TUSD appeal to save “Ethnic Studies” reveals “cult”

Closing arguments are due today in the courtroom of Judge Lewis Kowal in one of the most important legal hearings regarding education in this decade. Administrative Hearing Judge Kowal presided over the appeal of the Tucson Unified School District on the ruling by the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction that the district’s Mexican American Studies classes violate state law.

After an exhaustive investigation, which included over 7000 pieces of evidence; the Arizona Department of Education found that the district’s Mexican American/Raza Studies classes violated 3 of the four provisions.

Arizona’s law ARS 15-112 prohibits classes that are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group, promote resentment towards a race or class of people, and advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals, and promote the overthrow of the government.

The four day appeal hearing was held over three months, in Phoenix.

Hearing day 1: The audit

The State opened their case with the testimony John Stollar, Chief of Programs and Policy for the Arizona Department of Education. Stollar offered testimony the Cambium “audit,” the obstruction of the investigation by district officials, and the parallel investigation conducted by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SOPI).

The highly irregular Cambium audit was commissioned by the Superintendent. The loosely termed “audit’ found little wrong with the classes and has served to justify the district’s appeal and MAS proponents’ support. According to testimony, auditors only reviewed 9 out of 180 possible lesson units. This 5% of the curriculum could not be a representative sample from which to draw any conclusions, however 3 of the 9 units contained “an overabundance” of political material.” Recently, the “audit” and Cambium have come under a cloud of controversy due to the company’s alleged ties with district personnel.

Stollar, as well as other expert auditors who have reviewed Cambium’s work, concluded that the audit could not be considered an audit by most standards. “I don’t believe that they had sufficient information,” he told the court. He testified that that the auditors could not draw any conclusions as to whether the curriculum provided a balanced view of the issues it covered.

Stollar’s testimony touched on the auditors’ effort to quit midway through the project, due in part to the obstruction of the district. The district obstructed the auditors’ efforts to conduct a complete audit by giving Mexican American Studies teachers a heads up on the timing of classroom observation, and selectively as opposed to randomly choosing focus groups participants. An email from the district’s Deputy Assistant Superintendent Maria Menconi in which she discussed her concerns about the obstruction to the district’s superintendent’s assistant Karen Bynum.

The district’s Superintendent Pedicone allowed the Mexican American/Raza Studies director, Sean Arce, and his staff to refuse to cooperate with auditors and ADE investigators. One high school principal was allowed to email Sean Arce, and his teachers Curtis Acosta and Maria Frederico Brummer, to ask them to “select students for focus groups.” This principal, Abel Morado is a friend of radical activist Delores Huerta, who was the source of the first national attention brought to the Mexican American studies classes. Huerta famously announced in a speech to students at Tucson High School, “Republicans hate Latinos.”

Hearing day 1: “This is a cult”

TUSD Governing Board member Dr. Mark Stegeman took the witness stand next. Dr. Stegeman is an MIT PhD in economics, and a professor at the University of Arizona. Stegeman felt compelled to serve on the local school due to what he noticed were the academic needs of his students upon arrival at the university. Dr. Stegeman, a democrat, has served on the school board since 2008.

Testimony focused on notes the highly published and well respected teacher took during his visits to Mexican American Studies classes this past spring. The extemporaneous notes described Raza Studies teachers Curtis Acosta and Jose Gonzales’s classes. Stegeman noted the ritualized clapping and ritualized recitation of the “You are my other self” or “In Lak’ ek” chant both of which are commonly found in the MAS classes. Stegeman testified that he had an epiphany of sorts, when he heard one student recite their personalized version of the “In Lak’ ek” chant. The students said, “we are all still in the struggle” and he recalled of a book he had read years ago, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements by Eric Hoffer. At the time he heard the words, Stegeman wrote, “this is a cult.”

In his testimony, Dr. Stegeman described the alignment between Hoffer’s observation’s and his own experiences with the Mexican American studies classes, students, teachers, and community leaders. He testified about the tactics employed by both to denigrate the present and romanticize a fabricated history, the complete disregard for the opinions of others, and the use theatrical displays. Dr. Stegeman quoted and compared the students in class, “we must be willing to act in a revolutionary way” to Hoffer’s observation that mass movements’ need to stand in defiance of the world.

