Why should this question be so difficult for district-level school leaders to answer? Could it be that the superintendents were uncertain about their own beliefs about professional learning and unsure about policies pertaining to professional learning in their districts? It could be that administrators are not clear about requiring professional development (PD) because teachers may be resistant to engaging in PD, because they have had mixed experiences with the professional learning they have received in the past. It is possible that these school leaders do not want the added administrative burden of ensuring that PD is of high quality or to monitor teacher participation in professional growth. Perhaps, they may not have personally experienced worthwhile professional learning as an educator and don’t expect much from PD. Most likely, they think that PD should be optional, because they hold the assumption that teachers are adults and they will choose to engage in what they need to learn. I have heard some leaders of PD suggest that professional learning teams and other collective professional development opportunities should not include teachers who don’t want to be there because they have negative impact on the culture of the learning experiences. Does this suggest that it is acceptable for some teachers to not learn about district and school priorities?

Currently, evaluation processes and the expectations that states and local districts ratchet up evaluation systems is getting a lot of attention. There appears to be building political activity around a theory of action that new evaluation systems that identify teachers’ strengths and weaknesses, then weak teachers can be removed. The theory suggests that the remaining teachers will be motivated by the added accountability to work harder and teach better, and professional learning will be targeted to address what teachers aren’t good at. According to this theory, these strategies will ultimately result in increased student achievement. Given this theory of action, wouldn’t the causal relationships that connect the evaluation to the goal of improved student learning necessitate that professional learning be required of all teachers?

There are policies on the books that should make the decision about requiring professional learning more clear-cut. The superintendents I observed are from Iowa, a state that has teaching standards that include a professional development standard and the requirement that each teacher have an individual professional development plan. Other individual state policies include state PD standards, guidelines for PD, requirements for professional growth for license renewal, and requirements that each teacher have an individual professional development plan, etc. See Teacher Professional Learning in the United States: Case studies of state Policies and Strategies (Learning Forward, 201) for examples of selected states’ policies. Additionally, many states have or are in the process of adopting or adapting the InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards. The InTASC standards require professional learning – see Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice.
The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.

Policies should be clear that participating in professional learning on the part of teachers should be required. This then begs the question, how will district leaders evaluate participation in professional learning? It would be an easy task to consider attendance, but if policies are placing high stakes on teacher evaluation systems to inform professional development planning, wouldn’t it be logical to measure levels of engagement and whether teachers are implementing what they learn in professional development in their classrooms? A robust set of processes to fully evaluate professional learning seems reasonable when so much emphasis is being placed on accountability for the purposes of improving teacher learning in the work place. Findings from these evaluations may inform the conversation what teachers are learning (or not learning), and which newly learned practices teachers are implementing (or not implementing). This conversation might shift the focus about why students are not learning as intended away from identifying weak individual teachers to a discussion about how to improve the system of learning for teachers. Knowing about the quality of professional learning might make school leaders confident that it should be required.

Don’t get me wrong.  The West Wind staff agrees that these observances are important.  Our dilemma is, what is what are we recognizing? What does it mean to celebrate groups based on certain shared physical or genetic attributes? When we try to decide we find ourselves with all sorts of questions: Which cultural heritage months do we observe? Which cultural/social attributes count: Race? Ethnicity? Gender? Is it an observation or celebration and what action do we take to observe or celebrate? By making these observances are we taking part in something that separates specific groups from the whole of American history and experience?

There is no obvious nor easy answer.    However, with some discussion, we finally agreed that, as Ghandi said, “Action expresses priorities.”

We focused on a few key observances using the following rationale:

• We will use the observances recognized by presidential proclamation.
• We will recognize groups that are currently/persistently marginalized in our culture. As such, we will not recognize Irish American or Italian American History months.

