When legislators embraced Assembly Bill 101, the infamous legislation requiring high school students in the class of 2029-2030 to take a course in ethnic studies to graduate, let’s assume their hearts were in the right place and that it was a joint effort to rectify the omission in history lessons that related the struggles and achievements of the four ethnic groups traditionally associated with ethnic studies: Black-, Native-, Latine- and Asian-Americans.
That vote and passage of AB 101 happened in 2021. Since then, school districts’ attempts to create a curriculum that placates all points of view amidst heated controversy have been maddening to watch.
Because the state’s approved model curriculum, at a hefty 700 pages, is only a model with a vague menu of options and is devoid of rigorous content standards, some material in circulation can be described as discriminatory against certain ethnicities, particularly Jews, and focuses on an ideological framework that sorts people and nations into two binary categories of oppressed or oppressor.
This so-called “liberated” version of the model curriculum is based on the state’s first draft curriculum that was soundly rejected for its inappropriate content, but yet is widely used throughout the state. The liberated model connects students to resistance movements that fight for social justice, teaches about systems of power, and defines groups of people as part of a privileged class.
So, despite a feel-good idea about passing a bill that would unite students of all ethnicities in mutual respect, AB 101 has been perverted from its original mission by bad actors who have taken advantage of the state’s lack of formalized standards to insert bias and ideological extremism, including what some say are anti-American lessons, into ethnic studies.
Political ideology
Finally waking up to reality and realizing how the original intent of the AB 101 mandate has been too easily contaminated with controversial frameworks that seek to indoctrinate students into particular political points of view, many legislators in Sacramento — after first endorsing AB 101 — became alarmed over what they’ve seen, particularly the inclusion of stereotypical antisemitic material.
So, earlier this year, with great fanfare, Assembly Bill 1468 was introduced. Written by Assembly members Dawn Addis and Rick Chavez Zbur, and Senator Josh Becker, the bill was co-authored by 31 legislators and championed by the California Legislative Jewish Caucus and the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California (JPAC).
AB 1468 focused exclusively on the ethnic studies mandate and established comprehensive state standards, required curriculum oversight at the state level, provided lesson plans for professional development, enforced existing safeguards against discrimination, ensured contractor accountability, and authorized other reviews and recommendations.
Miller Saltzman, JPAC’s director of policy and partnerships, said in an April 30 email that passage of AB 1468 would “ensure that ethnic studies is implemented with accuracy and integrity, and without bias in California’s schools.”
Supporters were asked to participate in a summit in Sacramento, held May 5 and 6, to learn about the bill and lobby legislators for backing.
But within days after the summit, AB 1468 was suddenly dropped and replaced with a new bill, Assembly Bill 715.
An announcement from JPAC executive director David Bocarsly May 10 noted that AB 1468 “became the most widely supported Jewish community-backed bill in California history, with 66 Jewish organizations united in support.”
Nevertheless, Bocarsly said the decision was made to withdraw AB 1468 due to insufficient support for passage and because antisemitism was present across the K-12 school system, not just in ethnic studies. Thus introducing AB 715.
The pivot
Objections to AB 1468 came not only from the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Coalition, which claimed passage would stifle free speech rights (as if teachers have an inherent right to present controversial and one-sided political points of view).
Other groups were also opposed, claiming the bill narrowed the coursework to include only the four historically cited ethnic groups, thus limiting the ability of individual districts to provide lessons on other ethnicities.
Another complaint about AB 1468 was that it reaffirmed the legitimacy of AB 101’s mandate to make a course in ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement, which some are challenging.
Although it certainly looked like backtracking, Bocarsly called it a pivot and not a retreat, writing that AB 715 is a more powerful step forward, with broader protections, deep accountability and diverse support.
AB 715, he wrote, strengthens anti-discrimination protections based on religion and nationality, increases accountability for districts found engaging in discrimination and creates an antisemitism coordinator to oversee compliance.
AB 715 expands the definition of nationality beyond citizenship and country and national origin to include “a person’s actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.”
The bill also states that racial, ethnic or ancestral slurs or stereotypes would constitute discrimination on the basis of nationality.
The bill seeks to define discrimination based on religion to include, but not be limited to, antisemitism and Islamophobia.
Groups opposing the bill include the falsely named Jewish Voice for Peace, the Council on American Islamic Relations, and supporters of the liberated ethnic studies material.
AB 715 is supported by the chairs of the Jewish, Black, Latino and Asian American Pacific Islander caucuses and passed the state’s Assembly Education Committee on May 15 with a unanimous bipartisan 9-0 vote at a three-hour hearing.
The bill made further advances when it passed California’s Assembly Appropriations Committee with a unanimous 15-0 vote, according to a JPAC May 23 news release.
And an announcement by Bocarsly May 29 stated that AB 715 just passed the state assembly with a bipartisan 68-0 vote.
AB 715 now moves to the state senate where a vote by the Senate Education Committee is expected by mid-July.
Damage done
Although a complete repeal of the disastrous AB 101 is the obvious solution to undo this mess that state lawmakers created, reality is that ethnic studies is likely here to stay. What form it will take depends entirely on individual districts.
For now, a clause in AB 101 stating that the bill is operative only upon an appropriation of funds from the state — estimated to be $276 million which was not included in the governor’s latest budget for 2025-2026 — means that districts are technically not required to offer the class as yet.
However, a great deal of money and resources have been expended by school districts working to meet the bill’s requirement, which could be funded at a future date, leaving open the question of implementation.
The confusion in Sacramento over this mandate is exemplified by the struggle for legislators to resolve the inherent problems with the ethnic studies mandate.
Recognizing the problem by advancing AB 715 is a possible solution to the harm and ill-will AB 101 has generated. But how to combat, or at least limit, the damage will continue to be a source of controversy.
Marsha Sutton is an education writer and opinion columnist and can be reached at [email protected].
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Opinion: With one bill, then another, Legislature seeks to limit ethnic studies controversy )
Also on site :
- Harrison Ford Has 2-Word Response to Seeing Jason Segel Naked
- Chipotle Is Giving Away Free Food During The NBA Finals — Here’s How to Win
- 5 Best Moments as Tems Brings the Heat to Billboard’s The Stage at SXSW London