…and this is a 
Katherine Kersten is Minnesota's own version of Glenn Beck. She's a 'columnist' (literally true, since she is given a regular column to fill with right-wing nonsense) for the Star Tribune, and is a regular embarrassment. She recently aimed her smear-gun at the University of Minnesota, in a deranged tirade that has been picked up by Wing Nut Daily and Hot Air (read the comments at that site for a glimpse of how insane the right wing has become).
What made her so angry? The UM has a program in the college of education called the Teacher Education Redesign Initiative, or TERI. It's a reasonably routine effort; the college is reevaluating their program, trying to set up appropriate priorities for teacher education, and is churning out documents as various groups wrestle with decisions about what's important in their programs. Like I say, it's routine — I've had to read lots of this kind of thing as part of the general output of a university bureaucracy — and it's also a good thing, that university divisions exhibit at least a little introspection and flexibility.
Kersten does not think this is a good thing. She has her own strange view of what the effort is all about.
In a report compiled last summer, the Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group at the U's College of Education and Human Development recommended that aspiring teachers there must repudiate the notion of "the American Dream" in order to obtain the recommendation for licensure required by the Minnesota Board of Teaching. Instead, teacher candidates must embrace -- and be prepared to teach our state's kids -- the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic.
Except…the report says nothing of the kind. You can read it yourself, if you want, although you probably don't — it's written in lumbering, repetitive, earnest Academese, which is a dialect of Bureaucratese, and it isn't pretty. I get this stuff in my mailbox and it makes me want to claw my eyes out, so it took some masochistic discipline to dig into it voluntarily, but Kersten misrepresents the thing from top to bottom.
There is a grain of truth to what she says: the report does say that we need more emphasis on recognizing and appreciating diversity, and that we need more equitable representation of American culture in the teacher workforce. It does not say that America is an "oppressive hellhole"; that's her own weird interpretation. She should have looked deeper. Doesn't the fact that we're training teachers at all imply that America must be a pit of ignorance and stupidity that needs correcting?
She's basically taking the blinkered and customary wingnut position that any discussion of how we can improve the country implies that we are currently in a less than sublime state of perfection, which makes any constructive suggestion an unpatriotic act of treason.
This has set the wingnuts on fire. They are complaining bitterly about the goals of the UM college of education.
In an October 28, 2009, proposal to the Minnesota-based Bush Foundation, the college promises that it will revise its curriculum toward the "development of cultural competence." The college's full articulation of this vague concept at present is just what the Race, Culture, Class, and Gender Task Group has determined it to be.
Not only that, however, the college in its proposal promises to start screening its applicants to make sure they have the proper "commitments" and "dispositions":
Develop admission procedures to assess professional commitments.
We recognize that both academic preparation and particular dispositions or professional commitments are needed for effective teaching. [Emphasis in original.]
The college promises that it will begin using "predictive criteria" to make sure that future teachers will be able to develop an acceptable level of "cultural competence"-apparently, those who do not pass the political litmus test and seem too set in their beliefs will never get admitted. This is far worse than what Columbia Teachers College does with its own "dispositions" requirement, and far in excess of what the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) has ever mandated.
Never trust a kook to quote anything. When you see one line extracted from a document, and then spun out into a fable of planned oppression of a political point of view, you know there's got to be something more that they're leaving out. In fact, in this case you might be wondering what political views this 'litmus test' is intended to exclude…like, no Republicans will ever be allowed to teach again?
Nope. Here's what they mean by 'dispositions and commitments'.
Develop admission procedures to assess professional commitments.
We recognize that both academic preparation and particular dispositions or professional commitments are needed for effective teaching. Our school-based partners have told us that they would like to hire beginning teachers who demonstrate the commitment to focus relentlessly on student learning and take responsibility for the learning of all students without seeking excuses in the community, family, and culture of the students. They want teachers who can communicate and collaborate with each other and with the families and communities of their students. In response to our school partners, we will develop admission procedures that identify candidates with the potential to demonstrate these commitments as teachers.
Note the part I put in boldface. That's what has Kersten incensed, and that is fueling the fear of right-wing reactionaries. They're saying they want teachers who want to teach, and who do not sit around blaming the failure of students on their race or ethnicity. That's it. It isn't a political litmus test at all — it's saying that bigots who won't try to teach all of their students equally do not make good teachers.
That's the sentiment that Kersten, Hot Air, and the Wing Nut Daily find horribly objectionable.
Fundamentally, it's yet another admission that that (R) after politician's name has become shorthand for (Racist). Conservative politics has become so tainted with lunatic anti-immigrant, anti-diversity, anti-human policies that a college can't even say that tolerance and encouragement of the non-white portion of our populations is a good goal to work towards without being accused of being unpatriotic.
It's not surprising. These are the same people who think Lou Dobbs would make a good president, and who dream of a Beck/Palin candidacy in 2012.
Education
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Gabby | November 28, 2009 1:14 PM
I'm uncomfortable admitting it but I actually liked Dobbs a few years back.
I hope it's a matter of him getting more crazy as time goes by rather than me being crazy and not recognizing it.
"any discussion of how we can improve the country implies that we are currently in a less than sublime state of perfection, which makes any constructive suggestion an unpatriotic act of treason"
Boy, if that isn't hitting the nail on the head.
How many times and in how many ways have we seen that attitude?
