On Tuesday, Jan. 8, after newly-elected Tucson Unified School District governing board members Kristel Foster and Cam Juarez were sworn in, Adelita Grijalva was voted in as president of the board and Foster as clerk. When the board returned from executive session, Grijalva did exactly what she said she would after last month’s confusing meeting — she brought back a revote on the district’s objection to culturally relevant curriculum (CRC) in the desegregation proposal released Dec. 10.
In a vote 3-2, the new board majority directed TUSD legal to file a withdrawal of the district’s objection to CRC in the deseg plan. Where does the desegregation proposal stand now and what happen next? The Range recently talked with attorney Nancy Ramirez from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), who continues to represent the Mexican-American plaintiffs from the almost 40-year-old deseg lawsuit.
Read the Q&A interview after the jump.
What are your thoughts about the TUSD governing board vote on Tuesday, Jan. 8?
We’re very excited by the district’s withdrawal of the objection. It indicates a new day for TUSD. There’s a new governing board that is reflective and representative of the Tucson community. The Tucson voters elected Kristel Foster and Cam Juarez — who both supported MAS. I am very excited about the future and taking steps in the right direction to make sure all students are going to be benefiting from the USP and this new governing board.
During the Tuesday meeting, Stegeman commented that it could be late in the legal process because the deadlines set U.S. District Court Judge David Bury were month. Is this withdrawal of the CRC objection too late?
What’s important is that the judge have accurate information in front of him. While our deadline for filing our objections was mid-December, as you know we had the holidays. There is a lot of information for the judge to sift through, and it is unlikely he’s had sufficient time to review the unitary status plan, and all of the parties’ objections and comments to objections, as well as special master’s (Willis Hawley) comments. There are also the state objections and any underlined data, including all the appendices. The fact that it was filed in early January is a good thing and it shows a good-faith effort on behalf of the district to make sure that the judge has all relevant and accurate information before him.
What could keep Mexican-American studies classes from returning to TUSD at this point?
We are in a very good position. The school district’s filing yesterday, this whole issue of CRC couldn’t be in a stronger position than it is today. Not a single party in the lawsuit has objected to it, and as you stated the only entity that has objected is the state of Arizona, and they are not a party to the lawsuit.
There’s a lot of discussion on federal trumps state, while another perspective is that this one issue could remain in the courts.
We are in federal court and we are in a desegregation case where there has been a constitutional violation of Latino and African-American students’ right. So the court has the appropriate authority to institute culturally relevant courses, such as MAS and African-American studies in order to remedy the constitutional violation. This is separate and apart from the state saying “We are a sovereign state and you have to follow our laws.” Well, if you are opposing a court remedy to remedy a constitutional violation, than the federal court trumps the state law.
When you say, constitutional violation, what is the violation here?
Students were being segregated and they were not provided with equal education opportunities. That’s the violation of the equal protection clause of the U,S. Constitution and that is the underlying cause of action in in the original complaint that was filed in the1970s. The court has found that that violation exists.
With fed trumps state in mind, does that mean there is a possibility that MAS is returning to TUSD without further litigation?
Absolutely it’s a possibility and it is within the courts’ hands at this point and time. If you’re going to define very narrowly what would be a successful outcome … is that it has to be the exact same program that existed before with the same personal, etc., then that is not going to happen. What has been created in the plan is a framework to re-institute the courses that are culturally relevant that focus on the Mexican-American experience and there is a framework for hiring an individual who will oversee that program and the development of that curriculum who has experience in teaching those kinds of courses. So, it’s not a mandate to go back and replicate exactly what was there before, but it is a mandate to create something that’s going to be more extensive than the former Mexican-American studies program and that will provide the director of culturally relevant pedagogy and instruction a platform to do more than what the previous director of MAS was able to do. The new director is going to be in charge of not just teachers who are going to be teachers of MAS and African-American studies, but all teachers to be more sensitive and in tune with culturally-relevant instruction. I see the language in the plan as a bigger and better improved program than what was in place before.
There were changes the language of the final proposal released on Dec. 10. If felt like (special master) Willis Hawley listened to the community.
As not having been through this process in the case before, to see the responsiveness of the special master to the public input I thought was very honorable.
If the classes are to be reinstated, what will we see happen next?
As an attorney who has spent a lot of hours on this issue and negotiating it over the last year and in particular the last several months, I am extremely excited about the prospects of the plan, in particular the CRC. Obviously there is a process in place. We have to hear from Judge Bury. He’s going to be considering the state’s perspectives. It’s possible the state could influence him and he can still make changes. But in terms of being poised and putting in front of a judge a proposal that we want him to adopt, I believe we are in the best position today that we could have ever been in in terms of having culturally relevant curriculum reinstated in TUSD.
