This blog on Texas education contains posts on accountability, testing, K-12 education, postsecondary educational attainment, dropouts, bilingual education, immigration, school finance, environmental issues, Ethnic Studies at state and national levels. It also represents my digital footprint, of life and career, as a community-engaged scholar in the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin.
I really liked this Sunday, October 27th interview on Buelna News involving Drs. Alvarao Huerta and Fernando Guerra. It's cool to have a level-headed conversation of the Latino vote in light of the appalling racism exhibited by Trump and his supporters.
For a look at the latest anti-Latino rhetoric mixed with other racist, misogynistic rude, and crude disgusting remarks that were spewed at Trump's rally at Sunday's Madison Square Rally, check out my earlier post titled, Puerto Rico is No Joke: A response to the racist remarks made by Tony Hinchcliffe. And let's not forget the F***ing Mexican remark Trump made in reference to providing funeral support that he promised to Vanessa Guillen's family whose daughter, was viciously murdered on a military base in Killeen, Texas, where she worked as a member of the military.
Geez, the beloved Vanessa Guillen was a F***ing Mexican to him?!!! What a creep! In any case, Trump's F***ing Mexican comment motivated this "Tacos and Law" conversation hosted by Gabriel Buelna that you can follow on Tik-Tok and Youtube. Will have to check them out more as they're covering important topics and sharing great Mexican food recipes (on Tik Tok). A bonus!😺
Huerta and Guerra dove into the idea of Latino males supporting Trump. First of all, what should not get misconstrued according to Dr. Guerra is that most Latinos actually support Harris. There is interesting detail nevertheless to Latino support for Trump. One is that at the national level, we witness a dynamic of assimilation by not pushing ethnic politics. I would call this a process of "acting white." Doing so is harder at the local level where ethnicity plays out differently.
Though not addressed, it presumably means that ethnicity is an identity and resource that those interested in politics must marshall. A third important and super interesting to me dynamic is that Latinos have a long history of being conservative such as in their opposition to abortion. Drilling down further, within this conservative group are people from Latin American countries with right-wing leadership who come to the U.S. and become conservative.
Dr. Huerta said "some are confused" and this is probably true in every election where the candidates
are examined closely and are or are not trusted. He also said that we shouldn't "vilify" them as a consequence. I totally agree. We must always be respectful, especially since not all have the same knowledge base even where shared values exist. Dr. Guerra pointed to the working class makeup of the Latino community and said that Latinas and Latinos should support Harris because she will be better for the working class than Trump.
I'm most concerned about the very real possibility of a segment of Blacks or Latinos hating who they are—perhaps unknowingly—in the quest either for acceptance by whites or for a white identity itself.
Clearly, this is a process that immigrants like Trump himself and his family have gone through such that they can be—neither immigrants nor the children of immigrants that they are—but rather "white people," even to the point of denying one's immigrant identity. But then this makes sense, too, since one cannot be easily hateful or spiteful toward a group that one maligns if one belongs to it.
Great interview! Loved the conversation. You can view it here for yourselves if you like.
Very good news and reason to be hopeful from Michelle H. Davis, writing for the LonestarLeft. The question is less about whether Texas will turn blue as it is about when this will happen. I certainly hope this happens in this election.
Data do suggest this real possibility. Perhaps Puerto Ricans can help us out here. According to 2021 data, there were 253,800 (see infogram) Puerto Ricans living in Texas. Relatedly, see my earlier post from this morning:Puerto Rico is No Joke: A response to the racist remarks made by Tony Hinchcliffewhich points to just how important the Puerto Rican vote is in this election.
Conversely, according to Davis, "Statewide, the Republican lead has decreased from -21.9% in 2000 to -5.7% in 2020, indicating Texas is becoming less Republican over time."
The short of it is that the political landscape is changing with Black and Brown folks poised to not just turn Texas blue, but also lead in meaningful ways for all Texans. Those resistant to changes like these fail to see just how interesting and exciting this could be, as well as what a privilege to live in this moment of not just a change, but a real shifting of our state into a multi-ethnic, multi-racial democracy. Thanks to Dr. Jenna Doane for sharing.
