Critical race theory (2 Viewers)

[DaveXA]

Frankly, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to the Critical Race Theory curriculum. What is it, where does it come from, and is it legitimate? Has anyone here read it and maybe give a quick summary?

If this has been covered in another thread, then I missed it.

 

[Paul]

I agree that we are going too far to hold our ancestry to the standards of today. That is a negative sum game. But CRT doesn’t do that. It simply highlights the racial undertones that existed, and in many cases still exist today, in societal systems, like voting, employment and educational opportunities to name a few. Are you suggesting they didn’t exist?

Teaching CRT, marxism, homosexuality, etc in all schools is fine and should not be banned. The problem is that some schools may add rhetoric that is clearly hateful and divisive.

Could you be so kind as to expound upon this: “I am now seeing methods to fight racism that actually promote racism. Conciliatory remarks work better than acrimonious rhetoric.”

And maybe provide an live example of the former sentence.

Sure, look at this:

The framework for deconstructing racism in mathematics offers essential characteristics of antiracist math educators and critical approaches to dismantling white supremacy in math classrooms by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture. That would be page 1 of the proposed math curriculum for POC.

https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf

The manifesto on how to teach math to those that fall behind is to be admired, however the frequent references to white supremacy and to the teaching of racist math is not needed. This is the type of activity that turns people off. Otherwise, go for it, maybe it will work.

 

[CoolBrees]

I have seen this posted by you before, yes.

That is for Oregon allegedly. I live in Oregon and I have never heard of any of the individuals listed anywhere in their study. It certainly isn’t being promoted in any curriculum in Portland Public Schools. Or was this part of any potential plan or study purported by city or state.

so this isn’t a plan being seriously considered by any measure so why would it concern you so?

And slippery slope arguments really don’t hold nearly as much water as some might think

 

[Paul]

I have seen this posted by you before, yes.

That is for Oregon allegedly. I live in Oregon and I have never heard of any of the individuals listed anywhere in their study. It certainly isn’t being promoted in any curriculum in Portland Public Schools. Or was this part of any potential plan or study purported by city or state.

so this isn’t a plan being seriously considered by any measure so why would it concern you so?

And slippery slope arguments really don’t hold nearly as much water as some might think

If you and the rest of Oregon do not accept the hateful rhetoric then we have no issues. Thanks!

However, this is the type of rhetoric that gets votes for the extreme right. The hateful remarks may not be common but the Republicans use this to recruit voters. I will say the Democrat s also do the same thing with issues that are relatively uncommon.

 

[MT15]

Paul, what about this paragraph is hateful? Because I’m just not seeing it.

‘The framework for deconstructing racism in mathematics offers essential characteristics of antiracist math educators and critical approaches to dismantling white supremacy in math classrooms by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture. That would be page 1 of the proposed math curriculum for POC.’

How do you discuss racism or white supremacy without using those words? As a white person, I don’t feel the hatred that you see, so help me understand.

 

[Paul]

Paul, what about this paragraph is hateful? Because I’m just not seeing it.

‘The framework for deconstructing racism in mathematics offers essential characteristics of antiracist math educators and critical approaches to dismantling white supremacy in math classrooms by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture. That would be page 1 of the proposed math curriculum for POC.’

How do you discuss racism or white supremacy without using those words? As a white person, I don’t feel the hatred that you see, so help me understand.

Teaching math is teaching math. We know it is no an issue of white supremacy math because East Asian students excel at it in America and Europe. Secondly, you may like the term white supremacy, but I know many that are not in love with the term. The term white supremacy is a derogatory term to describe the hegemony of the West in world history. White Supremacy is also used as a dog whistle to yell racism. Lastly, when the term white supremacy is used there is an implicit acknowledgement that white people are indeed supreme. I do not agree with the latter. Most white are as ordinary as anyone else.

However, if a math teacher is racist and she on purpose does not teach the POC students math then we have a clear cut case of racism. That is way different that the concept that math is taught within the framework of white supremacy. The teaching of math with the concept of white supremacy becomes an abstract that is used as an excused to promote a political agenda.

If they want to alter the way is math taught to POC that is fine. They could use other non-Western curriculums and give it a go. I have no objections to that. Here is another few lines form page 1:

This text advocates for a collective approach to dismantling white supremacy. This school- wide approach ensures that anti- racist work is not left alone to one individual (i.e., math teacher or the director of equity.