 
Activities for each cultural observance include:

• We will use the same naming used in the presidential proclamation and as part of our observance will discuss/explain any variance to that naming we believe is appropriate (for example: while the presidential proclamation calls February African-American History month and we will too, we will likely note that it is our preference to call it Black History Month).
• We will create a graphic for the West Wind website to be posted for the month of the observation.
• We will convene a brown bag lunch to learn/understand/explore the cultural history and relevance of the group. During this lunch we will collectively write a blog post that includes such ideas as: why we are making the observance, commentary related to whether we discuss/deliberate naming, anything we deem of interest related to our discussion.
• We will share with each other opportunities to take part in observances such as lectures, performances, etc.
• We will consider having themed art or choosing particular artists exhibited in our workspace that represent the cultural heritage we are observing.

We are not entirely settled on our choices nor are we completely comfortable with what our choices mean. A major concern is how the individual observances impact the groups being recognized.   While the intention is to honor the value of each group and its contributions to American history and culture, the risk of singling them out is that it further creates silos and emphasizes their separation from the majority. Our project associate, Mandi Bozarth, summed up what we all were struggling with, “I feel ambiguous about these months because they do silo U.S. history and make it easy to downplay the role of all Americans in our history.  On the other hand, I wonder if we have come far enough into recognizing all history to where we no longer have to set aside time to think about the history of certain groups?  I don’t know the answer.”

While we collectively aren’t sure we have the right answer(s), we have chosen to recognize some of the cultural heritages that impact our history by observing these cultural heritage months and in doing so our actions express our priorities.

“Whatever we do to strengthen and elevate the teaching profession, we should bear in mind that reforms that fail to heed the voice of teachers are doomed.” Secretary Duncan

West Wind took to Twitter (using the below hashtag) to thank some of the influential teachers in our lives. It was often difficult to come up with just one!

[View the story "#ThankaTeacher" on Storify]

#ThankaTeacher

Who are some teachers you might thank if given the opportunity?

The screening at the Bijou Theatre was followed by a panel discussion.  I was honored to moderate the conversation between the audience and the following panelists:

• Michelle Bacon Curry, a graduate student at the University of Iowa, who is working toward an MAT in Secondary English Education.
• Andrew Fagersten, a junior in the University of Iowa Department of Education, who plans to teach elementary school.
• Mara Goodvin, an ementary music teacher in Rock Island, Illinois, who also holds a MA in Education Administration.
• Coy Marquardt, a former 6^th grade and language arts teacher, who is currently the Uniserv Director with the Iowa State Education Association.
• Valerie Nyberg, a policy analyst at West Wind Education Policy, Inc, who is currently finishing her Ph.D. dissertation in the Department of Education at the University of Iowa.   In addition, Valerie is a former high school teacher, holds a K-12 administrator license, and is an adjunct professor at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa City.
• Dr. Renita Schmidt, a University of Iowa Associate Professor in the Department of Education, who is also a former teacher.

Not surprisingly for a discussion of teacher working conditions and salary, the audience had a lot of questions and comments for the panelists. And the panelists, all former, current, or soon-to-be teachers, found much common ground with the teachers on the screen.

The film follows several teachers as they make the decision to keep teaching or move into more financially lucrative careers.  We see them in the classroom teaching; hear from students and parents about their impact on their lives and education; watch them spend their own money to purchase basic classroom supplies; see teachers preparing lessons, spending hours at night grading papers, and working second jobs at warehouse retail stores.  We see their families splitting apart from stress.  We watch a new mother pumping breastmilk in a co-worker’s office for her six week old daughter.  We hear from a teacher, Jonathan Dearman, excited to be in the classroom everyday—he says it is the best job he ever had—and we hear from the students whose lives were touched by Dearmon.  And then we see Mr. Dearman selling real estate to support his family, having left the teaching profession forever.

The panelists shared stories of their own decisions to teach and the supports they see as necessary to improve the working conditions for teachers.  Some of the issues discussed included the negative language often used when talking about teachers in the media and the often negative reaction of peers to young people who chose to go into the teaching profession, especially young men.

The panel also discussed some ways to increase racial and gender diversity in the teaching profession.  One suggestion was to offer alternative pathways to certification that include payment for student teaching.  Another was to ensure the right supports are in place in the school building to help teachers of color overcome the challenges and barriers they often encounter.

