Translate

Wednesday, February 25, 2026

UT's restructuring makes Texas less inclusive and more divided, by Alicia Perez-Hodge

 Friends:

I urge you to read this opinion on the dissolution of Mexican American and Latino Studies (MALS) at UT written by a highly respected member of the Latino community in Austin, Alicia Perez-Hodge. Our community is clearly concerned about these developments.

-Angela Valenzuela


By ,Guest columnist
A student walks through the University of Texas campus in 2023. A recent announcement to effectively end Mexican American Studies and related fields of study at UT came without meaningful discussion with those most affected, Alicia Perez-Hodge writes.Aaron Martinez/Austin American-Statesman

In South Texas public schools, I learned about Robert E. Lee and George Washington and the histories of the United States and Texas. Yet not a single lesson addressed Mexican American history — our Indigenous and African roots or the men and women who shaped this country. It was as if only Anglos made history.

It was only when I took an ethnic studies course in college that I discovered Mexican Americans have a history — one deeply intertwined with that of other communities. Later, when a career move took me to New England, that education proved invaluable. That knowledge shaped my professional life and prepared me to work with diverse communities.

I share this experience because the University of Texas now risks denying today’s students the same opportunity. UT President Jim Davis recently announced a proposal that will effectively end Mexican American Studies and related fields of study at the university. The proposal consolidates the Department of Mexican American and Latina/o Studies (MALS), the Department of African and African Diaspora Studies, the Department of American Studies, and the Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies into a single department called the Department of Social and Cultural Analysis.

In practical terms, the restructuring will result in funding cuts for staffing and research as well as the elimination of programs, threatening decades of academic achievement that made UT a leading center for the study of Mexican Americans and Latino communities. Davis has framed the restructuring as necessary to maintain public trust and fulfill the university’s mission.

For Latino and African American communities, the consolidation has the opposite effect. It neither builds trust nor fulfills the university’s responsibility to serve a state where communities of color are the majority. Among those most affected are MALS and its affiliates, including the Latino Research Institute (LRI) and the Center for Mexican American Studies (CMAS).

RELATED: The University of Texas is clipping the wings of students of color


CMAS, established more than 50 years ago in response to student and community advocacy, plays a crucial role in advancing research and public understanding of Mexican American and Latino histories, cultures and contributions. MALS, founded 15 years ago, has a national reputation as a high-caliber academic department that brings distinction to the university. These programs are not redundant or fragmented. They are the result of decades of scholarship, community engagement and institutional development.

Equally troubling is the lack of meaningful consultation with those most affected by this proposal. Davis has disregarded public input from major stakeholder communities. Two months ago, the Latino Coalition for Excellence in Higher Education — a consortium that includes the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Hispanic Advocates and Business Leaders of Austin (HABLA), the Latino Texas Policy Center and the Texas Association of Mexican American Chambers of Commerce — formally requested dialogue. The Texas Exes Hispanic Alumni Network also sent a letter in November.

Both groups expressed a willingness to collaborate with university leadership to ensure the continued vitality of Latino Studies. To date, these communications have been ignored, signaling a troubling lack of engagement with communities that have long supported and invested in UT.

This consolidation appears politically motivated, aligning with state and national efforts to restrict diversity, equity and inclusion. Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and President Donald Trump have all advocated eliminating what they label “divisive” academic programs. These efforts disproportionately target the study of Mexican Americans, Latinos and other minority communities.


Consolidating or diluting departments centered on communities of color — while leaving other academic fields intact — sends a message about whose histories are valued. More than 11 million Texans identify as Latino, representing about 40% of the state’s population and 53% of students in Texas public schools. To marginalize the academic study of these communities amounts to institutional racism. "Education without representation" is wrong and must be challenged. 


Davis’ announcement raises serious questions about process, transparency and accountability. Who conducted the review cited in his memo? What evidence supports claims of “fragmentation” and “inconsistency”? Why have affected faculty, students, alumni and community organizations been excluded from meaningful participation?

The proposed consolidation threatens not only specific departments, but the university’s commitment to academic excellence and public service. Community organizations, alumni and advocates urge university leadership to halt the consolidation, engage with stakeholders and uphold the integrity of programs that reflect and serve the people of Texas. Only through open dialogue and accountability can the university maintain public trust and fulfill its mission to all Texans.
Alicia Perez-Hodge is a long time community advocate, co-founder of HABLA and district VII director of LULAC in Austin.

