In a 3-2 vote at its Jan. 23 meeting, the Palo Alto Board of Education approved California Ethnic Studies as a graduation requirement for the class of 2029.
The Campanile thinks the board made the wrong decision and should have instead followed the amendment proposed by board member Alison Kamhi to delay the implementation of the course by a year.
We support the values of an ethnic studies course in fostering discourse and educating students on the history of minority groups within California, which is minimally covered in current freshman and sophomore social studies courses. However, because of concerns over the curriculum draft and the lack of transparency about what is being taught, we think further consideration and community involvement are necessary before the course is implemented.
A slippery slope
In a Jan. 16 letter to the community, Superintendent Don Austin said the original September 2023 mandate to require the course for the class of 2030 was contingent on funding from the state legislature, which has been paused indefinitely.
Austin said the state’s initial attempt at creating a model ethnic studies curriculum “proved so problematic that it had to be largely discarded and rewritten, resulting in a broad, ambiguous document that has led to local divisiveness across California” and the extreme politicization of the course “(undermines) the true goal of the course: to foster insightful, well-guided discussions.”
And it is not just the state that has struggled with developing a curriculum. Before the board meeting, Austin released, along with the California Ethnic Studies course description, a PDF titled “Curriculum and Sample Lessons,” which many assumed was a finalized version of what would be taught in the course.
But during the meeting, Paly social studies Instructional Leader Mary Sano said the file was a brainstorming draft compiled a year ago. Board member Rowena Chiu then asked if there was an updated curriculum created within the past year, to which there was no response.
This implies either a concrete curriculum has not been developed or the district is unwilling to release it. Both options are equally worrisome. In addition to community distrust, other districts have already faced financial consequences due to failure or refusal to release ethnic studies curriculums. Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District, for example, agreed to pay tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees in January for not releasing its ethnic studies curriculum under a public records request.
This uncertainty was heightened when, during the board meeting, board member Shounak Dharap asked “What is ethnic studies?” to the teachers who piloted California Ethnic Studies during the 2024-2025 school year.
Gunn social studies teacher Ariane Tuomy said the course intends to include “co-constructed” discussions but did not provide what the conversations were actually about other than that they “are centered in the disciplines of African-American, Asian, Pacific Islander, Latina and Native Americans” and will “look at the history.”
In addition to uncertainty over the topics covered, the claim the course prioritizes discussions during lessons is debatable. Survey data from the pilot classes conducted this year shows some students said the “debates stood out as particularly impactful because classmates got a chance to converse about their ideas” and prepared them “to engage in meaningful conversations much more because of all the very important class discussions.”
But other students said there was “very minimal discourse throughout (the) discussions” and “the course did not have debate or conversation as a big part, so the class never got a chance to practice.” These comments highlight inconsistencies that can be addressed through the release of a formalized curriculum for the community to review.
However, Gunn social studies Instructional Leader Jeff Patrick said the release of the curriculum would threaten his teaching agency by restricting him to a curriculum outlined by the community, eroding trust in his teaching capability. Paly social studies teacher Benjamin Bolanos called the requests the “definition of micromanaging” during the board meeting.
But instructional agency should not come at the cost of transparency, and adjusting to students’ needs should not conflict with the educational standards of a course. We trust teachers to discuss controversial topics responsibly, but that does not equate to blindly following every decision made. AP courses require teachers to follow syllabi to prepare their students for exams, yet classes can still maintain flexibility. The purpose of a curriculum is to provide information about the content, not the schedule, of a class.
Board member Shana Segal said curriculum requests could be a “slippery slope” because most courses only require a course description for board approval. Ethnic studies, though, especially being a required course, requires special attention because of the sensitivity of the topics. Even then, we do not think increased transparency through disclosing course materials should create fear.
During the approval of a PAUSD sex education curriculum in 2017, for example, community members requested the curriculum be released to the public. Max McGee, superintendent at the time, said parents should have time to review course materials and make informed decisions on whether their children should opt out of the lessons, and some board members at the time said parental input should have been incorporated.
We should not repeat the same mistakes of limiting openness and collaboration. If the district and teachers leading this course are afraid of these conversations, we are worried about the freedom of discussion within the classrooms as well.