Another topic of discussion was the amount of testing in the classroom.  Some of the panelists felt that the amount of testing is overwhelming the ability of a teacher to really teach or to even properly monitor student growth in the classroom.  A good portion of the panel discussion involved the supports teachers need in the classroom and in preparation programs.  These include higher salaries, support from the administrators, support from parents, recognition of their hard work in the media and community, and time for professional development and planning.  The panel also discussed some of the problematic laws currently proposed in Iowa, including raising the GPA for admission to a teacher preparation program to 3.0 and retaining children who cannot read in the 3rd grade.

Why did we at West Wind find this film compelling enough to organize a screening and discussion?  It is no surprise that a documentary about the teaching profession would catch our eye, but the way this documentary explores the profession and the individual teachers’ stories seem particularly relevant to the ongoing public debate about education today.  The teachers in the film do not seem different from many people in my life and, I suspect, yours either.  After I first watched the film, I was describing the story of Erik Benner, a teacher and coach in Texas who works several jobs to support his family, to my father-in-law, a former teacher, principal, and superintendent.  He said slowly, as though, I had missed something obvious all around us, “Yes.  When I taught I always painted houses in the summer.  That’s how we made a living.  Most teachers have to work a second job.”  As I thought about it, I realized he is right.  How many of us took piano lessons from the school music teacher or had our lawns mowed by the math teacher in the summer?  I know my teachers did these things, but I honestly never stopped to think about what that meant.

That is why the film seemed particularly relevant to me:  educator salary, working conditions, how we evaluate teachers, how we retain and recruit great teachers, and the language we use to talk about teachers are things many of us think about every day in our offices or otherwise.  But it meant something more to me because the film brought it to me through the lives of real teachers, teachers dedicated to their jobs and their students who I could see struggling on the screen.

The documentary has been screened across the country and is now available on Netflix.  In addition, screenings continue to be organized.  For a list of all screenings visit the Teacher Salary Project.

There are many challenges to implementing this agenda.  We will explore several  them in this blog, starting with today’s topic,  challenges faced at the high school level. Though helping develop college- and career-readiness among all youth starts at birth, today I want to focus on how the traditional comprehensive high school has ossified into a structure, culture, and set of professional capacities that work against achieving some of the key aspects of college- and career-readiness.  That is:

• College- and career-ready students have the capacity to draw on content knowledge from multiple disciplines to solve real-world problems; however, the traditional high school is organized into discrete departments and courses defined by the Carnegie Unit.
• College- and career-ready students have the capacity to apply knowledge to solve real-world problems; however, the traditional high school is primarily organized in ways that help students understand and use abstract knowledge within the four walls of a classroom, rather than in project-based classrooms, internships, and competency-based institutions–where students have the opportunity to apply abstract knowledge to solving novel and non-routine problems.
• College- and career-ready students have thought about their goals and aspirations and how their own learning at the high school level helps to prepare them for their desired futures; however, in the traditional high school, this activity has tended to occur with guidance counselors rather than incorporated into content-focused courses.  (Wow, so many issues … I’m not even going to go into the fact that on top of this, the average ratio of students to counselors in secondary schools is 500:1–double what is recommended.)
• College- and career-ready students have the capacity to work in teams, collaborating with others to solve problems and generate new knowledge; however, the traditional high school is organized around individual learners working toward individual achievement and grades, in contrast to working in teams where, through the efforts of the whole, students are graded and recognized.
• College- and career-ready students are prepared have the capacity to succeed in both college and careers, regardless which pathway they choose after high school; however, the traditional high school has implicitly tracked students, with career-readiness being explicitly attended to in vocations or career-tech programs that are not connected to college-preparatory, academic courses and college-preparatory, academic courses rarely incorporating career investigations, skills, and other readiness into their standards and goals.

The institutional and structural obstacles described above call for a more comprehensive approach to student work, including multidisciplinary and project-based learning environments, which we find in most approaches to competency-based education.

