By MARK SARDELLA
For something that is supposedly non-existent in any public school anywhere, an awful lot of effort and ink have been spent of late trying to convince us of that.
Critical race theory, they insist in no uncertain terms, has no place in public education.
The messaging usually goes something like this: “Of course we’re not teaching that. You don’t even know what it is. Where would you even get such an idea?”
Or as Wakefield School Committee chair Suzy Velleux put it more succinctly this week, “Critical race theory is not being taught in Wakefield Public Schools.”
Well. That’s settled.
Apparently, education officials think we don’t know how to use Google.
At its June 29 meeting, the School Committee heard from Social Studies and English curriculum coordinators Jason Pavey and Margaret Messier about ongoing efforts to “incorporate diverse perspectives across the curriculum in order to acknowledge that perceptions are affected by race, ethnicity, culture, religion, education, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability and personal experience.”
For those who survived the preceding sentence, one of the ways that the schools are “incorporating diverse voices” is by bringing in visiting consultants to show our own educators how it’s done.
Among those is Jamilah Pitts, a self-described “educational consultant and equity and justice strategist.”
Ms. Pitts is being brought in for four of the five professional development sessions this coming school year to train grade 5-12 teachers in “Culturally Responsive Teaching.” Pitts also agreed to do the Aug. 2 “retreat” for Wakefield school administrators.
“If you get a chance, look her up,” Pavey suggested at the June 29 School Committee meeting.
So, I did.
I found an article that Pitts wrote last year for a magazine called “Learning for Justice.” In a piece titled, “Teaching as Activism, Teaching as Care,” she talks about ways that teachers can incorporate current events into reading assignments.
“Teachers can allow students to apply critical lenses, such as critical race theory and Marxist theory, to the reading of news articles to allow students to think more deeply about who is being most affected and why,” Pitts wrote.
So, even as we are told that critical race theory is not being taught in Wakefield schools, local teachers are attending professional development sessions led by a consultant who believes that students should be taught to apply CRT and Marxist theory to their school assignments.
Most parents have neither the time nor patience to read through tedious scholarly pieces on such topics as culturally responsive teaching (sometimes called “culturally relevant teaching”).
Educators know that. In fact, they count on it. Luckily, I have a high tolerance for boring screeds.
One such piece that I found was written by Professor Judith Briggs of Illinois State University. The title is, “Engaging Critical Race Theory and Culturally Relevant Teaching.”
“Culturally Relevant Curriculum,” Briggs writes, “promotes critical questioning and is committed to social justice. Finally, culturally relevant teaching is grounded in CRT.”
Would that be the same culturally relevant teaching that is currently being deployed in Wakefield Public Schools?
Another consultant that was highly touted at the June 29 School Committee meeting was Dr. Clint Smith. He hosted a virtual assembly for all Wakefield High School students last school year, and the Wakefield Public Schools have cultivated an ongoing professional relationship with Dr. Smith. Superintendent Doug Lyons suggested that people Google him.
So, I did. (I’m very compliant.)
One of the first things that came up in my search was a podcast hosted by Bakari Sellers this past June. I’ll let you listen to the podcast for yourself, but here’s the accompanying description: “Bakari is joined by author Clint Smith to talk about what critical race theory is and why it’s important to teach it in schools.”
Finally, if it’s so manifestly obvious that CRT is not being taught in public schools, why would the Massachusetts Association of School Committees publish a whole guide devoted to helping School Committees convince parents?
One indication of how insulated the guide’s authors are from the concerns of parents and citizens is the following offhand admission.
“In the 1990s, some colleges of education started incorporating CRT into their coursework to help aspiring school administrators and teachers better understand inequities in the context of education.”
But we are expected to believe that after being marinated in CRT, graduates of these colleges never allow it to seep into their classrooms.
If CRT is such a wonderful, positive concept, why deny its existence in the schools? Why not embrace and defend it?
So, there you have it. Don’t say nobody told you.
