Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, already under fire for approving the nation's toughest illegal immigration law, has again run afoul of liberal activists, signing a bill Wednesday that targets ethnic studies programs in schools that critics say unfairly demean white Americans.

The law, which takes effect Dec. 31, would prohibit courses that promote resentment toward one race; that are designed for students of one race; that promote ethnic solidarity "instead of treating students as individuals;" and that encourage "the overthrow of the United States government."

The proposal was the brainchild of Tom Horne, Arizona state superintendent of public instruction, who has long battled with the Tucson Unified School District over its Mexican-American studies program, contending that it promotes "ethnic chauvinism" through the use of textbooks such as "Oppressed America" and at least one guest speaker who said, "Republicans hate Latinos."

Those who contend the law promotes racism are missing the point, Mr. Horne said.

"It's the opposite of racism," said the Republican, who is running for state attorney general. "We're trying to get schools to treat students as individuals and not on the basis of race."...

...As for the ethnic studies law, Mr. Horne said, it does nothing to prevent schools from teaching about students' cultures.

"We should learn about different heritages and languages, and I'm all for that," he said. "I'm just opposed to dividing students up and only teaching them about their own."

Among the Arizona schools that could be affected by the law are three charter schools run by Chicanos Por La Causa, a nonprofit group that bills itself as the state's largest community development corporation.

But spokeswoman Amanda Roberson said she doubted the schools would be in danger of losing funding. Schools that violate the law would lose a share of state education funds.

"We don't think right now it's going to apply to us," said Ms. Roberson. "The language is very extreme - I mean, it talks about overthrowing the government - and we don't think it applies to us."

Mr. Horne has argued that the curriculum prods Hispanic students into believing they are oppressed by whites. He pointed to a 2006 talk by Hispanic activist Dolores Huerta, who told students, "Republicans hate Latinos."

He also cited the use of textbooks such as "Oppressed America," which quotes a Hispanic activist saying that Chicanos should "kill the gringo." Another textbook, he says, "The Mexican American Heritage," promotes the idea of Aztlan, the five Southwestern states that activists say should be returned to Mexican control.

Chizzang wrote:I'll tell you what that Jan Brewer is a damn interesting person..!!!
I would love to sit down with her and chat for an hour or two - she seems super fascinating to me

She's got nerves of steel and a keen intellect - I enjoy how she pushes ideas and causes involvement

she's more like what we need all over America... agree with her or not she is "active" and "intense" and responding to her states interests in a way that very few politicians do

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I'll tell you what that Jan Brewer is a damn interesting person..!!!
I would love to sit down with her and chat for an hour or two - she seems super fascinating to me

She's got nerves of steel and a keen intellect - I enjoy how she pushes ideas and causes involvement

she's more like what we need all over America... agree with her or not she is "active" and "intense" and responding to her states interests in a way that very few politicians do

I wasn't impressed with her in the beginning, but I'm rapidly beginning to realize she's got chutzpah.

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I wasn't impressed with her in the beginning, but I'm rapidly beginning to realize she's got chutzpah.

Honestly I don't care what they teach kids in school in Arizona... seriously - who gives a sh!t - but I like that basically everything she does causes people to do research and investigate ideas - she makes you think things through to their logical end... Right or Wrong on the issues - I don't know - but she get's the ball rolling

Skjellyfetti wrote:What's wrong with ethnic studies? One of my majors was Appalachian Studies. One of the grad school programs I'm considering applying for is Southern Studies. Are they ok? Or just the ones dealing with minorities?

And, I think this is about high school and not college classes... but, why should there be a line drawn between the two?

blueballs wrote:
Your classes were cultural, not ethnic.

Skjellyfetti wrote:What's wrong with ethnic studies? One of my majors was Appalachian Studies. One of the grad school programs I'm considering applying for is Southern Studies. Are they ok? Or just the ones dealing with minorities?

And, I think this is about high school and not college classes... but, why should there be a line drawn between the two?

GSUAlumniEagle wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:What's wrong with ethnic studies? One of my majors was Appalachian Studies. One of the grad school programs I'm considering applying for is Southern Studies. Are they ok? Or just the ones dealing with minorities?

And, I think this is about high school and not college classes... but, why should there be a line drawn between the two?

You're right that we're talking about public high schools instead of college classes.

The superintendent of schools from AZ (who proposed the bill) was on CNN this morning and he made a lot of very good points. The bill doesn't outlaw studies of an ethnic or cultural basis. It simply states that courses can't be set up specifically targeting one cultural or ethnic base. Being a diverse state, students already undergo education on cultural and ethnic differences in their regular history classes. Not only did these courses separate and divide students, they were redundant.

