Elementary School Worksheet Shows Anti-Cop Bias

Elementary School Worksheet Shows Anti-Cop Bias

Elementary School Worksheet Shows Anti-Cop Bias

An elementary school in Pittsburgh is in trouble with parents after a worksheet caused some significant double-takes about it’s anti-police message.

While this isn’t as extreme as you might think, remember that this was handed out to first grade students.

This is what they are teaching in our Elementary schools in Pittsburgh. Really run from cop🤬 they couldn’t think of no…

Posted by Ladodie Whiters on Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Parents started complaining directly to the school district on September 25th, with a district response the day after on the 26th calling it “inappropriate.” Local media picked up the story as well, but this didn’t make national news.

The superintendent was quick to say that this was the fault of one teacher, and that this wasn’t a part of their standard curriculum, but that they wouldn’t comment further since it was now a “personnel matter.”

There are so many things wrong here, but let’s start with the obvious thing. “Rob’s socks is wet from the pond”??? Not only is the subject matter a problem, but the grammar is completely wrong! Whoever wrote that line should be fired just for that alone!

As the mother of a first grade student, this is absolutely the wrong kind of story to plant in the heads of six and seven year olds. Rob and Tom, apparently the Sacco and Vanzetti of elementary school, should not be running from police. That is completely the wrong message to give to young kids, especially since we keep pushing school resource officers on to school campuses. Elementary students need to learn through their contact with police that first, they are there to keep them safe, and second, they are there to help. Let’s not push the Ferguson projection on young kids. Children don’t need to fear police – or their working dogs. Police often speak out how they hate being made “the bad guy” by adults looking to keep children in line. This is a terrible message for a school assignment.

Which brings into question the judgment of the teacher involved. Obviously, the teacher has none. That’s a problem for the elementary school and the district, because there were a whole lot of angry parents who clearly did not want even a hint of whatever social justice power trip this teacher tried. With the comment about being a “personnel matter,” the district is closing ranks. I hope that the teacher is never in a position to choose their own curriculum again.

Also, what was this curriculum company thinking? No one who has lived through the last several years can fail to see that this is deeply problematic – which means that it had to be intentional on the part of whoever wrote it, edited it, and gave the okay for its publication and distribution. I cannot find a definitive source for the worksheet, so I can’t say for certain what group or company was responsible for it.

First grade students should not be getting the message that cops are going to chase them down and set a dog after them. Neither should they get the idea that their first instinct should be to run from the police. As the mother in the Facebook post said, there are better ways to teach kids how to read sight words. Pittsburgh Public Schools need to make sure that their teachers leave their social justice impulses out of the curriculum.

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Featured image via Pixabay, Pixabay license

Written by

11 Comments
  • Lloyd says:

    Somehow, we need to get back to “The policeman is our friend….We must respect him!” This would take much work on both sides, and I don’t think we will ever see it again….Sad!!

  • Wyldkat says:

    Saw this on FB the other day. My comment: I wonder if I rewrote this “Tom will run. He will run from the teacher. Tom will run with Rob. They will not stop. Look at the teacher. The teacher has a big mop. What will he do with the mop?” Would the teachers union have an issue? Or, from my sister, “Tom will run. He will run from the Muslim. Tom will run with Rob. They will not stop. Look at the Muslim. The Muslim has a big mop. What will he do with the mop?” Will we hear from CAIR?

    A simple word substitution and the bias/prejudice becomes clear.

  • GWB says:

    “Rob’s socks is wet from the pond”
    Huh. I didn’t see that in the article. Of course, I couldn’t read the assignment because the FarceBook page you linked is evidently now private. (I can’t see it at any rate.) And I don’t play with FarceBook. Ever.

    I have a question: Did the assignment give a reason the kids ran from the police? Was the reason then addressed? Were they punished for a crime they really did commit? Did they get a talking-to about not running from the police? Basically, I don’t have a problem with stories where the kids run from police – if it comes to the right conclusion.

    • Wyldkat says:

      “Did the assignment give a reason the kids ran from the police?”

      Nope. There is no context for why they are running. Here is what the images shows as the assignment.
      Let’s Read!
      Directions: Read the story 3 times. Color a star each time you read. {page has three stars in upper right corner} Color your evidence for each question in the text.
      Tom and Rob {some cartoon stick figures running next to the text}
      Tom will run. He will run from the cop. Tom will run with Rob. They will not stop. Look at the cop. The cop has a big mop. What will he do with the mop? Tom falls on a log. Rob falls in the pond. “Get them!” yells the cop to his dog. The dog gets Tom and Rob. Rob’s socks is wet from the pond.
      {across the bottom are the words “cop” “log” “on” “not” “mop”

  • Deanimator says:

    Children should be taught not to run from… or talk to the police.
    Why give police an opportunity or excuse to violate your rights?

    • Patty says:

      I pray that you are not a parent. Yes, we have rights. And you have the right to be anti-police and anti-cooperation with the police. Still makes you a loser.

  • Bill Dumanch says:

    “They was running from the Po-leece cause my PO has a-order for me…”.

  • SDN says:

    “Also, what was this curriculum company thinking? No one who has lived through the last several years can fail to see that this is deeply problematic – which means that it had to be intentional on the part of whoever wrote it, edited it, and gave the okay for its publication and distribution.”

    Nothing I could see gave any indication that this was produced commercially. I could run it up in PowerPoint, Word, etc.

    • Deanna Fisher says:

      SDN, I have very strong suspicions that this was a teacher-produced product, via a curriculum sharing platform, but like I said in the post, I can’t prove that.

  • Mark says:

    This story is sad all the way around. Even Ms. Whiters, who is rightfully complaining about this atrocious assignment, has a grammatical hiccup with her “they couldn’t think of no other story to teach them sight words huh?”. “…any other story…” would be correct. Sorry to be a grammar Nazi, but just saying…

Leave a Reply

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

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram