In response to Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal’s determination that the Tucson Unified School District is out of compliance regarding the anti-ethnic studies law, the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona issued a press release on Thursday, June 16, saying that it wants all Department of Education records relating to Huppenthal’s investigation for an investigation of its own.
Here’s the ACLU release:
PHOENIX — The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona today filed a records request asking Arizona education officials to produce all records in their possession relating to a review of the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) Mexican American Studies program. The ACLU’s request comes in the wake of an announcement by Arizona Department of Education Office (ADE) Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal that the program violates state law, despite findings by a state-selected auditor to the contrary.
“This law was deliberately written to enable the state superintendent to ban the Mexican American Studies program based on his own personal views and biases,” said ACLU of Arizona Legal Director Daniel Pochoda, who drafted the three-page records request. “By all indications, this is a political determination by Superintendent Huppenthal that is not based on an objective assessment of the program as the thorough review of the state’s own contractor clearly reveals.”
A.R.S. § 15-112, which went into effect on December 31, 2010, prohibits schools from teaching subjects that promote “the overthrow of the United States government, promote resentment toward a race or class of people, are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic race” or “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.” According to a recent review conducted by auditors from Cambium Learning, Inc. and National Academic Educational Partners, “no evidence as seen by the auditors exists to indicate that instruction within Mexican American Studies Department program classes advocates ethnic solidarity; rather it has been proven to treat student[s] as individuals.” Auditors went on to add that “no observable evidence was present to suggest that any classroom within Tucson Unified School District is in direct violation of the law …” and that the “courses promote a culture of excellence and support a safe and orderly environment conducive to learning.” Huppenthal himself hired these auditors to examine the ethnic studies program.
Despite these findings, Huppenthal made an announcement on June 15th claiming that: “As a result of the investigation and review of the Mexican American Studies Program and its classroom materials and instructional content, I find there is substantial evidence of a clear violation of Arizona Revised Statute Section 15-112 by the Tucson Unified School District.” He is giving the TUSD Governing Board 60 days to “bring the Mexican American Studies Program into compliance with A.R.S. §15-112,” adding that “failure to do so shall result in the withholding of 10% of the monthly apportionment of state aid to Tucson Unified School District.”
The ACLU believes the law is being interpreted to prohibit any classroom discussion related to Mexican American history, except those topics approved by the Superintendent, and thereby chills fundamental speech rights of students and teachers. The TUSD ethnic studies program includes African American, Mexican American, Native American and Pan-Asian studies. While the bill does not specifically cite the Mexican American studies program as one of the prohibited courses, Huppenthal and former Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, now Arizona Attorney General, have been outspoken critics of the Latino studies program since 2007.
“As is clear from the legislative history of this bill, a small group of public officials led by Tom Horne began a politically and racially discriminatory campaign almost four years ago to destroy a program that dared to break from traditional texts and teach tolerance and multiculturalism,” added Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona.
“Huppenthal is ignoring evidence showing how the program has made great strides in improving student achievement and in building students’ confidence, and in doing so is making a mockery of his oath of office, said Meetze. “This kind of censorship is even more offensive because it lets politics and bias dictate what should be discussed in the classroom.”
The ACLU’s comprehensive records request demands access to all of the information used by Huppenthal in making the determination that the TUSD Mexican American Studies Program is out of compliance with state law.
The ACLU has asked for a response by July 5.
This article appears in Jun 16-22, 2011.
Fantastic. Glad to see a heavy hitter getting into the game and not pulling any punches.
That letter is a body slammer…
Mari, any reason to expect they (“a small group of public officials led by Tom Horne”) won’t just stonewall the request? What does the law allow Huppenthal to do? Because obviously, he’ll do nothing if he can get away with it.
This is the key statement already stated;
“Huppenthal is ignoring evidence showing how the program has made great strides in improving student achievement and in building students’ confidence, and in doing so is making a mockery of his oath of office, said Meetze. “This kind of censorship is even more offensive because it lets politics and bias dictate what should be discussed in the classroom.”
What else needs said.
This has gotten way out of hand now. Huppenthal hired the auditors and they have found no evidence of violation, yet he arbitrarily decides the program is in non-compliance. His actions are more liking of that of a dictator and not of American Democracy. If this is the America that he wants then he should create his own country to dictate it. Huppenthal though was elected in a democratic system implying representative government. His Actions are contrary to his oath of office and needs to resign or get fired.
“Its American, not Mexican American….your either a American or a Mexican, not both. “
Remember when people used to laugh at lovable Archie Bunker the WASP?
How many years ago was that?
I know, I know, I know: there is a recession going on and that brings out the stupid and ugly in people.
Still this is a sad reminder of how little progress we have made.
Several points:
(1) The audit was only part of an extensive investigation. Audits are never the only tool used in investigations. (2)The audit was crippled by only doing short visits on announced days. This allowed the MAS staff that deigned to participate to present bowdlerized versions of their typical lessons. (3) Much of the MAS staff was allowed by Pedicone to refuse to participate in the audit. (4)The audit acknowledges it is based entirely on what the team was allowed to see and hear. (5)No student work was shown to the audit team.
Apart from the issue of whether HB 2281 was violated, the investigation found a complete lack of oversight of the program by the TUSD Governing Board. Huppenthal should have foregone the remedies available to him under HB 2281 and simply taken over the district because of the numerous violations of state law by the Governing Board that were revealed by the investigation (not by the audit). Most of these gross violations of law have been acknowledged by the members of the Governing Board. New elections could be held almost immediately and voters would get to make a clear determination whether they want to preserve the status quo on MAS classes or make changes.
“This allowed the MAS staff that deigned to participate to present bowdlerized versions of their typical lessons.”
No…
This allows you to claim the lessons were bowdlerized.
Why? Because it serves your apparent bias.
It is well to note here that even if the auditors showed up unannounced you can still claim the
educators bowdlerized their lessons on the fly. And that would be certainly true: Observations changes what is being observed. In other words: They can’t win in your eyes. You are determined to find banditos here. And if they are not apparent, it is because they are temporary in camo…
You also write: “The audit acknowledges it is based entirely on what the team was allowed to see and hear.” I believe that is known as evidence-based. Would you have them judge the situation on hearsay? Whose hearsay? Moyla’s? Archie Bunker’s? Or the magnificent (foreign-born) Horne who refused to ever even visit the program, and who, while State Superintendant, got caught speeding in a school zone? Whose hearsay you going to trust? The kids in the program with their boots on the ground? Or a drive-by speeder?
The “saw no evidence” is somewhat like our recorder, who insists she has seen no evidence of voter fraud, therefore there is no reason to look for voter fraud.