Critical Race Theory

mace1229

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

I would be shocked if  it was typical for any school to not teach slavery, civil rights movement, etc.
this article sums up what I often hear associated with teaching CRT.
https://educationpost.org/explained-the-truth-about-critical-race-theory-and-how-it-shows-up-in-your-childs-classroom/

Particularly this paragraph 

• The U.S., and all of its laws and institutions, were founded and created based on the myth of white supremacy—the assumption that lighter skin and European ancestry meant that white people were better and deserved a higher social and economic position than people of color. Because racism is embedded within our systems and institutions, codified in law, and woven into American public policy, this racial inequality is replicated and maintained over time. Thus, systemic racism shows up in nearly every facet of life for people of color. 

It’s the all inclusive idea. The “all it’s laws and institutions.” Yes there have been designs in the system to help some and hurt others. Yes we have done terrible things to blacks and other minorities. But it’s not in every law, every institution and every facet of life. And it seems like to some, not teaching that means erasing our history and pretending it was all good. There’s still plenty of ugly left to teach.

Hobbes

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

mcgruff10

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

Hobbes

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

Halifax2TheMax

For some who may believe systemic racism doesn't exist or that its not baked into our laws and the white power structure, see below. Laws are open to interpretation and often times violations of same have to result in court challenges and/or lawsuits. Where do the people of color and poor turn to fight the injustice? How do you begin to change the mindset of some of "inferiority?" How do you right the wrongs of the immediate, like yesterday, past, and from long ago, particularly if you're (general you like Tejas Gubner Abbott & Costello, POOTWH, etc.) not even willing to discuss, never mind acknowledge that it exists and is well entrenched?

Nikole Hannah-Jones, and the epic failure of the University of North Carolina to recruit the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist to its faculty, just proved the correctness of critical race theory. The controversial legal doctrine has been vilified by conservatives but, as this episode illustrates, it also challenges those liberals who worship at the altar of “diversity.”

According to some leading critical race theorists, integration — the traditional progressive route to racial justice — does not actually work for minorities. In this view, white supremacy is so embedded in most American institutions that people of color will never be accepted as equals — even when they are formally granted entry.

UNC demonstrated that point after its journalism school offered Hannah-Jones, an investigative journalist for the New York Times, a prestigious professorship. The MacArthur “genius” learned that her initial appointment would be without tenure. She said she knew of no “legitimate reason” why “someone who has worked in the field as long as I have, who has the credentials, the awards, or the status that I have, should be treated different than every other white professor who came before me.” After a threatened lawsuit and huge public outcry, the university’s Board of Trustees voted 9 to 4 to extend tenure to Hannah-Jones.

But this week, Hannah-Jones announced that she was instead accepting a tenured position at Howard University, a historically Black school. This wasn’t just a “drop the mic” moment. Hannah-Jones’s rejection of a majority-White institution whose leaders clearly did not value her worth — and her embrace of a Black institution that did — embodied critical race theory’s foundational principles.

The doctrine was first articulated during the 1980s as a way of understanding why, decades after the civil rights movement, African Americans still experienced discrimination in virtually every aspect of their lives. Columbia University law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, who coined the term “critical race theory,” has argued that the law can often be interpreted in a way that benefits the ruling class, no matter what the law actually says.

Or, as Hannah-Jones wrote this week, “We have all seen that you can do everything to make yourself undeniable, and those in power can change the rules and attempt to deny you anyway.”

Critical race theorists advanced concepts such as structural racism and intersectionality. Some were skeptical of civil rights strategies that relied on integration, notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that “separate but equal” schools were inherently unequal and, therefore, unconstitutional.

In a classic article published in 1976, Harvard professor Derrick Bell argued that during the Jim Crow era, Black students might have been better off if they had sought more resources for segregated schools rather than access to White schools. Bell’s premise was that actual integration would never happen, even if it were legally mandated, because of “massive white hostility.”

Critical race theorists described the heavy toll of desegregation efforts, including placing Blacks in hostile environments, in a way that resonates with Hannah-Jones’s explanation for her decision: “At some point when you have proven yourself and fought your way into institutions that were not built for you . . . you have to decide that you are done forcing yourself in.”