Academic Freedom Under Revision at Texas A&M: Family Values, Forbidden Fields, and the Closure of Women’s and Gender Studies, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Academic Freedom Under Revision at Texas A&M: Family Values, Forbidden Fields, and the Closure of Women’s and Gender Studies

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.
February 25, 2026

The Republican Party frequently invokes “family values” and moral order as justification for policies targeting LGBTQ+ communities, trans youth, and gender-related scholarship. Yet public rhetoric often collides with private reality—as seen in widely reported spikes in activity on Grindr—an LGBTQ social networking platformduring Republican National Conventions. According to Keller (2024), the app crashed during the RNC in Milwaukee (also see McFall, 2025).

To be clear, I am not suggesting that Texas Republicans themselves are part of this apparently large group of Grindr users. Sexual orientation exists across all political affiliations. The issue is not who uses a dating app. The issue is that the party apparatus leans into anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric and policy agendas while evidence suggests that sexuality is far more politically diverse and privately complex than its public messaging implies. That contradiction is what deserves scrutiny.

That tension is instructive as Texas A&M eliminates its Women’s and Gender Studies program, ending a field of study that had been part of the university since 1979 (Blinder, 2026; Panigrahi, 2026). Students currently enrolled may finish their degrees, but no new students can enter the program. At the same time, new policies restrict how race, gender, and sexuality can be discussed in classrooms unless explicitly approved by university leadership.

This is not an isolated administrative decision. It reflects a broader pattern across several states where women’s and gender studies, LGBTQ+ studies, and diversity initiatives are being reduced or dismantled under the language of neutrality and oversight. What is framed as restoring balance is, in practice, narrowing inquiry.

The deeper issue is governance. When elected officials condemn LGBTQ+ communities publicly while private behavior reveals a far more complex reality, and when universities respond by limiting academic exploration of gender and sexuality, the message is clear: this is less about morality than about control—including, perhaps, members within their own party where lived realities do not always align neatly with official policy platforms.

Academic freedom does not disappear all at once. It contracts. Programs close. Courses are reviewed. Speech is pre-approved. And gradually, the boundaries of legitimate knowledge are redrawn by political actors rather than scholars.

When one of the nation’s largest public universities eliminates a decades-long academic program focused on gender and power, it signals more than curricular change. It signals a struggle over who decides what can be studied—and ultimately, what kind of democracy we are willing to sustain.

References

Blinder, A. (2026, January 30). Texas A&M ends women’s studies and overhauls classes over race and gender. The New York Timeshttps://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/30/us/texas-am-gender-ethnic-womens-studies-academic-freedom.html

Keller, E. (2024, July 19). Grindr dating app crashes in Milwaukee during RNC: Everything we know, Newsweekhttps://www.newsweek.com/grindr-app-crashes-milwaukee-rnc-1927750

McFall, M. R. (2025, Aug. 14) Are gay dating apps threatening to expose republicans? What we know, Newseek. https://www.newsweek.com/gay-lgbtq-dating-app-republicans-supreme-court-marriage-2113522

Panigrahi, E. (2026, February 24). Texas A&M’s women’s and gender studies closure signals a wider crackdown on academic freedom. Ms. Magazine. https://msmagazine.com/2026/02/24/texas-am-women-gender-studies-academic-freedom-dei-diversity-equity-inclusion/


Texas A&M’s Women’s and Gender Studies Closure Signals a Wider Crackdown on Academic Freedom

PUBLISHED 2/24/2026 by Emersen Panigrahi


Texas A&M Aggies athletes cheer on a teammate in the Women’s 500 Yard Freestyle Finals during the Division I Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships on March 21, 2024, in Athens, Ga. (Alex Slitz / NCAA Photos via Getty Images)

In many parts of the U.S., students and professors are left navigating a rapidly narrowing space for inquiry and expression

Texas A&M University announced late last month it will eliminate its women’s and gender studies program, effective immediately. At the same time, the university enacted new policies that heavily restrict classroom discussions related to diversity, race and gender, unless a course has been previously approved by the campus president. While students currently enrolled in the women’s and gender studies program will be able to complete their degrees, new students can no longer enroll.

