Love @SpencerWMcBride's thread here on practical steps *individuals* can take at conferences like @SHEARites to help people feel welcome (even as we advocate for structural changes). Thought I might add a few ideas to the list. #SHEAR2021 /1
Resolve to meet one new person each day of the conference. Maybe that person is a brand new MA student. Maybe they're a long-established scholar. Regardless, everyone needs to feel like they're connected. /2
Invite someone when you are planning to go out for a meal. We all have those moments when we're standing around trying to figure out lunch. Just look around. You'll see someone alone, guaranteed. Unless the meal is *personal,* there's rarely reason not to include more. /3
Are you fully funded for this conference? Then you almost certainly can afford to buy something for someone who isn't. Offer to buy a meal for a grad student, or a coffee for a contingent colleague, or one book for a prof from a small underfunded school. /4
If you're funded, and you're willing to share a room with someone, offer to let an unfunded colleague stay with you. Big costs like travel/lodging are the things that keep most people from conferencing. Free room=huge barrier removed. /5
In summary, follow the Golden Rule for conferences. If you were alone, or shy, or lacked confidence, or underfunded, what would you want someone to do for you? Got the answer in your mind? Now, do that thing for someone else.
Can't wait for @SHEARites in New Orleans! /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many folks are claiming TX Republicans are "removing" teaching requirements about the civil rights movement & its leaders from TX curriculum standards w/ #SB3.
This is not true. But it contains just enough truth to make for powerful political fodder.🧵/1 news.bloomberglaw.com/social-justice…
True: the version of the #SB3 bill that the TX Senate just passed (w/o Democrat support) did in fact remove a *bunch* of specific people & events from the bill, including stuff on civil rights, women's suffrage, slavery, labor, & more. capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/871/bi… /2
Also true: the current version of the bill also removed mentions of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abigail Adams, the American GI Forum, the 19th Amendment, and *much more.* Why remove all of this? /3
Historians are dunking on the Project 1836 Law signed by @GregAbbott_TX & fairly so. It's pure culture-wars inflaming rhetoric, a response to a virtually non-existent threat of Critical Race Theory. But if we only trash it, we're missing the good news of *opportunity.* A thread/1
We're historians. We specialize in reading & interpreting primary documents. The Project 1836 law promotes "patriotic education" in "Texas values" through "knowledge of the founding documents" of TX History." This is *opportunity* to read w/ students! /2 capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87R/bi…
We *get* to read the TX Dec. of Ind. w/ our students. We get to discuss the Mexican constitution & colonization laws: how Santa Anna suspended the constitution AND how Anglos consistently broke/bent Mexican laws, esp. Mexico's abolition of slavery. /3 tsl.texas.gov/treasures/repu…
I was reminded today of how important it is to teach "basics." I devoted today's #TexasHistory class @SMU to 2 documents that explain why southern secessionists formed the Confederacy in 1861: the Texas Declaration of Causes & Alexander Stephens' Corner Stone speech. Basics. /1
The TX Declaration of Causes is short & clear. The "federal government" & "non-slaveholding states" had committed many offenses. The most severe one: their "hostility to these Southern States & their beneficent & patriarchal system of African slavery." loc.gov/item/95139713/ /2
The "Corner Stone" speech, by Alexander Stephens (VP Confederacy) shocks me every time. He claims that the "leading statesmen" who wrote the Constitution believed slavery was a "violation of nature." "They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error."/3