4 ms·

>Other schools [2] in the US are more explicit on change... ?> School of Education devoted to developing civically engaged children, youth, and adults for a di

>Other schools [2] in the US are more explicit on change... ?> School of Education devoted to developing civically engaged children, youth, and adults for a diverse and inclusive society. Why is developing "civic engagement" among our population a bad thing? Why is a "diverse and inclusive" society a bad thing? Not being snarky here, I just really don't understand how reducing civic engagement and excluding those who are "different" are good things. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning around that?

mfer 4y ago
First, let me say that I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on the direction that folks should go in. I'm most interested in bringing awareness as to what's going on so we can have deeper understanding and discussion. With the school his is from, look at what their vision isn't. It's not to create well educated people who can excel at their jobs. Their vision isn't to create people who are self sustaining adults who can operate in society. Their vision is to get people civically engaged around certain forms of change. The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US. This is an area where we don't have good in depth thoughtful conversations, either.
- nobody9999 4y ago
  >Their vision is to get people civically engaged around certain forms of change. >The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US. This is an area where we don't have good in depth thoughtful conversations, either. That's not what you initially said, nor do I understand how "civic engagement" is ever a bad thing. In fact, we need lots more of it. You are applying ("The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US") your trained-in prejudices as the right way, the only way. That's a little disturbing. I'd add, as far as creating civic engagement is concerned, that you should never, metaphorically (and literally) speaking, hand someone a gun unless you know where they're going to point it. I, and most reasonable humans, want more civic engagement from everyone. Including those with whom we disagree. Because that's how we make sure our society and government are working. Discouraging civic engagement for any reason is bad, IMHO. It's unfortunate that you don't come right out and say what you mean, rather than using inference and innuendo: You don't like what other folks want, so you want to ban it, or at least discredit those you believe disagree with you. At least that's my take on your comments. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.
  - mfer 4y ago
    To try and be more clear, I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on what should happen with regard to these topics. I'm attempting to highlight the disconnect. To get closer to a root of what's happening. This is from direct conversations with people across the political spectrum and from reading about it. > Discouraging civic engagement for any reason is bad, IMHO. When we deal with things there are priorities. What's the most important, what's less important, what's mildly important, etc. Where does pushing for civic engagement relate priority wise with things like being able to handle your finances as an adult? Or being able to take care of your home? Or being able to hold a job? Or being prepared for college (if that's your route)? The vision, in this case, points to civic engagement. It leaves out the others which makes them less of a priority. Now, relate that to things like skilled trades. That's not something you need a college degree for and doing those jobs doesn't relate to being civically engaged. Many schools don't provide the foundation for people to even start in skilled trades even though we have a lack of skilled trades folks that's growing. This is a simple angle for priorities. Even within Civic Engagement there are priorities. Who gets to choose the priorities to steer the kids into? At what age does the steering start? Who gets to prioritize that? Should it be university professors putting together programs for teachers to go through? Then those teachers implement those ideas with their students? Should it be the general public opinions? Priorities are multi-dimensional. The leaders who lead our school leaders are setting the agenda. And, there are a bunch of people who disagree with that. Again, please note, I'm not stating my opinion on these topics. I'm trying to highlight a little deeper on the root.
    - nobody9999 4y ago
      >To try and be more clear, I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on what should happen with regard to these topics. I'm attempting to highlight the disconnect. To get closer to a root of what's happening. This is from direct conversations with people across the political spectrum and from reading about it. Not bad. Still a bunch of mealy-mouthed bullshit, but a little better. Keep working on it. Perhaps you might one day convince someone you're actually a reasonable human being. I won't hold my breath. Health and good fortune to you.
  - 4y ago
yamtaddle 4y ago
Many right wingers believe "diverse and inclusive" is code for "progressive/communist indoctrination and telling our kids that LGBTQ people are better than cis straight people". They don't object to the literal words, they object to what they believe is the hidden meaning behind the words. (this is not an exaggeration—I have a sickness that causes me to be fascinated by right-wing media, so I watch/read/listen-to quite a bit of it)
- mfer 4y ago
  I think this already makes too many assumptions. Teachers are responsible for teaching kids how to read, write, do math, learn the basic geography of the world, to learn sports, possibly learn music, maybe learn how to manage money, learn to use tools, program computers, and so much more. What priorities are the highest? Should learning math be at the top? Should kids still learn cursive? Does memorizing spelling matter now? The vision statement says that being civically engaged around diversity and inclusion sits above those other things. People chase after visions. A lot of people don't agree on this. Even those in the middle.
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    So your belief is that teaching kids how our system of government works and what mechanisms are available to access and impact that system is wrong, and shouldn't be taught at all? Is that correct? Edit: Clarified my prose.

