Perhaps my biggest frustration in running for Texas State Board of Education District 10 has been the way certain editorial boards have been unable to see the differences between me and my Republican opponent. These people look at us, two women with Ph.D.s in education, and conclude that the safer choice is to back the Republican in red-state Texas. Safer for their reputations, perhaps, but certainly not safer for Texas children. For the benefit of those editorial boards, I have highlighted key differences between me and my opponent below in bold.
The current State Board of Education has politicized the curriculum-writing process because of the narrow personal political agendas of a few extreme Republican members who have depended on advocates of voucher programs for financial and political support. We have an opportunity to prevent the extremists from reprising what they have done with science and history standards, but to do so will require strong leadership from someone willing to stand up to the extremists. Repeatedly, so-called moderate Republicans on the current Board have failed to do so. My Republican opponent Marsha Farney, unlike me, has refused to state she would not align herself with those who politicize the Board. Her investment choices provide a clear indication of her fundamental values and political preferences.
Ken Mercer and the other extremists on the State Board of Education would have us believe that Social Studies textbooks in our state have been promoting the "Islamic agenda". The only problem is that the textbook used as the exemplar isn't in use in Texas and if it was it could only have been with the approval of the very members of the SBOE that are making an issue of it.
To paraphrase Pastor Niemoeller's famous quote: "First they came for the Muslims and I did not speak out - because I was not a Muslim. Then they came for the Mormons and I did not speak out - because I was not a Mormon. Then they came for the Catholics and I did not speak out - because I was not a Catholic. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Perhaps Mercer and his fringe associates believe that Texans live in fear of "the other" and scapegoating members of other faiths will bring them votes in November. I believe that Texans are better than that and electing Rebecca Bell-Metereau to the State Board of Education will prove that.
The Executive Board of the Texas Stonewall Democratic Caucus (TSDC) voted unanimously on September 12 to contribute $500 each to 12 Democratic candidates running for the Texas House and the State Board of Education.
Democratic incumbents receiving $500 each include the following.
Valinda Bolton (District 47-Austin)
Diana Maldonado (District 52-Round Rock)
Paula Pierson (District 93-Arlington)
Robert Miklos (District 101-Mesquite)
Carol Kent (District 102-Dallas)
Kristi Thibaut (District 133-Houston)
Ellen Cohen (District 134-Houston)
Democratic challengers receiving contributions were the following three.
Our SBOE races got lots of attention last May, and they've maintained some strong momentum throughout the summer. As they approach the stretch run, and if you're not as excited about helping out with Bill White or any of our other statewide races, I'd strongly recommend you give Judy and Rebecca's campaign a call. They are true champions of real curriculum change in Texas -- which, when you get down to it, can be some of the most important change in education we must achieive this cycle.
Get more information about how you can help at their website:
The Republican Party of Texas is making it their mission for Republicans to hide from voters and refuse to debate. We know all about Rick Chicken Perry -- take a look at all the ads around BOR if you don't. But Republicans have decided to refuse to debate up and down the ticket now, only ensuring that their candidates will be seen as cowards who are unwilling to face the voters and talk about the issues.
Judy Jennings and Rebecca Bell-Metereau are fighting back. From their press release earlier today:
"Republican nominees for SBOE Marsha Farney and Ken Mercer have a lot of questions to answer, and they should come out of hiding and answer them. Are they going to participate in a fair debate, moderated by a respected non-partisan journalist, or are they going to follow the orders of their partisan boss? Texans are tired of the State Board of Education being Republicans' political football, in which the school children of Texas get kicked around - this is supposed to be about quality public education, not political gamesmanship," Cook said.
Both the Democrats have notified the League of Women Voters that they will participate in the League's debate, and cautioned their opponents not to duck voters by failing to participate.
"I am honored to participate in the debate and to share my views with voters on how the State Board of Education can do much better for Texas school children. If my opponent respects the voters whose support she seeks, she will accept the offer to participate in this debate as well," said Judy Jennings.
[snip]
"I'm pleased to accept the opportunity to let voters know my priorities if they elect me to the SBOE, and I'm equally pleased about the chance to inform voters of what my opponent has already done as an SBOE member," said Rebecca Bell-Metereau. "I urge him to participate in the debate, because he has some explaining to do regarding his priorities while in office," she said.
The policy of the Republican Party of Texas to simply ignore voters and skip public forums speaks volumes of who they believe matters in this race -- and it's not you. It's not the parents, teachers, or children of Texas who care about public schools. It is themselves.
Up and down the ballot, whatever the race, Republicans are in it for themselves while Democrats are in it for Texas.
When I was an undergraduate, I once changed majors because a professor criticized me in front of the class for smiling too much. I didn't know a whole lot about education back then, but I knew enough to be confident that humiliating students was NOT good educational practice.
