Connect with us

#NNPA BlackPress

“What About People Like Me?” Teaching Preschoolers About Segregation and “Peace Heroes”

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — These are ideas my colleagues and I believe are very appropriate for preschoolers to explore and revisit often.

Published

on

By Nadia Jaboneta
The following article is an excerpt from Each and Every Child: Teaching Preschool with an Equity Lens, published by the National Association for the Education of Young Children

As part of the anti-bias curriculum at the preschool where I teach, we study the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Learning about Dr. King’s life provides us with a wonderful opportunity to reflect on the principles he stood for.

These are ideas my colleagues and I believe are very appropriate for preschoolers to explore and revisit often. We focus on Dr. King’s desire for all people to be treated fairly, regardless of the color of their skin. Solving problems with words; being fair, kind, and inclusive; appreciating similarities and differences among people—these are all ideas we include during morning meetings, small group activities, read-alouds, and regular conversations.

In October 2018, I began by reading a book to the 4- and 5-year-olds in my classroom that was written by a former teacher at our school. Titled Martin Luther King, Jr. and You, the book begins by describing Dr. King and his family, his work as a pastor, and his role in the community. One page introduces his work with Rosa Parks and states that the bus company had an unfair rule: “Their rule was that only some people could sit at the front of the bus.” The next page then shares how the community boycotted the bus company. The book does not explain segregation.

When I read this part of the book, I noticed that many of the children looked confused. I paused the read-aloud and asked them to share their questions. Elena asked, “Who could sit at the front?” Then Jane wondered, “Why couldn’t Rosa Parks sit at the front of the bus?”

I wasn’t sure how to respond. I thought to myself, “Is it age appropriate to introduce them to segregation? How would I explain it?” I decided to respond by telling the children, “Our country has had a lot of unfair rules based on the color of people’s skin. There used to be a bus rule that said only White people could sit in the front. Black people had to sit in the back. Rosa Parks was a Black woman and she had to sit in the back.”

Many of the children looked shocked. Several shouted out, “That’s not fair!” and “That’s not okay!” One child put her hands over her ears and said, “This is scary. I don’t want to hear about it.”

Marie, a White child, then announced, “Oh, phew! That wouldn’t happen to me. I’m White!” Before I had time to think about how to reply to this statement, Elena, a multiracial child, exclaimed, “What about people like me? Like Sofia? That is not fair! We are your friends!” I first responded by agreeing with the children that this was not a fair rule. I reminded them that the rule changed because Rosa Parks worked closely with Dr. King and their community to make it better. “They worked together, just like we do in our classroom community,” I told them. “If something unfair happens to someone in our community, it is all of our responsibility to help make change. People of all skin colors work together to make things fair.” Marie really listened. She then added, “I want to help my friends! I want to help change unfair rules!”

Reflections, Questions, and a Passion for Developing Leaders

As I reflected on our conversation later that day, I felt unsure about what I said and the role I should have played in this discussion. Had I given the children too little information? Too much?

Marie’s remark, “Oh, phew! That wouldn’t happen to me. I’m White!” really stood out. It reminded me that educators have lots of work to do in helping young children (and many adults) see that just because something may not directly affect us, that does not mean we should not care or should not do something about it.

I also thought about Elena’s response. She immediately shared her thoughts, standing up for herself and others as a leader. She helped Marie think about what she was saying and prompted the whole class to understand that working to increase fairness is about all of us and is everyone’s responsibility. As her teacher, it was wonderful for me to see her confident self-identity. In a moment in which I hesitated, she was willing to take a risk to speak up about unfairness. She was showing her competence—and she answered my inner question showing that, yes, these are topics children can handle.

Using the Thinking Lens to reflect further on my role with the children, families, and colleagues, I thought about the following:

· What is my role as the children’s teacher? I would like to learn alongside the children as well as be a leader in helping to guide their critical thinking and problem-solving around social justice issues. I want them to be well prepared for their future history and civics classes and, as an essential part of that preparation, I want them to develop their power to make the world better.

· What do children want to know? What do children already know and understand? Children have questions about what is happening in the world today and about history. I planned to observe, listen, and think deeper with the children about these questions.

