In the Ethnic Studies Debate, the Hardest Work Starts Now

It took four years of negotiations, dozens of rewrites, more than 100,000 formal public comments and countless slights, slurs, micro-aggressions and cross-cultural insults. But California finally has an Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum for our public school students. As is the case with anything that is produced after such an elongated, combative and emotional process, the final result is decidedly uneven.

The bad news is that the model curriculum (or ESMC) does not include much information about American Jews. The ethnic studies discipline in higher education has historically focused only on the experiences of African Americans, Latinos, Asian Pacific Islanders and Native Americans. Efforts to include Jews, Sikhs, Armenians and many other of California’s under-represented minority communities were largely unsuccessful, as their experiences were included only in a glorified appendix titled “inter-ethnic bridge building.” This add-on will incorporate sample discussions and suggested lesson plans that focus on the excluded groups, but it’s unlikely that it will see the light of day in any schools outside the communities in question.

The good news is that the model curriculum did not include much information about American Jews. The first draft of the curriculum contained several anti-Semitic references, laudatory comments about the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement and no reference at all to anti-Semitism in the list of ethnic and race-based hatreds outlined in the document. The Jewish Legislative Caucus, JPAC and the Jewish Community Relations Council deserve credit for their work to force the removal of the most objectionable wording and sentiments.

But this was the easy part. California’s Jewish leaders are well-versed in the art of State Capitol politics and effectively employed their experience, contacts and understanding of the policy process to improve the model curriculum. But that curriculum is only a suggestion at this point: no public school is required to use the proposed course or any specific part of it. (That may change next year, as legislation to require the ESMC’s use has been re-introduced.)

But now the debate shifts from State Capitol committee rooms to hundreds of school board meetings and principals’ offices, where individual schools and school districts will decide which recommendations to take as they develop their own ethnic studies courses. Unlike the Capitol, where the Jewish community works with great effectiveness and confidence, these district and school-based decisions will be made in environments much less familiar to Jewish influencers and through insular processes Jewish leaders are ill-prepared to navigate.

Now the debate shifts from State Capitol committee rooms to hundreds of school board meetings and principals’ offices, where individual schools and school districts will decide which recommendations to take… [these] decisions will be made in environments much less familiar to Jewish influencers and through insular processes Jewish leaders are ill-prepared to navigate.

For example, every school and school district will decide whether or how to include the two suggested lesson plans regarding the Jewish experience in their ethnic studies courses. The last four years have demonstrated how well-entrenched the supporters of traditional ethnic studies pedagogy are within the state’s educational establishment. They have equally developed networks at K-12 schools and districts throughout the state. The Jewish community’s relationships in the schools where these lessons are most needed are not nearly as strong. But if the partial victory of including the Jewish experience in the ESMC’s appendix is to make any practical difference, Jewish leaders are going to have to develop that outreach capacity very quickly.

The Jewish community’s relationships in the schools where these lessons are most needed are not nearly as strong.

The question then becomes who would spearhead this urgent effort. The Anti-Defamation League does heroic work every day to combat the forces of anti-Semitism. But they are most effective as first responders rather than general practitioners. After years of focusing almost exclusively on international matters, the American Jewish Committee has recently begun to reengage more strongly on domestic matters. But the organization is unlikely to fully commit itself to such work until current CEO David Harris’s successor takes over. The Bay Area Jewish Community Relations Council is a regional organization that has admirably stepped into a leadership role in the ethnic studies debate, but the lack of an LA-based counterpart limits its potential impact moving forward. And the Jewish Legislative Caucus and JPAC continue to do admirable work but would benefit greatly from a community-based partner able to take on a challenge such as this one.

The California Jewish community has spent decades doing invaluable work as part of a worldwide effort to organize and advocate on behalf of the state of Israel. But the disquieting truth is that our community currently lacks the infrastructure or organizational capacity to mount a similar effort to ensure that millions of California public school students learn about the Jewish experience. In the weeks ahead, we’ll see whether the will exists here to try to accomplish this critical goal.

Dan Schnur teaches political communications at UC Berkeley, USC and Pepperdine. He hosts the weekly webinar “Politics in the Time of Coronavirus” for the Los Angeles World Affairs Council & Town Hall.