Content misinformation
Increased transparency is especially necessary as we think parts of the current curriculum are problematic.
Linked in the “Curriculum and Sample Lessons” document, a 7-year-old video titled “Sex & Sexuality: Crash Course Sociology #31” describes how “among the Sambia of the Eastern Highlands of Papua New Guinea, young boys perform oral sex on, and ingest the semen of, older men, as part of a rite of passage to adulthood” and that “it’s not clear that this should be thought of as sexual.”
Multiple sample documents pose the question “Is AGENCY gained when oppression is resisted?” to which the notes say, “That depends on whether or not the oppression was resisted violently or nonviolently.” We think it is misleading and dangerous to teach students that violent resistance is inevitable and necessary.
In response to our request for comment on the video, Bolanos said it was “not taught” and part of “a list of options to discuss intersectionality.” Given that these samples were present in the brainstorming document, we acknowledge these materials may not be in the final curriculum. However, their presence still poses serious questions. The topic of sexuality is not mentioned in the course description, yet it is one of the first topics considered by the teachers during their brainstorming, creating confusion about the goals of the course.
Furthermore, if specific course content has been developed, it is reasonable for community members to assume the resources presented at the board meeting are the ones used in classes. It is unacceptable for the district to ignore concerns and expect parents and students to support a course that may include content condoning sexually explicit behavior between minors and adults or violence. If this is “misinformation,” then the district can easily alleviate those concerns by releasing the entire curriculum.
The course description also includes questions like “How much power do I have in my society?” and learning objectives like “I can reflect on my own positions of privilege and power.”
With these questions and objectives framed as having definite answers, the course risks generalizing ethnic identities and reinforcing the fixed mindset that power and privilege are innate and cannot be changed. Combined with an oppressor-oppressed approach, which categorizes students into binaries based on their race, these topics can lead to potential alienation or division among students regardless of educational professionalism.
Ignored complaints
Despite these concerns, defense of the course was largely influenced by student input, especially during the board meetings. But it is crucial to examine which voices are being amplified.
Students who participated in this year’s pilot course either volunteered or were selected to participate by their middle school teachers. While not all pilot students may be biased toward the class, since they were not a random selection of students, their perspectives may not reflect that of the broader student body.
In fact, a Schoology survey sent in January, which was later taken down, indicated students were split on approving the course. Similarly, an Instagram poll sent out by the Associated Student Body in January resulted in a 50-50 vote on whether or not the course should be implemented. It was, however, not clear in either survey that the course would replace a semester of World History and not be an extra required elective, which may have influenced results.
Regardless, the district appears unaware of students who have concerns. During the board meeting, Austin said “not a single complaint that came forward through any of our channels” based on the pilot survey’s results despite some criticism. This suggests the district either disregarded or has not put effort into understanding the varied opinions of our community outside of a small cohort of students.
By pausing California Ethnic Studies approval for a year, the district would have more time to collect community input to ensure the curriculum fosters productive discussions for students of all backgrounds. Ideally, this would allow for a randomly selected pilot to minimize bias and collect data to further improve the course.
At the bare minimum, we ask the district to release all California Ethnic Studies instructional materials and initiate community input sessions that are transparent and collaborative as opposed to the presentation-style meetings, which many of the past ones have been.
For a course meant to teach students mutual understanding, it is contradictory to withhold information that would allow open discussions and educate the community on crucial topics.
If the purpose of ethnic studies is to have difficult, uncomfortable conversations, this is one we should be having.
Paul Wang was amazing! • Feb 12, 2025 at 5:26 am
Paul Wang, a Paly student, did a masterful job summarizing last night’s board meeting. S & S and some of the staff are failing the students of this district. Stop wasting precious time, money, and other resources!! No wonder PTA and PiE donations are cratering. The numbers of students in the district lower every year. A major overhaul is needed, starting with the leadership.
Yoram • Feb 11, 2025 at 11:20 pm
Well said.
I’d be more receptive if this remained an elective class. Making it a requirement for graduation is extraordinarily misguided. Focus on STEM, economics, basic accounting, basic law etc., and provide electives to suit students’ interest, but don’t force oppression studies on everyone.
