Education Week - November 2, 2022 - 14

Atlanta District Drafts a Policy to Carry Out
State's 'Divisive Concepts' Law
Legal experts say the policy balances
state requirements with protecting
students' and teachers' rights
to discuss race in class
By Eesha Pendharkar
How do you write a policy to implement
a state law you disagree with?
That's the conundrum that faced
Atlanta public schools after Georgia
lawmakers passed a law this summer
restricting certain classroom conversations
about race and racism. Under
the law, school districts were required
to formulate policies aligned with it.
It's a task districts across the country
this year may face in the wake of a wave
of so-called " anti-CRT laws, " passed
by 17 states. Georgia's law, which went
into effect July 1, outlaws teaching students
that anyone by virtue of their race
" bears individual responsibility for actions
committed in the past by other
individuals of the same race, " or that
they " should feel anguish, guilt, or any
other form of psychological distress, "
because of their race. It bans " race
stereotyping " or " race scapegoating, "
espousing personal beliefs which the
law deems indoctrination of students,
or teaching that the United States is
fundamentally racist.
The Atlanta school board was already
on record opposing those kinds
of limitations on teaching. Its new policy,
drafted by the school board last
week, walks the tightrope between
meeting the requirements of the law
and protecting educators' freedom to
continue to have honest, uncensored
conversations about race and racism.
Parents will have 30 days to comment
on this version, after which their feedback
will be considered for any edits
to be made before final version of the
policy goes into effect in November,
said Eshé Collins, chair of the Atlanta
board of education.
" If you firmly believe that teachers
should be able to have this intellectual
freedom to teach and our students
should have the opportunity to learn
and experience the world that we are
actually preparing them to enter into,
what it takes are courageous steps to
speak out, " Collins said.
" Knowing our city, knowing what
our parents are demanding and the
type of education that they want their
children to experience, it was important
for us to lead the way and speak
out against the bill. "
Atlanta's draft policy states that
the school system " supports and encourages
an environment that fosters
independent and critical thought, including
the studying and teaching of
issues which may be considered controversial
or divisive. "
And it explicitly says that teachers
and students have the right to teach and
learn about issues considered controversial
or divisive and to express opinions
on them without fear of retaliation.
But, in keeping with the state law, the
draft policy also outlines a process for
parents to file complaints against the
district and advises teachers that they
can continue to discuss controversial issues
" in a professionally and academically
appropriate manner and without
espousing personal political beliefs. "
And it notes that the school system
can't prohibit curricula from addressing
slavery, racial oppression, racial
segregation, or racial discrimination.
" That encapsulates what I believe
that boards of education and school
systems should be putting in their
policies to say ... 'we are going to
teach these concepts because they
are important, and we don't believe it
violates the law,' " said Gerald Griggs,
an attorney and the president of the
Georgia's NAACP chapter.
" And so I think that it will survive
any type of legal scrutiny because of
the vagueness of the law, " he added.
Vague language opens laws to
interpretation
In other states, these laws have led
to teachers self-censoring because
they're afraid of retaliation or complaints.
Districts have been penalized
after parents complained about lessons
or books about race and racism
violating the divisive concepts laws,
and educators have been fired or have
quit in opposition to the censorship
and scrutiny.
" Teachers have been teaching
about race and racism in U.S. history
because race and racism exists
in U.S. history. But no one is telling
individual students that they should
be held accountable for the actions
of people centuries ago, " said Kristen
Duncan, an assistant professor in the
department of teaching and learning
at Clemson University.
Georgia's law, much like most of its
precursors in other states, is so vague
that districts can interpret it as they
choose when it comes to policymaking
and implementation, Griggs said.
Atlanta's interpretation balances the
rights of students and teachers with
the legal requirements of having to
pass a policy, he added.
Atlanta is a predominantly Black
school district with a large population
of Black teachers, which is why it's
especially important that lessons on
race and racism are not censored in
the district, Duncan said.
" These conversations that have
been deemed controversial in a lot
of places have always been happening
in these spaces, because Black
14 | EDUCATION WEEK | November 2, 2022 | www.edweek.org
teachers often feel it is part of their responsibility
to help Black students in
particular, learn how to navigate racism, "
she said. " And it looks to me like
APS wants to ensure that this is able
to still happen, because this is one of
the ways that Black teachers care for
Black students. "
How effective the policy is will depend
on how teachers interpret it
and how it influences curriculum,
said Keffrelyn Brown, a professor of
cultural studies in education at The
University of Texas at Austin and the
co-founder for Center for Innovation
in Race, Teaching, and Curriculum.
" But from the standpoint of their
objectives, it appears that they are
acknowledging that it's important
for students to learn about race and
the truth about our nation's history, "
Brown said. " And Atlanta public
schools are saying we believe this is
important, and so we are going to
strike that balance. "
Could Atlanta's policy be a
blueprint for others?
Whether or not this policy will be
a model for other districts across the
country depends on each state's law, she
said. But it's a good example of a district
standing up for accurate and honest lessons
about race, racism, and history.
" What I think this gives us that might
be useful across the country is an example
of a school district that is stepping
up and saying that we can't do the work
that we are supposed to do without
making sure that our students have access
to an accurate body of knowledge
as they're moving through school.
" By saying that, " Brown continued,
" it brings some level of security
for teachers, that they don't have to
worry about mentioning race, or talking
about race, when race actually has
to be talked about in order to address
specific kinds of curricular knowledge,
like slavery or civil rights. "
Collins, the board chair, hopes it will
serve as a template for other districts in
Georgia and beyond, and has spoken to
some leaders in other states who are in
the position of coming up with a resolution
or policy to align with these laws.
" There is this fear and intimidation
from their state legislatures and state
leaders, if they do, in fact, speak out, "
she said. " I often tell them about the
organizing and the coalition-building
that needs to happen to gain the support
that they need to issue a statement
and to have a firm stance and
firm position on that. "
Atlanta public schools had support
in its opposition to the law and in
drafting the policy from community
groups and leaders, state senators that
represent the area, and labor unions,
Collins said.
But she's worried about rural Georgia
districts without the community
support Atlanta has buckling under
the pressure of the law.
" It is always our goal to lead by example, "
she said. " Because the reality
is, in other parts of the state where we
have more of our rural school systems,
they're probably feeling a lot more
pressure because their communities
and constituents are a lot more singular
than the diversity that we have in
the metro Atlanta area. "
However, Griggs from the NAACP
fears that other Georgia districts will
not interpret the law the same way,
and that some conservative districts
will perceive the policy as a political
statement, which he said it shouldn't
be. " If teaching that dogs were sicced
on people, and people were excluded
from voting with poll taxes and literacy
tests-if that makes people feel
uncomfortable, and thus should be
banned by law, I would argue that the
law is unconstitutional, " he said.
"
There is this fear
and intimidation
from their state
legislatures and
state leaders, if
they do, in fact,
speak out.
ESHÉ COLLINS
Chair
Atlanta Board of Education
Tarras79 and iStock/Getty
http://www.edweek.org
Education Week - November 2, 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - November 2, 2022
