Translate

Showing posts with label culture of racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label culture of racism. Show all posts

Saturday, January 06, 2024

The ‘Southlake’ Podcast Is a Troubling Look at the Race Debate Tearing Apart a North Texas Suburb by Ian Dille

Friends:

Here is an honest reflection by author, Ian Dille, in the Texas Monthly on both his experiences as a white person growing up in Southlake public schools and the award-winning podcast, "Southlake." The series is centered on the virulent racism in this affluent, north Texas Carroll Independent School District that is undergoing demographic change. This is the same district that got national headlines for exposing a public school leader to balance the book on the Holocaust with opposing views. 

I concur with Dille's assessment of the podcast as "riveting and disturbing," taking the listener into the inner world of the district's school board politics that are in turn, about unabashed, unapologetic racism that has gotten so normalized that use of the "n-word" is simply how these wealthy kids talk. I don't know about you, but I grew up in conservative West Texas and I don't even think this way.

Did I hear it growing up? Yes, I did. And it was upsetting to me. Mexicans like myself grew up with racial slurs and we, too, were always made to think by white teachers and white people, generally, that we were inferior. It was baked into a school curriculum that excluded us—and largely excludes us today. 

In some reflections, I've referred to this as "the rejected self," born out of what I have termed, "subtractive cultural assimilation." My book, Subtractive Schooling, is fully about how these racial dynamics, albeit in a Houston high school, where I view these as features of everyday life for youth that work to disempower, as opposed to empower, them.

"Southlake" gives me that unsettling feeling that we're headed backwards as a society. I counterbalance that sentiment with the knowledge and awareness that we are nevertheless making positive strides and how this is good for Texas and the nation even if places like Southlake belie this. 

It would be incorrect to derive any conclusion that these racial dynamics are unique to Southlake, CISD. Rather the research suggests this to primarily be the case in middle-class, affluent districts undergoing rapid demographic change. 

I'll be focusing my own work this semester and in one class I'm teaching on school board and school district politics and policies and posting on the matter continuously. I'll have more to share. 

The podcast consists of 6 episodes that are between 30 and 42 minutes in length. It is well worth everybody's time. My husband and I listened to it in its entirety on a road trip we took a year ago. My students will listen to it, too. It's great for the college classroom.

A final comment is that it's hard for many white people to hear the truth of racism from Black and Brown people. They think we exaggerate or have a chip on our shoulder. It really does matter for writers like Ian Dille to put a face on white privilege and unaware racism.

We need more Ian Dilles in the world. Many more.

-Angela Valenzuela


The ‘Southlake’ Podcast Is a Troubling Look at the Race Debate Tearing Apart a North Texas Suburb

I grew up in Southlake and was mostly blind to the racism all around me. The NBC series changed my perspective.

By Ian Dille, Oct. 20, 2021 Texas Monthly

Host and NBC News correspondent Antonia Hylton reporting for the Southlake podcast.


In the fall of 1996, when I was a junior at Carroll High School in the North Texas suburb of Southlake, our football team faced off against Grapevine, the cross-town rival. Our team was all white; the Grapevine team was led by a Black wide receiver who would go on to play in the NFL. At the game, a group of Carroll students did something terrible: they began chanting the letters T-A-N-H-O, and one of them held up a sign bearing the same message. The acronym stood for “Tear a n—–’s head off.”  Only the student who held the sign was disciplined, and the punishment was mild: a two-week suspension from after-school activities and three days’ detention, according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

NBC News reporters Mike Hixenbaugh (a former investigative reporter at the Houston Chronicle) and Antonia Hylton uncovered this incident during their research for the riveting, disturbing new NBC News podcast, Southlake. The six-part show documents a bitter conflict, dating back to 2018, over efforts to implement diversity education in the Carroll Independent School District. Last week, Southlake was in the news for its latest scandal: as Hixenbaugh and Hylton reported, a high-ranking district administrator suggested during a training session that teachers include “other perspectives” on the Holocaust. Similar debates over how (or even if) to teach about race and religion are raging across the state and the country; in the podcast, Southlake comes across not so much as an extreme outlier, but as Anytown, USA. Listening to the series was an uncomfortable experience that forced me to reconsider my own privileged upbringing in Southlake and the racism around me that I’d been blind to as a white kid. The podcast also helped start long-overdue conversations with my family and friends. As so many Texans grapple with these painful issues, Southlake is a must-listen.  

