3 ms·
> Was that the purpose of that document? Or was it meant for people who all agreed (correctly or not) that this was a problem, and was exploring techniques to a
by qeternity 6y ago
> Was that the purpose of that document? Or was it meant for people who all agreed (correctly or not) that this was a problem, and was exploring techniques to address that?
How are you saying anything different? The premise is that teachers perpetuate systems of white supremacy implicitly in the way they teach, and, as you say, the document seeks to provide means of addressing this.
These cross-cultural efforts pretty much fall under the umbrella category of "creating allies". What specifically do you take issue with?
EDIT Ok OP has edited their comment. I will leave mine with the original text.
- ska 6y agoApologies, didn't see there was a reply before I trimmed mine or I would have left it. Trimmed because I thought it didn't add anything really and wasn't very articulate. Basically - not every document needs to justify its existence from first principles. "How to fix X" doesn't need to convince you that X is in fact a problem you have, if it's aimed at people who already think that.
- qeternity 6y agoI figured you didn't edit maliciously, I just wanted to explain where the extra content in my quote came from. > Basically - not every document needs to justify its existence from first principles That doesn't hold when your document is presupposed on there being an issue that most practitioners are ignorant to. "How to fit X" is very different from "People who don’t fit X are harmful to society". The latter absolutely needs to justify a number of things.
- ska 6y ago> That doesn't hold when I don't thing this is true. If for no other reasons than pedagogical, it can make sense to separate these things. I do agree there probably needs to be at least one other document, but don't know the context the authors presented this one, it was just given as a link.