United States | News & Politics

Some districts are putting topics such as slavery in the CRT bucket

Do you have an example? I can absolutely believe that some districts (particularly in N. Florida) would do that, but that seems to go against the actual curriculum standards that I've seen (linked below).

The new curriculum included instruction for middle school students that “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, can be applied for their personal benefit.” Are you kidding me?

That really depends on how it's being taught. The outcry I've seen has been saying, "they're saying slavery was a good thing!", which doesn't fit with the rest of the curriculum. This statement comes from Page 6 of the curriculum, which looks at the types of duties that slaves performed. There are 32 other pages related to slavery, and this is merely a clarification. That slaves were able to use skills they gained in slavery to start a new life is absolutely true, and that process is a lot more complicated than that (the social network among black communities was arguably much more important). I think this also gives context to the hate crimes committed after emancipation.

I went through a very similar discussion in the past, complete with examples outlining why I think the media response here is overblown, using citations and whatnot.

I don’t understand why they need to push this off at all? It’s education about their body…

The issue, I think, is that students aren't mature enough for a robust discussion about it, whereas they likely are at 6th grade. Boys usually don't hit puberty until 6th grade or later, so discussing it with them isn't appropriate when reproduction is pretty much the furthest thing from their mind.

That's why my issue is that it should be totally acceptable to discuss on a 1:1 basis with the school nurse, who is likely to handle any incidents that happen at school. Parents should be informed about that, and have the opportunity to handle it themselves.

And yeah, I think it's odd that sexual orientation/gender identity is delayed until 9th grade. That's quite easy to handle with a regular sex ed class, such as:

Female bodies go through puberty via changes like X, and male bodies go through puberty via changes like Y. Most of the time, biological males are sexually attracted to biological females, but that's not always the case. Some people are attracted to their same sex, and some don't experience sexual attraction despite going through these changes. Along the same lines, some people don't feel comfortable with their assigned sex, and they prefer to identify as another gender, and some use medication to adjust how their body works to fit the way they feel. There's no "right" or "wrong" here, just different ways people experience the changes in their bodies.

Now, back to the biological changes...

I'm sure there's a better way of putting that (I'm not trans or gay), but it seems like a natural segue to mention in a broader discussion about puberty. That should help students realize that maybe what they're feeling is different from what others feel, and that they should feel comfortable exploring that.

So yeah, a brief discussion on it seems appropriate around 6th or 7th grade, and perhaps go into more depth with the related social issues in higher grades.

I don’t think a parent should be allowed to rob a child of a proper education.

As long as the parent is the legal guardian of the child, they should have a central role in what gets taught at school. If the parent consistently blocks important instruction, that could rise to the level of abuse, and at that point the authorities should get involved to change legal guardianship.

I also believe that, as kids get older, they should have more and more say in their own education. So I could see parental control over their kids' education completely ending at age 16, which is the point where kids can be tried as adults in many jurisdictions, and in some jurisdictions kids may choose to drop out of school.

However, I don't want to ever get into a situation where governments get complete control over what gets taught in schools. A parent screwing over their child sucks, but a government screwing over many kids is much worse.

I don’t think if you believe contraceptives are evil that you get to rob your child from educating them on what condoms and birth control are. The same way if they are a flat earther or religion they shouldn’t be able to opt out of earth science or basic biology/evolution.

Sure. Parents should be required to educate their children at home on any subjects they choose to take their child out of, and the child will need to pass an exam showing they have at least the minimum understanding of the material. Parents should then be given the material, and it's on them to teach their child sufficiently.

I’m also against school choice

Are you against school choice generally, or just the way it has been implemented so far? One thing I don't like about current implementations is that it's on parents to transport their children to/from alternative schools, which means poorer households have less access because parents may not have the time or means to drop off and pick up their child.

How would you feel about this:

• city transit replaces school busses, and students get a free transit pass
• participating schools may not charge any tuition, fees, etc, and non-participating schools don't get any financial assistance
• participating schools must provide free lunches, and free breakfasts must be provided to those who meet income qualifications
• school counselors assist students on finding appropriate transit routes
• additional funding goes to schools that provide special needs resources, otherwise schools get funding based on headcount

This allows schools to specialize to attract students, much like universities specialize.