Mormons and Critical Race Theory

[Res Ipsa]

Thanks for the comments, sock puppet. I suggested teaching critical race theory is a positive. And if you're mistaking me for some form of a fox News enthusiasts, or something other than a classical liberal toy are greatly mistaken. I'd say I'm largely behind what you are proposing.

I would prefer that actual history and science be taught. We can start off with the fact that the concept “race” is outmoded, inaccurate, and deleterious. Then we can teach about the continuing history of its centuries of havoc and destruction from colonialism and slavery to Nazi Germany, Jim Crow, and mass incarceration/voter suppression.

I agree. I don't think critical race theory should be taught as a course in primary or secondary schools. I question whether such a course would be appropriate as a lower division university course. I think it would be much more informative in a broader course addressing critical theory and its applications.

However, I think that critical race theory should inform how we teach history. And I think that's what your description of how to teach the history of race does. It doesn't teach that slavery was a bad thing that people used to do but now we're not racist at all. (A caricature, to be sure). But it teaches how racism has had longstanding effects on the structure of society. Science as well. I think we really downplay the role that the eugenics movement played in the United States. There are important lessons to be learned there that we don't talk about because they make us uncomfortable.

So, I'm completely on board with teaching actual history and science in primary and secondary schools. I think what is getting confused (not by you, but in the general discussion), is the distinction between teaching critical race theory in primary and secondary schools and steps that are being taken to make sure that students aren't being disadvantaged in the schools based on their race by the way education is structured. Schools, just like any institution or structure in society, can be a source of structural racism. If they are, that's a problem we should fix.

[Marcus]

Could you give an example of this? Or explain why you think this? The link you gave talks about changing requirements, but it does not say it is race-based. I asked for examples of your comment before, but wanted to ask again in case you missed it.

It’s been happening for a number of years.

Under a dramatic new approach to rating public schools, Illinois students of different backgrounds no longer will be held to the same standards -- with Latinos and blacks, low-income children and other groups having lower targets than whites for passing state exams, the Tribune has found. In reading, for example, 85 percent of white third- through eighth-grade students statewide will be expected to pass state tests by 2019, compared with about 73 percent for Latinos and 70 percent for black students, an analysis of state and federal records shows.

The concept is part of a fundamental and, according to critics, troubling shift in how public schools and students will be judged after the federal government recently allowed Illinois to abandon unpopular requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.A key NCLB measure long considered unreachable -- that 100 percent of students must pass state exams -- will be eliminated. But the complex new approach of different standards for different groups is troubling to civil rights activists, who are not convinced that school districts will be held accountable for failing to educate minority students, and to some local educators, who say the lowered expectations will send a negative message to students.
-Chicago Tribune

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-soft-big ... ids-alike/

https://www.brookings.edu/research/race ... -mobility/

SAT scores are not being required now at some major universities. What does the future hold?

You can hop around the web and find similar references showing that ‘equity’ has become the primary driver and individual achievement based on high achievement in a rigorous educational environment has taken a backseat.

Rather than finding ways to lift ALL boats the educational establishment has dumb downed requirements across the board for the sake of equity. This can’t be good as we (the United States) are competing in the world marketplace.

Focusing SO MUCH on racial preferences and perceived inequalities…and dividing students into privileged and disadvantaged, with no solutions except dumbing down the education for ALL students, is going to end in a sad state of affairs.

interesting. Your comment was made in the context of your original complaint about (as yet nonexistent examples of )teaching critical race theory, but this above is just a different direction- maybe you can start a different thread,?

The second part of my question explained the context, which i see you completely avoided. Here is your quote again-

critical race theory implementation introduces the threat that the mathematical principles discovered by Euclid, Fibonacci, Pythagoras, Archimedes, and Newton be canceled because they are dead white men and not non-binary or BIPOC.

Can you show this is actually happening?

Yesterday I spent a LOT of time on this thread....