Yesterday, I posted a map I made on 270toWin on Twitter, which caused interesting reactions and a few ongoing debates. I made every toss-up state blue, Texas and North Carolina blue and asked, “What do you think?”
Some people pointed out my map was “wishful thinking,” while others rejoiced at Texas’s blueness. However, two groups of people wanted to let me know, “Texas will never be blue.” Those two groups were Democrats/Liberals who aren’t from Texas and Texas Republicans.
They’re wrong. Texas will be blue, it’s inevitable, it’s only a matter of when. And the data back it up. So, let’s talk about it.
Texas has moved further left in each presidential cycle for over a decade.
This graph presents the two-way vote margin in presidential elections across various regions in Texas for every presidential election since 2000.
Here are the key takeaways for Texas in presidential elections:
Harris County has transitioned from a Republican lead in 2000 to a Democratic lead in 2020.
Dallas County has seen a significant shift towards the Democrats since 2004.
Travis County (Austin) is shown as strongly Democratic, with the margin increasing over time.
Lower Rio Grande Valley and Southeast Texas show fluctuating patterns but lean Democratic.
Areas like the High Plains/Panhandle and West Texas have remained consistently Republican, though the margin has decreased slightly.
Statewide, the Republican lead has decreased from -21.9% in 2000 to -5.7% in 2020, indicating Texas is becoming less Republican over time.
Who determines the outcome of elections in Texas?
Each region is broken down by how much of the vote is determined by that region. For example, Houston contributed 14.5% of the total vote in 2020, whereas the Upper Rio Grande Valley contributed only 2.5%.
From this graph, we can discern about the blue areas:
In 2020, Houston accounted for 14% of Texas’ total vote.
Dallas accounted for 8.1% of Texas’ total vote.
Tarrant County accounted for 7.4% of Texas’ total vote.
San Antonio accounted for 6.8% of Texas’ total vote.
Austin accounted for 5.4% of Texas’ total vote.
Lower Rio Grande Valley accounted for 4.4% of Texas’ total vote.
Greater Austin accounted for 4% of Texas’ total vote.
Upper Rio Grande Valley accounted for 2.5% of Texas’ total vote.
So, let’s do the math. 52.6% of the votes in Texas come from majority blue areas, which doesn’t include Collin and Denton Counties, which may flip either this election cycle or in 2026. Of course, not all votes are blue votes, but this gives us a good starting point.
But didn’t Texas move further right in the last election (2022)?
First, 9.5 million Texans stayed home during the 2022 elections, which was a massive blunder on the Democrats’ part. However, it’s important to remember that 2022 was a midterm election, and 2024 was a presidential election. The two cannot and should not be compared. Data source: Texas Secretary of State
It’s a common misconception to draw direct comparisons between midterm and presidential year election data, as these electoral events often differ significantly in voter turnout and demographics.
Midterm elections historically see a drop in participation, particularly among groups that tend to vote Democratic, such as young voters and minority populations. Presidential elections, on the other hand, typically generate higher overall turnout, drawing a more diverse electorate that can more noticeably shift the political landscape.
Of course, the most significant driver is Republicans in Texas are hyper-focused on state elections, while Democrats primarily pay more attention to DC politics. We need to change this, but it likely won’t change overnight.
In Texas, the growing urban and suburban populations—areas that are increasingly leaning Democratic—are more likely to turn out in presidential years. This turnout contributes to the gradual leftward shift in the presidential cycle data.
While the 2022 midterm elections might suggest a swing toward the right, they do not necessarily indicate a reversal of the longer-term trend toward a more competitive political environment in Texas. The state’s changing demographics and the dynamics of presidential election years suggest that Texas’s journey toward becoming a blue state should be assessed through presidential election data rather than midterms alone.
Then there’s the demographic changes rapidly taking place in Texas.