With over 81,000 students, 17 colleges and schools on its main campus, three campuses across the state (plus several satellite locations, including one in Washington, D.C.) and more than 140 undergraduate degrees, Texas A&M is one of the nation’s largest public university systems. It began instruction in 1876 and began offering women’s and gender studies courses in 1979. The elimination of the program marks the abrupt end of a decades-long academic offering—and, coupled with new and dangerous policies regarding race, gender and sexuality, sets a disturbing precedent and furthers a chilling, anti-education agenda.
Timeline: How A&M Dismantled Gender and LGBTQ+ Programs, Step by Step

March 2023 — At West Texas A&M (Texas A&M’s northernmost campus), university president Walter Wendler blocked an on-campus drag show. The student group hosting the show, Spectrum WT, filed a lawsuit in response. The case remained active until recently, when federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk upheld the university’s decision, ruling the school did not violate the First Amendment.

August 2024 — Texas A&M stopped offering gender-affirming care to their students, forcing those receiving care to seek providers elsewhere.

November 2024 — The university eliminated its LGBTQ+ studies minor, previously housed within the women’s and gender studies program.

February 2025 — Texas A&M’s Board of Regents (all appointed by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott) attempted to ban drag shows across system campuses. This particular ban was temporarily blocked.

September 2025 — A&M’s university president Mark A. Welsh III fired lecturer Dr. Melissa McCoul following a classroom dispute over a lesson on gender identity. McCoul is now suing the university, alleging violations of her free speech and due process rights.

November 2025 — As a result of a unanimous Board of Regents decision, the university reviewed more than 5,400 course syllabi, cut six courses entirely, granted 48 special exceptions, and required hundreds more to be modified.

January 2026 — Texas A&M announced it would eliminate its women’s and gender studies program.

From Florida to Ohio to Texas, the Same Playbook Is Unfolding

Texas A&M is not alone. Across the United States, institutions including New College of Florida, Wichita State University and the University of Toledo have reduced or eliminated women’s and gender studies programs. Hundreds of universities have also scaled back or rebranded diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in response to political pressure and new state laws.

The closure of Texas A&M’s program reflects a broader national trend: mounting restrictions on how gender, race and sexuality can be studied and discussed in public higher education. For students and faculty, these changes reshape not only what can be taught, but what kinds of scholarship and inquiry are permitted on campus. The elimination of a long-standing academic program at one of the country’s largest public universities signals how quickly these shifts can take hold, and how widely they may spread.

Being concerned is no longer enough. It’s time for us to stand up and actively protect these programs.

Students, educators and advocates are increasingly being asked to document and challenge the dismantling of academic programs and protections across the country.

Ms. Classroom wants to hear from educators and students being impacted by legislation attacking public education, higher education, gender, race and sexuality studies, activism and social justice in education, and diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Cue: a new series from Ms., ‘Banned! Voices from the Classroom.’ Submit pitches and/or op-eds and reflections (between 500-800 words) to Ms. contributing editor Aviva Dove-Viebahn at adove-viebahn@msmagazine.com. Posts will be accepted on a rolling basis.

Tuesday, February 24, 2026

SEAT and the Student Bill of Rights: Texas Youth Shaping the Democratic Present, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

SEAT and the Student Bill of Rights: Texas Youth Shaping the Democratic Present

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

February 24, 2026

It’s time for another shout-out to the extraordinary young people of SEAT (Students Engaged in Advancing Texas) and their powerful Student Bill of Rights. I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: people need to know about this work. 

In my 25 years as a policy analyst and advocate at the Texas Legislature, I have never witnessed youth activism at the scale and intensity that I see today. 

I would even venture to say that we are living through a historic high point of youth engagement in our state. 

This level of organizing did not happen overnight. It reflects decades of groundwork, mentorship, courage, and persistence—and SEAT is just one of many remarkable youth formations. It does not even include the powerful activism of young leaders connected to LULAC, the NAACP, the Texas Freedom Network, and other organizations across Texas.

Congratulations to SEAT for developing what is arguably one of the most important democratic documents to emerge from Texas youth in recent years.

Crafted by students, for students, the Student Bill of Rights reminds us of something too often forgotten in public education debates: young people are not passive recipients of policy. They are primary stakeholders in their own futures.

