برچسب: liberated

  • Berkeley superintendent, GOP congressman tussle over ‘liberated’ ethnic studies

    Berkeley superintendent, GOP congressman tussle over ‘liberated’ ethnic studies


    Berkeley Unified School District Superintendent Enikia Ford Morthel and Republican Rep. Kevin Kiley at the House Education and Workforce Committee hearing on May 8, 2024.

    Credit: YouTube

    A first-term California congressman sparred with the superintendent of Berkeley Unified and denounced the district’s choice of a consultant to create an ethnic studies curriculum during a House subcommittee hearing on antisemitism in K-12 schools Wednesday at the Capitol.

    During his five minutes allowed for questioning, U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley, a Republican representing a huge expanse of eastern California, pressed Superintendent Enikia Ford Morthel about the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium.

    The group pitches to school districts in California an alternative to the state’s ethnic studies model curriculum framework with a focus on dismantling capitalism, systems of racism, and Zionism, which it equates to colonialism. The group’s leaders include ethnic studies professors from California State University and the University of California.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-tcSzYrQr8

    Berkeley Unified School District Superintendent Enikia Ford Morthel and Republican Rep. Kevin Kiley at the House Education and Workforce Committee hearing on Wednesday.

    The district hired the group on a one-year contract in June 2023 for $111,120 to serve as what Ford Morthel called “a thought partner.” Berkeley’s memorandum of understanding said that the district’s Ethnic Studies Advisory Committee recommended the group as a  “content expert group” that would “provide instructional materials, teacher training, and consultation for implementing ethnic studies.”

    The consortium’s contract is up for renewal next month. Jewish parents in Berkeley have written the school board opposing continuing it. In their letter, the parents criticized the consortium as pushing “a non-inclusive, biased, divisive, and one-sided ideological world view.”

    Ford Morthel testified Wednesday that the district has not purchased a Liberated Ethnic Studies curriculum. Rather, she said, the district takes pride that teachers and community partners have written the curriculum. Teachers created lessons on Israel and Palestine because of “a lot of curiosity, a lot of questions, and quite frankly, a lot of confusion from many of our students wanting to know what was going on.”

    The district did not respond Thursday to EdSource’s question on what the consortium is providing the district.

    The district has not released the lesson plans, and a parent, Yossi Fendel, has sued the district for them. Fendel said that what he had been allowed to view of the ninth-grade lessons was biased against Israel and violated the district’s policy on teaching controversial issues, the publication Berkleyside reported.

    The Liberated consortium is one of several consulting groups whose curriculum proposals have generated controversy in Sacramento and Berkeley.

    The 16 members of the leadership team are listed on the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium’s website and include leaders from across the state in ethnic studies.

    In 2019, state officials sharply criticized the first draft of the ethnic studies curriculum and ordered major revisions by writers from the state Department of Education. The authors disavowed the state’s model version of the curriculum and broke off to create the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum.

    Critics included State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond. The Jewish Legislative Caucus cited the curriculum’s one-sided view of the Israel-Palestine conflict and a favorable definition of the “boycott, divestment, sanctions movement,” which calls for sanctions and boycotts of Israel. Gov. Gavin Newsom called the document “insufficiently balanced and inclusive.”

    Please answer yes or no 

    Early in the two-hour hearing, the chair of the subcommittee, Rep. Aaron Bean, R-Fla., forced Ford Morthel and the other two superintendents on the panel, New York City schools Chancellor David Banks and Montgomery County school board President Karla Silvestre, to give one-word answers to a series of complicated questions. One was whether the phrase “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” is antisemitic.

    Yes or no, Bean asked?

    “If it is calling for the elimination of the Jewish people in Israel,” Ford Morthel responded.  “And I will also say that I recognize that it does have different meanings to different members of our community.”

    “I’m going to go ‘yes.’ I’ll put you down, yes,” Bean said.

    Kiley used that answer against her during his questioning. He referred to a slide in the teacher-prepared curriculum that cited the “From the river to the sea” phrase as a call for freedom and peace and paired it with a “supportive quote” by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Michigan, soon after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas in Israel. Congress censured Tlaib on a 224-188 Republican-led vote, with members claiming it implied support for armed resistance to abolish the state of Israel.

    Many people, including most Jews, also view it that way. Others, Tlaib included, say it evokes future coexistence where everyone can live in freedom in Palestine.  