I came in and set off a bomb.

If by bomb you mean innuendo unsupported by fact, then sure, a bomb. Gadianton's description of your "bomb" technique is more accurate, IMNSHO.
: D

[honorentheos]

Hi Res -

I was originally going to just agree with your comments because, in total, I do agree with them. But on reflection I think we need to dig in deeper into one of your points still. That being the following:

I think that, if one takes critical theory seriously, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and equality of opportunity. Likewise, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and oppression or institutional racism. The following two things can be true: western liberal democracy has been a vehicle of oppression and western liberal democracy can be a vehicle to provide equal opportunity for all. I'm sure if you or I look hard enough, we could find authors or speakers who argue that western liberal democracy should be rejected because of how it has been used in the past. I disagree with those people. I also disagree with people who equate criticism for the effects that have resulted from western liberal democracy with rejection of western liberal democracy. My position is, if we truly believe in the ideals of western liberal democracy, we should face up to the fact that believing in or teaching the ideals is not enough to obtain the benefits of western liberal democracy.

My initial instinct was to subsume the first few sentences into the conclusion you drew that, if we believe in the ideals we need to face up to the fact that believing in them or teaching them is not enough to realize them. The next paragraph that I didn't quote, stating that we need to confront the failures and make attempts at improvement, are ones with which I wholeheartedly agree.

But the bolded statement wouldn't go away from my mind and, as I thought about it more, I came to question what it is that you mean when you say that critical theory detaches the ideals of western liberal democracy from equality of opportunity as well as oppression and institutional racism? My belief is that the ideals are essential to establishing equality of opportunity, of improving equality of conditions needed to remove the institutional racism and oppression so those ideals can be better realized. So, I guess I'm looking for an expansion on your thought here so I better understand it.

[Res Ipsa]

See you on this thread tomorrow.

With practice, I might become as prescient as canpakes.

[Res Ipsa]

Thanks, Honor. I think you accomplished exactly what you set out to do.

Since my aim was to defend the proposition that our strength comes in affirming the ideal of seeking equality of opportunity or conditions, and better realizing them rather than rejecting this premise, I indeed hope I did. Thank you.

I think that, if one takes critical theory seriously, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and equality of opportunity. Likewise, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and oppression or institutional racism. The following two things can be true: western liberal democracy has been a vehicle of oppression and western liberal democracy can be a vehicle to provide equal opportunity for all. I'm sure if you or I look hard enough, we could find authors or speakers who argue that western liberal democracy should be rejected because of how it has been used in the past. I disagree with those people. I also disagree with people who equate criticism for the effects that have resulted from western liberal democracy with rejection of western liberal democracy. My position is, if we truly believe in the ideals of western liberal democracy, we should face up to the fact that believing in or teaching the ideals is not enough to obtain the benefits of western liberal democracy.

In my opinion, both the strength and the weakness of Critical Theory is that it cannot generate a plan that will get society to any given goal. What it leaves is with is try, check, try, check, try, check. It gives is a broader range of things to try, but provides no guarantee whatsoever that our attempts will achieve the desired result. It requires a willingness to honestly and critically appraise measures we take with respect to problems and the humility to say, "well, it doesn't look like that worked. Let's try something else." Which is, of course, at complete odds with our current political dynamic in the U.S.

I agree about the later paragraph. We have a lot of work to do, and there is an almost radical entrenchment of anti-enlightenment, anti-western liberal ideals draped in the flag even as the underlying principles behind it are trampled. We have to confront our failures to realize the ideals. I hope we do so in the context of first affirming the importance of the ideal itself, followed by an examination of what you pointed out - that disparate outcomes are a sign our biases may be blinding us to inequality in the conditions that demands change. How best to achieve that change? I don't fully know as I think the institutions of democracy are imperiled on all sides with little demonstration that behind that imperilment is a considered positive aim when articulated beyond platitudes.