In a political climate marked by book bans, attacks on truthful curriculum, punitive discipline practices, and the narrowing of student voice, this declaration reframes education as a site of agency, dignity, and collective care. It calls for high-quality public education, holistic well-being, freedom of expression, and truthful, critical curriculum—not as partisan demands, but as democratic necessities.

By linking student agency to public accountability and insisting that all students be served regardless of identity, history, or circumstance, SEAT articulates a vision of education rooted in belonging rather than exclusion. This Bill of Rights does more than outline aspirations; it models civic leadership in real time, reminding Texas that students are not merely the leaders of tomorrow—they are shaping the democratic present.

Follow them on Twitter and Instagram @studentsengaged 

Sending y’all much love. 🩷🩷🩷

Student Bill of Rights

SEAT (Students Engaged in Advancing Texas) | Adopted Jan. 6, 2025



Students Deserve:


  1. Agency to make decisions in education

  2. High quality public education for all

  3. Safe and welcoming school environments conducive to growth

  4. Freedom of expression in a pluralistic, multicultural democracy

  5. Holistic student care to support health and well-being

  6. Truthful, critical, and substantive curriculum

  7. To be leaders of today, not only of tomorrow

  8. Streamlined and personalized pathways for lifelong learning




SEAT believes all students and children shall be served under this bill, no matter their identity, lived experiences, disciplinary histories, or present interactions with public and educational institutions. All students deserve equal and positive treatment under the rule of law and this declaration of rights.


This Bill of Rights was crafted by the SEAT Roundtable Collective in Aug. 2024 - Jan. 2025 as a declaration for students, by students. We deserve a seat at the table.

View online: studentsengaged.org/bill-of-rights


  1. Agency to make decisions in education.

Having a seat at the table means students reclaiming ownership of our education, giving us power and freedom in the everyday social situations that impact our school experiences, and thus, our futures. We shall not be tokenized as an outsider or subjugated as political pawns in decisions most impacting us. Our voices have power.

Students are the primary stakeholders in education, but we are traditionally excluded from policy-making decisions in school boards and the state legislature. Officials cannot best represent students when they cultivate a "power over" relationship instead of "power with" students.

School boards directly influence education policy about students, often without us. These governing bodies should sufficiently include students in conversations, roundtables, workshops, committees, and most importantly, on the same dais where they legislate.

  1. High quality public education for all.

Education is a cornerstone of community and democracy. Students spend a significant portion of our childhood and adolescence in a classroom, and we want it to mean something for us. We want education to be a highlight of our youth and fulfill our sense of confidence.

Public schools must serve everyone to the fullest extent, throughout rural and urban communities, regardless of socioeconomic disparities. Students should face no entry barriers to accessing a quality education meant to help us learn and grow alongside peers. We can address chronic absenteeism by taking measures to uphold quality education.

Strong teachers help shape strong students. Our student experiences are defined by educators’ working experiences. We must invest in a workforce of educators who are duly committed to students, highly competent, and sufficiently compensated for teaching demands.

Trust is critical to students’ relationships with adults at school. Students should feel that our educators and administrators care about our needs as individuals, not merely as numbers or written records. Retention of educators and cultivating a school community of joy serves everyone.

The quality of facilities significantly influences students’ desire to attend and thrive at school. Students deserve functioning facilities with prime infrastructure, free from dangers to student health, including excessive temperatures, harmful substances, or biohazards.

Students deserve the right to school libraries that provide access to resources and knowledge, in the form of books, the Internet, guidance by librarians, and more. Libraries and classrooms shall be boundless for fostering exploration, imagination, and possibility.

Schools should be a support system meant to break cycles of marginalization. Not all families can or want to be involved in fostering a student’s educational trajectory. Education systems must be accountable to helping first-generation or dropout-prone students thrive, despite any potential barriers like wealth or citizenship status.

  1. Safe and welcoming school environments conducive to growth.

When students enter school each day, we should not fear gun violence, bullying, harassment, or a prison sentence. School should support students coming as we are, with limited English proficiency or in proximity to the impact of substance abuse. Schools can make a difference in a student’s life if it becomes a central goal for education.

Gun violence is a public health epidemic and a reality for Generation Z and Alpha. These cycles of violence do not need to be a broken record. We are ready to turn the page toward safe storage measures and preventing guns from ending up in the hands of anyone in crisis or who has made threats of violence toward themself or others.

