I would send my kids to the best school that I could afford. Wouldn't all the parents who send their kids to Ranier do the same? We are not a post-racism society (yet) but this sounds like more of a money issue than a race issue.

Frankly, I find it 100% acceptable that a school tailors its mission to best serve most of its students most of the time. If a lot of the kids in the area in question don't get their basic needs met at home, then it makes sense for one school to sacrifice higher academia for "basic needs" than for both to do it.

Now whether kids not getting their basic needs met outside of school is acceptable is a separate question. Presumably, if that problem was resolved, Ranier's priorities would change.

Isn't being able to review the schools and move to the district with the better school, or afford to send your children to private school, a hallmark of privilege (white or otherwise)?

I count myself lucky to have transferred to Evergreen during college where I was first introduced to the concept of privilege and given the opportunity to take control of my interactions around this issue. As a white middle-class girl from the burbs, child of 'liberal' parents, I was brought up with the super-well intentioned and super-idiotic 'color-blindness' as an ideal. Bless my stupid mother for believing so strongly in it, but I could not be more thankful for having similar (to Greenberg's course) race/gender/justice concepts introduced to me at age 20. I'm 29 now, work in low income housing, and I see white folks (and menfolks!) struggle constantly with race and gender issues (we always want to make it about us, and *our* feelings, and prove how not racist or sexist we are by not talking about it). I would have killed for a course in high school like this, as well as courses in labor history (another thing I am thankful to Evergeen for). Our country will never change until we trust our youth to have engaging and critical conversations about privilege. Hope it works out for these students, and fellow whiteys: please stop making this about you.

Jesus, you're a pain in the ass. At Rainier Beach last year, 86% of seniors graduated, with 57% going on to 2/4 years schools.

The drop put rate city wide is just over 20%, and the city estimates that 60% of total students are qualified to go on to post secondary institution of some sort. Though the number who actually do is probably lower. Test scores are, as I said above, lower than average.

Out of 1700 high school aged teenagers in the area, only 500 students attend Rainier, up from a low of 361 in 2007.

There are a number of AP options, though only 15% of kids take classes there.

As far as expulsions go, there is no clear data breakdown by school (that I could find in the five minutes of research), but it has been found that black students are expelled/suspended at roughly twice the rate of white students. Read into that what you will.

The main difference that sets Rainier apart is that it's student body is mostly black. Only 5% are white, 25% Asian. Another school in my neighborhood is Cleveland High School with roughly the same ethnic make up. Where did all the white kids go?

You can talk all you want about parent choice, class issues, whatever, but this is just more de facto segregation on the part of middle class whites. It would be nice if everyone could just be honest about it rather than make up excuses for why they bus their kid out of the neighborhood every weekday morning.

The enrollment at Rainier Beach High School, as of the February 4 count, is 372. Even the October count was 407. There hasn't been 500 students at Rainier Beach High School since 2005.

The inaccuracy of the enrollment data at Rainier Beach stated by Rotten666 makes me question the accuracy of the other statistics quoted in comment #110.

The number of high school aged teenagers in the Rainier Beach attendance area is hard to count.
Here is an Enrollment report with data from 2011-2012

http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/gr…

It shows that 38% of the students living in the Rainier Beach High School attendance area attend another attendance area high school.
31% of them attend an option school.
11% of them attend a service school.
Only 20% of them (323) attend Rainier Beach.
That doesn't count the ones who leave the district or go private.

If 323 are 20%, then the total must be about 1600. Again, since this report doesn't count the ones who leave the district or go private the grand total of all high school aged students in the area must be higher. What is the source for the 1700 figure stated by Rotten666?

On the annual school report, Rainier Beach reports 76% of students graduating in six years or fewer. What is the source for the 86% quoted by Rotten666? 53% graduated in four years or fewer for those who put a value on that.

The report also says that 41% of graduates take a college level course during high school, such as AP. That's much higher than the 15% quoted by Rotten666.

These large discrepancies make me wonder what Rotten666 is using as a data source. It's not the annual school report. It's not the OSPI report (which has the same numbers as the annual school report). What could it be? And why are they so different from the officially reported numbers?

Also, with over 80% of the families in the area choosing a school other than Rainier Beach, I don't think anyone can claim it is a race thing. The question is not "Where did all the white kids go?" but "Where did all the kids go?"

Everyone knew that the creation of neighborhood schools would create this situation - this de facto segregation. It's not a surprise. The district was supposed to make this big effort - the Southeast Education Initiative - to make Cleveland, Rainier Beach, and Aki Kurose into "schools of choice". It failed. It was poorly planned and implemented and it failed. That's what has put us in the current situation.

@ 110, I make no apologies for that. Cries of racism are easy to make, but they should be proven if we don't want it to become a cry of wolf. ESPECIALLY if you don't have first hand knowledge of someone keeping their kids out for that reason.

