Author Topic: Arizona no like Latinos  (Read 28027 times)

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #120 on: May 14, 2010, 07:21:02 am »
Here is a link to yesterday's Tell Me More on the subject:
Arizona has a new law that will closely regulate ethnic studies programs in state schools. Any school offering programs perceived to be galvanizing ethnic solidarity will have a portion of its public funding withheld. Guest host Allison Keyes speaks with Superintendent Tom Horne, of the Arizona Department of Education, who has been a leading backer of the law. She also speaks with Sean Arce, director of the Mexican-American Studies Program in the Tucson Unified School District, who calls the initiative racist, and is planning to participate in a legal challenge against it.

Excerpt:
Another new state law signed Tuesday targets ethnic studies programs in the state schools, and it's got more than a few educators, parents and students a little riled up. The law targets classes that, according to the state superintendent, encourage students to resent a particular race - namely, Caucasians. He cites as an example Tucson school district, which offers courses in Mexican-American, Native-American and African-American studies.

We've got both the Arizona school superintendent and Tucson's director of Mexican-American studies on the line to tell us what they think. Tom Horne is the state school's chief. He's also running as a Republican for attorney general in Arizona. Also, Sean Arce is with us from the Tucson Unified School District.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us.

Mr. TOM HORNE (State Superintendent, Arizona): Thank you for having us, Allison.

Mr. SEAN ARCE (Tucson Unified School District): Thank you for having us, Allison.

KEYES: Mr. Horne, let's focus on the Mexican-American studies classes, since that's kind of a focal point of the legislature. What is it that you've heard being taught that's either offensive or inappropriate for the ears of students?

Mr. HORNE: Well, we have testimony from a number of teachers and former teachers. One is Hector Ayala, who is a current teacher, was himself born in Mexico, but he's an excellent English teacher, teaches at a very high level. The former director of Raza studies taught next to him, and accused him of being the white man's agent because he accused - he opposed that thing. He was told by students that he taught a separate political agenda, and that students told him they were taught to not fall for the white man's traps.

We have another former teacher who says the whole inference and tone was anger. They taught students that the United States was and still is a fundamentally racist country to those Mexican-American kids. Individuals in this ethnic studies department are vehemently anti-Western culture. They are vehemently opposed to the United States and its power. They are telling students they are victims. They should be angry and rise up. By the time I left that class, I saw a change in the students, he said - an angry tone.

We have testimony from other teachers I can read to you if you want to, but that gives you a picture of it. One of their principle textbooks is called "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" by Paulo Freire, who's a well-known Brazilian Marxist. I've read the book. His sources are Marx, Lenin, Engels, Che Guevara and the philosophers who influenced them.

KEYES: Mr. Arce, is that what's going on in the Mexican-American studies program?

Mr. ARCE: Not whatsoever. Not at all. We are about culturally relevant and curriculum. We're about engaging students, and we're about providing multiple perspectives for our students so they have a more comprehensive view and better understanding of the totality of the American experience and American history.

KEYES: What exactly is being taught? Is it Latin-American authors? Is it just history? I mean, what - briefly.

Mr. ARCE: Yes. We actually are in alignment with the Arizona State standards for both history, as well as language arts. So we covered the traditional standards for the state of Arizona for American history. But we also have a more inclusive outlook, and we highlight and insert more of the Mexican-American contributions to this great nation.

KEYES: So there's nothing as far as you know that is anti-white that's - or anti-USA that's being taught in those classes?

Mr. ARCE: Most definitely not. We are about upholding the Constitution of the United States. We're about highlighting, and the students are able to analyze -critically analyze history from multiple perspectives, so they have a more comprehensive outlook on how this country was formed and how Mexican-Americans and all people have contributed to the fabric of this great nation.

KEYES: And students of all colors are welcome in these classes? And people that are not of Hispanic descent are encouraged to enroll?

Mr. ARCE: Oh, most definitely. This class is not in any way limited to Latino students. All students are welcome to take this class. 
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline Lion

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1275
  • Totally hatin'.
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #121 on: May 14, 2010, 08:31:07 am »
Reginald, course content is amended and revised all the time. Look at any textbook today, compared to (say) one used in the 1950s.

In any event, I see you are not really interested in responding to what I posted, above. Which is fine.

Have a good night.