My family moved to Southlake in 1990, from Berkeley, California. During my eight years in Carroll public schools, I became a proud Dragon, the school district’s mascot. My experience at school was positive: I ran for the high school cross-country team (today a national powerhouse) and adored our coach. My journalism teacher inspired me to pursue the field professionally. 

As I grew up, I also watched Southlake transform from a relatively rural area with working-class roots into a gilded suburb. On the farmland that became Southlake Town Square—a throwback “Main Street” now lined with high-end restaurants and shops—my friends and I once drove four-wheelers and rode horses. The community is now wealthier—the median household income is more than $240,000—and less white than it was during my time there. Over the last ten years, Southlake Carroll schools have seen an increase in Asian and Hispanic students and a decline in white students, from 88 percent of the school population in 2008 to 67 percent in 2018. During that time, the population of Black students has remained between 2 and 3 percent. The average SAT score at Carroll High School in 2019 was 27 percent higher than the state average, and according to the school’s website, “approximately 98 percent of Carroll’s seniors go on to attend a college or university.” I still look back on my time there fondly—but listening to Southlake helped me see how the comfort of this privileged bubble shaped some elements of my own cultural ignorance. 

Case in point: I don’t recall hearing about the T-A-N-H-O incident during my time in Southlake, nor did I notice other racist jokes or slurs. However, in the podcast, Black students and parents attest that such experiences have been commonplace for decades. Carroll ISD’s efforts to implement a diversity education plan began in 2018, after a viral video showed white Southlake students chanting the N-word. In response, the school board hosted an open forum at which Black residents gave painful testimony, explaining how the video exemplified a pattern of racist abuse. In one clip from Southlake, a mother describes a sixth-grade boy joking to her child, “How do you get a Black out of a tree? You cut the rope.”

For decades, Black residents in Southlake (and in other towns across the state and nation) had endured such comments. But now it seemed that real change might occur. The district selected a 63-person committee and tasked it with drafting a Cultural Competence Action Plan. The plan aimed to better educate Carroll ISD’s students and staff on issues of race, culture, sexual identity, gender, and more. It also called for accountability, evaluating the district’s progress on cultural literacy. A newly hired head of diversity would help implement the plan. After more than a year of work, the district released a first draft of the plan in the summer of 2020—amid a global pandemic, in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, and at the height of the U.S. presidential campaign. 

The reception was rocky, to put it mildly. Some parents praised the plan, saying it prepared students to succeed in an increasingly diverse world. A much more vocal group accused the school district of attempting to implement critical race theory and indoctrinate students with liberal and Marxist ideologies. Two school board trustees were indicted for violating the Texas Open Meetings Act—because they discussed an upcoming vote via text message—and a judge placed a temporary restraining order on the plan (an appeals court lifted the order last week). The formation of a well-funded conservative PAC, Southlake Families, turned a local election in May 2021 into a referendum on the Cultural Competence Action Plan—and Southlake’s future. Every candidate backed by the PAC won.

Through in-the-moment reporting, heartfelt interviews, and secret recordings, Hylton and Hixenbaugh weave an engrossing, troubling saga. A variety of compelling characters, including Black Dallas Cowboys players, lend emotional depth to the series. The first episode focuses on the experience of Robin Cornish, the wife of former Cowboys center Frank Cornish. Following Frank’s unexpected death from a heart attack in 2008, the city of Southlake honored his legacy of community engagement by naming a park after him. But in 2017, a memorial plaque at the park was defaced with the message “KKK w[ill] get You Black People.” That incident, along with numerous other racist indignities, led Robin to become a champion of the school’s diversity plan.

The Cowboys’ former defensive tackle and Super Bowl champion, Russell Maryland, also appears as a key member of the District Diversity Council, the group tasked with crafting the school district’s plan. Maryland is measured but passionate in discussing the cultural challenges facing Southlake. “The work is going to continue,” he says in episode five. “It has to, because our kids are reliant on us, and they’re the ones who are suffering. And if we don’t, they’ll continue to suffer.”

Listening to Maryland and Cornish speak up and describe their efforts to help Southlake do better, I felt inspired. It was also incredibly frustrating and heartbreaking to listen to them recount the vitriolic opposition to the diversity plan that they and others had worked so hard on. That same sense of heartbreak comes through in the voices of students who advocate for the plan. 

