Activism
COMMENTARY: Resistance to School Closings and Privatization Drives Candidacies in 2022 School Board Elections
Since the State took over the district in 2003, more than 30 schools have been closed, debts have soared and the ranks of high-paid outside consultants have burgeoned. While the closing of schools was justified as a path to financial stability, there has never been an accounting of the savings and there is always a new budget shortfall and a new list of schools to close.
By Ken Epstein | Post News Group
Heading into the Fall 2022 school board election season, the political atmosphere remains highly energized in the wake of the community-wide rebellion that started last year when the school board, directed by state officials and their representatives, pushed the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) to close schools and dramatically cut school spending.
There are three seats that are up for election on the seven-member board. None of the incumbents, who backed the school closures, are running for re-election. There are a total of nine candidates, three in each of the three races. At least six of the candidates, two in each race, self-identify as progressives who are opposed to school closures and privatization.
The rebellion in the school community erupted in early 2022 after the school board approved the closure of 16 schools last school year and this year. Schools and communities responded with daily walkouts and marches, as well as citywide mass marches and rallies. Two staff members at Westlake Middle School held a prolonged hunger strike that captured international attention.
Joining the opposition, the Oakland City Council passed a resolution against the closings, as did the Alameda Labor Council and the Alameda County Board of Education.
Possibly in response to the pressure, the school closure list was reduced from 16 to 11. The decision to close some of the schools that were slated to close last year was postponed to this year, giving sites time to organize to save themselves. At least two schools, Westlake Middle and Prescott, were permanently removed from the closure list.
Ultimately, three schools were closed in June.
Opposition to school closures gained strength from a newfound alliance between rank-and-file teachers and longshore workers, members of ILWU Local 10, who formed a new organization, Schools and Labor Against Privatization (SLAP), has held joint actions against school closures and the City’s proposed giveaway of public land at the Port of Oakland to the Oakland A’s corporation.
In addition, community anger ended the political career of Alameda County Supt. Of Schools L. Karen Monroe, who was voted out of office in November. It was Monroe, as the front person for the state officials and the state-funded nonprofit Fiscal Crisis Management and Assistance Team (FCMAT), who threatened OUSD with direct takeover if it didn’t close schools and make budget cuts that officials were demanding.
Within these highly charged unfolding events, at least six progressive candidates have stepped up to oppose school closings and the privatization of schools and public resources.
The candidates are optimistic, speaking at various community forums, saying they have a chance in this election to swing the school board majority against privatization and closing more schools. They say a change in the balance of power on the board would make a dramatic change in Oakland’s educational leaders’ willingness to accept the decades-long dismantling of the public school system.
While hopeful that this is a moment for change, many school advocates have a sober estimate of what it will take to undo the damage done to Oakland schools by the onslaught of education privatizers that is devastating public education across the United States.
There is currently an understanding among many advocates that state Democratic leaders, who have operated through FCMAT and the County Office of Education at least since 2003, are deeply committed to an austerity agenda and not likely to back off simply because there is a new school board majority.
Many see that it will take a resolute and united school board, allied with a powerful citywide grassroots movement and community leaders with allies throughout the state to dislodge the colonial regime that dominates and drains the resources of OUSD.
Since the State took over the district in 2003, more than 30 schools have been closed, debts have soared and the ranks of high-paid outside consultants have burgeoned. While the closing of schools was justified as a path to financial stability, there has never been an accounting of the savings and there is always a new budget shortfall and a new list of schools to close.
At present, about 30% of Oakland students attend charter schools, many located at sites the district closed.
Speaking at a meeting with candidates organized by SLAP, several candidates emphasized the importance of electing a board that is connected to the community movement against closures and privatization.
“This is a moment — school closures have galvanized the entire community,” said District 6 candidate Valerie Bachelor. “We need to take (this) as an opportunity to really engage our community in a much deeper way, and this election is the way to do that. We need to get a super-majority to the school board so we can end this now and forever.”
Said District 4 candidate Pecolia Manigo, “Privatization is a much bigger agenda than just charters. (It’s about) real estate attempts to sell district properties (and) privatization in district contracts. There is an overuse of a lot of consultants and a lot of lawyers.”
“She said, “We’re trying to get four votes if not five” on the board. It’s about being clear about the moment we’re in, because we may not have this moment ever again.”
More news about the school board candidates and where they stand on issues will follow in coming weeks.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of September 18 – 24, 2024
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of September 18 – 24, 2024
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
Activism
OPINION: Why the N-Word Should Be Eliminated from Schools: A Call to Educators, Parents and Students
The N-word’s use in schools, intentionally or otherwise, preserves a cycle of racial abuse, degradation, and discrimination which are violations to the dignity of African American students. Its usage perpetuates a legacy of hate and is a dignity violation that makes it a pressing issue for educators to address. Not addressing use of the N word in school contradicts the principles of equity and inclusion that educational institutions strive to uphold.
By Zetha A. Nobles,
The presence and rampant use of the N-word in educational settings poses significant challenges to the social-emotional learning (SEL) and psychological well-being of students and teachers.
The historical and contemporary usage of the N-word carries deep-seated racial connotations and trauma, making it imperative to address its impact in the school environment.
Here’s why the N-word should be eradicated from schools and its detrimental effects on SEL and psychological health.
Historical Context and Significance
The use of the N-word is considered a severe violation of dignity due to its deeply hurtful and dehumanizing nature. The N-word is historically rooted in a long and sordid history of racism, oppression and dehumanization.
It was and is used to dehumanize, degrade, demean and denigrate African American people. Its historical presence is marked by extreme violence and pernicious systemic oppression.
