Epic Beard Man
Bearded Philosopher
Please watch the video and comment after watching it.....The man who teaches it is Dr. Rashad Richey (the man with the glasses on the right).
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Critical Race Theory as explained by the man who actually teaches it
- Thread starter Epic Beard Man
- Start date
Please watch the video and comment after watching it.....The man who teaches it is Dr. Rashad Richey (the man with the glasses on the right).
Augustus
…
He seems to be using a bit of a strawman to score points.
From about 1.55 he says they don't teach CRT to kids then the other chap states that while they may not teach graduate level CRT to kids, if CRT is influencing teacher pedagogy then it is something that should be looked at.
So people don't really support or oppose 'teaching CRT to kids', they support or oppose utilising certain kinds of CRT influenced pedagogies in children's education.
He ignores this and keeps focusing on a narrowly defined graduate CRT.
For anyone interested:
Some educators distill the aforementioned [CRT] principles into a pedagogical approach referred to as critical race pedagogy. Critical race pedagogy encapsulates the teaching practices and content that Educators of Color employ for Students of Color (Jennings & Lynn, 2005; Leonardo, 2009; Lynn, 1999, 2004, 2005; Lynn & Jennings, 2009; Solórzano & Yosso, 2000b) in order to center race and racism, validate the experiential knowledge of Students of Color, and deconstruct dominant ideologies in their class- rooms. In other words, critical race pedagogy is characterized by the ‘emancipatory teaching practices of People of Color’who utilize multiple‘liberatory strategies as a vehicle for counteracting the devaluation of racially oppressed students’ (Lynn, 2004, p. 155). These approaches include – but are not limited to – critical pedagogy (Freire, 2003), anti-racist pedagogy (Sleeter & Delgado Bernal, 2004), decolonial pedagogy (Asher, 2009), feminist pedagogy (Trinh, 1989), border pedagogy (Giroux, 1988), Afro-centric pedagogy (Lynn, 2004), culturally responsive pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995), and engaged pedagogy (hooks, 1994). Critical race scholars describe these varied teaching stances and curricular choices as not only a form of ‘dissent’ towards the inequities that subordinate marginalized students (e.g. poli- cies, curriculum, funding structures, and testing standards), but also a source of ‘affirmation’ that helps develop positive cultural/racial/ethnic identities (Jennings & Lynn, 2005, p. 192). Such approaches and class material challenge color-blindness, whiteness, meritocracy, assimilation, and conformity in K-12 schools; they also critique deficit thinking about the educability of Students of Color. Moreover, critical race pedagogy aims to revolutionize classrooms into sites where marginalized students flourish (Leonardo, 2004, 2009; Lynn, 1999; Robinson, 1997; Stovall, 2006a). Thus, critical race pedagogy utilizes various instructional approaches and race-based content that, at minimum, both challenge mainstream discourses and legitimize the experiential knowledge of Students of Color...
Most of the literature documenting challenges to pedagogies – like critical race pedagogy – that unmask and dismantle systems of oppression concern the reactions and sentiments of white students. In particular, much emphasis is placed on how both white and non-white educators face multiple challenges in their efforts to name and interrogate race and whiteness among the nation’s predominantly white college students (Johnson, Rich, & Cargile, 2008). Simpson, Causey, and Williams (2007) argue that classroom spaces mirror contemporary society’s dysfunctional color-blind or post-racial discourses (Johnson & Bhatt, 2003; Roberts, Bell, & Murphy, 2008), resulting in ‘heightened tension, resistance to or denial of raced readings of reality, rigorous avoidance of race issues’ (Simpson et al., 2007, p. 34). Notably, the current millennial generation of college students present a particular challenge to these types of pedagogical approaches, because although they may have more tolerant racial attitudes, they are invested in a post-racial world which they believe is better integrated and more egalitarian than years past, resulting in a skewed understanding of racism (Mueller, 2013).
Sonya M. Alemán & Sarita Gaytán (2016): ‘It doesn’t speak to me’: understanding student of color resistance to critical race pedagogy, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2016.1242801
Regardless of one's ideological persuasions, there are good faith arguments to be made for and against critical race pedagogy and it driving classroom behaviour by teachers who may lack the training, skills and knowledge to implement it effectively.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
My post disappeared. But I was originally asking for discussion what is the debate of why critical race theory as a problem?
I feel it's common sense. I posted a video that described it without argumentative leanings. It's hard to keep track of interview or two people talk news and shows so I rarely watch them.
Is it possible to explain more of the OP?
I feel it's common sense. I posted a video that described it without argumentative leanings. It's hard to keep track of interview or two people talk news and shows so I rarely watch them.
