GaryK wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 1:55 pm
And the only reason she would have been the only black person in the class with that teacher was because the principal had already segregated the classes. This is not about what you are suggesting.
I’m unsure of what you’re trying to say. I agree that the principal specifically put the Black students in certain classes so they were together, but I’m not sure if that’s what you think happened. You do think it was all white and all black classes?
Also, could you explain in some more detail how this would be a practical outworking of CRT? Like, what aspect of CRT goes through what specific steps to lead to this happening? I’m trying to get a clearer understanding of your thought process.
You used the term "well intentioned" and I'm trying to understand what is "well intentioned" about segregating classes by color, when the civil rights movement worked so hard to end this very thing. I understood you to be suggesting that the principal was "well-intentioned" to not want to see only one black child in a class, which is not what this incident is about. Maybe I misunderstood you.
It seems clear to me that there were all black classes in this case. Otherwise, why would the school district stepped in to stop the practice?
My question about CRT is whether the recent push to understand the oppressor/oppressed dynamic, which I understand to be one of the main components of CRT, allows for things like this incident to happen?
Your facts are simply wrong.
1. There were no "all black" classes at this school. there aren't nearly enough black students to even have all-black classes.
2. Many other parents both black and white have since come forward to say that the entire narrative is wrong and black students weren't being concentrated into just a few classes and that this fact is easy enough to verify by looking at the school yearbooks which show no concentrations of black students into single classes.
3. No, this incident has nothing to do with CRT. In fact the facts don't appear to even support the initial claim of segregated classes.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
I’m unsure of what you’re trying to say. I agree that the principal specifically put the Black students in certain classes so they were together, but I’m not sure if that’s what you think happened. You do think it was all white and all black classes?
Also, could you explain in some more detail how this would be a practical outworking of CRT? Like, what aspect of CRT goes through what specific steps to lead to this happening? I’m trying to get a clearer understanding of your thought process.
You used the term "well intentioned" and I'm trying to understand what is "well intentioned" about segregating classes by color, when the civil rights movement worked so hard to end this very thing. I understood you to be suggesting that the principal was "well-intentioned" to not want to see only one black child in a class, which is not what this incident is about. Maybe I misunderstood you.
It seems clear to me that there were all black classes in this case. Otherwise, why would the school district stepped in to stop the practice?
My question about CRT is whether the recent push to understand the oppressor/oppressed dynamic, which I understand to be one of the main components of CRT, allows for things like this incident to happen?
If there were all Black classes then I’m in complete agreement that it was wrong and segregation. I can’t see how anyone could think that’s a good idea in this situation. But I’m also not seeing anything that explicitly says there were all Black classes. It seems that would have been noticed years ago and called out as unacceptable. It would be very hard to hide something like that. But dividing a handful of Black students amongst white students in two classrooms, rather than across all six, that could be done much easier.
Do you agree that there were some all white classes? I have seen no reporting saying that there were white students in the "black classes". The principal allegedly told the mother that she wanted to create a community, whatever that means in this case.
I’m unsure of what you’re trying to say. I agree that the principal specifically put the Black students in certain classes so they were together, but I’m not sure if that’s what you think happened. You do think it was all white and all black classes?
Also, could you explain in some more detail how this would be a practical outworking of CRT? Like, what aspect of CRT goes through what specific steps to lead to this happening? I’m trying to get a clearer understanding of your thought process.
You used the term "well intentioned" and I'm trying to understand what is "well intentioned" about segregating classes by color, when the civil rights movement worked so hard to end this very thing. I understood you to be suggesting that the principal was "well-intentioned" to not want to see only one black child in a class, which is not what this incident is about. Maybe I misunderstood you.
It seems clear to me that there were all black classes in this case. Otherwise, why would the school district stepped in to stop the practice?
My question about CRT is whether the recent push to understand the oppressor/oppressed dynamic, which I understand to be one of the main components of CRT, allows for things like this incident to happen?
Your facts are simply wrong.
1. There were no "all black" classes at this school. there aren't nearly enough black students to even have all-black classes.
