# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. 

https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. 

https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh https://t.co/yB0gHPgcpi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh pic.twitter.com/yB0gHPgcpi
— UCB History-Social Science Project (@UCBHSSP) April 27, 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. 

https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh https://t.co/yB0gHPgcpi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. 

https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh https://t.co/yB0gHPgcpi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Join @CAsocialstudies at this May 3 teach in. 

https://t.co/GruuLT7HSh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
21CSLA Research-Practice Webinar | Educating for a diverse democracy: Leading schools and districts in a time of political conflict

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
21CSLA Research-Practice Webinar | Educating for a diverse democracy: Leading schools and districts in a time of political conflict

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
UCLA researchers expect more measures limiting instruction on race and racism this year

Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

A national conservative movement to limit the teaching of race and racism is finding its way into California schools, leading to worry that teachers are being muzzled.

Elected officials nationwide introduced at least 563 measures to restrict teaching about race in 2021 and 2022, and 241 of those passed, according to "CRT Forward: Tracking the Attack on Critical Race Theory," a recently released report from the UCLA School of Law. Almost all the measures impacted K-12 education, and 70% sought to control teaching and curriculum in the classroom. The most common consequence for a breach was withholding funding.

"We are now living in a country where books and ideas can be banned in the name of freedom and censorship can be applauded as a means to combat indoctrination, and teachers can be fired for trying to teach any idea that someone deems divisive," said Cheryl Harris, vice dean for community, equality and justice at UCLA Law during a webinar last week.

Sixty percent of the anti-CRT measures were adopted in conservative, or red states, according to LaToya Baldwin Clark, a co-author of the report.

California remains solidly blue, but arguments over the teaching of so-called critical race theory can be heard in some red areas of the state.

In California Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified, Visalia Unified, Paso Robles Joint Unified, Temecula Valley Unified, Ramona Unified and Newport-Mesa Unified collectively passed seven measures restricting instruction about race. Four additional measures were introduced in California school districts but not approved.

The state and local measures almost always invoke critical race theory, a college-level theory seldom taught in K-12 education. It examines how laws, regulations and government practices have perpetuated racial injustice. The theory is not included in California's voluntary state model curriculum and is only taught in a handful of districts that have adopted an alternative curriculum promoted by the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Consortium, a group of ethnic studies professors and high school teachers.

Critical race theory is often confused with culturally relevant teaching, according to the California School Boards Association.

"These measures purport to ban things like saying anyone should feel guilty or responsible for the past or the present, or that the United States is fundamentally racist," Clark said.

Critical race theory is now being used to describe anti-gender measures as well as social-emotional learning, according to the researchers.

"In the K-12 context, it's kind of a boogeyman," Harris said. "It's a made-up version. Nobody is teaching this version of CRT and yet it's all traveling under the same sort of umbrella heading."

Conservative groups like Reform California are encouraging more school boards to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory and "to demand an honest and balanced view of U.S. history be taught to our children."

The anti-critical race theory movement was a backlash to demands for racial justice and equality after the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor in 2020, Clark said.

"Looking at it in that context, I think we need to understand that this is really about resisting racial progress, not necessarily about CRT," she said.

Many of the measures opposing critical race theory repeat language in a September 2020 executive order signed by former President Donald Trump. The order banned the federal government and its contractors from offering employee diversity training based on race or gender that the administration deemed "divisive." The executive order was rescinded by President Joe Biden in 2021.

School officials of both Temecula Unified, in Riverside County, and Paso Robles Joint Unified, in San Luis Obispo County, used similar language as that in the executive order when they wrote measures that referred to critical race theory as a divisive ideology that can result in racial guilt. Both school districts end their resolutions with the same provision, that the theory can be included in classroom discussion as long as that instruction focuses on its flaws.

In Temecula, teachers filled an auditorium in last December to protest the resolution, according to The Mercury News. Union President Edgar Diaz called the resolutions "vague" and a "lightning-rod issue" for education, according to the article written by the Southern California News Group.

The Ramona Unified School District in San Diego used much of the same language in a civic education policy its school board passed on Aug. 12, 2021. The measure prohibits schools from using curriculum or teachers from teaching that one particular race is superior or inherently racist, sexist or oppressive. It prohibits instruction that would make a student feel "discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress" on account of his or her race or sex.

Last April, Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified passed a policy prohibiting teachers from talking about critical race theory or using it as a framework to teach about race. The board doubled down in June with a resolution on the teaching of "controversial issues," requiring teachers to address all sides of the issue when presenting educational information.

School board President Carrie Buck and board member Karin Freeman voted against the resolution, calling it censorship, according to the Voice of OC.

"At its worst, this resolution positions our educational program for abridgment of free speech and the creation of censorship and bans. This change creates obstacles and impediments for students' success," Freeman said in the article. "I anticipate that the curriculum will suffer the consequence of dumbing down."

"Our goal should never be to graduate modern-day Rip Van Winkles," she said.

In 2021 the Visalia Unified school board voted against a motion to renew a charter school's Newsela subscription. The platform provides news articles on topics like social studies and science customized to each student's grade level. Some of the same board members who voted to renew the subscription two years earlier called it biased and said it teaches critical race theory, according to the UCLA report.

In July 2021 Newport-Mesa Unified School District paused anti-bias training put in place in 2019 after an antisemitic incident involving students after the Newport Harbor Republican Women and some parents campaigned against it.

Two months later the board voted to renew a revised contract for foundational anti-bias training for staff but exclude advanced training that would have explored the dynamics of power, privilege and perspective, according to the district agenda. Students would only receive training if they volunteer.

John Brazelton says anti-CRT sentiment hasn't impacted him much as a science teacher at Newport Harbor High School, but it has had a chilling effect on other teachers.