Let’s educate, not incarcerate. Student discipline must improve situations, not worsen them. School officials have the subconscious power to permanently affect a student’s life trajectory. Instead of punitive alternative programs, racially biased to involve students of color, restorative practices can help shatter the school-to-prison pipeline.

The carceral state disproportionately harms marginalized youth and establishes no accountability. Incarceration costs excessive public dollars and too often repeats with recidivism. We must invest in students’ future as leaders, not victims of a broken juvenile system.

Education systems should enforce contemporary, comprehensive anti-discrimination policies that protect all students. We can cultivate compassion in school culture for students to best learn and grow skills needed in adulthood.

Ensuring schools take proactive measures to prevent drug abuse and support affected students is essential for fostering overall student well-being. Actions by school and public officials, instead of complicity or roundabout attempts at solutions, can contribute to safer educational environments.

Bilingual education should serve students from a variety of language backgrounds. Texas is a multilingual state. Our education system should empower, not shame, native tongues and language learning.

Children are one of the most disabled groups of people. Disabled and neurodivergent students should not be unfairly punished or judged for behavioral actions considered outside of normative societal standards.

When environments are not safe, students should be aware of processes for reporting issues or talking to trusted adults who will advocate for us. School professionals should hold responsibility toward protecting students with utmost integrity regardless of school pressures.

  1. Freedom of expression in a pluralistic,
    multicultural democracy.

To freely express ourselves is core to shaping our lives and bettering the future. Texas is an enormous state with rich culture. Our diversity makes us great. Schools must empower students to be the best of ourselves.

Discriminatory dress codes, targeting students across gender norms and ethnic-cultural styles, distract from education and harm self-esteem. The right to our own bodies is critical, and the State belongs away.

Generation Z is the most openly LGBTQ+ generation in history. Names and pronouns are centermost in our lives. Regardless of what we call ourselves, it matters more that others refer to us in affirming ways. To support student well-being and social confidence, we must embolden inclusive community values of respect that do not give power to deadnaming and misgendering.

As lawmakers seek to blur the separation of Church and State, public schools must support students secularly and without enforcing religious customs. We should, however, learn of diverse world faiths and defend students’ individual right to religious liberty. Nationalism, especially bolstering religious doctrine, undermines faith and education.

Students clubs, organizations, and athletics should be spaces for us to explore interests, engage in social causes, and create community. Students should have equal access to lead or participate in clubs. School publications should respect student voices without censorship.

When power structures aren’t right, students deserve the unfettered ability to challenge oppression, especially when imposed by authority. Our right to assemble and petition must be protected, not trampled.

  1. Holistic student care to support health and well-being.

Entering school each day, students bring a reflection of our personal lives into the classroom. Regardless of socioeconomic status, wraparound services fulfill student needs and steer us on a track to success, fostering better social and learning environments for all.

From food to healthcare, including breakfast and menstrual products, schools must fulfill our basic needs before expecting us to perform socially and academically. These services should be provided to students at no individual cost and without stipulations.

Schools should have nurses, sufficiently equipped with inhalers, epipens, insulin, overdose medication, and other necessary, potentially life-saving measures for students. All students should be generally knowledgeable of resource locations and how we can access them in an emergency.

Amid a youth mental health crisis, school counseling and seamless pathways to additional services are vital for vulnerable students to navigate trauma, substance abuse, adverse experiences, and everyday dilemmas.

Neighborhood transportation between home and school is necessary to ensure student safety and breaking barriers for students and families on financial, physical, or workplace bases.

After-school tutoring and programs, both social and extracurricular, are vital to narrowing the gap between student performance, well-being, learning loss, and at-home factors contributing to a student’s situation at school. Schools should be a community of care for students.

  1. Truthful, critical, and substantive curriculum.

Students must hold agency to indiscriminately access and utilize our education in ways that affirm our identities and help us discover the unfamiliar. Teaching to an unjust status quo is a disservice to the youngest generation of Texans.

Students deserve the right to educate ourselves about sensitive topics, especially when politically contentious. To foster a love for reading and learning, no one should decide for students what we can or cannot read. We must hold the individual agency to decide which books we read.

We should trust the expertise of librarians and educators to curate age-relevant and educationally-suitable collections. Interest groups and politicians with ulterior motives should not hold greater authority over the autonomy of all families in a school system.

