Eurocentric perception of modestly

again, moral by whose standards! morality in this sense is a construct, often having to do with purity or virginity.... double standards for men and women.

side note: i read somewhere about how women historically liked jewelry as gifts because it could be easily sold if your husband abandoned you or stole all your money (or you couldn't access the money etc). Really changed my whole perspective.

for whom, by whose standards? schooling as it is is patriarchal and white supremacy.

white people can flip flop around in politics because their rights are not being infringed upon.

makes me think of the concept of purity as whiteness. the ideal of purity as a religious (christian) concept used to divide and pit people against one another.

shocker. wealthy people being visible and respected?! no way.

ooooooo. Further evidence to what I was saying after watching blacking it up and in whose honor, white women are the worst because people often expect more of them . but here we see that they are actually actively and intentionally perpetuating white supremacy! i understand wanting to grieve the dead, but you can do that and denounce what they were fighting for.... like. if white people had just... respected other cultures and humans instead of STEALING them.... this war wouldn't have happened.

.... i don't know why but i cannot comprehend this sentence.... so.. are men joining the military because the women support it? is this because they are worried about being emasculated or from a desire for sex? or what

you know I really just don't understand people who actively fight agains their own rights??? for example.... anyone who isn't a hetero cis white man voting for tr*mp. like why??? is your internalized misogyny that strong? that you believe you are right to be dehumanized

i assume this is studying white women. even though black trans women are the real backbone of inclusive movements.

.....did they need to be re-created? i didn't think they changed...

very interesting to see democracy in this list! i know many people think of democracy as like ~the Best~(TM)..... I mean... yes I think that people should have a say int heir future but the way the US democracy works is through suppression and $$ (people buy elections! those with the most money to advertise... among other things... usually win). also i think this is a good segue into the fact that lots of conservatives use democracy as an excuse for all the bad things that happen or as a way to ignore bad things. They're like... well we all voted so this must be how everyone thinks! or, we live in a democracy so bad things don't happen here. they forget about voter suppression, felons not being allowed to vote.... should i continue?

good. but also... it says largely not completely.

I know you know this. but this whole thing is garbage. it's all lies that people tell themselves to feel better.

they should have just... acknowledged the horrible things their ancestors did and then moved forward to do everything in their power to dismantle the system that continues to treat Black people as second class citizens.

BOY even in the lies life sounds shitty

key word. PRESENT. were they... enjoying them? or more likely being used for labor during the wedding

hmmmm sound familiar??!? like the GWC book perhaps?? ah yes he was treated so well by the people who enslaved his parents and then as soon as he was born, him.

i'm going to assume at least some of this is a lie. because all their other ideas an not factual

THE PROBLEM OF FREEDOM??!?!?!?

i really don't understand this.... somehow they don't want to say they were protecting slavery? i kinda feel like they should just be all in. like if you're gonna be racist a believe in white supremacy just go for it. don't change history.

YIKES.

going to google her now.

even if it's the truth?

from a logical standpoint, there is no possible way to look at a group named supporting one half of a war as impartial. like. you literally chose a side, so how can you be a judge of impartiality?!

HUH. interesting. but on the UDC website it says they aren't affiliated or condone hate groups???? so what's the truth.

what is there to re-interpret????

like what we were tlaking about in class today. White people DO NOT care about young Black kids. They are more concerned with protecting a fake history and the :tender" emotional states of white kids. you can't say anything bad about my great grandfather he was just fighting for what he thought was right. Like... human rights is not a debatable issue???? it's not whether pineapple goes on pizza???? you're wrong and a horrible person thank you and goodbye.

brainwashing??? indoctrination?? i think so! not giving kids critical thinking skills.

yet you say the KKK is necessary for protection.

he has the sickest mustache.

i need to know more

really not that long ago. and if we care to remember, the Civil War was from 1861-1865... so this is 30 years AFTER it ended. I feel like by that point they should just let it go. let alone over 150 years later.

they believed enslaved africans were treated well and that slavery benefited EVERYONE. how is that impartial

yuck.

i really want to read their actual arguments so I can explain how wrong they are.

all lies unsurprisingly

ah yes... celebrate the losers of a racist war.

key. feminism is white supremacy unless it betters the world for ALL women. we're not free unless we're all free, so we need to start looking out for Black trans women.

hm. antique gender roles soaked in misogyny. shocking.

i don't know that i agree with this...

mmm I don't know how I feel about this framework.. I guess I don't know much about it, but it feels really.... capitalist-centered? i don't know. I'm gonna google it.

the mission and vision SOUND good.....

i hate this man. he is the worst. I mean so is Kim though... but at least he wanted to review the standards? I wonder what prompted that.... pushback from the people? I'll do some investigating...

wow. okay, well, i'm going to go look at the old standards and see if I agree with these people.