In episode two, we’re taken inside the Carroll High principal’s office. It’s 2019, and a seventeen-year-old student, Raven Rolle, who’s Black, has reported a white student for using the N-word. Fed up with the lack of support from school administrators, Rolle secretly records the meeting.  

The Texas drawl of principal Shawn Duhon gave me an odd sense of comfort, taking me back to my own—um, multiple—trips to the Carroll High principal’s office. Duhon attempts to provide a teachable moment, but clearly lacks the training, tools, and language to effectively address the conflict. In the principal’s office, the white student tells Rolle, “To me, it’s just a word.” Rolle is understandably upset, replying, “Because you’re white!” Instead of immediately correcting the offending student, Duhon tries to calm Rolle and advises her on navigating future racist incidents. “When you see ignorance like that, you can’t let them take your joy,” Duhon says.  

The notion that Black residents should assimilate to Southlake’s culture, and not the other way around, comes to the fore in episode three, when impassioned parents speak out against the district’s proposed diversity plan at a school board meeting. They echo points made by some Black scholars, such as linguist John McWhorter, who’s argued that singling out people of color as victims diminishes them and their ability to succeed. In the podcast, we hear from many well-meaning parents (from a range of ethnic backgrounds) who insist that race is not a barrier, to an extent that limits further conversations about race, diversity, and culture. One father tells the school board that his eight- and eleven-year-old-children “have never heard the N-word,” and expresses concern his kids will learn a bad word as part of Southlake Carroll’s diversity-education efforts. “You know where they’re going to hear the N-word from? You. You guys. You guys are going to teach my kids what the N-word is,” the father says. He doesn’t seem to have considered the possibility that he could use the debate as an opportunity to talk with his kids and teach them himself.

That’s what I tried to do, however imperfectly and awkwardly, with my own family after listening to the Southlake series. As I discussed the podcast with my mom while prepping for a Sunday dinner, my eight-year-old son lifted his head from his Legos and asked, “Dad, what’s the N-word?” Later that evening, my wife and I told him about the word, what it meant, and why he shouldn’t use it. Talking to my sister, who is Black, ten years older than me, and never lived in Southlake, I learned she “never felt comfortable” when she came to visit. She reminded me that when I was eleven, the owners of a Southlake horse-riding school gave me a Confederate flag to carry in a town parade. My parents politely requested a different flag.

Southlake effectively shows how the Texas Republican party helped sow divisions over the diversity plan. In a speech to Southlake residents, former Texas GOP chairman Allen West urged the audience to welcome new neighbors with a pecan pie, and then inquire about the newcomers’ political ideologies, asking, “Now, why are you here?” In another secret recording in episode five, the Southlake Families PAC vets school board candidates. The questions, including “Who did you vote for in the 2020 presidential election?” are unrelated to the nonpartisan duties of the school board. 

But it’s not just political parties that have something to gain from this divisive framing. The dramatic tone of NBC’s storytelling forced me to reflect on the role of the media in fanning the flames of so-called culture wars. The series frequently uses the language of war to characterize the conflict as a “fight” or “battle,” casting those for the diversity plan and those against it as “warring parties.” Winners are pitted against losers, with little discussion of how to find common ground. This problem is bigger than any one podcast or news report.

There are signs of progress, however. Sources ranging from Harvard professors to PBS Kids are offering guidance on educating children about race. In the spring of 2020, the Texas State Board of Education unanimously approved African American Studies as a high school elective, exposing thousands of students to a more complete view of Black history.  

Whether progress is happening in Southlake is less clear. If anything, the district may be continuing to veer toward the far right. In the podcast’s bonus episode, a school board member who recently stepped down reveals that a revision of the diversity plan removed much of the language around “microaggressions,” a term many Southlake residents opposed. A judge lifted the temporary restraining order on the Cultural Competence Action Plan last Thursday, and sent the lawsuit alleging that school board members violated the Open Meetings Act back to trial court for further review. The current Carroll ISD school board can now move forward with revisions, approval, and implementation of the diversity plan. However, such movement appears unlikely.

In the May election, candidates endorsed by the Southlake Families PAC won school board seats by a seventy-to-thirty margin. Rather than working to increase students’ cultural literacy, the school district has begun restricting educational materials available to students.

