1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Decolonising the curriculum

Discussion in 'Education news' started by physicsfanboy, Jun 12, 2020.

  1. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    You hysterically screamed “that’s racist” at a post of mine where I had repeated the fact that different minorities have different rates of school exclusions.

    You’re in no position to lecture anyone about “healthy debate”!
  2. costermonger

    costermonger Occasional commenter

    The science curriculum is about atoms, forces, matter, energy, fields, evolution, cell structure, space etc etc. Scientists only appear as peripheral mentions. You might mention Newton and Darwin at GCSE, Einstein at A level. They are not important. The science is the important bit.
    As I said, the social context doesn't apply to science. It also doesn't apply to maths. Other subjects context is clearly important to some degree or other.
    You are right about one thing. I don't teach the way you would. I teach science correctly. I teach facts and how to apply them. I teach how the scientific method works. I teach lab skills. I do not faff about trying to contextualize anything.
    Have a good day too.
    P.S I am not aware of ignoring any evidence you have presented. If I have missed any, please point it out.
    alex_teccy likes this.
  3. costermonger

    costermonger Occasional commenter

    Exactly so. The people are not the important bit. You could learn about Pythagoras's theorem without knowing his name, it would still work.
    Having said that, little asides about the personalities are interesting. Newton, in particular, was an utter nutter (as well as being a genius).
    peter12171 and alex_teccy like this.
  4. MsOnline

    MsOnline Occasional commenter

    Try to move on.

    I agree to disagree.

    Doesn't seem useful to carry grudges from thread to thread.
  5. MsOnline

    MsOnline Occasional commenter

    Back to topic.

    When I said Sceince was about people I stand by it - the curriculum is about people at the core, every single subject. We're supposed to be equipping young people to be successful in the world of diverse people, to navigate and use what they've learned in schools in the real world. I aim to make subjects relevant even if by discussing a recent news story - haven't you ever done this to bring a topic to life? If not try it. I don't plan to deliver boring lessons, even if it's recommending a clip or article to refer to outside the class.

    Science includes biology, health, well-being, disease prevention, nutrition, diet, global warming, the environment, reproduction, substance abuse - all of these have technical theory but who could deny the Human aspects? It includes political and social context, funding, current developments.... Therefore Science in indeed about people...too.

    Even in the current climate, not every country has taken the same approach to the prevention of illness. Science is not neutral.

    Also one person has just posted that maths is neutral while another maths teacher has posted that they try to incorporate different contributions (which I agree with) Eg might not be on 'the curriculum' but clips about the incredible pyramids enrich lessons and engage pupils.

    Every educator is different and has the prerogative to enrich lessons how they see fit. I might make the choice to encourage critical thinking whilst others may not - that's fine.

    So yes, costermng we perhaps do have a different view about what lessons should look like and how we can help pupils connect and engage and that's fine. I disagree that I teach in the wrong way - just different to yours.

    Good debate. Let's respectfully agree to disagree.
  6. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    This was the post where you decided that spitting out asinine allegations of racism was easier than “healthy debate”.

    Sounds like you’re only interested in ”healthy debate” when it goes your way and “agreeing to disagree” when posters happen to agree with you.

  7. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    Just look at these two young men both “BAME” though I doubt they’re remotely concerned as being labelled banging out this Rachmaninoff tarantella.

    Just two guys living in the moment full of positivity, not decolonising the composer. Pure meritocracy.

    George_Randle likes this.
  8. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    This week’s prize nuttiness comes from Duke University, North Carolina, ranked 20th in the world, ahead of the London School of Economics and Edinburgh. Its “Teaching for Equity” programme tells academics that “objectivity”, “perfectionism” and “a sense of urgency” are traits of — I kid you not — “white supremacy”. As is “worship of the written word”.

    Earlier this year, the university’s vice-chancellor Prof Lousie Richardson said that many departments in social sciences have “begun work on making their curriculum more inclusive and adding diverse voices to it”.

    She went on to explain: “This includes steps such as integrating race and gender questions into topics, embedding teaching on colonialism and empire into courses, changing reading lists to ensure substantial representation of a diverse range of voices, and ensuring better coverage of issues concerning the global South in syllabuses.”

    Professors expressed regret that of the students who took a paper in medieval Christendom and its neighbours, just 13 chose to write essays on women, men or gender.