👀 oh... oh my they really said that 👁👄👁

this does not surprise me

this is analyzing the OG standards, not the new ones.

ok go off.

biiig yikes.

this man is the worst. this is why i never want to live in Iowa again. these people are everywhere. and I know they're everywhere in the US and the world.... but I just get so mad because they're arguments are non-sensical. it's just about how they think nobody should have rights and feelings except for them.

great but you have no actual reason to dislike it.

uuuugggghhh I honestly don't want to keep reading because I just keep writing the same argument.

this man is so closed minded he can't see beyond his own privilege and should not be allowed to write articles when he can't think critically about his own positionality and how other people might feel.

as they should. the world is a whole lot bigger than the us. sorry this curriculum isn't nationalist enough for you.

maybe not with the way schooling is right now because we only teach from a eurocentric POV. maybe if we actually considered other people we could be global citizens! sorry but i hate this guy.

as they should be. bc FOX exists and spews garbage every day.

a bunch of old white slave owners. soooo who really cares what they think anyway

well. yeah. everyone does that. but i think statistically speaking conservatives more commonly state opinions or inaccuracies as fact.

you don't know that. you're interpreting it how you want. just like every other person will.

further confirmation that he's homophobic/transphobic, etc.

social constructs have real world implications.

F*CK this guy for real. if children are taught to be accepting form a younger age we would be doing something really good for our future.

this guy sucks. confirmed.

he's just wrong? this is exactly what i was talking about in the standards document. people don't. understand what kids can do and they shortchange them all the time which is detrimental in the long run.

and he... disagrees with this? i don't understand where he stands.

again, skills are more important. they can be applied to many different areas. Content is memorization. not that content isn't also important, but you know. you need both. I think his interpretation of the standards is severely limited.

FOR WHITE PEOPLE

disagree.

so they can be adapted to the situation? I really hate this dudes attitude.

first graders aren't reading this document???? it's for the teachers? they're not (or at least they shouldn't) ask the kids this verbatim! it's a GUIDE.

ok yeah i actually do agree with this. i should have stated at the beginning but i came in ready to hate this bc it was written by an old white dude. i would say I have healthy skepticism.

...okay.... so on one hand,yes I agree with this, like, you should do what's best, not just what everyone else is doing FOR SURE. but... sometimes a lot of people (states) can be on the same good page...

oooo interesting. I will have to fact check!

this was a lot shorter than i anticipated. But... all in all it sounds like an ok framework? the ideas/guiding principles are good. they want students to be engaged in their learning and in society.... could use some work of course.

yesssss. tell it like it is. (do we talk about why this is tho???)

TRUE. get rid of textbooks! i mean... i know it's more complicated than that.... and I understand that people put a lot of effort into creating them. but then why are they still so terrible? we could learn by reading other things.

sounds like CRT and ethnic studies could be very easily integrated if this mindset is actually implemented.

great! we love connecting areas of learning

good deal

WOOOO I made it to the end. Honestly....there are definitely still problems and gaps, but I think this seems like a step in the right direction. To reiterate what I said before, I'm most worried about pedagogy and implementation. While the bones are there.... the meat is probably not.

why not start earlier?

talk about other impacts of capitalism?

who decides

address white saviourism? studying BIPOC cultures from a white lens?

everyone should be required to talk about this

something missing from the financial literacy sections are how identify impact availability of these resources. how does your race/gender/abilities impact your access to investing or a bank account.

yes! as well as how intersectionality/identity impacts those opportunities and challenges

i know the bar is pretty low, but I think I would be a lot better off today if i had even had these standards to learn from. I'm honestly a little jealous of the kids 😂 I guess that's a good thing? obviously there's still a LOT of work to be done, esp since i don't know how well these are actually being implemented. but.... some progress is better than nothing. and now we keep pushing for bette pedagogy and keep editing the standards to be more inclusive/ expansive/ critical

the standards seem to get more specific and (IMO) "better" (i guess i mean more analytical?) as we get older. Which makes sense and is good, but i feel like the analyses could start younger. people really underestimate what kids can do.

I'm noticing the emphasis on "21st century skills". Which makes a lot of sense, and I really wish I had received. But of course cell phones weren't even popular until I was in middle school so i guess.... it make sense

emphasize the every person needs to be involved in local/national/global politics? how PEOPLE are the most important part of the process? you vote! you have a say in who is elected! use it!

i wonder how protest is discussed... or if the murder of dissenting voices is covered..... (thinking specifically of the civil rights leaders)

does that include the impacts of agriculture?

does that include conversations around appreciation vs appropriation?

does this include talking about indigenous people as currently living? and the reasons behind the FORCED removal

okay... this sounds promising. as long as all perspectives are considered along with their positionality and their intentions/intended audience.

this sounds like it could be taught though a nationalist lens. like, people come to america bc it's awesome and they want to improve their lives.

again. What people? not everyone uses these the same. Lots of talk about capitalism throughout here and economics... from a capitalistic POV. "othering" different economic styles.

very general. rules and laws don't impact everyone in the same way... but if that isn't brought up, students may assume that everyone is the same. (ex. white students will assume policing affects black students similarly, when that is far from the truth).

which social/racial/ethnic groups will be considered here? is this a global or local perspective?

A lot of the standards appear to be good, especially the ones in the history section. BUT a lot is up to the individual teachers discretion, which is tricky, because on on the one hand it's good, and teachers can tailor their lessons to be relevant to their students, but also it means they could still be teaching from a Eurocentric perspective. I am assuming very few, if any, of the teachers have a background in Ethnic Studies or CRT, so the ambiguity in the standards does give me some pause. I worry that it's more of a performative change.

what makes a compelling question? who decides? what perspective?

first mention of indigenous communities. It's hard to know how exactly they will be presented.

I definitely never had this. If I did I don't remember it at all.

very recent, actually AFTER I graduated high school. So hopefully these are better than what I learned