A parent holds a sign during a meeting of the Carroll ISD school board on May 3, 2021. Some attendees protested the district’s diversity plan.Courtesy of NBC News


At the start of the 2021 school year, the newly installed school board members formally reprimanded a fourth-grade teacher after a student checked out This Book Is Anti-Racist by author Tiffany Jewell from the classroom library. The incident created confusion and concern among Southlake teachers, who were told to close their classroom libraries until their books could be vetted. In protest, some teachers strung caution tape and black paper across their bookshelves. 

Resistance to conversations about race is nothing new to Southlake. Back in 1996, following the T-A-N-H-O incident, one of my few Black classmates and his family members called out the school district in an article that appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. The family banded together with 26 other Black families in Southlake, and the group requested a meeting with the superintendent. But the superintendent refused to meet with them collectively, saying, as summarized by the Star-Telegram, that “the incidents were isolated and do not reflect the attitudes of all Carroll High School students.”

During my time at Carroll, teachers rarely discussed race and privilege in class. Lessons about Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement were presented in historical context, divorced from our current reality—for example, the 1991 beating of Rodney King. Representation in the form of Black educators and administrators was minimal to nonexistent. And after graduating, I entered the world lacking empathy. When I initially failed to get into the University of Texas at Austin, I felt wronged by the state’s newly enacted “top 10 percent” rule (a replacement for affirmative action), and complained that kids from poorer, less-competitive school districts got an advantage. 

There’s a telling moment in the final episode of Southlake, when Hylton interviews newly installed superintendent Lane Ledbetter, the son of legendary Southlake football coach and athletic director Bob Ledbetter. Hylton asks him, “Is there racism in Southlake, and in Carroll ISD?” 

Ledbetter is caught off guard, momentarily speechless. “I didn’t know that was going to be asked,” he says, and then pivots to an unrelated talking point. It’s clear that he, as well as Southlake more broadly, still isn’t quite ready to answer that simple query.

Thursday, April 20, 2023

Texas Senate passes bill to kill DEI programs: You can hear all of yesterday's hearing on SB 17 here

These are our students standing up for higher education! So proud of them. You can hear all of yesterday's hearing on SB 17 here: tinyurl.com/mrttabk7

-Angela Valenzuela


Texas Senate passes bill to kill diversity, equity and inclusion programs


“DEI has become a political agenda," said the bill's author, while critics warned that eliminating the programs would jeopardize the progress Texas universities have made in hiring diverse talent.


Jeremy Wallace | April 20, 2023 | Houston Chronicle


Left to right, Jenna Doane, Cecelia jordan, Janeva Wilson, Maria del Carmen Unda, and Lauren Mena Shook discuss proposed legislation to ban diversity hiring programs in Texas colleges at the Texas State Capitol in Austin on April, 6, 2023. The are all members of the education policy planning program UT Austin.Bob Daemrich/Bob Daemrich/Contributor

After more than five hours of debate, the Texas Senate voted 19-12 late Wednesday to bar all public universities and colleges from having diversity, equity and inclusion programs or staff.

State Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, said while he is all for diversity, DEI programs have gone too far, and are actually excluding some job candidates and ultimately not succeeding in increasing the diversity of college faculty.

LATEST: Killing diversity hiring programs in Texas colleges could hurt push for more engineers

“DEI has become a political agenda, not a program that follows civil rights law,” Creighton said.

Democrats vehemently opposed the legislation, saying DEI was being mischaracterized by Republicans based on a few isolated incidences, and that it ignored how colleges have used the programs to make sure diverse candidates — once overlooked by universities — are getting a chance to be considered for jobs and future advancement.

The legislation now goes to the Texas House, which must pass the same bill if it is going to make it to Gov. Greg Abbott, who has the final say on whether it will become law.

Creighton argued scrapping DEI would allow more “diversity of thought” and that lawmakers could work on other ways to promote diversity.

But state Sen. Borris Miles, a Houston Democrat and one of just two Black members of the Senate, said that didn’t make sense.

“There is no logic in the belief that you can increase diversity by removing the policies and offices that work to promote diversity,” he said.

EXCLUSIVE: Gov. Greg Abbott explains his fight against diversity hiring programs on college campuses

All 12 Democrats in the Texas Senate voted against the bill.

