# data[].attributes.body
This article explains anti-literacy laws and how they were used to stop Black people from learning to read and write. A main reason for this was that slaveholders were scared education would give Black people too much freedom and allow them to think for themselves or even resist slavery(Wow shocker!). Because of this fear, these laws became very common in the South and made it illegal to teach both enslaved and free Black people. The goal was to keep them uneducated and easy to control.

However, even with these strict rules many people still found ways to learn. For example, Frederick Douglass secretly taught himself how to read, showing how determined people were to gain knowledge. Others also learned in hidden ways, proving that education was very important to them. This shows that learning wasnt just about learning , it was about empowering taking back that freedom. This connects to today because education is still not equal for everyone. Some schools have fewer resources / funding than others, and certain books or topics are still being debated or restricted. ellenda

# data[].attributes.body
1. What information from the article should your classmates know about? If you were to teach them about what you've read, what would you say?

t's basically about how public schools because a thing in the US. Before, it was kinda messed up because only rich kids got a good education. But then this due Horace Mann was like, "Nah", everyone deserves to learn!" so he fought to create schools that were free and open to all, paid for by taxes. The idea was to make everyone a good citizen and give them a fair in life. Of course, not everyone agreed at first. Some people don't want to pay for it, and others were worried about the government telling them what to teach their kids.

2. What is resonating with you, or what connections can you make between this article and other articles/topics we've discussed so far?

Public schools have changed a lot since then, but the main goal is still to give everyone a chance to learn, which is pretty cool. What I think Is most important is that everyone gets the same opportunity, no matter who they are or where they come from.It's like, a level playing field for everyone.

# data[].attributes.headline
Literacy By Any Means Necessary: The History of Anti-Literacy Laws in the U.S Overview

# data[].attributes.subject
Literacy By Any Means Necessary: The History of Anti-Literacy Laws in the U.S Overview

# data[].attributes.body
This article is mainly about how anti-literacy laws were used to stop Black people from learning how to read and write because slaveholders were afraid that education would lead to freedom. These laws were common in Southern states and made it illegal to teach enslaved or even free Black people. Even though these rules were strict, many people still found ways to learn. For example, Frederick Douglass secretly taught himself to read, Jennie Proctor studied at night using a hidden book, Mathilda Beasley ran a secret school, and John Berry Meachum created a floating school to avoid the laws. This shows that even when people were being controlled, they still fought to get knowledge.

What stood out to me is how important education really is. It wasn’t just about reading, it was about freedom and being able to think for yourself. This connects to things we’ve talked about in class, like how access to education can still be unequal today and how some topics or books are still being debated or restricted.

- Bing B

# data[].attributes.body
The anti literacy laws in the U.S were designated to prevent black people from gaining knowledge and freedom, because literacy was seen as a threat to white power. To response black communities created their own secret schools and learning networks. Education has been tied to power, oppression and resistance. its also connected to the book were reading where black teachers share hidden knowledge outside official systems

# data[].attributes.body
In the Indigenous Assimilation text, Captain R.H Pratt thinks that Indigenous Americans needs to be modified to be more like whites, and to imitate white behavior. He discuss briefly about Indigenous Americans savageness, inferiority, and being lesser then. Due to this he believed that Indigenous people should abandon their identity, values, basically their whole axiology and to conform to whites instead. This is the true meaning and message behind the ''Kill the Indian, Save the Man speech''. To kill and make them abandon their identity, language and culture, when this happen the man would be saved from himself. By aiming to be more like whites the Indigenous people are saving themselves. Pratt argued that Indigenous should be assimilated into white society and to adapt their axiology. In order to do this they need the help of whites the ''superior''. If whites infant was in Indigenous civilization he would grow up to be a savage, but if the Savage-born infant is raised in white civilization he will grow up to be civilized in his habits. He doesn't believe in the killing of them, yet he sure wants to kill their culture, values, and identity.

All of this can be connected to the article, ''Schooled for Servitude and Black Intellectuals and the Crisis in Black Education'' that article focused on Africans, while this text is about Indigenous people, but they have the same approach of assimilation. Africans were perceived as miseducated and Indigenous as needed to be civilized. Both shows that whites want to be superior and to be doing the teaching and manipulation of other cultures and people. They were different, had different societies and education from whites, and the whites don't like that. Africans and Indigenous people were both rewarded and complimented for imitating whites, as a result their manner improved and civilized. That was basically the few occurences where Natives and blacks were acknowledged and they also got higher status. Whites come with their messed up system and with their inferiority-complex and kill other people's axiology and assimilate them.

-Lomiah M

# data[].attributes.body
In this text, author Captain R.H. Pratt believes that it is not right to treat Indigenous Americans inhumane and as an inferior race. However, he follows by claiming that it is instead better to show Indigenous Americans how to behave properly and civilized. He says that he does not agree with killing the Indian race. He then follows by saying "[I only agree with this]: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, save the man." This means that only their culture, way of life, and behavior should be gotten rid of and changed. The author believes that to help them, assimilation is the correct way to go about it.

Much like the article "Schooled for Servitude," there is an established superior race that views another race as inferior. They say that the uncivilized race needs to be taught like the superior race. Instead of helping them improve, the "inferior" race is oppressed and persecuted so that their heritage and culture are threatened and adjusted to fit a "modern" take.

