by David Safier
A few things have happened since Huppenthal said he was ignoring everything in the MAS audit, except for the few peripheral criticisms he agrees with, and declaring the program illegal. TUSD is appealing the decision, and the ACLU has made an extensive records request.
The TUSD Board asked for "an administrative hearing to appeal Arizona schools chief John Huppenthal's decision regarding its Mexican American Studies program." The word "appeal" is key. The Star article says Pedicone hopes to understand "what Huppenthal would find to be an acceptable remedy." But by appealing the decision, TUSD isn't just asking for guidance. It's saying it doesn't accept Huppenthal's pronouncement.
After some back and forth, the only dissenting voice on the Board was Stegeman's. He presented what I find to be a wildly wrongheaded proposal: cancel MAS courses for awhile.
In voting against the hearing, Stegeman said that though he supports the infusion of Mexican American history and culture into the curriculum, he has concerns about the fact that some of the program's courses were never approved by the board and others may have been approved in improper fashion.
His solution would be to cancel the courses for the fall semester and re-create the Mexican American Studies program going through the proper policies and approval processes.
See if this reasoning makes sense to you. Because a previous TUSD board screwed up and didn't officially approve the MAS program, the students, teachers and administrators should be punished for the error. Sounds to me like Stegeman is using a legal technicality to put the program on hold. Doesn't it make more sense for the Board to vote on retroactive approval of the program, or if it's not comfortable with that, issue a temporary approval — a year? two years? — during which time they look over the program to see if some parts of it should be changed before they vote to make the approval permanent?
I'm assuming there really is a problem with MAS not being officially approved by the Board, but I may be wrong. I haven't heard any serious discussion of the matter.
The other major event is that the ACLU is chiming in. According to its media release, the ACLU wants the ADE "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 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.
You can read the ACLU's letter here. (h/t to Three Sonorans for the link)
You never know what will turn up in that kind of search, especially since the request includes "communications with Arizona State Legislators or local or State officials, persons or organizations outside of Arizona, political parties or officials, the TUSD and any teachers or students, and members of the public or community organizations." On top of that, the ACLU wants documents going back to 2006 related to reports about Ethnic Studies. Could be revealing. Could be embarrassing. Could even uncover some illegal shenanigans. You never know.
I expect Huppenthal to object strenuously and dig in his heels as hard and for as long as he can. But he's a government transparency guy, so it will be interesting to see how he reacts.
The MAS story gets more and more interesting. The pressure on Huppenthal is coming from all sides, and the pressure on Pedicone and the TUSD Board continues. It's summer vacation, and everyone is supposed to go away quietly, aren't they? Just sit poolside during the long, hot days and drink lemonade or beer? Huppenthal all but said he was counting on that. Apparently, it's not gonna happen.
NOTE: Josh Brodesky and Ernesto Portillo both had good columns on the MAS situation in today's Star. Neto pretty much always does good work, but since I'm on Brodesky's case a lot — well, credit where credit is due.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here’s what I don’t like about Brodesky: his opinions aren’t opinions. He uses his editorials for target practice, and little else. If you look closely he stands for nothing, and to me that is a waste of space. Take this piece on MAS. I thought maybe I’d like one of Brodesky’s pieces then I read: “‘All evidence points to peace as the essence for program teachings.’I wish the students could show more of this outside the classroom. It would give critics less fuel to burn.”
OK, so for starters – you’d think you’d be safe if the monster is already chewing on dinner but for some reason this guy is insatiable. He will drop his half-eaten meal and go after you if you’re anywhere in building.
Second, um.. WRONG on what peace means, what the critics are fueled by and how power works. Is he so anxious to take a bite out of anything moving that he’s willing to be this sloppy? Annoying. Show more peace? Did I miss the bodies or burning buildings? I think he means the students should not protest period in order to curry favor from critics. Right. I think BRODESKY is trying to curry favor from the critics.
He comes back to being seemingly in favor of MAS at the end of the article, but it’s an offshoot thought. Brodesky never presents a clear opinion when it comes to actual subject matter. Instead, he takes shots at players where he can, even if they aren’t worthy shots. So, right, he’s a long, long ways away from journalistic integrity… and principles. I haven’t read a lot of Brodesky’s opinions, but I have yet to read the one that shows he’s not merely a mercenary and a cynic, or even one that makes a worthy addition to the discourse on any subject.