It would seem that community standards would come into play here. If a large chunk of the demographic at a particular school are kids from backgrounds who would be offended, then that would obviously be a relevant consideration to factor in prior to deciding whether or not to introduce content.
Prophet Muhammad cartoon sparks Batley Grammar School protest
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
It would seem that community standards would come into play here. If a large chunk of the demographic at a particular school are kids from backgrounds who would be offended, then that would obviously be a relevant consideration to factor in prior to deciding whether or not to introduce content.
And I go back to my previous comments about the teacher’s actions in how he taught the material vs. the material itself and the fact that opt out rights exist.
Not much if I go by your justifications for what you feel like teaching at a high school vs college/university classes. "I know more than you" is also not very convincing of a stance when your argument is "kid better learn it, idc"
Persian art, Charlie Hebdo etc. Same difference I guess.
That makes sense for colleges. Not basic high school or school classes.
Are you in USA? How does the curriculum work there?
As a general point and certainly not having a go at you personally, I don't like the "it's part of the curriculum" argument I have seen teachers use in different situations. Certainly here in England, in my experience of having worked in a school and as a parent.
Certainly the opt out isn't easy either. I have had my kids opt out of certain things and "it's the curriculum" argument was used. Only my own experience of being a teacher lead to the teacher/school backing down.
However the "it's the curriculum" isn't a free for all or restrictive. Sure there is guidance and source materials but also leeway for teachers to use their own materials or lessons. In fact I would say that contrary to the oft used argument of it's decided by education boards and such majority of the influence for curriculums comes from teachers and boards and principles.
Yeah the right to opt out would seem essential.
For what it’s worth, I have multiple friends who work as ps teachers/design learning curriculums and none of them think it is a good idea to include such imagery as part of the curriculum. Especially for high school kids. Simply because it deters someone from that particular faith to speak up or it can lead to negative stereotypes regarding their faith, religious beliefs. Both are terrible situations for any student to be in.
Well, it’s part of the law for public schools.
Fairly decent article, but just about the obvious really.
The Batley Protests ask a profound question about who we are. No-one seems to have noticed.
The Batley Protests ask a profound question about who we are. No-one seems to have noticed.
The state department of education sets statewide standards and individual districts write the curriculum that applies to those standards.
Opt outs exist to accommodate things like freedom of religion. I.e. parents can opt their kid out of something like evolution lectures in biology. While they can do that, the teacher is still going to present the scientific facts about evolution in class that day. The bio teacher is under no obligation to deviate from their curriculum because it offends a person’s faith.
Champion of liberal values has now receded to "get with the system or get out". Also, is the right to protest suddenly now not civil and democratic? It's also very problematic the way you think here. What you think you should be able to do is not how a modern fair society works.
In a successful multicultural society, you respect every ethnicity and religious belief. Schooling is a mandatory thing and it's not a place to dive into potential your personal hot takes on what you think is the best way to teach, without taking into consideration your audience.
You can do it and marginalize further an already marginalized minority but then don't complain why they aren't "like us".
As I said earlier, there are countless university courses and subjects that students can sign up for that are all full of these cartoons and no one cares. That is different that shoving offense material into a students face in school where they have no choice.
Actually under the Co-vid 19 restrictions during lockdown i'm not sure what the right to protest is. Otherwise it would be fine in normal times.
I'm not sure what opt out achieves in many cases. I'm of the opinion that certain factors play a key role that maybe do away with the necessity to opt out.
For example I know muslims who send their kids to Catholic schools because the schools have higher achievement rates. They then go in and see the head about participation in assembly and worship. I don't think it's unreasonable for a head to say we are a Catholic school and this is a core value, so no opt out.
Similarly a secular school doesn't need to incorporate worship into assembly at all. If they do and say no opt out then they are wrong. But overall the school should be told no worship.
Now we have issues such as some Muslim parents not wanting kids participating in music. Here if it's a school in Birmingham with a high Muslim intake then surely rather than doing music and having opt out why not look at what it is about music that is the issue and act accordingly? If the issue is no string instruments then why insist on violins, use drums.
You're keeping up with your theme of #MAGA posts. Again, exactly what I would have read on anti BLM youtube comments.
Indeed, everything comes down to the audience type.
Thanks for taking the time to explain.
See for me the opt out for evolution in biology is nuts. I don't see how it would offend a person's faith if it is something that is delivered for what it is.
In your phse type lessons I can see why certain issues maybe a problem. But again for me it's how you deal with them. Surely the idea of education is to not exclude, so you try and find ways around tackling subjects without causing offence.
You might interested in this...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selman_v._Cobb_County_School_District
This is very recent history over here when the pendulum had swung a bit in the opposite direction. Not exactly an apples for apples comparison, but similar in many aspects.
Also I would venture that sometimes it isn't the audience but the teacher. Something that doesn't get as much attention in these situations.
In my two years of working in a secondary school it was obvious that some teachers were on a "crusade" rather than educators.
Well, that’s why the opt out exists. Because it’s purely up to the individual as to what offends them.
For evangelical Christians, evolution is viewed as anti-god propaganda being pushed by evil atheists that want to destroy the Christian religion. They take the story of Creation literally and see any deviation from that as blasphemous.
I think the issue is that my views are shaped by how "we do things here" and a lack of understanding in how you guys do things over there. Not just how you do things but the barriers you face.