In May, prior to a complete review of the classes’ materials, Dr. Stegeman then President of the district’s school board had proposed changing the classes from meeting core curriculum requirements to elective status, in an effort to forge a compromise. As a result, radicals including discredited professor Ward Churchill organized or participated in a takeover of a regularly scheduled school board meeting. Mostly non-district students chained themselves to the Board member’s empty chairs and did not allow the public meeting to proceed.

Dr. Stegeman’s testimony touched on this event. He compared the takeover to use of theatrical displays Hoffer discussed. Stegeman testified that students were publicly congratulated on their participation in the takeover. Leaders even went so far as to grant one of the students who participated in the takeover a seat on the dais of the Ethnic Studies sponsored forum. At that same forum, politicians and educators congratulated the students on their participation in the takeover.

Dr. Stegeman fought his emotions when he told the court “we are the caretakers” for these children. Since his testimony Dr Stegeman has come under attack for his honesty. He was “demoted” from the presidency of the board, in an effort led by progressive Congressman Raul Grijalva’s daughter and fellow board member Judy Burns. Burns claims that the Mexican Americans Studies classes saved her troubled son’s life.

Hearing day 1: Regrets appeal

The testimony concluded for the day with TUSD Governing Board member Michael Hicks. Hicks had originally voted to proceed with the appeal. Shortly thereafter he released a statement saying that, “Board members were told that the appeal was intended to lead to a better understanding of Huppenthal’s finding, when in fact the appeal challenged not only the constitutionality of the finding, but denied those parts of the finding that the district knew to be true.”

“Michael Hicks was led to believe that by voting in favor of the appeal, Huppenthal’s findings would be explored further. Had he known the outcome, he would have voted against the appeal and regrets his original position. Mr. Hicks has met with individuals who have come forward to express their continued concerns about the course and curriculum. This information also leaves Mr. Hicks with concern for the children who have been exposed to the program and the implications for the community,” Hicks confirmed his statement in his testimony to the court.

Hearing day 2: Their own systems of thought

Kathryn Hrabluk, Associate Superintendent of School Effectiveness with the Arizona Department of education, took the stand on the second day. Hrabluk testified that the foundation of her assessment of the program was the question, “Are we truly offering them (students) an opportunity to develop their own systems of thought.”
Hrabluk, a curriculum expert, addressed the lack of curriculum in TUSD’s MAS program and the standard practices of curriculum development. Hrabluk found the “disconnected and disjointed materials sent a consistent message, the basic message speaks to the inherent racism in this society,” and it “speaks to the oppressors as white society and the oppressed as Latino.”

Hrabluk noted that the materials are exclusively written for Latino students, and the MAS website clearly states that the curriculum has “an emphasis on Latino students in particular and students of color in general.” Hrabluk testified that the curriculum has an emphasis on developing a “Chicano identity” and that it views some Latinos are as “brown Anglos” and “self-haters” if they do not speak Spanish.

Hrabluk, and educator with over twenty three years in education testified that the classes are based on the belief that we must “raise our critical consciousness, and that children must “understand that they are oppressed” and “this has been done to you.”

Hrabluk, as well as many other experienced educators, believe that Critical Race pedagogy creates “victimization” in children which in turn leads to the resentment toward one class of people, in violation of Arizona law. TUSD’s Critical Race educators disagree and argue in defense of the “problemitization” of children, believing that the resulting discontent is not only desirable, but necessary to cause children to transform the world through revolution.

Just like TUSD’s expert defense witness, Dr; Jeffery Milem, Hrabluk had not visited a MAS classroom. She explained that “observation is to determine if the curriculum is being effectively taught in the classroom, it does not give a complete view.” She concluded “if the materials are presented as written, they would violate the law.”

Hrabluk explained the difference between the widely accepted definition of critical thinking and the definition of Critical Race theorists. She testified that the standard definition “speaks to higher thinking that requires the thinker to look objectively and thoughtfully at all kinds of information to begin to analyze and synthesize information….” Hrabluk explained that the Critical Race definition is “critical consciousness” which instead causes the thinker to “become aware of your oppressors” and use that awareness “to define your response to them.”

She continued to explain that based on her evaluation of the classroom materials, TUSD students are taught that white oppressors are “incapable” of understanding.

