The fight about Critical Race Theory is happening across the country and in Michiana.
New research shows the number of anti-CRT measures introduced in the US has been increasing since 2020.
Penn-Harris-Madison School Corporation has been a CRT battleground for more than two years.
PHM Board Meetings
At meetings for the Penn-Harris-Madison Board of School Trustees, CRT is on repeat.
The topic of Critical Race Theory has made regular appearances at school board meetings from either the trustees themselves or parents and community members who elect to speak.
At its meeting on May 22nd, nearly the first 40 minutes of the meeting was about whether to add an item concerning CRT onto the agenda.
“I move that we add to tonight's agenda, a discussion of, and a vote for or against, concerning CRT,” said longtime school board member Jim Garrett.
Several Penn High School teachers spoke out against the resolution.
The motion to add the CRT resolution to the agenda was defeated by a vote of five to two.
Later in the meeting, some parents spoke in favor of a CRT resolution.
Garrett, a former teacher, says he has been trying since 2021 to get his CRT resolution on the agenda.
Garrett admits he does not think Critical Race Theory is being taught at PHM right now but says he believes CRT should be banned from PHM schools.
“I would just like to have each board member chime in about this, and say what do you think, and why aren’t you willing to support this,” Garrett told WSBT22.
CRT Resolution
Garrett had his anti-CRT resolution written up based on a 2021 memo issued by the Indiana Department of Education.
Dr. Katie Jenner, Indiana’s Secretary of Education, sent the memo to school administrators across the state to address growing questions about whether Critical Race Theory was taught in classrooms in the state.
The memo says in part:
In Indiana, K-12 schools are required to teach the Indiana Academic Standards and the Indiana Employability Skills Standards. Neither set of standards includes Critical Race Theory. Critical Race Theory is not designed for elementary, middle, or high school students. Additionally, the State of Indiana will not support, condone, or fund anything that alienates, discriminates, or negatively divides students based on race or background.
The memo also says, “we fully support Indiana’s racially and ethnically diverse communities and believe all Hoosier Students benefit from learning a full and factual account of our country’s historical events, shortcomings, and progress.”
Garrett's proposed resolution uses many of the words and phrases used in the letter by the IDOE.
“The resolution is simply taking what the IDOE put in the memo,” argued new PHM board member Matt Chaffee at the May 22nd board meeting.
Chaffee was elected in November. During the campaign, he promised more accountability if he was elected to the school board.
Chaffee was sworn in at January’s school board meeting and with his new position has said he can now second Garrett’s proposals to add his CRT resolution to the agenda.
“If fellow board members, you don’t stand with that (IDOE memo) and you are disagreeing with what the Indiana Department of Education flat out said, that’s an issue,” Chaffee said to the board on May 22nd.
Along with the 2021 memo, the IDOE also released a list of answers to frequently asked questions about Indiana’s Academic Standards and CRT.
The IDEO FAQ sheet does not require schools boards pass a resolution about CRT.
Board Agenda
The problem for Garrett and Chaffee is that district and school board leadership won't put CRT on the agenda.
WSBT22 asked PHM School Board President Christopher Riley why that hasn’t happened.
“The reason this hasn't been placed on the agenda is because there is absolutely no need for it whatsoever and it is not sound policy,” said Riley.
Riley was first elected to the PHM School Board of Trustees in 2010.
He is a lawyer who is also the policy liaison for PHM and the Indiana School Board Association.
We have spent so much time talking about CRT, a field of study we don't even teach, that it has occupied so much time already just trying to get it on the agenda, that it comes really as a distraction from other things the board should be focusing its attention on,” says Riley.
As is standard procedure for school board agenda creation, the President and Vice President of a school board will meet with district administration to orchestrate the agenda.
If a school board member wants something added to the agenda that hasn’t been placed there by board and district leadership, they can make a motion to amend the agenda.
It would need a second and a majority vote of the school board to amend the agenda.
Riley has called Garrett’s proposed CRT resolution “vague,” “ambiguous,” and “repetitive.”
When you take the notion of Critical Race Theory and define it so ambiguously and so broadly that it discourages people from even talking about culture or diversity, we have a problem,” said Riley, “the bottom line is the Indiana Department of Education has already said Critical Race Theory is not part of Indiana’s Academic Standards. As long as you stick to Indiana’s Academic Standards you are not teaching Critical Race Theory.
Garrett and Chaffee have argued that the CRT resolution is specific because it is based off the IDOE memo.
They point to the fourth paragraph in Garrett’s proposed resolution which says, word-for-word what is written in the IDOE memo, that the state will not support anything that “alienates, discriminates or negatively divides students based on race or background”
Riley says, despite Garrett and Chaffee’s argument, those words are not specific and leave too much open for interpretation.
Interpretation of CRT
Critical Race Theory has been around for decades originally appearing as a legal studies movement in the 60s and 70s.
Currently, it is a legal analysis that looks at reasons why and how systemic racism exists.
UCLA School of Law has a Critical Race Studies Program.
In a research study released in April, the UCLA School of Law Critical Race Studies Program calls CRT an “interdisciplinary practice and approach to understanding the foundations and maintenance of race and racial subordination in the legal system throughout history.”
Concern about whether CRT is being taught in kindergarten through 12th grade classrooms is growing.
That could be because what CRT is and what it is being defined as now are different.
The PHM School Corporation has said it does not teach CRT.
District leaders have also said teachers are not hiding CRT in their lessons, like some have claimed.
In fact, all parents can go online to see their child's curriculum.
Still, some parents and community members at PHM School Board Meetings have argued that teachers are teaching the “tenets” of CRT.