Dude... The fact is that it is NOT being taught in "mainstream" social studies courses, even if a smidgen - and I do mean a smidgen - makes it into the history books. An American history teacher has one year to get from Plymouth Rock to the modern day. If it comes crunch time, stuff is going to be cut out.

Do you know the extent of "Mexican-American" history that a student is likely to get? The Mexican-American War and Pancho Villa. Maybe Father Hidalgo if they are lucky.

You're going to learn a HELL of a lot more about England/France wars and the Roman Empire.

Talk all you want about how it "should" be incorporated into the American curriculum at large, but the fact is that it ISN'T. It's never going to be as long as it is seen as "supplemental" rather than "core."


Offline Reginald Hudlin

  • Landlord
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9888
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #122 on: May 14, 2010, 09:45:41 am »
From Desmond Tutu's Huffpo piece on the Arizona law:

"Abominations such as apartheid do not start with an entire population suddenly becoming inhumane. They start here. . . .They start with trying to solve a problem by asserting superior force over a population.. . . . Not because it is right, but because you can. And because somehow, you think this is going to solve a problem."

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9289
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #123 on: May 15, 2010, 09:09:06 am »
Here's a little debate between 2 university students I saw printed in today's local South Carolina newspaper.  Both are missing some essential points in thier arguement and contradict themselves more than once in their remarks and other statements are lifted directly from right-wing, conservative radio talk shows *cough*FOX!!!*cough* but I think this gives somewhat of an idea what people around my way are thinking:

Should Arizona be boycotted over illegal immigration crackdown?

YES

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.  Send these, the homeless, the tempesttost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

This quote from the Statue of Liberty is what this country was founded on.  We came from immigrants in search of a better life and freedom from oppression.  So why do we feel the need to keep others out of our country who are looking for the same opportunities?
Many United States citizens complain about immigrants coming in and taking away our jobs.  But when it really comes down to it, the jobs they take are the ones that most of these complainers feel are beneath them.  Yes, Yes we have high unemployment rates right now, but how many of the unemployed have tried to find work mowing lawns or washing dishes?  So instead of taking jobs like these, some states have decided to find other remedies.  Arizona has decided that they are going to put laws in place to prevent illegal immigration because of the negative economic effects it has had.
As Americans, we have the right to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment, which means that protestors have every right to boycott these laws.  In turn, these boycotts will cause more economic decline for Arizona.  So instead of helping the economy and “protecting the border”, this state has caused more hardship for its own citizens and for immigrants looking for a chance at a better life.

Mandi  Sordelet,  Senior @ the University of South Carolina





NO

When the Constitution was written back in 1787, the last of the original Bill of Rights was the 10th amendment, often, considered to be the most important amendment.  Essentially, the 10th  amendment states that all powers not given to the federal government are to be left up to the individual states.  Specifically when it comes to illegal immigration, neither the federal government nor the individual states have taken steps to prevent it.  Both levels of government have abdicated their duties and neglected their responsibilities across the board, allowing  illegal immigration to run out of control in the United States.  Arizona, however, has had to deal with the negative economic effects of rampant illegal immigration for decades, and as such passed immigration reform mandating that documentation of citizenship be carried at all times.  This is a very reasonable and appropriate measure for ensuring security and enforcing already-standing immigration laws.  However, activist groups have risen to protest this new mandate and even political leaders in California such as Senate President Darrell Steinberg have called for the elimination of all ties and contracts to Arizona.  National and international boycotts are being proposed against the state.  However, whether you agree with this new immigration law or not, the Constitution was designed so that each state pursue safety, security and prosperity in the ways it best saw fit provided they not intrude upon national responsibilities.  Arizona has been one of the hardest hit by the huge negative economic impact  by illegal immigration, and as such they can attempt to ensure their security in any way they see fir provided they not infringe upon Constitutional rights.  
If you don’t like it, move.

Matt Kneece,  Senior @ University of South Carolina    
« Last Edit: May 15, 2010, 09:29:44 am by Battle »

Offline BmoreAkuma

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2237
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #124 on: May 15, 2010, 10:23:41 am »
If you don’t like it, move.

Matt Kneece,  Senior @ University of South Carolina    
Clown. His entire argument went to waste once he stated this.
With these choices, I felt that the American black man only needed to choose which one to get eaten by; the liberal fox or the conservative wolf because both of them will eat him.