Hrabluk testified that the MAS literature’s describes MAS students as “vulnerable, having dropped out once” and “having personal challenges.” She stated that, “We must provide safe opportunities for learning,” and concluded that the MAS classrooms do not.

Hearing day 2: Ward Churchill and “some people at the UofA.”

TUSD’s Superintendent John Pedicone, a former adjunct professor with the University of Arizona and strong supporter of the Mexican American/Raza Studies classes briefly testified. His testimony focused primarily on the exploitation of students by “community and national activists.”

Pedicone was asked about an email exchange between him and Governing Board member Judy Burns. In that email, dated two days after the student take over, Burns called the takeover, “pretty impressive.” He responded “Too bad, Judy that they are so well meaning and exploited.” When asked specifically who exploited the students, Pedicone responded that they were Ward Churchill and “some people at the UofA.”

Pedicone was referring to Roberto “Dr. Cintli” Rodriguez a professor at the University of Arizona in the Mexican American Studies department among others. Cintli’s book The X in La Raza, and Professor Rudy Acuna’s book, Occupied America form political basis of the MAS curriculum. Rodriguez with his vested economic interest in the survival of the classes is a regular speaker at TUSD school board meetings.

The Superintendent chose to ignore the involvement of Board member Burns in the takeover. Burns alerted radicals to Dr. Stegeman’s proposal to change the class status to electives. She publically called for action on her Facebook page. On April 19, Burns posted “Wait until you see what the board president has proposed for next Tuesday’s mtg. Can’t let it happen. Call me if you want more details 429-XXXX.” Within minutes, she received a response from Ethnic Studies propagandist, David Abie Morales, otherwise known as the Three Sonorans, “Our education is under attack, what do we do… FIGHT BACK!”

Pedicone did not deny the state’s contention that the classes deliberately attempt to “racisimize” students which is an element of the “Barrio pedagogy” created by Augustine Romero, for the district’s Social Justice Education Project and adopted by the MAS program. He testified that the curriculum is and that he hired Assistant Superintendent Maria Menconi to work on its lack of “vigilance in structure.”

Apparently Dr. Pedicone has based his support on little personal experience. He testified that he had never been in an MAS elementary class or the middle school Social Justice classes. Pedicone testified that he did not know how many MAS classes were offered. He also limited his encounters with students to those who supported the classes.

Pedicone was confronted with an email he received from Assistant Superintendent Lupita Garcia. Garcia had written to him with concerns about MEChA on TUSD campuses and a recent effort by the group to recruit students for an “occupied peoples” conference at the University of Arizona. She wrote of “deep concern” and the “vulnerability of Raza Studies students.” She wrote, “our Raza students are ripe for this kind of influence” referring to MEChA at TUSD. She told him that she had mentioned her concerns about MEChA at the time of her hiring, and pointed out the organization’s “anti-Semitic tone and tenor on our campuses.”

Pedicone claimed to have no knowledge of MEChA or its role on TUSD campuses. Later at a school board retreat, Pedicone advised Board members that sending emails, “really puts us in jeopardy.” Pedicone reminded the Board that emails are public record.

Hearing day 2: Fear of retaliation

Next on the stand was a TUSD teacher whose daughter took a Mexican American Studies department American History class. The teacher’s testimony was entered into evidence despite the fact her daughter took the classes before the law went into effect, due to the testimony of Superintendent Pedicone that the district had not changed the classes at all since before the law went into effect.

She testified that when her daughter first signed up for the MAS American Government class at Rincon High School with Jose Gonzales, she was excited for her. She felt that as a student at eastside school in Tucson, her daughter had been sheltered. The educator believed that the classes would give “her daughter a different perspective” and “thought it would be important to round out her education.”

The teacher testified that Gonzales “taught a lot about the Aztecs” and the “life forces.” She stated that Gonzales told his class that “he didn’t care what the University of Arizona courses said, he had done his own research about the Aztecs” and there “was no human sacrifice that went on in those cultures.” She felt that this was misinformation. Many educators have not supported the Raza Studies due to what they believe is its anti-intellectual nature and its rejection of modern science based theories.