"People aren't teaching everything they did before," he said.

Brazelton, who retires next year, says teachers aren't valued in the current climate.

"Teachers are being accused of indoctrinating kids and not being trustworthy in terms of what curriculum to teach and what books we choose to have students learn," he said. "But then some talking heads are saying we should be packing heat in the classroom. Are we trustworthy or not? Are we valued or not? I haven't heard of any students being killed by reading the wrong novel."

In 2021, the California Teachers Association provided guidance to its members about how to deal with politically motivated attacks on racial equity in schools, including avoiding the academic term critical race theory.

"The phrase, unfamiliar to most audiences, has been redefined by the political right as an all-purpose dog whistle. Talk instead about the more honest and more complete education our students deserve," the guidance says.

The National Council for the Social Studies weighed in on the debate in 2021: "Critical race theory has been used by some as an argument to ban the teaching of such concepts as race, racism, white supremacy, equity, justice and social-emotional learning, as well as to limit the teaching of content such as slavery, Black history, women's suffrage, and civil rights. Efforts to ban these topics aim to eliminate any discussion of race or the historical roots of racism in our classrooms. The accurate and truthful representation of historical events is necessary and beneficial for all students to learn."

​​According to the UCLA report, government officials nationally are on pace to introduce as many anti-critical race theory measures this year as in the previous two years. In response, the CRT Forward Tracking Project will develop model legislation and school policies that lawmakers and school board members could use to ensure history is taught accurately, Harris said.

The American Civil Liberties Union also is pushing back against measures to limit teaching about race and racism, filing lawsuits on behalf of students, teachers and university professors. Its lawyers have argued that the measures violate students' First Amendment rights and are so vaguely written that teachers and students can't understand what is prohibited and what is allowed, said Emerson Sykes, an attorney for the ACLU.

"We need universities to nurture new ideas, challenging ideas (and to) challenge norms," Sykes said. "It's not the role of a state legislature to reach into a college classroom and tell professors what ideas they can and cannot teach."
To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource's no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
National wave of anti-CRT measures trickles into California schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education A national conservative movement to limit the teaching of race and racism is finding its way into California schools, leading to worry that teachers are being muzzled.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Coordinated, well-funded campaigns by conservative lawmakers across the United States are fast-tracking a radical agenda to shut down diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in schools. Book bans, rules for restroom and pronoun use, regulations against rainbow flags, restrictions on curriculum addressing race and gender, and other efforts fly in the face of facts, logic, democratic norms, and basic humanity. Even in areas with a liberal majority, it can only take one or two powerful parents to disrupt long-needed efforts for change.

As a result, educators committed to inclusive, equitable, information-rich schooling are asking: How can we avoid becoming targets for right-wing smear campaigns? What might get us in trouble with a zealous school board? What if we get fired-or even prosecuted? Should we quit rather than comply with a policy that hurts youth?

Even if we continue to teach in humane, loving, accurate ways regardless of reprimand or retribution, we must consider these questions. They are not irrational hypotheticals. Teachers have been asked to change their curriculum and disciplined or fired when they didn't. Educators have been doxxed and harassed. Teachers have quit. These dilemmas are especially intense for Black, queer, and trans teachers, whose identities are currently under attack.

So, what do we do? There is no surefire, one-size-fits-all solution to navigating anti-equity campaigns, but we can find inspiration in the strategies of courageous, creative educators past and present.

Recommendations for educators

Connect with people who show up to support efforts that center marginalized students and communities, including members of local organizations and online networks.

Dedicate time for students to build the relationships of care and concern that make dehumanizing someone or jumping to conclusions less likely.

Create a clear process for students to raise concerns with you.

Engage students in primary-source inquiry, allowing them to draw their own conclusions to compelling questions. Couple this inquiry with lessons about critical media literacy and the civics of technology so their claims utilize credible evidence.

Connect your state standards to students' questions and interests.

Know your content well enough to anticipate and plan for dilemmas that might arise-missteps are more likely when teaching a complex topic without a robust understanding of the material.

Review district policies and state legislation carefully so you can avoid the chilling effect of ill-informed or bogus interpretations of new rules.

Keep school leadership in the loop about your students' engagement and success. This provides evidence if they need to defend you and gives them time to prepare for pushback.

Build trust by communicating with families about your appreciation for their child, what you're doing, and why-not just when controversies arise.

When families, students, or colleagues raise concerns, seek to understand different perspectives rather than dismissing them outright-and document every conversation.

In consideration of your own health and well-being, know which lines you refuse to cross and have a plan should you get fired, quit, or risk legal action.

Draw inspiration from how educators and students (particularly those from communities of color and LGBTQIA+ communities) have responded to attacks like these with organizational networks, creative acts of resistance, walkouts, freedom schools, and more. Actively continue these legacies of what education scholars Jarvis R. Givens calls fugitive pedagogy and Harper Keenan calls fugitive learning.

Even the best, bravest educators in the world can only do so much if no one has their backs. Every single one of us has a role to play in helping make the work of educators less fraught and dangerous.

Recommendations for administrators

Develop a detailed plan for how to support and protect staff and students if they get targeted by community members, media, or lawmakers on the anti-equity bandwagon.

Remind yourself that it's not all pushback. There has always been an incredible push for justice in schools that deserves your advocacy.

Educate staff about the political climate so they can be more proactive about the support students and colleagues in targeted groups need.

Confirm your commitment to equity and justice with clear plans. If staff ignore your initiatives, coach them up or out as you remind them of their professional responsibility to care for all students.

Celebrate and allocate resources for staff and youth defending educational equity.

