A certain self-styled educational expert who posts freqently on this list has claimed that he has never accused others of racist motivation. He has challenged us to come up with examples of his imputing racist motives to others on this list. About 10 minutes' search of the archives produced the following examples, but there are MANY, MANY more. Most of that 10 minutes was taken in figuring how to find ANYTHING at all, and then in cutting and pasting. All I had to do was pick a thread at random and then click on almost anything written by him.
Interestingly, this self-styled educational expert claims that self-styled educational experts should be barred from having anything to do with education.
If anybody else feels like looking for other examples, here is the address of the archives:
Subject: Re: Message to David Klein -Reply Author: Wayne Bishop <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 00:48:43 -0600 (CST)
Hear no evil, see no evil, and there won't be any. "Being a racist" is farther than I usually state or believe. Effectively racist policies by well meaning people is quite different but the bottom line looks an awfully lot the same.
Wayne. ------------------------ Subject: Re: Dumbing Down Teachers Author: Wayne Bishop <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 03:41:58 -0500 (CDT)
Dear anonymous <email@example.com>,
I do regret having used that deliberate and offensive term and have apologized to my university for doing so. Not because of any implied racism, quite the reverse in fact. The context, you will recall, was the (fortunately vain) effort last summer, on the part of many in positions of influence, to water down the proposed California Math Standards from the original and respectable first draft. The criticism offered many times that day was the standard, and essentially elitist, racist and gender biased perspective that genuine, verifiable standards are unattainable by African Americans, by Hispanic Americans, and sometimes even by the majority, women, although good people never phrase it so bluntly. The term that I was deriding was the term, "developmentally inappropriate", because good people don't use racially offensive terms to describe their racially stereotypical beliefs. Good people deny my daughter's private school curriculum, pedagogy, and year-by-year standards of development to inner city students, to reservation school students, in general to students who need it most. Good people boldly sign their name "anonymous".
I regret my use of the term because it represents so much of my own naive ignorance. I should have realized that such obvious sarcasm in a private email conversation would be deliberately abused to a national and influential audience by good people.
Wayne. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Slander Author: Wayne Bishop <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 00:54:16 -0500 (CDT)
>I'll be glad to refresh your memory, because my comments on this point >were extensive and repeated. After re-reading them and having your memory >refreshed, I trust that you will understand ...
Please, Bob, please. If that list of weak suggestions for "everything but the obvious" is what you meant, of course, I didn't give the items much credence. At best, the effects fall into the unverifiable category and perhaps even the laughable. At least with Sister Patricia, by actually reading her specialist thesis, I was able to see how much less there ever was than you had been implying. The AISES piece you had me order and read is more of the same, hardly even removed from the "right-brained Indian mind" of a generation early that, quite frankly, strikes me as so inherently racist as to sound like a David Duke speech.
Subject: Re: Slander Author: Wayne Bishop <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 10:19:43 -0500 (CDT)
A week ago I posted the attached request to Ruth Parker to substantiate her self-serving claims of what she has done over the years for those innocent little Native American children, "one of our nation's most under-represented minorities when it comes to mathematics education".
I am sure that in the eyes of some, asking for such information is slander. I see it quite differently; I see failing to produce such documentation readily and forthrightly as the same kind of paternalism that has kept minorities "in their place" for decades. Whether it is well-intentioned articles on the right-brainedness of American Indians (their non-PC but less discriminatory name) in the seventies and early eighties, the now defunct QUASAR fiasco at Spurgeon Intermediate praised so highly to the nation's math ed community in 1995 by then NCTM president Jack Price ("...this school is more than 90 percent Hispanic, of whom more than 75 percent have limited or no proficiency in English"), or IMP imposed on defenseless African American kids at Roosevelt and Marshall here in LA with substantial NSF support through LA-SI that is going on right now, the situation remains the same. Separate but equal was outlawed by the Supreme Court in 1954. Why must it take a half-century for the education community to actually implement it? Will it take another half-century?