What are the next things that need to be done for the deseg. process?
I can tell you that some of the activities are already underfoot. There are a number of deadlines that we are soon going to be hitting that are in the plan, a number in February and in March. The district and the parties are working together to meet those deadlines in anticipation that the court will be approving the plan. Granted we don’t know for sure. (Bury) doesn’t just have to stick to the parts that were objected to. He can say “I’m going to change this section even if nobody objected to it.” That’s within his prerogative and authority to do so. We want to see all the parties have a vested interested in seeing this plan get implemented. We don’t want to lose time because we’ve already lost a lot of time to begin with — the next steps to making sure we meet the initial deadlines that are there.
Will MALDEF remain involved as we move forward, once Bury approved the unitary status plan?
We will be apart of the process to see it through to the end at this point. Under the terms of the USP — it is supposed to be in place until 2017. It could change depending on the progress the district makes. If it doesn’t make sufficient progress it’s possible it could be extended, but as the attorneys for the Mendoza plaintiffs MALDEF will be continuing to represent that class of plaintiff until the end.
This article appears in Jan 10-16, 2013.
There was a black parent of a child in TUSD who was on the news and look terrified that just Mexican American studies would be taught. And now they’ve added African American studies, which is a good thing, but the big gaping hole in all of this is Native Americans studies which look at the tribes indigenous to the U.S., and to Arizona. To say nothing of Asians who are the fastest growing minority in the U.S.
Having taken anthropology classes at the U of A, there is a lot of history in Arizona, and most of it is not necessarily related to the history of Mexico. I don’t believe that the MAS classes teach about the Dine, or any of the native peoples that live on reservations in the state, but rather the courses seem to use narratives which are historically inaccurate and are written by Latino activists that live in Los Angeles.
The MAS advocates don’t seem like academicians with an interest in teaching history, but rather are focused on indoctrinating Latino students to think a certain way.
Honestly, somebody should take an objective look at these classes. Whites, black, asians, Native Americans can now rightfully consider themselves ‘minorities’ in TUSD, and have a right to learn in an environment free from intimidation. At face value, MAS certainly seems to give special status to certain students in a school, and seems to foster hatred against a number of different racial groups in the U.S..
I think that Native Americans, white students, asian students, and their parents, should file a lawsuit against TUSD if the school board allows special ethnic pride classes like MAS to continue as they may very well make schools a hostile learning environment for non-Latino students.
There used to be more amity between the races in the old Pueblo, and I can’t help but think that MAS, MEChA, and other programs were forced upon us by ‘carpetbaggers’ from the northeast who are peddling their manifesto which is that racism explains everything.
I don’t understand how desegregation can still be an issue when TUSD is something like 2/3rds Latino. I also don’t see how MAS mitigates the racial balance in schools as it is just a single course. I think that the MAS advocates want to piggy-back MAS studies onto the deseg order in order to circumvent state law. The state law isn’t that bad, it basically says no classes that teach resentment or ethnic solidarity or racial hate. Jeez, have any of these MAS advocates taken graduate level courses? Truly worthy education is the unbiased study of facts, something which the MAS classes don’t seem to focus on. I think it is a big red flag that MAS advocates can’t work within the broad guidelines provided by the state! They seem to want to be able to create whatever course even if it is a bad idea for Latino students and gets them off track as far as their education goes.
I guess it would be considered a radical and even racist idea if the $60 million a year taxpayers pay for federal desegregation went to actually providing books for the schools and field trips and special classes. Seriously, some schools in TUSD have gone without books!
Anonymous, get your facts straight. You are making the same bias and unsubstantiated statements that got rid of the program in the first place. After the court approves the CRC the
school board needs to fire Pedicone who with the other board members started this whole mess. They had a choice, fight for local control of the curriculum and side with students who are 75% minority or side with right wingers like Horn and his side kicks. The CRC will not only expand the MAS program, it will include courses of all cultures and ethnicities
I think that Dr. Stegeman explained it very well. He seems to advocate for inclusion of the study of the U.S.’s more diverse population, but said that the problem was that MAS doesn’t teach critical thinking in that it pushes just one extreme viewpoint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4L4f2F6j904
I was surprised that he said that there are 30,000 Latinos in TUSD, but only a few hundred, 700?, in the MAS classes. He also said that there were different classes which more Latinos take which have a greater statistical impact in terms of achievement, and that MAS classes were more expensive on the administrative level.