    “Do you think that’s an appropriate thing to have on a slide for students?” Kiley asked Ford Morthel.

    “So,” she replied, “we definitely believe that it’s important to expose our students to a diversity of ideas and perspectives. And if it was presented as a perspective, I do think it’s appropriate.”

    “You said earlier you thought this was antisemitic, and you put this on a slide in the classroom, and then students go around the hall saying it. I don’t think there’s anything surprising about that,” Kiley said.

    Noting that the district passed a policy against hate speech last year, Ford Morthel said, “Public schools reflect the values and aspirations of their local communities. Berkeley is no different. 

    “Our history of activism, social justice, diversity, and inclusion is alive and well today. And we recognize the need to teach students to express themselves with respect and compassion.”





    Source link

  • ‘Liberated’ ethnic studies courses challenged amid allegations of antisemitism

    ‘Liberated’ ethnic studies courses challenged amid allegations of antisemitism


    Santa Ana Unified board President Carolyn Torres, right, and board member Rigo Rodriguez speak at the board meeting on August 27, 2024. Both sit on the district’s Select Committee on Ethnic Studies.

    Credit: YouTube / Santa Ana Unified

    The hearing on the case has been rescheduled to Friday, Oct. 25 at 10 a.m. in Orange County Superior Court. The court gave no reason for the change. Updated Sept. 16.

    Santa Ana Unified staff members on a steering committee led by two school board members expressed antisemitic views while designing new ethnic studies courses, newly released legal documents reveal.

    The comments have tainted the new courses, which were written out of public view, in violation of state law, according to the motion asking a state court to invalidate the courses.

    “The students of Santa Ana will be taught damaging, biased views about Jews and Israelis — views that the State has expressly warned school districts against teaching,” the 31-page document reads. “Once these biases are imparted onto impressionable youth, they cannot so easily be undone.”

    Attorneys for two nationally known Jewish legal groups — the American Jewish Committee and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights under Law — are asking the court to throw out four ethnic studies courses that they say are biased against Jews and that the school board passed in violation of the Brown Act, which requires open meetings with advance notice to the public. They want a court to order compliance with the Brown Act as a condition for working further on ethnic studies curricula.

    A judge for Orange County Superior Court has set a hearing on Sept. 19 to consider the motion. The initial lawsuit in the case was filed in August 2023. 

    The attorneys uncovered prejudiced remarks through depositions, affidavits, documents, text messages and emails that the district turned over in response to subpoenas. 

    One ethnic studies steering committee member, identified in the memorandum as “Employee 1,” referred to the Jewish Federation of Orange County as “racist [Z]ionists” to whom the District should not “cave” in a text to another district employee. In a deposition, Employee 1 called the Jewish Federation “racist Zionists.”

    Employee 1 referred to the lone Jewish member of the steering committee in a chat as a “colonized Jewish mind,” as well as a “pretender,” a “f—— baby,” and as “stupid” because of the person’s reservations about some of the committee’s work.

    In an online chat, the Jewish member wrote this summary of what he heard when he and the other members were preparing to meet with the Jewish Federation: “Jews greatly benefit from White privilege and so have it better,” and “We don’t need to give both sides. We only support the oppressed, and the Jews are the oppressors.”

    The Jewish member continued, “When I very respectfully said that those comments were personally offensive and racist, (name redacted) told me to ‘check my tone’ so as not to “ruin the spirit and mood of the room.”

    The lawsuit focuses on the work of the ethnic studies steering committee. Since its inception in March 2020, school board members Carolyn Torres and Rigo Rodriguez have served on the committee; one veteran administrator said they ran it “like a dictator.” They enlisted only staff members to the project who agreed with their views. They “consisted of a narrow and insular group of individuals who were close to the board members and were ‘handpicked’ to promote a ‘very pro-ethnic studies’ vision, without any “naysayers,” the complaint said.

    Torres, the current board president, is a seventh-grade teacher and longtime ethnic studies advocate. Rodriguez is an associate professor in the Department of Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies at CSU Long Beach. Both were deposed in this lawsuit.

    Torres is not cited in the complaint with making antisemitic remarks. The complaint said Rodriguez  “freely shared in his deposition his reductive belief that Jewish Americans are ‘racialized as under the White category,’ which is why they do not belong in the ethnic studies curriculum.

    The committee has adopted a “liberated” ethnic studies orthodoxy, the complaint said, that  “classifies Jewish people as white — regardless of their actual skin color or historical perceptions of Jews as nonwhite — and the Jewish people as oppressors.”