And, I think it's fair to point out, there are anti-enlightenment forces at work on both ends of the political spectrum. Those who are committed to enlightenment values and liberal democracy are fighting a two-front (actually, multi-front) war to try and preserve the ideas and values that can make the U.S. a great country. It's like having a chronic case of whiplash.

I don't know how to make the change either. In my opinion, it requires a sense of humility that has almost vanished in American society. Or maybe it was never there at all.

[Marcus]

[addressing critical theory and its applications.

However, I think that critical race theory should inform how we teach history. And I think that's what your description of how to teach the history of race does. It doesn't teach that slavery was a bad thing that people used to do but now we're not racist at all. (A caricature, to be sure). But it teaches how racism has had longstanding effects on the structure of society. Science as well. I think we really downplay the role that the eugenics movement played in the United States. There are important lessons to be learned there that we don't talk about because they make us uncomfortable.

So, I'm completely on board with teaching actual history and science in primary and secondary schools. I think what is getting confused (not by you, but in the general discussion), is the distinction between teaching critical race theory in primary and secondary schools and steps that are being taken to make sure that students aren't being disadvantaged in the schools based on their race by the way education is structured.

exactly my issue with mg2's latest direction.

Schools, just like any institution or structure in society, can be a source of structural racism. If they are, that's a problem we should fix.

Agreed.

[Res Ipsa]

Hi Res -

I was originally going to just agree with your comments because, in total, I do agree with them. But on reflection I think we need to dig in deeper into one of your points still. That being the following:

I think that, if one takes critical theory seriously, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and equality of opportunity. Likewise, there is no necessary connection between the ideals of western liberal democracy and oppression or institutional racism. The following two things can be true: western liberal democracy has been a vehicle of oppression and western liberal democracy can be a vehicle to provide equal opportunity for all. I'm sure if you or I look hard enough, we could find authors or speakers who argue that western liberal democracy should be rejected because of how it has been used in the past. I disagree with those people. I also disagree with people who equate criticism for the effects that have resulted from western liberal democracy with rejection of western liberal democracy. My position is, if we truly believe in the ideals of western liberal democracy, we should face up to the fact that believing in or teaching the ideals is not enough to obtain the benefits of western liberal democracy.

My initial instinct was to subsume the first few sentences into the conclusion you drew that, if we believe in the ideals we need to face up to the fact that believing in them or teaching them is not enough to realize them. The next paragraph that I didn't quote, stating that we need to confront the failures and make attempts at improvement, are ones with which I wholeheartedly agree.

But the bolded statement wouldn't go away from my mind and, as I thought about it more, I came to question what it is that you mean when you say that critical theory detaches the ideals of western liberal democracy from equality of opportunity as well as oppression and institutional racism? My belief is that the ideals are essential to establishing equality of opportunity, of improving equality of conditions needed to remove the institutional racism and oppression so those ideals can be better realized. So, I guess I'm looking for an expansion on your thought here so I better understand it.

Please dig away. I learned Critical Theory in law school, but not in a course called Critical Theory. I learned it through the utterly charming case method of study (a la the Paper Chase), but with the method turned on its head. And I was left to figure out what it all meant mostly on my own. So, it's hard sometimes for me to articulate as a general concept something that I learned through repeated examples.

Your initial understanding is what I intended, but I can see why you found my wording problematic. It's easiest for me to illustrate in law. Classical legal theory postulated that judges decided cases by the application of discernible and neutral rules. Langdell proposed that we could discover those rules by studying cases. From the cases, we could infer the rules. And, once we knew the rules, we could deduce the correct result in any given case.

Between classical legal theory and Critical Legal Studies came a school of thought called Legal Realists. I believe they were the first recognized school fo thought to apply Critical Theory to law. One of the notions that they challenged was that general rules could ever dictate the results in a specific case. When I referred to the ideals of western liberal democracy, I'm analogizing to the general legal rules. And when I referred to equality of opportunity vs. oppression, I'm analogizing to the results in a specific case. If a general rule cannot dictate the results in a specific case, then we cannot simply rely on what appears to be a fair and neutral set of general principles to give us a fair and just society on the ground. We have to look at outcomes and not just be satisfied with theory.

