Doth thou even white privilege, brother?

[Locutus]

Teacher offended by Shakespeare's 'white' male perspective

The Common Core English Language Arts Standards include Shakespeare as a high school requirement.


Dana Dusbiber, who teaches at Luther Burbank High School is objecting to Shakespeare because of his outdated 'white' man's perspective


Dusbiber argued that students could learn from other forms of world literature including from African, Latin American, and Southeast Asian.


readeth on:


Teacher offended by Shakespeare's 'white' male perspective

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

To learn or not to learn, that is the question.
To be offended by anything ....

 

[Machjo]

Teacher offended by Shakespeare's 'white' male perspective

The Common Core English Language Arts Standards include Shakespeare as a high school requirement.


Dana Dusbiber, who teaches at Luther Burbank High School is objecting to Shakespeare because of his outdated 'white' man's perspective


Dusbiber argued that students could learn from other forms of world literature including from African, Latin American, and Southeast Asian.


readeth on:


Teacher offended by Shakespeare's 'white' male perspective

First off, Locutus, you need to brush up on your archaic English grammar.

That said, if that teacher had a shred of competwnce, she'd understand that the purpose of teaching literature is not necessarily to make the students agree with it, but rather to understand it. If she had any competence, she'd see this as an opportunity to teach the beliefs of the time pertaining to the status of women.

I remember my Jewish high school history teacher recommending Mein Kampf as possibly the best source to understand Hitler's beliefs and how they may have influenced other peoples' beliefs. That teacher clearly understood that you don't read a book to necessarily agree with it, but rather to learn from it.

Though I don't profess the Christian Faith myaelf, I could support requiring English students to read the King James version of the New Testament, or at least the four Gospels or at least one of them as literature to help them understand the book that has influenced the minds of so many English-speakers.

 

[Sal]

Though I don't profess the Christian Faith myaelf, I could support requiring English students to read the King James version of the New Testament, or at least the four Gospels or at least one of them as literature to help them understand the book that has influenced the minds of so many English-speakers.

I just gotta say Machjo...it fascinates me that you have posted this same thought three times in under a week

it's not super significant, but you keep posting about using the bible as a literary source

yes we all know it can be used as a literary source and so can Spencer, and so can Shakespeare and so can a thousand OTHER literary works

and for the record...it doesn't have to be

and it doesn't make you appear more open minded to the Christian bible to say "I would support using it as a literary source"

it is already happily used as such and you have zero input via university curriculum

 

[Machjo]

My view is that the more a book has influenced people's thoughts and beliefs, the more reason it ought to be taught not in university but in compulsory education so as to help students to better understand the books that have influenced the world around them for good or bad. They can include many sacred texts such as the Bible or the Qur'an, official documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. The purpose is not to force students to agree with them, but to understand them.

 

[Sal]

My view is that the more a book has influenced people's thoughts and beliefs, the more reason it ought to be taught not in university but in compulsory education so as to help students to better understand the books that have influenced the world around them for good or bad. They can include many sacred texts such as the Bible or the Qur'an, official documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. The purpose is not to force students to agree with them, but to understand them.

I "sort of" get your point...but if a child is being raised as a Christian that is their belief system. It is a child and as such would be completely confused to be presented with the bible as a "literary source"

just the same as a Muslim would to use the Koran as such

you can't force this as compulsory education when it is THEIR belief as truth

why would you even want to venture there?

beside which they are already taught in school in order to facilitate better understanding of others...

is that not good enough?

 

[Machjo]

I don't understand. Teaching the Bible as literature is neutral by definition. Though it does not promote belief in it, it also does not promote disbelief in it. It merely teaches what it says.

 

[Sal]

I don't understand. Teaching the Bible as literature is neutral by definition. Though it does not promote belief in it, it also does not promote disbelief in it. It merely teaches what it says.

True

but why are you into this whole change the curriculum thing....do you even know anything about the curriculum in the public school?

it sounds like you do not


it also sounds like you mention the bible a lot for someone who professes not to be a Christian

when someone does that it just alerts me to an agenda...actually a hidden agenda...I am not Christian either but like you do I come from a RC background...but I also work within the separate school system

wtf do you care about bible teaching...Catholics don't even teach the bible in school and neither do the public schools

it strike me as exceptionally odd that you would keep bringing this up as a curriculum agenda

 

[Machjo]

No agenda Sal. I went through the separate school system myself, and instead of Catechism where the teacher was explaining how Jesus rose to heaven and my rational mind was thinking rate of acceleration, trajectory and co-ordinates, the teacher could have just had us read the Gospel as literature and decide for ourselves whether His assention was literal or not. It would have developed better critical thinking skills.

Likewise when the teacher tried to teach the Nicene Creed which even some Christians reject. Had she just had us read the Gospel, we could have come up with our own conclusions and better understand where these ideas came from.

 

[eh1eh]

Now we have to change history to avoid offending giant babies? Try reading those other things and leave the rest alone. It all happened. You can't change it. Blow me Dana.

 

[Sal]

No agenda Sal. I went through the separate school system myself, and instead of Catechism where the teacher was explaining how Jesus rose to heaven and my rational mind was thinking rate of acceleration, trajectory and co-ordinates, the teacher could have just had us read the Gospel as literature and decide for ourselves whether His assention was literal or not. It would have developed better critical thinking skills.

Likewise when the teacher tried to teach the Nicene Creed which even some Christians reject. Had she just had us read the Gospel, we could have come up with our own conclusions and better understand where these ideas came from.

you were in a separate school and that was curriculum long long ago...it did not deter your critical thinking one single bit nor did it negate mine...;-)

that was the separate system...you can not possibly judge today's system by the one you came through...it's like comparing apples and oranges... for those who do not like it, they simply do not send their children there it is that simple...and it does not affect you or me one single bit

and all's well that ends well

 

[SLM]

Now we have to change history to avoid offending giant babies? Try reading those other things and leave the rest alone. It all happened. You can't change it. Blow me Dana.

I'm no expert or anything but I'm pretty sure that statement is full of all kinds of triggers.

 

[Curious Cdn]

She's right, you know. Let's stop reaching that "Shakespeare" nonsense and switch to drum circles so that our children develop normally.

 

[eh1eh]

I'm no expert or anything but I'm pretty sure that statement is full of all kinds of triggers.

What? Now I can't have a conversation to save some giant babies from having an uncomfortable time?
Life is a trigger for me, maybe everyone should stop living.

She's right, you know. Let's stop reaching that "Shakespeare" nonsense and switch to drum circles so that our children develop normally.

Define normal.

Without triggering anyone.

 

[Curious Cdn]

What? Now I can't have a conversation to save some giant babies from having an uncomfortable time?
Life is a trigger for me, maybe everyone should stop living.




Define normal.

Without triggering anyone.

I will check what normal is these days with my two children Pugsley and Little Wednesday.

 

[gopher]

Nothing wrong with studying Shakespeare so long as kids also learn Third World literature. This gives them a more balanced and expansive education.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Nothing wrong with studying Shakespeare so long as kids also learn Third World literature. This gives them a more balanced and expansive education.

You mean, like Mao's little red book?

 

[taxslave]

Sounds like the same mentality that got Huckleberry Finn banned from schools.

 

[gopher]

You mean, like Mao's little red book?

I read that as well as Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, & writings of Ho Chi Minh before graduating from high school. Would have read the Rosy Crucifixion but had to turn 18 before the book stores would sell it to me - read the three part series as a college freshman a year later.

 

[Ludlow]

I liked it when the dude said,,,,you mean coitis?"