Did you read that? "A collective approach to dismantle white supremacy." Why not teach math and forget politics? Why must children be subjected to this?

 

[MT15]

What do you suppose is the actual method of doing what they say? Are you actually thinking they are discussing white supremacy during math class? Because that’s not how I take this at all.

I really don’t know what to say about your unusual take on the term “white supremacy”. Well, yes, it’s a derogatory term because white supremacists are terrible people. It’s not a dog whistle for racism, white supremacists are racists. How can you discuss this without using that word? What term should we use to discuss the problem?

My takeaway is that this is a teacher instruction resource. They would like to educate teachers about ways and methods they might use that could impact their minority students. This would assume that the teachers would want to know if some of their methods of teaching would negatively impact minority students. And they would care because they want all their students to do well.

I also noticed that you keep saying you’re fine with having a different way to teach minority students. Where does that come from? We don’t need different methods of teaching for different races, IMO.

 

[SystemShock]

Paul, what about this paragraph is hateful? Because I’m just not seeing it.

‘The framework for deconstructing racism in mathematics offers essential characteristics of antiracist math educators and critical approaches to dismantling white supremacy in math classrooms by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture. That would be page 1 of the proposed math curriculum for POC.’

How do you discuss racism or white supremacy without using those words? As a white person, I don’t feel the hatred that you see, so help me understand.

I wouldn't call it hateful, but I am at a loss; what does math have to do with racism? There is no racism in mathematics. How do you deconstruct something that is not there? If anything, math is as universal a language as there is. What's the equation or algorithm that makes visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy?

 

[V Chip]

Link to the Reddit thread:

 

[MT15]

System: This is just a guess, but it’s not the math itself. It’s teaching methodology. For example, word problems could be possibly designed better, or teachers could be unwittingly emphasizing certain cultural aspects that would make minority children feel excluded.

There is a similar issue with math and girls, or at least there was when I went to elementary school.

It could be something as simple as a teacher who only calls on certain kids for the answers. They probably do it unwittingly, but once they are educated, they can presumably try to do better. My son had a teacher in middle school who always had one student he would ask “did you get that?” when he was explaining a new math concept. Just so happened this was the kid who was the best math student in that class, and the answer was almost always “yes”. And so he would move on.

The other kids would just sit there because nobody wanted to be the one who said “I don’t get it”. These are children, after all. Was this teacher doing it maliciously? Absolutely not, he was a great guy and generally a good teacher. He didn’t even realize what he was doing was stifling the other kids in the class.

 

[MT15]

This is part of what is so frustrating about the right’s assault on CRT. It isn’t anything that is taught to kids, it’s a teaching tool. That’s it. The willful misinformation is just maddening.

 

[Paul]

What do you suppose is the actual method of doing what they say? Are you actually thinking they are discussing white supremacy during math class? Because that’s not how I take this at all.

Why is the manifesto riddled with the concept of removing white supremacy from math?

I really don’t know what to say about your unusual take on the term “white supremacy”. Well, yes, it’s a derogatory term because white supremacists are terrible people. It’s not a dog whistle for racism, white supremacists are racists. How can you discuss this without using that word? What term should we use to discuss the problem?

Yes, they are plenty racist people out there and you can call them anything you want. However, CRT assumes the entire system is built on white supremacy. That is about a broad as it gets. I do not believe the entirety of the USA is built on white supremacy. Obama won because of the white vote. All I see here is a theory that is very well intentioned, but has been corrupted by terms that have no place in teaching students the basics such as math, reading, and writing.

My takeaway is that this is a teacher instruction resource. They would like to educate teachers about ways and methods they might use that could impact their minority students. This would assume that the teachers would want to know if some of their methods of teaching would negatively impact minority students. And they would care because they want all their students to do well.

I agre, it is a teacher resource, but I do not see the need for anything political.

I also noticed that you keep saying you’re fine with having a different way to teach minority students. Where does that come from? We don’t need different methods of teaching for different races, IMO.

That is what the math curriculum is saying. I just echoed their intentions.
Otherwise, I agree with you, math is math and should be taught equally to all students. WE AGREE!!!

 

[Paul]

This is part of what is so frustrating about the right’s assault on CRT. It isn’t anything that is taught to kids, it’s a teaching tool. That’s it. The willful misinformation is just maddening.