Get creative with your leadership team about how to adhere to the letter of the law while leveraging loopholes in poorly crafted policy, such as laws against teaching that this country is systemically racist while simultaneously permitting instruction about racial oppression.

Have a backup plan for your own employment and know the line you will not cross. Fear of being fired cannot motivate our decisionmaking about children's education.

Recommendations for families and community members

Ask young people what they need from you to feel safe and supported.

Support local and national organizations defending teachers and librarians' efforts to make schools more inclusive and just.

Donate or request books at libraries from banned lists.

Organize advocates to attend and speak at school board meetings or legislative hearings using a prepared list of talking points to counter anti-equity agendas.

Support educators who refuse to comply with bigotry and ignorance.

Pool resources in a legal defense fund for educators in trouble for defying anti-equity policies.

Pressure your employers to take public stands against these bills.

If you can, launch a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of these laws and policies.

We opted not to list recommendations for students because they should never be in the position to defend themselves. And they don't need our advice! Many are already strategically advocating equity and justice, organizing and building coalitions while too many adults stay silent.

Whatever we do, we cannot choose to ignore this moment or shrink from scrutiny. That will not make these problems go away. It simply offloads them onto the shoulders of youth. And of any of the options before us right now, that is the least conscionable.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Thwart an Anti-Equity Agenda: Advice for Teachers, Administrators, and Families (Opinion)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Coordinated, well-funded campaigns by conservative lawmakers across the United States are fast-tracking a radical agenda to shut down diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in schools. Book bans, rules for restroom and pronoun use, regulations against rainbow flags, restrictions on curriculum addressing race and gender, and other efforts fly in the face of facts, logic, democratic norms, and basic humanity.

# data[].attributes.headline
Californians for Equal Rights (CFER) and the backlash to diversity, equity, inclusion and ethnic studies

# data[].attributes.subject
Californians for Equal Rights (CFER) and the backlash to diversity, equity, inclusion and ethnic studies

# data[].attributes.body
This community research report was created to document activity in CA and nationally to dismantle affirmative action, race-conscious admission, DEI initiatives and ethnic studies. CFER is one of many astroturf groups enacting policies and narrative strategies designed by Chris Rufo to target education equity under the guise of "merit" and "colorblindness".

# data[].attributes.headline
DISCUSS: Describe the challenges you have experienced or are currently experiencing related to the topic, as well as any lessons learned.

# data[].attributes.subject
DISCUSS: Describe the challenges you have experienced or are currently experiencing related to the topic, as well as any lessons learned.

# data[].attributes.headline
ASK QUESTIONS: What would you like to ask the presenters? Click the comment bubble on this post to add your question.

# data[].attributes.subject
ASK QUESTIONS: What would you like to ask the presenters? Click the comment bubble on this post to add your question.

# data[].attributes.headline
Are kids collateral damage in California culture wars?

# data[].attributes.subject
Are kids collateral damage in California culture wars?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are kids collateral damage in California culture wars?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Political polarization is negatively impacting school staff, undermining school management and heightening anxiety and hostility among students, according to a survey of 150 school principals.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Study of School Board & Superintendent Relations: Strategies for Building Trust in the Mistrustful Context of K-12 Public Education

# data[].attributes.subject
A Study of School Board & Superintendent Relations: Strategies for Building Trust in the Mistrustful Context of K-12 Public Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Abstract

A Study of School Board & Superintendent Relations:

Strategies for Building Trust in the Mistrustful Context of K-12 Public Education

By

Kelly Dawn Bowers

Doctor of Education

University of California, Berkeley

Professor Heinrich Mintrop, Chair

As illuminated in my study, which is only a small subset of the larger public education governance system, the mounting political pressure that school boards and superintendents face does not seem to be diminishing. It is well documented that boards under fire from constituents often make the superintendent the scapegoat, which undermines trust and threatens their strength of relationship with an uneven power dynamic. Whether attributed to general dissatisfaction with American governance which leaves superintendents subject to the political whims and winds of school boards (Lutz & Iannaccone, 1978); their increasingly limited sphere of influence in an era of high stakes external accountability (Howell, 2005), or the acute pressures of the politics of personalism (Feuerstein & Opfer, 1998), the odds of forming solid, trusting relational bonds are stacked against them. Over the past few decades, there has been a growing movement in many fields and industries, including public education, to develop new, collaborative models and approaches to managing and governing, as an alternative to more adversarial, bureaucratic and top-down methods (Ansell & Gash, 2008). With this move away from competitive toward collaborative governance, relationship building at all levels has taken on new importance.

In this case study, I examined the conflict-ridden relationship dynamic and tense micropolitical climate inherited by two superintendents and boards, within a general context of distrust directed toward public education and elected officials, which is further exacerbated by negative interactions with their immediate predecessors. Using Bryk and Schneider's (2002) concept of relational trust which was developed in other public school system settings, as an ideal measure, I was able to gather evidence of substantive change in the tenor and positive quality of the board/superintendent relationship over time. My findings highlighted two newly hired superintendents who took stock of their somewhat damaged and mistrustful board/ superintendent relationship status upon entry and strategically cultivated relational trust with their respective school boards, as substantiated by increased and genuine displays of mutual respect, personal regard, integrity and competence in their public and private interactions.

