CRT - Why this guy is right and wrong


Carborendum
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Correct: CRT was supposed to be taught as a legal theory in the collegiate level among law students.  It was never meant to be taught at a lower level as historical/political fact.

Incorrect:  It is your (schools) job to teach math and science.  It is our (parents/family) job to teach them about life.

The simple fact is that Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, history, etc.  CANNOT adequately be taught without also teaching about life.  It is never about a "school" (worth its name) teaching academics without also teaching values.  It is only a question of "which" values are going to be taught.

We don't object to values being taught in schools.  We object to values we disagree with being taught in schools.  This is true from whatever background one may come from.  But if we give in to one person's request for values being met, then another person loses.  There is no win-win in a system like this.

The contradiction here is:

1) We have expectations that "the government" is in charge of paying for that education.
2) We expect to be in charge of what value system will be taught.

You can't have both.  Either you pay for it, or someone else will decide what to teach your children about life.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I see all these anti CRT protests at school boards, I want to challenge the parents to do private or home school.

Public school is the easy and convenient choice… but is also in most cases the worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Fether said:

When I see all these anti CRT protests at school boards, I want to challenge the parents to do private or home school.

Public school is the easy and convenient choice… but is also in most cases the worst.

Not really. Many parents lack the training and education needed to be teachers. Private school is very expensive and it was a miserable experience for many of us. 
 

Use it as a teachable moment. “Ask your teacher why CRT is wrong.....”. Hopefully your kid will be able to ask questions and debate ideas instead of running away like a baby. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Not really. Many parents lack the training and education needed to be teachers. So there’s that. 

I agree, which is why I would only challenge them. Public school is paid for and run by the government. Like someone who is choosing to be on unemployment instead of working, they give up their right to reasonably be angry if something doesn’t go perfect.

If the free thing isn’t cutting it, maybe it’s time to put in some of your own effort.

side note: Think of everything you learned in pre-school - 4th grade. Then 4th - 6th. Grade school is only EXTREMELY simple things. I understand many still don’t have the needed education, but teaching grade school topics is mostly just learning to add and creating learning habits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fether said:

I agree, which is why I would only challenge them. Public school is paid for and run by the government. Like someone who is choosing to be on unemployment instead of working, they give up their right to reasonably be angry if something doesn’t go perfect.

If the free thing isn’t cutting it, maybe it’s time to put in some of your own effort.

side note: Think of everything you learned in pre-school - 4th grade. Then 4th - 6th. Grade school is only EXTREMELY simple things. I understand many still don’t have the needed education, but teaching grade school topics is mostly just learning to add and creating learning habits.

Whatever works, I guess. 
 

I still think it’s a terrible idea to hide your child from ideas you disagree with rather than have them confront and analyze them. After all, if you truly believe you have the truth, what are you afraid of?

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I still think it’s a terrible idea to hide your child from ideas you disagree with rather than have them confront and analyze them. 

I am glad you, me and everyone else on this forum agrees! It’s good that the form in which you school your kids has nothing to do with this

Edited by Fether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fether said:

I am glad you, me and everyone else on this forum agrees! It’s good that how you school your kids has nothing to do with this

Wrong.
 

Public school was the first place I was introduced to ideas that, myself and my parents disagreed with. Could a home schooled parent do the same? Maybe, but I sort of doubt it. So on the contrary, it has a great deal to do with it. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, and it pains me to say this, even my Catholic high school introduced us to Protestantism, evolution, feminism, etc. All things the church does not agree with. Even though I hated that place and time in my life, through clenched teeth, I give them “credit.” 
 

I have zero confidence that Karen would homeschool her kids and introduce to her ideas she personally opposes. To me, that shows the importance of non-homeschooling environments. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I still think it’s a terrible idea to hide your child from ideas you disagree with rather than have them confront and analyze them. After all, if you truly believe you have the truth, what are you afraid of?

I think that's a bad idea too.

  • I welcome the exposure to differing ideas. 
  • What I cannot accept is the forced indoctrination of a differing idea. 

When you get an adult in front of the class room saying "this is the way things are" and the kids are supposed to parrot that, there is no open discussion about anything.  The public school system is set up in such a manner that the teachers have all the power.  There is no open debate about 2+2 = 4.  The teacher says.  The student accepts.  When it comes to more esoteric topics like philosophy, there isn't much difference.

51 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Many parents lack the training and education needed to be teachers. Private school is very expensive and it was a miserable experience for many of us.

You're thinking in terms of replacing public school with a substitute public school model that isn't publicly funded.

I'm talking about a completely different way to teach and learn.

https://www.amazon.com/Carry-Mr-Bowditch-Jean-Latham/dp/0618250743/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Carry+On+Mr+Bowditch&qid=1625596833&sr=8-1

18 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Public school was the first place I was introduced to ideas that, myself and my parents disagreed with. Could a home schooled parent do the same? Maybe, but I sort of doubt it. So on the contrary, it has a great deal to do with it. 

That is spoken like a person who has never had any experience with homeschool.

There is a difference between opening up the Communist Manifesto and Antifa website for educational purposes vs telling them that Communism is superior -- and they had better agree or they'll flunk that class.

The myth that people believe about homeschool is that ALL the education a child gets is from one (or possibly two) parent(s).  The vast majority of parents don't do the teaching.  They get books and curricula to allow the child to explore many topics on their own -- many of which the parents may not have ever learned themselves.

That kind of opportunity would never be had in a public school (nor most private schools).

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Public school was the first place I was introduced to ideas that, myself and my parents disagreed with. Could a home schooled parent do the same? Maybe, but I sort of doubt it. So on the contrary, it has a great deal to do with it. 