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #125 on: May 15, 2010, 10:45:47 am »
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #126 on: May 16, 2010, 10:51:13 am »
The Apartheid references (Reginald’s post) and the Nazi references (Curtis’s post above, reference to the famous poem that the Nazis took this group and that group, etc ..) are absurd.  By equating the Arizona law with either Apartheid or the Holocaust, they trivialize both.

So, a comic strip is absurd. Gee, really? You, humorless, Micheal? I'm shocked.

The Arizona immigration law does nothing but mandate that local police enforce existing Federal immigration law.  Nothing more.  It is not “Nazi-like” for a police officer to ask for I.D. when a person is stopped for an alleged crime.  Happens all the time.  The hype about “show me your papers” is pure distortion.  

The law says "reasonable suspicion" not "when a person is stopped for an alleged crime". So where did you get your formulation?

The issue being raised on the forum is the potential for harassment and extra scrutiny for citizens and legal immigrants who merely look like they might be illegal. If you don't care about that, fine. Many of us do not assess that risk the same way you do. You've probably never been stopped for DWB.

The Arizona law regarding ethnic studies is actually the antithesis of Apartheid or Nazism, as it demands an inclusive curriculum for all students, treating each student as an individual, rather than indoctrinating students along racial or ethnic lines as members of racial or ethnic blocks. Nothing could be less like Apartheid or Nazism. Arizona is expressly demanding that its educational system not segregate students on the basis of race or ethnicity, which is the real effect that many of these programs foster.

And you know "the real effect" how? So we should pay no attention to the head of the program who says that the intent and effect of the program is the opposite of your intimately held convictions. You must be sure to use this power only for good.

The inclusive uniformity you want to enforce is the status quo. I am in favor of a more inclusive approach to teaching history; I'd like it to go beyond the (white) hero worship orientation. Race and ethnicity is at the heart of the American story, is it not?

Arce claims the classes are "open to everyone." That raised my eyebrows. I can just imagine the grade a non-Chicano student could expect to get from some ideologically driven teacher, and the hostile response the kid would get from his or her classmates, if that student were to seriously critique and strongly disagree with the perspective purveyed in the classroom. As a matter of fact, I wonder how many non-Chicanos have opted to enroll is this alternative program? The practical effect is of course racial segregation of the public schools.

You can just imagine? Michael, that is simple prejudice. The situation you describe occurs every day except most of the time it is the brown and black student in a majority white class. If you listen to the interview, Mr. Arce also said that the ethnic profile of the students in the program is consistent with that of schools in which the classes are taught. So, again, you seem to making stuff up.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #127 on: May 16, 2010, 10:54:19 am »
The Apartheid references (Reginald’s post) and the Nazi references (Curtis’s post above, reference to the famous poem that the Nazis took this group and that group, etc ..) are absurd.  By equating the Arizona law with either Apartheid or the Holocaust, they trivialize both.

The Arizona immigration law does nothing but mandate that local police enforce existing Federal immigration law.  Nothing more.  It is not “Nazi-like” for a police officer to ask for I.D. when a person is stopped for an alleged crime.  Happens all the time.  The hype about “show me your papers” is pure distortion.  If that conduct were Nazi-like, then every time the California Highway Patrol pulls someone over and asks for their driver’s license, one could claim the Highway Patrol officers are a bunch of Nazis.  Under California law, one is required to have with him at all times either a driver's license, state issued I.D. card, or other form of identification. Under Federal Law, since the 1940’s, all immigrants have been required to keep with them at all times proof of legal immigration status.  The Arizona law adds no new burden on immigrants that does not already exist under Federal law. Under the new Arizona law, if the person stopped does not have any form of I.D., that will create a reasonable suspicion that the person might be here illegally.  The police are now authorized to look into that person’s immigration status.  Which is the way it should be, if we are indeed a nation of laws.  What is shocking and irresponsible is the degree that local police in some jurisdictions have been unwilling to enforce the law, and unwilling to cooperate with Federal law enforcement (as is the case with so-called “amnesty” cities). 