Most professors of color work at majority-White schools, which remain better resourced than historically Black universities. Hannah-Jones’s platform allowed her to quickly raise $15 million to fund her chair at Howard, as well as another for the journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates. Few scholars enjoy that level of access to capital.

People of color in majority-White spaces often find themselves having to do “diversity” work that is not part of their job description. This can be draining and frustrating, making it difficult to refute the wisdom of Hannah-Jones’s observation that “for too long, powerful people have expected the people they have mistreated and marginalized to sacrifice themselves to make things whole.”

Nevertheless, some of us persist, based on another lesson from critical race theory: that those Hannah-Jones described as the “powerful people who maintain” racial injustice are unlikely to seek change, because the status quo provides them with too many benefits. Unfair as it is, that work remains up to people of color and our allies.

I have no beef with Hannah-Jones for declining a job at a journalism school that is literally named after the White man who, as he so delicately put it, “expressed my concerns” about her hiring. But, for now, I am okay with working at a university that in its early years was financed by the sale of enslaved people. I love my students and respect my colleagues, and have been part of the community’s efforts, still incomplete, to make reparations for that travesty. Sometimes, helping majority-White spaces be less racist and more inclusive feels transformative. Other times, it feels like an intellectual version of my great-grandfather’s job; he cleaned outhouses — i.e., shoveling White people’s excrement.

Much respect to Hannah-Jones for providing another example. Much respect to critical race theorists for keeping us focused on the crucial question: whether any approach can achieve racial justice in our flawed and divided country.

Opinion | Nikole Hannah-Jones just proved the correctness of critical race theory - The Washington Post

mcgruff10

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Hobbes

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

mcgruff10

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

Hobbes

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

CRT is not a topic, it is an anti-racist pedagogy. Content and delivery change to become more historically, culturally, and socially appropriate and accurate. An anti-racist pedagogy would be apparent in every facet of the educational system. 

mcgruff10

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

CRT is not a topic, it is an anti-racist pedagogy. Content and delivery change to become more historically, culturally, and socially appropriate and accurate. An anti-racist pedagogy would be apparent in every facet of the educational system. 

So where do you teach it?  Seems pretty high level to me, perfect for a college level class.  

oftenreading

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

CRT is not a topic, it is an anti-racist pedagogy. Content and delivery change to become more historically, culturally, and socially appropriate and accurate. An anti-racist pedagogy would be apparent in every facet of the educational system. 

So where do you teach it?  Seems pretty high level to me, perfect for a college level class.  

The point is, it isn’t an “it”. It’s an approach, and one that needs to start from the youngest grades. 

mcgruff10

I wouldn't even know how or where to teach this, maybe some sort of elective?  Even though we didn't get taught this I don't think our history classes were whitewashed.  This to me is just the popular buzzword of the day.

Just what is critical race theory anyway?

Critical race theory is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies.

The basic tenets of critical race theory, or CRT, emerged out of a framework for legal analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s created by legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and Richard Delgado, among others.

A good example is when, in the 1930s, government officials literally drew lines around areas deemed poor financial risks, often explicitly due to the racial composition of inhabitants. Banks subsequently refused to offer mortgages to Black people in those areas.

Today, those same patterns of discrimination live on through facially race-blind policies, like single-family zoning that prevents the building of affordable housing in advantaged, majority-white neighborhoods and, thus, stymies racial desegregation efforts.

CRT also has ties to other intellectual currents, including the work of sociologists and literary theorists who studied links between political power, social organization, and language. And its ideas have since informed other fields, like the humanities, the social sciences, and teacher education.

This academic understanding of critical race theory differs from representation in recent popular books and, especially, from its portrayal by critics—often, though not exclusively, conservative Republicans. Critics charge that the theory leads to negative dynamics, such as a focus on group identity over universal, shared traits; divides people into “oppressed” and “oppressor” groups; and urges intolerance.

Thus, there is a good deal of confusion over what CRT means, as well as its relationship to other terms, like “anti-racism” and “social justice,” with which it is often conflated.

To an extent, the term “critical race theory” is now cited as the basis of all diversity and inclusion efforts regardless of how much it’s actually informed those programs.