mfer 4y ago

First, let me say that I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on the direction that folks should go in. I'm most interested in bringing awareness as to what's going on so we can have deeper understanding and discussion. With the school his is from, look at what their vision isn't. It's not to create well educated people who can excel at their jobs. Their vision isn't to create people who are self sustaining adults who can operate in society. Their vision is to get people civically engaged around certain forms of change. The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US. This is an area where we don't have good in depth thoughtful conversations, either.

nobody9999 4y ago
>Their vision is to get people civically engaged around certain forms of change. >The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US. This is an area where we don't have good in depth thoughtful conversations, either. That's not what you initially said, nor do I understand how "civic engagement" is ever a bad thing. In fact, we need lots more of it. You are applying ("The specific forms of change are not agreed to as a culture in the US") your trained-in prejudices as the right way, the only way. That's a little disturbing. I'd add, as far as creating civic engagement is concerned, that you should never, metaphorically (and literally) speaking, hand someone a gun unless you know where they're going to point it. I, and most reasonable humans, want more civic engagement from everyone. Including those with whom we disagree. Because that's how we make sure our society and government are working. Discouraging civic engagement for any reason is bad, IMHO. It's unfortunate that you don't come right out and say what you mean, rather than using inference and innuendo: You don't like what other folks want, so you want to ban it, or at least discredit those you believe disagree with you. At least that's my take on your comments. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.
- mfer 4y ago
  To try and be more clear, I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on what should happen with regard to these topics. I'm attempting to highlight the disconnect. To get closer to a root of what's happening. This is from direct conversations with people across the political spectrum and from reading about it. > Discouraging civic engagement for any reason is bad, IMHO. When we deal with things there are priorities. What's the most important, what's less important, what's mildly important, etc. Where does pushing for civic engagement relate priority wise with things like being able to handle your finances as an adult? Or being able to take care of your home? Or being able to hold a job? Or being prepared for college (if that's your route)? The vision, in this case, points to civic engagement. It leaves out the others which makes them less of a priority. Now, relate that to things like skilled trades. That's not something you need a college degree for and doing those jobs doesn't relate to being civically engaged. Many schools don't provide the foundation for people to even start in skilled trades even though we have a lack of skilled trades folks that's growing. This is a simple angle for priorities. Even within Civic Engagement there are priorities. Who gets to choose the priorities to steer the kids into? At what age does the steering start? Who gets to prioritize that? Should it be university professors putting together programs for teachers to go through? Then those teachers implement those ideas with their students? Should it be the general public opinions? Priorities are multi-dimensional. The leaders who lead our school leaders are setting the agenda. And, there are a bunch of people who disagree with that. Again, please note, I'm not stating my opinion on these topics. I'm trying to highlight a little deeper on the root.
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    >To try and be more clear, I'm not attempting to give my own opinion on what should happen with regard to these topics. I'm attempting to highlight the disconnect. To get closer to a root of what's happening. This is from direct conversations with people across the political spectrum and from reading about it. Not bad. Still a bunch of mealy-mouthed bullshit, but a little better. Keep working on it. Perhaps you might one day convince someone you're actually a reasonable human being. I won't hold my breath. Health and good fortune to you.
- 4y ago

yamtaddle 4y ago

Many right wingers believe "diverse and inclusive" is code for "progressive/communist indoctrination and telling our kids that LGBTQ people are better than cis straight people". They don't object to the literal words, they object to what they believe is the hidden meaning behind the words. (this is not an exaggeration—I have a sickness that causes me to be fascinated by right-wing media, so I watch/read/listen-to quite a bit of it)

mfer 4y ago
I think this already makes too many assumptions. Teachers are responsible for teaching kids how to read, write, do math, learn the basic geography of the world, to learn sports, possibly learn music, maybe learn how to manage money, learn to use tools, program computers, and so much more. What priorities are the highest? Should learning math be at the top? Should kids still learn cursive? Does memorizing spelling matter now? The vision statement says that being civically engaged around diversity and inclusion sits above those other things. People chase after visions. A lot of people don't agree on this. Even those in the middle.
- nobody9999 4y ago
  So your belief is that teaching kids how our system of government works and what mechanisms are available to access and impact that system is wrong, and shouldn't be taught at all? Is that correct? Edit: Clarified my prose.