Posted by: Zack Ford | November 28, 2009 1:14 PM
Ugh! PZ! Way to write the same story at the same time as I did! lol. Did you notice that Kersten's story got picked up by WorldNetDaily and The FIRE is now involved in this case? It'll be interesting to see how "big" this one gets! http://is.gd/55Wt5
Posted by: inkadu | November 28, 2009 1:21 PM
I feel for teachers, especially new teachers, especially because they have to run judgemental hurdles like this questioning their commitment any time they consider the very real possibility that home environment, past history, and native ability effect learning.
Maybe their should be another school for principals and school administrators that demands a "commitment to focus relentlessly on providing teachers with the tools and environment they need without resorting to excuses about the dedication of their teachers."
Posted by: Kevin | November 28, 2009 1:23 PM
Isn't that exactly what the republicians have been saying for years -- it's personal responsibility, don't use race/color/creed/economic status/community as an excuse?
dumb asses can't even recognize their own theories.
Posted by: Chuck | November 28, 2009 1:25 PM
I also dream of a Beck/Palin candidacy in 2012 ... but only because it would be crushed so easily by the Dems.
Throw Chuck Norris in and it would be comedy gold for years to come.
Chuck
http://www.irreligiosophy.com
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
November 28, 2009 1:27 PM
From the mouths of babes ...Posted by: Apikoros | November 28, 2009 1:27 PM
But, PZ...I'm dreaming of a Beck/Palin candidacy in 2012!!
It will be comedy gold!
It's the republicans who can go on TV and keep it together for five minutes at a stretch that scare me. The TV reporters will never bother to scratch the surface of a Huckabee or a Jindal to expose the loony beneath. That's why I like my unveneered loonies like Palin so much more.
Posted by: Zeno | November 28, 2009 1:29 PM
My father likes Lou Dobbs because he is a "true" American. Dad was bragging that he recently lost a business opportunity when a potential client called and asked him if he spoke Spanish. According to Dad, he answered, "No, I'm an American! I speak English!" The potential client thanked him and said she might get back in touch later, but she never called again. I'm sure she called because our Portuguese family name looks like it could be Spanish in origin. As a matter of fact, Dad speaks fluent Portuguese as his first language and can make himself understood in Spanish. These days, however, he'd rather put a chip on his shoulder and prate about supposed American values than serve a client who asks a perfectly reasonable question. And then he brags about it (and then gets irritated because I don't congratulate him and offer him a high-five).
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 28, 2009 1:29 PM
Let them have their Beck/Palin ticket in 2012. The Crazification Factor people would vote for it, and the other 73 to 82 % of the populace would vote for Obama. That would destroy the Reptilian Party altogether, good riddance.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
November 28, 2009 1:29 PM
Never underestimate the ability of the Democratic party to snatch defeat from the jaws of certain victory.Posted by: idle.pip.verisignlabs.com
|
November 28, 2009 1:29 PM
You mean Palin/Beck, which is about the only worse combination then Beck/Palin.
It really is sad, how they can have one conservative who screams at the top of their lungs, which gets hundreds (or thousands) of parrots following and yelling loudly. Those parrots never understand the issue, they just yell. And sadly, it actually affects change.
Posted by: inkadu | November 28, 2009 1:33 PM
Hey, idle.pip, never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world. Heh.
Posted by: Apikoros | November 28, 2009 1:34 PM
@Chuck: Great minds think alike, but slow typists just look unoriginal. Sigh.
The problem with the Chuck Norris candidacy is that he would probably win. Chuck Norris always wins.
Posted by: cylusys
|
November 28, 2009 1:38 PM
Kevin @#4
Well yes, but the intent there was to deny them help should their status be hindering them in some way. ACTUALLY treating everyone as equals? With no eye on their inherent worth based on either wealth or breeding?
Not gonna happen in the Right's world.
Posted by: Midnight Rambler
|
November 28, 2009 1:39 PM
Kevin @4: that was what struck me as well upon reading the full passage. Not making excuses for "cultural differences" - or for that matter, having any place for them at all - is at the heart of their ideology. Not sure what the problem is.
Posted by: Medieval Guy | November 28, 2009 1:50 PM
I think the problem they have with "responsibility" is that the guidelines are asking the teachers to take responsibility for the academic success or failure of their students, and not the students.
I think they're fine with blaming minority students for their own failure. They just don't want to blame teachers for minority students' failure.
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 28, 2009 1:53 PM
"Chuck Norris always wins."
Ever see "Return of the Dragon"?
Posted by: Epsilon Perseii VIII | November 28, 2009 2:03 PM
She's basically taking the blinkered and customary wingnut position that any discussion of how we can improve the country implies that we are currently in a less than sublime state of perfection, which makes any constructive suggestion an unpatriotic act of treason.
I've seen this termed "conserving narcissism".
It's not new, but over the past decade it's snowballed into a nihilistic cult. I find it very worrisome.
Posted by: boygenius | November 28, 2009 2:05 PM
The comments on the Hot Air site put this in my head: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp9852hq0W0
Now I can't get it out. Help.
Posted by: botanyguy | November 28, 2009 2:14 PM
Shucks. I was planning to vote for Palin/Bachmann in '12.