One conservative organization, the Heritage Foundation, recently attributed a whole host of issues to CRT, including the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, LGBTQ clubs in schools, diversity training in federal agencies and organizations, California’s recent ethnic studies model curriculum, the free-speech debate on college campuses, and alternatives to exclusionary discipline—such as the Promise program in Broward County, Fla., that some parents blame for the Parkland school shootings. “When followed to its logical conclusion, CRT is destructive and rejects the fundamental ideas on which our constitutional republic is based,” the organization claimed.

(A good parallel here is how popular ideas of the common core learning standards grew to encompass far more than what those standards said on paper.)

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/what-is-critical-race-theory-and-why-is-it-under-attack/2021/05

Hobbes

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

CRT is not a topic, it is an anti-racist pedagogy. Content and delivery change to become more historically, culturally, and socially appropriate and accurate. An anti-racist pedagogy would be apparent in every facet of the educational system. 

So where do you teach it?  Seems pretty high level to me, perfect for a college level class.  

Anti-racist pedagogy is appropriate for K-12. Racism is learned and recognized as early as age two. Certainly anti-racism can be taught to primary grade students. This lays foundation for when students are taught and view history, social studies, even literature, through a more critical lens.

The Juggler

Arizona gov just signed a law banning it...

tempo_n_groove

Halifax2TheMax said:

For some who may believe systemic racism doesn't exist or that its not baked into our laws and the white power structure, see below. Laws are open to interpretation and often times violations of same have to result in court challenges and/or lawsuits. Where do the people of color and poor turn to fight the injustice? How do you begin to change the mindset of some of "inferiority?" How do you right the wrongs of the immediate, like yesterday, past, and from long ago, particularly if you're (general you like Tejas Gubner Abbott & Costello, POOTWH, etc.) not even willing to discuss, never mind acknowledge that it exists and is well entrenched?

Nikole Hannah-Jones, and the epic failure of the University of North Carolina to recruit the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist to its faculty, just proved the correctness of critical race theory. The controversial legal doctrine has been vilified by conservatives but, as this episode illustrates, it also challenges those liberals who worship at the altar of “diversity.”

According to some leading critical race theorists, integration — the traditional progressive route to racial justice — does not actually work for minorities. In this view, white supremacy is so embedded in most American institutions that people of color will never be accepted as equals — even when they are formally granted entry.

UNC demonstrated that point after its journalism school offered Hannah-Jones, an investigative journalist for the New York Times, a prestigious professorship. The MacArthur “genius” learned that her initial appointment would be without tenure. She said she knew of no “legitimate reason” why “someone who has worked in the field as long as I have, who has the credentials, the awards, or the status that I have, should be treated different than every other white professor who came before me.” After a threatened lawsuit and huge public outcry, the university’s Board of Trustees voted 9 to 4 to extend tenure to Hannah-Jones.

But this week, Hannah-Jones announced that she was instead accepting a tenured position at Howard University, a historically Black school. This wasn’t just a “drop the mic” moment. Hannah-Jones’s rejection of a majority-White institution whose leaders clearly did not value her worth — and her embrace of a Black institution that did — embodied critical race theory’s foundational principles.

The doctrine was first articulated during the 1980s as a way of understanding why, decades after the civil rights movement, African Americans still experienced discrimination in virtually every aspect of their lives. Columbia University law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, who coined the term “critical race theory,” has argued that the law can often be interpreted in a way that benefits the ruling class, no matter what the law actually says.

Or, as Hannah-Jones wrote this week, “We have all seen that you can do everything to make yourself undeniable, and those in power can change the rules and attempt to deny you anyway.”

Critical race theorists advanced concepts such as structural racism and intersectionality. Some were skeptical of civil rights strategies that relied on integration, notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education that “separate but equal” schools were inherently unequal and, therefore, unconstitutional.

In a classic article published in 1976, Harvard professor Derrick Bell argued that during the Jim Crow era, Black students might have been better off if they had sought more resources for segregated schools rather than access to White schools. Bell’s premise was that actual integration would never happen, even if it were legally mandated, because of “massive white hostility.”

Critical race theorists described the heavy toll of desegregation efforts, including placing Blacks in hostile environments, in a way that resonates with Hannah-Jones’s explanation for her decision: “At some point when you have proven yourself and fought your way into institutions that were not built for you . . . you have to decide that you are done forcing yourself in.”