The teacher wrote in the email to the Arizona Department of Education, that Gonzales said that “no other culture was ever treated as badly as the Chicano people. My daughter did her best to interject some facts particularly that nearly all cultures have some history of being the underdog.” She stated that her daughter tried to keep the focus on the United States and that all cultures including “the Irish, the Chinese, the Native Americans had all been treated badly.” She stated that Gonzales then told her daughter that with “the exception of Native Americans, they hadn’t lost their land.”

In that same email, the teacher wrote, “Mr. Gonzales her teacher, seemed like a nice guy. I met him at a rally that she was told she had to attend as part of her grade. She was told her grade would be better if she brought a parent. I was a bit disappointed by the fact that part of her grade was to attend rallies for Raza Studies, for laws the program found upsetting, and for “Chicano Americans.”

Educators generally agree that whenever a teacher or a school incentivizes students to take one side of a controversial issue and take action for that side it is unequivocally indoctrination. This teacher’s testimony proves that what passes for “critical thinking” in MAS classes is, in fact, its antithesis…the unquestioned and automatic support for one side of a controversial issue.

The teacher testified that the rally focused on the Aztec people. “It was not about participation in history” but about their “religious beliefs.” The teacher found “no tie to American History.”

The teacher was uncomfortable that the students had to go to the rallies “or family gatherings.” She was uncomfortable with an “instructor who was clearly biased and presented his class in that matter.” She stated that Gonzales “said things about Anglo-Saxons, and how the Anglo-Saxons had treated people badly, particularly Chicano people.” She further stated that her daughter “experienced fellow students, primarily Hispanic, who as the course progressed had more and more of a chip on their shoulders.” Other students have come forward to the ADE, but who will not offer testimony due to fear of reprisal, have reported similar experiences with their classmates’ change of attitude.

In keeping with the belief upon which the MAS classes are based, that white oppressors are not capable of understanding their own oppression and prejudice, the teacher testified that when her daughter challenged some of the claims by Gonzales, she was told things like “Oh mija, there’s just no way you can ever understand. Oh mija you just haven’t lived the way we have lived.”

Like other parents who have expressed concerns about their children’s experiences in the classes, she did not come forward earlier because she did not want her child to experience retaliation.

Fear of retaliation, and instances of retaliation have kept students, parents, and educators silent for a number of years. Reports of retaliation have been ignored or dismissed at the school level, at the district level, and the administration.

Immediately prior to the teacher’s testimony, Dr Pedicone admitted that he only met with students who favored the classes. He admitted that he did not set up similar meetings with students who were opposed to the classes as he had with students in favor of the classes.

Hearing day 2 and 3: “Barrio Pedagogy” and the moviemento

Mexican American Studies Director, Sean Arce was the last to take stand on the second day, and first to take the stand telephonically on the third day.
Arce testified as to the foundations of the Mexican American curriculum. The curriculum is based upon the works of Arce and Augustine Romero, the works of Roberto “Dr. Cintli” Rodriquez, and Aztec spirituality.

According to testimony, the curriculum was not designed to put the United States in a bad light, but to “rehumanize” Mexican American students who have been dehumanized by the dominant group’s (white) system.

For the most part, Arce sat in denial, delaying answers and dodging questions.

He did however testify about an assigned reading by Roberto “Dr. Cintli” Rodriquez called The H Word, and its advocacy for the movimiento. The article argues against those who deny their heritage and fail to join the movimiento, especially those “who are born in the USA and still have relatives south of the US and Mexico border” and those “stranger still, are Raza who migrate to El Norte” and assimilate.

The article clearly condemned those people who “could be part of the movimiento” but have been discouraged, or in environments in which it is “frowned upon.” The article rejects the “Americanization movement.” It refers to the pilgrims as the “Plymouth Rockers.” Yet, Arce denied that the classes advocate for the movimiento and testified that it would be inappropriate for educators to do so.

MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán) and the movimiento became a topic of testimony also due to Pedicone’s testimony on the second day hearings about an email he received from Assistant Superintendent Dr. Lupita Cavazos-Garcia. In the email, Dr. Garcia expressed her concerns regarding MEChA’s efforts to recruit primarily the district’s Mexican American Studies students for an occupied peoples’ conference at which Palestinian and TUSD students would be sharing their experiences living in occupied territories.

Dr. Garcia wrote that she was concerned about the organization’s “anti-Semitic tone and tenor on our campuses.” She went on to state that the some of the district’s students have little emotional support and “our Raza students are ripe for this kind of influence.”