(rolls eyes, blows nose, emits methane)
Posted by: Mystic Olly | November 28, 2009 2:22 PM
Antiochus Epiphanies:
I think it was "Way of the Dragon", though it may have had a different title in you country. There is also the great moment when Bruce Lee tears out a large handful of Ol' Chuck's ginger chest hair.
And yes he gets considerably whipped.
Elsewise: It is important that teachers are sensitive to background as it appears that childhood stress (often a result of poverty or marginalisation) can adversely effect adult working memory.
http://www.pnas.org/content/106/16/6545.full
I hope this turns up as a link, cos I ain't got no skillz at the wub.
Hugz, Oli.
Posted by: The Bobs | November 28, 2009 2:50 PM
She's basically taking the blinkered and customary wingnut position that any discussion of how we can improve the country implies that we are currently in a less than sublime state of perfection, which makes any constructive suggestion an unpatriotic act of treason.
Right you are PZ. It is important to realize that this same belief system applies to themselves as well as the state they inhabit. Conservatives see themselves as incapable of change. They then take the egotistical position that they don't need to change. They are already perfect, and so are their ideas. Religious beliefs are used to justify this position.
Posted by: AdamK
|
November 28, 2009 3:15 PM
Commitment?
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/28/palin-turkey-trot-quit/
Posted by: Shane Street | November 28, 2009 3:17 PM
As is all too distressingly usual, when PZ goes off the biology reservation he gets it wrong, and the echo chamber drowns out reason.
Look, if someone as fair-minded as Margaret Soltan thinks you have a problem re: "disposition" as a criterion for admission, you do in fact likely have a problem (http://www.margaretsoltan.com/?p=19663)
In the comments at University Diaries, a Sherman Dorn also tries to argue that the document has been distorted. He is wrong, as Soltan points out:
“dispositions as a criteria (should be criterion) for admission” – page 30
“disposition assessment” as a criterion for admission is repeatedly cited.
Posted by: natural cynic | November 28, 2009 3:29 PM
If this country is so perfect, why did a guy named B Hussein Obama get elected president?
And the R stands for reactionary. It's more comprehensive term than racist.
Posted by: lordshipmayhem | November 28, 2009 4:03 PM
>>>Shucks. I was planning to vote for Palin/Bachmann in '12.
I'm even more disappointed. I was hoping to vote for Bachmann/Turner Overdrive. ^_^
Posted by: variable | November 28, 2009 4:12 PM
I like this sort of thing. PZ gets the real scoop and what a dull story it'd be without lunatic conservatives.
With them it is more of a parade of folly. Thanks for writing this particular story.
Posted by: Kagehi | November 28, 2009 4:23 PM
"I think I must just be paying more attention than the rest of you, but by turning my brain into a pretzel I can just about see this as, "Not allowed to use the excuse that student's parents, or the students, are ignorant dumbfucks, to teach creationism and other nonsense, instead of real classes."
I am *sure* this is precisely how they are interpreting the wording. After all, the whole goal of the right wing wackos is to stuff Jesus in every dark hole they imagine exists, and a few that make certain online sex aid stores make more sense, so anything suggesting that professors should ignore the mythologies of the students, and do what they always have, which is teach *fact*, wouldn't sit well at all with crazies. Especially if a) they can make it seem like its some new, anti-Christian policy, or b) they actually imagine that this new policy addresses the subject of "what" not "who", and "how".
Posted by: Moggie
|
November 28, 2009 4:28 PM
#26:
You ain't seen nothing yet!
Posted by: Rey Fox | November 28, 2009 4:52 PM
The R is for Racist. Spread the meme far and wide.
"I also dream of a Beck/Palin candidacy in 2012 ... but only because it would be crushed so easily by the Dems."
Never, ever, EVER put it past the American public to vote in complete idiots. Obama only beat McCain/Palin by three percentage points, remember. All it takes is one foreign scare to rush all the sheeple to the R side.
Posted by: No BS | November 28, 2009 5:26 PM
Chuck Norris's real name is "Carlos Norris".
Oh the irony....
Posted by: bcoppola | November 28, 2009 6:02 PM
@Kevin #4: You beat me to it.
Posted by: plumberbob | November 28, 2009 6:04 PM
We're all having too much fun setting-up the next ticket for the R's, but we should all remember H. L. Mencken:
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
H. L. Mencken
US editor (1880 - 1956
Posted by: Haley | November 28, 2009 6:10 PM
I realize this was back in the 70's, but when my mom was in high school she was failing geometry. The teacher offered to give her a C in the class if she would drop the class at the semester and take home economics. She took up the offer, figuring she was just stupid.
Should Minnesota really work to stop such wonderful math teachers from helping failing females whose pretty little brains can't handle triangles?
Posted by: HenryS
|
November 28, 2009 6:24 PM
teachers who demonstrate the commitment to focus relentlessly on student learning and take responsibility for the learning of all students without seeking excuses in the community, family, and culture of the students
**********
I bet that the "academic" educators who write this crap wouldn't last a day in a "challenging" teaching environment.
I have a friend who teaches 4th grade in a "inner city" school and it very good at it. At the beginning of the years 50 to 75% of her class is functioning below grade level; some at pre-school level. At the end of the years her class is usually #1 on the 4th grade achievement test.
That said, it is hard to blame the teacher when the kids come to school with inadequate diets, lack of sleep from gun shots during the night and a parent who doesn't have 20 minutes at night to hear Jane read.
