From xxxxxx <[email protected]>
Subject Why CRT Belongs in the Classroom, and How To Do It Right
Date January 28, 2023 1:05 AM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
[If classroom realities matter at all to governors and state
legislators who have imposed CRT bans on schools, they would be
embarrassed at having barred students from the kind of thought
provoking teaching we witnessed in this project.]
[[link removed]]

WHY CRT BELONGS IN THE CLASSROOM, AND HOW TO DO IT RIGHT  
[[link removed]]


 

Stacie Brensilver Berman, Robert Cohen, and Ryan Mills
January 22, 2023
History News Network [[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ If classroom realities matter at all to governors and state
legislators who have imposed CRT bans on schools, they would be
embarrassed at having barred students from the kind of thought
provoking teaching we witnessed in this project. _

Professor Derrick Bell flanked by pro-diversity protestors at Harvard
Law School,

 

Right wing politicians  in eight states have enacted laws and
mandates banning Critical Race Theory (CRT) from their schools, and
 since 2021 an astounding total of 42 states have  seen bills
introduced in their legislatures that would restrict the teaching of
CRT and limit how teachers can discuss the history of racism and
sexism in public schools. This has been done  on the dubious grounds
that such teaching amounts to left wing indoctrination, which they
denounce as divisive, anti-American, racist, and damaging to white
students’ self-esteem. Such gags on teachers constitute the greatest
violation of academic freedom since the McCarthy era. The hysteria
against CRT has been so extreme that Republican legislators in states
such as North Dakota enacted anti-CRT bans while publicly
acknowledging that there was no evidence that their state’s public
schools even taught CRT.  The bans amount to a new front in the
culture wars, designed to preemptively strike against critical
historical thinking and sow political division at the expense of
meaningful learning experiences.

Though we are veteran teacher educators, we never taught CRT to our
student teachers prior to this era of anti-CRT hysteria. This was not
because we disdained CRT, but rather because secondary school history
tends to be atheoretical, focusing primarily on the narration of
political – and to a lesser extent social – history.(1)  We
thought of CRT primarily as a set of ideas taught at the graduate
level, especially in law schools, and of little use for high school
teachers.  Though we observed New York city public school history
teachers for years, we never saw one teach CRT. But all the
controversy about CRT provoked us to explore its origins and meaning,
which led us to realize our error in failing to see CRT’s utility
for teaching US history and debating the history of racism and the
theory itself. Note that we speak here of having
students_ debate _the history of racism and CRT,
not _indoctrinating _students, as right-wing politicians imagine. We
are convinced that CRT, with its controversial assertion that racism
is a permanent feature of American society, is a powerful tool that
enables students to analyze, discuss, and debate the meaning of some
central events and institutions in US history, including slavery,
Indian Removal, Jim Crow, Chinese Exclusion, Japanese internment, mass
incarceration of Black men, and the Trumpist movement to bar Latinx
immigrants.   Those seeking to ban CRT either do not understand it
or distort its meaning to obfuscate the educational benefits of
discussing and debating its provocative perspective. We witnessed this
positive impact firsthand as we piloted a unit on the uses and debates
about and criticism of CRT in a high school class.

Based as we are in New York, we were drawn to study and teach about
the writings of the late New York University law professor Derrick
Bell-- a widely admired teacher and mentor--regarded as Critical Race
Theory ‘s intellectual godfather.(2)  Un-American? Hardly. Hired as
a civil rights attorney by Thurgood Marshall for the NAACP’s Legal
Defense Fund, Bell spent years championing equal opportunity in
historic desegregation cases.  But Bell was troubled by the fact that
even when he won such cases, whites evaded school integration to the
extent that by the early 21st century many school systems remained de
facto segregated and scholars wrote about the r_esegregation _of
American public education. Seeking an explanation for this persistent,
effective white resistance to racial integration, Bell argued that
racism was a permanent feature of American society, and any
anti-racist court victories and political reforms would have limited
impact since whites would always find ways to avoid integration and
limit progress towards racial equality.