· What is developmentally appropriate and socially and emotionally appropriate for young children? As I listened to the children’s questions, I thought about the best way to answer. How much should children know about past and present injustices? How much background knowledge did I need to provide for them to think meaningfully about social justice issues? Was I telling them enough? Was I going too far? I planned to do research and collaborate with my colleagues and the children’s families to agree on what is appropriate for the different age groups.

· How can I help children feel safe with all the scary things going on in our world? Often children come to school and share knowledge they have learned at home about our current political climate or about violence in their communities or other places.

What is my role when these conversations emerge? How can I help them develop their sense of safety?

· How can I introduce powerful “Peace Heroes” in a positive way? An important part of my anti-bias teaching is exposing children to a diverse group of leaders we call Peace Heroes from history and from today. I purposefully select Peace Heroes from around the world, such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mahatma Gandhi, and also from our community, such as Harvey Milk (California’s first openly gay elected official). I know I have to provide context to explain these leaders’ accomplishments, but should I include information about the violence that was often a part of these people’s stories? If yes, how might I do that?

Asking Big Questions and Developing Powerful Knowledge

After our initial conversation about segregation, we embarked on a 7-month journey learning about important Peace Heroes in our world and what our role could be in making this world a better place. Several weeks in, I realized that our investigation was about so much more. The children had big questions. They wanted to have real conversations and understand why things happen in our world. They asked about life, death, fairness, skin color, and race.

Recently, I was asked by a colleague, “What’s your favorite thing about your work with young children?” I answered, “The spontaneous conversations we have about how the world works.” As I continue my journey as an anti-bias educator, I often reflect on what is hard and what is rewarding about this work. Although I love engaging in real conversations with the young children in my classroom, it is challenging. I don’t know when these conversations will arise or what children will say or ask. My hope is that I can be as prepared as possible and answer children in a way that is honest, is developmentally appropriate, respects their competence and point of view, helps them feel safe, and shows them their power to change the world.

The rest of the school year, the children, my colleagues, and I thought together about what our roles are and what we can do as Peace Heroes in our communities to make this world a better place. We often sang the song “What Can One Little Person Do?,” by Sally Rogers. The children answered that question with many ideas that give me hope for the future.

People should sit wherever they want on public transportation! I want to help change unfair rules.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Jim Crow 2.0 at the Pentagon

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

Published

on

Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA.

Pete Hegseth insists that he is restoring “merit” to the United States military. But after months of dismissals, blocked promotions, and ideological purges, the evidence tells a different story. His campaign against so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has become something far more dangerous: an assault on equal opportunity that falls with particular force on African Americans, while also targeting women, Latinos, gay Americans, and transgender service members.

The latest example is both troubling and infuriating.

Once again, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly blocked the promotion of an exceptionally qualified woman—Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt. Bauernschmidt is no ordinary officer. She became the Navy’s first woman to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the most demanding leadership assignments in the world. Her career reflects decades of exemplary performance, operational excellence, and leadership under extraordinary pressure.

Yet once again, a distinguished military career appears to have been subordinated to an ideological agenda masquerading as “merit.”

I call BS!

The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

The pattern has become impossible to ignore.

General Charles Q. Brown Jr., only the second African American to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed despite a career that placed him among the most accomplished military leaders of his generation.

Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman ever to serve as Chief of Naval Operations, was removed despite decades of distinguished command experience.

Reports have documented interventions that blocked or delayed the promotions of Black officers and women selected through the military’s rigorous promotion system.

Now Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt joins the growing list of highly accomplished officers whose careers have been derailed for reasons that have never been persuasively explained.

Where is Congress?

Its silence has become deafening.

Congress has an independent constitutional responsibility to oversee the armed forces. Instead, too many lawmakers have watched silently while one of the nation’s most respected institutions is subjected to ideological litmus tests and political interference.

This is not military reform.  It is testosterone-fueled performative masculinity disguised as a philosophy of military excellence.

The irony is impossible to miss. Hegseth repeatedly invokes “merit,” yet his rhetoric begins with the assumption that Black officers, women, and other historically excluded Americans must somehow justify their achievements in ways that white male officers are rarely required to do.