On the third day, during his telephonic testimony, Arce was asked to locate some highly inflammatory class materials from among the evidentiary materials sent to him by the attorneys. At that point, the telephone call was mysteriously disconnected. The momentary levity provided by the conveniently dropped call broke the building tension in the courtroom. At least five minutes went by before the court could reach Arce again.

Arce was asked about class materials including pictures of lynchings, a picture of Texas Rangers holding nooses connected to recently hung dead bodies, and a lesson entitled Birth of a Mestizo which included a picture of an Aztec in a ceremonial headdress with the caption, “Who is the illegal, pilgrim?” Arce testified that those materials did not promote resentment.

Hearing day 3: A captive audience

Abel Morado, the principal of Tucson High School and friend of Delores Huerta testified on the MAS program in his school. Morado said that he did not know the exact number of MAS classes offered at THS.

He offered testimony as to how students enroll in the classes. Morado testified that the school offers senior American Government from a Chicano Perspective, senior and junior English (Literature) from a Chicano Perspective, junior History from a Chicano Perspective, Art from a Chicano Perspective.

District wide the total number of high school and middle school students taking the classes as dropped from approximately 1500 to 375. As a result MAS teachers have been assigned standard curriculum classes as well as a few MAS classes. Tucson High School continues to offer the most sections of the classes in the district.
Morado described freshman students as a “captive audience” and said that his teaching staff would “put the word out” or actively recruit students from the 8th grade for their classes. However, one student reported that they were automatically enrolled in the MAS classes; they assumed it was because they had a Hispanic surname.

Morado testified about his interactions with MAS students. He stated because the classes were the subject of controversy, he “found myself asking the students how they are doing,” probably “more so than a biology student.” He described the classroom instruction in detail. He stated that the MAS students were no different than students in welding class.

Morado testified at first, that he had not received any complaints from students, parents, or other educators about the classes. He said that he was unsure of the curriculum details, but that “I think there is a lot of relationship building in the classes -getting to know them as individuals.” Morado explained that the students are able to “identify with events in history based on ethnicity” and that the students’ education was enriched as a result.

Morado’s testimony under questioning by the district’s attorney led the fact finder to get the impression that he had evaluated the classes in the past and he had seen nothing to indicate that the material or the classroom instruction created resentment or promoted ethnic solidarity. Morado explained the teacher evaluation process and the process used to determine which of the many school administrators would evaluate which teachers.

Morado was presented a piece of paper by the state’s attorney with a name written on it, due to the fact that the name could not be revealed to the public in order to protect the student’s identity. He was asked if he recognized the name. He denied that he did. Surprised by Morado’s response, the state’s attorney then asked if he had been advised by anyone about a student who had been called “white boy” by one of the MAS instructors and expelled from class. Morado responded, “no.”

Judge Kowal interrupted the testimony and suggested that Morado’s testimony seemed contradictory. He asked Morado to clarify his statements. Morado testified that his testimony was specifically referring to only the kinds of complaints the district’s attorney was referring to.

The judge changed his line of inquiry and asked whether Morado had seen the chant use in classes other than MAS, he responded that he had not. The judge then asked whether he had seen the chant use in classes other than MAS, he responded that he had not.

Morado described the use of ritualistic clapping and chanting used in the MAS classes. He testified that he had seen the use of the “In Lak Ech” chant or pledge and the Caesar Chavez clap in all the MAS classrooms he had visited.

When asked if he would have a problem if the kids were told that they had been dehumanized by the system he replied, “Yes.”

Hearing day 3: “Disequilibrium”

TUSD’s defense of the classes included testimony Professor Jeffrey F. Milem, the department head of Policy Studies and Practice in the College of Education at the University of Arizona.

Milem testified that he had never been in a TUSD MAS classroom and had only talked to students who attended the Institute for Transformative Education. He also testified that he had never reviewed the MAS curriculum. Despite this, he offered testimony about the classes and their effect on Hispanic and Anglos children.
Milem stated that some might consider him to be an expert in Critical Race Theory (CRT). Milem was presented to the court as an expert witness, usually someone not associated with a party in a legal matter except to offer an outside opinion on an issue in the disputed matter; despite his ties to the district and the MAS program.