# data[].attributes.body
The text is told from the perspective of the author, Captian R. H. Pratt, a former US Army Officer. What you need to know about the text is that it revolves around the "betterment" of Indians, regarding them as subjects to be taught and trained to be civil or improved by the white man. ["Kill the Indian in him, and save the man"], Pratt argues, enforcing the idea that Indians are savages and that the only quality that make them men can only be brought out to its full potential with the aid of the "superior": the whites. This belief that stated Indians could be reshaped into proper men by whites made its way to classrooms, influencing the curriculum in Indian schools and staff -employees were mostly white people. Moreover, Pratt pushed for the assimilation of whites and Indians, stating ["Transfer the infant white to the savage surroundings, he will grow to possess a savage language, superstition, and habit. Transfer the savage-born infant to the surroundings of civilization, and he will grow to possess a civilized language and habit."] It is also important to note that he has created a school at Carlisle which share these sentiments and agenda.

This text is very similar to the article, "Schooled for Servitude" in the sense that the curriculum and overall structure of the school is aimed to train minorities into obedience and submissiveness before the white man. ["I leave off the last two words, "of Servitude," because I want to be entirely and consistently American."]

-Yuri

# data[].attributes.body
What should classmates know?

> Du Bois explains that the public school system in the South wasn't a gift from the government it was actually started by Black people and Northern supporters. Most white leaders at the time hated the idea and thought educating Black people was "dangerous." They even tried to make the schools as bad as possible and forced Black workers to pay for their own education through high rents and low wages.

> By 1879, they had built over 80 high schools and 16 colleges (like Howard) to train leaders so they wouldn't be "driven back to slavery."

What’s resonating/Connections?

> It's wild how "local control" was just a code word for keeping things segregated and unfair. It connects to the idea that education isn't just about books; it’s a tool for survival. While other groups were being told they couldn't read, this group was literally building their own universities to make sure they stayed free.

- Fatmata Allen.

# data[].attributes.body
Captain R. H. Pratt founded the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, a boarding school created to assimilate Native American children into white American society. In his speech, Pratt uses the phrase “Kill the Indian, Save the Man” to argue that Native American culture, language, and tribal identity needed to be destroyed in order to “save” the individual. He believed Native Americans were not biologically inferior, but rather "culturally backward" and that progress would only happen if they were fully immersed in white society. Instead of keeping Native Americans on reservations, Pratt argued they should be assimilated and forced to adopt Western habits and values.

This connects to the article "Schooled for Servitude and Black Intellectuals and the Crisis in Black Education", which also shows how education has been used as a tool for control. While Pratt’s speech focuses on Native Americans and the other article focuses on Africans and African Americans, they share a similar strategy: assimilation. Pratt believed Native Americans needed to abandon their culture to become “civilized,” while the other article discusses miseducation, where a small educated elite is trained to think and act in European ways. In both cases, education is used to erase cultural identity and make people function within the oppressor’s system.

-Edwina A.

# data[].attributes.body
What information from the article should your classmates know about? If you were to teach them about what you've read, what would you say?

There was some talk, even from legislators, about creating a free, public school system in Southern states throughout the late 1700s and early to mid 1800s. However, it never went very far and was often just an idea. These ideas were also always for poor white people, they never had free or enslaved black people in mind. Despite most white people not caring about their lack of education, it was something black people were very interested in. The first public schools were created by and for black people, so they could be educated.

What is resonating with you, or what connections can you make between this article and other articles/topics we've discussed so far?

While reading, I was thinking about how so many students nowadays are dissatisfied and upset with education, particularly in public schools, but children back then didn't even have it as an option. Many people and children, mostly black ones, wanted education. They wanted schools that were accessible for them. No matter how many plans were made, they didn't get them. This isn't to say there are no issues, there are. It's just very sad that these kids didn't even get the chance to have what we take for granted so often.

-Alice

# data[].attributes.body
In the book I read, Captain Pratt believed that the Native Americans should abandon their cultures and traditions and assimilate to white culture. This is where the phrase “Kill the Indian in him, and save the man” came from. He didn’t mean to literally murder the Natives but to force them to forget their values and become more like the white people. In the book Pratt is complimenting a native man for acting like the white peoples. He says “He learned to imitate, so far as he was able, the dress of the gentlemen he associated with ; and his manner became wonderfully improved and civilized”. This suggests that the English men only acknowledged the Natives for acting like them. He also mentions that these Native men were getting high praises and status for their behavior.

-I remember in class, it was a packet and we had to jot down the steps it took for the Europeans to conquer a country in Africa. I believe it was Ghana or Kenya? The Europeans had to first convince the King that letting the people learn from them would make them knowledgeable and give them status. They also were able to convert the King and his people to Christianity. This kind of plays part in the role of assimilating to the white people. The Europeans were able to strip down Africans and the Natives culture in order to civilize them and then began to praise them for adopting their cultures.

# data[].attributes.headline
history of anti literacy laws in the us 

# data[].attributes.subject
history of anti literacy laws in the us 

# data[].attributes.body
Carliss Maddox tells the story from the perspective of those who fought for Black literacy in the United States, showing how learning to read and write was treated as a threat to white power. The most important thing to know is that anti-literacy laws were created to keep Black people from gaining knowledge and freedom, which meant that Black communities had to create their own schools and learning networks, often in secret. This history shaped U.S. education by highlighting how teaching and learning have always been connected to power and resistance. During this time, the Reconstruction era and Jim Crow laws were also shaping society, making literacy a key part of both oppression and liberation. Understanding this helps educators see that teaching is not just about following a curriculum but also about empowering students and challenging systems that have excluded marginalized groups. This connects directly to Fugitive Pedagogy, where Black teachers used hidden curricula to share knowledge that official textbooks ignored. Overall, the article shows that the fight for literacy was a fight for freedom, and it reminds us how education can be a powerful tool for resistance and community empowerment. -- markayla cooke