United States law encourages immigration … legal immigration. We are not a racist nation. What opponents of the law are really advocating, though most don’t come right out and say it, is that the United States should have no borders whatsoever, or at least no borders vis a vis "some" immigrants.  However, if open borders were truly the “just and compassionate" standard to apply, there are people from all over the world who would flock to our nation, not just immigrants from nations south of the border. Whatever legal immigration standards we have, they should be applied to potential immigrants worldwide, from Latin America, from Africa, from Asia, and from Europe.  There is no moral justification for the de facto favoritism shown by those who demand that the law not be consistently enforced as to all immigrants.

The Arizona law regarding ethnic studies is actually the antithesis of Apartheid or Nazism, as it demands an inclusive curriculum for all students, treating each student as an individual, rather than indoctrinating students along racial or ethnic lines as members of racial or ethnic blocks. Nothing could be less like Apartheid or Nazism. Arizona is expressly demanding that its educational system not segregate students on the basis of race or ethnicity, which is the real effect that many of these programs foster. Programs that promote ethnic or racial chauvinism should not be encouraged, and should certainly not be supported with taxpayer dollars. That is all the Arizona law is preventing. The focus of our public educational system should be to foster unity and mutual respect. 

Furthermore, this has no bearing on freedom of speech. There is no "book burning" here (as Reginald alluded to). Any student or parent or private organization is free to purchase any books they please, and hold private study sessions if they wish. What we are discussing here is the official school curriculum, funded by the general public.  As noted above, there is a great deal of "core" material that needs to be covered by all students, and these courses should not be segregated by race or ethnicity. As to electives that may focus more heavily on the contributions to our nation of one or more ethnic groups , I am sure it is possible to craft courses that meet the criteria mandated by Arizona.  It is just that such courses won't serve the ends of bigoted ethnocentric chauvinists.

I did a quick search to get a sense of what is taught in some of these "ethnic studies" classes, as the description of the program provided above by Mr. Arce sounded like a bit of a whitewash.  You may wish to check this out: 
Arizona Ends Divisive Chicano Studies in Schools
http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?doc_id=1321
Arce claims the classes are "open to everyone." That raised my eyebrows. I can just imagine the grade a non-Chicano student could expect to get from some ideologically driven teacher, and the hostile response the kid would get from his or her classmates, if that student were to seriously critique and strongly disagree with the perspective purveyed in the classroom. As a matter of fact, I wonder how many non-Chicanos have opted to enroll is this alternative program? The practical effect is of course racial segregation of the public schools. Anyone who denies that many of these programs foster ethnocentricism and racial division is, really, not being honest.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #128 on: May 17, 2010, 06:53:24 am »
The Apartheid references (Reginald’s post) and the Nazi references (Curtis’s post above, reference to the famous poem that the Nazis took this group and that group, etc ..) are absurd.  By equating the Arizona law with either Apartheid or the Holocaust, they trivialize both.

So, a comic strip is absurd. Gee, really? You, humorless, Micheal? I'm shocked.

The Arizona immigration law does nothing but mandate that local police enforce existing Federal immigration law.  Nothing more.  It is not “Nazi-like” for a police officer to ask for I.D. when a person is stopped for an alleged crime.  Happens all the time.  The hype about “show me your papers” is pure distortion.   

The law says "reasonable suspicion" not "when a person is stopped for an alleged crime". So where did you get your formulation?

The issue being raised on the forum is the potential for harassment and extra scrutiny for citizens and legal immigrants who merely look like they might be illegal. If you don't care about that, fine. Many of us do not assess that risk the same way you do. You've probably never been stopped for DWB.

The Arizona law regarding ethnic studies is actually the antithesis of Apartheid or Nazism, as it demands an inclusive curriculum for all students, treating each student as an individual, rather than indoctrinating students along racial or ethnic lines as members of racial or ethnic blocks. Nothing could be less like Apartheid or Nazism. Arizona is expressly demanding that its educational system not segregate students on the basis of race or ethnicity, which is the real effect that many of these programs foster.

And you know "the real effect" how? So we should pay no attention to the head of the program who says that the intent and effect of the program is the opposite of your intimately held convictions. You must be sure to use this power only for good.

The inclusive uniformity you want to enforce is the status quo. I am in favor of a more inclusive approach to teaching history; I'd like it to go beyond the (white) hero worship orientation. Race and ethnicity is at the heart of the American story, is it not?