And then we get to the threats of violence from parents and the kids; fourth grade boys sexually assaulting girls in the bathroom, etc. Then the administrators who don't want to deal with these types of problems because it will look bad for them and instead blame the teachers for not being sensitive to the culture.
Unless and until the out of classroom environment is also dealt with; it is a hopeless situation, IMHO. Won't happen because it will cost money.
Posted by: Knockgoats | November 28, 2009 6:30 PM
Obama only beat McCain/Palin by three percentage points, remember. - Rey Fox
7.2%: 52.9% Obama, 45.7% McCain. Amazing how long the "close result" meme has persisted.
Posted by: Biology Blogger | November 28, 2009 6:47 PM
It's not so far in the future that Glenn Beck will advocate a coup-de-tat, and then cry on his new youtube channel why the FCC shut him down, and how they are defecating on the constitution.
Posted by: amphiox | November 28, 2009 6:48 PM
"Obama only beat McCain/Palin by three percentage points, remember."
Heh. And by how many percentage points did Bush beat Gore?
Oh. Never mind.
Posted by: Biology Blogger | November 28, 2009 6:49 PM
@38 Obama also beat McCain by about 8 million votes in the popular vote. The GOP was slaughtered.
Posted by: Mark A. Siefert | November 28, 2009 6:52 PM
I remember a similar reaction around the time Dances With Wolves came out and when their was criticism of commemorating the 500th Anniversary of Columbus' first voyage to the "New World." back in 1992. I remember conservatives complain that any facts brought up about how whites mistreated the aboriginal peoples was "historical revisionism" from the anti-American, Marxists in Hollywood and Academe and that the Native Americans where either heathen savages who got what was coming to them or benighted primitives who are now ungrateful for all the things the white folks have done for them. (For instance: There is one Christian troll on the JREF forums that insists that Conquistadors SAVED the Meso-American people by forcing Christianity on them.)
For these people, America is perfect... or it was until those evil liberals in the 1960s ruined it all by ending mandatory prayer in schools, legalizing abortion, and letting the "coloreds" use the same restrooms as the white folk. Bringing up matters like slavery, or the genocide of native peoples, or the internment of Japanese American during WWII are either outright lies or exaggerations made up by people who "hate" this country and the freedoms (well, freedom for rich, white Protestant, males) it stands for.
Despite their alliance with fundamentalist Christianity and the monotheism that it entails, U.S. Conservatives actually worship two gods: Yahweh and America--or at least their mythologized America ala John Wayne, Norman Rockwell, and Ward Cleaver. Like I AM, America is a jealous, spiteful, and violent deity who will not abide criticism or competition.
Posted by: Midnight Rambler
|
November 28, 2009 7:02 PM
Actually, the thing that really set them off wasn't so much this bland policy, but the fact that behind it was the document reported on here, which calls for a raft of sensitivity training for teachers. To me it looks like the typical earnest, do-gooder diversity blather that comes out of university humanities departments, but some people seem terrified that teachers might have to be learn about multiculturalism. The horror!
Posted by: Monado, FCD | November 28, 2009 7:02 PM
#38: -1/2 ?
#35: HenryS, congratulate your friend for me. Then find out what she's doing and bottle it. Maybe she can write out some principles and procedures and go on a teach-the-teacher tour?
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
November 28, 2009 8:02 PM
Mark A. Siefert
You are correct.
I know people, some of them relatives, who really do see America as God’s chosen country, and they don’t want anyone apologizing for it—about anything—or changing it in any way. They long for the Reagan years, and it’s not hyperbole to say that they fear God’s wrath if the country become tainted with “socialism.” (God apparently is a diehard capitalist, and we all know how scattershot his aim is if he gets pissed.) Many of them believe Obama is a Muslim, or even the anti-Christ (he sure ain’t no Christian), set out to destroy America from within. When conservative leaders try to stir up controversy about, well, anything, and rant and rave about how it’s all a socialist/communist/fascist plot to overthrow America, these salt-of-the-earth Americans can be depended upon to become hysterical. And the more obscure the talking points — like this article that the average wingnut probably doesn’t even understand— the better the tactic works with people who are already riled that a black Muslim is in office.
It takes patience to deal with them, and it always leaves me feeling drained and a little sick to my stomach.
Posted by: Kseniya | November 28, 2009 8:11 PM
I've pretty much given up on changing anybody's mind -- if they're that far away from the middle, anyways.
Posted by: Matt T. | November 28, 2009 8:14 PM
I also dream of a Beck/Palin candidacy in 2012 ...
Those two monumental egos? Never happen as neither would agree to being subordinate to the other. It'd be fun to watch 'em fight and scratch, though.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
November 28, 2009 8:23 PM
Kseniya
I can’t help it. I’m too stubborn to let some things slide. I just have to step in and say something. Oh when will I ever learn?
Actually, I think it helps sometimes. A calm voice of reason can help loosen the grip on those pitchforks.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | November 28, 2009 8:24 PM
Perhaps this is the problematic line:
After all, anybody who can speak their language must be one of them.
