Representatives of UNIDOS, the student-led group organized in support of Tucson Unified School District’s dismantled Mexican-American Studies program, recently met with three TUSD school board members identified as MAS supporters: Kristel Foster, Cam Juarez and Adelita Grijalva to discuss Judge David S. Bury’s deseg decision.

This statement was read at the TUSD school board meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 12:

First I would like to thank board members Adelita, Kristel and Cammy for meeting with us in a timely manner. We are grateful for the opportunity we had to speak with you three and we gained a lot of insight from each of the meetings.

There is much optimism in our community surrounding the Unitary Status Plan, the new members on the board and Judge Bury’s latest ruling. But in light of Pedicone’s statement that the new Culturally Relevant Curriculum courses will be nothing like the old MAS—UNIDOS recognizes that the TUSD administration has no intent of bringing back MAS as the successful program and department that it used to be. The board must not stand by and allow this to happen like your predecessors on the board did in 1983 with the Superintendent’s administrative termination and book-banning of Middle East Studies.

We find that the various Student Services programs do not have the same impact as the Mexican American Studies program did. There are multiple independent reports that back up the success of the program like the Cambian and Cabrera report that have been completely disregarded by the district. There aren’t any studies that show that the “student services” model can improve students’ lives in the same ways that actual pedagogy and curriculum can, like with MAS.

That is why we demand that the district rescind the Hicks Resolution and reinstates the previous Mexican American Studies as a component of the CRC classes. Mexican American Studies is unjustly charged with racism and teaching the overthrow of the government but has taught the acceptance of all peoples and the value of critical thinking.
Next we demand that there be multiple directorship positions for the Multicultural, Mexican-American, and African-American courses. One director cannot absorb all of the responsibilities necessary for the courses to be successful. We all know there are many useless administrative positions at TUSD but these directorship positions will be instrumental to the success of the programs and the achievement of students.

It is essential that these directors be appointed by committees that include youth and community members; as well as the constituents who the director will be serving.

The topic of money always comes up when we deal with TUSD. As everyone should remember, Rincon and Palo Verde high schools were subjected to those insidious turn-around models just to get funds.

But there is around 60 Million dollars coming from the desegregation order—money that has historically been abused and improperly allocated. Director positions don’t sound like a misuse of desegregation money. I would say that it is central to the success of students. If the district believes that one person can handle the job of at least three people then they are setting that person up for failure.

This new board has been given the opportunity to correct history by bringing back our courses that were unjustly banned. The responsibility is on your shoulders but the community voice is and will always be a vital component to the success of any program.

This article appears in Feb 14-20, 2013.

10 replies on “UNIDOS on Future of MAS: ‘We Demand That the District Rescind the Hicks Resolution’”

  1. The $60 million cost of the program is funded by real estate tax assessments on real property within the city of Tucson. More than $2 per assessed valuation goes to Tusd which is by far more than any school district in the state. The taxpayers are taxed too much and the recipients are not respectful of who pays their bills. Tusd and mas is not a federally funded program. Hence, the state, distributer of the tax dollars, may withhold money to the district when the district fails in its contract obligations to the taxpayers. We the taxpayers and the state of arizona do not support an agenda that violates state law 16-805.

  4. “The State, like the Plaintiffs, must set aside what has occurred in TUSD in the past
    and assume, as does this Court, that the USP will be implemented in good faith by the
    District. The State is free to monitor the development of the culturally relevant courses and
    their implementation. The State is free to enforce its laws as it did in 2011 when it took
    action against TUSD for the MAS courses, if it believes any culturally relevant courses
    developed and implemented in TUSD violate state law.”

    Case 4:74-cv-00090-DCB Document 1436 Filed 02/06/13 Page 16 of 40, Lines 14-19

    UNIDOS should read the decision in it’s entirety. TUSD cannot reinstate the MAS program as it existed unless state law is changed or eventually ruled unconstitutional in Acosta et al. v. Huppenthal. Simple as that.

    The decision already stipulates how much of that 60million must be allocated. A forensic examination of the decision and its relative costs to the district would need to be conducted (Hello Journalists! This is what you guys used to do!) to find out how much would be left over to justify the UNIDOS position that this money could be used to fund the new iteration of ethnic studies or new directorship positions.

    Again, simply reading the decision would have prevented UNIDOS from writing a letter that has no applicable value at this point. Read the decision, and then formulate a plan that actually fits into the legal framework provided by the courts decision regarding the USP.

    I also find it ironic that UNIDOS wants to create three new director positions, one being multicultural, one Mexican-American and the other African-American. Add it all up and what do we get? One multicultural director and two uni-cultural directors!

    One step forward and two steps back…..

    I do think it is awesome that these young Americans are working hard and trying to make a difference with a cause that they hold near and dear, and they should be recognized and commended. My only recommendation to UNIDOS is that you need to be your biggest critic. Often times when people with similar ideologies are working together they can lose sight of the big picture or they can lose touch with reality (much like our state legislature did with SB1070); by being your biggest critic you can avoid these pitfalls and deliver a succinct, uniform and valid message! A good start would be re-writing this letter to accurately reflect the decision by Judge Bury and its implications.

  5. Students in America should be taught American History, period. There is no place on a public school K-12 agenda for any kind of ethnic studies programs.

  6. These students should learn to respect their elders. Referring to school board members by their first names in their statement is either grossly disrespectful or indicative of a done deal by those three members.

  8. Catsskinner, Let me get this straight. What you consider to be American history is a historical event occurring on America soil involving a citizen of European descent, is that right ?

    Lets just say, for the sake of argument. What if an event occurred on American soil that just happened to involve a Mexican American Citizen of this nation. I must ask you, WHY ! in your opinion, is the Caucasian history considered to be American, while the other UN-American, even though both historical events occurred with-in our nations border? Is there a specific color that is mandatory in order to be classified as an American, and if there is, what color, or type of person would that be ?

  9. at what time did we allow students to “demand” anything? Students in the corrupt and inept TUSD need to focus on the “3 R’s”, and learn thier ethnic culture at home from their parents, not some liberal anti American, history twisting “teacher”.

  10. Dave D. You read an opinion and responded with hostility and a personal attack based on an assumption. This type of reaction unfortunately has created much division and animosity within our community. It intimidates and stifles conversation that could be productive.
    It’s much more effective to respond with a rebuttal or personal view on the issue which can open an intelligent exchange.
    It’s bad enough that we have an ignorant and bigoted state government without additional fighting amongst ourselves.
    HumanBean, above, has offered some very valuable suggestions and is worth a second read.

Comments are closed.