Thread by @MgS_2011

Since a copy of the DRAFT curriculum outline has been posted on Scribd, we can now compare it with @DavidStaplesYEG' column yesterday.

scribd.com/document/38416…
edmontonjournal.com/news/local-new…

Right off the top, we find this little gem from Mr. Staples:

Which, Mr. Staples has clearly taken out of context by ignoring that it is part of a principle about understanding others through their stories:

Context matters here, and I would point Mr. Staples to the TRC Calls to Action, item number 62 in particular. As well as the blunt reality that Alberta wasn't settled by a single group - we have many cultural groups that settled in what is now Alberta. tinyurl.com/phhrhf8

Whether that is the francophone population that settled in and around St. Paul, the influx of first wave Ukrainian settlers, or the settlement of Cardston by the Mormons in 1887, we have a complex history.

All of those stories are different, and the reasons people came here are unique.

So, Staples goes on to start his politicized argument as follows:

I could go on a long rant about how the "rugged individualist" narrative I was taught in school is complete nonsense. What Staples is advocating for here is a teaching of equally politicized values which have a long history of being used to exclude and marginalize.

If Mr. Staples wants to argue that the TRC's recommendations and calls to action are nothing more than "Social Justice Warriors", I invite him to do so openly, and see what happens.

If the TRC did any one thing, it shone a giant spotlight on how the "self-sufficient, competitive settlers" abused and mistreated the indigenous peoples here. Is explicit inclusion in our curriculum a bad thing?

I will point out that when I was in school, Louis Riel was characterized (badly) in English curriculum as "Canada's Benedict Arnold". The discussion about how ill-informed that perspective really was began as I graduated high school.

Today, Louis Riel is portrayed far differently in our schools. I credit that change in part to the development of the French bilingual programs which used textbooks from Quebec - introducing a much different perspective on the topic.

Would Mr. Staples argue that those changes to our curriculum are to be dismissed as the work of "social justice warriors"?

and here we come to the crux of Staples' arguments: basically that we should keep things the way that they were because social justice advocacy has gone too far.

But has it? The last residential schools only closed in the 1990s. Legal equality for LGBTQ people is still recent (and opposed in many corners). Racism is still alive and well - heck, the CPC in 2015 created the most overtly racist platform I've ever seen in my lifetime.

Mr. Staples seems to fear that his values are being erased. He isn't, but this curriculum certainly challenges the assumption he makes that just because his values are dominant, that they are the only valid values to teach.

He closes with the following:

I think Mr. Staples has missed a key point: The subject is called "Social Studies" - not geography, not history, although both are important dimensions of the topic. Our understanding of either is necessarily influenced by the lens through which we look at it.

This curriculum outline at a very high level reflects a shift away from a "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant" lens to one which includes other perspectives that have traditionally been ignored in our education system.

As happened with Louis Riel, time and knowledge can change our understanding of things. It would be folly to ignore the voices of those who are saying "wait a minute, you're ignoring an important perspective".

In order to continue to grow and develop, we must change. The last 25 years in particular have shaken some foundational understandings about Canada and its history. It should make us uncomfortable.

Inclusion is not erasure, it is inviting others into the room with you. Alberta will be stronger for it in the long run.

... and dismissing opposing views as "you're just an SJW" is less than helpful - speaking of "wanting dialogue".

One last thought: Thank you to the Edmonton Journal and Mr. Staples for doing the right thing (albeit belatedly) yesterday and posting the "smuggled" document online.

Okay another thought: Staples continues to whinge about #abed "secrecy". I'm fairly certain he's ignoring the "Work In Progress" side of the discussion. Any significant project has intermediate stages which outside of the team working on it aren't meaningful to review.

Similarly, sometimes reviews are done with a representative subset of the overall audience in order to make the feedback cycle manageable. As things get closer to a solid state, that's when you open the doors further.

This is done precisely because people seeking to "make gains" will use intermediate material to their advantage - often by twisting its interpretation. The government is not being unreasonable in its process here. ~fin~

. @threadreaderapp unroll