Talk:New York City teachers' strike of 1968

Untitled
I'm adding stuff from a Time article I found. I'm not cutting anything. If the neutrality of the current article is disputed, please discuss. --Thelema12 (talk) 20:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Infamous Julius Lester incident
The notorious and much-commented incident when Julius Lester broadcast a certain poem on his WBAI show is considered pretty much the public launching of modern political antisemitism among Blacks in the United States, and is well worthy of a mention in this article... AnonMoos (talk) 05:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Pointy vague
Barely scratches the surface of the underlying issues. Let's see a more comprehensive summary of the reasons for the strike. Was it just about Decentralization? Was it only about the desire of one man to have an "all-black" teaching force? 

Does it make sense to say that a strike "dragged or for months" if classes were suspended for only 36 days? I make that out as 7 weeks. We're making just under two months sound like the entire 6 months. It's like a misleading headline that makes an exaggerated point, but immediately supplies toned-down information if you read any further. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Capital or lower-case?
Take a look at these sentences:

"Most of these outside students were Black but some were white...."

and

"A statistical study published in 1974 found that teachers—white and Black—of Black students were significantly more likely to oppose the strike."

Any particular reason why the word "black" is being capitalized while the word "white" is not?

For what it's worth I think neither should be capitalized, but there should be some consistency. --1:48, 10 January 2014‎ 79.6.203.43

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New York City teachers' strike of 1968. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121210093018/http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/3815 to http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/3815

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Ambiguity in sentence
The following text in the section "Curriculum and school environment" is ambiguous due to sentence structure and the two possible meanings of principles/principals:


 * "many [teachers] objected to the board's new policies concerning personnel and curriculum. The UFT opposed the new principals denounced the Ocean Hill–Brownsville curriculum, saying that awareness of one's racial heritage would not be helpful in the job market."

In most of the article, the word "principal" appears very frequently, and refers to the individuals who serve as heads of schools. This section deals with curriculum, which is more related to "principles" - as in relating to a belief system. Prior reference has been made to a desire by the ATA for "educating with a "Black value system." The first paragraph in this section refers to the schools expanding "role of Black and African history and culture in the curriculum." The sentence prior to the one where the principles/principals ambiguity arises mentions both curriculum and personnel. However, the second half of the sentence refers only to curriculum ("awareness of one's racial heritage"). So which is intended?

If the term refers to personnel, then the correct word is, as written, principals. However the sentence should read:


 * The UFT opposed the new principals and denounced the Ocean Hill–Brownsville curriculum, saying that awareness of one's racial heritage would not be helpful in the job market."

If the entire sentence is discussing curriculum, then the sentence should be:


 * The UFT opposed the new principles in the Ocean Hill–Brownsville curriculum, saying that awareness of one's racial heritage would not be helpful in the job market."

Unfortunately, the supporting citation is behind a paywall, so I can't determine which is correct. Ileanadu (talk) 21:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)