BY DAVE PRICE
Daily Post Editor
It can be a big mistake to sign a contract without reading it. If you don’t look carefully at, say, an auto financing contract, you might end up with higher payments than you were expecting.
We expect the school board to gather the information they need before making a decision. Sometimes that means telling the superintendent that they can’t decide something because they lack information.
Such is the case with the Palo Alto school board’s decision to make ethnic studies a graduation requirement.
I’m not against the concept of ethnic studies. It helps students understand how race, ethnicity, and other factors shape people’s experiences. It also helps students develop critical thinking skills and become informed citizens.
But before making this class a graduation requirement, the board should have had more information about how different groups would be portrayed. There’s a fear among Asian-American parents that the curriculum will downplay their experience while overemphasizing other groups. Jewish families are worried that these classes would denigrate their experience and portray Israel in an inaccurate light. I also fear that these classes could be used by teachers to turn students into protesters rather than productive members of society.
The best way to have dealt with that is for the district to have released a lesson plan for this one-semester class. A plan that shows what would be taught each day. The plan should be so granular that it includes scripts or bullet points of what a teacher would say, since ad-libbing might lead to problems different groups are concerned about.
If the students will be evaluated based on the papers they write, what will be the topics of those papers, and what points do they need to cover in order to get a good grade. Same for tests. What will they be tested upon?
The board needs to put ethnic studies back on the agenda. They should postpone any approval until they have all the answers. All proposed class materials, including books and online readings, should be available to the public long before a final decision is made.
The approval of ethnic studies has created a massive controversy. Transparency is the only way to bring everyone together for the betterment of our students.
Editor Dave Price’s column appears on Mondays.
So Chiu is apologizing for the X post that caused Dauber and the cancel crowd to come after her. I’ve got news for Rowena. They won’t stop because you’ve apologized. They see that as a sign they’re winning and they’ll keep on attacking. The last thing you should have done is apologize.
What would be the harm in releasing a lesson plan? That might not be needed if the board was approving, say, second-grade reading. But this is controversial and parents have a right to know what we’re getting into. Especially because of the allegations this class would preach antisemitism and anti-Asian views.
Before they approve this class, I’d like to see the Oppressor and Oppressed list they’ll be using. Who will the teachers name as Oppressors? Based on what I heard at the school board meeting, it will probably be “whites” and “Asians.” Who will be on the Oppressed list? These would be the accepted victims in PAUSD. My guess is that Blacks, Latinos and Muslims. And I guess anybody who claims to be LGBTQBBQ. Got to cast a broad net.
They also use jews as oppressors, really sad there’s a big Jewish community in Palo Alto. They have always been a scapegoat to the left.
I want to thank Dave Price for his usual great common sense editorial and for not adding to the controversy !
I’m having a difficult time understanding how Rowena offended Blacks. Is her sin re-posting a message on a platform where people offer diverse opinions? How is that different from a person who writes an Op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal, and is somehow blamed for other opinions on that paper’s editorial page? It’d be helpful if Ken Dauber and his band of bureaucrats were clear about what “sins” she committed.
The community really deserves to know what will be involved in this class. Why can’t they tell us? The fact that they’re keeping it secret makes me suspicious that Don Austin and his administrators have something up their sleeve. If the board doesn’t re-visit this topic, let’s start a petition drive and put this on the ballot. I’m sure the details will come spilling out then.
Thank you david price and Doris summa. If only we could get such common sense from PAUSD. Please remember this at election time
This is a good idea. The state isn’t putting any time deadlines on the schools adopting a ES curriculum. So there’s no reason why we shouldn’t take our time and get it right.
Excellent point. I don’t know how any Board member could have voted for something without knowing what was in it. It seems very similar to that famous quote “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it”. There is no rush, this is a potentially divisive topic, so it makes a lot of sense to step back and have a redo once there is full transparency and Board members know what they’re voting for.
Thank you Dave for this suggestion. It has been a very frustrating process which has led to a frustrating outcome. Having a reset with more information would be a great rebuilding step.
How is ethnic studies going to address Israel/Palestine, and why wasn’t this discussed at the board meeting? Will it be in an oppressor/oppressed framework? What will they say about Oct 7? Why hide it and wait to get sued over what’s taught rather than actually work it out with the community?
Great points Dave. Note that the PAUSD board and staff continue their un-democratic ways: no transparency on the curriculum of a highly controversial course, no revote, bullying a fellow board member. What a sham. Disgusting lack of leadership on the part of the board senior people. The staff behaving like parents are totally unimportant in this process, manipulating the data. Please send come to the next board meeting and see with your own eyes!
There is a risk this community faces by denigrated the work of teachers and micromanaging a state mandated class that they were asked to work on and create 2.5 years ago. No teacher ever just ad
Libs a class. They use daily lesson plans. They built a pilot course. Students gave testimonials as to how this course has impacted their lives and made them better people. That should be the sole purpose of our Board, to support and facilitate this kind of life learning done with hands on curriculum to improve the lives of our students. Did you watch the five hour meeting and listen to what the teachers presented in detail as well as what the students shared with our community about their learning in the pilot? The reason the vote passed is because of this impressive recounting of how impactful and well done the class already is. I do not think it correct to have a re vote. I think that this district risks losing many good teachers if we continue to treat them this way. Teachers are leaving the peofession at high numbers since the pandemic. Why would a good, trustworthy, effective teacher who has worked 2.5 years as he or she was directed to do on a curriculum like this, which is mandated at the state level, want to continue working in a district where parents are so micromanaging and snowplowing and untrusting of their ability to do their job? I know I would never continue working in a district like this when neighboring districts like MVLA have successfully implemented this course with little parental drama and the community trusts me to do my job. We have a choice Palo Alto, to trust our teachers or drive good ones away with our incessant need to usurp their work and mistrust their capabilities in the classroom.