Tweet
1619 Project creator states the obvious -- "The 1619 Project is so important for young people." https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/l...rence-83607780
That's why, of course, she's created a 1619 Project curriculum that is now taught nationwide in at least 3500 classrooms as well as being adopted in toto by various city school districts such as Chicago and Buffalo and DC. https://www.educationnext.org/1619-p...nificant-cost/
So, yeah, that's shooting fish in a barrel.
What about other more CRT-based teaching.
Let's start with Illinois which has adopted the Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning Standards (https://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar...40000500R.html). It's worth reading the entire CRT (L) standards (I appreciate Illinois making it so fucking easy for me), but here's a nice snippet:
And as a sort of general summary document -- Culturally Response Teaching in the 50 states (https://d1y8sb8igg2f8e.cloudfront.ne...-28_130012.pdf)
CRT includes a number of different competencies including:
The paper goes on to assess how many states have statewide standards that address each competency. It's a little outdated because, e.g., California has fully adopted the CRT framework (as has Illinois).
Well, wait, Talent -- very clever -- you're using "Culturally Responsive Teaching" as a stand-in for "Critical Race Theory" -- you know, one CRT doesn't necessarily equal the other CRT! Hey -- fair point. Let's prove this shit up.
From the California FAQ on Critical Race Theory:
And then from the earlier-linked document summarizing Culturally Responsive Teaching:
Wait, so Gloria Ladson-Billings began applying principles of CRT to the field of education and Glorida Ladson-Billings is also the seminal creator and introduer of the term "culturally relevant pedagogy"? Well, shit, man, seems like there is a clear fucking straight-line from CRT to CRT. Good job, Talent -- you proved that shit up, HARD!
That's why, of course, she's created a 1619 Project curriculum that is now taught nationwide in at least 3500 classrooms as well as being adopted in toto by various city school districts such as Chicago and Buffalo and DC. https://www.educationnext.org/1619-p...nificant-cost/
So, yeah, that's shooting fish in a barrel.
What about other more CRT-based teaching.
Let's start with Illinois which has adopted the Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning Standards (https://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar...40000500R.html). It's worth reading the entire CRT (L) standards (I appreciate Illinois making it so fucking easy for me), but here's a nice snippet:
Systems of Oppression – Culturally responsive teachers and leaders understand that there are systems in our society, especially, but not limited to, our school system, that create and reinforce inequities, thereby creating oppressive conditions. Educators work actively against these systems in their everyday roles in educational institutions. The culturally responsive teacher and leader will:
1) Understand the difference between prejudice, discrimination, racism, and how to operate at the interpersonal, intergroup, and institutional levels.
2) Collaborate with colleagues to determine how students from different backgrounds experience the classroom, school, or district.
3) Know and understand how the system of inequity has impacted them as an educator.
4) Understand how current curriculum and approaches to teaching impact students who are not a part of the dominant culture.
5) Be aware of the effects of power and privilege and the need for social advocacy and social action to better empower diverse students and communities.
6) Understand how a system of inequity creates rules regarding student punishment that negatively impact students of color.
7) Understand how a system of inequity reinforces certain suppositions as the norm.
1) Understand the difference between prejudice, discrimination, racism, and how to operate at the interpersonal, intergroup, and institutional levels.
2) Collaborate with colleagues to determine how students from different backgrounds experience the classroom, school, or district.
3) Know and understand how the system of inequity has impacted them as an educator.
4) Understand how current curriculum and approaches to teaching impact students who are not a part of the dominant culture.
5) Be aware of the effects of power and privilege and the need for social advocacy and social action to better empower diverse students and communities.
6) Understand how a system of inequity creates rules regarding student punishment that negatively impact students of color.
7) Understand how a system of inequity reinforces certain suppositions as the norm.
Teachers are the drivers of culturally responsive practices in schools and classrooms. But without the appropriate training and support, even the most well-meaning teachers can unwittingly provide instruction that is irrelevant, ineffective, and even antagonistic to today’s diverse learners. Research concludes that recruiting a more racially diverse teaching workforce can dramatically improve cultural responsiveness in schools, but demographic parity is unlikely to be achieved in the coming years. Therefore, all teachers, regardless of background, benefit from support in reaching the diverse learners they are likely to serve.