Only 33% of children born in Texas in 2020 were white. 48% were Latino, another 13% were Black, and 5% were Asian. The only states/areas with a lower birthrate of white babies than Texas are California and New Mexico, both blue states. Washington, DC, also has a 33% white birth rate. DC is blue.
According to the 2020 Census, Texas is 39.8% white (non-Hispanic), 39.3% Hispanic, 11.8% Black, and 5.4% Asian. Of course, that doesn't include the half-million Texans who were undercounted. The only states/areas less white than Texas are Washington, DC, New Mexico, California, and Hawaii. Once again, all blue states.
Although Anglos (white, non-Hispanic) people only make up 38% of the population in Texas, during the 2022 election, they made up 62% of the vote. That was higher than in the 2020 election when Anglos made up 60% of the vote.
What we know about voter turnout in Texas is that the majority of non-white people vote blue, but we also know that the majority of voters are white, even though they are now a minority in this state.
The significance of Black and Hispanic voter turnout in Texas cannot be overstated. These demographic groups not only represent a substantial portion of the state's population but are also pivotal to the shifting political landscape in Texas. Given the demographic trends and the gradual blue shift in key urban and suburban areas, mobilizing these voters could very well tip the scales in favor of the Democrats in upcoming elections.
For Texas Democrats, the path to turning Texas blue involves a multifaceted approach that includes:
Developing targeted strategies to engage Black and Hispanic voters, focusing on issues that directly impact their communities and lives.
Continuing to fight against voter suppression tactics that disproportionately affect minority communities, ensuring equitable access to the ballot box.
Strengthening alliances with grassroots organizations, community leaders, and activists within Black and Hispanic communities to amplify their voices and concerns.
For Democrats aiming to turn Texas blue, recognizing and acting on the pivotal role of these communities is not just strategic; it's essential to achieving their political aspirations in the Lone Star State.
Will Texas ever be blue?
Of course it will, silly. It’s inevitable. At this point, it’s only a matter of when. All the data points to how Texas has shifted left consistently over the last decade, and how the demographics are increasingly blue.
But, when?
Political engagement and the strategies employed by the Democratic Party will play crucial roles in determining the timeline for Texas turning blue. Engaging underrepresented communities, particularly young voters, Black, and Hispanic populations, through grassroots organizing and digital campaigns, can significantly impact voter turnout. Moreover, addressing the issues that matter most to these groups, such as healthcare, education, and economic opportunities, can strengthen the Democratic base.
If you missed the article from James Bedwell a few months ago, I urge you to read it for further analysis of the shifting political landscape in Texas.
Even though Texas is trending toward a bluer and more equitable state, we can’t just sit on our hands waiting for it to happen. Everyone needs to be putting in the work, and they need to be putting in overtime work in the areas which are already blue (Houston, Dallas, Austin, etc).
In 2024, we’ll probably flip a few House seats, maybe even a Congressional seat or two, if the work is done. While flipping the Texas House is what it will take to completely shut down Republicans in Texas, we should be realistic that it may not happen this cycle. It will happen by 2028.
We’ll have to see how things go in the next few elections, but the data tells us by 2028, (or maybe 2032 if the Texas Democratic Party keeps fucking up), Texas will be blue. While the exact timing remains uncertain, the trends suggest that Texas is on a path towards becoming a battleground state, with the potential to lean blue in the near future. The outcome will depend on the efforts of those on the ground, the responses of the political parties, and the evolving priorities of the Texas electorate.
The data is on our side. All we have to do is show up. Vote early, vote often, and vote in every single election.
Comedian Tony Hinchcliffe has created a firestorm after telling a hugely offensive racist joke about Puerto Rico that that has appropriately and expectedly enraged Puerto Ricans. According to this NBC news articleby Nicole Acevedo and Ignacio Torres, this has brought to mind just how incompetently Trump's handled the devastating impacts of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico all of which has sparked outrage and disgust by the Puerto Rican community.
The Trump campaign is trying to walk this back but the cat is out of the bag. I'm not seeing how the press is covering the Latino community at large on this matter, but as a Latina and Mexican American myself, I similarly feel a deep sense of anger, rage, and disgust.