Posted by: Decker | November 28, 2009 9:06 PM
This is too much to hope for, but PLEASE let them destroy our fucked-up concept of teacher education and replace it with something reasonable. Teaching draws some wonderful, dedicated professionals. It would be nice if universities provided extended professional experience in the classroom, instead of five semesters of "theory" and one semester of student teaching. We might even weed out the minority of bad teachers and attract more people to the field.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet
|
November 28, 2009 9:20 PM
PZ, I'm surprised that you're defending multi-culti nonsense like this:
Special "respect" for superstition, as long as it's not American superstition? I thought better of you.Teachers are already the least-academically qualified among college-goers, which has a large negative effect on educational outcomes (teachers can't teach what they don't know). The effect of this demand to make teachers "look like" the student population would be to lower standards further. Worst of all, the students most in need of highly-qualified teachers would be the least likely to get them; the best of their co-ethnics will be off to med school and business school instead of taking low-paying teaching jobs where they're abused every day.
That's pure racism.
In other words, the prospective teachers must internalize and agree with the multi-culti orthodoxy before they'll be allowed to study for credentials.
More racism. The university is blatantly marginalizing anything and anyone "white", while asserting that the people being marginalized enjoy "privilege". This is pure Newspeak.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has been attempted. Teachers College—Columbia University established an ideological litmus test for teachers calling for “commitment to social justice.” One would think that a solid education in the Three R's would be the best way to achieve equality, but that is now secondary to promoting multi-culturalism. And it is not mealy-mouthed nonsense; it means that students not spouting the ideology will be expelled, like Ed Swan at Washington State University (link in next comment).
I'm afraid that the columnist is right and you are wrong.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet
|
November 28, 2009 9:22 PM
FIRE item on Ed Swan case at Washington State University.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
November 28, 2009 9:25 PM
well, it took long enough for the "talking about white privilege = racism" crowd to show up.
Posted by: R. Schauer
|
November 28, 2009 9:29 PM
If you aren't from the Minneapolis area you probably don't know that KK's cognitions are beyond the density of Osmium.
A true flat-earther, KK has repeatedly demonstrated an inability to see beyond her own narrow beliefs and wishes so it's no wonder she would rail against something in education she doesn't understand.
And for the republithugs to pick-up her rantings...well, it doesn't speak well for them at all. In fact, they have embarrassingly little to say if KK is their new mouth piece. KK, what a joke.
Posted by: a_ray_in_dilbert_space
|
November 28, 2009 9:32 PM
Engineer-Poet,
Spoken like a man who has never done any teaching. Please do carry on while the others sharpen their claws.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
November 28, 2009 9:58 PM
While I have never heard of you. You need to prove yourself trustworth and truthworthy. So far, you are off to a bad start.There is a difference between respecting those different than you, and expecting teachers to be minorities. I can be a white male old fart, but still respect those who are in the minority, unlike you. Your failure to understand the difference says a lot about you, none of it good.The school district I live in has a majority of "minority" students. What part of that don't you comprehend may happen? They don't need minority teachers, just teachers who won't treat them like trash because they are minority.Big baldfaced lie. Those who are white can be respectful of diversity. Those who are white, but aren't respectful of diversity, like you, are bigots. Don't want the term applied to you? Change your attitude.No, idjits like you columnist and you are always wrong. Get used to it, or actually learn something.PS. Engineers are not known for their rational thinking at this blog. Lose the attitude. There are some very smart people here, people who used to teach losers like you.
Posted by: HenryS
|
November 28, 2009 10:11 PM
#35: HenryS, congratulate your friend for me. Then find out what she's doing and bottle it. Maybe she can write out some principles and procedures and go on a teach-the-teacher tour
*********
What does she do? She gets up every morning at 3:30 AM, runs five miles, drives for 45 min., gets to school at 6:30 to get ready for class and works every day to get the kids to learn.
Every year before school starts, the "educators" have a week "work shop" outlining the latest "sure fire" method to get the kids to learn..ie pass the "test". Her approach is to care for the kids, don't take any shit from the kids or parents and expects them to work hard.
A couple of years ago she had a child newly arrived from India, who spoke little English. His parents opened a "hole in the wall" restaurant. My friend's daughter and I went there for dinner and the kid was sitting at one of the tables working on a huge pile of homework. My friend smiled and said "That's my mom".
This is probably her last year...she will be 69 years old and the school district has been trying to get her to retire for four years. An easy way to cut the budget is to retire the senior teachers and hire the new grads.
Posted by: Kseniya | November 28, 2009 10:22 PM
Engineer:
You fail to discern the differences between superstition, convention and tradition.
Posted by: Anri
|
November 28, 2009 10:36 PM
Engineer-Poet sez:
Could you link to the discipline this teacher received? I mean, she was punished for this, right?
Because the bit you quoted just said that the Koreans were shocked, and then the teacher was told why they were shocked. Please let us know the outcome of this sordid tale.
- Citation needed.
(Even assuming that this is calling for more teachers that 'look like' the students - it doesn't, but let's pretend that it does...)
Why would that lower standards? Because minorities make poorer teachers than whites? Please explain.
- Citation needed.
Which bit? Please be more specific.
Would you say that no teachers are privileged due to race?
Would you say that no teachers are challenged due to race?
Would you say being aware of this, in your own life and others', is a good or bad thing?
Can you give us some examples of this marginalization?
What part of a commitment to social justice as a guideline do you object to, exactly?
Yep, worlked just fine in the 50's, right?
Oh, wait...
The world, you know, the actual real world, is becoming increasingly multi-cultural.