We are inspired by state leaders–particularly those in New Hampshire, Iowa, Maine, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Oregon–who are striving to change the conditions described above.  Here are (just a few) resources:

• Iowa Forum on Competency-Based Education (and on Twitter at #iacomped)
• New Hampshire High School Transformation
• iNACOL research on competency-based pathways
• New England Secondary School Consortium

Here are a few places (more to come) where you can get background information on college- and career-readiness:

• National High School Center College and Career Development Organizer
• Educational Policy Improvement Center

Dr.Calhoun is a national expert and author who supports schools, districts and state agencies in designing and implementing school reforms that focus on instruction, curriculum and assessment. In this publication, Emily reminds readers of the importance of setting goals sharply focused on student learning. She contends that one powerful student learning goal is sufficient for a school staff to work on. Having too many goals makes it difficult for educators to work collectively to study teaching practices and results. Focusing on one powerful goal enables teams of teachers to engage in highly focused professional learning, dig into the external knowledge base, thoroughly examine student data, and to carefully study the implementation of strategies identified by the faculty.

One of the most important concepts put forward by Emily in the interview is called “seeing through and beyond,” which is a process of identifying all the changes that will be required to accomplish the goal by looking through the goal to the student performances that are expected. The next step is to determine what teacher behaviors in curriculum, instruction, and assessment are needed to promote the desired student behaviors. Continuing the process, the faculty must see right through the teacher behaviors to what the principal and central office need to do. Seeing through and beyond enables program implementers to make better use of data, to design comprehensive staff development, to employ technical assistance and leadership, and to make critical decisions about the effective use of time and resources. A singular goal helps the faculty to focus and to push through to address the things that everyone must be working on to fully accomplish the goal. Of course, limiting the focus of a school’s improvement plan to a single goal is not easily done and achieving the goal is not that simple, and Dr. Calhoun comments on the many barriers and challenges.

When the article came out twelve years ago, districts were struggling to comply with NCLB and having difficulty managing the expectations to meet student achievement goals in multiple subject areas at the same time. Today, districts are still struggling to figure out how to design reforms that accomplish everything that is expected of them, with even fewer resources. The concept of seeing through and beyond is intriguing to think about in our current context.

Schools are being expected to adjust to newly revised student learning standards, modify curriculum, improve formative assessment processes, add more summative assessments, apply new technologies for both classroom and organizational purposes, implement new data management stems, engage parents more fully, respond to revised teaching standards, add new teacher and leader evaluation procedures, deliver intensive professional development, reform hiring and retention practices …and the list goes on.

How might applying the idea of “seeing through and beyond” to policy development change this picture? What if school leaders and policy makers started the policy making process by considering how the policy would enable districts and schools to focus on fewer priorities rather than adding more. Just as school leaders should look through the learning goal and the desired student performance to consider all the actions needed at various levels of the system, policy makers need to see beyond the specific actions and immediate consequences of the policies and reforms they are promulgating. Are there protocols that could help leaders to think about how their policies affect student learning and how they change the behaviors of teachers, principals, central office staff, and other role groups at all levels of the system? Is there a way to consider whether the policies are likely to lead to systemic changes that yield improved practices in instruction and assessment with enough fidelity to the design of the innovation and with enough teaches to make a difference? Reforms where innovations are done incorrectly or partially by many teachers or reforms that are fully implemented by only a small percentage of the teachers responsible for instruction are not going to yield the intended outcomes.

There are processes available to help planners to see through and beyond the policy goal. The new field of implementation science offers strategies for increasing fidelity and ways of accomplishing full scale replication across a large system. The work of Dean Fixsen and the National Implementation Network give policy makers and practitioners a way to intentionally explore and adopt the innovation, consider the various organizational complexities and the context that contributes to the success or failure of an implementation, and address both expected and unexpected barriers to putting a reform in place. Attending to the factors of implementation early in the planning process by using implementation science would give reformers tools they need to increase the likely hood that the policies they advance will make a difference.

