• Oni_eyes
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 天前

    Again, how was I cherry picking? The class taught? We now have offering for african-american studies but that’s not incorporated into the main history class which then leaves it to a teacher by teacher basis rather than a standard like European/American history.
    I would still argue the majority get the standard based curriculum (which does not include African American history).

    I could also argue that you’re cherry picking with your personal experience, especially since I have experience teaching in multiple districts in one of the main textbook states.

    • imaqtpieA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 天前

      Okay, fair enough. Ultimately we live in a world that is still dominated by Europe and America. In order for children to have the best chance of succeeding in this world, it’s necessary for them to have a basic grasp of how things ended up this way. And most of the main characters in that story were of European extraction. That’s the rub of it. It’s not pretty, but it is what it is.

      Education is not a purely intellectual pursuit, it’s actually primarily an economic one, now more than ever. I didn’t create this situation, so please don’t go after me for explaining it.

      • Oni_eyes
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 天前

        While this is true, African American history is American history but has parts that are heavily overlooked or ignored by standard curriculum. So we’re not even getting full American history, especially bits that provide valuable context on a demographic that is overlooked and was actively involved in almost all of the mainstream American history. How is it advantageous not to be taught all of your counties history unless it is to allow for overlooking or continuing on prejudiced ideals?