If you don't care for that, that's fine (well, it actually smacks of bigotry, but whatever floats your boat). Ignoring it is not going to make it go away, though. And ignoring instruction based on the facts facing the current world is, well, just kinda dumb.
Um, yeah, and the student sued the school, and won.
The case was ruled on by college graduates, I'm almost certain of that fact - pretty well-educated folks, I think.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and think that most of them are strong believers in a commitment to social justice, as well.
But don't take my word for it, ask them - write to the Supreme Court of New York and ask them if they believe that a commitment to social justice is a good thing or a bad thing.
Wanna lay odds on the response?
Nope, don't see it.
Posted by: OctoberMermaid | November 28, 2009 10:42 PM
Having not read any comments on either of those wacko sites (I'd rather not get queasy this late in the evening), I might be completely out of line saying this, but... I don't really think it was a racism thing for them. I honestly don't think they gave it that much thought.
With how clear the language seems to be here, they're either blatant and shameless liars, or they're truly delusional conspiracy theorists who pick out random words and sentences from any paragraph, like Russell Crowe in a Beautiful Mind, and see sinister plots in it that they just know are true because they know that they know.
Or they're just your garden variety ignoramuses who butt their heads into something they don't understand and don't care to understand, then freak out when their idiotic misinterpretation of the situation sends them into a panic.
It's like writing your congressman begging him to ban genetics because you heard there are "terminator genes" and you don't want any of those little robots coming after you.
Posted by: sioux laris | November 28, 2009 10:59 PM
Engineer-Poet.... My word, what a bunch of faux-reverse-racism bullshit!
I'll stoop in the mud and feel around.... There! Got one!
Well you've managed to further the negative stereotype of TWO perfectly respectable occupations, so why not extend your name a bit more? Engineer-Poet-Mime-Accordionist, perhaps?
[steps back on the shores of Sanity and hoses off.]
Posted by: isaac | November 28, 2009 11:01 PM
So true.
I wonder sometimes if she is there to blunt some of the charges from the right that the Star Tribune is a leaft-leaning newspaper. It is not.
One strong possibility is that she is at the Strib so the righties won't holler so hard because of Syl Jones' column.
(Syl Jones is a black man with a column wherein he regularly disabuses conservative white Minnesotans of their self-delusions of superiority. He calls them the "Ice People." And he is quite good at what he does.
The right hates the fuck out of that.
But Minnesota itself seems much less liberal than it did. People are talking about Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann, and it is getting hazier and hazier that this place also turned out Paul Wellstone, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale and others. Minnesota is at least a bit to the right of where it used to be, collectively, although there is enough blue left for it to still be a kind of a purplish state.
There is a particular fiction that Minnesota maintains about itself, called Minnesota Nice. It's kind of hard to define it exactly for those who haven't been here, but just think of Garrison Keillor and Lake Wobegon and you get a feel of how Minnesotans regard themselves. If you scratch a Minnesotan invoking Minnesota Nice, you will more than likely reveal a real bastard, and an ignoramus as well. Katherine Kersten is a "Minnesota Nicer." (There are good people in Minnesota, of course, but like most genuinely good people everywhere, they don't make a big fuss over what good people they are. It's the ones that make a big deal out of being good and honest you have to keep an eye on).
Well, Syl Jones isn't having any of that either, and he calls "bullshit" at the drop of a hat. I regard the hoards of wingers howling after one of his columns as signification that he hit another one right on the head. I haven't read that paper in a little while, though, so I'm not sure if he's still there.
But I wonder if there would *be* a Katherine Kersten without Syl Jones.
Posted by: ice9 | November 28, 2009 11:21 PM
As a Minnesota teacher transplanted from, well, less sensitive parts, I find myself in the awkward position of agreeing with Katherine Kersten, just a little bit. (and for those of you not routinely subjected to her emetic prose, she's every bit as bad as PZ says, perhaps worse--she's a flat, uninteresting writer, a one-note twit.)
Engineer-Poet's rather shrill fisking above is no better. The reverse-racism case is far too complex for teacher-training, which is hand-to-mouth half-academic bureaucrat hamster-wheeling at best and not likely to foster much in the way of anything as it's currently operated.
The real failure is not the processing of education grads, who are typically very light on content areas and heavy on practically worthless educational courses. Nothing has been done in recent years to encourage the strong and capable candidates to choose education; those with the natural inclination to teach (those who will become very good teachers) are discouraged from venturing anywhere near the classroom. Education schools do their part by being stultifyingly boring and by inflicting on their students catastrophes like diversity training when what they really need is lots of contact with kids in order to evaluate whether they really want to undertake the critical first five years in school that is essential to establishing and polishing the best teachers.
90% of what is useful to a teacher is gained through experience, either before or after the college credentialing. Yet colleges imagine that they instill some kind of lasting and useful content matter, pedagogical tactics, and experience of diversity. Lily-white midwesterners who have seldom seen a person of any unusual experience or heritage can still be deeply empathetic teachers, or bigoted, narrow-minded dolts. A course equips students with little of value. Learning idiotic trivia, like that Koreans write dead people's names in red, is irrelevant. If you have your Korean students' respect then minor cultural errors will be learning opportunities. If you don't have their respect, you can know their culture inside-out and have kimchi buried all over your backyard and they will still learn nothing and give you a very hard time. Which you will deserve.