In her article from over a decade ago, Emily advised that it takes both leadership and willpower to face the challenges of school reform. It will take leadership to intentionally use today’s implementation science and other processes to “see through and beyond”. It will take will power to narrow the focus of reforms, to selectively abandon projects and reforms that aren’t working, to eliminate barriers to reforms that are likely to accomplish goals of improved teaching and learning and to target actions to the ultimate goal – student learning.

Sparks, D.(1999). The singular power of one goal: Action researcher narrows focus to broaden effectiveness. JSD, Winter, 54-58. Retrieved from http://www.learningforward.org/news/jsd/calhoun201.cfm

Image from Flickr user: Kristin Mckee

Stand Your Ground

The 2011 Stand Your Ground statute, Chapter 776 outlines  justifiable use of force on the “presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.”  One question missing from the current conversation is, wouldn’t Trayvon Martin have the right and responsibility to stand his own ground as well?  In all of the conversations I have not heard enough emphasis of the degree of the fright and alarm that Trayvon experienced by being followed by an adult man.  In Trayvon’s case, it’s not hard for me to imagine that he was aware of his surroundings.  In the clip of recorded conversation between Trayvon and his girlfriend, we hear her tell him to run.  Should Trayvon have run home that night to avoid a confrontation?  From an adult perspective certainly, he would likely be here today to share his own point of view if he had.

However, would it have been wrong for him to turn and face his follower?  Certainly not.  Who was this man who continued to follow him through the complex as he made his way from the 7-11 to his father’s townhome with his candy and tea?  What had Trayvon done to be considered suspicious?

In my own imagination, I can easily see Trayvon, feeling relatively safe in his own neighborhood.  He may have been tired of being treated as a suspect first, and 17-year old boy second and not wanting to be subjected to that behavior from others anymore, and so instead of running he turned and stood his ground.

Or, I can also see him as a somewhat cocky young man who, knowing that he was being followed, figured that he could handle the man on his own and turned to face him, thinking if it came to a fight, he would easily win.  I can also see that as a young African American man, to run can be considered to be a coward, and with the mixture of the two scenarios, Trayvon turned to stand his ground.

We don’t  yet, and might never, know exactly how Trayvon and George Zimmerman came to be in a struggle on the sidewalk that night, but I can imagine that Trayvon felt as threatened and in defense of his own life as George Zimmerman is reported to have felt, with the exception of the fact that Trayvon only had his fists to defend himself while George Zimmerman had a loaded gun.

History

Secondly, in all of this, history is curiously absent.  It was not even 70 years ago (the 1950s and early 1960s) when lynching occurred with some regularity in the south.  In the intervening years, where these incidents have widely been condemned and more people have been brought to justice for their participation, we continue to hear of incidents where Black men are dragged, tortured, and killed.  In fact in the wake of this case, a recent NPR Morning Edition show featured writer Donna Britt regarding “the talk” she’s had with her two sons.  The fact of the matter is I too have had similar discussions with my own 15-year-old multiethnic son.  “The Talk” concerns how the world perceives them and their own responsibility to be aware of the perception, no matter how real or imagined, and to be prepared for the reaction they may likely receive at times.

I imagine that Trayvon’s parents had similar discussions with him regarding the dangers of the police and his interactions with White people in general that could lead to tragic consequences.  Today a young Black man can’t be picked up simply for failing to yield the sidewalk to a White person, or for being “fresh” or overly friendly towards White women; however, it seems, if someone feels threatened, especially in states with Stand Your Ground statutes like Florida, there continues to be legal justification for killing young Black males.

Walking While Black

Thirdly, part of the conversation that remains largely absent is that I still have not heard of just cause for George Zimmerman to have followed Trayvon in the first place.  Yes, there had been a few robberies in the area recently.  Yes, according to reports, it is suspected that those crimes were committed by Black men.  However, does that mean that every Black male is suspect?

