On Wednesday, Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, John Huppenthal, challenged the characterization by the Tucson Unified School District Superintendent, H.T. Sanchez, that the state had approved the new “Culturally Relevant” curricula. Huppenthal said that the public and the Board were misled when they were given the impression that the state had approved the curriculum.
“We feel like the people in the audience were not fully informed as to the nature of the issues,” said Huppenthal. He went on to say that last night’s presentation to the board was the second time the District implied that they had gained the state’s approval of the controversial Critical Race Theory based curriculum. “They implied that we’ve reviewed the courses. They misrepresented what our department’s involvement has been.”
Huppenthal noted that although Sanchez “indicated that they modified the curriculum, we have not seen the changes.” Huppenthal said it was nearly impossible for the District to have made appropriate adjustments to the curriculum based on the advice of the State’s experts because the experts had only issued their findings 6 days before last night’s vote.
In the memorandum from the state, the district was advised that the classes did not align to state standards and would likely violate the law which prevents the teaching of hate and the overthrow of the government.
Huppenthal, who has been known for his cautious and conciliatory tone with TUSD throughout the years long battle between the state and the district, was unusually strong in his statement about the curriculum. The same curriculum, under the old Mexican American Studies label, was found to be in violation of state law due to the fact that the pedagogy promoted resentment toward white people and segregated students into separate classes based solely on their ethnicity and the color of their skin.
In the letter dated August 7, the state wrote, “While ADE recognizes that it remains the district’s responsibility and purview to design local standards-aligned curriculum, the department is compelled to point out that the draft courses as submitted do not appear to be standards-aligned at this time. Achieving this will require significant revision to include the missing content…”
The State also questioned the texts as proposed by the District. While the District has refused to reveal most of the texts they intend to use, claiming that they have not had time to compile the information, the State did question the use of one of the few they were willing to reveal. They wrote:
“While there is evidence of a few additional texts being listed as primary and secondary resources, most of the texts being used seem to be deliberately vague. The one text that is mentioned consistently is Howard Zinn’s The People’s History of the United States. This is a matter of serious concern. While his history books provide an alternative look at American history, as a social and political activist, he represents a particular viewpoint focused on the struggle for civil rights. In order for students to demonstrate the critical reading skills required in the ACCS Literacy Standards for History/Social Studies, there must be clear evidence of an intentional use of a wide variety of resources that ensure a balanced approach to the course of study. There is serious concern that a single, intentional bias is being presented to students and students are not being asked to come to conclusions or find textual evidence on their own.”
Critical Race pedagogy requires students to view the world through a racial lens and in terms of “oppressor” versus “oppressed.”
The TUSD drafts of multicultural history course documents show evidence of a narrow viewpoint emphasizing a social justice perspective focusing on the history of a civil rights movement. While this perspective is important, the standards call for students to evaluate authors’ differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors’ claims, reasoning, and evidence. Examples from both draft course documents include:
• Students will analyze and synthesize information from primary and secondary sources about the social and political implications of this era for immigrants, indigenous people, women, and the labor class and draw a conclusion about the accepted level of exploitation and injustice a prosperous society will condone.
• Students will read excerpts from Marcus Garvey’s “An Appeal to the Soul of White America” and write a critique of Black Nationalism as the best response to racism in the U.S.
• Students will analyze how the American Revolution affected Native Americans in terms of genocide, land theft and dislocation
• Was the American Revolution a “full” or “kind” revolution (i.e. one that required an end to conflict resulting from various forms of oppression and subordination) – in other words creating a new society characterized by economic, social, gendered and political equality or one that set the stage for equal rights to follow?
• Students will use the 13th and 14th Amendments and relevant Supreme Court cases to define citizenship. They will add the current on-going efforts to amend the Constitution to deprive “anchor babies” of their citizenship
• Students will develop a logical argument to explain the phenomena of how various ethnic groups who immigrated to the United States were segregated/relegated into new and/or existing ethnic enclaves/barrios/colonias during the era of urbanization
• Students will analyze the concept of “triple oppression” that has been applied to the experiences of Mexican/Mexican American and African American women during the 20th century
• Students will write an argumentative essay taking a position on whether Mexican Americans-Chicanas/os are “second class” citizens in the United States (consider indicators such as income and wealth, educational attainment, political representation, ballot access, access to health care and incarceration rates.)
• Students will debate the militarization of the U.S. – Mexico border and the impact it has had on the communities and ecology of both sides of the political boundary.
• Students will write an argumentative essay on the following: Is the U.S. experiencing a revival of hostility toward immigrants?
• Students will write an argumentative essay that answers the following: What is affirmative action? Are there programs that benefited white males that are similar to affirmative action programs? Do you think it is an effective way to right socio-economic injustice?
Huppenthal suggested that the District step back and reevaluate their decision to start the classes today.