“What makes America great?…. Is it education, culture, feeling of a home, suffering, struggling, fictitious manufactured plans by forefathers, immigrants, advantages to gringos, diversity, lying, wealth, activism, depression, disease, action, greed, is America great?” ~TUSD Social Justice Education Project, “Decolonize and Reclaim”
Now that Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction is about to release the long awaited finding on the Tucson Unified school District’s highly controversial Mexican American/Raza Studies program, it is not too early to look back at the events, players, and issues. This is the first part of our series; The history of the TUSD Ethnic Studies controversy.
Frantic attempts to discredit the finding, the law, Superintendent Huppenthal, and anything and anyone else deemed an enemy of Raza Studies have begun in anticipation of the finding’s publication. Interested parties on both side of the issue believe that the finding will be “harsh.” Even Roberto “Dr. Cintli” Rodriguez, a fringe assistant professor heavily involved in the program has written that the classes must be eliminated in order for the district to be compliant with state law.
It is imperative that supporters create as much hype, drama, confusion, and fear as possible. An example of this is Cintili’s most recent screed, “When Huppenthal issues his finding – his own Auto de Fe or his own Requerimiento – it will not deter MAS supporters because we too are involved in our own cosmic drama. It comes down to us from the ancient Codex Chimalpopoca (The Legend of the Suns) and the Popul Vuh; it is about how human beings and maiz were created.”
While slightly amusing, he is a minor player. The elected players are our concern. What did the TUSD Governing Board members know, when did they know it, and what are they going to do now that everyone else knows?
It is clear from the record that Dr. Mark Stegeman believed that there was more to the classes than met the public eye at least a year ago. He made it clear that he and many others in the district had very serious questions and concerns about the class curriculum, the teaching methods employed, and the treatment of staff and students.
The most obvious place to begin any inquiry into the issue was with the players in the melodrama. The question for the skeptics of class critics was, “Are the people who criticize the classes credible?” and “What do we know about this John Ward person?” “Is this strictly a political stunt by Tom Horne?”
As a result, Mark Stegeman, board member-elect Michael Hicks, and others met with John Ward. Mr. Ward answered all questions in a frank and emotionless manner. He told of his personal experience and provided information about others, who like him had had disturbing encounters with the Mexican American/Raza staff and students.
Mr. Ward explained the methods of indoctrination he had witnessed, the disturbing compliance and lack of questioning by the students, and the anti-intellectual nature of the curriculum itself. He reported that the students learn to protect their teachers from their “enemies” in the district who do not understand what they are trying to achieve. Others report that the students are taught to recite a reaffirmation/chant , “In Lak Ech” or “You are my other me.” This repeated pledge serves as a constant reminder to the students that they are not to betray their teachers and any betrayal is a betrayal of themselves.
Mr. Ward told of the use of the books such as Rodolfo Acuña’s Occupied America and Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed and that the materials were used to promote hate, segregation and the overthrow of the U.S. government. He reported that the American History book ordered for the class was not used except briefly as a dramatic device to emphasize the lack of interest in the “white man” for the “red and brown man.” He relayed that one “teacher” held up two pages in the middle of the American History textbook and told the students that those mere two pages were the only ones dedicated to them and their ancestors.
Interested parties, including Michael Hicks and Mark Stegeman were provided the curriculum from past MAS classes through a third and reliable party, supplied by a teacher who had recently left the district. There was no definite proof that those materials were going to be used in the classrooms after the law went into effect, only that they had been used in the near past. The materials were not offered as a complete or wholly representative of the class materials, however they do give a sense of the tone of the classes. Those materials can be found at public education information website http://www.tu4sd.com/.
Both Mark Stegeman and Michael Hicks separately called for an independent review of the classes. Many believed that a community based panel would expose the truth of the classes and the finding would be accepted by the more liberal Tucson community than one conducted by conservatives, Huppenthal and Horne.
Neither Hicks nor Stegeman were involved in the public school support group, TU4SD’s final panel proposal to the Board. Board President Judy Burns and Board Clerk Miguel Cuevas refused to put the question of a panel review on the Governing Board meeting for an up or down vote by the whole board.
During a meeting with an employee of the district, Mark Stegeman was asked how many members of the Board understood that the classes were based on critical race pedagogy and what that pedagogy was. He replied that only he and maybe Pedicone knew what it was and how it was being used. There is very little evidence that this statement was inaccurate, however most people believe that Board member Adelita Grijalva understands that the classes are designed to create progressive activists with a social justice agenda.