["White privilege" is to be a workshop and subject of curriculum development in Ontario — spurred by the Elementary Teachers' Association of Ontario. That's 6-13 year olds! Lots of backlash on the Internet. SQE (Society for Quality Education blog) featured a post, worth reading as a teacher unionist provides a POV. http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/read/professional-undevelopment Below is my second comment.]
Should “Radicalization” Be A School Task?
What’s the difference between this Madrassa school in Pakistan that trains suicide bombers http://www.ted.com/talks/sharmeen_obaid_chinoy_inside_a_school_for_suicide_bombers and a teacher who provokes outrage in students so they can feel oppressed?
It’s a matter of degree, isn’t it?
Maybe the madrassa devoted to training suicide bombers is much, much worse than our public school which guilts, cajoles, and wheedles children to want to “change the world”.
In reading scads of material on “white privilege”, which is becoming a sub topic in the social justice field, I came across a range of challenges activist teachers face in advancing their social justice cause. One pointer was to focus on students with “chips on their shoulders”. One teacher of teachers, Maxine Greene, spoke at an AERA (American Educational Research Association, 2008) meeting saying “we must teach ‘uneasiness, outrage, anything that will awaken . . . How can I cultivate appropriate outrage?’”
Well, it’s happening.
In America right now a new national curriculum in American History is being pushed. Instead of the traditional emphasis on historical heroes and the Constitution, etc., there is increasing emphasis on European exploitation, black bondage, white racial superiority, dropping of atomic bombs, race and segregation — relentlessly negative views of American history. The seeds of discontent would lead young people to believe the propaganda on the Internet. How does ISIS recruit but with preying on disenchanted young Americans?
Is this too far from home, from Canada, for us to pay attention? No. The discontent is being sown here, and for the greater good. For a “strong welfare state.”
In so much of the writings on 21st C Learning and necessary transformations we see certain gurus appearing regularly with their visions of the new global world. Two are now advising Ontario Ministry of Education – Michael Fullan and Andrew Hargreaves.
In the literature, and often in the same reports is a buddy of Fullan’s and Hargreaves’, Jal Mehta. Well, while so many of these gurus mask their intent in obfuscating narratives, this is what Amazon.com says about Mehta’s latest book:
“The larger problem, Mehta argues, is that reformers have it backwards . . . Our current pattern is to draw less than our most talented people into teaching, equip them with little relevant knowledge, train them minimally, put them in a weak welfare state, and then hold them accountable when they predictably do not achieve what we seek. What we want, Mehta argues, is the opposite approach which characterizes top-performing educational nations: attract strong candidates into teaching, develop relevant and usable knowledge, train teachers extensively in that knowledge, and support these efforts through a strong welfare state.”
A strong welfare state — exactly what does that mean? It means an enforced, delegated, coerced welfare state with compliant residents. Throw “citizenship” and “democracy” as we know it out the window!
Much as I see the need for improved teacher training, what I see here is intense inculcation of teachers in “white privilege”, social emotional learning, etc. with the intent of converting both teachers and students to some new world order!