Milem also testified that he and his employer, the University of Arizona, have benefited from their association with the MAS program and its Institute for Transformative Education. Milem was referring to the fact that he MAS classes have operated for years as a pipeline for students going into the university’s Ethnic Studies Department and the College of Education. The district then employs some of the graduates of the Ethnic Studies Department or contracts with its staff.

He spoke of his role in the district’s Institute for Transformative Education. The Institute was a joint event by the district and the University. Up until this year, the district carried most of the cost of the Institute of upwards of $200,000 including using desegregation funds which were intended for underserved classrooms, to instead purchase speakers’ books for distribution to attendees for free. He stated that the greatest minds in CRT come together at the Institute.

Milem testified regarding the academic value of Ethnic Studies for students in TUSD and elsewhere. He wanted to discuss the legal history of CRT, despite the fact that it has been not been accepted by the mainstream legal community and its proponents have been called the “lunatic fringe” by Judge Posner. However, it has been widely embraced by the education community due to the efforts of activist educator William Ayers.

Milem testified that Hispanic children will find their true identity through exposure to the truth about their oppression. Anglo children will experience “disequilibrium” when exposed to the truths presented through Ethnic Studies. Milem testified that through “disequilibrium” we develop better cognitive skills and when they are confronted by the truths presented through Ethnic Studies.

He testified that the students then work through the “disequilibrium” with the assistance of caring adults. He could not and did not testify with specificity about TUSD’s Anglo students’ “disequilibrium” and the actions of their educators.

Hearing day 3: Precious Knowledge

In TUSD’s defense of its Mexican American Studies classes, they offered the testimony of third grade Teacher Julie Elvick-Mejia from Ochoa Magnet Elementary. Elvick-
Mejia’s testimony interrupted the testimony of Jeffery Milem.

Elvick Mejia appeared telephonically and her availability was limited by her class schedule. Ms. Elvick-Mejia has taught grades 2-5 at three schools in TUSD.

Elvick-Mejia, testified that she is among a “handful” of elementary teachers who have introduced MAS into their classrooms. She testified that she made the decision to introduce the curriculum after having attended the Institute for Transformative Education conference.

Ms. Elvik-Mejia was a presenter at the Institute on the subject of the “Implementation of Critical Praxis with Elementary Students.” According to Freire, critical praxis develops “conscientization.” This is “the process by which students, as empowered subjects, achieve a deepening awareness of the social realities which shape their lives.” Gaetane Jean-Marie, in “Leadership for Social Justice: Preparing 21st Century School Leaders for a New Social Order,” describes the classroom as one which “raises students’ consciousness and prepares them to engage in larger social struggles for liberation.”

Ms. Elvick-Mejia testified that she accesses the MAS materials and staff to teach “big ideas” like identity.

Ms. Elvick-Mejia testified that she and MAS staff employ a team teaching model. Elvick-Mejia testified that she has worked most recently with Norma Gonzales and in the past with Jose Gonzales.

Elick Mejia testified that she started the year working on the Aztec calendar and the “guiding principles” or “five nahuatilli.” She states that these “are not lessons” but “guide our interactions in our classroom community.”

She testified specifically that she used one part of MAS lesson plans in her class, the “Four Sacred Elements to Becoming Human.” The four elements are represented by Aztec gods. She discussed the gods at length.

She offered explanations for two of the Aztec gods which represent the “four sacred elements”. She described the hummingbird symbol, otherwise known as Huitzilopochtli. Huitzilopochtli is the Aztec god of war, which she claims represents introspection and reflection. She stated that the most misconstrued god was Quetzalcoatl because he appears to be peeling off his own skin. Elvick-Mejia testified that he represents transformational change. She mentioned that Quetzalcoatl the serpent god represents precious knowledge.

Elvik Mejia’s testimony implied that the Aztec gods are not treated as myth, but elevated as guides for behavior. The Supreme Court has strictly limited the use of public school classrooms to promote Christianity and Judaism.

Hearing day 3: The situation was “dire, dire”

Maria Menconi, TUSD’s Deputy Superintendent and newest member of the large administrative staff, offered confusing and contradictory testimony in defense of the district. However, in one brief candid moment, when asked about the overall state of the district’s curricula. She responded the district “has a lot of work to do.”

