Two year old forced to take part in Rosa Parks re-enactment

It is important to create an environment where children can learn about the differences and similarities between people of different races, cultures, and religions at an early age. You can read them picture books and show them TV shows and movies that celebrate kids of all colors, cultures, and religions, but include examples of these kids doing everyday things so that they won’t see difference as exotic. Role-model interracial and interfaith interactions, and actively seek out diverse playgroups and child care
 

againstthegrain said:
I'm the parent of a teacher in the US and the idea that teachers "are only answerable to themselves" is absurd. She answers to the parents, and to the school admin and the school district. And then there is the "parents rights" group of culture warriors ready to pounce on the the most innocent actions of teachers, which any teacher w a ounce of sense has front of mind at all times.
Click to expand...
well no shade on your child whose a teacher... but the fact is if they were answerable to parents..no 2 year old would be in handcuffs....
 
hollydolly said:
well no shade on your child whose a teacher... but the fact is if they were answerable to parents..no 2 year old would be in handcuffs....
Click to expand...
Indeed. That's what keeps "hitting me in the face" over and over about all this: the handcuffs. Handcuffs. On that young a child. Why someone would even have handcuffs anywhere near that young a child let alone have one young child put another young child in @#$%ing handcuffs. Of course the fact of racism should be taught, but handcuffs?! :(
 

This is egregious. Some roll play like this shouldn't be done before middle grades if not high school. And any "reenactment" should not have students handcuffing one another or touching one another aggressively. And in the end, I don't think this kind of roll play should be taught. Education can be done without a roll play type situation. Perhaps they can put the kid who gets beat up weekly by their alcoholic father being the aggressor. That won't mess with their mind.
 
hollydolly said:
..but they are described as teachers in the report of this story...
Click to expand...
Well yeah but if you look at the qualifications of "teachers" at that particular daycare, which I did, you'd realize that just about anyone w a pulse and no criminal record could qualify.

And the fact that they carried through w the lesson as planned is a huge indication of who works there.
 
againstthegrain said:
Well yeah but if you look at the qualifications of "teachers" at that particular daycare, which I did, you'd realize that just about anyone w a pulse and no criminal record could qualify.

And the fact that they carried through w the lesson as planned is a huge indication of who works there.
Click to expand...
all the more reason for qualified people to work with tiny tots.. and not anyone they can drag off the streets...
 
hollydolly said:
all the more reason for qualified people to work with tiny tots.. and not anyone they can drag off the streets...
Click to expand...
Well no doubt, but teaching and daycare aren't valued in our society at all so the pay scale stinks so it attracts many that have no skill or training and a very few others that dedicate their lives to teaching, at great personal expense I might add.
 
officerripley said:
I'm of the opinion that humans are indeed in some ways delicate snowflakes--it one of the things setting us apart from the other animals--therefore, due to the well-proven theory of the formative childhood years, 0-8 years (link to a UNICEF article here: file:///C:/Users/mocas/AppData/Local/Temp/MicrosoftEdgeDownloads/889ca9ba-56cc-40be-aeca-16944bc6d9fb/Formative-Years-ECD-Brochure-EN.pdf), care must be taken with what is taught during those years and how it is taught.
Click to expand...
@officerripley, not sure if you realized that you've linked to a PDF on your computer's hard drive ...?
 
Devi said:
@officerripley, not sure if you realized that you've linked to a PDF on your computer's hard drive ...?
Click to expand...
No, I hadn't realized that; thanks, and it looks like Matrix removed it from the thread (thanks, Matrix). It's so weird, though: I copied the URL of that UNICEF site and then used the Link icon to paste it into the thread, just like I've done before with no problems. I wonder what went wrong; gee hope I don't have a virus or something. o_O
 
officerripley said:
No, I hadn't realized that; thanks, and it looks like Matrix removed it from the thread (thanks, Matrix). It's so weird, though: I copied the URL of that UNICEF site and then used the Link icon to paste it into the thread, just like I've done before with no problems. I wonder what went wrong; gee hope I don't have a virus or something. o_O
Click to expand...
I doubt that you have a virus.

Actually, the link is still there in your post (and in my comment). At any rate, for things like PDFs, it's best to use a link to the item on the web. And you don't have to use the Link icon ... just paste the link into your comment.
 
Devi said:
I doubt that you have a virus.

Actually, the link is still there in your post (and in my comment). At any rate, for things like PDFs, it's best to use a link to the item on the web. And you don't have to use the Link icon ... just paste the link into your comment.
Click to expand...
Although the link is still there, when clicked on, it just says, "Oops...requested page not found" so I figure Matrix caught it and fixed it. So instead of using the Link icon here, I should just select and copy the URL address in the box on the site's page and then just paste it into the reply?

Let's give it a try: GIPHY - Be Animated

Okay, I think that worked. Thanks Devi! :love:
 
officerripley said:
Although the link is still there, when clicked on, it just says, "Oops...requested page not found" so I figure Matrix caught it and fixed it. So instead of using the Link icon here, I should just select and copy the URL address in the box on the site's page and then just paste it into the reply?

Let's give it a try: GIPHY - Be Animated

Okay, I think that worked. Thanks Devi! :love:
Click to expand...
I don't think Matrix fixed anything; your original links are still there. It's just that when we click on a link to something on YOUR computer rather than on the Internet, the browser cannot go there and does the standard "page not found" (technically called a "404").

And yes, just paste the URL (link) into your reply.
 
Haven't read this whole thread, but perhaps that Rosa Parks re-enactment was a case of best intentions gone awry?
 