    The “liberated” perspective frames ethnic studies as a struggle against white supremacy, capitalism and the legacy of European imperialism, in which Israel is a modern outpost. The liberated approach was woven into the first draft of the state’s Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Framework, but the State Board of Education criticized it and ordered it rewritten in 2019.

    When it passed Assembly Bill 101 in September 2021, mandating that all high school graduates take an ethnic studies course for a diploma, the Legislature stated that districts should not include unadopted content from earlier drafts of the framework. The Newsom administration and state Attorney General Rob Bonta have reiterated that warning in guidance to districts.  

    Despite this rebuke, Santa Ana’s steering committee “created a curriculum animated by the rejected draft of the Model Curriculum, including portions that were removed due to bias,” the complaint said. 

    Behind closed doors

    For years, the steering committee worked, as one member put it, “under the radar” to avoid scrutiny from the public, especially Jews. 

    When it came time to present two ethnic studies courses to the full school board, two senior district officials in text messages suggested scheduling the approval on a Jewish holiday so that Jews would not attend. “We may need to use Passover to get all new courses approved,” one suggested.  The other official responded, “That’s actually a good strategy.” 

    The select committee has no community members, and the district has not published the names of the staff members on the committee. However, one active member is Roselinn Lee, a curriculum specialist for the district who was among State Board of Education’s appointees to an advisory committee for the ill-fated first draft of the state model curriculum framework. After the state board ordered it rewritten because of bias, Lee and the other advisers, primarily CSU and UC ethnic studies faculty members, disavowed the framework and denounced “the pressures and influences of white supremacist, right-wing, conservatives” in a letter to the state board. They created the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium as an alternative.

    Santa Ana’s school board subsequently hired the Xicanx Institute for Teaching and Organizing (XITO), a consultancy group, to train teachers in the district’s ethnic study courses. Its leader, Sean Arce, is a team member of the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium. The complaint characterizes his social media postings as “an extended anti-Israel and extremist screed,” including an April 11, 2022, Facebook post that denounces “Zionist control of the CA Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum.”

    At a meeting earlier this week, the Santa Ana board renewed a contract with XITO for $80,633 for 11 days of professional development training in ethnic studies.

    Redacted names

    Attorneys for the complainants have redacted the names of select committee members who made antisemitic remarks from exhibits that have been made public. Marci Miller, an attorney for the Brandeis Center, said, “We sued the district itself, and we want the focus to be on the district, not on these individuals. We don’t want individuals attacked by the public, because obviously what they did was outrageous and heinous. However, that is not what we’re suing for.”

    In a statement this week, the district denied allegations that it violated the Brown Act and that it approved materials for teachers that negatively portrayed the state of Israel and the Jewish community. It will defend its actions approving ethnic studies courses at the September hearing, it said.  “The District denies these claims and will present counterarguments and facts to the Court for consideration and is optimistic that the Court will ultimately find in favor of the District.”

    The complaint said that three Jewish community groups reached out over two years to express interest in the select committee’s work and support for the state’s model ethnic studies curriculum. Board members and the select committee ignored all the inquiries, it said.

    The Jewish community, the attorneys for the complainants wrote, “was seen simply as a roadblock to their vision rather than a stakeholder and constituency that deserved to be heard.” Orange County, with Santa Ana as its second largest city, had 87,000 Jewish residents in 2020. In 2022, the county had 3.12 million residents.

    The complainants argue the select committee falls under the Brown Act, because the school board created it indefinitely as a legislative body with no end date. The complaint said that the committee has met monthly and set agendas but did not publish them or open meetings to the public, in violation of the law.

    Approved with no discussion

    The strategy of secrecy kept the public in the dark. State law under AB 101 requires school boards to present proposed ethnic studies curricula twice, first at an information hearing intended to encourage discussion and then for formal consideration at a second board meeting.

    The select committee presented the World Geography and World Histories ethnic studies courses to the school board in spring 2023. The board treated the item perfunctorily; there was no discussion, public comment or presentation by the select committee. It consisted of “merely reading the titles of the courses. The entire ‘presentation’ was over in less than thirty seconds,” the memorandum said.

    The school board then approved the courses at its April 25, 2023 meeting without discussion after one member of the Jewish community who “heard about the courses and could attend the meeting in time to make a public comment” objected. Only subsequently, after they learned about the content, did Jewish residents show up at meetings to urge the board to change its mind, to no avail.