Despite the evolving societal appropriation and the exploitation of the word in hip hop music and other media forms, its controversial use has morphed or mutated into a word now used to signify friendship or endearment.
In schools its use is complex, representing camaraderie, being cool and defiant while consciously and unconsciously dehumanizing African American students and staff.
The N-word has a long history of being used as a tool of oppression and degradation against Black people. It was employed during periods of slavery, segregation, and ongoing racial discrimination to strip individuals of their humanity and reinforce systemic racism.
Its use is a painful reminder of this history and the ongoing struggle against racism. Its impact:
- Dehumanization: When the N-word is used, it reduces Black individuals to a derogatory stereotype, stripping away their identity and worth as human beings. It perpetuates the idea that certain groups are inferior and unworthy of respect and dignity.
- Impact on Self-Worth: Hearing or being called the N-word can have profound psychological and emotional impacts, leading to feelings of shame, anger, and diminished self-worth. It communicates to individuals that they are lesser or undeserving solely because of their race.
- Interpersonal Harm: The use of the N-word in interpersonal interactions conveys disrespect, hostility, and a lack of regard for the feelings and dignity of others. It undermines efforts to build inclusive and respectful relationships.
- Symbol of Structural Injustice: The N-word symbolizes larger societal injustices and inequalities. Its continued use reflects ongoing racial prejudice and discrimination, perpetuating harmful attitudes and behaviors.
Given these reasons, using the N-word is not just a matter of inappropriate language; it represents a significant violation of human dignity and reinforces harmful racial stereotypes and hierarchies. It is crucial to reject and actively challenge the use of this word to promote equality, respect, and dignity for all individuals.
In schools, the word retains its harmful and damaging impact and remains a powerful symbol of racial animosity. The N-word’s use in schools, intentionally or otherwise, preserves a cycle of racial abuse, degradation, and discrimination which are violations to the dignity of African American students. Its usage perpetuates a legacy of hate and is a dignity violation that makes it a pressing issue for educators to address. Not addressing use of the N word in school contradicts the principles of equity and inclusion that educational institutions strive to uphold.
Impact on Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)
Social-emotional learning is crucial for students’ development as it encompasses the skills needed to manage emotions, establish positive relationships, and make responsible decisions. The use of the N-word in schools disrupts this process in several key and critical ways:
- Emotional Trauma: The N-word is a trigger for emotional pain, particularly for African American students and teachers. It can evoke feelings of anger, sadness, shame and humiliation, which hinder the ability to engage fully in the learning process.
- Hostile Learning Environment: A safe and supportive learning environment is essential for effective SEL. The use of the N-word creates a hostile and unsafe atmosphere, leading to increased anxiety, disrespect, and stress among students and teachers.
- Relationship Building: One of the goals of SEL is to foster positive relationships. The use of derogatory language such as the N-word fosters division and mistrust among students and staff.
Psychological Impact on Students and Teachers
The psychological effects of the N-word on students and teachers are profound and far-reaching. For students, especially those of African American descent, the word can lead to feelings of inferiority and exclusion. This not only affects their academic performance but also their self-esteem and mental health. Studies have shown that exposure to racial slurs can increase levels of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues.
For teachers, addressing the use of the N-word in the classroom is a significant challenge. It places an emotional burden on them, particularly for teachers of color who may feel personally targeted. The stress of managing such situations can lead to burnout and affect their ability to provide a supportive learning environment.
Strategies for Eliminating the N-Word from Schools
To effectively eliminate the N-word from schools, a comprehensive approach is necessary. Here are some strategies:
- Clear Policies and Consequences: Schools must implement and enforce policies that explicitly prohibit the use of the N-word and other derogatory language. Clear consequences for violations should be established and communicated to all members of the school community.
- Cultural Competency Training: Providing cultural competency and anti-racism training for teachers, staff, and students can foster a more inclusive and respectful environment. This training should include the historical context of the N-word and its impact on individuals and communities as well as alternative language.
- Support Systems: Schools should offer culturally congruent support systems, such as counseling and peer support groups, for students and teachers affected by the use of the N-word. These resources can help individuals process their experiences, mitigate psychological harm and co-create a culture of dignity.
- Community Engagement: Engaging the broader school community, including parents and local organizations, in dialogue about the impact of the N-word can reinforce the school’s commitment to creating a respectful and inclusive environment.
In addition to the moral and ethical arguments against the use of the N-word, there are also legal and policy considerations that support its prohibition in schools. Many school districts have anti-bullying and anti-discrimination policies that explicitly prohibit the use of derogatory language, including racial slurs. The use of the N-word in schools can lead to disciplinary actions and legal consequences for both students and staff who violate these policies.
Furthermore, federal laws such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. Schools that fail to address the use of the N-word and other forms of racial harassment may be in violation of these laws, potentially resulting in investigations and penalties from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights.
Addressing the N-word in educational settings is not just about prohibiting a word; it is about dismantling a symbol of hate and fostering an environment where all students and teachers can thrive.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of September 11 -17, 2024
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of September 11 – 17, 2024
To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of August 21 – 27, 2024
-
Antonio Ray Harvey3 weeks ago
“The Nation is Watching”: Cal Legislature Advances Four Reparations Bills
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of August 28 – September 4, 2024
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Oakland Architect William ‘Bill’ Coburn, 80
-
California Black Media3 weeks ago
Sec. of State Weber Releases Voter Registration Report
-
Activism4 weeks ago
A New Coalition Says: ‘Respect Our Vote – No Recalls!’
-
Business3 weeks ago
Gov. Newsom Signs New Laws Strengthening State’s Crackdown on Organized Retail Crimes
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
World Arts West Dance Festival Puts Culture and Joy Center Stage