They absolutely can and should introduce and invest time into addressing opposing ideas, even critically thinking about their own views and critically talking about racism and institutionalized racism.

The problem with the school system making Critical Race Theory as part of the curriculum is that it isn’t really “critical”. Being critical of something is challenging and evaluating mindsets. With CRT, We aren’t evaluating whether certain things are racist, the conclusion is fixed. Everything and everyone is racist. If you are by definition being critical on this, you are automatically wrong.

A parent that is homeschooling and isn’t offering sources of opposing views (at appropriate times, I would add) is failing. Not to say your parents failed, they had public school to pick up where they chose not to act (which is the purpose of school).

Edited by Fether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fether said:

Not to say your parents failed, they had public school to pick up where they chose not to act (which is the purpose of school).

No worries, I didn’t take it personal. I wasn’t homeschooled, for the record. Public school-Private High School-1st college was private, but I graduated from UNH. I do see it differently than you do though. 

 

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

What I cannot accept is the forced indoctrination of a differing idea. 

Right, and teaching your kids to argue against indoctrination and think for themselves against it rather than meekly submit or, much worse, run away, is another important life skill. 
 

And define “indoctrination”. I want my kids to know 2+2=4, and honestly, if my kid says the 2+2=9, then he needs to be “indoctrinated”. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LDSGator said:

Right, and teaching your kids to argue against indoctrination and think for themselves against it rather than meekly submit or, much worse, run away, is another important life skill. 

At what age do I start telling my son he is racist and everyone and everything is racist? Do I wait till 6 or should I start now at 3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LDSGator said:

And define “indoctrination”. I want my kids to know 2+2=4, and honestly, if my kid says the 2+2=9, then he needs to be “indoctrinated”. 

And that's the argument that's always made, isn't it?  What is considered a "settled" idea?  What is "open for interpretation"?

Not only that, but recently a MATH CLASS had a word problem about a transgendered boy wanting to calculate the number of tampons required for a day based on flow rate.  Yup, a perfectly valid mathematical question.  And it has a useful application (for all those who menstruate).  But throw the transgendered boy issue in there and all of a sudden there's indoctrination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

:: snickers :: 

Don’t assume things kid. I have grave reservations about CRT. 
 

and age 9 is appropriate. 

This is the heart of this specific issue and why I say we bounce out of public school. I love critical thinking and reading opposing views. I spent a week digging through as much pro CRT stuff I could to understand it. 
 

the issue is introducing this too early.

Edited by Fether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

And define “indoctrination”. I want my kids to know 2+2=4, and honestly, if my kid says the 2+2=9, then he needs to be “indoctrinated”. 

Sorry, 

I didn't answer your first question.  The difference between indoctrination vs education is the difference between opinion and facts.

Only through dishonesty, misinformation, and disinformation can the two be conflated.

When we are in the realm of opinions, ideologies, etc. I want to be in charge of my children's indoctrination.  That is part of my right as a parent.  And, this is what that man in my OP was really trying to say.  But he didn't understand the contradiction in his own position.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Right, and teaching your kids to argue against indoctrination and think for themselves against it rather than meekly submit or, much worse, run away, is another important life skill. 

I'd agree in principle.  But in practical application (for this context) that is asking too much.

Do you really expect a child of any age to hold his own against a teacher who has been practicing the arguments for 10, to 20 years?  That ain't a fair fight -- especially with such a power imbalance.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LDSGator

I think we pretty much agree on the principle, but disagree on the application.

Let me clarify my view a little more.

I don't think it would be wise for every parents to start homeschooling. I would say most are not well equipped right now to do this. But what I see with people refusing home/private school but also complaining is the same as what I see with a perfectly healthy and able person angry because his unemployment showed up 2 days late.

the best teacher is a parent who loves learning and has an expectation of excellence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

I'd agree in principle.  But in practical application (for this context) that is asking too much.

Do you really expect a child of any age to hold his own against a teacher who has been practicing the arguments for 10, to 20 years?  That ain't a fair fight -- especially with such a power imbalance.

I understand your point as well, I just see it differently. 
 

It’s not about that particular argument because it won’t matter in three months, much less three years.  It’s about planting the seeds and teaching them to think. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I understand your point as well, I just see it differently. 

It’s not about that particular argument because it won’t matter in three months, much less three years.  It’s about planting the seeds and teaching them to think. 

And who says homeschoolers don't do that?  Where are you getting this idea that homeschoolers are "sheltering" rather than "protecting and nurturing"?  Yes, a characterization.  But it is one that you seem to have a distorted opinion of.  It's like pulling a Harold Hill.

Most homeschoolers I know have no problem with bringing up controversial topics.  But they are controlled by the parents.  It is really a question of parents' rights.  Do we or do we not have a right to provide an ideology for our children?

I'm not sure if you ever heard my struggle with accepting homeschooling.  I hope you have.  But it was not an easy sell for me.  It was easy to discuss it in the theoretical.  But when reality hit, I knew there were certain limits for ALL the same arguments you're making now, that I made back then.  And today's schools are far beyond that line for me and mine.

BTW, it is not just about one argument.  It is about 13 years of arguments all tilted the same way.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

It's like pulling a Harold Hill.

Uh, @Carborendum? The Music Man is one of my all time favorite musicals, one of my favorite movies, one of my favorite soundtracks,  and Harold Hill is one of my all time favorite characters in fiction. In fact, I think it’s a perfect movie. One of maybe....5 movies I’d call “perfect.”
 

So, you just gave me a tremendous compliment!!! 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stepping further-look at the tone of the people in “Iowa Stubborn”. Cold, uncaring, selfish. “You can have the fill of all the food you bring yourself.”



Then, look at their attitude after he visits the town. 
 

 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share