I've been to Puerto Rico. It's a beautiful island its people are affable, generous, and kind. I offer you more context for the gut-level response against this toxic racism, opposing not just Hinchcliffe, but Trump's campaign and Trump himself using racism as a way to stoke an irrational fear of Black and Brown people and immigrants in his race for the presidency. Clearly, both Trump and his running mate, Vance, think that this is a good strategy.
The backlash we are seeing now suggests that there are limits.
After all, recent Census data indicate that over 5.8 million Puerto Ricans live in the U.S.and many of them in swing states. Remember, as well, that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens. Fingers crossed that this parlays into a flexing of not just the Puerto Rican community's political power, but the Latino community, in general, with Latinas and Latinos determining who the next president of our nation will be.
You can view Hinchcliffe's comments in the video below. I also encourage you to read this article from the Center for Puerto Rican Studies in Hunter College, New York that responds to Hinchcliffe's racist remarks.
Protestor holding up a sign with the Puerto Rican flag on it that reads “Puerto Rico is no Joke – Want to Laugh – Burn Your Own” at a protest in response to the Seinfeld episode titled “The Puerto Rican Day” which aired on May 7, 1998. Carlos Ortiz Collection. Puerto Rican protest: CaOr_b21_f13_0004. Center for Puerto Rican Studies Library & Archives, Hunter College, CUNY.
The Center for Puerto Rican Studies (CENTRO) at Hunter College condemns the racist, demeaning, ignorant, and grossly offensive remarks made by Tony Hinchcliffe during the campaign rally for Trump at Madison Square Garden yesterday afternoon.
As Puerto Ricans, we know our influence and contributions are inseparable from the cultural fabric of the United States. Moreover, we assert that our value as a people both in the Archipelago and across the international Diaspora extends beyond our relationship with the United States. Referring to Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage in the ocean” speaks to the willful ignorance of the conditions facing Puerto Rico this very moment and for the last 126 years under US colonial rule. This comment raises deep concerns about the type of persons who may influence policy over Puerto Rico and its inhabitants. Historic and ongoing forms of colonialism continue to shape the history of Puerto Rico and the everyday lives of Puerto Ricans. Since 1898 , failed US policies have resulted in over a century of violent occupation, exploitation, disenfranchisement, dispossession, and oppression. Austerity policies and failed government initiatives are responsible for creating disastrous conditions and exacerbating them each day as the healthcare industry, education system, and basic infrastructure continue to crumble.
CENTRO finds the application of the stereotype that Latinos “love making babies” to be egregious, degrading, and insensitive. For decades, African-Americans, Indigenous people, and Puerto Ricans specifically, have served as a playground for eugenics and scientific experimentation. Puerto Rico has often been mischaracterized as suffering from overpopulation and the methods to address this supposed issue of overpopulation included the mass sterilization of Puerto Rican women and using poor Puerto Rican women as subjects for birth control trials without informed consent. Puerto Ricans have often been the subject of eugenic practices and rhetoric resulting in lifelong trauma, permanent bodily harm, and death.
As advocates of free speech, academic freedom, and freedom of expression, CENTRO deeply understands the need to prevent censorship across the public square, academia, college campuses, the arts, and the press. However, to take a national stage for the US Presidential race and utilize it to make light of imperialist wars, refugee crises in Latin America, and to spew racist rhetoric about multiple racial/ethnic groups is dangerous and harmful.
While Trump’s campaign has distanced itself from Tony Hinchcliffe’s remarks in a statement, saying “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign,” we demand that Trump condemn this characterization of Puerto Rico. Moreover, we demand that Trump explain what his position is on Puerto Rico, and what his policy priorities are for this U.S. territory, the home of more than 3 million U.S. citizens. We also call for the Republican Party at the national and state levels to clarify what their positions are on Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans in the United States.