“Well, it depends on what their definition of the tenets of CRT is and we don't know what their definition of the tenets of CRT is,” says Riley.
Because CRT is a theory for legal scholars, there are even variations in beliefs among members of the CRT movement.
You can read about what some believe might be a set of “basic tenets” of CRT in this Critical Race Theory definition in Britannica.
At past PHM School Board meetings, some parents concerned about CRT have voiced their thoughts on what “tenets” they believe teachers at PHM might be teaching.
In 2021, a woman chastised the PHM School Board for teaching about racism.
“Stop creating racism. Doctor Martin Luther King Junior got rid of it years ago. Keep it out of our schools,” the woman said.
Just last month, a parent called CRT “word salad” and said employees are being trained on how to incorporate tenets into their teaching.
She said topics like social justice, group identity, prejudice, discrimination, oppression, power, privilege, white supremacy, micro-aggression, implicit bias, and antiracism teach that “that America is racist, American government is racist, and it is a revolution whose goal is equity, you only get there when you punish some from having more or being smarter or working harder. This is socialism.”
The problem, according to Riley, is that there is so much confusion about what CRT is, that teachers are struggling to understand whether they can teach topics they have been teaching for years including about Martin Luther King Jr., an activist in the American Civil Rights movement.
“When policies are vague and ambiguous, it is unsound for the school board to adopt them. It does nothing more than intensify the burden that already exists on our teachers' shoulders,” says Riley.
What should be banned?
Riley says PHM School Corporation has been transparent and accountable in responding to concerns about CRT.
In August of 2021, when there were concerns about Social Emotional Learning and Diversity Equity Inclusion Lessons, the school corporation hosted community forums and put materials and a FAQ sheet on its website.
In an email to WSBT22, the district said, after the sessions were held, the Superintendent’s office has received no other complaints or concerns about CRT or SEL outside of the group of approximately 6 to 10 parents who regularly attend board meetings and speak out against CRT and SEL.
“People who keep bringing CRT up (at the board meetings) have conflated Critical Race Theory with diversity. But there is a very distinct difference,” says Riley, “why can't we celebrate diversity? Why can't we be culturally responsible? Why can't we have a culture night? Why can't we teach our kids the golden rule and teach that regardless of race or origin or culture that we treat each other the way we want to be treated.”
WSBT22 asked Garrett and Chaffee for clarification on what they believe should be allowed in the classroom at PHM and what they believe is CRT.
When asked if racism should be taught in a history class, Garrett said, “I suppose. It depends on how you talk about it. I can’t make that judgment. All I’m trying to do is get the memo passed. To make hypotheticals, I really can’t speak to that.”
When asked if discrimination or oppression should be talked about in a history or economics classroom, Chaffee said:
“In regards to Critical Race Theory and what that has to do with it, I think we need to focus on not alienating discriminating or negatively dividing students based on race or background. I am not going to speak on hypotheticals with those. Of course, with any type of lessons certain topics can come up. I want to ensure all our students in PHM schools are being educated properly on the history of our country.”
WSBT 22 asked Riley whether those topics are currently being taught in classrooms at PHM.
Riley said, “to some extent, obviously it is. It would be impossible for teachers to teach children how to communicate with one another properly without one of those topics coming up and someone would wrongly misconstrue as CRT.”
Teachers weigh in
“So, when we start prohibiting things, we are running the risk of sending the wrong message to teachers that the positive things that we have been teaching all along are not disallowed,” said Riley.
That is what some teachers are worried about.
At last month's meeting several teachers spoke to oppose Garretts proposed resolution, saying the policy would hurt teachers.
“If you cannot define it, how can you justify an official policy against it? Having a rule about something undefinable is dangerous. Many people have differing opinions about what CRT is and is not. If we do not agree, then where do we draw the line?” a Penn High School teacher said to the board, “our students deserve to learn about all facets of history, not just the ones that make us look good. Learning from the past helps us to keep that from happening again. And yes, talking about racial injustice, genocide, and discrimination is tough but our students deserve a safe space to learn the facts, learn how to analyze and evaluate them and not gloss over them because they are uncomfortable.”
“Classrooms are centers of learning, debate and developing the skills to participate in American civil discourse. Civil discourse includes patience, open mindedness, compromise, and mutual respect. It is engaging in conversation to seek and create mutual understanding,” another Penn High School teacher said at the meeting, “to ban a discussion of an entire lens of a analysis seems very antidemocratic to me and very far away from our ideal of civil discourse.”
The teachers said the campaign against CRT by school board members is part of a campaign to discredit the professionalism of hard-working teachers in this district.
Garrett says he feels his resolution will protect teachers.
“No teacher should be afraid to do what they think is right. And if they have a question about it, a good thing to do would to be run it by somebody and if it fits the program, with our standards and our rules, and if the principal okays it, then there you go,” says Garrett.
“In regards to teachers, I don't think you will find someone who supports teachers more than me personally,” says Chaffee.
Chaffee does not believe CRT is being taught in PHM now, but he says being a good leader means holding people accountable.
“CRT is not a PHM problem. CRT is a two-school board member problem,” says Riley, “(it is) a politically contrived issue, which is really only meant to inflame the emotions of people.”
“I would encourage anyone to watch the school board meetings and ask yourself, are the school board trustees asking the questions, doing their homework, are they striving to make PHM schools a better place,” says Chaffee.
Garrett says he won't stop bringing it to the board's attention.
“I’m not going to give up. If I gave up, I wouldn’t be a good leader, would I,” said Garrett.