Is it possible to explain more of the OP?
Last edited:
That is interesting. I also agree with making it illegal for officers to tamper with body cameras, with having them wear body cameras (mandated by their city or community not at a federal level). I may agree with this 'Bad actor database' or may not, but I can't contrive the details surrounding it. I think they are talking about something like the sex offender registry but am not sure.
Perhaps we could start by changing the term. Instead of Police we should have 3 branches. 1 Janitorial -- handling detective work and cleanup of crime sites. 2 Toughies -- handling evictions, traffic tickets, armed responses, etc. 3. Repair -- a social arm designed to mitigate harm, to decrease crime.
I also agree that 911 survey is significant. If 50% of calls don't require police then its a good idea to train the right people to answer those calls. Something should change. We can do better and possibly for less $$, too.
The police force develops gradually from a civilian janitorial service. In conception it is a do-all force: serve and protect. Its time to add to that: repair. Keep in mind that the verb 'Police' means 'Cleanup', literally; and the noun 'Police' comes from that. What does it mean to police? If you are camping you don't leave a mess. You police your site before moving on. It was always was the 'Clean up' group, which then also became a kind of security force. Its always been a kind of do-all thing, but a lot has changed about how we think about the mentally ill. They aren't something to clean up. They are something to fix.
We no longer mix hardened criminals with the mentally ill and don't toss them all into asylums together. We used to. Therefore in modern times it makes sense to also have different people handle criminals and the mentally ill, to answer calls that clearly don't require brute force and to not subject an under-trained security force to situations they aren't prepared for.
Epic Beard Man
Bearded Philosopher
Apparently you like to disagree just to disagree. Even in the brief discussion we've had you haven't posted facts about CRT in your defense which heavily discusses systemic racism. You've cited one "scholar" but hasn't disproven CRT in fact if universities across the country had an issue teaching graduate students this subject it wouldn't be in our curriculum.
So wait a minute. The man actually teaches CRT. I could understand a man who doesn't teach it makes these claims that is taught at the graduate university level could be suspicious but the man is literally a professor and you're questioning his judgment? Who are you? Are you of graduate education and have you studied any social science at the graduate level to make such claims? I actually took this for my MSW and you couldn't be further from the truth.
What irks me about people like you who haven't even studied CRT make these claims especially from someone who teaches the course and is knowledgeable more than you on the subject have the audacity to challenge his claims considering the main aspect of CRT speaks on systemic racism which is quantifiable. This is clearly legal scholarship that has been taught at the university level for over 40 years and somehow on religiousforums.com you can contradict its framework that highlights systemic racism as something being taught in K-12 when the facts state otherwise? SMH
Because there is no proof that it is being taught in K-12. Many idiotic conservatives have conflated CRT with the 1619 project (or condemn both). You had said nothing significant here, just parroting conservative right-wing talking points.
Your reference was speculative and did not substantiate its claims with quantifiable proof. Do you believe racism exist? If yes then I would ask do you believe systemic racism exists? If no then you'd have to prove how Jim Crow, Reconstruction, Redlining, Gentrification, The inequities of the Judicial system while punishing black and white criminals, etc are not systemic. My guess is you cannot because systemic racism still exists and therefore since you ultimately disagree with CRT must prove systemic racism does not exist.
Augustus
…
Are you saying he doesn't misrepresent what he said at 1.55?
How?
Can you explain rationally why the author of the peer-reviewed article that is pro-critical race pedagogy should be dismissed out of hand as a "scholar"?
My point: The Prof is misrepresenting the argument of the other chap, I shall explain how...
You reply: "How dare you say the Prof doesn't understand CRT!!!!!! Look at mine and his credentials!!!!!"
Are you saying being an expert on CRT makes it impossible to strawman a person in a TV interview? Are you saying for MSW you 'actually took' a course on "What Major Williams said in one TV interview?"
Of course not, so why is it relevant to what I said?
My point: People end up talking past each other as one group focus on defining CRT as a graduate topic in its original legal context and then
(correctly) claim that it's not taught in k-12. Whereas others (also correctly) note its influence has spread into other areas. One of these is teaching, and critical race pedagogy does indeed influence what happens in k-12 classrooms.
Your reply: It's only legal scholarship and has no influence on k-12!!!!! The man on the TV said so so it must be facts!!!
Might be why you keep misreading things. Keeping it still might improve your ability to read and respond accurately.
Did you open the article? It was the literature review in an article supporting CRT influenced education. It wasn't "speculative".
Any reader can check for themselves - CRT has influenced teaching pedagogy to some extent and there are hundreds of scholarly articles that explain this written by people who are promoting this methodology.