Arce claims the classes are "open to everyone." That raised my eyebrows. I can just imagine the grade a non-Chicano student could expect to get from some ideologically driven teacher, and the hostile response the kid would get from his or her classmates, if that student were to seriously critique and strongly disagree with the perspective purveyed in the classroom. As a matter of fact, I wonder how many non-Chicanos have opted to enroll is this alternative program? The practical effect is of course racial segregation of the public schools.

You can just imagine? Michael, that is simple prejudice. The situation you describe occurs every day except most of the time it is the brown and black student in a majority white class. If you listen to the interview, Mr. Arce also said that the ethnic profile of the students in the program is consistent with that of schools in which the classes are taught. So, again, you seem to making stuff up.

Sorry for the out of order thing above; I didn't think anyone was responding, so I added something and re-posted.  Anyone else on the forum will see that your post is a response to mine, above.  OK, quick reaction:

The cartoon was funny, but on the "Nazi name-calling" issue that doesn't mean that a political cartoonist can't advocate an absurd point of view if he does so.  As is the case here.

On illegal immigration, the tacit postion that opponents of the law are taking is that our immigration laws should not be enforced if the majority of the illegal aliens are of one ethnic/racial group, because enforcement might result in racial profiling.  I disagree and believe the law should be enforced irrespective of race or nationality.  The position that the law should not be enforced, that some violators of the law should be immune because of their race or national origin, is itself ... racist.  Look at the language of the statute, what it permits and what it does not. If the provisions of the statute are not applied as written, and there is instead abuse, then that will be have to be addressed.

As to ethnic studies: The link I provided gives a sample of the sort of thing that is disseminated in the Chicano Studies program. It does not appear to foster mutual respect, appreciation of other racial groups, or unity.  This is not speculation on my part, it is based on what has been reported to the Arizona State Superintendent, and from the materials themselves (and there are other samples in the Internet, emulated by the students at the schools today).  So actually, Curtis, what I am expressing is not prejudice, but rather a simple observation based on reports and materials. 

As to the Arca interview, you evidently did not post the entire text of the interview of both individuals. Why not? Because in what you posted he did not say what you say he said. Mr. Arca has an interest in justifying his program, so what he says, directed to a public audience, must be understood in that context. If you or he are saying that a majority of the kids at one school are Hispanic, and most of those take the Chicano studies program, does that mean there is a separate "Chicano" program and a separate "all others" program? Any way you slice it, this smacks of segregation to me. Fostering division, not unity.

It is not prejudice to speculate that an ideologically-driven left-wing or right-wing or ethnocentric teacher might evidence bias in his grading.  We see this all the time (on the left-wing front) at universities. I don't see why high school would be any different. Again, this is not prejudice on my part, it is just the common sense observation that teachers and professors can themselves be prejudiced.

Let me share with you a very simple vision: A vision of a world without racial or ethnic prejudice. That means respecting others of all races and ethnicities. Respecting each person, as an Individual. If an individual has not harmed you, and wishes you no harm, view him favorably. If he embraces an ideology of hate or purveys prejudice against others, judge that person accordingly. Otherwise, judge him or her favorably, as you would like others to judge you. In applying these simple standards, race is entirely irrelevant. Unless the purveyor of prejudice makes it relevant.

Because, truly, even with all of our differences, we are One Nation and One People. That is what must be taught to our children in our public schools.

I apply the same standard to Jews as to any other ethnic group.  I would not support a separate course of study for Jewish students in our public schools, to replace the core curriculum, notwithstanding the significant contributions that Jews have made to our country, and notwithstanding the fact that there has been antisemtism in America. That is not the function of our public schools, which is to educate our young to become adult American citizens. On the other hand, I would have no problem with an elective course being offered, provided that it did not foster animosity broadly directed against any other ethnic or racial group in the United States (including, of course, "Gentiles" collectively).  Any elective course that would meet my criteria would certainly meet Arizona's.

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9289
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #129 on: May 17, 2010, 07:04:10 am »
Apparently, there was a Miss USA beauty pageant over the weekend and the winner was a 24-year old of Arab-American descent, Ms. Rima Fakih straight outta  Dearborn, Michigan.
As-Salāmu `Alaykum, America!

