"He treats LGBTQ-inclusive education as if it were some optional "add-on" that schools can easily work around. As a former teacher, I can confidently say that is not how education works, especially when it comes to curriculum and lesson planning. And while Justice Thomas calls LGBTQ-inclusive education "ideological conformity," he fails to see that most LGBTQ+ adults today grew up in a school system that forced us to conform to a cisgender and straight worldview. Ironically, I'd consider the Court's narrow view of public education to be ideologically driven."
"They are trying to show students that families come in all colors, shapes, and sizes, reflecting our diverse society. LGBTQ+ people are also part of every community. We have always been a part of human history, and we deserve to be represented in our nation's schools. The goal is not to change what students believe at home; it is to teach them how to be respectful in a democratic and diverse world."
A 6-3 Supreme Court decision allows parents to withdraw children from lessons including LGBTQ+ characters, elevating religious objections over inclusive schooling. The majority framed LGBTQ-inclusive education as an optional add-on, neglecting curricular integration. Judges labeled inclusive content as ideological conformity while ignoring historic forced conformity to cisgender and straight norms. LGBTQ-inclusive curricula depict diverse family structures, aim to reduce invisibility, support anti-bullying efforts, and foster mutual civility and respect. Educators note that curriculum and lesson planning make inclusive content integral rather than removable. A dissent emphasized that inclusive education is designed to foster mutual civility and respect.
Read at Advocate.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]