Unfortunately, teacher preparation programs and professional development systems across the country are not sufficiently preparing educators to bring CRT to life in the classroom. Consider: while some educator preparation programs are now required to offer coursework on teaching diverse students, these courses are often narrow and disconnected from the mainstream curriculum. In-service support and development fall short as well, as confirmed by teachers themselves. For instance, a 2018 survey of New York City teachers conducted by the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools, found that fewer than one in three teachers had received ongoing professional development on how to address issues of race and ethnicity in the classroom.
Unfortunately, teacher preparation programs and professional development systems across the country are not sufficiently preparing educators to bring CRT to life in the classroom. Consider: while some educator preparation programs are now required to offer coursework on teaching diverse students, these courses are often narrow and disconnected from the mainstream curriculum. In-service support and development fall short as well, as confirmed by teachers themselves. For instance, a 2018 survey of New York City teachers conducted by the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools, found that fewer than one in three teachers had received ongoing professional development on how to address issues of race and ethnicity in the classroom.
Competency 2: Recognize and redress bias in the system Culturally responsive educators seek to deepen their understanding of how social markers (such as race, ethnicity, social class, and language) influence the educational opportunities that learners receive. Sonia Nieto suggests that teachers ask questions like: “Where are the best teachers assigned?” “Which students take advanced courses?” and “Where are resources allocated?” Teachers further engage with literature and professional learning opportunities to learn more about how institutional racism and other forms of bias (e.g., racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism) at an institutional level can result in disadvantaging some groups of learners while privileging others. Teachers who are informed about institutional bias, accept that not all learners are equally rewarded for their hard work. They advocate for the disruption of harmful school and district-level practices, policies, and norms. Conversely, teachers who are poorly informed about institutional biases may blame learners and perceived cultural deficiencies for academic achievement disparities.
Well, wait, Talent -- very clever -- you're using "Culturally Responsive Teaching" as a stand-in for "Critical Race Theory" -- you know, one CRT doesn't necessarily equal the other CRT! Hey -- fair point. Let's prove this shit up.
From the California FAQ on Critical Race Theory:
How does CRT relate to education?
In 1995, the scholars Gloria Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate began applying the principles of CRT to the field of education as a way to understand inequities within the education system. CRT argues that legal interventions, while helpful and essential to the cause of eradicating discriminatory aspects of the education system, are not by themselves sufficient to promote equality in schools. For example, merely ending legal segregation did not appropriately address de facto racism nor the systemic impact of factors like housing, demographic patterns, and funding mechanisms and decisions.
In 1995, the scholars Gloria Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate began applying the principles of CRT to the field of education as a way to understand inequities within the education system. CRT argues that legal interventions, while helpful and essential to the cause of eradicating discriminatory aspects of the education system, are not by themselves sufficient to promote equality in schools. For example, merely ending legal segregation did not appropriately address de facto racism nor the systemic impact of factors like housing, demographic patterns, and funding mechanisms and decisions.
What is Culturally Responsive Teaching?
Several frameworks exist for culturally responsive approaches (e.g., culturally responsive education, culturally relevant teaching, and culturally congruent teaching), each outlining various components. Capturing the history and broad base of scholarship on CRT is not possible here as there are decades of research and analysis. However, outlining the seminal work of key scholars and teacher educators Gloria Ladson-Billings, Geneva Gay, and Django Paris is a necessary starting point. Over two decades ago, Gloria Ladson-Billings introduced the term culturally relevant pedagogy to describe a form of teaching that calls for engaging learners whose experiences and cultures are traditionally excluded from mainstream settings.
Several frameworks exist for culturally responsive approaches (e.g., culturally responsive education, culturally relevant teaching, and culturally congruent teaching), each outlining various components. Capturing the history and broad base of scholarship on CRT is not possible here as there are decades of research and analysis. However, outlining the seminal work of key scholars and teacher educators Gloria Ladson-Billings, Geneva Gay, and Django Paris is a necessary starting point. Over two decades ago, Gloria Ladson-Billings introduced the term culturally relevant pedagogy to describe a form of teaching that calls for engaging learners whose experiences and cultures are traditionally excluded from mainstream settings.
Comment