A higher-ed push for conformity in the name of diversity

It appears that higher education in Minnesota is about to undergo its own "awokening," thanks to the efforts of a task force created by the chancellor's office of Minnesota State (formerly MnSCU). The result of this group's work might well be termed "critical race theory by stealth."

The effort targets something called the Minnesota transfer curriculum (MTC), which the Legislature mandated more than three decades ago to assure a smooth transfer of credits among the state's public colleges and universities. The idea was to establish uniform goals for all courses designated for the transfer curriculum.

The curriculum identifies six "core goals": communication, critical thinking, natural sciences, mathematical/logical reasoning, history and the behavioral and social sciences, and humanities and fine arts. In addition, there are four "theme goals": human diversity, global perspective, ethical and civic responsibility, and people and the environment.

It's all standard, uncontroversial, apolitical stuff, and by all accounts, the transfer curriculum has done its job.

But now, through the new effort, and without a renewed legislative mandate, the transfer curriculum is in the process of being revised for reasons that have little to do with education and much to do with politics. Ironically, the politics has been injected by educators, not by politicians.

The specific focus is the current "human diversity," or seventh, goal, which calls upon teachers to "increase students' understanding of individual and group differences," as well as to enhance "their knowledge of the traditions and values of various groups in the United States."

Last fall this goal was slated to be scrapped and replaced with a new goal titled "Acknowledging and eliminating structural racism in the United States." Under this goal, teachers would have been required to "build knowledge and understanding of historical and contemporary phenomena related to the ongoing legacy of structural racism and other forms of intersectional oppression in the United States."

For whatever reason, this proposed revision of goal seven has since given way to a further revision in advance of a final Minnesota State board of trustees decision scheduled for sometime in March.

What is now being considered for adoption as goal seven, "Acknowledging and dismantling structural racism in the United States": Students would be equipped to "describe dynamics of unequal power relations among racial groups in the United States and how this division exponentially harms other intersecting identities," as well as to "identify anti-racist and other liberating practices that increase equitable outcomes and inclusion in American society."

An easy case could be made that each of the 10 current goals of the transfer curriculum is directed at educating student-citizens as they pursue knowledge, intellectual enrichment and career skills, while living and learning in a decent country of fair-minded fellow citizens.

Not so with either the revised or the re-revised goal seven. In both versions, the focus is on two highly politicized "truths":

1) The heart of the American story is conflict between oppressors and victims, and 2) the color of one's skin determines one's status as an oppressor or victim.

Translation: Keep in mind that white racism is the main issue here, but don't forget about other types of oppression in this godawful country.

Meanwhile, "anti-racist educators" are defined as those who "understand and recognize that all individuals are affected by living in a racialized society. Their curriculum demystifies differences and demolishes stereotypes, encouraging students to see each other more fully. Confronting racism means explicitly addressing bias, racism, power, privilege and oppression."

Just what is a racialized society? I don't exactly know, but it doesn't sound good. I do know that any decent educator is an anti-racist educator.

The proposed revisions to the transfer curriculum contain no bullet-point goal explicitly stating that, upon completion of this course, students will be better equipped to take to the streets to tear down a country founded on — and still perpetuating — white racism and oppression. But students might reasonably expect to be excused — maybe even praised — if they decide that is their charge.

And teachers? While their charge is clear, the consequences of noncompliance are not. If this re-revised goal does pass final muster, any teacher who dissents from this ideological orthodoxy might have to resign or retire — or resort to some sort of wink-wink, nod-nod accommodation to this new regimen.