Ulty

oh man...I forgot all about Chad May. What a freaking pansy a$$.

Can't wait for the right-wing talking points tomorrow, about how this guy's testimony somehow proved Joe Biden's guilt.

Poll: Republicans see Trump as a ‘person of faith’ ... more so than Mitt Romney, Mike Pence and others https://www.deseret.com/2023/9/26/23891360/trump-biden-man-of-faith-religious-mitt-romney-vivek-ramaswamy

Whoa, now. I hate CU more than most and hope they lose every game and shut the hell up...but there is no need to celebrate a kid being injured.

I predict that MSU and Tucker will ultimately negotiate a settlement. He definitely royally f#cked up, but his attorneys might have a smidgen of a contractual argument that neither party will want to drag out in court. Tucker will then lay low for a couple of quiet years and resurface as a coach at some religious school in the south.

I mean, he sent his son to play for Mike Riley...so, yeah.

Mel Tucker changed his story, misled investigator in Michigan State sexual harassment case https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2023/09/22/michigan-state-mel-tucker-false-claims-sexual-harassment/70922038007/

I don't know where that term came from, but I think about it every single time I actually carry a loaf of bread, and it makes me self-conscious about how I am carrying it.

Too easy, I'll let someone else answer. I used to work at a school where the same poet once said something over 100 years ago about the campus being beautiful, and the school has been milking it as a marketing slogan ever since then.

We'll agree on that. Dealing with other kids' parents is the worst. All right everyone, if this conversation has run its course...stay gold.

8th grade? You should read about Anne Frank!

damn delinquents with their cigarettes

Fair enough. I love the movie and the book, by the way. And different teachers teach it in different ways. Suppose there was a discussion after every chapter. Dally's relationship with Cherry is not the main theme of the book, but it is one of the smaller themes. A discussion about this particular scene would not be unreasonable if a teacher thought it was important, or if a student had a question about it, it might generate discussion. Or we could all move on because there are more important things happening. It's all fair, and perfectly appropriate for the teacher to make the decision re: how to handle it. In the controversy around this Anne Frank book, do we know how much the teacher focused on that particular page about the menstruation and the breasts? Or did a snowflake parent see it and decide to raise hell based on this one page out of context? You and I would probably both agree that if the teacher planned a whole lesson around that page, it was probably not the most appropriate use of class time (although not worthy of a firing or banning).

I did not say it was sexual harassment, I said it could be a form of sexual harassment, but not on its own, would be dependent on other factors. God damn. The panels shown in the image, on their own, if it happened in real life, would not be sexual harassment or sexual assault, either by the letter of the law or in any practical matter. Girl A asks Girl B if they want to show each other their breasts. Girl B says "absolutely not". If that is the end of the conversation, it is an awkward moment and nothing more. If Girl A continually pressed the issue despite the verbal rejection, if there was unwanted touching, if there was additional unwelcome conduct, it might be a different matter. What I suggested might be a teachable moment is discussing whether or not this was an appropriate interaction. It also doesn't have to be the focus of the lesson plan at all (and probably shouldn't be). But Anne Frank's diary is all about the thoughts and feelings of a teenage girl in hiding, which (gasp!) includes thoughts of sexuality. I don't know all of what is included in the comic version, but the original book is called "Diary of a Young Girl," not "Anne Frank: Nazi Hunter." I have a child in middle school right now reading "the Outsiders." There is a part of the book (and in the movie, which they will also watch in class) when one character harasses a girl at the movies. Is that a lot to toss on the teacher to discuss? Or might that make an interesting conversation in class? Kids are in gangs, stabbing each other, smoking cigarettes, dying. What's the point of reading the book if not to discuss some of these awkward themes? A good teacher is going to be well-suited to talk about these things and have conversations in an age-appropriate way.

No it is not, stop saying that. I'm quite familiar with sexual assault. You're out of your element, Donnie. Maybe it would be an unwanted advance, and therefore a form of harassment (but not on its own, would be dependent on other factors)?

No. If I am a Title IX Coordinator at a school, and someone brings me this book, opens up to that page, and says they would like to make a sexual assault complaint, this is the response I would give:

No, I think I said previously that it's fair to have differing thoughts on the appropriateness of it. However, I definitely am getting worked up on the frequency and normalization of censorship and the suppression of uncomfortable topics. We should talk about these things more at school and at home. But too many people are scared or offended by discussing things like sex and race, even though kids are actually ready for it and need these conversations sooner than most adults realize. Very tactful of you. I would guess that if this is how you talk to your daughters about sexuality, they will certainly not be inclined to engage in a healthy dialogue. How about you zoom about a little bit and question whether or not middle school girls would be curious about sexuality. Maybe have your wife ask them instead (unless she is one of the Moms For Liberty). What, pedagogy? Fair question, but I didn't realize it was such an obscure word. My wife is an educational researcher, and I have heard and read the word "pedagogy" in my household thousands of times over the years. I've also written several investigative reports involving faculty members (germane to this conversation, as I have actually had to investigate claims of discrimination or harassment based on the content of an instructor's curriculum) and have used "pedagogy" or "pedagogical" in context for those reports. Although I definitely agree it is better to use clear, simple language whenever possible.

It's a pretty bad message, especially in New York of all places. The home of the Statue of Liberty. Immigration is a pretty complex issue, and there are certainly issues with infrastructure, housing capacity, etc when facing an influx of newcomers, and some places are going to be better suited than others for managing this. But saying "go somewhere else" is just...bad.

Here is what I actually said, acknowledging that it was adapted from one of the most well known books: "This is one of the best known books, ever, about an extremely important topic, adapted into a graphic novel format." The content came directly from the original diary. I have no idea what the lesson plan was and neither do you. The hysteria seems to be stemming from a single page, but I would be very surprised if the lesson plan centered around this one page. I might surmise that the purpose of teaching the book altogether was to explore the thoughts and feelings of a middle school aged girl while going through such a harrowing experience, presented in a way that middle school students could identify with. But that's just a guess. Okay then. But it was certainly fueled by hysteria. Teachers make questionable pedagogical choices all the time. I'm sure that neither you nor I would choose to teach Anne Frank in the same manner that this teacher did. But the faux outrage over this issue is not driven by pedagogy, it is driven by hysteria, similar to books being removed all across the country for simply discussing race, sex, or LGBTQ issues. You did not directly advocate for banning books, yet you posted note that claimed that the book depicted molestation and that the teacher asked students to discuss molestation. You presented this as "relevant context" even though the claims were hyperbolic and untrue. Posts like this attempt to justify the horrible reaction from the school district. Even you agree that the outcome was ridiculous. Now, the debate about the appropriateness of the book is reasonable. Your opinion on that matter is not completely off (I disagree, as the content was written by a 14 year old and believe the content is perfectly appropriate for 14 year olds), but again, the main issue to me is a teacher getting fired for this and how the right wingers are justifying it.

You know how you get annoyed when other people talk about teaching practices when it is clearly outside their lane? I actually investigate sexual misconduct, and you are being absurd. You're the teacher: isn't it a teacher's job to explain things to students? When a character does something inappropriate, isn't it a great opportunity to discuss it? Middle schoolers and high schoolers read books about violence, drugs, race, sex, and politics all the time because it provides these opportunities.

What would fall under SA? Reading a book? What does your post have to do with any of this?

"A Small Light" was an excellent (and sobering) series. Highly recommended. It was streaming on Hulu, Disney, and Prime at one point not sure if it still on all three of those. Trigger warning for some conservatives and Texas residents: it tells the story of Anne Frank's family in hiding and depicts Nazis as the bad guys.