    The Jewish community “had expressed their concerns throughout the process, unaware that the process was taking place behind closed doors by this secretly run committee,” said Miller. “There was no way of knowing what was coming to the board and that it would be essentially rubber-stamped when it got there.”

    “There is reason to require that meetings have to be open to the public,” said Miller. “When the Brown Act is not followed, people can be free to impose their ideology. When nobody is watching, people will be left to their own prejudices.”

    To prevent scenarios like the one depicted in Santa Ana, the Legislative Jewish Caucus joined Assemblymembers Rick Zbur, D-Los Angeles, and Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, in authoring legislation that would strengthen AB 101’s public disclosure provisions. Assembly Bill 2918 would have required school districts to create a committee of teachers, parents and representatives of community organizations “with experience assisting children build cultural awareness and understanding” to review proposed ethnic studies curricula and materials. Districts would also have to notify parents how they could participate in the review or comment on the proposed courses and materials.

    Faced with strong opposition from UC and CSU ethnic studies faculties and the California Teachers Association, the authors pulled the bill this month and said they would continue negotiations for a new bill next year.





    Source link

  • Judge rejects lawsuit over ‘liberated’ ethnic studies classes in LAUSD

    Judge rejects lawsuit over ‘liberated’ ethnic studies classes in LAUSD


    Theresa Montaño, a professor in Chicano/a Studies at CSU Northridge and a member of the LAUSD-UTLA Ethnic Studies Committee, is a defendant in the lawsuit.

    Credit: Luis Garcia / California State University, Northridge

    A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit against the United Teachers Los Angeles and the organization that created a controversial ethnic studies curriculum adopted by at least two dozen school districts in California. 

    U.S. District Judge Fernando Olguin’s scathing ruling on Nov. 30 criticized what he concluded was a lack of evidence and unpersuasive arguments made on behalf of the two Jewish teachers and parents in Concerned Jewish Parents and Teachers of Los Angeles, the group that brought the litigation.

    The plaintiffs’ complaint “is difficult to understand and contains a morass of largely irrelevant — and sometimes contradictory — allegations, few of which state with any degree of clarity precisely what plaintiffs believe defendants have done or, more importantly, how plaintiffs have been harmed,” wrote Olguin of the Central District of federal court in California. His 49-page pretrial ruling dismissing the lawsuit “with prejudice” precludes the plaintiffs from refiling another similar lawsuit in federal court.  The lawsuit was filed in 2022.

    The lawsuit alleged that the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium, the teachers union, its president Cecily Myart-Cruz, and two members of the LAUSD-UTLA Ethnic Studies Committee encouraged the adoption of instructional materials used in several LAUSD classrooms, that they also “covertly” trained teachers in the “liberated” ethnic studies curriculum, which condemns capitalism, white privilege, and Zionism, and characterizes Israel’s existence as “based on ethnic cleansing and land theft, apartheid and genocide,”  according to Olguin’s summary of the lawsuit.

    The lawsuit also alleged that teachers who identified as Jewish or Zionist were not welcome in classrooms where ethnic studies was taught and “personally experienced the official hostility” of UTLA to Israel and to the concept of Zionism.”

    Denying they are antisemitic, educators affiliated with the consortium — mainly instructors and professors in ethnic studies departments at California State University and University of California — have made anti-Zionism and opposition to Israel a focus of their curriculum. They characterize Israel as a settler, colonialist nation, similar to European nations’ oppressive occupations of Africa and Asia in the 19th and 2oth centuries.

    The “liberated” approach to ethnic studies has drawn scrutiny since its leaders formed the consortium in protest after the State Board of Education rejected as ideological and one-sided a draft curriculum that some of them had authored. In passing Assembly Bill 101, creating a mandate requiring high school students to take ethnic studies to graduate, the Legislature, at the encouragement of the Legislative Jewish Caucus, specified that school districts should not use unadopted portions of earlier drafts of the model curriculum. 

    Advocates of liberated ethnic studies charged the clause and other “guardrails” in the law were intended to squelch their free speech. The largely unfunded graduation mandate is set to take effect in 2029-30.

    In an online celebration Monday, Theresa Montaño, a defendant in the lawsuit who is also a member of the LAUSD-UTLA Ethnic Studies Committee and secretary of the consortium, said, “The end of this two-and-a-half year lawsuit means vindication, affirmation, and victory.”