Menconi testified that Math was the most pressing issue, and that the district “had fallen off a cliff” in terms of performance and the situation was “dire, dire.”
Menconi testified that instead of attending to Math curricula that was used by well over 70% of the district’s students, she spent much of her time working with Sean Arce on curricula used by a few hundred students. Fewer than 1% of the district’s Latino students are in MAS classes.

Menconi testified that her role in the Cambium audit was to “help them with the logistics.” She was the primary point of contact for the auditors. She testified that she was an experienced auditor and said that the Cambium auditors were “thorough” and “spent more time than a lot of auditors spend in our district.” She was not asked if the obstruction of the auditors by TUSD staff was one of the reasons the auditors “spent more time.”

Despite the fact that the TUSD staff did not cooperate with the auditors and they only reviewed 5% of the MAS curriculum, she stated that “once they were done, I was not concerned that they hadn’t explored things.”

The district’s head cheer leader testified that it was “almost good” that the district had issues with the MAS curriculum because through this ordeal it was discovered that the Board had failed to adopt much of the district’s curricula. In one recent Board meeting Board member Adelita Grijalva admitted that the Board had failed to adopt upwards of 85% of the district’s curricula in violation of state law.

Menconi was asked about a quote from a piece of evidence entitled “Why we don’t know our culture” by Alberto Acosta Figueroa. The district’s attorney had her read it to herself, not out loud for the record, and asked her if it was promoting resentment. She stated “If a teacher were to take this quote and state it as fact I would have concern.” Most experts on pedagogy have concluded that statements made by teachers will almost automatically be heard by students as statements of fact, and that, as a consequence, most young students will come to believe the statement as fact.

Menconi’s lack of candor and credibility strained the judge’s patience. Under cross examination, Menconi attempted to stall by parsing words. At one point, Menconi asked the state’s attorney to define the word “dramatically.”

Menconi and the state’s attorney then painstakingly worked out an agreement on a definition. The attorney then used the word “big” in a follow-up question instead of the word “dramatically.” Menconi incredulously questioned the attorney’s words again and asked “a big difference?” The impatient judge interrupted and told the state’s attorney, “I am going to ask you to be consistent… if you can use the same term or terminology, that would be helpful…. the next thing we’re going to have ‘big’ defined.”

During cross examination, Menconi was asked about her experience with curriculum audits. The state’s attorney went through a series of questions about those things that would need to be done in an adequate audit, most of which was not done in the Cambium audit. Menconi agreed that those things should have been done. She admitted that at the time of the audit, she could not even locate the whereabouts of two MAS teachers who were supposedly co-teaching at middle schools.

Menconi was questioned about the specifics of her deposition. Menconi’s deposition focused on her investigation of the MAS program. Through her investigation she found areas of concerns with the program. In her deposition, Menconi found that in total, the “Mexican American Studies department was both disorganized and dysfunctional.”
Menconi testified as to a unit of lesson prepared for MAS students in grades K-5 by a teacher who taught in the spring of 2011, entitled “America Without Borders.” The unit introduction concluded with these words, “Hopefully with a little knowledge students will comprehend some of the actions and reactions of our people.” One of the lesson plan’s activities called Clash of Cultures; the people who met Columbus asked students the question “What kind of immigration papers did the new arrivals have?”

Menconi testified that no one “could ever know what is actually happening in any Mexican American Studies class at the elementary level” because the lessons are developed on “an ad hoc basis.”

The state’s attorney asked one more time whether she had been in a MAS elementary classroom. She replied, “No, I have not.”

Menconi testified about program’s textbooks. She started an investigation into textbooks this past summer. She stated that the process to review texts and determine which books will be put before the Board for their approval, in accordance with state law, had not yet been completed.

Menconi offered testimony that she had no idea what books were being used in the classes. She explained the process she was employing to determine the texts in use, as well as the process for future approval by the Board as necessary. First, she would determine what books were actually being used. Then her staff would review the texts to determine the appropriateness of the materials. Those materials would then be submitted to the Board for review and approval.

Menconi was not asked how the Governing Board could have twice adopted resolutions finding the classes to be in compliance with state law when no one knew even knew what books were being used.

Menconi was asked about the difference in appropriateness of teaching about racial oppression in order to educate students or to incite them. She was asked if teaching about oppression as a vehicle to incite political activism was appropriate, and she responded that it was not.