There has to be a line drawn between college courses and high school courses. There's a vastly improved ability of critical thinking and maturity between a college sophomore and a high school sophomore. But more importantly, my concern would be with the professors. Most likely a college professor that would be teaching an ethnicity course would have advanced education, hopefully a doctorate, in the area. They would have advanced knowledge in the field and would understand the complexities and nuances of such discussions.

I would imagine, on the other hand, the teachers for such a HS course would have only an undergraduate degree in something such as history and limited knowledge in this specialized field. I fear they would break down their discussions to the easiest "talking points" such as slavery for African Americans, the trail of tears for Native Americans, etc. And more often than not I fear that they'd lead to discussions of hatred rather than the ideals that each culture truly holds dear.

It's not an unreasonable law. I do fear that the IMPLEMENTATION of the law may be unreasonable, however. Mostly, I just don't agree with the idea of splitting up high school students by the color of their skin or their parents ethnicity.

GSUAlumniEagle wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:What's wrong with ethnic studies? One of my majors was Appalachian Studies. One of the grad school programs I'm considering applying for is Southern Studies. Are they ok? Or just the ones dealing with minorities?

And, I think this is about high school and not college classes... but, why should there be a line drawn between the two?

You're right that we're talking about public high schools instead of college classes.

The superintendent of schools from AZ (who proposed the bill) was on CNN this morning and he made a lot of very good points. The bill doesn't outlaw studies of an ethnic or cultural basis. It simply states that courses can't be set up specifically targeting one cultural or ethnic base. Being a diverse state, students already undergo education on cultural and ethnic differences in their regular history classes. Not only did these courses separate and divide students, they were redundant.

There has to be a line drawn between college courses and high school courses. There's a vastly improved ability of critical thinking and maturity between a college sophomore and a high school sophomore. But more importantly, my concern would be with the professors. Most likely a college professor that would be teaching an ethnicity course would have advanced education, hopefully a doctorate, in the area. They would have advanced knowledge in the field and would understand the complexities and nuances of such discussions.

I would imagine, on the other hand, the teachers for such a HS course would have only an undergraduate degree in something such as history and limited knowledge in this specialized field. I fear they would break down their discussions to the easiest "talking points" such as slavery for African Americans, the trail of tears for Native Americans, etc. And more often than not I fear that they'd lead to discussions of hatred rather than the ideals that each culture truly holds dear.

It's not an unreasonable law. I do fear that the IMPLEMENTATION of the law may be unreasonable, however. Mostly, I just don't agree with the idea of splitting up high school students by the color of their skin or their parents ethnicity.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

blueballs wrote:
Your classes were cultural, not ethnic.

The difference between ethnicity and culture is VERY thin. And I don't think it would be too hard to argue that the South and Appalachia are a distinct ethnicity. Both are becoming less distinct where it may not be as true now... but, for most of our history I think so.

A group's cultural heritage defines their ethnicity. A group's biological makeup determines their race. Race =/= ethnicity. Ethnicity ~ culture.

GSUAlumniEagle wrote: There has to be a line drawn between college courses and high school courses. There's a vastly improved ability of critical thinking and maturity between a college sophomore and a high school sophomore. But more importantly, my concern would be with the professors. Most likely a college professor that would be teaching an ethnicity course would have advanced education, hopefully a doctorate, in the area. They would have advanced knowledge in the field and would understand the complexities and nuances of such discussions.

I would imagine, on the other hand, the teachers for such a HS course would have only an undergraduate degree in something such as history and limited knowledge in this specialized field. I fear they would break down their discussions to the easiest "talking points" such as slavery for African Americans, the trail of tears for Native Americans, etc. And more often than not I fear that they'd lead to discussions of hatred rather than the ideals that each culture truly holds dear.

JayBilasBitesPillows wrote:If high school sophs are required (or strongly encouraged) to participate in such classes, they have little choice but comply and be taught by a teacher normally woefully unprepared to deal with the emotion that follows (which in most instances, would shut it down at that point).

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Yeah after thinking about this awhile............this law was obviously written so cops can racially profile high school students.





Like everyone that thinks SB1070 will cause the police to racially profile in the state of Arizona I didnt read anything about this bill either but that wont stop me from running my mouth and making shit up.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Dude it was

I agree with the law, it should become federal law then the federal government could not enforce that one as well.

Once again I was implementing

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:That is what I was implying.

I am now extremely confused, you win. I was wrong, I give up.

danefan wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:That is what I was implying.

I am now extremely confused, you win. I was wrong, I give up.

Maybe we got our wires crossed. Forget the intent of the bill. Do you think there is valid concern over the potential implementation of this bill?