사진/ 포브스

[텍사스N 영어칼럼/ 에런 마이클스]

As of December 2021, Texas now has a law in effect that is designed to limit the way race and racism are discussed in schools. Governor Greg Abbott signed legislation over this past summer during the Texas Legislature’s second special session—under House Bill 3979 and Senate Bill 3. Abbott has said that he wants to “abolish critical race theory in Texas, but more must be done.”

What is Critical Race Theory?

Critical Race Theory is a concept taught at the university level, which suggests that racism is not limited to individuals, but is also embedded in legal systems. The theory hasn’t actually be taught in K-12 schools, and yet it has become a common talking point within conservative media in recent years in regard to public education. Fox News in particular has made this a frequent point of discussion in its programming. A study from Media Matters found that, over a 3 1/2-month period, Fox News had mentioned critical race theory nearly 1,300 times.

Their strategy has been to recast the term away from its academic meaning, having it rather stand as a catch-all term for any discussion of race or racism that makes white people feel uncomfortable. In this way, related ideas such as white privilege or anti-racism are falsely branded as critical race theory.

The Texas law, however, makes no mention of critical race theory. Instead, it specifies that “a teacher may not be compelled to discuss a widely debated and currently controversial issue of public policy or social affairs.” If teachers do wish to discuss these topics, they must “explore that topic objectively and in a manner free from political bias.” It is notable that the law does not define what is considered “controversial”.

Early attempts at following the law have been problematic

School districts have already taken steps in attempting to follow the law, but much confusion has set in among educators on how this is to be done. Gina Peddy, The Carroll Independent School District’s executive director of curriculum and instruction, on an audio recording of an Oct. 8 training session is heard telling teachers to “make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust, that you have one that has an opposing—that has other perspectives.”

Carroll ISD has had other recent examples. Their school board also recently voted to reprimand a fourth grade teacher for having an anti-racist book in her classroom. One teacher has also covered a classroom library with “DO NOT ENTER” tape. The teachers at the school are being tasked with evaluate all books to make sure they are in compliance with the new law.

The Association of Texas Professional Educators indicated they have been receiving many questions from educators because they are unsure of what they are able to teach. A biology teacher is quoted as having asked whether they “should teach creationism alongside evolution.” Paul Tapp, an attorney at the association, explains that these are the dangers of these types of laws, and “the point of public education is to introduce the world to students. It’s not there to protect students from the world.”

The McKinney school district has also indicated that, based on the law’s ban on political activism, their social studies curriculum “will no longer be allowed [to] offer Youth & Government as an elective course for credit.” This was apparently a misapplication of the law due to confusion on the part of educators struggling to understand its scope. The law only applies to required social studies classes and not electives.

Why is this even happening?

The Texas law is not unique, as it fits within a pattern seen within a broader set of Republican-controlled states. In 2021, nine such states approved laws limiting discussions of racism, and four others imposed restrictions through their state’s board of education. Conservative policy advocacy organizations, such as Heritage Action for America, are similarly promoting moves to limit discussions of race within public institutions.

Issues surrounding the discussion of race and racism hadn’t been relevant to politics until fairly recently, starting with former President Trump. In September of 2020, Trump issued an executive order banning federal contractors having to take racial sensitivity training. He referred to these training sessions as “divisive, un-American propaganda.”

That move was inspired by advice Trump had received from Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist at the Manhattan Institue—a conservative think tank. Rufo had learned in July 2020 of an anti-bias training program being implemented for employees of the city of Seattle. Rufo saw this as a political opportunity to manufacture a culture war issue. The goal is to make Democrats appear radical and mobilize more Republican voters in the mid-term election.

The most heated local disputes regarding race in the curriculum are coming from suburban communities that have historically been white, but are becoming more racially diverse. The Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access at UCLA did a nationwide study showing that in districts where the white share of students had declined significantly were more than three times more likely to have public backlash over the teaching of race as compared to districts with stable demographics.

Janai Nelson, counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, views the law’s principal goals as “trying to create a new generation of potential voters who have a warped view of this country’s history and are not informed about present-day inequities.” This can similarly be seen as serving the same goal as new voting restrictions in the same Republican-led states: preventing the shift of political power across the South from moving away from mostly non-urban whites and toward more racially diverse groups that usually favor Democrats. “They are doing everything they can: It’s voter suppression; it’s control [of] the curriculum. It’s all designed to keep the people currently in power in power longer, because they can see what’s coming.”