    “The overwhelming majority of essays, that is, the other 185 essays, barely mentioned women,” examiners said.

    “Many exam scripts did not mention women once. The world of EWH2 seems to be a world in which only men are worth studying and writing about, that is, provided they were not slaves or serfs.”

  9. Romoletto

    Romoletto Occasional commenter

    Given you posted this:

    And this:

    It’s odd that you do seem to be exhibiting the exact same behaviours you accused me of and failed to substantiate.
  10. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    What behaviours?
  11. Romoletto

    Romoletto Occasional commenter

    “expecting posters on an Internet forum to align with your opinions.”

    “throwing your toys out of the pram”
  12. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    Yes, those were your behaviours. You started flaming and accused me of bias or something.
    Whatever. They weren’t about the arguments you were or were not making.
  13. George_Randle

    George_Randle Established commenter

    When it comes to bees, I'll take Yuja Wang over Arthur Askey:

    alex_teccy likes this.
  14. George_Randle

    George_Randle Established commenter

  15. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    An enlightening tweet from Conceptual James:

    Imposing my assumption of how units work is actually just stating how units work. Postmodernism would say, "ah ha! You're blind to your bias!" but really I'm just right. Repeat, ad infinitum because unlike serious people, postmodernists can go on being wrong forever.

    “Postmoderism holds that whether or not something is true isn't all that interesting. The really interesting thing is making people aware that political power, mostly in the sense of a diffuse social SYSTEM, authenticates statements as true, say by choosing which methods work.

    I started to type that postmodernism is interested in HOW political power authenticates statements as true, but that's wrong. It only pretends to do this because it believes (Foucault's power/knowledge) that's just what power does. It mostly just says it a lot and confuses itself

    Postmodernism would be concerned specifically with how rigorous methods and thus real truth limit the possibilities of other ways of knowing (read: thinking) and thus limits the "potentialities" of knowingness (read: ******** it's possible to say). It "expands" these w word games

    Foucault's contention (power/knowledge) is that "truth" misses the point of the politics inherent in the social process of authenticating statements as "true," and then "true" statements shape society (biopower or biopolitics) because people (politically) believe their truth.

    Dipshits like this math ed activist and math teacher () play word games like "when does a heap become a pile?!" to confuse themselves and others (politicians and our kids) about the simple fact that like units are required to made addition mean something.

    Their next step is to make political use of that confusion to reorganize math according to a pedagogy of confusion and mind-expanding explorations of other potentialities, all while dropping Critical Theory lines about how white, Western men brutalized and excluded other cultures

    Their goal, on paper, is to make "math achievement" (but not math literacy or competence) go up by getting rid of real mathematical assessment and real math and replace it with nonsense like art projects and storytelling, all subjectively graded for equity. All Critical, too.

    The "ethnomathematics" programs already being installed in Seattle schools and possibly San Francisco's explicitly make these claims, trying to make math "more collectivist" and discussion/ storytelling-oriented about when math maintains or overthrows injustice.

    At the forefront of these projects are political interests on the left, talking about other cultures' approaches to math, how the West "stole" or "excluded" those (first by starting to do math well, then by demanding rigor/proof, which they see as white supremacist politics).

    They explicitly want to move away from the idea that there's "one right answer in math," which is a slightly complicated topic, to admit "multiple ways of thinking" and subjective "answers" to mathematical-ish questions, usually involving feelings, stories, and word games.

    A lot of people don't know this, but I started my journey into speaking publicly because I was incensed that some Christians around 2010 refused to recognize the first amendment by wanting Biblical creationism in public schools. This is legitimately far worse than that.

    Addendum: In light of this remark, because postmodernism views all claims on truth as political stances, it is almost entirely culturally relativist, but because it, especially now, is Critical in orientation, it believes "oppressed" "truths" are most true

    The Woke ideology is a very specific form of (Critical) applied postmodernism, which dramatically magnifies the belief that "marginalized" politics are, by definition, better than "dominant" ones. So, "dominant" truths are much less valid than "oppressed" "truths."

    It's absolutely crucial to understand that this principle about knowing, called the radical egalitarian principle, is a functional core to Woke "logic." It's the politics of "liberation" from "systemic oppression" (Neo-Marxism) with postmodernist truth-as-politics relativism.”

  16. Romoletto

    Romoletto Occasional commenter

  17. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Star commenter

    1 hr 8 of pure cringe

Share This Page