Curricula should represent Texas’ vast diversity in culture and ideas. We must teach the truth, with fact-based evidence and critical perspectives. Commonplace myths and false narratives make dangerous impressions on students and hold no educational suitability. If we are to act as critical thinkers, we must not lie to students. Truth must be the norm.

Education should be liberating and life-giving. To facilitate freedom, we must teach standards, not standardization. Rote memorization for heavy testing and data collection treats students homogeneously. Instead, we must give life to each students’ uniqueness, curiosity, and passion.

  1. To be leaders of today, not only of tomorrow.

To best navigate the complexities of today’s Texas, students must be equipped with the education necessary for becoming a generation of success, impact, and excellence. We must be prepared for our futures so we determine and shape our trajectories. Critical thinking is crucial to becoming an active member of society.

Our 13 years in K-12 schools must adequately prepare us with resources and curriculum for financial and medical literacy. Learning to file taxes, buy a car or home, and understand legal contracts instills confidence in our socioeconomic lives. Comprehensive fact-based sex ed curriculum, with an emphasis on consent, is necessary to reduce domestic violence and STDs. This is how we build a society with competency and respect for one another.

With the integral presence of the Internet in contemporary life, we must learn responsible digital citizenship. Social media is a valuable tool in which we must safeguard our rights for free use. Big Tech should be held accountable for dangers posed to youth. Empowering students with multimedia literacy and judgment of reality facilitates a more informed, cooperative, and engaged society.

We must actualize power for civic leadership, navigating interpersonal conflict, and building professional relationships. We must be aware of our elected officials at all levels of government and understand that we play a critical role as a Fourth Branch of government. Learning how to engage in civic institutions through voting and public engagement will help us shape, not merely inherit, the world we wish to live in.

  1. Streamlined and personalized pathways
    for lifelong learning.

Education is a life-long endeavor. Opportunities for Higher Education must be affordable, accessible, and student-oriented.

There is no singular or correct path for students. Education should challenge us to be the best of ourselves while simultaneously handing us the keys to our own academic, social, and professional journeys.

Districts should provide classroom instruction and hands-on experiences for learning Career and Technical Education.

K-12 education should prepare us for post-school opportunities that empower and encourage excellence. We should have opportunities to explore Higher Education through online research and firsthand experiences. Academic advising should be available to all students.

University finances should hold students in their best interest. We should be given an educational experience worth our investment and be spared from malicious billing practices. Financial aid should ensure any student with the interest of pursuing higher education is guaranteed such opportunity.


Monday, February 23, 2026

Academia Cuauhtli, the Eagle’s Vision, and the Architecture of Belonging: Education in the Shape of a Circle, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Academia Cuauhtli, the Eagle’s Vision, and the Architecture of Belonging: Education in the Shape of a Circle

by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

February 23, 2026

In “Academia Cuauhtli and the Eagle: Danza Mexica and the Epistemology of the Circle,” co-authored with Emilio Zamora and Brenda Rubio, we examine what it means to build Academia Cuauhtli as more than a Saturday school program in Austin, Texas. We frame it as an effort to rethink education itself.

The eagle’s vision represents the ability to see in all directions at once—expansively and relationally. For those of us working in community, it reminds us that while no single person can carry all the knowledge required to sustain an ambitious initiative like Academia Cuauhtli—with its Summer School program, parent development component, and curricular writing work—together, we can. 

It also symbolizes the aspirations we collectively hold for the children, families, and community in our care, alongside the disciplined precision with which the eagle, from great heights, fixes its gaze and moves with intention. Analytical clarity. This is what we want for all children—especially in this moment of chaos and uncertainty—so that they may see their world clearly, act with purpose, and rise with confidence rather than confusion.

Access full article here.

At the heart of this work is the circle. It is best exemplified by Danza Mexica or Aztec "dance," connoting not performance, but ceremony and a way of knowing and being in the world, including in educational spaces like Academia Cuauhtli about which I have previously blogged over the years.

In Danza Mexica, individuals form into a circle or concentric circles depending on the size of the group. Movement unfolds collectively. No one stands in front. No one stands above or below. Everyone faces inward toward a shared center—toward memory, spirit, healing, ancestors, and community.

The form itself encodes reciprocity, relationality, and a shared, sacred purpose.