I hope that is a better explanation.

[Gadianton]

I DO NOT come here to lie, link, and run. You are free to point out what you believe to be inaccuracies in what is said or linked to

I disagree, that's exactly what you did. Out of all the criticism of critical race theory that you provided links to, the point that apparently was most worthy of featuring as an excerpt in your post was a childish claim that critical race theory is canceling the principles of physics. The quote you provided is summarized by this; from the same paper:

Even at prestigious private schools, the principles of physics, such as Newton's Laws, are being canceled or renamed

When others have pointed out how silly that is, you refuse to back down. You refuse to investigate. You refuse to provide evidence. You halfheartedly looked for other claims that in your mind justify the quote, but aren't the same thing, and then say:

Deserves digging deeper. Maybe some else is up for it.

That's like one of your grade-school students telling you that a dog ate his homework, and when you contest it, the student tells you that a dog could have eaten his homework and it deserves digging into deeper. Maybe somebody else is up for figuring out if a dog ate his homework, but until then, the lie stands.

-----

Concerning MG's desperate link to that k12mathmatters paper:

But “data science” - computer science, statistics, and artificial intelligence- is built on the foundations of algebra, calculus, and logical thinking. While these mathematical fields are centuries old and sometimes more, they are arguably even more critical for today’s grand challenges than in the Sputnik era.

declares victory:

Why in the world would algebra and calculus be ‘boogy manned’ by the powers that be? Maybe American Thinker was NOT off base. Maybe I’m NOT so foolish.

Are the Fathers of algebra and calculus ‘approved’ by the WOKE?

Deserves digging deeper. Maybe some else is up for it.

To be fair: this example is not one of MG lying; this is MG's general lack of education showing.

The complaint about data science near the end of that paper has nothing to do with "woke" or cancelling math based on critical race theory or for any other reason. It's a continuation of an age-old dilemma where there's only so many hours in the day, and do you teach theory or practice? Data science is just an extension of a trend that began years ago with students using slide-rules, then calculators, then programmable calculators and mathematica software, and then...

Long before machine learning came to be, you could get a Phd in applied mathematics. That didn't mean the world was forgetting about fundamentals, as Phds were also handed out for pure mathematics.

It's a valid concern, but 1) it has nothing to do with "woke" or critical race theory, 2) it's highly unlikely that the sky is falling, and the world will forget how to do an integral. We're at yet another fork in the road that amounts to another division of labor in theory and practice. My guess is that even with the rise of data science, universities are handing out more degrees in pure mathematics than ever before. Number topology might ultimately be a deeper field, but creating an A.I. to beat another A.I. at chess isn't analytically light. There's always going to be more engineers and technicians than theoretical physicists and pure mathematicians. That's a good thing.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

… then we cannot simply rely on what appears to be a fair and neutral set of general principles to give us a fair and just society on the ground. We have to look at outcomes and not just be satisfied with theory.

At first blush what you propose is terrifying since it’s been tried over and over again with disastrous results. If Group A is failing to achieve the American Dream, whatever that actually means (I think Honor accurately portrays the American Dream as, pardon my summary, ‘getting a lot of crap’) then blaming the system that’s in place in 2022 is bananas. At what point do we keep leading horses to water that don’t want to drink water, while corralling our thoroughbreds who are thirsty af and don’t even need to be led? They’ll just run to the water and drink. Team Horse suffers when the thoroughbreds are hamstrung.

For example. Do we fight inequity by throwing money at designated groups because of historical sins? A short-term gain in the sense of their momentary happiness is achieved, but at what long-term cost? The problems of that policy are legion.