With the greatest of respect, reading that link you sent, I think the issues affecting you guys are more than just whether to opt or or not to opt out.
I can’t remember if I posted this to you or not, but the first parent complaint I ever had was an evangelical parent claiming I was trying to indoctrinate their child to become a Muslim... because I assigned them to watch a National Geographic video on the Hajj.
This is a couple generations back from the Cobb link I sent you, less than 100 years ago...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial
You are right, our issues over here are deeper than opting. So are the UK’s.
Last edited:
To a degree it has to be.
As a teacher with a room full of 30 kids there are many factors that come into play where adjustments are and have to be made.
I used to have a class where one kid shouldnt have been at the school as he had learning difficulties. The father himself had the same issue when in school and had gone to a special school. He wanted his kid to go to a regular school as he had faced bullying himself and didn't want his child to go through the same issues.
It may sound unfair that 1 child out of 30 meant I had to make adjustments to how I delivered certain topics but not doing so meant he would become disruptive, which he did out of frustration when not grasping something.
Yeah I think he should have gone to a special school and yeah I could have basically ignored him as to be honest he wasn't going to achieve high grades. But my attitude was to work with what was in front of me and make the best of a situation with minimum disruption.
Kids are no different to any other sphere of life. Some need an arm around nthe shoulder some need a stern word. Part of the role of teacher is to recognize that and adjust accordingly.
In my opinion anyway
but thats not community standards is it?
thats a pupil with learning difficulties and that should always taken into account.
community standards are things like faith, belief system etc of the parents of the pupils and its those things that should not be taken into account
It will always be taken into account. Even history and literature is not without bias.
history and literature as you say are not without bias, but why should that mean you should take local community standards into account when deciding what to teach?
Kids aren't educated to suit their parents personal desires and opinions, they're educated to enable them to fit into society and become productive citizens of such. Curriculums should be standard and obligatory. If we're excluding subjects that offend people, then I have a whole list of things that I want excluded, including any form of religious service.
That's one kid with a certain background. So why not do it if lots if kids have a certain background?
This isn't to confuse with not broaching a subject.
Let's take another example that was real a few years back. Teaching interview technique and shaking hands. Muslim women didn't so we adjusted the lesson. Still taught them the skills.
For me as a teacher many factors would need to be included. So if I had just one Muslim kid in the class and I was teaching blasphemy I would certainly not broach the topic with Muhammad cartoons. I would feel it would be uncomfortable for the one kid and unfair.
Similarly if I had a majority muslims in the class, opt out wouldnbe pointless, unless my aim was to just do it and only a small percentage benefited from the topic.
I don't mean you here, but in discussions like this people don't really consider the intricacies involved. There is a an almost bigotted we know best approach, which teaching isn't the forum for.
The whole point of the post you responded to was that if you send your kids to a religious school then expect religion to be taught. If you don't want that then send them to a non religious one.
If at a secular school then the school hasn't the right to push religious practise onto the pupil.
Curriculums are not standard and don't need to be. A Catholic school having their curriculum based on the ethos of catholicism is absolutely within their rights. Parents choice is not in changing the curriculum.
Becoming productive citizens is a whole other discussion.
It's always been one of the basis for education. A school is a sub section of the community it is based in.
At the same time, I’ve taught a course on the Civil War in a school that was 95+% white rural southern conservative. How should I “tailor” my characterizations of the Confederacy for that majority demographic?
Then whose standards should we take the teachers?
Stick to the facts and have a neutral approach should work?
And when that offends them because they’ve grown up in rural South Carolina conservative culture that teaches that the war was about states’ rights, that the Union were the bad guys, that slavery actually helped black people, and that the Klan is a misunderstood christian organization, then what?
Should I just not teach the course? Since telling the truth about it is definitely, and I mean 100% definitely, going to offend some folks in there...
Religious schools are a blight on society. Education should not consist of splintering the population into groups. Schools should be one place where kids get taught things regardless of their parents own opinions and ideologies.
Your posts are interesting and I have 2 questions
1) How do your colleagues teach Civil war there?
2) If you tell the/your truth, what happens to you?
I think we established earlier that America, and may I suggest particularly the South where I understand you are, and we here in England have different "ideas" about education.
The education system here has core fundamental directives from govt down. So for example the every child matters had an impetus for community partnership working. This was built on by the children's plan. Community involvement and cohesion are key elements of how education is to be taken forward.
Over the years these type of initiatives have seen changes in how certain subjects have been delivered and the changes. A good example would be history and specifically crusades.
In the 80's a kid was thrown out of a class because he was "disruptive". His disruption was to query what the teacher was saying about Richard the lionheart and evil Saladin as well as other bits.
Crusades are still taught but they are more factual now and not biased. Or certainly less so.
This may not answer your question but as I said earlier you seem to have bigger problems over there
Religious schools are amongst the top performing schools in the country.
Education is about preparing kids not just to be economical productive but assets in their communities. Their communities are dictated by the religions and otherwise of the people around them.
A dictatorial approach benefits no one. Schools exist in a social context and this has to be taken into account
Doing your job in factually laying out historic events is not that same as you deciding to show a controversial picture in the current poltical climate. If you do youre purposefully instigating.
If you can't get a point across without these cartoons you'd be a bad teacher.