Like Creighton, Abbott has argued DEI programs sound good on the surface but that they have been manipulated to pass on potential job applicants because of their race. He sent warnings to colleges and universities in February, which was followed by schools like the University of Texas, Texas A&M University and the University of Houston all announcing that they would step back from DEI programs or review how their programs work.

But that hasn’t been enough for the Republican-led Legislature, which has threatened to cut funding for colleges that use DEI programs and now has Creighton’s legislation advancing.

jeremy.wallace@houstonchronicle.com

Sen. Creighton said that his anti-DEI bill is “first to market.” Hmm. How can that be?

 Friends,

I am re-posting this in light of a comment made by Sen. Creighton yesterday.

Specifically, Sen. Creighton said that his anti-DEI bill is “first to market.”

Hmm. How can that be when these bills have been in the works nationally for some time?  Specifically, according to figures from PEN America“state lawmakers in 15 Republican-controlled states have passed 19 bills that seek to restrict teaching on issues of race, racism, and gender, . Laws in seven states specifically address instruction on those topics at public colleges.”

You can hear all of yesterday's hearing on SB 17 here: tinyurl.com/mrttabk7

We can even be scientific about Creighton's claim. We, all of us, can take a look at this DEI Legislation Tracker:Explore where college diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are under attack. I plan on taking a look at it myself. 

Sadly, and regardless of his claim of Texas' SB 17 being the first to market, that he extolls this as good policy, is disturbing. At the very least, he manifests both hubris and privilege in not having to take into consideration the diversity of our state and the growing need—and desire, I might add—for unity as people in a multiracial and multiethnic democracy.

Sí se puede! Yes we can!

-Angela Valenzuela


The Plan to Dismantle DEI: Conservatives Take On Colleges' 'Illiberal Bureaucracy'

Friends, 


Do keep your eyes on Texas now that both Gov. Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick have jumped into the fray.



For the rest of us who bear the brunt of decades of a culture of racism and exclusion in our state, this is terrible news. But then, of course, that's the point. To continue limiting our access, as under-represented, minoritized people to the good life, including access to higher education. 


After all, Black and Brown folks might get so empowered as to threaten the incumbencies of those who currently hold power.


This is flat-out discrimination and has serious implications for academic freedom. We must vigorously challenge this.


Nothing good will come of this spiteful agenda should their bills (HB 1006, HB 1607, and HB 1046) become law.


-Angela Valenzuela


The Plan to Dismantle DEI: Conservatives Take On Colleges' 'Illiberal Bureaucracy'


Two influential conservative think tanks described in detail on Wednesday how legislatures could dismantle the administrative structures that support diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts at public colleges.

Model state legislation, written by scholars at the Manhattan and Goldwater Institutes, if passed, would prohibit colleges from hiring diversity, equity, and inclusion officers; bar trainings that instruct staff to identify and fight against systemic racism; eliminate requirements for employees to commit to diversity statements; and could disallow even institutional commitments to social justice and recommendations that students be addressed by their preferred pronouns.

“This package is meant to reverse illiberal tendencies that have swept across higher education in the past decade,” said Ilya Shapiro, one of the authors of the model bill and a senior fellow and director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute.

It’s the means of the DEI efforts that are more of a problem than the goals of making campuses more diverse and inclusive, Shapiro wrote in an email. “Should colleges afford equal opportunity? Reach out to underprivileged communities to make sure otherwise qualified students aren’t being overlooked? Make students feel welcome and supported on campus? Of course — all of these are no-brainers,” he wrote.

But institutions should pursue those outcomes, he added, in a way that doesn’t “determine and enforce hierarchies of privilege, compel speech, or extend preferential treatment based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.”

DEI officers form a kind of revolutionary vanguard on campuses; 

their livelihood can only be justified by discovering — i.e., 

manufacturing — new inequities to be remedied.

In explaining the rationale for the document, Shapiro and his co-authors decry DEI offices as Soviet-style enforcers of left-wing ideology that are wasting tuition money and public tax dollars.

“There is a widespread consensus among conservative academics and higher education experts, as well as many centrist faculty, that university DEI offices are the nerve center of woke ideology on university campuses,” the authors write. “DEI officers form a kind of revolutionary vanguard on campuses; their livelihood can only be justified by discovering — i.e., manufacturing — new inequities to be remedied.”

In addition to prohibiting such administrative units, the proposed legislation would make public colleges that violate its codes subject to lawsuits by individual students, alumni, or faculty. The draft also recommends that money spent on diversity programs be redirected to scholarships for low- and middle-income students at the discretion of a governing board.