So, what outcomes are we actually looking to achieve? If we’re talking about achieving the opportunity of opportunity, then it exists. It may not be perfect in every situation, but people are allowed to pursue opportunity, and if that opportunity isn’t available to them, they’re free to form their own organizations or endeavors and carve out a living in some fashion.

If you take MG’s weird segue into ‘California calculus’ at face value there is something there. Not one person, practically speaking, is preventing anyone from cracking open a book and learning the material in 2022. You can attend a class, receive instruction, and study the material. If a particular demographic values the opportunities that is provided they’ll do it. If a demographic doesn’t, they won’t. The ‘outcomes’ are more tied to what the individual or their group values, and less about social inequality. The equality exists, which is the equality of opportunity. I don’t know how a municipality or state overcomes an individual’s desire, or lack thereof, to pursue opportunity.

Perhaps Honor simply cut through all the noise, and asked the right question. What are real aims or dreams we’re talking about here?

- Doc

[canpakes]

Could you give an example of this? Or explain why you think this? The link you gave talks about changing requirements, but it does not say it is race-based. I asked for examples of your comment before, but wanted to ask again in case you missed it.

It’s been happening for a number of years.

Under a dramatic new approach to rating public schools, Illinois students of different backgrounds no longer will be held to the same standards -- with Latinos and blacks, low-income children and other groups having lower targets than whites for passing state exams, the Tribune has found. In reading, for example, 85 percent of white third- through eighth-grade students statewide will be expected to pass state tests by 2019, compared with about 73 percent for Latinos and 70 percent for black students, an analysis of state and federal records shows.

The concept is part of a fundamental and, according to critics, troubling shift in how public schools and students will be judged after the federal government recently allowed Illinois to abandon unpopular requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.A key NCLB measure long considered unreachable -- that 100 percent of students must pass state exams -- will be eliminated. But the complex new approach of different standards for different groups is troubling to civil rights activists, who are not convinced that school districts will be held accountable for failing to educate minority students, and to some local educators, who say the lowered expectations will send a negative message to students.
-Chicago Tribune

You are referring to the 2015 decision allowing Illinois to set educational standards differing from the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act. Here’s some additional context from the State of Illinois-

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) is the K-12 federal education law. It reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and replaces No Child Left Behind. Signed into law on December 10, 2015, it returns significant management authority over K-12 education to the state and local school district. The law was designed to increase opportunities for local input and flexible decision making and will be phased in over the next few years. Many areas in the law provide opportunities to boost student achievement by building and strengthening before, afterschool and summer learning opportunities. ACT Now has developed a set of recommendations that demonstrate how afterschool programs are particularly suited to assist school districts in meeting their ESSA requirements as well as reaching their goal that students from all backgrounds are successful in college and their future careers.

https://actnowillinois.org/every-student-succeeds-act/

Is it possible that State legislators may have a better idea of the needs of students within their state to the extent that modifying a standardized national standard might be beneficial to students?

Rather than finding ways to lift ALL boats the educational establishment has dumb downed requirements across the board for the sake of equity. This can’t be good as we (the United States) are competing in the world marketplace.

Focusing SO MUCH on racial preferences and perceived inequalities…and dividing students into privileged and disadvantaged, with no solutions except dumbing down the education for ALL students, is going to end in a sad state of affairs.

And yet, your own link - in this same post from you - does not reveal that standards are being ‘dumbed down for ALL students’. It doesn’t talk about the standardized tests being changed, for all or any students. Rather, the issue is allowing a lower overall passing rate for some groups of students. This can happen with the standardized tests remaining exactly the same as before.

You’ve conflated an approach designed to address the needs and abilities of all students with a claim that doing so ‘dumbs things down’ for all students, when this is not correct.

Why do approaches that are designed to address perceived challenges of non-white student groups and the very real inequalities between districts become so irritating to some parents of white students, as it is? And to the point where they are willing to misread and misinterpret what’s actually going on, at times?