VaughanJB said:
Good grief, we're become a society of delicate flowers. A two year old "forced"? Forced? Really? It's highly unlikely a two year old would have had much idea of what was going on. As to a two year old being "visibly disturbed and upset", I'm sure that happens in that classroom, oh, every hour or so.


When is it too young to teach about racism?
At two years of age, what is the best way to tackle such a topic?
What methods are most effective in teaching the young about this insidious problem?........
Click to expand...
I have an 18 month old grandson and two years is way too young to be doing that to a kid! He's not even talking yet although he can communicate with us sort of. And even if kids can talk at two, their brains aren't digesting complex issues for the most part as they're still figuring out the basics of this world they live in. Basics like sharing, not hitting the kitty, helping mommy......

Their job at two is learning to control their little bodies, to learn cause and effect by playing and getting along with each other, i.e. sharing. That's it! Their little brains aren't ready for societal issues like racism! Left to their own devices, little black kids and white kids will play with each other happily. That teacher was way out of line and yes, by running this little program of hers, she was forcing those kids. And I'm betting that the little kid who was handcuffed felt very isolated and picked on as she couldn't move or leave while all the other kids were free.
 
Paco Dennis said:
Two years old is too young IMO. You would think that teaching basic learning skills and learning how to cooperate would be the curriculum. No need to be teaching innocent children abstract socio-political controversy. There are many ways to introduce the subject without such drastic means also. Let them have their childhood. Save the children!! :)
Click to expand...
Exactly! Our kids will learn to not be racists by how we adults interact with people of every ethnic group. Let them see and hear examples of our accepting interactions with Indians, black people, Asians, etc. Little kids learn as much by seeing how we act or talk to others, as they do from the verbal directions we give them.

I saw a video once of a little girl, pushing her dolly in a little toy grocery cart in the supermarket with her mom. I watched as she strolled along the cooler, pausing now and then to inspect the frozen stuff, picking it up, putting it down.....she looked exactly like a little three year old 'mommy'. That's when I realized how much they watch us and how important our behaviour is.
 
Beezer said:
Haven't read this whole thread, but perhaps that Rosa Parks re-enactment was a case of best intentions gone awry?
Click to expand...
[Sarcasm On]

Couldn't possibly be. It must be a violation of rights, abuse, cause lifetime scarring and trauma, and clearly the teacher should be fired, fined, and put on some kind of register. Because you know, who knows where it could go!

We should remove children's toys that might upset them too. Ban the bible. And protect them like the delicate little flowers they are.

[Sarcasm Off]

What's interesting is that not only do people object to the "play time" nature of this exercise, but they've also decided two years of age is too young to be taught about racism. In any context (or at least none have been mentioned). Which, of course, is exactly what these sensationalist stories are banking on. Outrage, demands, and people who know about things like when is an appropriate time for kids to learn about topics, when for all we know, they've already experienced the issue themselves. Everyone's an expert.

Now, I've been away for a day or so, so I've not been through the entire thread since my last visit. But again - this is the kind of outrage the article banked on.
 
VaughanJB said:
[Sarcasm On]

Couldn't possibly be. It must be a violation of rights, abuse, cause lifetime scarring and trauma, and clearly the teacher should be fired, fined, and put on some kind of register. Because you know, who knows where it could go!

We should remove children's toys that might upset them too. Ban the bible. And protect them like the delicate little flowers they are.

[Sarcasm Off]

What's interesting is that not only do people object to the "play time" nature of this exercise, but they've also decided two years of age is too young to be taught about racism. In any context (or at least none have been mentioned). Which, of course, is exactly what these sensationalist stories are banking on. Outrage, demands, and people who know about things like when is an appropriate time for kids to learn about topics, when for all we know, they've already experienced the issue themselves. Everyone's an expert.

Now, I've been away for a day or so, so I've not been through the entire thread since my last visit. But again - this is the kind of outrage the article banked on.
Click to expand...
Having a completely "objective" reaction to this story or the millions of other stories that people are "outraged" by is kind of a unique position. Reporters look for stories of injustice, accidents, problems, civil strife, etc...because people ARE moved by some of the issues. Are we to stop exposing potential harmful news, because the public has a strong reaction to it?
 
Paco Dennis said:
Having a completely "objective" reaction to this story or the millions of other stories that people are "outraged" by is kind of a unique position. Reporters look for stories of injustice, accidents, problems, civil strife, etc...because people ARE moved by some of the issues. Are we to stop exposing potential harmful news, because the public has a strong reaction to it?
Click to expand...

No, we can discuss it. The linked news story was from the Daily Mail, which US members may not know, is a thoroughly discredited rag in the UK.

There are two elements to this story. Firstly, when should kids be taught about racism. Secondly, is a two year old crying during a class something to be outraged against? For the first, I think there's debate. For the second - do me a favor. :D
 
VaughanJB said:
No, we can discuss it. The linked news story was from the Daily Mail, which US members may not know, is a thoroughly discredited rag in the UK.

There are two elements to this story. Firstly, when should kids be taught about racism. Secondly, is a two year old crying during a class something to be outraged against? For the first, I think there's debate. For the second - do me a favor. :D
Click to expand...
the daily mail is widely distributed in the USA
 
hollydolly said:
the daily mail is widely distributed in the USA
Click to expand...

Having lived in the USA, I can tell you that British newspapers are sold at very select stores, and then out of date. They're not what you'd call "widely available". I mean, you can buy The Sun over there too, but you'd have to do a lot of looking to find it.

One way or the other, The Daily Mail has a reputation for publishing right-wing propaganda and nonsense, and is not an outlet to be taken seriously.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top