2. Many other parents both black and white have since come forward to say that the entire narrative is wrong and black students weren't being concentrated into just a few classes and that this fact is easy enough to verify by looking at the school yearbooks which show no concentrations of black students into single classes.
3. No, this incident has nothing to do with CRT. In fact the facts don't appear to even support the initial claim of segregated classes.
Do you have first hand access to the facts in this case? How do you know this has nothing to do with CRT? Did you talk to the folks involved in this case?
What did the school district correct if there was nothing wrong with what the principal did? That's what you seem to be implying.
GaryK wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 2:34 pm
You used the term "well intentioned" and I'm trying to understand what is "well intentioned" about segregating classes by color, when the civil rights movement worked so hard to end this very thing. I understood you to be suggesting that the principal was "well-intentioned" to not want to see only one black child in a class, which is not what this incident is about. Maybe I misunderstood you.
It seems clear to me that there were all black classes in this case. Otherwise, why would the school district stepped in to stop the practice?
My question about CRT is whether the recent push to understand the oppressor/oppressed dynamic, which I understand to be one of the main components of CRT, allows for things like this incident to happen?
Your facts are simply wrong.
1. There were no "all black" classes at this school. there aren't nearly enough black students to even have all-black classes.
2. Many other parents both black and white have since come forward to say that the entire narrative is wrong and black students weren't being concentrated into just a few classes and that this fact is easy enough to verify by looking at the school yearbooks which show no concentrations of black students into single classes.
3. No, this incident has nothing to do with CRT. In fact the facts don't appear to even support the initial claim of segregated classes.
Do you have first hand access to the facts in this case? How do you know this has nothing to do with CRT? Did you talk to the folks involved in this case?
What did the school district correct if there was nothing wrong with what the principal did? That's what you seem to be implying.
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
As for the extent to which classes were organized around race? The initial claims of the first parent that they were, have been contradicted by multiple other parents who say otherwise and point to the school yearbooks as proof that she is wrong. Am I in possession of a school yearbook from this school? No. But I have no reason to question their statements.
As for CRT? Apparently you are unclear as to what CRT actually is. CRT is an analytical tool used by researchers when examining the impacts of laws on society. It is not some formula used to organize elementary school classrooms. So no, this has nothing to do with CRT.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
1. There were no "all black" classes at this school. there aren't nearly enough black students to even have all-black classes.
2. Many other parents both black and white have since come forward to say that the entire narrative is wrong and black students weren't being concentrated into just a few classes and that this fact is easy enough to verify by looking at the school yearbooks which show no concentrations of black students into single classes.
3. No, this incident has nothing to do with CRT. In fact the facts don't appear to even support the initial claim of segregated classes.
Do you have first hand access to the facts in this case? How do you know this has nothing to do with CRT? Did you talk to the folks involved in this case?
What did the school district correct if there was nothing wrong with what the principal did? That's what you seem to be implying.
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
As for the extent to which classes were organized around race? The initial claims of the first parent that they were, have been contradicted by multiple other parents who say otherwise and point to the school yearbooks as proof that she is wrong. Am I in possession of a school yearbook from this school? No. But I have no reason to question their statements.
As for CRT? Apparently you are unclear as to what CRT actually is. CRT is an analytical tool used by researchers when examining the impacts of laws on society. It is not some formula used to organize elementary school classrooms. So no, this has nothing to do with CRT.
Again, please explain what the school district corrected.
Ken wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 3:07 pm
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
Do you have first hand access to the facts in this case? How do you know this has nothing to do with CRT? Did you talk to the folks involved in this case?
What did the school district correct if there was nothing wrong with what the principal did? That's what you seem to be implying.
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
As for the extent to which classes were organized around race? The initial claims of the first parent that they were, have been contradicted by multiple other parents who say otherwise and point to the school yearbooks as proof that she is wrong. Am I in possession of a school yearbook from this school? No. But I have no reason to question their statements.