PA Alum • Feb 11, 2025 at 7:11 pm
One exchange from the Jan 23 meeting stuck with me. In describing her concerns about the curriculum, Ms. Chiu remarked that members of a certain community felt unsafe. In response, a teacher said something to the effect of, “Check your usage of the word ‘unsafe'”. The unspoken part was, “because of your race”.
If our teachers believe that the right to feeling unsafe is race-dependent, their message of “trust us” is not only a weak one, it’s a frightening one.
Asian American Student • Feb 12, 2025 at 11:07 am
You are deeply dishonest and infantile if you think that Rowena was shut down (*50 minutes* after she brought up feeling unsafe) over her race. Nobody said that, and any attempt to make some “unspoken” guideline nonsense is really a reflection of Asian-American community chauvinism leaking out. I say this as an Asian-American!
Head-Scratching Senior • Feb 11, 2025 at 2:08 pm
The so-called “grown ups” who suffer from an infantile understanding of the world around us and have continued to indulge in really embarrassing apologism are truly representative of the limits of Palo Alto “progressive-ism” in a time of crisis.
While I applaud the article writers for providing a better editorial than last time (defending modern-day slavery in prisons), i’d like to point out that most of these comments seem to be from parents for a reason . . . not from the students that i’d hope they would try to represent. Oops.
Very Concerned • Feb 11, 2025 at 11:24 am
Thank you for the in-depth analysis and being so clear-eyed about it. I watched the board meeting where they made that decision. Your account of it and the analysis are spot on. The matter isn’t put to bed, so please be prepared to write more pieces on this topic. Thank you again.
What Will They Do Next • Feb 11, 2025 at 9:35 am
“We need to pass the bill before we know what’s in it.” Sound familiar?
PA mom • Feb 11, 2025 at 9:22 am
Wow, what a thoughtful article. It’s more thorough and better reasoned than what I’m reading in the local newspapers for sure.
Wakeup • Feb 10, 2025 at 10:26 pm
This article highlights the independent thinking, courage, and thoughtfulness that a good school should cultivate in its students. I wonder, is this the outcome of the Ethics Studies pilot course, or was it achieved without it? After all, every cloud has a silver lining!
PAUSD parent • Feb 10, 2025 at 9:34 pm
Great article and congratulations for speaking up. If only PAUSD board members were as informed as you are, they’d make better decisions on behalf of our community.
Yan • Feb 10, 2025 at 8:48 pm
I agree with every word and couldn’t have said better myself! I’m so proud of our students! Your voice is loud and clear. I hope that Don Austin and the school board will hear you this time!
Hiral Parekh • Feb 10, 2025 at 8:06 pm
I am so impressed by the writing and analysis.
Kudos – thank you for sharing your voices.
Pa • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:34 pm
This student-written article is an exemplary piece of journalism that stands out for its precision, logical structure, and balanced perspective.
The author does an excellent job of presenting both sides of the argument without appearing biased or dismissive.
The points are thoughtfully organized, and the analysis is clear and well-supported by evidence—much better than Palo Alto Online articles!
Great job! I hope this author will come to speak at the board meeting tomorrow.
Parent in PAUSD • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:31 pm
Great article. This is the true voice from the community.
A parent in PA • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:47 pm
This article provides the best and most evidence-based analysis of this event to date. I am extremely proud of the students who wrote it and admire their bravery in bringing it to publication
Pat Donahue • Feb 13, 2025 at 3:41 pm
My first thought is that in a state like CA, whose ethnic make-up is highly complex, a course in “Ethnic Studies” should not be controversial. But I’m also puzzled by the inclusion in such a program of issues pertaining to power and privilege and sexual practices in certain communities. In Political Science, sure, in Anthropology, OK, but in this course, a course that is required, the reasoning escapes me.
Joel Barbier • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:13 pm
Great, insightful and decisive article – I am impressed with the Campanile’s perspective.
I am also greatly concerned with the lack of accountability the majority of the PAUSD Board showed when voting on a poorly defined, incomplete and highly controversial curriculum…
PAUSD Parent • Feb 10, 2025 at 5:58 pm
Bravo for a well researched and thoughtful article. Many adults in our community, including some on the PAUSD board and administration, could learn a lot from you.