Most professors of color work at majority-White schools, which remain better resourced than historically Black universities. Hannah-Jones’s platform allowed her to quickly raise $15 million to fund her chair at Howard, as well as another for the journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates. Few scholars enjoy that level of access to capital.

People of color in majority-White spaces often find themselves having to do “diversity” work that is not part of their job description. This can be draining and frustrating, making it difficult to refute the wisdom of Hannah-Jones’s observation that “for too long, powerful people have expected the people they have mistreated and marginalized to sacrifice themselves to make things whole.”

Nevertheless, some of us persist, based on another lesson from critical race theory: that those Hannah-Jones described as the “powerful people who maintain” racial injustice are unlikely to seek change, because the status quo provides them with too many benefits. Unfair as it is, that work remains up to people of color and our allies.

I have no beef with Hannah-Jones for declining a job at a journalism school that is literally named after the White man who, as he so delicately put it, “expressed my concerns” about her hiring. But, for now, I am okay with working at a university that in its early years was financed by the sale of enslaved people. I love my students and respect my colleagues, and have been part of the community’s efforts, still incomplete, to make reparations for that travesty. Sometimes, helping majority-White spaces be less racist and more inclusive feels transformative. Other times, it feels like an intellectual version of my great-grandfather’s job; he cleaned outhouses — i.e., shoveling White people’s excrement.

Much respect to Hannah-Jones for providing another example. Much respect to critical race theorists for keeping us focused on the crucial question: whether any approach can achieve racial justice in our flawed and divided country.

Opinion | Nikole Hannah-Jones just proved the correctness of critical race theory - The Washington Post

Good article.  This touches on why republicans are pushing the “see they want segregation back” theory.  I read many an article that mentions generational wealth.  That brings power and for far too long the African American community hasn’t had it.  

This article touches on why it can be better for them to stick together.

People like Lebron James and Tyler Perry are doing this and helping their people.  I get it.  It’s definitely different but it makes sense.

I’d like to add if the other professors before Hannah-Jones were offered tenure where she was not is some bullshit.

tempo_n_groove

Existed and still exists.  Poor choice of words.  We were taught about affirmative action that was becoming a hot topic at the time.

No matter what I say you’ll have a problem with it anyway…

tempo_n_groove

The Juggler said:

Arizona gov just signed a law banning it...

Pretty much and Rep state is trying to do so.

Malroth

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Hobbes said:

mcgruff10 said:

Hobbes said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mcgruff10 said:

Taught 8th grade for sixteen years and every year I would teach reconstruction and the civil rights movement.  I wonder if some
of these topics will be a thing of the past in some states.  

You think that they will stop teaching what actually happened?  That is nuts and hope that isn't true.

They've never taught what actually happened. That's the whole point of CRT.

What do you mean they’ve never taught what actually happened?

Whitewashed version. No discredit to you and your efforts to educate your students, but more than likely it was a whitewashed version.

How does one whitewash reconstruction?

Was Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois part of your assigned curriculum? Mine neither.

So we are cherry picking exact books that weren't taught now?  C'mon.  If it was taught right it doesn't matter a source that was left out.

It was an example. And our education was not taught right no matter how strongly you believe it was.

I'm sorry that your education wasn't like mine and you are apparently angry about it.  My apologies...

You were taught CRT in school? Well versed with Du Bois, Fredrick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, and Antonio Gramsci? Derrick Bell and Kimberle Crenshaw? And I'm not angry in the way you may think. I am suggesting you/me/we be more critical of our education. You have claimed luck in receiving a more historically accurate education. I claim that even your education was whitewashed. As was mine. To purport otherwise is ignorant.

I'm ignorant then.  Thanks.  No point in arguing...

We are all ignorant. We have discussions to promote awareness and education. Not only on this forum but in our classrooms. Again, the whole point of introducing CRT as part of the curriculum. You started this thread for a reason, correct?

I did.  Not so you can tell me that I wasn't taught anything pertaining to CRT.  That is ignorant.  I have said that I was fortunate enough to learn about the racism that existed throughout our history as a nation.  

