As I told @TaliRichman: The move to ‘curriculum transparency’ – while it appears neutral – is coming on the heels of an effort to quite explicitly, in many cases, ban or prohibit books, history lessons, and conversations about diversity, race, and racism. dallasnews.com/news/education…
@TaliRichman Just look at what the backers of these bills are saying.
After a year of "review" Leander ISD in Texas has now banned 11 books from its optional book club reading lists -- and will be proceeding to ensure no student has access to them in classroom libraries. A profound shame. #FReadom
Some of these banned 11 books are still accessible in school libraries in Leander; but Machado's 'In the Dream House' and Hutchinson's 'Brave Face' are not in the library collections, so they're effectively inaccessible in the district now. docs.google.com/document/d/1UD…
Reminder that as Nov ends -- many books have still been removed from school libraries based on parents' demands. Some books have been returned to the shelves, but other removals still in effect. And now reports of 'soft censorship' going on, i.e. books not being ordered, etc /1
This remains very much an attack on books about LGBTQ+ identities and race. Just look at 3 places books are being removed en masse.
We see the same pattern of books removed in Canyons, Utah. There, no one filed any complaint whatsoever. A parent just gave a list of books she was concerned about. poof-- 9 books gone from shelves. Same subjects targeted. /3 ncac.org/news/canyons-u…
A coalition of 80 scholarly and educational organizations joined us @PENamerica issuing a pubic statement today voicing firm opposition to the troublesome "divisive concepts" legislation around the country. nytimes.com/2021/06/16/art…
"Educators owe students a clear-eyed, nuanced, and frank delivery of history so that they can learn, grow, and confront the issues of the day, not hew to some state-ordered ideology." Read the full statement and signatories here: pen.org/joint-statemen…
We write: "A white-washed view of history cannot change what happened in the past. A free and open society depends on the unrestricted pursuit and dissemination of knowledge."
It's clear anti-CRT bills are already impeding academic freedom and teaching around the country, in different ways.
Some examples:
In Oklahoma, a fully enrolled summer college course on 'race and ethnicities' has been outright dropped. koco.com/article/oklaho…
In Idaho, Boise State abruptly suspended 52 sections of a class on diversity and ethics b/c of an odd complaint. Investigators later found nothing... but 1300+ students had their course interrupted and made 'asynchronous'. insidehighered.com/news/2021/03/1…
In Iowa, the DoE cancelled a whole conference on “Social Justice and Equity in Education" b/c of the "divisive concepts" bill there. Note, this was not b/c it was yet law-- people were "mindful" of the pending law. This is how 'chilling' of speech works. iowapublicradio.org/state-governme…
Last week, we @PENamerica called the suspension of a diversity and ethics class at Boise State "unfathomable" -- an extreme reaction to halt over 50 classes for 1,300 students. Glad to see @michelleinbklyn discuss the issues surrounding it today: nyti.ms/3w48rPg
The classes were cancelled b/c of the alleged existence of a video of ONE zoom class where a student was degraded. That's unfortunate and concerning, yes, but University overreacted. Cancelled everything w/o actually seeing video. & there were no formal complaints lodged over it.
This week the University announced that the classes would no longer be suspended... But the catch is that they're being run asynchronously, while an external law firm conducts an investigation. So the classes aren't exactly suspended but they also aren't exactly running as normal
Today's Executive Order instructs various federal agencies to take "appropriate steps" to ensure universities which receive federal research and education grants promote "free inquiry" and comply with other laws, incl the First Amendment. Here's why that's a problem. THREAD.
One, the language is completely vague. There is no further guidance on what steps would be 'appropriate' or what 'free inquiry' means. Apparently agencies might make their own guidelines to ensure compliance. That's a recipe for inconsistent interpretation and confusion.
Second, universities are enormous, decentralized beasts. The idea of tying research funds from a grant won by an individual faculty member to the decisions of administrators or faculty with regard to "free inquiry" in general is overly punitive, nonsensical, absurd.