Since our founding in 1973, CENTRO has remained the largest university-based research institute, library, and archive dedicated to the Puerto Rican experience in the United States precisely for the continued mischaracterization and ignorance that exists in the United States about Puerto Rico, its people, their history and their trajectory. On Saturday, October 26th, our television show Puerto Rican Voices won two New York Emmy Awards for our investigative documentaries examining the current conditions facing Puerto Rico. Over five episodes we covered the privatization of the power grid, the legacy of Tito Matos, the collapse of communities in Fajardo reliant on the ferry service, the effects of the AES coal plant on the environment and local community, and increased gentrification due to exploitative tax laws. This is all the context needed to understand the gravity of such disgraceful comments by Tony Hinchcliffe.
Love for Puerto Rico does not come from vacationing in an AirBnB that likely displaced a Puerto Rican family or a hotel that unlawfully blocks public access to the beach. Love for Puerto Rico is deeply rooted in a collective struggle, the ongoing fight for self-determination, a shared unique culture, and a lifelong commitment to the true meaning of community – whether showing up at the polls to vote or taking to the streets to make our voices heard.
As of the 2023 United States Census estimates, there are over 5.8 million Puerto Ricans living in the United States including key battleground states like Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Our Data Hub’s new voting tool dashboard showcases the citizen-voting age population for Puerto Ricans and other selected populations in the United States across all 50 states. This tool can be used as a resource to see the potential Puerto Ricans, Hispanics, and other selected racial and ethnic groups may have as a voting group, based on its share of the citizen, voting-age population.
Puerto Rican Heritage Month starts November 1st and Election Day is next Tuesday, November 5th, in both the United States and Puerto Rico. We highly encourage all eligible voters to make a plan and exercise your right to vote: ¡BORICUA: TU VOTO ES PODER! If you live within the United States, you can find information about voting locations and your voting rights here. If you live in Puerto Rico, you can find information about voting locations and your voting rights here.
Not sure if this is the "October surprise" in politics folks are looking for but I certainly hope that it changes some votes. Trump is not just pure fiction, but a monster created by NBC chief marketer John D. Miller who expresses deep regret for making Trump a household name that ultimately plummeted him into the White House.
Trump has mostly been great at serial bankruptcies, as opposed to being the great businessman that people believe him to be.
If you've not seen the Trump Town Hall on Univision, I encourage you to do so. Trump's audience was comprised of undecided Latino voters, including immigrants, from many different backgrounds, ranging from agricultural workers, construction workers, college students, and business professionals, all very clear and well-spoken in their questions of Donald Trump.
To say the least, he answered unclearly, dodged or failed to answer questions, gaslighted and insulted his audience, said January 6 was a "day of love," didn't walk back his statement in the debate with Kamala Harris about immigrants in Springfield eating cats and dogs. What planet is this guy on?
A more critical angle appears on MSNBC's Morning Joe with former Univision president Joaquin Blaya referring to it as an "infomercial" that brought in the audience as "props," who further criticizes the network for not doing any fact-checking. Blaya is concerned that the network was irresponsible in giving Trump a platform. A serious Town Hall, he says, would have featured journalist Jorge Ramos who is arguably the most respected Latino journalist in the nation. Why they didn't do this, I agree, is troubling.
To this, I would add that a serious Univision Town Hall on Latino undecided voters should conduct a poll of audience members following the debate if it is to make a real contribution to the process.
My sincere wish is that Kamala Harris also gets invited to an Univision Town hall to address either this same, or another similar audience and that Jorge Ramos moderate it.
Criticisms aside, the faces of the audience were priceless and telling, so opposite from other audiences he's been in front of where genuinely serious people are treating an "unserious" man seriously. To me, this means that even if they were intended to be "props," the audience clearly showed little love toward him, suggesting that they decided, as a whole, to effectively reject his role or presence in the performance. This could indicate that the audience found him unconvincing or simply unlikable, and as a result, distanced themselves from his part in the show.
Yes, Univision needs to stop aiding and abetting a fraudster, convicted felon, and media-created monster by giving him a platform, but I'm still glad that all of this came out. I hope this isn't too little too late.
