Copyright Arizona Capitol Times
Key Points: Arizona schools chief Tom Horne wants to revise teacher training standards due to federal funding concerns President Trump’s order requires states to remove “diversity, equity, and inclusion” references from programs receiving federal funds Arizona’s teacher standards may need to be revised to comply with federal directives Fearing a loss of federal dollars, a state schools chief, Tom Horne, wants the Board of Education to immediately begin revising the standards used to train teachers in Arizona. Horne says an order issued by President Trump on the first day of his presidency requires states to scrub any references to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” from programs that receive federal funds. And he contends there are items in Arizona’s professional teaching standards that could run afoul of that edict. More to the point, Horne says it places about $866 million in federal dollars at risk. But education board members are not quite as anxious to rush into changing the rules. At an Oct. 27 meeting, several said they had serious questions, including who would be on the committee Horne wants to appoint to review the existing rules to ferret out provisions the Trump administration might find offensive. So board members put off a decision on crafting new rules until their December meeting. Horne, however, warned the delay could prove financially hazardous. “I’m fearful that if we act too slowly we may get caught in a situation where we can’t get it done in time and we’re facing the ax from the federal government,” he said. Less clear is whether there’s actually anything in the existing rules that would endanger federal dollars and what changes might be needed. One possibility deals with current standards for learning environments. Sid Bailey, an associate school superintendent, pointed out that one of these requires teachers to manage the environment “to actively and equitably engage learners by organizing, allocating, and coordinating the resources of time, space, and learner’s attention.” He told the board that it may be necessary to excise the words “and equitably” to comply with the presidential directive. Then there’s a provision saying teachers should communicate in a way that demonstrates respect and responsiveness “to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives learners bring to the learning environment.” All that verbiage, Bailey said, may have to go. And that, he said, is why the rule-making process must begin with a committee to scour this and all the rules. “I’m not a prophet and can’t predict what we would come up with,” Bailey said. But he said that the rule-making process — and a study by a committee named by Horne’s department — would propose revising language “that’s no longer aligned with current federal directives.” Arizona’s standards are not unique to the state. The state board here adopted what is known as InTASC in 2011. That’s short for the Interstate Teachers Assignment and Support Consortium, which uses the standards to guide education and professional development for teachers across the country. In essence, the idea is to ensure teachers have the knowledge and ability to help all students learn. Bailey told board members that the 2011 revisions to InTASC — the ones adopted by the Arizona board — included key changes, including an emphasis on personalized learning, the integration of 21st-century skills, and “support for diverse student needs.” He said he and other Department of Education employees have since met with the deans at the colleges of education at the three state universities. “All university deans agreed that the teaching standards that they teach do not align with federal mandates and need adjustment,” Bailey said. The only thing is, the universities also must align their standards for preparing new teachers with the rules of the state Board of Education. And the purpose of drafting new rules — what Horne wants — would be to ensure that Arizona’s teacher training rules align with federal rules to avoid losing federal dollars. Not everyone on the board is convinced they need to rush to address that fear. “I just want to make sure that we’re not a solution in search of a problem,” said Daniel Coor, president of Arizona Western College, who sits on the state Board of Education. Bailey said that’s not the case. “We’ve got evidence that our universities, two of them, have already been challenged by the federal government, that are concerned with their course curriculum,” he said. And there’s more. One is a “Dear Colleague” letter that went out in February to all state education agencies from Craig Trainor, acting assistant secretary for civil rights from the U.S. Department of Education, detailing how his office is interpreting the law to make it illegal to use race in making any decisions. And he said there are other “insidious” ways that DEI programs keep students from fully participating in school life. “The (Education) Department will no longer tolerate the overt and covert racial discrimination that has become widespread in this nation’s educational institutions,” Trainor wrote. And then there is an April request from the feds that the state must certify it is not using DEI, with a reminder of financial penalties for failure to comply. In an interview with Capitol Media Services, Horne said he agrees that some of the rules need to go — regardless of the possible loss of federal dollars. Consider the one that says teachers should respect “cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives learners bring to the learning environment.” Horne called that unnecessary. “They’re teaching academics,” he said. “And all kids, as individuals, can learn academics.” The problem, Horne said, is how that guideline is interpreted and implemented. “When they are culturally sensitive, they dumb down the requirements for the minority kids,” he said. “Minority kids can learn just as well as other kids,” Horne continued. “And you don’t need to treat them differently.” And what’s wrong with ensuring that teachers “actively and equitably engage learners”? Horne acknowledged that, at one time, “equitable” was a positive word. “It meant ‘fair,’ ” he said. “Now, with the ‘woke’ philosophies, ‘equity’ no longer means ‘fair,’ it means ‘equal results by race,”’ Horne said. “And if you have equal results by race, you’re rewarding people for what race they belong to rather than what they’ve accomplished individually.” Monday’s vote puts off the board’s decision until December on whether to start reviewing the rules — and not just the ones Bailey cited during the meeting. Kathleen Wiebke, a public member of the board, said she understood Horne’s desire to move forward immediately. But she said she wasn’t ready to push ahead now. “I do think there are a lot of questions,” Wiebke said. “And what I don’t want to do is start working on these standards and then have them changed again.” Horne acknowledged he has no idea when the U.S. Department of Education will return and start demanding proof that all traces of DEI have been removed from regulations and policies.