I was lucky to student-teach with a guy who would never have passed the University of Minnesota's coursework in education. He was hopelessly unorganized, culturally clueless, and constantly wore an expression of astonished shock. And he was among the best teachers I've ever seen. He taught advanced maths and AP English to a student body that was very diverse. On my first day in a class that was about half Vietnamese I asked one of the kids how to say "Good Morning" in Vietnamese. He taught me carefully, and I proceeded to tell the next dozen kids to enter the room to eat shit. Disaster? Horror? Nope. Just kids. Within a month I had to stop shopping in the Vietnamese shops because they wouldn't take my money. I wasn't much better at the culture (though I had mastered the real "Good Morning") simply because it didn't matter to them; what mattered was hard work, sincerity, high standards, and fairness. The model has repeated itself throughout my career in suburbs and in slums.
Kersten is wrong, and stupid, but teacher training is a major problem for our system. University systems are famous for erecting idiotic and useless barriers in the way of people who want to teach, and who should be allowed to try. When I came from my previous state with nearly 20 years of success with a wide variety of students, I was required to take a human relations class that was insulting, obvious, and expensive, and made me embarrassed to be a liberal. (luckily I was not by far the most jaded veteran teacher there, and the piercingly boring three-hour class sessions were lightened by the lovely friction among the old chalky retreads in the back and various paragons of diversity in-the-flesh, including the several foreigners, militant lesbians, various stenographic undergraduates, and the violently empathetic instructor. We even had a pair of hockey players taking the course because it was advertised as easy. I wasn't affected by the indoctrination, but it was there, if only in the person of the state requirement to take a course that was administered by people who think it's critical to master dumbassery like how not to offend adolescents from 140 different cultures.
ice9
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
November 28, 2009 11:41 PM
You are exactly right -- a lot of the education revision involves this kind of rhetorical inbreeding, where people waste a lot of time in committees and spew out a lot of mushy, jargon-filled memos. More and better-presented content is essential.
The point is, however, that the college of education was not trying to implement a tyrannical scheme to exclude certain political groups. The goals were good (I think it's fair to say that people who say, for instance, that black kids are inherently handicapped are not the kind of people we want teaching black kids), but it was presented in a lot of high volume academic hot air.
Posted by: argystokes | November 28, 2009 11:41 PM
I can report a little bit of good news for teaching programs. I was just certified in June, having taken only a handful of Education courses, but serving a full time internship for an entire school year. I think this has given me a serious edge over the other new teachers who came from traditional programs, even though I probably won't be imitating my mentor too much when I become a full time teacher.
I am under the impression that more schools are beginning to switch to this model of Ed School. Hell, they still get to charge big tuition and don't have to pay as many professors to teach courses.
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | November 29, 2009 12:24 AM
PZ, my all-time favorite crusade of Miss Gulch's was The Great Northfield Smack 'n' Crime Epidemic of 2007.
Posted by: Ema Nymton | November 29, 2009 1:43 AM
Wow.
Engineer-Poet, do you realize you're a dumbfuck? Just thought I'd point that out.
Posted by: Colin Meier | November 29, 2009 1:52 AM
ice9 - that was a great post. Loved the bit about the Vietnamese kids' language lesson! ROFL.
Having taught at high school (for a thankfully very, very short period of time), I'd say from what I saw that a lot of teachers become teachers because they enjoyed being students - which is the wrong reason.
You're right - it is truly only those who have a strong desire to teach who succeed, and they should be encouraged.
Posted by: Notkieran | November 29, 2009 2:07 AM
As a teacher (in Singapore), I have been fortunate enough to benefit from the system here, whereby the majority of classroom teachers are graduates in a related discipline, and then get a one-year postgraduate diploma course in "education" inflicted on them.
The module in "special needs" taught us "general strategies" to deal with "individual differences" and never noticed the irony.
I didn't have much good to say about the course in general, but mostly I just smiled and nodded and wrote postmodernist Sokal Hoax-type essays to pass.
There are, of course, teachers who are light in content and heavy on "educational" modules (they graduated directly from teacher training colleges). Normally we they're slated to be fasttracked into administrator and principal positions.
Posted by: Kagehi | November 29, 2009 2:48 AM
It should be noted that there "has been" a real trend in some universities, or at least there was, to go *too far* along this path. One of the biggest, about 5+ years ago, "diversity experts" hired to teach the subject to both faculty and even students was notable for stating that, "You should give black people some slack about being late all the time, they can't help it." As near as I could figure, he was black himself. However, this wasn't the only idiot thing he tended to teach. I am not sure there was one single culture or 'race' that he didn't have some stupid assed claim about, including whites, which basically presented them as having some major failing, which was either innate in their culture, or, it could be implied, their genetics, which you had to be aware of, if you wanted to properly deal with their 'diversity'.
In short, the sorts of people that come up with these committees, and worse, make policy on them, can be just as blindly stupid about who, what, and how they teach "sensitivity training" as the Iraqi military is about the effective use of dowsing rods.
That said... The far right are **still** wrong, and I stand by my statement that this is bloody not about mere racism, but the fact that it undermines the imaginary ability of equally imaginary teaching freedom fighters, to teach utter bullshit, or right wing ideology, along *with* the racism. The irony... some of the dumbshits they hire for this can be actually more effective at teaching false stereotypes, perpetuating racist expectations and perceptions about cultures and people, and creating the very environment of inequity, in the name of fixing it, than any white power loony has *ever* managed, and some of them do it to themselves.