NBC’s former chief marketer regrets selling an illusion that has had dire consequences for the world.
By John D. Miller | ContributorOct. 16, 2024, at 5:35 p.m.
I want to apologize to America. I helped create a monster.
For nearly 25 years, I led marketing at NBC and NBCUniversal. I led the team that marketed “The Apprentice,” the reality show that made Donald Trump a household name outside of New York City, where he was better known for overextending his empire and appearing in celebrity gossip columns.
To sell the show, we created the narrative that Trump was a super-successful businessman who lived like royalty. That was the conceit of the show. At the very least, it was a substantial exaggeration; at worst, it created a false narrative by making him seem more successful than he was.
In fact, Trump declared business bankruptcy four times before the show went into production, and at least twice more during his 14 seasons hosting. The imposing board room where he famously fired contestants was a set, because his real boardroom was too old and shabby for TV.
Trump may have been the perfect choice to be the boss of this show, because more successful CEOs were too busy to get involved in reality TV and didn’t want to hire random game show winners onto their executive teams. Trump had no such concerns. He had plenty of time for filming, he loved the attention and it painted a positive picture of him that wasn’t true.
At NBC, we promoted the show relentlessly. Thousands of 30-second promo spots that spread the fantasy of Trump’s supposed business acumen were beamed over the airwaves to nearly every household in the country. The image of Trump that we promoted was highly exaggerated. In its own way, it was “fake news” that we spread over America like a heavy snowstorm. I never imagined that the picture we painted of Trump as a successful businessman would help catapult him to the White House.
I discovered in my interactions with him over the years that he is manipulative, yet extraordinarily easy to manipulate. He has an unfillable compliment hole. No amount is too much. Flatter him and he is compliant. World leaders, including apparently Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, have discovered that too.
I also found Trump remarkably thin-skinned. He aggressively goes after those who critique him and seeks retribution. That’s not very businesslike – and it’s certainly not presidential. This week, he threatened to use the National Guard against Americans who oppose him, calling them the “enemy from within.”
I learned early on in my dealings with Trump that he thought he could simply say something over and over, and eventually people would believe it. He would say to me, “‘The Apprentice’ – America’s No. 1 TV show.” But it wasn’t. Not that week. Not that season. I had the ratings in front of me. He had seen and heard the ratings, but that didn’t matter. He just kept saying it was the “No. 1 show on television,” even after we corrected him. He repeated it on press tours too, knowing full well it was wrong. He didn’t like being fact-checked back then either.
At NBC, we promoted the show relentlessly. Thousands of 30-second promo spots that spread the fantasy of Trump’s supposed business acumen were beamed over the airwaves to nearly every household in the country. The image of Trump that we promoted was highly exaggerated. In its own way, it was “fake news” that we spread over America like a heavy snowstorm. I never imagined that the picture we painted of Trump as a successful businessman would help catapult him to the White House.
I discovered in my interactions with him over the years that he is manipulative, yet extraordinarily easy to manipulate. He has an unfillable compliment hole. No amount is too much. Flatter him and he is compliant. World leaders, including apparently Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, have discovered that too.
I also found Trump remarkably thin-skinned. He aggressively goes after those who critique him and seeks retribution. That’s not very businesslike – and it’s certainly not presidential. This week, he threatened to use the National Guard against Americans who oppose him, calling them the “enemy from within.”
I learned early on in my dealings with Trump that he thought he could simply say something over and over, and eventually people would believe it. He would say to me, “‘The Apprentice’ – America’s No. 1 TV show.” But it wasn’t. Not that week. Not that season. I had the ratings in front of me. He had seen and heard the ratings, but that didn’t matter. He just kept saying it was the “No. 1 show on television,” even after we corrected him. He repeated it on press tours too, knowing full well it was wrong. He didn’t like being fact-checked back then either.
Now America is facing a critical choice. Should this elderly, would-be emperor with no clothes, who is well known for stretching and abandoning the truth, be president again?
