Is It Education or Political Activism? Turning our children into “militant leftists.”

Or is it both?

The California Board of Education “wants to turn your children into militant leftists.”

In an opinion piece dated March 18, Kaylee McGhee White wrote in the Washington Examiner that “a divisive and radical educational curriculum that would force a series of courses into the public school system based in critical race theory and the social justice agenda of the Left” is expected to be passed by the California Board of Education.

She concludes by writing, “These courses will become the new norm in California, and before long, they will spread to other blue states too.”

Like Washington where perhaps, just perhaps, the Clover Park School District (CPSD) will follow suit?

According to the powers-that-be at OSPI, those barriers are “power and privilege, implicit biases, and institutional racism.”

OSPI also references the National Equity Project’s (NEP) site which claims the “current system” – presumably including education – is an “oppressive, dehumanizing system that reinforces the marginalization of certain groups.” As such, individuals need to be “liberated” from the present system.

For a moment, consider that one of SEL’s curriculum goals is to “cultivate students’ political consciousness and support students to challenge injustice.”

Is it a stretch to think that the mix of OSPI’s political leanings in its SEL curriculum will become a goal of the CPSD?

At its upcoming April 19, 2021 meeting, the Lakewood City Council will discuss and vote on a joint resolution with the CPSD that targets “systemic inequality and racism (as) barriers to assuring the basic principles of diversity, equity, inclusion for historically marginalized people groups.”

The opening WHEREAS statement of Resolution 2021-04 (p.66) reads:

“The people of the City of Lakewood and the Clover Park School District value and acknowledge that diversity, equity, and inclusion are essential to our community.”

When did the citizens agree to this statement?

When did the city or school district’s board seek input from the citizens so as to make that all-inclusive claim?

At the CPSD board meeting the night of March 22, 2021, Grant Twyman, Diversity and Inclusion Program Manager, presented on the district’s “equity journey.”

He shared that only 31 percent of the 83 participants in workshops concerning Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) were categorized as “community members.” This finding is not representative of the people of Lakewood.

During the working workshops on diversity, equity and inclusion, the participants had been asked about their level of trust – presumably their trust toward or within – the school district. Fifty-eight percent said they were “maintaining;” twenty-two percent said that trust needed to be built; and twenty percent said trust needed to be restored.

Even with this poor sampling, it is easy to see why.

Bear in mind, this is the same board that has disallowed any of Paul Wagemann’s requests for background information on the consultants which will provide diversity, equity and inclusion training; this is the same board that has denied Wagemann’s request to have his explanation concerning his “crack the whip” comment entered into the record.

Twyman was correct when he stated, “To build a healthy community, trust is critical, essential, and foundational.”

The school board has a dismal record of transparency; the statistical data the board is acting on is questionable; and what is additionally significant in this “equity journey” is the anemic level of trust.