My findings indicated that a board/superintendent relationship is not static but malleable, and with concentrated focus and customized strategic intervention by a new superintendent, a previously damaged governance team relationship can be repaired and trust restored. Even in a high-trust situation, however, my conclusions divulged cautionary implications, as a board and superintendent that become too close, too trusting in the public's perception or reality, risk becoming insular or out of touch with the larger constituency they represent and serve.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Study of School Board & Superintendent Relations: Strategies for Building Trust in the Mistrustful Context of K-12 Public Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Author(s): Bowers, Kelly Dawn | Advisor(s): Mintrop, Heinrich | Abstract: AbstractA Study of School Board & Superintendent Relations:Strategies for Building Trust in the Mistrustful Context of K-12 Public EducationByKelly Dawn BowersDoctor of EducationUniversity of California, BerkeleyProfessor Heinrich Mintrop, ChairAs illuminated in my study, which is only a small subset of the larger public education governance system, the mounting political pressure that school boards and superintendents face does not seem to be diminishing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Educating about Elections in a Partisan Age

# data[].attributes.subject
Educating about Elections in a Partisan Age

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Authors:

Abby Kiesa

Leah Bueso

Erica Hodgin

Joe Kahne

Page:232-238

When educators teach about democracy in a nonpartisan way, young people are more likely to become civically and politically engaged in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Educating about Elections in a Partisan Age

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Authors: Abby Kiesa Leah Bueso Erica Hodgin Joe Kahne Page:232-238 When educators teach about democracy in a nonpartisan way, young people are more likely to become civically and politically engaged in the future.

# data[].attributes.headline
Expanding digital citizenship education to address tough issues

# data[].attributes.subject
Expanding digital citizenship education to address tough issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How can teachers better help students use online tools to learn about and address racism, polarization, and other volatile topics?
Even as educators wrestle with the ongoing challenges of pandemic-era teaching and learning, they've found themselves thrust into the middle of a civic crisis as well. For months now, fierce and hyperpartisan debates have raged at school board meetings and in district offices all over the country, focusing on everything from mask mandates to systemic racism and critical race theory, with those involved drawing on wildly divergent sources of information. No doubt, educators have a lot to contend with already, but these angry conflicts highlight the urgent need for our schools to provide civic and media education that prepares young people for responsible citizenship in a sharply divided and media-saturated society.

As members of the Educating for Civic Reasoning and Discourse Commission (sponsored by the National Academy of Education; Lee, White, & Dong, 2021), we recently reviewed the existing research into digital citizenship, focusing specifically on educators' efforts to help students use digital tools for civic and political engagement. We found that such efforts primarily cluster around preparing youth in three important areas: civility, information analysis, and civic voice. Further, we found that this work shows much promise, especially in helping to diminish cyberbullying and to increase students' capacities to decide what online sources to trust (Gaffney et al., 2019; Wineburg et al., 2019). However, we also concluded that if we want our schools to provide civic education that truly prepares young people to contend with current levels of political polarization, disinformation, and racism and other forms of prejudice, then these efforts will need to expand significantly.

Specifically, we urge educators to consider and apply three principles for innovative instructional design. All three can support effective teaching and learning for all age groups and across all subject areas. The strategies we outline are just initial steps, but we believe they can help educators at all levels chart a path through the storm that both youth and adults currently confront.

Principle 1: Delve deeper than surface-level civility

A popular digital citizenship curriculum from Common Sense Media, used in more than 75,000 schools, includes the story of Marcus, an 8th grader who creates a pseudonymous Instagram account and posts an image of his rival school's mostly Black basketball team, along with a racist message. When other students from Marcus' school find the post, they post their own racist jokes. The 8th-grade lesson plan suggests that teachers use this hypothetical example to start a discussion with students about ways they can respond to cyberbullying and online hate speech, focusing on raising awareness and supporting those targeted by discrimination and bigotry.

This lesson plan is typical of many current instructional resources in this area. It engages on a surface level with the volatile combination of social media, racism, and civic discourse but fails to delve deeper into the root causes of racism and racist rhetoric in U.S. society. As important as it is to instill in students values of kindness and civility in the face of online racism, lessons that focus on these values often dodge much thornier questions lurking just below the surface. For example, how do the structures of online environments facilitate racism? What does the prevalence of racism online suggest about the state of our society? Other than promoting civility, what can be done to address this urgent social challenge? While this scenario is certainly a valuable conversation starter and could help students consider how they can respond when they see racist posts, it does not do enough to prepare students for the complex demands of digital citizenship. Such preparation requires fuller consideration of the root causes and mechanisms of polarization (and its frequent white supremacist undertones). So, how can teachers get to these deeper issues?

Students should learn to analyze the political partisanship that fuels the production and spread of so much online information, particularly disinformation.

One strategy involves supplementing vignettes like this one with data points that speak to broader structural trends. For example, the story about Marcus could be paired with the recent finding that, each day, the average Black adolescent receives two derogatory messages online, such as a racist image or a racist joke (English et al., 2020). Now, conversation about an individual incident can be put into a wider social context and spark provocative questions such as: If a post like this occurred at our school, what should happen to the student who posted it? Other than addressing this single event, are there things teachers, the principal, or students could do to prevent such abuse? Students might also think about online environments more generally: Do platforms like Instagram do all they can to stop these kinds of events? Are there things they could do that would help? Finally, it would be valuable for students to consider broader societal dynamics - for example, how is it that the same racist ideas keep being recycled by different kids and adults, year after year?

Dialogue about these questions ought to dig deeper into what it means to be a citizen committed to challenging systemic racism in our democracy. Data points can be drawn from local or national research and policy documents and even become a catalyst for classroom inquiry for students who seek out additional data to inform class discussions. While the challenges of racism defy simple solutions, encouraging students to think more carefully about why racist messages proliferate on digital platforms is an important step to addressing the problem. The guidance to simply "be nice" online, without further analysis of the issue, rings hollow as the storm rages on.