For anyone reading who cares - here are some scholarly sources that are written to promote CRT in education and are thus not some "right wing conspiracy"
I could post dozens more, or you can search for yourself on Google Scholar.
CRT and K-12 Education
Here, our discussion highlights works that emphasize what we believe are the important contributions of CRT in K-12 education, keeping in mind the important precautions offered by Ladson-Billings (2005). This discussion is not intended to exclude other work; rather, the work we highlight here can be characterized as a deeply engaged application of CRT. Accordingly, the work we review here demonstrates how CRT is used to locate how race and racism manifest themselves throughout the K-12 pipeline, and more importantly, this work offers us tools that allow us to engage these issues in the classroom, in the context of policy, and in community work. From issues of pedagogy, curriculum, to leadership, policy, and school politics, CRT in education highlights the persistence of racism across education...
The depth of this work demonstrates the necessity of CRT in education, illuminating that we cannot truly assess, respond, and promote educational research and praxis devoid of the deep and entrenched nature of White supremacy in U.S. Society. Certainly, the shared themes explored by these texts are the analyses and responses to the continuing inequities (Ladson-Billings, 2009) found in K-12. Furthermore, current educational climate dictates that no matter a democratic or republican agenda, the neoliberalization of education, the increasing onslaught of corporate interests in controlling public education (Au, 2011; Pierce, 2012), we continue to be on a fast track in which education continues to privilege the rich and underserve the poor (Au, 2014; Cook & Dixon, 2013; Giroux, 2004; Pierce, 2012; Stovall, 2013).
Critical Race Theory in Education: A Review of Past Literature and a Look to the Future María C. Ledesma and Dolores Calderón
https://www.researchgate.net/profil...-Past-Literature-and-a-Look-to-the-Future.pdf
I enter this teacher action research project with an interest in studying how I, as a high school teacher, developed a critical race pedagogy (CRP) curriculum for students in an out-of-school context. My intrigue with race started at an early age growing up in Oakland, California, where my classmates were primarily of African American, Central American, and Southeast Asian descent. As a Southeast Asian student in Oakland schools, even with 100% students of color in my classes, my teachers in school rarely talked about race or racism. Prior to my graduate studies, I taught in Richmond, California for almost a decade, working exclusively with lowincome students of color. I walked away from the teaching profession dissatisfied with the fixation on standardized testing at the peak of No Child Left Behind. I entered my doctoral program haunted by the limitations I encountered as an educator for social justice. Signing on as a graduate student instructor teaching historically marginalized youth in a teacher pipeline program, I envisioned this as a redemptive opportunity for me to develop a curriculum that bolstered racial consciousness in students.
In Real Time From Theory to Practice in a Critical Race Pedagogy Classroom - Van T. Lac
https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1146&context=ie
Completely irrelevant to anything I said.
If systemic racism exists, that wouldn't change whether or not your prof misrepresented the other chap or whether or not CRT influenced pedagogy influences school classroom behaviour.
Do you accept that critical race pedagogy is a real thing and can legitimately be said to derive from CRT? I didn't argue it was good or bad, just that it exists.
If so we agree, your post was wasted, if not how can you explain the large numbers of scholarly articles on the topic? A "right wing conspiracy'?
Last edited:
Augustus
…
And no rational person can deny that any complex problem like systemic racism has multiple potential (partial) solutions, some of which may end up improving the situation, others that will have minimal effect, and others still that will makes things worse.
On this issue, many people seem to think that even questioning whether any aspects of one broad framework aiming to solve this complex problem are likely to be beneficial or problematic is necessarily a bad-faith act born of ignorance and racism.
No rational person can deny that this is a terrible approach that is symptomatic of the infantile political culture that exists on 'both sides' of the political divide in many Western nations (mainly among those who can only think of issues in terms of 'sides' representing good and evil).
Augustus
…
I'd say the people who think purely in terms of 'sides' are the 'evil' ones whichever 'side' they belong to...
BS the racists are the evil side, and they're the ones fighting CRT being taught in our Universities
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
CRT has been lauded as being a form of social constructivism that has been labeled as being academic.
As I see it. It's activism that is being taught here.
As I see it. It's activism that is being taught here.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Or fuels it further.
rubbish
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Augustus
…
To be fair, they seem to be a bunch of nutjobs who married fringe forms of black nationalism with white patriot militia type nonsense.
It's not got anything to do with CRT or its derivatives.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Maybe not directly, but indirectly.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
Here's an article that's too long for you to read instead:
Critical race theory: What it is and what it isn't