Imagine my amusement when I recently read a conservative blog post that showed the photo I use in my campaign for Texas State Board of Education with the caption "ferociously smiley 'expert'". At fifty-something, I'm proud to be called ferocious, as well as smiley; in fact I think it's kind of cute. But I wonder, why is the word 'expert' is in quotes? Is it that expertise is something to be made fun of? Or is it that a Ph.D. doesn't really indicate expertise?
Perhaps the blogger believes that expertise is not really valuable. Recent comments and behaviors of members of the State Board make that a good possibility. When rewriting the science curriculum created by science teachers and approved by science experts, Don McLeroy, former chair, stated that someone had to "stand up to the experts." The Board's continued micro-managing of curriculum standards in various subjects for almost 4.7 million children in Texas certainly dismisses the expertise of the teachers and subject-matter experts who created those standards.
(Lots of great content in our user section today... - promoted by Phillip Martin)
After bullying the minority of sensible members into submission, extremists on the Texas State Board of Education managed to distort, water down, and politicize the curriculum. Now they complain that people have gotten the facts wrong in describing the latest version of Texas curriculum standards. It's true that many people are confused about the current state of affairs, after hundreds of deletions, additions, and last-minute revisions.
Who is responsible for this confusion? I lay the blame squarely on the radicals who threw in inflammatory and unreasonable suggested revisions all along the way-from wanting to remove Cesar Chavez, Barbara Jordan, and Thurgood Marshall and substitute Sean Hannity and Phyllis Schlafly, to eleventh-hour attempts to call the slave trade the "triangular trade." Even though the board ultimately rejected some of these extreme suggestions, it's no wonder the public rebelled. Many people are left with the impression that the curriculum contains some outrages that have been removed or altered, but the fact remains that extremists bullied the board into passing a highly politicized document.
What remains is a damaged SBOE, with zero credibility and a butchered curriculum still riddled with inaccuracy and instances of plagiarism. This situation has hurt the entire education system in Texas. For every hour we engage in political bickering, we're not spending that time addressing the need to lower our soaring dropout rate, grapple with problems of high-stakes testing, and determine how to hire and keep good teachers.
One might wonder why the board would engage in such a destructive and divisive process, wasting countless hours micromanaging the curriculum and squandering limited resources for education. The answer lies in the words of these extremists: Cynthia Dunbar's calls public education a "subtly deceptive instrument of perversion." My opponent, incumbent Ken Mercer, brags about giving a teacher coalition a "well deserved spanking."
People have protested, petitioned, and wrung their hands about the May Texas State Board of Education meeting. What struck me most clearly about this board, beyond the ideological mania that motivates them, was their utter incompetence in running a meeting, conducting analysis, or making logical decisions. It's amazing that these people actually have jobs out in the real world. Anyone who carried on a business in such an illogical and inefficient manner would have a difficult time keeping it afloat.
This group of ideologues is hopeless, and attempting to conduct a reasonable dialogue with them is doomed to failure. Only the election in November will change things. People ask what we will be able to do if we are elected. With real leadership, we can return the board to a reasonable process with the clear goal of improving education in Texas.
Today marks a big defeat for kids in Texas, and anywhere else else kids read and use textbooks. The current State Board of Education (SBOE) approved history requirements that, among other things, incorrectly imply that:
Woodrow Wilson and Oliver Wendell Holmes were eugenics proponents,
Global organizations undermine US sovereignty through treaties,
Social Security and Medicare are not credible programs,
and a host of other inaccuracies that promote a distinct partisanship that can't be confused with historical truth.There were some small victories today but ultimately, most of the conservative agenda and amendments were or will be approved.
We are past the point of petitions & public hearings- the ONLY recourse we have now is to change the face of that board. That means we need to open our wallets and donate to Democratic State Board of Education candidates Judy Jennings and Rebecca Bell-Metereau right now.
Even if you don't live or vote in Texas, it's clear that the missteps of the SBOE might have implications for kids outside of Texas. Your donation matters more than a lot of races out there - because the outcome of this race has not only Texan implications, but national impact. Please vote with your wallet and change the face of the State Board of Education for all students' sake.
We also need your help to spread the word to others.
Below we've created one-click links for you to share a message of support on Facebook & Twitter. Click either or both of the links, customize the text if you like, and then share this call to action with your friends.
First of all, thank you to everyone who sent emails, signed petitions, spoke at the State Board of Education meeting, and did whatever they could to help save education in Texas. Unfortunately, the Board chose to ignore the pleas of thousands of historians, parents, and teachers to Put Our Kids First. Instead, they chose to make further ideological changes to the social studies curriculum. On Friday, the Board passed a curriculum that included amendments characterizing global organizations as "efforts to undermine U.S. sovereignty" through "forced redistribution of American wealth to third world countries." They also required that students be taught about "the solvency of long-term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare" (in the history curriculum!). They even spent time debating whether to include President Obama's middle name when referring to him.