It appears Trayvon became suspicious to George Zimmerman for “walking while Black.” He was a young Black man, unfamiliar to Zimmerman, walking at night with a hoody on.  Our society perpetuates the notion of Black men as dangerous and criminal. People respond with fear and suspicion when we see Black males, particularly at night.

The continued perpetuation of fear of Black men every day in the media, in entertainment, and in our own imaginations, results in someone like George Zimmerman seeing Trayvon and easily justifying the ensuing actions in his own mind.  Zimmerman, like all of us, consistently sees the message that Black men are dangerous, whether they are 12 or 35.  He saw Trayvon and said to himself, this shadowy figure is up to no good.

What’s more, this doesn’t simply happen in our neighborhoods or on the streets…this also happens in our classrooms and schools.   We can examine the recent reports regarding disproportionate suspensions and actions of discipline in schools where  Black males especially, but Latino males as well, are disproportionately suspended in schools[1].  Here we see school officials disciplining Black boys, in particular, for like-transgressions, often with the intent of “sending a message” as if Black boys are somehow in need of extreme measures to learn the same lessons about behavior, rules, and right and wrong as other kids.  Rather it is the imagined consequence that “lenience” (which I consider to be more proportionate responses) does in light of the exaggerated notion of Black males as dangerous and criminal that underlies such decisions regarding appropriate discipline.

Underlying Beliefs

I’m troubled by a seemingly double standard.  In our media and popular entertainment, we see the image of White males taking charge.  On more than one occasion, I’ve seen stories of Iraq and Afghanistan vets, in particular, hailed for their quick thinking and response to threatening situations.  In their cases, they emerge not only unscathed, but admired for their response and bravery.  This to me demonstrates how our culture on the whole values brashness and no-holds bar behavior from White males, yet these same behaviors are considered aggressive and undesirable in minorities, especially Black males.   According to Zimmerman’s lawyer and friends, he was justified in his pursuit of Trayvon, yet, in their minds, Trayvon was not justified if he had turned and faced his pursuer in the very least, and defended himself at the most.  How can both perceptions exist at the same time?  It goes back to what we value as appropriate responses from specific subject positions.  How is it that the only seemingly acceptable response that Trayvon should have had was to run?

A recent blog by Michael Skolnik points out, if it had been him, rather than Trayvon, he doubts that Zimmerman would have seen him as suspicious.  He states:

No matter how much the hoodie covers my face or how baggie my jeans are, I will never look out of place to you.  I will never watch a taxi cab pass me by to pick someone else up.  I will never witness someone clutch their purse tightly against their body as they walk by me.  I won’t have to worry about a police car following me for two miles…I will never look suspicious to you, because of one thing and one think only.  The color of my skin.  I am white.

The point being, if Trayvon were White, how different would the conversation be?  Based on which underlying beliefs and values would the media and others’ respond?  How does this notion change the conversation completely?

Reversal of Fortune

The last and most important question that remains unaddressed is if the situation was reversed, would we even have this same degree of speculation?  I suspect that had Trayvon been the one to carry a weapon, even with a permit, Trayvon Martin would be held in jail with a hefty bond.  The media would ponder why this “troubled teen” went out to kill a law-abiding Neighborhood Watch captain.  Not only would the questions surrounding the incident (I doubt anyone would have asked if George Zimmerman was agitated that night) would have been different, but also the language used to frame the incident would likely have included emphasis of murder and killing rather than a death.   How do we continue to talk about Trayvon’s death as if his death wasn’t the result of another’s intentional or unintentional actions.

Missing Conclusion

It seems to me if George Zimmerman never spends a night in jail, if the Stand Your Ground law only applies to him and is a means of his escaping criminal liability for his actions, and not to Trayvon who reasonably felt he was defending his own life, then  we are saying to everyone that it’s okay to shoot an unarmed 17-year old Black male, as long as you feel threatened.  And in doing so, we continue to justify the perpetuation of fear of Black men and boys.

How is this substantially different than our recent and unfortunate racial history?