If you take away the incendiary remarks there is nothing wrong with CRT.

 

[SystemShock]

System: This is just a guess, but it’s not the math itself. It’s teaching methodology. For example, word problems could be possibly designed better, or teachers could be unwittingly emphasizing certain cultural aspects that would make minority children feel excluded.

There is a similar issue with math and girls, or at least there was when I went to elementary school.

It could be something as simple as a teacher who only calls on certain kids for the answers. They probably do it unwittingly, but once they are educated, they can presumably try to do better. My son had a teacher in middle school who always had one student he would ask “did you get that?” when he was explaining a new math concept. Just so happened this was the kid who was the best math student in that class, and the answer was almost always “yes”. And so he would move on.

The other kids would just sit there because nobody wanted to be the one who said “I don’t get it”. These are children, after all. Was this teacher doing it maliciously? Absolutely not, he was a great guy and generally a good teacher. He didn’t even realize what he was doing was stifling the other kids in the class.

But that has nothing to do with math, but rather the behavior of teachers. Statements like "deconstructing racism in mathematics" don't help anything, and missions statements like " by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture", it would mean you'd have to forego teaching math for social studies.

 

[DaveXA]

It seems to me the subjects themselves aren't the issue, but rather teaching methodology. There's nothing fundamentally racist about most school subjects, but how they're taught can possibly be. There's nothing fundamentally racist about wanting law and order, but the way it's structured and designed will often lead to disproportionate outcomes for some minority groups.

 

[Paul]

It seems to me the subjects themselves aren't the issue, but rather teaching methodology. There's nothing fundamentally racist about most school subjects, but how they're taught can possibly be. There's nothing fundamentally racist about wanting law and order, but the way it's structured and designed will often lead to disproportionate outcomes for some minority groups.

I agree. But the most important tenet of CRT is that all activities in Western nations are based on White Supremacy. By definition that makes math racist.
This abstract way of looking at racism has some basis on reality as Western nations are based on the West. That is not surprising in itself.

 

[DaveXA]

I agree. But the most important tenet of CRT is that all activities in Western nations are based on White Supremacy. By definition that makes math racist.
This abstract way of looking at racism has some basis on reality as Western nations are based on the West. That is not surprising in itself.

Where are you getting that that's the most important tenet of CRT? Source?

 

[Paul]

Where are you getting that that's the most important tenet of CRT? Source?

While critical race theorists do not all share the same beliefs,[2] the basic tenets of CRT include that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices on the part of individuals.[11][12] CRT scholars also view race and white supremacy as an intersectional social construction[11] which serves to uphold the interests of white people[13] against those of marginalized communities at large.[14][15][16] In the field of legal studies, CRT emphasizes that merely making laws colorblind on paper may not be enough to make the application of the laws colorblind; ostensibly colorblind laws can be applied in racially discriminatory ways.[17] Intersectionality – which emphasizes that race can intersect with other identities (such as gender and class) to produce complex combinations of power and disadvantage – is a key CRT concept.[18]

Roy L. Brooks defined critical race theory in 1994 as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view".

WIKI

In summary: The entire system is racist hence the term systemic racism is commonly used.

 

[DaveXA]

While critical race theorists do not all share the same beliefs,[2] the basic tenets of CRT include that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices on the part of individuals.[11][12] CRT scholars also view race and white supremacy as an intersectional social construction[11] which serves to uphold the interests of white people[13] against those of marginalized communities at large.[14][15][16] In the field of legal studies, CRT emphasizes that merely making laws colorblind on paper may not be enough to make the application of the laws colorblind; ostensibly colorblind laws can be applied in racially discriminatory ways.[17] Intersectionality – which emphasizes that race can intersect with other identities (such as gender and class) to produce complex combinations of power and disadvantage – is a key CRT concept.[18]

Roy L. Brooks defined critical race theory in 1994 as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view".

WIKI

In summary: The entire system is racist hence the term systemic racism is commonly used.

I'm not really getting that conclusion from what you quoted.

racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing and often subtle social and institutional dynamics, rather than explicit and intentional prejudices on the part of individuals ...race and white supremacy as an intersectional social construction[11] which serves to uphold the interests of white people[13] against those of marginalized communities at large.

This doesn't sound like it's saying all activities in Western nations are based on White Supermacy.