Principle 2: Focus on credibility and underlying motivations

On Aug. 23, 2020, the eve of the Republican National Convention, the Twitter account @WentDemtoRep tweeted, "I've been a Democrat my whole life. I joined the BLM protests months ago when they began. They opened my eyes wide! I didn't realize I became a Marxist. It happened w/o me even knowing it. I'm done with this trash. I'll be registering Republican." This tweet quickly accumulated 39,000 likes and 22,000 retweets before Twitter suspended the account for violating its policies on platform manipulation. It turns out that the same tweet was posted by dozens of other accounts as part of a targeted disinformation campaign (Timberg & Stanley-Becker, 2020).

How should students critically evaluate a tweet like this? They need an approach that prioritizes questioning the source (Who is this? Do I trust them on this topic?) and discounts less germane elements (the account's number of followers or the post's likes and retweets). Additionally, they should analyze the contexts, power relations, and motivations that underlie the production of content like this, understanding not only who produced this information and their political or ideological ties but also why it was produced and who stands to gain power or influence from this tweet and others like it. How does the tweet's message take advantage of partisan and racial divides in the U.S. to sow further distrust and resentment?

When students turn to the internet for information, they have access to extraordinary troves of content - and they are largely responsible for sifting through it to find information they trust. Efforts to teach students online evaluation skills can help them get better at finding high-quality sources and evidence (McGrew, 2020). In addition to learning to evaluate online content, students should learn to analyze the political partisanship that fuels the production and spread of so much online information, particularly disinformation, and learn to recognize, cope with, and respond to content posted with ill intent (Tynes et al., 2021).

What might this look like? Teachers could help students understand that the production and spread of digital disinformation is often a political act performed for political or ideological gain. Such information often uses racist tropes or messages to inflame preexisting tensions and biases and to promote white supremacy. Consider, for example, the Russian disinformation campaign during the 2016 presidential election cycle. It has been widely reported that Russian operatives tried to use social media to weaken confidence in our democratic institutions. What has received far less attention from the news media, however, is the extent to which their strategy focused on race. Sixty-six percent of Russia-sponsored Facebook posts, for example, aimed to stoke racial division on both the political right and left either by promoting hate among white supremacist groups or by heightening distrust in Black communities (U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 2020). In this context, the tweet from @WentDemtoRep is not just an individual post to evaluate; it is part of a larger program that advances its agenda by targeting political and racial fissures. If teachers help students to consider the political motives that often influence the creation and dissemination of social media posts, young people can learn to look beyond individual sources, begin to ask how sources are connected, and investigate why disinformation is produced and shared.

In addition to helping students evaluate the political purposes of disinformation, teachers can ask them to consider their own motivations for sharing such material. Even if students know how to evaluate information, they may still post and share misinformation that aligns with their political views or ideological positions. This is due both to the fact that youth and adults are less likely to critically evaluate content that aligns with their perspectives and because some individuals knowingly share false information. Students won't necessarily stop retweeting false information just because their teachers call them on it, but at the very least, they should be challenged to reflect on such behavior and define their ethical position on it.

Finally, not only should young people learn to evaluate the credibility of online information, but they should also be challenged to decide how and whether to act on what they've learned. For example, they can consider how they might take action in response to online mis- or disinformation in ways that promote equity and justice.

Principle 3: Support youth civic voice

"The world needed to see what I was seeing," said 17-year-old Darnella Frazer, explaining why she took out her phone to record the murder of George Floyd on May 25, 2020 (Sullivan, 2021). The video galvanized an international protest of state-sanctioned violence, even murder, against Black Americans. Driven by a sense of civic responsibility, Frazier bore witness, using the digital tool available at her fingertips, and her action shows the power of youth civic voice.

Whereas young people may have traditionally been guided toward forms of civic participation that required them to be of voting age and legally recognized as U.S. citizens, today's digital tools broaden the ways young people can engage with complex civic issues. Rather than serving to keep minors on the sidelines, public platforms like Twitter and Facebook have illuminated how youth advocacy can bring about substantial real-world change. From a youth-organized global climate strike to legions of K-pop fans crippling a Donald Trump presidential rally, contemporary examples of youth organizing and participating in online spaces are abundant. More important, the opportunities for developing and honing youth civic voice in classrooms can also be developed in spaces cordoned off specifically for education. The public media station KQED's Learn platform, for example, is a space where teachers can invite middle and high school students to create content, view content created by other students, and participate in discussions about current issues.

These kinds of educational spaces can help students learn (alongside their teachers) how to use their voices in ways that resonate in public contexts outside of school. That is, digital tools can create opportunities for civic involvement that recognize and demonstrate the legitimacy and civic brilliance of young people's ideas, whether they are sharing thoughts on a class-managed Twitter account (that allows them to preserve their anonymity) or creating digital public service announcements that can be shared on school social networks. Teachers across subject areas and age groups can cultivate youth civic voice in the present moment, going beyond simply preparing them for the future.

Where do we go from here?

The urgent need for action is clear. Far less clear is how to advance this agenda successfully. Indeed, a recent survey of legislative efforts at the state level suggests that efforts to teach digital citizenship will stick to the surface, focusing primarily on ways to promote safety, reduce bullying, and help youth judge the credibility of online content (DiGiacomo et al., 2021). Very rarely do education policy makers say anything at all about the prevalence of racism online or about ways to reduce it. Nor do they say anything about the need to teach young people about the underlying reasons why bullying, misinformation, and other unsafe content are allowed to spread so easily on the web.

The three principles noted above offer a starting place, showing how teachers can expand lessons on civility, information analysis, and civic voice to give greater attention to the ways in which cultural, political, and institutional factors influence what students encounter online. (See Table 1 for a summary of how the current digital citizenship curricula could be expanded.) It's not sufficient to teach young people to be more polite and careful online. They should also be taught to take a deeper look at how the digital world works, including how and why racism, sexism, homophobia, and other prejudices remain so prevalent online; why so much online content reflects partisan biases; and why so much of that content aims to promote distrust of and disrespect for others.