Posted by: Thomas Galvin | November 29, 2009 7:28 AM
"Jesus loves you just the way you are, but he loves you too much to leave you that way" = a lovely Gospel message.
"I love America just the way it is, but I love it too much to leave it that way" = unpatriotic heresy.
Posted by: J-Ball | November 29, 2009 10:22 AM
Understatement of the century.
It's been said that Palin heading up the R ticket in 2012 would probably result in "a catastrophic election result". Beck/Palin would be even better. For the Rs it would make the movie 2012 look like a Disney flick. For the rest of us it would make the election look like a Quentin Tarantino flick. :-)
Please, please, please.
Posted by: Paul Hands | November 29, 2009 10:58 AM
Hey, PZ.......just got the 28th November issue of New Scientist. You have a 2 page spread on pages 32 & 33.
Nice one!
Paul
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
November 29, 2009 11:04 AM
Paul, we know.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/11/im_profiled_in_new_scientist.php
Posted by: The Swede | November 29, 2009 11:23 AM
OctoberMermaid:
I don't really think it was a racism thing for them. I honestly don't think they gave it that much thought.
So if someones gut reaction when not thinking is racist, that means they are not racists?
Your logic completely escapes me.
Posted by: Forbidden Snowflake | November 29, 2009 12:05 PM
Mark @#40:
Rockwell, who, ironically, did not see the United States as perfect by far and wide, and expressed considerable social criticisms, esp. on the topic of racial segregation.
The Problem We All Live With
Moving In
Posted by: R-Tam | November 29, 2009 2:05 PM
"You mean Palin/Beck, which is about the only worse combination then Beck/Palin."
Palin/Beck is never going to happen. I'm gonna let Glenn explain...
Palin's gotta know her place, y'see.
Posted by: Jim Thomerson | November 29, 2009 4:05 PM
I knew, maybe 30 years ago, that using a red pen to mark papers was not a good thing. That teachers today do not know this suggests that transmission of educational research results is not very well done.
I think we got our sociology department headed off from accepting graduate students based only on attitude, while ignoring academics.
Posted by: Jim Thomerson | November 29, 2009 4:13 PM
Just for S&G, google 'grading red ink'.
Posted by: Amy Alkon | November 30, 2009 9:07 AM
I'm usually a lurker here -- suggest you check out FIRE's posts on this (that's the Foundation for Individual Rights in education -- a terrific organization that doesn't care what your political background is, liberal or conservative, as long as you are allowed freedom of speech.)
Here's a link: http://thefire.org/article/11316.html/
Piece there is titled "Political Litmus Test for Future Teachers at University of Minnesota - Twin Cities"
Posted by: JBlilie | November 30, 2009 12:08 PM
The problem this report highlights and PZ put in bold at the bottom quote is a real one.
My wife is a teacher and she has seen, many times, seriously discriminatory behavior by colleagues who don't care for non-white students. The Twin Cities (MN) have changed dramatically in the last 30 years -- the area is now very diverse (it used to be lily-white). Some white residents are still adjusting (poorly) to this change.
One time, when asked to identify a child, a colleague referred to one of her students as, "oh, one of those Hmong boys." She didn't even know the child's name. And she didn't care.
Kersten and Beck et al. are in favor of this kind of behavior. Disgusting.
Posted by: JBlilie | November 30, 2009 12:17 PM
Amy @78:
A public school teacher can't say anything they want during their work day. They are contractually bound to teach a specified curriculum and follow the rules of the school and district. (For instance, they can't promote racism in class, even if they are a fervent racist. They can't promote Chrisitanity in their classroom even if they are a fervent Pentecostal.)
Academic freedom does not apply to public school teachers.
Posted by: Rob Czar | December 1, 2009 5:02 PM
You are way off on this one. The authors of the report in no way support their assertions with anything like empirical evidence. The post-modern crowd is distinctly anti scientific and are promoting an ideological agenda.
Please tell me what is an objective measure of bigotry? Are you an bigot about religious fundamentalists? They think you are. Do you want to keep them from teaching? Who gets to decide who is a bigot and who isn't? Why do the non-science departments of the Education college get to insist on a multicultural acid test for teachers?
I cannot believe you are offering an anecdote about teachers in the Twin Cities as some kind of evidence. Please practice what you preach.
Posted by: Resa | December 16, 2009 10:29 AM
"Let them have their Beck/Palin ticket in 2012. The Crazification Factor people would vote for it, and the other 73 to 82 % of the populace would vote for Obama. That would destroy the Reptilian Party altogether, good riddance."
Right, because 82% of the population is going to vote for a guy who not even a full year into his presidency has less than a 50% approval rating? That make sense, I swear it does!
One thing that I have always loved about both conservatives and liberals and really any other political ideaology is that EVERYONE IS A BIASED BIGOT!
How many times do you go do all the digging, reading, research, and contemplating that goes into developing an opinion? Instead, 95% of ALL AMERICANS just watch or listen to their favorite political people and emulate what they say and do. Most people can't even back up one issue with any sort of facts, figures, or even testimonials.
Go read a book or two on the founding of this country and then read John Locke, Montesquie, and Cicero. Develop your own opinions based on the true evidence and then see how you feel.