The model bill, as written, could have a variety of unintended consequences, said Jeremy C. Young, senior manager for free expression and education at the nonprofit advocacy group PEN America, including diminished efforts to recruit underserved populations as students and faculty members. The bill could also violate free-speech rights by constraining administrators and faculty from even advocating for diversity, equity, and inclusion, and could cause institutions to violate accreditation standards, Young said.

“There’s no way in which it is helpful to have state governments come in and pass something like this,” Young said.

Several colleges in recent years have deployed a litany of efforts to better serve students of color, who today make up the majority of high-school graduates. Colleges have hired DEI officers, reckoned with the ways their institutions in the past banned students of color, and set aside money, programs, and spaces on campus to serve the needs of such students.

The Black Lives Matter movement has created even more momentum. DEI offices are now ubiquitous on the campuses of public and private nonprofit colleges. In addition, improving the outcomes of Black, Hispanic, and Native American students, which often lag behind those of white and Asian students, is one of the top priorities of state higher-education leaders, according to a recent survey from the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.

But as those efforts have grown, conservative activists and elected officials have pushed back, arguing that such measures may discriminate against white students and violate academic freedom, and that they are part of a liberal effort to indoctrinate students.

Over the past two years, state lawmakers in 15 Republican-controlled states have passed 19 bills that seek to restrict teaching on issues of race, racism, and gender, according to figures from PEN America. Laws in seven states specifically address instruction on those topics at public colleges.

Many of those laws are likely to face legal challenges. In November, a state court judge in Florida suspended parts of the so-called Stop WOKE Act championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has made it a mission to snuff out diversity, equity, and inclusion proposals at public colleges.

There are also efforts afoot by college leaders to root out color-conscious programs from their campuses. On Wednesday, the Florida College System released a statement, attributed to the presidents of its member institutions, that they would identify and eliminate any academic requirement or program “that compels belief in critical race theory or related concepts such as intersectionality.”

“We must ensure that our institutions of higher learning are focused on academic excellence and the pursuit of truth, not the imposition of trendy ideology,” DeSantis said during his inaugural speech for a second term. A possible presidential contender in 2024, DeSantis has also asked all the state’s public colleges and universities to provide details on spending for diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. A Chronicle analysis found that among the state’s public universities, none spent more than 1 percent of their budget on such measures.

The governor has also appointed a bevy of well-known conservatives to the Board of Trustees of New College, the state’s public liberal-arts institution. One of those appointees is Christopher F. Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and director of the initiative on critical race theory, who has pledged to remake the college into a haven for conservative thought and instruction.

Rufo is also among the authors of the model legislation to ban DEI offices at public colleges.

“Left-wing radicals have spent the past fifty years on a ‘long march through the institutions,’” Rufo tweeted following his appointment. “We are going to reverse that process, starting now.”

Shapiro, another author of the bill, said his own experience of being investigated by the Office of Institutional Diversity, Equity, and Affirmative Action at Georgetown University informed his thinking on the model bill. Last year he was named executive director of the Center for the Constitution at Georgetown’s law school. Before he began his duties, his job was put on hold after he criticized the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court in a way that some, including the dean of the law school, considered “appalling.” After a four-month inquiry, Georgetown reinstated Shapiro, but he resigned immediately.

“That lived experience certainly opened my eyes to these issues,” Shapiro said during an interview. “If I were at Georgetown, I wouldn’t be rolling out model legislation.”

The model legislation by Rufo, Shapiro, and Matt Beienburg, director of education policy at the Goldwater Institute, is a 13-page memorandum, including a baker’s dozen of endnotes, that lays out the legal mechanisms for abolishing DEI offices as well as the rationale for the proposal.

“Although DEI sounds innocuous and even salutary, it’s an Orwellian phrase that in reality prevents intellectual diversity, impedes equal opportunity, and excludes those who don’t conform to progressive orthodoxy,” the authors write.

The bill defines DEI offices as any administrative effort meant to “manipulate or otherwise influence the composition of the faculty or student body with reference to race, sex, color, or ethnicity.” The bill carves out numerous exceptions for lawyers who ensure compliance with the requirements of federal law, such as Title IX, which prohibits discrimination based on sex, and Title VI, which bars discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Other exceptions include academic programs, courses or research, and the activities of student groups.