I spent 50 years successfully promoting television magic, making mountains out of molehills every day. But I say now to my fellow Americans, without any promotional exaggeration: If you believe that Trump will be better for you or better for the country, that is an illusion, much like “The Apprentice” was. Even if you are a born-and-bred Republican, as I was, I strongly urge you to vote for Kamala Harris. The country will be better off and so will you.
John D. Miller was the chief marketing officer for NBC and NBCUniversal, and retired as chair of the NBCUniversal Marketing Council.
Dr. Epstein also shares this in-depth, authoritative piece published by the National Education Association authored by leading scholar Dr. Christine Sleeter titled, What the Research Says About Ethnic Studies that is also great for the college classroom, together with works cited herein.
Why does it work? The short answer to this question is that all of these pieces collectively speak to the importance of a curriculum that not only fosters positive pro-social and communitarian values but as importantly, speaks to the situated experiences of the children and youth in the classroom.
The jury is in. Ethnic Studies changes lives and promotes college-going. The reason we have to struggle for it is therefore less about evidence than it is about politics. This is the story for quality, well-funded, and staffed Bilingual Education, too. Yet both offer such potential and richness to culture and society.
I remain encouraged by the ongoing activism around it.
This morning I read a Bible verse that says, "God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice, for they will be satisfied." (Matthew 5:6)
Regardless of religion, faith, or creed, this is who we are in the Ethnic Studies struggle. We hunger and thirst for justice. We advocate for our children, youth, and communities. We care deeply about the future. This shouldn't even be a struggle to begin with.
It's a lifelong quest that will most certainly continue until we are satisfied. In some sense, for those of us knee-deep into the movement, it already is. We love the work we do in our communities like we do at Academia Cuauhtli, our Saturday school in Austin, Texas, to offer a nurturing, culturally resonant pedagogy and vision for the future. At this school, we combine Ethnic Studies, Bilingual Education, and Indigenous pedagogy into a beautiful curriculum for elementary school youth that motivates and inspires. There needs to be more Academia Cuauhtlisin the world.
I've always said that someday, Ethnic Studies will just be called a "good education." Thanks, Dr. Epstein. I always appreciate a fresh reminder of why we do what we do.
A new study shows that students assigned to an ethnic studies course had longer-term improvements in attendance and graduation rates.
A ninth-grade ethnic studies class has a remarkably prolonged and strong positive impact on students, increasing their overall engagement in school, probability of graduating and likelihood of enrolling in college, according to a new study of a curriculum offered at the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD).
A new Stanford study found that students assigned to an ethnic studies course had longer-term improvements in attendance and graduation rates. (Image credit: Getty Images)
The findings, which follow up on earlier research by two of the authors indicating short-term academic benefits of the course, appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Sept. 6.
The study provides “compelling and causally credible evidence on the power of this course to change students’ life trajectories,” said Thomas S. Dee, a professor at Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE) and senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR).
Dee co-authored the study with former GSE doctoral student Sade Bonilla, now an assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and Emily K. Penner, an assistant professor at the University of California at Irvine and former postdoctoral researcher at the GSE.
Lasting gains
The study was done in collaboration with SFUSD as part of a research-practice partnership with the GSE that began in 2009. In 2010, SFUSD launched a pilot program in which students were automatically assigned to an ethnic studies course as their first-year social studies requirement if they had a GPA of 2.0 or less. About nine in 10 were Hispanic, Black or Asian.
In 2017, Dee and Penner published a study showing academic gains at the end of ninth grade (e.g., higher attendance, grade-point averages and credits) among students encouraged to take the course. The researchers weren’t sure the gains would last over time, as countless promising academic interventions fade quickly.
But this one stuck. For one thing, attendance improved: Students who participated in the course came to school more often during their remaining time in high school, for a total of one additional day of school every two weeks.
By their fourth year of high school, the students had also passed six more courses than a comparison group. More than 90 percent graduated within five years, versus 75 percent of their peers. They were also 15 percent more likely to enroll in college within six years. (At the time of the study, they were not yet old enough to graduate college.)