Was Bell right?  This question has great potential to spark
historical debate in our nation’s classrooms because his perspective
offers one possible explanation for key events in African American
history. Think, for example, of the emancipation of enslaved Blacks at
the end of the Civil War, which the white South quickly limited by
adopting Black Codes. Congress responded by enacting Radical
Reconstruction to empower and enfranchise formerly enslaved people,
but this multiracial democracy was overthrown violently by white
supremacists and replaced with what became the South’s Jim Crow
regime.  The dynamic of racial progress yielding white
backlashes--asserted by Bell and documented exhaustively in Carol
Anderson’s recent study, _White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our
Racial Divide _(2016)-- can be seen in the way the _Brown _decision
sparked a furious massive resistance movement in the South, the
Supreme Court’s refusal in _Milliken_ to mandate busing to
integrate schools across municipal lines, and the Court’s assault on
affirmative action. Think, too, of how Barack Obama’s two terms as
 America’s first Black president were followed by Donald Trump’s
presidency, which championed white grievance, flirted with white
nationalism, and demonized the Black Lives Matter movement and the
national wave of protests following the police murder of George Floyd,
culminating in banishing CRT from schools.  How do we account for
this pattern of racial progress followed quickly by reversals? And
what are we to make of the fact that this pattern seems to conform to
Bell’s argument about the permanence of racism in America?  In
confronting, rather than evading or banning these questions, we enable
students to probe some of the central questions in American history.

Discussing and debating Bell and CRT works best when we also explore
their most perceptive critics’ arguments. Harvard Law School
Professor Randall Kennedy, for example, charges that Bell was too
pessimistic in his outlook on the history of racial progress and
unrealistic in his yardstick for measuring the impact of civil rights
law.  According to Kennedy, Bell

 …was drawn to grand generalities that crumple under skeptical
probing. He wrote, for example, that “most of our civil rights
statutes and court decisions have been more symbol than enforceable
laws, but none of them is … fully honored at the bank.” Yet
consider that phrase “fully honored at the bank.” It does suggest
a baseline – perfect enforcement. But such a standard is
utopian. _All_ law is underenforced; none is “fully’”
honored.(3)

 Kennedy draws upon voting rights to support this critique, finding
that deep South Black voter registration skyrocketed thanks to the
Voting Rights Act of 1965. Whereas in 1965 Black voter registration in
Alabama was meager, with only 19.3% of Blacks registered, by 2004
72.9% were registered. In Mississippi the percentage rose from 6.7% in
1965 to nearly 70% in 2004.(4)  Kennedy viewed such statistics as
proof that civil rights law worked over the long run, undermining
Bell’s pessimistic claim that “Racism in America is not a curable
aberration. [O]ppression on the basis of race returns time after time
– in different guises, but it always returns.”(5) 

Clearly, then, debates about Bell and CRT are thought provoking and
merit inclusion in high school history classes since they challenge
students to assess the trajectory of a central theme in American
history: the ongoing struggle for racial equity.  We partnered with a
New York City high school teacher in designing a unit on debating
Derrick Bell and Critical Race Theory.  We describe this unit below,
but we would like to preface this summary by assuring you that –
contrary to the hysterical fears of right-wing politicians – no
students found these lessons anti-American, racist, divisive, or
emotionally disturbing.  To the contrary, the students learned a
great deal of history from this unit and came to see it as foolish,
even outrageous, that teaching about CRT was banned from many school
systems.

As we began to plan the unit certain things were clear: students
needed to learn about Bell’s ideas, life, experiences, and
intellectual turning points; the unit had to include resources and
information that explained CRT in a way that high school students
could understand; we needed to include a range of views on CRT from
those who support it, to scholars who critiqued it, to polemics
against it from the Right; and it was essential for students to
evaluate historical and current events and decide for themselves if
Critical Race Theory is, in fact, persuasive.   We were intentional
in our planning–this could not be a unit that explicitly or
implicitly steered students’ thinking in one way or another.  Our
goal was to enable students – with proper support and resources –
to discuss and debate CRT and its use as a tool for assessing key
patterns in American history, arriving at their own conclusions.  The
unit, therefore, gave students the tools to engage in this work.