The need for systemwide support

Online prejudice, bullying, and disinformation cannot be overcome by piecemeal approaches in individual classrooms across this country, and teachers cannot and should not be expected to address such challenges on their own. Systemic problems require systemwide responses. Indeed, if we want to provide quality digital citizenship education at scale, then we will need to take action on many levels at once, including standards and curriculum development, professional learning, and more. We will also need to ensure that educators at every level receive sustained training about how to engage in conversations about systemic inequality with young people in ways that do not create further harm.

Thus, we are encouraged to see many organizations working to create model units and share resources related to digital citizenship. For instance, the National Council of Teachers of English has developed reports, policy briefs, and webinars focused on critical media literacy that can be leveraged for planning at the district and classroom level (see https://ncte.org/critical-media-literacy). Similarly, the National Council of Social Studies has issued position statements on both Media Literacy and Youth, Social Media and Digital Civic Engagement (see www.socialstudies.org/advocacy/ncss-position-statements), and a number of school districts are now compiling teaching resources in these areas.

However, school and district leaders - and the broader education community - must make greater investments in this work, and they must provide firm support for the teaching of digital citizenship in the face of efforts now underway, in many states, to curtail discussions of challenging topics (related to race in particular) in schools. Nothing about this challenge strikes us as easy. But if schools are to remain a foundational support for a democratic society, then such support will be vitally important.
References
DiGiacomo, D., Hodgin, E., Taylor, C., Alkam, S., & Kahne, J. (2021). State level education policies on digital civic engagement. (Working paper).

English, D., Lambert, S.F., Tynes, B.N., Bowleg, L., Zea, M.C., & Howard, L.C. (2020, January-February). Daily multidimensional racial discrimination among Black U.S. American adolescents. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 66.

Gaffney, H., Farrington, D.P., Espelage, D.L., & Ttofi, M.M. (2019). Are cyberbullying intervention and prevention programs effective? A systematic and meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45, 134-153.

McGrew, S. (2020). Learning to evaluate: An intervention in civic online reasoning. Computers & Education, 145.

Sullivan, M. (2021, April 20). By bearing witness - and hitting 'record' - 17-year-old Darnella Frazier may have changed the world. The Washington Post.

Timberg, C. & Stanley Becker, I. (2020, August 26). Black voters are being targeted in disinformation campaigns, echoing the 2016 Russian playbook, The Washington Post.

Tynes, B.M., Stewart, A., Hamilton, M., Willis, H.A. (2021). From Google searches to Russian disinformation: Adolescent critical race digital literacy needs and skills. I nternational Journal of Multicultural Education, 23 (1).

U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. (2020). Russian active measures campaigns and interference in the 2016 U.S. election, Volume 2: Russia's use of social media with additional views. (Report 116-290). U.S. Government Printing Office.

Wineburg, S., Breakstone, J., Smith, M., McGrew, S., & Ortega, T. (2019). Civic online reasoning: curriculum evaluation (Working paper 2019-A2). Stanford History Education Group, Stanford University.

This article appears in the February 2022 issue of Kappan, Vol. 103, No. 5, pp. 31-35.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Expanding digital citizenship education to address tough issues - kappanonline.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How can teachers better help students use online tools to learn about and address racism, polarization, and other volatile topics?

# data[].attributes.headline
Fulfilling the Democratic Aims of Education: A systemic approach for generating learning opportunities for students’ informed participation in civic and political life

# data[].attributes.subject
Fulfilling the Democratic Aims of Education: A systemic approach for generating learning opportunities for students’ informed participation in civic and political life

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
AASA, The School Superintendents Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fulfilling the Democratic Aims of Education A systemic approach for generating learning opportunities for students’ informed participation in civic and political life BY ERICA R. HODGIN, JOSEPH KAHNE AND JOHN S. ROGERS/School Administrator, September 2020

# data[].attributes.headline
Leading for Democracy: A Vital Agenda for Public School Principals

# data[].attributes.subject
Leading for Democracy: A Vital Agenda for Public School Principals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Three Ways to Lead for Democracy

Leading for Democracy by Supporting Participatory Classrooms

Leading for Democracy Through Student Voice and Governance

Leading for Democracy Through a Democratic School Culture

Importance Over Ease

How can school leaders help to revitalize democracy in a time of polarization?

Abstract

Three Ways to Lead for Democracy

Leading for Democracy by Supporting Participatory Classrooms

Leading for Democracy Through Student Voice and Governance

Leading for Democracy Through a Democratic School Culture

Importance Over Ease

Linda James, an award-winning high school principal in the Southeast, worries about the effects of growing political polarization.* Her school has received recognition in the past for ensuring that 100 percent of eligible students are registered to vote. But now, she agonizes that greater political engagement is "when things fall apart." She is reluctant even to include words like civics and democracy in the school's mission statement because she doesn't think the "very diverse" community would tolerate it, Ms. James explains. "We have extremes on both ends."

In this political moment, Ms. James does not believe it is her job to get students "to understand the other's viewpoints," she tells us. "I don't think anybody's been very good at doing that."

We live in a challenging time for American democracy. Deep fissures in our civic community along with the spread of misinformation undermine our commitment and capacity for public engagement and action. This weakening of our ability to solve problems democratically coincides with crises that demand our collective attention- a global pandemic, an urgent need to address racial injustice, threats to the environment, and more.

Historically, Americans have looked to our public schools to establish democratic commitments and enable young people to engage thoughtfully with societal issues. Yet, in recent decades, preparing students for college and the workplace has garnered more and more attention, often at the expense of civic preparation. Only about one in three high school principals in a national survey we conducted in 2018 cited "promoting informed participation in civic and community life" as one of their school's top three goals .

