Florida nixes African American studies course, claims it ‘lacks educational value’

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Florida nixes African American studies course, claims it ‘lacks educational value’

The Florida Department of Education left the door open for possibly accepting the course eventually, but only if the content is tweaked to meet state guidelines.

www.politico.com

Wow, no one saw that coming.

 

[Rhea]

And it is jus the beginning.

 

[ZiprHead]

Cancel culture strikes again.

 

[Juvenal]

I can't say if DeSantis is a racist, but his administration keeps doing and saying things that make it clear that constituency is important to him.

 

[Oleg]

Florida law already requires students to learn black history.

https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/19975/urlt/5-3.pdf

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Florida law already requires students to learn black history.

https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/19975/urlt/5-3.pdf

And US history too... but the AP provides an avenue for much deeper look into the study on such subjects. So much to count as Freshman level courses in college. AP History isn't about learning dates and events, it is about research and a lot more reading.

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

 

[Oleg]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

 

[ZiprHead]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

Can you show the part of CRT teachings that teaches

that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc.

I'll wait.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

So, you made something up.

 

[Oleg]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

Can you show the part of CRT teachings that teaches

that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc.

I'll wait.

Race essentialism is quintessential to CRT.

 

[ZiprHead]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

Can you show the part of CRT teachings that teaches

that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc.

I'll wait.

Race essentialism is quintessential to CRT.

Prove it with quotes.

 

[Oleg]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

So, you made something up.

No. I am aware of the Florida law. And Florida said the AP course could still be allowed if changes were made. It’s not a difficult extrapolation that the AP course, as proposed, in someway deviated from the law.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

So, you made something up.

No.

Yes, as you have no evidence of why they rejected the course. So you made up it had to be CRT.

I am aware of the Florida law.

Well, you think you are.

And Florida said the AP course could still be allowed if changes were made. It’s not a difficult extrapolation that the AP course, as proposed, in someway deviated from the law.

That isn't extrapolating. You just made it up. Which is unfortunate, because Florida had an opportunity to say what was wrong, instead, they just reject it without much of any other comment. Hard to fix something if one doesn't say what is wrong.

 

[laughing dog]

The Government in Florida also noted that this subject was not approved and violated the law, though they did not say what law or how it violated it.

As I understand it, Florida does not allow teaching race essentialism, that one race is superior to another, that a student should be made to feel shame because of their race, etc. Why anyone would oppose those guidelines, I don’t know. But I do know that the proposed AP course is still being developed (it isn’t taught anywhere yet) and I’d guess its drafters tried to include CRT type stuff, e.g., race essentialism.

So, you made something up.

No. I am aware of the Florida law. And Florida said the AP course could still be allowed if changes were made. It’s not a difficult extrapolation that the AP course, as proposed, in someway deviated from the law.

True, but the state did not elaborate on how they thought the AP course deviated from Florida law.

 

[Gospel]

Genuine question. Why haven't the publishers shared what was rejected? Are they under some restraint I'm not aware of?

 

[laughing dog]

Genuine question. Why haven't the publishers shared what was rejected? Are they under some restraint I'm not aware of?

One possible restraint is self-restraint: the publishers do not want to upset the state of Florida by making the specifics public. Publishers of K-12 curriculum are notoriously risk-adverse in these matters because they do not wish to lose access in big markets. That is true whether or not they need to make a few tweeks or if the the state of Florida is simply over-reacting.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Genuine question. Why haven't the publishers shared what was rejected? Are they under some restraint I'm not aware of?

Who says they were told?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Genuine question. Why haven't the publishers shared what was rejected? Are they under some restraint I'm not aware of?

Think Florida said why?? Either they would be exposed as racists or they would be exposed as attacking for invalid reasons.

 

[Politesse]

I doubt it's actually anything so specific as particular lines or passages in need of correction. Florida legislators are barely literate, as the vague and rambling language of FL HB 7 clearly demonstrates; they're not going to be able to produce a detailed critique of a AP Level high school textbook, nor inclined to try.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

We've seen many examples now of Moms for Liberty and other conservolibertarians screaming about things in books and education that are anti-American, make white people feel bad, etc etc that are not actually anti-American or making white people feel bad. So, it may be the case that the state lacks confidence in defending any claims they may have heard from Qaren reviewers of the course curriculum or even possibly that courts could find it unconstitutional for them to ban teachings that turn out to be factual. Making some blanket claims, on the other hand, might get the AP to self-censor and eliminate the factual portions by themselves without the state ever having put in writing the specific wrong conclusions. Or it could just make the AP throw their hands up in the air and give up.