What I see is that I wasn't taught enough about it to your liking wheras people like Fredrick Douglas were taught to me.  We have a boulevard here in NY named after him.  Someone like Kimberle Crenshaw was not though.  She became popular after my HS years.

Just because every name you mention wasn't taught to me doesn't mean that I wasn't taught about it.  I'm learning that I was taught about it more than I thought initially.

It's impossible to make you happy is what I am seeing unless it's all and everything.  That is for a college course and not a HS class and that is not white washing.

I see this back and forth between you and I as pointless...

Existed? There's the ignorance and the whitewashed version. CRT focuses not on the explicit racism found in most textbooks, but the social and institutional dynamics that still exist. 

Which from what I read, CRT is only taught in college, not k-12.  

CRT, an umbrella term for anti-racist curriculum, has been embraced by the National Education Association who just recently voted in support of incorporating it as part of a K-12 pedagogy.

So it hasn’t even been taught yet.  

Proving my point that our education has been whitewashed.

I disagree with that.  Where would you teach it?

And what other topics  do you want history teachers  to teach?  Remember there is only 180 school days a year so you can’t spend too much time on one topic because you have a huge curriculum to get through.  Plus if you spend too
much time on a topic kids get bored and tune out. 

CRT is not a topic, it is an anti-racist pedagogy. Content and delivery change to become more historically, culturally, and socially appropriate and accurate. An anti-racist pedagogy would be apparent in every facet of the educational system. 

So where do you teach it?  Seems pretty high level to me, perfect for a college level class.  

Anti-racist pedagogy is appropriate for K-12. Racism is learned and recognized as early as age two. Certainly anti-racism can be taught to primary grade students. This lays foundation for when students are taught and view history, social studies, even literature, through a more critical lens.

Thanks, Hobbes.

I learned more about CRT in five sentences from you than five articles elsewhere.

I was starting to think it was pro-racism.

Halifax2TheMax

I think you could begin teaching concepts and elements of CRT beginning in 5th grade and going right up to 12th. Like most things, its a complicated subject with lots of nuance. Sure, you can focus on the big ticket items like slavery, the civil war, Jim Crow, civil rights movement, BLM, etc. but you also need to teach the how and why those things happened and the what and how the insidious nature of institutional racism was/is created, occurs and what the effects were/are. You can draw direct lines from government policy, law and impacts on minorities and the poor. But it is bigger than just that, its societal (business owner being racist in their hiring practices), education (access/quality, desegregation), corporate America (too many to list), housing/zoning (redlining, development, warehousing, tree canopy/parks), social programs (pro-family versus forced separation) and law enforcement (crime & punishment), among others. Its wide and its deeply rooted. However, you could begin teaching the concept and effects of racism in pre-K, K and grades 1-4, along with more Crispus Attucks and less the rah, rah, rah, USA, USA, USA, history of George Washington and the Cherry Tree, Honest Abe, etc.

Have you ever wondered why the following happen and are true?:

Average life expectancy 2020: White 78; Black 72
Family Net Worth (2016): White $171,000; Black $17,150
Loan denial Rates (2015): White, 10.9%; Black, 27.4%
Refinance denial rate: Industry average, 17.07%; Blacks, 30.22%
Homeownership (2020): White 64.6%; Black 42.1%
Education Attainment, College Graduate or Higher 2020: White 35%, Black 25%
Black Percent of Population: 1980, 11.7%; 2020, 13.4%
Federal Bureau of Prisons Population % (July 2021): White, 57.8%; Black, 38.3%
Death Rate per 100K (2019): White, 736.8; Black, 870.7

These are the effects of institutional racism that US history doesn't speak to or teach about. Tough pill to swallow.

Halifax2TheMax

A potential subject of CRT that could be taught.

For example, from the 1930s to the 1960s and even the 1970s, a practice of discriminatory lending now known as “redlining” was carried out in cities across the country, from Los Angeles to Baltimore. Color-coded maps dissuaded not only mortgage but also health care and infrastructure investments based on where people lived. The red lines that were drawn around neighborhoods — predominantly Black as well as Catholic, Jewish and immigrant — now often line up very closely with maps showing a lack of tree canopy today.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/30/opinion/environmental-inequity-trees-critical-infrastructure.html