Manassas schools’ proposed anti-racism policy an excuse to explain classroom challenges

My daughter is a rising 5th grader going into Mayfield Intermediate School in Manassas.

I’ve spent some time reviewing the proposed policies to be added to Manassas City’s Foundations and Commitments. Code ACC [the city school division’s newly proposed anti-racism policy] and DAB [newly proposed diversity, equity, and inclusion policy].

I want to begin by saying I believe the majority of this Board to be committed to improving the lives of Manassas’ kids, and there is no doubt energy in America for rethinking certain systems.

ACC and DAB use a lot of empty corporate language which obscure a massive overhaul to the mission of Manassas Schools.

The central claim of DAB is that inequity exists in Manassas student outcomes on the basis of race. It should be noted that studying performance by race instead of other metrics like class or zip code is a choice. And a revealing one.

It’d be a lot harder to determine if the students struggling the most were clustered in low-income zip codes, or are impacted by high crime or family dysfunction. That would be difficult, it would also be more illuminating for guiding policy & tax dollars.

Tying success to equity in outcomes says little about if the ideal is to raise everyone up or simply handicap top performers. A lower district average for test scores is obviously not a greater good than a higher district average on the net, even if it features disparity amongst groups. These distinctions matter to parents.

What this policy aims to fix is bigger than Manassas City Schools.

Systemic racism in certain areas of life is real. But using it as a catch-all excuse to explain away classroom challenges is dishonest and burdens kids with a perception of struggle that has real consequences on their performance.

Code DAB correctly recognizes the fast track to special ed and the principal’s office for black and brown kids, as well as any child — white, blue, or purple who might just be shy or learn at a different pace. In my time doing criminal justice reform advocacy, I’ve seen the same things.

The disciplinary school to prison pipeline & how the criminalization of difference sets people up for failure in the classroom, and a lifetime of harm.

But what this policy does is wrong. It looks at the historical struggle and places Manassas City schools in the position of being responsible for eliminating social ills beyond its purview.

It calls for hiring waves of “culturally responsive personnel” as if we live in a society or a city with cultural cohesion within racial groups. What is the culture of mixed-race households?

• What is the culture of a Latino student?
• Does a Venezuelan have the same culture as a Guatemalan?

You can’t teach based on culture. We can teach with attention to language barriers and helping everyone keep up.

DAB empowers this Board to funnel money toward consultants, politically charged staff training, and administrative glut — so long as any inequity in outcomes exists.

It’s a blank check.

What it does not do is say that Manassas City Schools is responsible for teaching kids to read. It does not say that illiteracy is directly linked to incarceration, and incarceration to broken families, and broken families, to poor performance in classrooms, and poor performance back to crime.

In a vicious cycle that doesn’t stop.

The board should re-evaluate the scope and motive of Codes DAB and ACC, and reassert its commitment to teaching reading, math, and science as the key to opportunity in life.

As long as your commitments are to “the continuous work to dismantle systemic oppression” our schools are absolved of responsibility for the things they are for — which is literacy and knowledge.

Some may be afraid to say it, but every parent watching this cares primarily about their individual child flourishing, not group dynamics.

I ask the Board to consider the gravity of these proposals, and how they radically shift responsibility for performance away from our educators.

And to practice patience and prudence by not passing these policies in their current form. They are too broad. Too sweeping and ideological. They are not scientific. They’re not focused.

And if more time is given to the public in the post-COVID 19 and post-ZOOM call world to get familiar with the proposals, I’d argue they’ll be deeply unpopular.

Stephen Kent
Manassas, Va.