Altered by a publishing company with no consultation with Florida educators.
"Because the Florida Department of Education provided no guidance on interpreting Florida House Bill 7, Studies Weekly, like every publisher, has had to decipher how to comply with their legislation. That being said, during the Florida social studies adoption, individuals in our curriculum team severely overreacted in their interpretation of HB 7 and made unapproved revisions.
Typically, our quality assurance processes would have flagged and denied edit approval. Unfortunately, during the final hours before the deadline, they circumvented our established protocols in an attempt to submit their revisions on time. We have identified those individuals, taken corrective action, and implemented additional safeguards to avoid any issues in the future." (The publisher is Studies Weekly)
"The company said that the version sent for review will not enter any curricula, and the organization has added mention of race to the story. "We find the omission or altering of historical facts to be abhorrent and do not defend it," the company added."
Regardless of one's opinion on the matter, simply believing something someone sent you in the mail without checking its veracity is not doing the cause of nuanced debate any good. This one was easy to verify: it's true that a draft of the version in red was proposed, but it was turned down by the publishers and described as an overreaction to a vaguely written law. See: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/rosa-parks-race-removed-florida-textbook/
I agree that I should have tracked down more primary information rather then let my readers do it for me. But I'm not altering the title or text, because it IS an example of "anti-wokeness" (tho perpetrated by the publisher rather than the state governing board) and it WAS done in response to the governor's mandate.
Can we agree that if being woke means being anti-racist, that anti-wokeness then simply means (pro-)racist.
Words have meaning, and what we see at the moment with this idiotic anti-wokeness nonsense is that the racists have found a new euphemism for racism that they're happy to exploit, while the press is too chickenshit to call them out on it.
I'll add a little nuance in the sense that anti-woke seems to generally promote not only racism, but also discrimination against LBGTQ people, misogyny, islamophobia a good dollop of antisemitism. In short, if you're not a white christian alpha male, they want to put you in your place.
And now for the rest of the story;
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cnn.com/2023/03/22/us/florida-textbook-race-rosa-parks-reaj/index.html
Altered by a publishing company with no consultation with Florida educators.
ReplyDelete"Because the Florida Department of Education provided no guidance on interpreting Florida House Bill 7, Studies Weekly, like every publisher, has had to decipher how to comply with their legislation. That being said, during the Florida social studies adoption, individuals in our curriculum team severely overreacted in their interpretation of HB 7 and made unapproved revisions.
Typically, our quality assurance processes would have flagged and denied edit approval. Unfortunately, during the final hours before the deadline, they circumvented our established protocols in an attempt to submit their revisions on time. We have identified those individuals, taken corrective action, and implemented additional safeguards to avoid any issues in the future." (The publisher is Studies Weekly)
"The company said that the version sent for review will not enter any curricula, and the organization has added mention of race to the story. "We find the omission or altering of historical facts to be abhorrent and do not defend it," the company added."
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/rosa-parks-race-removed-florida-textbook/
Thanks for tracking that down. I've added a postscript to the post.
DeleteRegardless of one's opinion on the matter, simply believing something someone sent you in the mail without checking its veracity is not doing the cause of nuanced debate any good. This one was easy to verify: it's true that a draft of the version in red was proposed, but it was turned down by the publishers and described as an overreaction to a vaguely written law. See: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/rosa-parks-race-removed-florida-textbook/
ReplyDeleteI agree that I should have tracked down more primary information rather then let my readers do it for me. But I'm not altering the title or text, because it IS an example of "anti-wokeness" (tho perpetrated by the publisher rather than the state governing board) and it WAS done in response to the governor's mandate.
DeleteCan we agree that if being woke means being anti-racist, that anti-wokeness then simply means (pro-)racist.
DeleteWords have meaning, and what we see at the moment with this idiotic anti-wokeness nonsense is that the racists have found a new euphemism for racism that they're happy to exploit, while the press is too chickenshit to call them out on it.
I'll add a little nuance in the sense that anti-woke seems to generally promote not only racism, but also discrimination against LBGTQ people, misogyny, islamophobia a good dollop of antisemitism. In short, if you're not a white christian alpha male, they want to put you in your place.
No, I don’t think we can agree on that.
DeleteThe publishers,with their livelyhood on the line, did exactly what Governor D-Santos wanted.
ReplyDeletexoxoxoBruce