As for CRT? Apparently you are unclear as to what CRT actually is. CRT is an analytical tool used by researchers when examining the impacts of laws on society. It is not some formula used to organize elementary school classrooms. So no, this has nothing to do with CRT.
Again, please explain what the school district corrected.
I’m not Ken, but I’m assuming they changed it so that Black students could be dispersed among all six of 2nd grade teachers, rather than just in two specific classes where they were grouped with other white students too.
As to the number of students, 2nd grade has 98, and 12 of those are black.
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
As for the extent to which classes were organized around race? The initial claims of the first parent that they were, have been contradicted by multiple other parents who say otherwise and point to the school yearbooks as proof that she is wrong. Am I in possession of a school yearbook from this school? No. But I have no reason to question their statements.
As for CRT? Apparently you are unclear as to what CRT actually is. CRT is an analytical tool used by researchers when examining the impacts of laws on society. It is not some formula used to organize elementary school classrooms. So no, this has nothing to do with CRT.
Again, please explain what the school district corrected.
I’m not Ken, but I’m assuming they changed it so that Black students could be dispersed among all six of 2nd grade teachers, rather than just in two specific classes where they were grouped with other white students too.
As to the number of students, 2nd grade has 98, and 12 of those are black.
So if there were white students in the black classes they wouldn't be segregated, would they?
Do you have first hand access to the facts in this case? How do you know this has nothing to do with CRT? Did you talk to the folks involved in this case?
What did the school district correct if there was nothing wrong with what the principal did? That's what you seem to be implying.
You made the claim that there were all-black classes at this school. That is a claim that is unsupported by ANY of the news coverage and something that would be impossible because there simply aren't nearly enough black students at this school to even form all-black classes. So you are just completely wrong on this point.
As for the extent to which classes were organized around race? The initial claims of the first parent that they were, have been contradicted by multiple other parents who say otherwise and point to the school yearbooks as proof that she is wrong. Am I in possession of a school yearbook from this school? No. But I have no reason to question their statements.
As for CRT? Apparently you are unclear as to what CRT actually is. CRT is an analytical tool used by researchers when examining the impacts of laws on society. It is not some formula used to organize elementary school classrooms. So no, this has nothing to do with CRT.
Again, please explain what the school district corrected.
It appears that they reiterated district policy that students should not be assigned to classes by race. It is unclear to what extent that actually changed anything, because it is unclear whether it was actually happening as described in the complaint. This all happened last spring. The new school year starts soon. To the extent that anything changed or even needed to change is not clear from the reporting.
I expect from all the blow-up over this that they will now be FORCED to distribute students according to race rather than in some other race-blind random distribution that might result by chance in a class with a higher-than-average number of black students. If as a result of this national news coverage they now make sure that each of the 6 classes gets 2 black students, that is just as much of a racial-based distribution of students as having two classes with 6 each.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
GaryK wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 3:10 pm
Again, please explain what the school district corrected.
I’m not Ken, but I’m assuming they changed it so that Black students could be dispersed among all six of 2nd grade teachers, rather than just in two specific classes where they were grouped with other white students too.
As to the number of students, 2nd grade has 98, and 12 of those are black.
So if there were white students in the black classes they wouldn't be segregated, would they?
I guess that’s a matter of opinion. Technically, no they aren’t segregated because they’re with other white students. However, it meant that if a particular (Black) student would have been better served by having a particular teacher, but that teacher didn’t teach one of the ‘black’ classes, then that seems like the child is being put at a disadvantage because of his/her color.
I’m not sure segregation was the best term to be using. Because as has clearly happened in this thread, we associate certain things with that word. So we have this big debacle amongst ourselves, where I think we all feel the same about the situation once we are actually clear on what that situation is. But for the longest time, we are talking about two completely different things.
(All this other stuff aside: as someone who has fought more than once to make sure my child’s educational needs were being taken care of in a way that best suited them, I’m sympathetic to this mom’s plight. I just wish she would have framed it with better terminology, so we could discuss the actual issues, rather than having some stupid culture war over something that isn’t even happening.)