In terms of fairness, should taxpayers fund expensive tailored classes just for Latinos? I would think Black, Native Americans, asian, and caucasian students are equally deserving of money being spent on special programs, and would benefit from classes that talk about the history of Arizona.
I would say rework the MAS classes to be better by offering a more balanced approach, such as involving study of Native American cultures in Arizona in the past and present, in addition with mentoring, and then do a rigorous research study, and make sure that these classes don’t intimidate students of other races.
It is so frustrating to see the issue of exclusivity come up again and again. The success being talked about here is a result of a lawsuit that was brought by African American and Latino plaintiffs. That doesn’t mean that the resulting desegregation won’t beneficially affect other minorities, but it does mean that programs specific to other minorities are not included in the litigation. Apparently only the litigation will force a recalcitrant TUSD to level the playing field–that in itself is the real problem here.
The District needs to be held accountable for its segregationist policies and/or actions both within the litigation (that takes care of the plaintiffs concerns) and outside of it. I believe there are other ethnic studies organizations for native americans and for asians, and that they do not use the “curricular” method of increasing graduation.
If it has taken almost 40 YEARS to get rights recognized and acted on for African American and Latino students, that should be celebrated instead of dunned because other non-plaintiff groups are not covered.
In addition, I just do NOT see how teaching the realities of one (underserved) culture has to lead to hostility against all other cultures. You know, I learned a fair amount about Nazis in my schooling (I am an old f…) but I am not hostile to Germans. And since, in fact, that group is exempt from the state’s law, shouldn’t that tell us that such education does not HAVE to create animosity?
The law has done a masterful job of setting us against each other…and the success so far of the USP should be able to unite us again to work for what is best for the STUDENTS of all races and ethnicities. If the USP goes through the struggle is not over–the ‘non-curricular” student services model of trying to increase graduation should be looked at for its efficacy with as much scrutiny as that placed on MAS. The community needs to stay involved, unify around the issue of desegregating TUSD and help all students graduate. We need to keep the Districts’ feet to the fire.
Betts, I think there are several issues here that have been wrapped into desegregation ruling, and it might be productive to look at each issue separately.
1. Latino achievement gap. I’m sure people could, and have, written books about this achievement gap. There’s a brief overview on Wiki (Achievement Gap in the United States), and it mentions that the achievement gap begins *before* schooling begins in elementary school. Black children may be more likely to come from single parent homes, and thus be disadvantaged, and once you score low on cognitive tests pre-elementary school, you most likely won’t catch up. This would mean, I would assume, that pre-K and nutritional assistance programs (to aid cognitive development) would help minorities.
Given that the achievement gap is pre-K, does it seem fair to label TUSD as being “recalcitrant” when it comes to addressing the achievement gap which also is due to cultural and environment factors?
2. As Dr. Stegeman said, mainstream textbooks have a paragraph on Caesar Chavez, and not much else on Mexican Americans. I think there needs to be a whole chapter, to be sure, but the educational merits of teaching just one narrow point of view need to be addressed.
Yes, students learn about Nazis, but that is part of a world history course. There never has been, or should be, a German studies course which uses material that is entirely “pro-German”. During my time as a student in TUSD I met two holocaust survivors, and it was an eye-opening experience, and learning about the world wars is important to understanding the U.N. and a lot of other things . . . but it was never mandated that Germans must teach these courses with coursework that reflects positively on Germany, and only German students will learn about the Holocaust in a specially segregated class. Like that old television show, I want kids to learn “just the facts.”
3. MAS effects on other students. Now that whites, asians, blacks and others make up the non-Latino minorities, the issue of making the educational environment welcoming to everyone is important with a more heterogenous student body. Betts, I actually did all of my K-12 schooling in TUSD, and some of my friends who were segregated away into the MEChA classes were angry after this class, and oddly some didn’t want to tell me what they talked about, and eventually they stopped going to them. I’m kinda suspicious that these sorts of classes detract from a positive learning environment. (I’m part American Indian, but I did not attend these classes).
4. While whites, asians, Native Americans, were not part of the deseg lawsuit (and black ethnic studies classes may not receive the funding of MAS classes and may not exist in every school), the judge needs to make a decision about all students. And since MAS represents a major change to education in TUSD, you can sure bet that folks of other ethnic groups will raise obvious issues regarding favoritism for a certain racial/ethnic group, and issues of a learning environment free from division. MAS studies have bitterly divided Tucson, and they’ll no doubt turn students against each other in some schools.