Lesson on racism sparks outrage at SC school board meeting. What might change

Speakers at Monday’s school board meeting in Lexington-Richland 5 called for changes to district policy and disciplinary action after a teacher introduced the discussion of racism to her Chapin High School class.

It was the first board meeting since English teacher Mary Wood’s lesson plan on the Ta-Nehisi Coates memoir “Between the World and Me,” and the comments that led the school to stop it, received local and national media attention.

“I was surprised to find this teacher is still employed at Chapin High even though she showed no remorse and strongly defended herself after she broke the law,” one member of the public said during Monday’s meeting.

She was one of a half-dozen speakers at the meeting, including two state lawmakers and the chair of the Lexington County Republican Party, who spoke out about the classroom lesson. All criticized the inclusion of the book and two videos presented to advanced placement language arts students.

Wood planned to discuss Coates’ book, a national award-winning recounting of Coates’ experience growing up Black in inner-city Baltimore, as part of a wider discussion of systemic racism, according to lesson plans released as part of a freedom-of-information request. The book was supposed to be used as part of the course’s argument essay unit, inviting students to respond to or critique the ideas in the book. But at least two students complained that the material and accompanying videos made them feel “ashamed to be Caucasian” and violated a state prohibition on teaching divisive racial concepts.

Speakers at Monday’s meeting agreed that the lesson breached an addition to the state budget for the 2022-23 school year that prohibits instruction that causes a student to “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his race or sex.”

“It’s not only inappropriate and divisive, it’s illegal,” one speaker Monday said of the lesson plan. Wood said her lesson plan followed the standards outlined by the College Board for an advanced placement course, in which students are expected to learn college-level material.

“My lesson was not designed to make students feel uncomfortable about anything,” Wood told The State. “Materials presented merely provided background information about topics which would be addressed in the longer text,” she said, referring to the two videos which raised student complaints, “The Unequal Opportunity Race” and “Systemic Racism Explained.”

Board chairwoman Rebecca Blackburn Hines asked Superintendent Akil Ross to present possible revisions to the district’s policies around the use of controversial materials in the classroom that board members could discuss at their next scheduled meeting on July 17.

Many speakers Monday said the lesson was an example of “critical race theory” making its way into public schools, which was the impetus behind the state budget proviso.

Critical race theory is an academic framework for studying how the development of laws and public policy contribute to racial inequity. The theory is normally used in high-level university courses, but critics have applied the term to almost any discussion of race or racism in K12 schools.

State Rep. R.J. May, R-Lexington, spoke at the meeting about the recent legal settlement reached after the S.C. House Freedom Caucus sued the Lexington 1 school district over alleged violations of the law, which led Lexington 1 to end its relationship with an outside curriculum development group that the Freedom Caucus said had pushed “critical race theory-derived ideas.”

Lexington 1 Superintendent Gerrita Postlewait said last week the district reached the settlement in order to avoid a “lengthy and costly legal battle.” May, who is the vice-chair of the Freedom Caucus, told school board members the group will continue to look at legal avenues to combat the teaching of any material caucus members feel violates the Legislature’s proscriptions.

“We should be a color-blind society that values merit, rather than view people as oppressor or oppressed because of the color of their skin,” May said, arguing against what he characterized as the idea that “The way to make up for past discrimination is with present and future discrimination” against white people.

Also speaking on Monday were S.C. Rep. Joe White, R-Newberry, and Lexington County GOP chairwoman Pamela Godwin.

None of the speakers at Monday’s meeting defended Wood’s lesson plan. Wood said the concerns were misplaced.

“Critical Race Theory is a legal theory which is studied in upper-level college courses. We do not teach this in high school,” she said. “Demonizing teachers for unfounded suppositions is dangerous to academia.”

Wood said the state budget proviso was “purposefully vague” so that almost any classroom discussion could easily trigger a complaint.

“Theoretically, a Black parent could complain that the history of the Confederacy makes their child uncomfortable,” she said. “Would that eliminate instruction of the Civil War? A gay student could argue that only reading about heteronormative relationships in literature makes them feel uncomfortable. Would that inspire the removal of ‘Romeo and Juliet’ from the classroom? The proviso is a slippery slope.”

Hines, the school board chair, told the audience at Monday’s meeting that board members are tasked with setting overall policy for the district and are unable to publicly discuss the individual lesson plans of specific teachers, whatever they may privately think about them.

“We’re in the very rare category of elected officials who have limitations on what we can and cannot discuss,” Hines said. “I know that is frustrating, but that’s the truth.”

Board member Elizabeth Barnhardt, who has spoken out against “cultural Marxist indoctrination” in the classroom, made a motion Monday for the district to convene a policy committee to review potential changes to the district’s rules and guidelines for teachers before the board’s next meeting.

“If something’s not in line with policy, we need to make crystal clear if they’re not, and make any repercussions if they’re violated crystal clear as well,” board member Catherine Huddle said in support of the motion. “Our community’s upset, we’re in the news, and we need to resolve this.”

Hines argued that a committee that would include only a few board members and would meet in the middle of the day was not the best venue to decide how to address the issue.

“Few people come or listen to those meetings, and board members often can’t make those,” Hines said. “Important policies should be decided by the whole board.”

The move to call a policy committee meeting was voted down 4-3, with Barnhardt, Huddle and Matt Hogan voting in favor. Hines, Mike Satterfield, Kevin Scully and Kimberly Snipes voted against.