The state’s attorney read to Menconi from a final exam, “All year long we have read stories where the Mexican American were discriminated against, take advantage of, oppressed, etc. We are destined to repeat history if we don’t do something to change it. Reflect on what we have read about this year and in an essay, write about what we can do as a group to change things, what would you do as an individual to change things? Select one of the pieces we have read this year that best reflects that point, the point you are trying to make in your essay.”

The state’s attorney then read to Menconi, passages from students’ work products, “There are so many people that are racially profiling the Mexican American people,” and “Mexican Americans are the only ones being attacked by the government.” Menconi responded that IF they were being taught that the Mexican American population was the only ones being attacked by the state of Arizona she would be concerned.

The next reading included, “Why are ethnic programs being attacked by the Board of education? They refuse to teach us about our history but we must learn about the white man’s history.” Menconi responded that IF they were taught that she would be concerned. Again, as a long term educator she knows that this writing by a student is absolute proof that is what the student learned in class.

Menconi listened as the state’s attorney read from another student’s work, “I think that as an Arizonan today, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has an impacted my life a lot.” “All the laws that have been occurring here in Arizona such as SB1070 not only makes us wonder what would have happened if the US had never bought the states from Mexico but makes us realize that step by step they want to get rid of Mexicans like they did back then.” Menconi stated that IF they were taught that, it could promote racial resentment.

The state’s attorney asked Menconi about a MAS class text; The X in La Raza II: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, a book by Roberto “Dr. Cintli” Rodriquez. The book is assigned as reading for MAS students. In his book, “Cintli” discusses at great length the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. “For more than fifteen years many of the Chicano indigenous groups have based their struggles on the treaty. The treaty is used to promote the cause of self-determination and to defend the human rights of Chicanos’ on the basis that it is a living legal document that governs relations between signators; the governments of the US and Mexico and the Chicanos come under its protections.”

The state’s attorney continued to read a passage from The X in La Raza II: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, “Many of us were raised with the idea that the war with Mexico was simply conducted to steal its territory and the treaty negotiated under military duress and signed by a corrupt dictator simply formalized the theft of half of Mexico’s territory.” The reading continued, “Because Mexicanos within the United States are not a sovereign people, the question that arises is whether those rules of construction apply to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The answer has to be a definitive, yes.” (inaudible) “that Mexicanos and their descendents are the only other group in the continental United States who are today covered by a US treaty. That is the only similar situation and the only other legal precedent applicable to the population in question. Additionally, Mexican treatment particularly in relation to land disputes at the hands of whites has also historically been marked by the use of force, fraud and exploitation.”

Hearing day 4: Lack of critical thinking

Dr. Sandra Stotsky, the state’s last witness, graduated from the University of Michigan and Harvard. Stosky has worked for the Massachusetts Department of Education, the United States State Department, and Harvard University. Stosky worked for the state of Massachusetts incorporating multi-cultural education into the state’s curriculum. She currently a professor at the University of Arkansas.

Dr. Stotsky testified that like the district’s expert witness, Dr. Jeffrey Milem, she has never been in a TUSD Mexican American Studies class. Unlike Milem, she did review the curriculum and student work submitted as evidence by the district. She testified as to lack of critical thinking promoted by the curriculum.

Stotsky was brought in to rebut Milem’s earlier testimony that the effort to create “disequilibrium” was normal and healthy. Stotsky testified that creating “disequilibrium” is not and should not be used as a pedagogical practice. Instead educators should use “scaffolding” to introduce new information that “may jar” students.

Milem appeared briefly as a rebuttal witness to Dr. Stosky, and in a seeming effort to rehabilitate himself, due to his earlier testimony. In total the testimony of the two lasted approximately one and a half hours.
The state rested its case.

Judge Kowal has thirty days to render a decision in the case. The judge advised attorneys in the case that he will spend a substantial amount of time reviewing the curriculum entered, the student work products, and the testimony entered as evidence. Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal will then take that under advisement and issue his ruling on the matter. If the district is found guilty of violating state law, the district will lose 10 percent of their funding provided by the state.

***************************************************

Closing arguments in TUSD’s appeal of Mexican American Studies classes

by Loretta Hunnicutt on Nov. 27, 2011, under ethnic studies, tusd