    “This is a win for liberatory critical ethnic studies and academic freedom. It’s a testament to the power of solidarity and liberation, whether that be in South Los Angeles or in Gaza,” said Montaño, a professor of Chicano/a Studies at CSU Northridge. “And so it’s a signal to us that we will not stop, that we will persist until authentic ethnic studies is guaranteed to every student in this state.”

    The attorney representing the defendants, Mark Kleiman, told teachers on the press call, “The moral of this story for people in the other school districts is, you don’t have to be afraid of these kinds of attacks. Given half a chance in a fair courtroom, you will be vindicated.” 

    Meanwhile, the legal director for the Deborah Project — the law firm that filed the lawsuit — said, “We absolutely will be appealing the decision and are confident that the decision will be reversed on appeal.” The appeal must be filed by Dec. 30.

    The ruling, said Lori Lowenthal Marcus, “is deeply flawed, as it ignores crucial allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint, fails to address arguments plaintiffs made in their briefs, and even ignores binding precedent from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.”  

    “We are in the midst of soaring antisemitism in education throughout the U.S., and this is no time for anyone — much less a federal court — to allow publicly funded public schools to be used to indoctrinate children to hate the Jewish commitment to Israel,” she said. “Contrary to the ruling, that’s not ‘education’ about a ‘controversial’ issue. It’s prejudice, pure and simple.”

    Uncertain implications

    It’s unclear what impact, if any, the ruling might have on other litigation in California involving ethnic studies and allegations of antisemitism and indoctrination which include a potentially stronger lawsuit that the Deborah Project filed last month against the Sequoia Union High School District in Menlo Park, its superintendent, and administrators at two high schools. The plaintiffs in this case are the parents of Jewish students who claim that the district ignored parents’ repeated complaints of antisemitic taunts and bullying by students and biased lessons on the Israeli-Gaza conflict, taught by two history teachers.

    On Friday, an Orange County Superior Court judge will consider a motion to invalidate four ethnic studies courses in Santa Ana Unified. In their lawsuit, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law claims that district staff wrote the courses, with the participation of school board members, in violation of the California open meetings law. They did so in order to hide the content from Jewish community members who had repeatedly offered to participate in the process and offer their perspectives. Documents reveal that staff members referred to the Jewish Federation of Orange County as “racist Zionists” and made other bigoted remarks about Jews. 

    The lawsuit against UTLA and the consortium did not include LAUSD as a direct defendant, which may have weakened the case because the district has not adopted the Liberated Ethnic Studies curriculum, and there is no indication if and when it would. That made the plaintiffs’ concerns speculative and, therefore, their proposed remedies invalid, Olguin wrote, noting that the participation of Montaño and Guadalupe Carrasco Cardona, an LAUSD teacher and a member of the consortium’s leadership team, in an advisory committee is not evidence of the district’s endorsement of the curriculum.

    Olguin further ruled that the plaintiffs could not substantiate that teachers and other plaintiffs had yet faced any actual harm, nor did they demonstrate that the eventual adoption of the curriculum would violate civil rights. The judge continued that although plaintiffs claimed the curriculum was “infected from top to bottom with racism,” they didn’t show any evidence to support their assertion.

    “It is far from clear that learning about Israel and Palestine or encountering teaching materials with which one disagrees constitutes an injury,” Olguin wrote.

    The plaintiffs had asked Olguin to issue injunctions prohibiting LAUSD from including language critical of Israel or Zionism in teaching materials; preventing the district from paying teachers who used the liberated curriculum; and prohibiting the district from using materials from liberated curriculum in classrooms and teacher training paid for by public funds.

    Olguin ruled that the plaintiffs had not substantiated claims that their First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom and their right to equal protection under the U.S. and California constitutions were impeded. However, their request for an injunction would have raised an unconstitutional prior restraint on the defendants’ First Amendment speech rights, he concluded.

    While a district can “reasonably” curtail teachers’ speech rights in a classroom, “those limitations are fundamentally different from speech restrictions imposed by a court at the behest of a group of private citizens,” he wrote.

    In language certain to alarm Jewish organizations worried that antisemitic and anti-Israel bias is gaining a foothold in California schools, Olguin wrote, “It would be of great concern for the educational project and for academic freedom if every offended party could sue every time they did not like a curriculum or the way it was taught.”





    Source link