CRT Controversy
Critical race theory should be included in the curriculum
December 16, 2021
After three years of traditional history courses, my senior class was finally deemed ready to discuss critical race theory (CRT). I had no clue what to expect. Would tensions boil over in our discussion? Would our teacher present biased sources? Instead, we analyzed numerous sources and expressed unique opinions, with complete respect and civility.
Critical race theory analyzes U.S. history through the lens of systemic racism, an idea that has exploded across America in recent years. Americans are divided on whether schools should support, teach or even discuss CRT.
This brief senior unit is reflective of CESJDS’s stance on the theory; the school isn’t unequivocally embracing CRT but isn’t shying away from the topic either. By introducing the theory’s ideas in a constructive manner, JDS is fostering a better understanding of American history.
The school’s approach stems from a framework called the Diversity Equity Inclusion and Justice (DEIJ) Learning Framework. The document was carefully crafted by administrators in the 2021-2022 school year and commits to teaching about inequality, injustice and privilege.
In today’s polarized climate, addressing these topics is bound to trigger some level of alarm. In Washington Jewish Week, parents of JDS alumni raised concerns through an open letter. The letter expresses fear that the framework discourages free thought and mainstreams a radical ideology.
In reality, there is very little evidence to necessitate this reaction. Neither teachers nor students are restricted by this document. During my history class’s discussion, minority opinions were freely shared without any animosity or angry responses. I am glad that our school is able to instill freedom of speech and thought while also introducing us to critical theories.
Despite this, one phrase in particular from the framework has drawn the most criticism. “Students will recognize that power and privilege influence relationships on interpersonal, intergroup and institutional levels and consider how they have been affected by those dynamics while identifying figures, groups, events and a variety of strategies and philosophies relevant to the history of social justice around the world.”
Recognizing “power and privilege” was specifically critiqued in the parent-written op-ed. The op-ed authors interpreted this incredibly specific sentence through a racial and political lens. While this idea could have been more clearly conveyed, the framework is acknowledging power and privilege as two factors in the larger context of history.
History Department Chair Mark Buckley teaches CRT in an unbiased way in his senior classes. He views the framework as applicable beyond the U.S. and race.
“It’s [the framework] not just racial. The feudal system was built around the ideas of power and privilege, so understanding those dynamics can be applied in a variety of different contexts,” Buckley said. “I don’t think it has to be a racially charged perspective.”
While some schools have botched the implementation of CRT and become kindling for conservative pundits, JDS has not. The document itself is a general guideline of our school’s objectives and nothing more.
Since its establishment, JDS has been constantly evolving and modernizing its curriculum. But the line of unfairly restricting speech or thought is not being crossed. Teachers, administrators and students are all doing their part to continue fostering productive, analytical and respectful conversations.
Brandy Shufutinsky • Jan 4, 2022 at 9:02 pm
December 2021
I was one of the two co-authors of the Open Letter to Washington Jewish Week about the CESJDS DEIJ curriculum. I am the proud mother of two former CESJDS students, a social worker, educator, diversity trainer, and Black Jewish woman who has experienced her fair share of racism. I recently completed my EdD in Education. I was glad to see that JDS students have in the pages of the Lion’s Tale debated the issue of how race and racism are taught in schools. I hope you’ll consider another perspective on the topic.
Recent debates about CRT and whether it should be taught in school have all missed an important factor. One side insists that CRT should be taught because it highlights racism faced by Black Americans and others throughout US history. The other side argues against the teaching of CRT because they view it as a method of indoctrinating students to believe that America is racist, devoid of virtue. While both sides may have a point or two, I believe their arguments are flawed. Before debating whether or not CRT should be taught in K-12 schools we need to define CRT and examine exactly what it means to “teach CRT.”
Critical Race Theory surmises that racism is embedded in every institution in the United States. It theorizes that any and all inequity can be explained solely by racism. CRT holds the following principles:
• Racism is so ingrained in daily life that everyone can fuel it by their behavior
• Only outcomes, as opposed to individual beliefs, should be considered when examining racism
• Any and all disparities in outcomes are due to racism (systemic/institutionalized)
• Racism that existed in the past still exists (to the same extent) in current times, negating all progress and achievements.
Those who are in favor of CRT insist that it is the only way to address racism, bigotry, and race-based oppression. However, they fail to identify how all of those things have been taught, and are taught, respectfully, thoroughly, and accurately by educators who do not use a Critical Theory lens. You see, thousands upon thousands of students have learned about racial injustices, past and current, without using CRT as the lens in which to examine them. Students have learned about the horrors of chattel slavery in the United States, about lynchings, red-lining, Jim Crow, and race massacres, like Tulsa–all of which have been and are often taught without using CRT.
Some of those who argue against teaching CRT in K-12 schools base their arguments on the belief that we now live in a post-racial country. They admit that racism existed in the United States in the past, but often use progress in race relations as evidence that it no longer exists today. Often, they base their concerns over teaching CRT on the assumption that speaking about racism will lead to division amongst students. They ignore that historical and current facts have been part of K-12 curricula for decades, including discussions about racism, bigotry, and prejudice, and have not led to widespread divisiveness over the American narrative.
My position is not that CRT should not be taught in schools, but rather it should not be the exclusive lens that material is taught through. Here’s an example that may provide a better understanding of my stance. When students are taught about a religion they learn its origins, foundational beliefs, holidays, and maybe even how it is practiced. This is completely different from teaching students how to adhere to said religion. Learning about Christianity is not the same thing as learning how to be a Christian, with the latter requiring students to forego all other religions in favor of one doctrine. This is where “teaching CRT” becomes problematic. When it is used as the only lens through which to examine historical and current injustices it is not teaching, but indoctrinating.
It is my hope that students are presented with a plethora of information, knowledge, and theories in which to better understand the world. This should not be done in a vacuum, where only some information is allowed in, limiting intellectual curiosity and diversity of thought. I would encourage both the schools and the parents to ask the following question: What would a thoughtful counter-narrative be to CRT and who is giving voice to it? You don’t have to agree with them, but do you understand the perspectives of Black intellectuals such as New York Times Columnist and Columbia Professor John McWhorter? How does their perspective differ from a CRT-oriented perspective?
These are polarized times in America. I hope CESJDS students will not merely fall in line with the poles, but will seek out alternative and more creative ways to understand our complex reality.
Respectfully,
Brandy Shufutinsky