We worked with an AP Government teacher at a large comprehensive
Brooklyn high school.  He taught this unit over three days to his
senior-level class, whose racial composition was 50% white, 29% Black,
14% Asian, and 7% Latinx.  The teacher was white.  Students
previously learned about racial conflict in the United States,
including lessons on slavery, Reconstruction, segregation, violence
against Black people, and resistance to each; this unit built on that
prior knowledge.  The readings and resources, though used here a
senior class, could be used in any high school class.

We established two Essential Questions to frame the unit: “To what
extent is backlash an inevitable response to Black Americans’ legal
and societal progress?” and “To what extent does Critical Race
Theory (CRT) provide an accurate framework for the US’s relationship
to and problems with race in the past and present?” These questions
challenged students to assess historical developments and CRT’s
validity as an overarching theory.  To help students answer these
questions, the lessons explored Bell’s central claim about the
permanence of racism in the United States, and the ways racism is
institutionalized.  We were mindful of planning a unit for high
school students and tailored our intended understandings about Bell
and CRT to that audience; we focused on Bell’s most important
argument about the endurance of racism and chose not to explore his
secondary arguments (such as his claim that fleeting moments of Black
progress only occur when they align with white self-interest).   At
the end of this unit students would understand the most important
component of a nuanced and complicated legal theory and, through
historical analysis, be able assess the extent to which it explained
the role of race and racism in the United States.

Students navigated a variety of resources including biographical
information on Derrick Bell, videos of scholars explaining CRT,
excerpts from Randall Kennedy’s critical essay on Bell, primary
sources focused on instances of progress and backlash in Black
history, and statistics and media reports on school segregation and
recent attempts to prohibit discussions of CRT in classrooms. 
Ultimately, students used all that they learned to evaluate CRT.  At
the unit’s end, students responded to two prompts: “To what extent
does history align with Bell’s ‘one step forward, two steps
back’ argument?” and “Indicate the extent which you agree with
the following statement: ‘Critical Race Theory accurately depicts
the impact of racism in the United States.’”  Additionally, the
students responded to a scenario addressing the New York State
Assembly’s proposal to ban discussions of Critical Race Theory from
schools, drawing upon information from the lessons to support their
positions.

Most students knew little about CRT before the unit began.  Four
recalled hearing of it but were not sure of its precise meaning. 
Their previous study of racial conflict in American history – from
slavery through and beyond the Jim Crow era– made them more open to
learning about this and understanding Bell’s views.  Three
surmised, based on prior study, that it was related to systemic
racism.  Students participated in discussions and group work,
volunteering to share their thoughts with their peers.  From the
first day of the unit, where students learned about Derrick Bell and
the origins and critiques of Critical Race Theory, takeaways included:
“Derrick Bell was one the first people to discuss this theory” and
“Racism is more than just how people talk to each other. It’s more
systemic.” Students were especially animated on Day Two, when they
watched video of North Dakota legislators debate banning CRT in
classrooms and worked in groups to apply CRT to pairs of historical
events.

Overall, students gained an understanding of the debate over Critical
Race Theory and the extent to which arguments and theories on the
permanence of racism in the US explain Black Americans’ struggles. 
Through historical analysis they made connections between events that
signified progress towards racial equality, such as the Fourteenth
Amendment, _Brown v. Board of Education_, and Obama’s election, and
the backlash that curtailed that progress–Jim Crow laws, massive
resistance, and the way Trump’s “birther” slander against
America’s first Black president helped make Trump a popular figure
on the right, paving the way for his presidential campaign and
ascendance to the presidency.  Seventy-five percent of the students
identified “one step forward, two steps back” as a trend over
time, claiming, for example, “I think throughout most events in
history involving race, there had been more setbacks than step
forwards for people of color.”  Of course, this pessimism merits
critical interrogation since such steps forward as the abolition of
slavery and Jim Crow were not followed by a “two steps” return to
that degree of racial oppression.  