This stands in contrast to the dominant architecture of schooling.

Most classrooms operate through vertical authority structures. Knowledge flows from expert to novice. Students are ranked, sorted, and compared. Time is segmented into benchmarks and testing cycles. Culture is often treated as enrichment rather than foundation.

The circle disrupts this logic.

An epistemology of the circle understands knowledge as generative and co-constructed rather than extractive or subtractive. It recognizes the body as a site of learning. It treats memory as living presence. It invites families, community members, scholars, and children into shared intellectual space. It refuses the idea that culture is peripheral to academic rigor (Colin, 2014).

For us at Academia Cuauhtli, the circle is also a form of pedagogy. It is history enacted through rhythm and specific movements (dance steps) across various ceremonies preserved throughout time. It is language, philosophical concepts, and civic education carried in collective movement. It signals and affirms that children—especially those labeled as “English learners” and targeted by subtractive, deficit-driven discourses—stand within powerful knowledge systems that have survived conquest, colonization, and erasure.

The circle also carries political meaning.

In a moment when ethnic studies programs are dismantled, faculty governance is constrained, and curriculum is policed under the language of “neutrality,” the circle offers another organizing principle. Education can be structured around relational accountability (or "responsibility") rather than surveillance. It can center dignity rather than deficit.

The eagle—or "Cuauhtli," in Nahuatl—symbolizes vision and strength. Yet the eagle rises from within the circle. Aspiration without community becomes isolation. Achievement without memory becomes assimilation.

The circle is not nostalgia. It is infrastructure, a third space situated between the over-prescribed role of the school and the under-prescribed role of the home in the education of our youth.

If we take educational equity seriously, we must ask: What would it mean to organize our classrooms, research partnerships, and institutions around relational centers instead of competitive hierarchies?

The answer does not begin with new mandates.

It begins with remembering—and practicing—the circle as a way of knowing and being in the world.

References

Colín, E. (2014). Indigenous education through dance and ceremony: A Mexica palimpsest. Palgrave MacMillan.

Valenzuela, A., Zamora, E., & Rubio, B. (2015). Academia Cuauhtli and the Eagle:" Danza Mexica" and the Epistemology of the Circle. Voices in Urban Education, 41, 46-56.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1074841.pdf



Congressman Joaquín Castro: Bearing Witness in the Dilley, Texas Detention Center, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Congressman Joaquín Castro: Bearing Witness in the Dilley, Texas Detention Center

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

February 23, 2026

When Joaquín Castro speaks about what he witnessed in Dilley, Texas, he is not speculating—he is bearing witness. He has reported that eight women are currently pregnant inside the South Texas Family Residential Center, a federal immigration detention facility funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and operated under contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Eight pregnancies unfolding behind barbed wire.

These women remain largely out of public view, their prenatal care subject to conditions we can only imagine. As Castro emphasized during his February 20 visit, detention centers are not designed to safeguard maternal health. They are designed to confine.

He has also raised serious concerns about CoreCivic, the private corporation operating the facility, citing failures to provide even basic dental and general medical care to those detained. BlackRock is its largest shareholder. The land and structures are owned by Target Hospitality. The City of Dilley neither owns nor manages the site.

Originally opened in 2014 for family detention, the center houses hundreds of migrants — primarily women and children — and has long faced scrutiny over health care, living conditions, and the well-being of children held there.

If routine medical care is already inadequate, what does that mean for women who require consistent prenatal monitoring, proper nutrition, rest, and emergency responsiveness? What happens if complications arise?

The moral gravity deepens when we remember Liam Cornejo Ramos—and now two-month-old baby Juan Nicolas, reportedly suffering from bronchitis, who was recently deported to Mexico. An ill infant deported. Pregnant women detained. Children experiencing psychological, emotional, and physical harm in confinement.

A drawing shared with Congressman Castro by a child
during his visit who is currently held in detention.

These are not bureaucratic footnotes. They are human lives shaped by policy decisions and corporate contracts. When health care becomes secondary to detention quotas and profit margins, we move into dangerous territory.

Castro’s testimony pulls back the curtain. If these women are kept out of sight, they must not be kept out of conscience. Dilley is more than a point on a map. It is a test of our collective humanity. What we tolerate there, especially for pregnant women and sick children, will define us long after the headlines fade.