That is not meritocracy.  It is prejudice wrapped in patriotic language.

No one is asking that anyone be promoted because of race or gender. Americans simply expect that promotions be based on demonstrated competence, leadership, integrity, and service. The officers being targeted have already proven themselves repeatedly under one of the world’s most demanding evaluation systems.

Their records speak for themselves.

The attack on African American military leadership has been especially pernicious.

For generations, Black Americans fought in segregated units, earned decorations while denied equal treatment, and repeatedly demonstrated loyalty to a nation that often failed to extend them full citizenship. They broke barriers not because standards were lowered but because excellence finally overcame institutional discrimination.

Today’s campaign against “diversity” threatens to revive old assumptions under new slogans.

The implication that Black generals and admirals somehow owe their success to affirmative action rather than extraordinary performance echoes some of the ugliest stereotypes of the Jim Crow era. Yesterday’s segregationists claimed Black Americans were inherently less qualified. Today’s culture warriors simply employ more politically acceptable language while inviting the same suspicion about Black achievement.

That is why Hegseth’s campaign increasingly resembles Jim Crow 2.0.

The targets may now wear stars on their shoulders instead of military patches on segregated uniforms, but the underlying message is hauntingly familiar: Black excellence is presumed suspect, while white excellence is presumed earned.

America’s military became the finest fighting force in history because it opened its doors to talent wherever it could be found. It grew stronger after President Truman desegregated the armed forces. It became stronger when women assumed greater command responsibilities. It became stronger when every qualified American was given the opportunity to serve to the fullest extent of their abilities.

Diversity is not a concession.  It is a strategic advantage.

The nation’s adversaries do not fear an American military because it is racially homogeneous. They fear it because it draws upon the talents of more than 340 million Americans whose diverse experiences, perspectives, and abilities make our armed forces unmatched anywhere in the world.

Every politically motivated dismissal of a distinguished officer sends a chilling message throughout the ranks: excellence alone may no longer be enough if you belong to the wrong demographic group.

That weakens morale.  It weakens recruitment.  It weakens retention.

And ultimately, it weakens national security.

Pete Hegseth has every right to pursue military readiness. He has no right to redefine merit in ways that repeatedly cast suspicion upon the accomplishments of Black officers, women, and others who have devoted their lives to defending this nation.

America deserves better.  The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better.  The Constitution deserves better.

And unless Congress finds the courage to exercise meaningful oversight, history may well remember this period not as a restoration of military excellence, but as the moment political ideology attempted to resurrect, in modern form, the old poison of exclusion.

Jim Crow did not strengthen America.  Jim Crow 2.0 will not strengthen America’s military.  It will only diminish it

Wade Henderson
Strategic Advisor
Civil and Human Rights
wade@wadejhenderson.com

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial

By Emilie St. John (Contributor) Karmelo Anthony will return to court next month in his first step to overturn his murder conviction. Anthony was found guilty last month in the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison. His new legal team has filed motions seeking the recusal of State District […]
The post New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Published

on

By Emilie St. John
(Contributor)

Karmelo Anthony will return to court next month in his first step to overturn his murder conviction.

Anthony was found guilty last month in the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison. His new legal team has filed motions seeking the recusal of State District Judge John Roach Jr. from overseeing the appeals process.

Two hearings have been scheduled on the motion for Aug. 9 and 10 in the Collin County Courthouse in McKinney, Texas, according to Fox4 News.

On July 14, Senior Judge Sid L. Harle of the 226th District Court was assigned to preside over the defense’s motion to recuse Collin County Judge John Roach. The assignment took effect immediately and authorized Harle to handle all matters related to the recusal request, the filing read. 

The Collin County District Attorney’s Office continues to defend its handling of the case by issuing a statement to NBC 5 DFW.

“The defendant’s new lawyers have filed a motion containing several inaccurate characterizations of the trial proceedings. The entire prosecution team and I conducted this trial ethically and in full compliance with the Court’s rulings and any agreements with defense counsel. We look forward to addressing these claims thoroughly in a Court of law in the coming weeks. The jury heard extensive evidence over the course of the trial and returned a unanimous verdict. We remain confident in that verdict and the fairness of the proceedings.” 