As reported in a local newspaper today, during the program actor Oscar Nunez ("The Office") asked one of the other contestants, Miss Oklahoma USA  Morgan Elizabeth Woolard about Arizona's new immigration law.  Woolard said she supported the law.  She said she's against illegal immigration but is also against racial profiling.

"I'm a huge believer in states' rights. I think that's wonderful about America. So I think it's perfectly fine for Arizona to create the law."


---------------

Now you know why she didn't become Miss USA! ;D

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #130 on: May 17, 2010, 08:06:51 am »
We've seen in the past how this pageant uses left-of-center political litmus tests to exclude contestants.  I certainly hope this was not what was going on here.  I respect a contestant who is willing to express her sincere point of view, probably knowing that by honestly answering she will get dinged by the biased judges.

However, at least from the appearance of Rima Fakih, she certainly looks deserving. I can't imagine a more attractive contestant.  ;)

If she is of Muslim background, I hope a fatwa is not pronounced against her by some influential radical cleric, on the grounds that she is (1) violating sharia in her public displays and (2) collaborating with the enemy.  I would hope that the radicals have bigger fish to fry. If of Muslim descent, my hat's off to Ms. Fakih, as no doubt she did know that she will get some negative blow-back from extremists. On the other hand, maybe she's Christian. I've no idea (though your caption suggests the Muslim Faith).

Either way ... congratulations to her.   

Though I think beauty contests are kinda silly, her winning the pageant does typify what America and being an American is all about. Not that all of us need to hurry up and enter beauty contests, hahaha.  ;D

Offline Vic Vega

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4140
    • View Profile

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #132 on: May 17, 2010, 11:57:10 am »
As to the Arca interview, you evidently did not post the entire text of the interview of both individuals. Why not? Because in what you posted he did not say what you say he said. Mr. Arca has an interest in justifying his program, so what he says, directed to a public audience, must be understood in that context. If you or he are saying that a majority of the kids at one school are Hispanic, and most of those take the Chicano studies program, does that mean there is a separate "Chicano" program and a separate "all others" program? Any way you slice it, this smacks of segregation to me. Fostering division, not unity.

If you follow the link provided, the complete interview transcript is there. What Mr. Arce said is that the ethnic demographics of students in the Mexican-American Studies Program resembles that in the school overall.

It is not prejudice to speculate that an ideologically-driven left-wing or right-wing or ethnocentric teacher might evidence bias in his grading.  We see this all the time (on the left-wing front) at universities. I don't see why high school would be any different. Again, this is not prejudice on my part, it is just the common sense observation that teachers and professors can themselves be prejudiced.

And what is the reason you bring that kind of bias up as regards the Mexican-American Studies Program (MASP)?
Obviously, grading bias of any sort in any program including the core curriculum would be wrong, right? So how is that charge relevant to this discussion? Unless you think it's more likely to occur in the MASP. And why would you think that?

Let me share with you a very simple vision: A vision of a world without racial or ethnic prejudice. That means respecting others of all races and ethnicities. Respecting each person, as an Individual. If an individual has not harmed you, and wishes you no harm, view him favorably. If he embraces an ideology of hate or purveys prejudice against others, judge that person accordingly. Otherwise, judge him or her favorably, as you would like others to judge you. In applying these simple standards, race is entirely irrelevant. Unless the purveyor of prejudice makes it relevant.

Well, ethnicity might be relevant. Embracing cultural diversity is a good thing. Pretending there are no differences is a fail.

Because, truly, even with all of our differences, we are One Nation and One People. That is what must be taught to our children in our public schools.

I apply the same standard to Jews as to any other ethnic group.  I would not support a separate course of study for Jewish students in our public schools, to replace the core curriculum, notwithstanding the significant contributions that Jews have made to our country, and notwithstanding the fact that there has been antisemtism in America. That is not the function of our public schools, which is to educate our young to become adult American citizens. On the other hand, I would have no problem with an elective course being offered, provided that it did not foster animosity broadly directed against any other ethnic or racial group in the United States (including, of course, "Gentiles" collectively).  Any elective course that would meet my criteria would certainly meet Arizona's.


What do you know, the Tucson Unified School District Mexican-American Studies Department has a website:
Quote
Our Vision

The Mexican American Studies Department is dedicated to the empowerment and strengthening of our community of learners.
Students will attain an understanding and appreciation of historic and contemporary Mexican American contributions.
Students will be prepared for dynamic, confident leadership in the 21st Century.