Power does not corrupt. Fear corrupts… perhaps the fear of a loss of power.

–John Steinbeck

What seems like a staunchly anti-Mexican, anti-immigrant saturated Arizona agenda has now irrevocably seeped into the state’s education system, risking the success of its many Mexican students.

The Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) was denied reinstatement of its Mexican American Studies (MAS) Program last week after the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) filed the request over a month ago.

Since January, the MAS Program has been closed down on the grounds that it violates one of Governor Brewer’s approved laws, HB2281.

In Arizona, following Brewer’s signing of HB2281, school curriculums “[can]not:

• Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
• Promote resentment toward a race or class or people.
• [Be] designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
• Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”[1]

The MAS Program’s vision is as follows:

“The Mexican American Studies Department is dedicated to the empowerment and strengthening of our community of learners. Students will attain an understanding and appreciation of historic and contemporary Mexican American contributions. Students will be prepared for dynamic, confident leadership in the 21st Century.”[2]

This hardly sounds like something to be so fearful of that one is led to dismantle it. The benefits of the MAS Program (i.e. a 93% graduation rate of MAS students; improved grades and attendance) can easily be seen upon viewing the trailer to a new documentary, “Precious Knowledge,” wherein MAS student profiles, classroom conversations, etc. are featured.

Another reason behind the cancellation of this program has been twisted into being a financial one. In what the New York Times called a blackmail tactic[3], $14 million would have been withheld from the district per TUSD Superintendent Huppenthal, if the program was not shut down. But, how costly is it to empower students with their cultural; and yes, American history—at minimum to simply ensure them they have a place in it, too?

Why must education reform conversations often resort to focusing on the technical?

Failing to look further allows us to be in the dark about how beneficial a tailored, more relevant curriculum can be for students. I would argue that empowerment through the MAS program has led to a better school climate and a more positive socio-emotional experience for its students; which in my mind, is priceless.

Stripping students of the opportunity to acquire “precious knowledge” about their cultura is a detriment to not only the students themselves but to Jan Brewer’s entire constituency.  When the Program was stripped away, so was a chance to achieve the Program’s goal of preparing “dynamic, confident leadership in the 21^st century.”

With the growth of Latinos continuing to be a hot conversation topic, I have seen fears arise in many different forms. One being a fear of Latinos holding power that they are not prepared for – what with their young demographic and their drop-out rates being the highest among all other minority groups.

We’ve seen this argument aplenty in the National conversation on the importance of Latino educational success in our classrooms. The future of our country will soon depend upon it.[4]

But from HB2281 comes another fear. An undeniable assertion and simultaneous attempt to deny the fact Latinos will take away [our] power, whether they are ready or not. Whether [we] want them to or not.

Or, as one blogger put it, “It (the closure of the MAS Program) happened because the state’s Latino population has nearly doubled in the past 20 years and the right wing is angry and afraid that it is helpless to stop it. In one generation, Latinos will be 50 percent of the state’s population and, short of declaring martial law and deporting everyone with brown skin, there’s nothing anyone can do to prevent that.”[5]

Clearly, Arizona is not ready to accept the outcomes of its ever-changing demographic. Underlying this fear of losing power is a long-held belief that is being threatened—one of white as unarguably dominant and deserving of power over any other group of people.

Through this situation in Arizona, we see that much of what James Baldwin asserted in his “Talk to Teachers” decades ago is still true today:

Without a robust understanding of one’s identity both personal and cultural, less will be achieved—for individuals and for society as a whole. When we embrace diversity, we all reap the benefits. Forcing instead a common knowledge that does exactly what it forbids (pitting the contributions of one ethnic group above another) will lead to an “ideal” society—a society that may perish because of its refusal to embrace changes that are inevitably forthcoming.

Arizona is just one example of the inability of a system to look at things in a whole new way. The MAS Program was a counterexample to this and the 93% graduation rate of students within the program is proof of its success[6]. Without continuing to approach things differently, those dismal outcomes that my fellow Latinos typically experience in school are bound to remain the same, and that makes me afraid.