Anthony’s new legal team, made up of appellate, civil rights, and criminal defense attorneys, was retained following Anthony’s conviction.

“Our responsibility is to determine whether a legal error occurred and to ensure that every issue supported by the record is fully and vigorously presented on appeal,” the team said in a statement.

“We recognize the profound loss suffered by one young man’s family and the uncertainty facing another, and we extend our respect to everyone whose lives have been forever changed by these events,” the release reads.

Anthony was charged with the stabbing death of Austin Metcalf during a track meet in Frisco, Texas, April 2, 2025. Anthony has long maintained it was an act of self-defense.

The attorneys are representing Anthony pro bono. The nearly 200-page notice of appeal seeks a new trial because his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was violated.

“The cumulative and practical effect of these provisions was to exclude members of the public from proceedings at every stage,” the filing reads. 

The filing also focused on an alleged “handshake deal” that kept Anthony from taking the stand in his defense.

The defense filing said the agreement was that the jury would not hear that Metcalf and his twin brother had been accused of racism and bullying in the past. In exchange, they also would not see Anthony’s cellphone records or his school disciplinary record, according to court documents reported by the Dallas Morning News.

Anthony’s former defense attorney, Mike Howard, said the defense relied heavily on that deal. The team chose not to ask certain questions of witnesses or call on a separate expert witness based on that agreement. It also abandoned plans to introduce testimony and evidence about the allegations against Metcalf and his brother.

Appellate attorney Russell Wilson is now handling post-trial proceedings and Anthony’s appeal.  He recently sat down for an interview, stating, “The court committed multiple errors during the June murder trial, preventing him from receiving a fair trial.”

“You know, we file motions that we expect to prevail on, but we understand that there’s two sides to every story. And at the end of the day, it’ll be a judge that has to make these decisions, but we feel confident in the positions that we’re taking,” Wilson said during an interview with WFAA. “There were substantial issues that we thought a reviewing court needed to look at. We thought these were constitutional irregularities, and we could have them addressed now. And so, we put them into a motion for a new trial.”

Bree West, a former Dallas County Assistant District Attorney, found it startling that so little time was given to Anthony’s team for such a serious “life or death” situation.

“I do think that it’s really challenging that potentially a court decided that you have 10 minutes to make that level of decision when it has the potential of being life-altering,” said West during an interview with Fox 4 News.

Judge Harle is no stranger to high-profile cases, having presided over the prosecution of a police officer charged in connection with the 2022 mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.   

Anthony was convicted on June 9 of the murder of Austin Metcalf and sentenced to 35 years in prison.

The post New Judge Could Decide if Karmelo Anthony Gets a New Trial appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump!

WESTSIDE GAZETTE — The author criticizes Donald Trump’s rhetoric, noting his use of terms like “Dumbocrats” and “Communist” to describe Democrats and democracy. The column asserts that Trump’s current strategy involves creating doubt about midterm elections due to a lack of Republican agenda.
The post COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump! appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Published

on

Frankly Speaking

Wow! Wow! Wow! The swamp drainers have truly stepped down to new levels of stupidity. You remember Weapons of Mass Destruction? We now have Weapons of Mass Distraction. Trump has introduced Dumbocrats and Communists into the conversation about Democrats and Democracy.

Trump lies so much, and his current strategy is to set up doubt about midterm elections because he and Republicans have no agenda!

He has no “Trump “ card, but Iran has a strait! He called it a skirmish; it’s now a War. He said five days; now it’s five months. He said few casualties; now it’s 18 deaths. He knew nothing about Project 2025 but hired its architects! Trump lies about the lies and often forgets these little inventions called cameras and phones

We see and hear and then see and hear the inconsistencies.

I didn’t like 45 and dislike 47 even more!

The post LSMFT! Lord Save Me From Trump! appeared first on The Westside Gazette.

Based on reporting by Westside Gazette.



The post COMMENTARY: LSMFT! Lord Save Me from Trump! appeared first on BlackPressUSA.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.