Parallels with psychological interventions
How could one class in ninth grade have such a large effect? While there are many theoretical perspectives on the academic impact of ethnic studies, Dee underscored its parallels with recent insights from social psychology. Targeted psychological interventions that promote a sense of belonging in school, affirm personal values and forewarn about stereotypes have all shown promise in improving student engagement and motivation.
Dee noted that ethnic studies share these features and resemble “an unusually sustained and intensive social-psychological intervention.”
In SFUSD’s ethnic studies class, for example, students examine the role that their ancestors played in history, getting into the experiences of groups that have been literally pushed to the margins of textbooks. They study, in-depth, discrimination against various groups of people based on their race, social group, ethnicity or country of origin.
“The biggest thing that happens in an ethnic studies course, I believe, is that students get to approach an academic course from the perspective of their own experience,” said Bill Sanderson, assistant superintendent of high schools at SFUSD. “Everything is approached in the course from the experience of the students.”
Though the principles of the class remain set, teachers tailor the content to the ethnic and racial communities at their school in order to “to bring relevant curriculum that these students can identify with,” Sanderson said.
Critiquing history cultivated students’ analytical abilities across classes, and the focus on anti-racism catalyzed their idealism. But the work of the course goes far deeper than that, the researchers said.
“There’s long-standing evidence that many historically underserved students experience school environments as unwelcoming, or even hostile,” said Dee. Those in this pilot, particularly, hadn’t done well academically and didn’t feel like they belonged. And ninth grade can be a nerve-wracking, transitional year.
Ethnic studies gave students “the opportunity to see their community reflected in the curriculum,” said Bonilla. Learning about their ancestors’ contributions made them feel proud and made school feel relevant, contributing to a sense of belonging. Learning about oppression and stereotypes in action reminded students that not every failure is an individual’s fault. Students conducted research projects out in the community and connected school with their lives.
Beyond ethnic studies
From there, once a student starts doing well, you’re “starting a stone rolling downhill,” Dee said, catalyzing greater motivation.
“There’s a basis in the science of learning for why courses like this can change students’ learning trajectories,” Dee said. “And if the mechanisms we’re describing are really valid, then this goes well beyond ethnic studies,” encouraging schools to make their teaching culturally relevant across subjects.
Education policymakers have focused recently on “curricula as the low-hanging fruit of education reform,” or something comparatively simple to change, Dee said.
Nevertheless, the results might not be easy to replicate. The district honed the curriculum over several years with faculty at San Francisco State University, home of the nation’s first ethnic studies college program. Many of the initial set of teachers had studied in that department and learned how to manage debate on sensitive subjects, Sanderson said.
Efforts to replicate this success without similar teacher supports and careful implementation are unlikely to be successful, Dee said, and may even trigger unintended and negative consequences. “Consider the potential educational and political fallout of asking teachers to discuss unusually sensitive topics in the classroom without the proper training to do so effectively.”
This is an especially pertinent consideration now, in the middle of a new wave of political controversy about history curriculum. While states and school districts are increasingly adopting requirements and standards for K-12 ethnic studies, some state legislatures are debating bills to ban the 1619 Project or critical race theory, a scholarly academic analysis of structural racism.
SFUSD, for one, isn’t going back. Its board voted this spring to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement.
“Ethnic studies is an important part of every young person’s education,” SFUSD board president Gabriela Lopez said in a statement issued by the district in March, which pointed to research showing the curriculum’s impact on GPA across disciplines, high school graduation rates, college-going rates and sense of belonging.
Media Contacts
Thomas S. Dee, Stanford Graduate School of Education: tdee@stanford.edu
Wanted to share my gratitude about winning this year's Lifetime Achievement Award from the Texas Association for Bilingual Education. Considering that I cannot be present, I shared this video where I accept this unexpected wonderful recognition. It acknowledges my dedication to #bilingual education and advocacy for Latino youth as having left an indelible mark in the ongoing struggle for our full cultural and language rights in the U.S. I couldn't be more humbled or honored. Wish I could be there this morning with everybody. Were it not for health reasons, I would be there.