The bill would also bar colleges from taking any official stand on a long list of social issues, including “a particular, widely contested opinion referencing unconscious or implicit bias, cultural appropriation, allyship, transgender ideology, microaggressions, group marginalization, anti-racism, systemic oppression, social justice, intersectionality, neo-pronouns, heteronormativity, disparate impact, gender theory, racial or sexual privilege.”

Mandatory diversity training prohibited under the model bill includes any requirement for a student, faculty member, or job applicant“purporting to describe or expose structures, systems, or relations of power, privilege.” Such requirements could include not only traditional trainings and workshops, but also participation in “ any administrative process or decision-making body,” the proposed bill states.

“Even when DEI officials claim their training is ‘voluntary,’ it is often in fact required for faculty who wish to perform the most basic roles on campus,” the proposed bill states. “At most leading public universities, DEI training is mandatory for faculty who wish to serve on any hiring committee, which is a function nearly all faculty perform.”

The bill also argues that diversity statements, which are becoming more common in the hiring and promotion processes at colleges, should be outlawed because they function as a kind of loyalty oath or litmus test for employment.

Under the bill, colleges would not be able to require job applicants to share their “views on, experience with, or contributions to diversity, equity, and/or inclusion; marginalized groups; anti-racism; social justice; intersectionality; confessing one’s race-based privilege; or related concepts.”

Other states are already considering similar measures. A bill introduced in Texas late last year would prohibit “any office that funds, promotes, sponsors, or supports an initiative or formulation of diversity, equity, and inclusion beyond” federal nondiscrimination requirements.

The Board of Governors for the University of North Carolina system is considering a policy that could bar the use of diversity statements in hiring by prohibiting any requirement for employees or applicants to “affirmatively ascribe to or opine about beliefs, affiliations, ideals, or principles regarding matters of contemporary political debate or social action.”

Such efforts still face numerous hurdles and are likely be challenged in court.

Joseph Cohn, legislative and policy director at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said his organization shares some of the same concerns about diversity statements and other measures colleges use to create a diverse and inclusive campus. In some cases, colleges may be trampling the First Amendment rights of faculty, FIRE argues, by requiring them to “demonstrate their commitment to ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion.’”

But the model bill and other measures must strike a difficult balance, Cohn said, between prohibiting diversity statements but also not barring employees or students from sharing opinions that support diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The Texas bill, for example, strays into areas that would be unconstitutional, FIRE said, because it would require a “policy that prohibits students from ‘endorsement or dissuasion’ of a particular religion, lifestyle, or culture.”

Paulette Granberry Russell, president of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, said campus officials should fear the proposed bill because it would silence essential conversations on the continued impacts of racism.

“Everyone in higher education needs to be alert and aware of what’s going on.”

A version of this article appeared in the February 3, 2023, issue.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.


Friday, February 10, 2023

The Plan to Dismantle DEI in Texas and Beyond

Friends, 


Do keep your eyes on Texas now that both Gov. Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick have jumped into the fray.



For the rest of us who bear the brunt of decades of a culture of racism and exclusion in our state, this is terrible news. But then, of course, that's the point. To continue limiting our access, as under-represented, minoritized people to the good life, including access to higher education. 


After all, Black and Brown folks might get so empowered as to threaten the incumbencies of those who currently hold power.


This is flat-out discrimination and has serious implications for academic freedom. We must vigorously challenge this.


Nothing good will come of this spiteful agenda should their bills (HB 1006, HB 1607, and HB 1046) become law.


-Angela Valenzuela


The Plan to Dismantle DEI: Conservatives Take On Colleges' 'Illiberal Bureaucracy'


Two influential conservative think tanks described in detail on Wednesday how legislatures could dismantle the administrative structures that support diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts at public colleges.

Model state legislation, written by scholars at the Manhattan and Goldwater Institutes, if passed, would prohibit colleges from hiring diversity, equity, and inclusion officers; bar trainings that instruct staff to identify and fight against systemic racism; eliminate requirements for employees to commit to diversity statements; and could disallow even institutional commitments to social justice and recommendations that students be addressed by their preferred pronouns.

“This package is meant to reverse illiberal tendencies that have swept across higher education in the past decade,” said Ilya Shapiro, one of the authors of the model bill and a senior fellow and director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute.