By Marsha Sutton
Times of San Diego
SAN DIEGO — With dozens of offerings at last month’s Equity Conference, sponsored by the San Diego County Office of Education, I was particularly interested in the session titled “Students of Color: Promoting Equity Through the New Ethnic Studies Graduation Requirement.”
Unfortunately, this session was a major disappointment, unlike the previous equity conference session I attended.
Ethnic studies will be a required course for graduation for all California high school students, starting with the class of 2030, thanks to state Assembly Bill 101.
Signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2021, the bill calls for providing students with a better understanding of the contributions and struggles of four ethnic groups: Native Americans, Latinx Americans, Black Americans and Asian Americans.
The ethnic studies session was led by Pamela Low, policy analyst with Oakland-based Education Trust-West.
Low said ethnic studies is about communities of color and that districts should involve their own students of color in creating the coursework. She said courses should focus on social justice.
After her brief introduction, Low had attendees gather into small discussion groups and then report out. There was concern about inadequate teacher training and frustration with district policies. Some participants said they were confronting opposition from parent groups concerned about white fragility, which elicited suggestions on how to skirt parental resistance.
Although some comments were interesting, the session felt unorganized, with no facilitator summary and little educational value.
One point was noteworthy though.
Low opened the session by saying that Education Trust-West is “committed to advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in California’s education system.”
Since the program was about implementing ethnic studies — which is, after all, a curricular matter — I wanted to know what in California’s existing curriculum included “embedded racial and economic barriers.”
Mariel Matze, associate director of communications at Education Trust-West, said that statement is part of the organization’s mission statement and sent me a link to a 62-page report titled “Segregating California’s Future.”
The report detailed the inherent inequity in student achievement stemming from housing and isolation issues that affect academic success, primarily for low-income students.
No argument. Certainly segregation and the disproportionate allocation of educational resources severely impact educational success. There’s plenty of work to be done to address this chronic problem.
Perhaps this might have been a better topic for Education Trust-West.
But since the presenter spoke about what’s being taught in the classroom, I assumed the reference was to racial and economic barriers embedded in California’s curriculum, not in demographic disparities.
So, I asked Matze again for examples of racial and economic barriers in the state’s curriculum. After three requests, no response.
I then twice asked Talisa Sullivan, SDCOE’s executive director for equity, for her view on the matter, but received no reply.
After the law passed, the state created an Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum that was strongly opposed for its inclusion of antisemitic and anti-Zionist content, which was not only offensive to many but also veered far afield from what was supposed to be a focus on the four specific ethnic groups.
Since the onset of the Israel-Hamas war, California Department of Education spokesperson Liz Sanders said state guidelines are clear: “The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a recommended topic for discussion in world history courses, but not in ethnic studies,” according to a Feb. 15, 2024 New York Times article.
The ethnic studies requirement itself has become highly controversial and has been mired in debate and criticism.
Critics say the mandate can divide the world into oppressors and victims, triggering “white guilt” and pitting student against student.
Recognizing the flaws of the original model curriculum, the state created a revised Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum and put in place “guardrails” which state that ethnic studies courses must not reflect or promote, directly or indirectly, any bias, bigotry or discrimination against any person or group of persons.
However, there seems to be no state oversight to ensure compliance.
The Department of Education’s Sanders, in the New York Times article, said there is “no mechanism to enforce the guardrails and no consequence for breaking them.”
Because the mandate allows districts to create their own versions, many worry that districts may take advantage of the lack of teeth in the law by creating ethnic studies that overtly violate state guidelines and detour around the guardrails to promote political agendas, specific ideologies and generalizations about race.
The San Diego Unified School District already offers a number of ethnic studies options. The district’s graduation requirement began with the class of 2024. But most districts are still in the process of design work.
The San Diego County Office of Education encourages local districts to use the state-approved curriculum to fulfill the mandate, rather than older versions, said SDCOE’s Sullivan.
SDCOE has information for educators on how best to serve all students, especially historically underserved populations, and the office offers its Equity Blueprint for Action that outlines needs and approaches in more detail.
I’ve tried to like the idea of ethnic studies, at first hoping it would bring students from all cultures and ethnicities together in a sort of kumbaya experience. The idea was good but the devil is in the details, as they say.
Worrisome is the lack of punitive measures that ensure that the spirit and intent of the law are followed. This opens the door for bad actors with personal agendas to hijack the process.
Ethnic studies was created to focus on four ethnic groups that have been historically overlooked in classrooms, so let’s stick to that without injecting unrelated, politically-motivated matters into the mix.
It’s a well-meaning idea that may fall victim to unintended consequences by being divisive rather than cohesive, the opposite of the mandate’s goal. And that makes ethnic studies problematic.
*
This article initially appeared in Times of San Diego, with which San Diego Jewish World trades stories under auspices of the San Diego Online News Association. Marsha Sutton can be reached at suttonmarsha@gmail.com.