Further, even principals who would like their schools to invigorate democracy often are unsure of how to do this amidst growing partisanship and political contention. In recent interviews we conducted, several principals told us that one of the surprising benefits of remote instruction is that they did not have to deal with the in-person political battles that might otherwise have emerged in their school during the 2020 presidential election. Notably, these same principals believe that public schools should support civic education.

Three Ways to Lead for Democracy

How can school leaders help to revitalize democracy? We look for guidance to John Dewey, who took up this question in the late 1930s amidst rising fascism in Europe and reactionary politics at home. In his 1937 speech, "Democracy and Educational Administration," Dewey lifts up three priorities for leadership practice (Boydston, 2008):

1. School administrators should support participatory classrooms in which all students engage in dialogue and inquiry about vital issues of shared concern. Such practices foster a "democratic faith" that "each individual has something to contribute" (p. 220).

2. Leaders must create opportunities for students to exercise voice and participate in school governance. Dewey reasoned that "all those who are affected by social institutions must have a share in producing and managing them" (p. 218). Democratic schools should invite young people to share their ideas and to practice the complex work of self-governance.

3. Leading for democracy entails establishing a democratic culture in which hierarchy and coercion are replaced by "mutual consultation." Dewey spoke of democracy as a "way of life" characterized by communication, collaboration, and respect "in all social relationships" (p. 217, p. 225).

Having spent the last few years conducting interviews with high school principals around the country, we are heartened to find that Dewey's decades-old vision still resonates with many leaders who are working to strengthen democracy in our current moment. Many are doing so in ways that mirror Dewey's priorities. We turn now to three high school principals who lead for democracy through classroom practice, student voice, and school culture.

Leading for Democracy by Supporting Participatory Classrooms

Eric Jasper is a high school principal in a predominantly white, working class suburb in the upper Midwest. He wants his students to become "well-connected and valuable members of the community" who are active in civic life and committed to making "well-informed decisions" on issues of public concern. Principal Jasper looks to classroom instruction to develop such dispositions, encouraging teachers to foster "conversation and debate" on "relevant issues" to motivate student interest.

Though Principal Jasper's community leans Republican, the student body is ideologically diverse, so discussions are often "very spirited." Principal Jasper works with his teachers to set norms and expectations about how to disagree and how to focus on the substance of issues without attacking opponents personally. Principal Jasper tells his teachers that the goal should be empathy and mutual regard.

"We are going to listen to others, and we are going to really acknowledge that others' opinions are good and right to them, whether you agree or not," he tells us.

To deepen engagement in local civic life, Principal Jasper and his staff encourage students to support voter registration efforts and volunteer in electoral campaigns. Some students stuff envelopes, knock on doors, and write letters as an optional assignment in their government class. Principal Jasper sends a letter home to parents and caregivers in advance, letting them know that students have the choice of whether or not to participate.

Even so, he receives some concerned calls, especially when "kids support a candidate their parents do not." But he speaks highly of the benefits that accrue from the "passionate dialogue" that emerges as students come together to share their experiences and talk about the issues that led them to support a particular candidate.

Leading for Democracy Through Student Voice and Governance

Andre Ibrahim is the principal of a high school serving a multi-racial, mixed-income community in New England. He considers himself to be a democratic leader who encourages students to voice their opinions and participate in decision-making and school improvement efforts. "Listening to and honoring" student voices, as Principal Ibrahim says, allows him to acknowledge dissenting viewpoints and develop students' democratic capabilities. He not only supports young people to "be independent thinkers" who "question everything," but also aims to have students recognize that they have "a moral responsibility to be respectful of different individuals from different cultural backgrounds and different political groups."

Principal Ibrahim invites students to approach him with their ideas and concerns. Every day, he receives between 15 and 25 emails from students and meets with others who advocate for changes to school policies and practices. Students are advised to be well prepared for these meetings: "Have your story. Have your evidence, express your disposition, and what kind of change you want to see happen," Principal Ibrahim tells them. He reminds students that they won't always get what they want, but if they frame their case well, they will "make the adults really pause and think"-a first step toward change.

Principal Ibrahim's students also participate in formal governance structures and school improvement initiatives. A principal's advisory council-made up of low-, middle-, and high-achieving students-convenes regularly to get the pulse of the student body. Students have participated alongside teachers in summer professional development workshops and examined data on the school's culture and climate and racial inequities in educational outcomes. Some students were so motivated by the data that they presented a workshop for teachers about how different forms of societal oppression shape their school experiences.

Such requests are a learning opportunity for staff as well as students. Before the students were given a "green light" to present to the entire faculty, they had to take their ideas through several stages of feedback, including written comments from Principal Ibrahim and a rigorous Q and A with the administrative team. Ibrahim compares this process to "a dissertation defense."

Leading for Democracy Through a Democratic School Culture

Anthony Montesa leads a racially diverse school serving an upper middle class Mid-Atlantic suburb that includes a roughly split between registered Democrats and Republicans. When Principal Montesa first came to his school a few years ago, teachers and students were not "talking to each other." Principal Montesa views dialogue as a means of encouraging broader perspectives. To change the climate, he organizes his school in ways that encourage dialogue and collaboration.

Perhaps even more important than classroom opportunities are the programs and extracurricular activities that invite students to exercise voice and contribute to a more inclusive and equitable school environment. They have student mentoring programs, a district equity team, an equity team in every building. They encourage students to participate on student committees and the student council and use student surveys. Students play leadership roles, organizing events, participating in small group discussions with teachers, and teaching other students. These activities provide young people opportunities to learn how to work with others across lines of difference.

"Even if we are making some decisions that maybe they don't agree with, at least they feel they are being heard," says Principal Montesa.