Our Goals

The department is firmly committed to the following with an academic focus:
    * Advocating for and providing culturally relevant curriculum for grades K-12.
    * Advocating for and providing curriculum that is centered within the pursuit of social justice.
    * Advocating for and providing curriculum that is centered within the Mexican American/Chicano cultural and historical experience.
    * Working towards the invoking of a critical consciousness within each and every student.
    * Providing and promoting teacher education that is centered within Critical Pedagogy, Latino Critical Race Pedagogy, and Authentic Caring.
    * Promoting and advocating for social and educational transformation.
    * Promoting and advocating for the demonstration of respect, understanding, appreciation, inclusion, and love at every level of service.

Sounds like their classes would meet your criteria as well.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #133 on: May 18, 2010, 07:00:28 am »
Curtis, a curriculum that is ethnically focused is more likely to attract an agenda-driven teacher than is the "general studies" version of the core curriculum, which is not ethnically focused on one group.  A curriculum that has a left-wing agenda is more likely to attract a leftist ideologue than the more balanced "general studies" program. Often such folk are not tolerent of alternative points of view. That's why I think it more likely that a student who might be inclined to strongly disagree with the tenor and content of the "Chicano Studies" program might run the risk of a lower grade. I'm not saying this would always be the case, no doubt this would vary from teacher to teacher, but logic would dictate an increased risk. In the same way that we see biased grading in universities. Do you seriously disagree? 

As to whether the Tuscon "Mexican American Studies" alternative program would meet my criteria would depend on the actual content of the courses and the way the teachers teach them. Not on general platitudes on a website.  I'm not sure what the last item really means: "Promoting and advocating for the demonstration of respect, understanding, appreciation, inclusion, and love at every level of service" ... is this directed at members of other races or ethnic groups, including those of European descent, or something else? What does this mean in the context of "Latino Critical Race Pedagogy" and "invoking of a critical consciousness" and "pursuit of social justice" (which, depending on who is using the phrase, can mean various things, and I am totally in favor of true social justice, but often that phrase is used to only mean advocacy of a Left-wing agenda including massive income transfers and increased Government growth and increased Government economic power and domination).  The link I provided, to some of the texts used, didn't seem consistent with multi-ethnic respect and unity of the American People as One People.  There seemed to be a rather divisive separatist orientation. One would not expect this to be proclaimed on the official Program website.

Seriously, I think the only solution is to drop General Studies and Chicano/Black studies and replace them all with ...


   Lebanese-American Studies

Offline Curtis Metcalf

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4501
  • One never knows, do one?
    • View Profile
Re: Arizona no like Latinos
« Reply #134 on: May 18, 2010, 07:35:20 am »
Curtis, a curriculum that is ethnically focused is more likely to attract an agenda-driven teacher than is the "general studies" version of the core curriculum, which is not ethnically focused on one group.  A curriculum that has a left-wing agenda is more likely to attract a leftist ideologue than the more balanced "general studies" program. Often such folk are not tolerent of alternative points of view. That's why I think it more likely that a student who might be inclined to strongly disagree with the tenor and content of the "Chicano Studies" program might run the risk of a lower grade. I'm not saying this would always be the case, no doubt this would vary from teacher to teacher, but logic would dictate an increased risk. In the same way that we see biased grading in universities. Do you seriously disagree? 

Let's see: a questionable assumption followed by specious reasoning along with another implicit assumption that there would be no oversight of unprofessional teachers issuing grades based on anything other than academic achievement and then the leap that differently ethnic students face the prospect of punishment for participating in the program. How could anyone disagree with all that?

As to whether the Tuscon "Mexican American Studies" alternative program would meet my criteria would depend on the actual content of the courses and the way the teachers teach them.

Ding, ding, ding. But that didn't stop you from jumping to the conclusion that they don't meet your criteria. In the interview, Mr. Arce was adamant that the program does not violate the law in spite of Superintendent Horne's assertions. I heard little in the way of evidence put forth by Mr. Horne. Maybe he's got other stuff that he has not yet revealed. Sounds like there will be an effort to stop the program that will follow its due process. Until that time, I will consider that the burden of proof lies with Mr. Horne.
"Seek first to understand, then to be understood."
"Be hard on systems, but soft on people."