They started a blog so they can share their experiences as they progress through their Civil Rights Tour. It’s been great to keep up with them as they explore, learn, and no doubt have a some fun along the way.

Check out the FasTrac blog here: fastracprogram.wordpress.com/

I recently went to Ecuador on a “Fellowship and Learning Tour” via The Ecuador Partnership where we were able to learn about some churches and schools that [our] U.S.  Mennonite congregations have helped to sustain over a period of 10 years.

The problem with being able to provide (mainly financial) sustenance to these congregations is the sense of dependency that is evident during our visits with each other.

As an American, we are held in high regard, even revered, but it’s not a comfortable feeling.

The Ecuador representative confided in me that because of this dependency, true growth in these congregations is stunted. Autonomy is still a far-off goal.

In our visits with each other, we recognize the great need of the congregations. But, instead of speaking financially with the Ecuadorian congregations, our American leaders simply refer back to the importance of relationships and how this 10-year-long relationship is helping to show whether financially supporting Ecuador will be “worth it” or not. In other words, [we] want to support something that can be self-sufficient and sustainable.

My hands, as an American with a fondness for fellow Latin@s and a passion for helping those who need, remain tied. I tagged along to learn and kept an open mind as to what I would learn, even though I do not carry much weight when it comes to deciding whether/how to support our Ecuadorian partners. The Ecuador Partnership has existed for over 10 years and consists of 3 Mennonite organizations: Central Plains Mennonite Conference, Mennonite Mission Network and the Colombia Mennonite Church. Every other year or so, this partnership tries to set-up travel groups from the U.S. to Ecuador and vice-versa. Anybody affiliated with the Central Plains Mennonite Conference and who is interested in learning and seeing the partnership in action is invited to travel to Ecuador. Members of the two Ecuadorian congregations travel to the U.S. as well.

Living for a few days in the circumstances these Ecuadorians find themselves in makes it impossible not to embrace such lifestyles, because the people unquestionably embrace you. As the trip went on, I reminded myself to refrain from taking too many exploitative photos and keep my potentially harmful observations as an outsider to myself.

On the 12-day tour, I started to understand how polar our lives are – struggling to access daily transportation, living off of about $5-10 per day and raising three growing teenagers on your own like my host mother; living as a Colombian refugee, in fear for the safety of yourself and your family;  uncertain about how well the water will run on any given day; but, I still had a return flight scheduled back to America a few days later, where customs are hardly the same.

Being an outsider American is one thing. But, almost immediately, upon being picked up from the Quito Airport, I was aware that being a Latina American outsider may alter how I was seen in comparison to my fellow travelers.

In Ecuador, straddling the line that distinguishes two hemispheres simultaneously took on a new meaning.

I am Latina. But I am still (and probably more so) American, in Latin America.

Our hosts respectfully question why I don’t (really) know Spanish and leave it at that, after I give the response I have been primed to give (it’s hardly the first time I’ve been questioned about this).

 I learned Spanish in High School after my father refused to make any real effort to teach me and my sisters, fearing discrimination similar to what he experienced growing up, only speaking the minority language.  

But as the trip goes on, they compliment how much of the language I do know and can understand. Still, I wish I could relate more to them. To be in the company of fellow Latin@s is something I generally appreciate because it does not happen all of the time. It also lent a sense of guilt that I wasn’t prepared for.  Nothing, not even double-checking the contents of your suitcase and making sure you have your passport can prepare you for that guilt.

When we had to say goodbye to each other, I was tongue-tied. I could not fully articulate how grateful I was for their hospitality, but I hope my hugs translated some of it.

I learned that one of the challenges of being privileged/having power is knowing how to use it for good and how to respectfully involve the less privileged in deciding what will help most. What will lead to the greatest level of autonomy so true fellowship can take place?

I’ve witnessed these lifestyles while trying not to exploit them, now what?

In my very spacious office room to which I arrive via guaranteed transportation; a room complete with heat and the assurance of running water, I will continue pondering this.