Star Teachout • Feb 10, 2025 at 5:49 pm
Fabulous, respectful article with a refreshing balance. I very much appreciate your examining the nuances of offering a high quality Ethnic Studies course that can be not only exemplary with our teachers’ skills, but also embraced by our community. There is hope for future journalism with this high quality writing. Thank you, truly.
Palo Alto Mom • Feb 10, 2025 at 5:33 pm
Wow! Really impressed with this article and the research and insights that the writer has put in. The maturity and thoughtfulness shown by the writer is more than a number of comments from adults I’ve seen in recent days on this topic. Keep up the great work and courage in speaking up for the student body. Thank you for making an impact in the community!
Anna • Feb 10, 2025 at 5:16 pm
That’s an amazing article and a comprehensive explanation why this course shouldn’t be implemented next school year.
Rebecca • Feb 10, 2025 at 4:45 pm
What a great article! Thanks to the editorial board for their thorough analysis!
Lyn Chen • Feb 10, 2025 at 4:42 pm
Initially, I believed that ethnic studies would benefit everyone. However, after reviewing the course materials, I was shocked by what I discovered. The content reminded me of the Cultural Revolution that took place in China from 1966 to 1976—a period widely regarded as a national disaster for the Chinese people. Astonishingly, in 2025, right here in Silicon Valley, one of the most developed regions in the world, I found history repeating itself.
First, students are being sorted by identity. Factors beyond their control—such as race or ethnicity—determine whether they are categorized as oppressors or the oppressed. This is eerily similar to how, during the Cultural Revolution, families were labeled as either “good” or “bad” based on their class background. Entire generations of children from so-called “bad” families were deprived of education and opportunity.
Second, capitalism is portrayed as inherently evil, which is deeply concerning. Such ideas may pave the way for dangerous outcomes, including promotion of a communist-style, closed-market economy that stifles innovation and freedom which are the cornerstone of the silicon valley.
Third, resistance, including violent resistance, is glorified. In this ideology, social chaos becomes inevitable. In China, we witnessed students assaulting teachers and even children attacking their own parents under this mentality.
Given these parallels, I am deeply concerned about the appropriateness of exposing 13- to 14-year-old children to such ideas—especially those that condone violence and promote distorted perspectives on identity.
Pandora Harper • Feb 10, 2025 at 4:35 pm
Great article. I really hope that the authors speak at tomorrow’s board meeting to ask that the district PAUSE. It’s incredibly important feedback from student leadership.
Tom • Feb 10, 2025 at 4:32 pm
The facts are clear:
1. The board voted to eliminate a semester of World history without knowing what will be removed
2. The board voted to make ethnic studies mandatory without knowing what’s in the curriculum.
Joel Barbier • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:19 pm
Precisely… The majority of the PAUSD Board is not doing its job – not driving accountability! The teachers working on this curriculum had two years to define it and failed. This is a disappointment…
Education Advocate • Feb 10, 2025 at 6:36 pm
Re: “The board voted to make ethnic studies mandatory without knowing what’s in the curriculum.”
Those most familiar with the curriculum of this course are the 2 board members who have carried over from the previous term (Mr. Dharap & Ms. Segal), as well as the 3 members who have left the board.
Those least familiar with the course are the majority of the board – the 3 new members (Ms. Kamhi, Mr. Salcman, & Ms. Chiu). They should’ve been given the opportunity to be brought up to speed prior to the vote, which they didn’t have access to prior to being elected.
Ms. Segal & Mr. Dharap have worked on this for 2 years (along w/ their 3 former co-trustees), and it seems clear that they forced this early vote because they knew their 3 new trustees did not support it, and therefore chose to do so asap while they were still “new” and not yet up to speed. They could have moved this vote out a bit and supported their new co-trustees in the process of understanding the curriculum. The fact that they did not reflects poorly on them, and looks very much like the old board is still in power, as opposed to the majority who are newly elected.
Parent in PAUSD • Feb 10, 2025 at 1:43 pm
Thanks for this in depth, thoughtful analysis- it’s clear you all put a lot of time into this editorial.