Though Principal Montesa encourages open dialogue and collaborative decision-making, he adopts a different stance when the interests or rights of vulnerable students are at stake. Recently, he overrode the objections of several vocal students who were against a new bathroom access policy designed to protect transgender youth. Such issues that strip away fundamental rights don't allow for majoritarian politics, he says.

There have been a few cases when contentious national political rhetoric has seeped into the classrooms and hallways. Principal Montesa and his staff try to "teach tolerance and respect for different viewpoints" and "hold students accountable when necessary." Montesa points out that they do not "tolerate bullying and harassment for any reason, specifically for someone's political views or personal or ethnic or racial background."

The school treats incidents of hate speech or intolerance as "teachable moments" to address in which educators talk with the students "and just say, 'Hey, look. If you have something to say, here's how you go about doing it. Here's the right way,'" says Principal Montesa.

Importance Over Ease

In 2016, for the first time since the Pew Research Center began tracking democracy as a topic, a majority of both Democrats and Republicans reported that members of the opposing party "stirred feelings of fear and anger in them ." Both students and parents often are fierce partisans, and conflicts can easily arise. It is not a surprise, then, that many educators are tempted to avoid rather than engage with controversial issues. But avoiding such tensions won't make them go away.

The principals we describe above are not overly romantic. They recognize the need to be prepared for inevitable challenges. Teachers need significant support, for example, to facilitate controversial issue discussions. Students need guidance as they negotiate the balance between voicing strongly held opinions and building community in ideologically diverse settings. Parents need to feel included in planning. Nevertheless, some teachers or students will say the wrong thing. And even when teachers handle complex classroom discussions brilliantly, and students work through their differences, some parents are sure to complain. Democracy is messy.

But the alternative is worse. If we want young people to do a better job talking across differences and making well-reasoned arguments, then we need to provide them opportunities to practice when they are in school. And if we want students to appreciate the democratic values of tolerance and inclusion and speak up effectively in the face of injustice, then we need to immerse them within respectful communities in which their voices are heard. Schools are well positioned to provide such opportunities and to do so equitably.

Indeed, we must run our schools as though democracy depends on it. Because, in many significant ways, it does.

*Authors' note: All names for the principals in this article are pseudonyms.

References

Boydston, J. A., Ed. (2008). The later works of John Dewey, Volume 11, 1925-1953. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

ASCD is a community dedicated to educators' professional growth and well-being.

Let us help you put your vision into action.

ASCD empowers educators to achieve excellence in learning, teaching, and leading so that every child is healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leading for Democracy: A Vital Agenda for Public School Principals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract Three Ways to Lead for Democracy Leading for Democracy by Supporting Participatory Classrooms Leading for Democracy Through Student Voice and Governance Leading for Democracy Through a Democratic School Culture Importance Over Ease How can school leaders help to revitalize democracy in a time of polarization?

# data[].attributes.headline
Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities

# data[].attributes.subject
Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Authors: John Rogers and Joseph Kahne with Michael Ishimoto, Alexander Kwako, Samuel C. Stern, Cicely Bingener, Leah Raphael, Samia Alkam, and Yvette Conde

November 2022

Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities by John Rogers and Joseph Kahne with Michael Ishimoto, Alexander Kwako, Samuel C. Stern, Cicely Bingener, Leah Raphael, Samia Alkam, and Yvette Conde is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

DOWNLOAD

Full Report

Executive Summary

Methodological Appendix

CITATION

Rogers, J. & Kahne, J. with Ishimoto, M., Kwako, A., Stern, S.C., Bingener, C., Raphael, L., Alkam, S., & Conde, Y. (2022). Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.

PRESS COVERAGE
NPR Weekend Edition Washington Post Washington Post Opinion USA Today New York Times ABC News Education Week Chalkbeat K-12 Education Dive Ed Source NEA Today
SHARE

Tweet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Authors: John Rogers and Joseph Kahne with Michael Ishimoto, Alexander Kwako, Samuel C. Stern, Cicely Bingener, Leah Raphael, Samia Alkam, and Yvette Conde November 2022 Educating for a Diverse Democracy: The Chilling Role of Political Conflict in Blue, Purple, and Red Communities by John Rogers and Joseph Kahne with Michael Ishimoto, Alexander Kwako, Samuel C.

# data[].attributes.headline
REFER TO THE RESEARCH: Educating for a Diverse Democracy in California: The Growing Challenges of Political Conflict and Hostile Behavior

# data[].attributes.subject
REFER TO THE RESEARCH: Educating for a Diverse Democracy in California: The Growing Challenges of Political Conflict and Hostile Behavior

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
DOWNLOAD

Full Report

Methodological Appendix

CITATION

Rogers, J. & Kahne, J. with Kwako, A., Ishimoto, M., Stern, S.C., Bingener, C., Raphael, L., Alkam, S., & Conde, Y. (2023). Educating for a Diverse Democracy in California: The Growing Challenges of Political Conflict and Hostile Behavior. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.

SHARE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Educating for a Diverse Democracy in California: The Growing Challenges of Political Conflict and Hostile Behavior

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
DOWNLOAD Full Report Methodological Appendix CITATION Rogers, J. & Kahne, J. with Kwako, A., Ishimoto, M., Stern, S.C., Bingener, C., Raphael, L., Alkam, S., & Conde, Y. (2023). Educating for a Diverse Democracy in California: The Growing Challenges of Political Conflict and Hostile Behavior. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.

# data[].attributes.body
April 26, 2023 at 3:30-4:30 pm PST

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: 21CSLA Research-Practice Webinar: Educating for a diverse democracy. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: 21CSLA Research-Practice Webinar: Educating for a diverse democracy. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.