Clearly, the CRT argument about the endurance of racism resonated with
many students who had come to political consciousness in a city where
there had been vocal opposition to Trump and his rhetoric of white
racial backlash. When asked if CRT accurately depicts the impact of
racism in the United States, about 75% of the students wholeheartedly
agreed that it does, positing, for example, “One of the main points
of CRT is that racism is fundamentally and deliberately worked into
our government and society, and I think that that is absolutely true
in the United States. A variety of factors, including healthcare
outcomes, educational attainment, average income, and incarceration
rates, all indicate that there is a disparity in opportunities offered
to white people versus people of color.”  

But on the other hand, twenty-five percent of the students took more
moderate stances, asserting, “Regression does happen but that does
not mean that substantial progress has not/ can't be made.”  Just
under a fifth of the class  aligned with Kennedy and his critique of
Bell.  One student, for example, stated, “While racism was
indubitably present in society, I don't completely agree with it being
embodied in law and government institutions because people have tried
making some progress by passing laws that would make people more
equal.” 

Learning about CRT did not offend students, and none felt pressured to
agree with Bell.   Students’ differences of opinion indicate that
this unit, which provided plenty of room for debate and discourse,
didn’t indoctrinate students.  Though the students’ views on
Bell/ CRT differed, evidence suggests that they found these ideas
intellectually stimulating and so were unanimous in their belief that
they should be taught.  The same student who critiqued CRT said,
“People have to be aware of darker aspects of history so they
remember those bad times and prevent them from happening; it
encourages understanding of each other.”  A classmate who agreed
with CRT’s assessment of US history connected what happens in
classrooms to society at large, stating, “I would say that for the
sake of our democracy, it is always better to err on the side of
protecting free speech.  This is especially true when it comes to
students and teachers.” 

As students became more familiar with the critique of American racism
offered by Bell and CRT and with the movement to ban CRT in schools,
they grew more vocally critical of that movement, which they saw as
“an attack on unbiased education” and proof that “the system has
been working against people of color up until even now.”  They
reacted passionately when asked how they felt about New York
considering such a ban, saying, “It’s not right to pass laws
saying we can’t learn about it in school” and “CRT is as much a
part of history as everything else we learn about.  We should learn
about virulent racism happening at the same time as all these other
events.”  Students also questioned, “What is education if we
erase history?”

None of the students’ comments disparaged the country or sought to
evoke white guilt. Rather, learning about CRT and historical evidence
that supports and contradicts it enabled students to better
investigate and understand events of the past and develop informed
conclusions about the present.  We observed a huge chasm between
anti-CRT polemics, such as that of North Dakota Representative Terry
Jones (R), who compared teaching CRT to “feeding our students…
poison,” (6) and our class sessions, where students were not
poisoned but intellectually stimulated by engaging in open discussion
and drawing their own evidenced-based conclusions.  Such open-minded
inquiry is, after all, a goal of historical and social studies
education.

Creating this unit and working with a high school teacher to implement
it demonstrated the possibilities and benefits of exploring Bell and
CRT’s claims about the permanence of racism in America.  Students
learned about figures and ideas omitted from their textbooks and most
curricula and engaged with multiple and diverse resources.   Did
every student agree with Bell? No.  Did that indicate that the unit
failed?  Of course not -- and such disagreement attests that the
lesson succeeded in fostering debate.  Did students walk away with a
better sense of Bell and CRT’s critical take on racism and the way
it might be applied to US historical events?  Certainly.  Whether or
not students’ analysis of racism aligned with Bell’s, they had the
time and space to think deeply about CRT, its roots, and the debate
over its place in education in the last year and a half. 

