|
Some of these seem pertinent to your point, others seem irrelevent, and some even seem to undermine you. If i was paying for this i would want my money back. For example,you list > It still says that as a math teacher it's your job to remove the thing stopping minorites from succeeding which obviously must be inequity, racism, and discrimation. "Research indicates that there are groups of students (for example, Indigenous students, Black students, students experiencing homelessness, students living in poverty, students with LGBTQ+ identities, and students with special education needs and disabilities) who continue to experience systemic barriers to accessing high-level instruction in and support with learning mathematics. Systemic barriers, such as racism, implicit bias, and other forms of discrimination, can result in inequitable academic and life outcomes, such as low confidence in one’s ability to learn mathematics, reduced rates of credit completion, and leaving the secondary school system prior to earning a diploma. Achieving equitable outcomes in mathematics for all students requires educators to be aware of and identify these barriers, as well as the ways in which they can overlap and intersect, which can compound their effect on student well-being, student success, and students’ experiences in the classroom and in the school. Educators must not only know about these barriers, they must work actively and with urgency to address and remove them." https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/curriculum/secondary-mathem... Based on that snippet, it seems to be saying that if a teacher is being straight up racist, e.g. marking black students differently than white students for the same work (or perhaps something more subtle), that is wrong and should be stopped. Is that really what you want to use as an example of inapropriate political interference in the classroom? |
According to some of these teaching guides, the first one recommended by State Depts. of Education, things such as the concept of grading work, expecting assignments to be turned in, etc. All are "systemic" (common features of the learning system), and now "racist", therefore "systemic racism". That's the "beauty" of their way of writing. It can mean anything they want at anytime, and is framed in such a way that calling them out automatically "undermines" (to use your term) yourself for investigating their gelatinous word-soup common in their writing. Even asking questions about it you find yourself Kafkatrapped.
"We are pro-good, anti-bad. What kind of person would you need to be to even ask questions about it in the first place in this day and age. Wow, really says a lot about you. Be better and do the work." That's just gossip, moralizing, shaming, all dressed-up and using the shield of academicism. It shares many characteristics with religion from a century or two ago, certainly its tribalism and fervor.