schools.

---

We will have ended racism before I finish reading that post.

<_<

TC, you lack perspective. Listen to the voices of poor people.

---

Robot2600 posted...

LOL @ TC thinks ppl will read

I won't since I tagged him as a MAGA some time ago.

The tag saves me the trouble

---

MajesticFerret posted...

I was kinda on the fence on this one, but after reading an actual published abstract published by the government of a professor trying to explain it...yeah, no.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506735.pdf

So here's a document by a fairly reputable professor published under ed.gov (government education) specifically trying to outline what CRT is, how to teach it, examples of how it would be taught, etc.

And yeah...there's some absolutely horrific stuff in here. If anyone can find me a more definitive article than an actual government published article written by a professor trying to explain and sell the concept...I am all ears.

If you feel like anything I say is out of context, do say so, but a lot of this might be even worse when read with the rest.

This is going to be a trend, but you will notice a very large implication (sometimes they pretty much just outright state it), that implies pretty much EVERYTHING about the educational system is stemmed in white supremacy...despite America using the same core school metrics used across the planet (school being competition based with grades, testing, and quantitative performance metrics mattering).

The wording "deficit" is odd, as if he's talking about actual funding, schools typically receive MORE money if they underperform and/or are public with a high number of POC.

Aaaaand here we go. Implying that literally all education in Western Society is inherently racist and favors white people...which is immediately debunked by the fact that most school systems have very similar curriculum across the world...AND many POC (eastern asian and indian) outperform white people pretty consistently... You could argue that history could be taught differently, but they imply that science, math, the concept of grades or testing, any objectivity, etc. are ALSO flagrantly designed to favor whites...despite white's not inventing some of the most important subjects taught in school, them being taught in non-white countries, non-whites performing the best, etc.

Again, they are not attacking funding, they are outright attacking curricula, implying the same curricula undergone by POC inadequately prepares them for college yet somehow does for whites...which has absolutely no citation or makes any sense...and again, what about the all the non-black POC absolutely crushing it college? Or the fact that colleges are mostly woman dominated when earlier they directly state education is "male based" (more huge lies, it's been shown conventional teaching methods actually massively favor women, one of the reasons they are far more likely to go to college).

Last I checked, this is also offered to POC... If they think there are schools that don't have enough funding and they need more funding to get more people involved in this, they can say that, but this heavily implies that taking advanced courses for people who are ahead of the curricula, is racist because there's a larger percentage of POC who can't keep up...

American school systems are dumbed down enough, thank you very much. And we don't need to ALSO punish high performing POC because of the low performing ones. AP courses were a fantastic idea to save people money and keep America up to date with the rest of the world's education systems, as taking AP away furthers American educational progress compared to other powerful nations that much more.

Yet no intelligent solution is provided. Basically just attacks on institutions being used world wide and blaming "bad grades" on racism when America teaches the same shit they teach worldwide, for the most part. I am all for teaching more non-white history, but you don't need to explicitly attack the foundations of education to simply revise how history class is taught.

ie, please throw money at us so we can fix a problem that will likely never be fixed through the school system but only through marginalized groups improving financially, which leads to more stable homes for children to learn in, which is main reason higher income people out perform lower income people.

Sir, this is a Wendys

---

look its a hard game but its not that bad.

https://youtu.be/zHhRjWEvD3E?list=PLfQ0j5YNcrZpXmjBHOcsd97zgTHP2qGSN

---