If classroom realities matter at all to those governors and state
legislators who imposed CRT bans on schools, they ought to be
embarrassed at having barred students in their states from the kind of
thought provoking teaching we witnessed in this project.

NOTES:

(1) Though CRT has been applied to analyses of educational inequities,
it is not a pedagogical practice or topic that most American students
encountered in K-12 education prior to this.  As Stephen Sawchuk
wrote in _Education Week_, “much scholarship on CRT is written in
academic language or published in journals not easily accessible to
K-12 teachers.”  (Stephen Sawchuk, “What Is Critical Race Theory,
and Why Is It Under Attack?,” _Education Week_, May 18,
2021, [link removed].)

(2) “Tributes,” Derrick Bell Official Site, 2014, accessed August
10, 2022, [link removed]
[[link removed]].

(3) Randall Kennedy, _Say It Loud!: On Race, Law, History, and
Culture_ (New York: Pantheon Books, 2021), 45.

(4) Kennedy, 50-51.

(5) Kennedy, 44.

(6) Maddie Biertempfel, “North Dakota Senate passes bill banning
critical race theory, heads to governor’s desk,” KX News, November
12,
2021, [link removed].

 

REFERENCES:

“Black [Americans] Upbeat about Black Progress, Prospects.” Pew
Research Center, January 12,
2010.  [link removed].

Calixte, Christiane. “Take it from a high schooler who’s actually
learned about CRT: Adults need to chill out.”  _Washington Post_,
January 14,
2022.  [link removed].

Cobb, Jelani. “The Man Behind Critical Race Theory.” _The New
Yorker_, September 13,
2021.  [link removed].

“Critical race theory: Experts break down what it actually
means.” _Washington Post_, July 13,
2021.  [link removed].

Delgado, Richard & Stefancic, Jean, eds.. _The Derrick Bell
Reader._  New York: NYU Press, 2005.

Fortin, Jacey.  “Critical Race Theory: A Brief History.” _New
York Times_, November 8,
2021.  [link removed].

“Most Americans Say Trump’s Election Has Led to Worse Race
Relations in the U.S.” Pew Research Center, December 19, 2017.
 [link removed].

Schwartz, Sarah.  "Who's Really Driving Critical Race Theory
Legislation?: An Investigation." _Education Week_, July 19,
2021. [link removed].

Stout, Cathryn and Wilburn, Thomas. “CRT Map: Efforts to restrict
teaching racism and bias have multiplied across the U.S.” Chalkbeat,
updated February 1,
2022.  [link removed].

_Stacie Brensilver Berman is a visiting assistant professor in
NYU's department of Teaching and Learning, and author of Teaching
LGBTQ+ History in High School Classes Since 1990 (2021)._

_Robert Cohen is a professor of social studies and history at NYU,
whose most recent books are Rethinking America's Past; Howard Zinn's
A People's History of the United States in the Classroom and
Beyond (2021), co-authored with Sonia Murrow, and With Liberty and
Justice For All? The Constitution in the Classroom (2022) co-edited
with Steven Steinbach and Maeva Marcus_

_Ryan Mills in Assistant Principal for social studies. Edward R.
Murrow High School Brooklyn, New York_

_History News Network's mission
[[link removed]]is to help put
current events into historical perspective. Given how public opinion
is shaped today, whipsawed emotionally on talk shows this way and that
in response to the egos of the guests, the desire for ratings by the
hosts and the search for profits by media companies and sponsors,
historians are especially needed now. They can help remind us of the
superficiality of what-happens-today-is-all-that-counts journalism._

* Critical Race Theory
[[link removed]]
* teaching
[[link removed]]
* teaching history
[[link removed]]
* History
[[link removed]]
* Racism
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: Portside
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: United States
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a
  • Email Providers:
    • L-Soft LISTSERV