I was going to go on, thanking you for providing this info and asking more questions, but I refreshed and read Charlie Mas's comments. So I'm going to hold off and see how you respond to them.

Rotten666 has a valid point when saying that the ratings given to schools primarily reflects the level of support the students are getting at home rather than any quality in the school.

Good, bad, or indifferent, a school in a community of affluent, well-educated middle-class families will rate high because the students, thanks to home-based factors, will do well academically.

Good, bad, or indifferent, a school in a community of low-income, poorly-educated families will rate low because the students, thanks to home-based factors, will do poorly academically.

Until schools have the license and the funding necessary to provide students with the preparation, support, and motivation to achieve academically, these trends will hold.

There is a difference between Rainier Beach and Ballard high school, but the difference is entirely rooted in the student population.

@ 114, that is true. But does that mean that a parent who decides that it's better to send a child to a school where there is parental involvement, and where most of the kids are encouraged to go rather than dumped off for state-run babysitting, is being racist? Institutional racism and personal racism are different things.

@11 and @13 Oh I have no excuse for the sloppy data, I looked at a source that was 3 years old. And also used Wikipedia (horrors). I got impatient looking for the school report on the SPS site so, yeah. Thank you for rightly calling me out on it.For the 1700 I just rounded up. Again with the enrollment, I just rounded up as it jumps all over the place.

So we are on the same page...

http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/gr…

@114 Yes! When people get down of schools like Rainier Beach, I tell them that you can swap the student populations of RB and Ballard, and the RB students are not going to perform any better. The schools are fine (there is always room for improvement), its the outside support that is lacking.

This was my original point. If all of the families who lived here just enrolled their kids in these school it would benefit EVERYONE. Like I said , a rising tide lifts all boats. Instead, we send our kids outside the district where they can take classes on social justice rather than, you know, actually interact with black people.

It's real hypocrisy and it's a goddamn shame.

@ 116, I'm no fan of school choice, but this much is true: if people were limited to sending their kids to neighborhood schools, then they would congregate and segregate on their own, just as they had for centuries. The poor schools would not rise in you scenario.

It's kind of funny - Brown v. Board of Education and Central High School in Little Rock were about school choice. The parents of those kids recognized that their schools sucked and wanted the kids to go to a better place. They weren't trying to end Jim Crow for the sake of ending Jim Crow.

@117 Well I disagree. But one of us may be proven right in the near future. Being one of the last areas in the city with affordable housing, the south end is filling up with young, white couples starting families. If (and that is a big if) they start sending their kids to their neighborhood schools in increasing numbers we will see some change, for better or for worse.

@116, Rotten666 wrote: "If all of the families who lived here just enrolled their kids in these school it would benefit EVERYONE. Like I said , a rising tide lifts all boats."

Where is the data that supports the belief that having prepared, supported, and motivated students in the school benefits the un-prepared, un-supported, and un-motivated students in the school?

How does it help the low-income students at Washington or Garfield, for example, to have APP there? Are they even in classes together? In a six period day, with four classes taken up with core curriculum and the motivated students taking music and academic electives like world languages, when do the high performing and low performing students even cross paths?

Do the high performing students serve as models for the low performers? Wouldn't it be just as likely that the low performing students serve as models for the high performers? Doesn't the influence run in both directions? Is there any evidence that supports this belief? Have we seen it at Washington or Garfield? Did we see it at Lowell?

Do the involved families do things that help all students in the school? The efforts of involved families at Madrona K-8 were spurned by the school leadership. There are already over 100 adults working at Rainier Beach High School (check the staff page of their web site). Yes, about a 1:4 adult:student ratio. Does that school really need more adults in it? Is it the next ten who will really make the difference?

How, exactly, would it benefit anyone for these families to enroll their children at this school? How would it benefit the students now there?

This will get censored because you can't argue with its logic, but the censor will see it and be cursed.

The "invisible knapsack" is a bunch of bogus BS white-guilt babble, written by Peggy McIntosh, who is a naive, sheltered, out-of-touch, ivory-tower "academic", who lives Wellesley, MA, which is 80% white and only 1.4% black, according to city-data.com

Allow me to destroy its "logic" - my comments in [brackets]:

From "The Invisible Knapsack" by Peggy McIntosh

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time. [So can anyone of any other race. Where does this woman live? Oh yeah, a place that is 80% white and only about 1% black, which explains her naive and skewed perspective. Bogus.]

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me. [So can anyone of any race. Bogus.]

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live. [So can anyone of any race. Bogus.]

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me. [This is also true of anyone of any race in who lives "n an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live". It is also basically a re-wording of #3, which I already debunked. Try being white and living in a black part of Detroit, or any other black-majority city and see how pleasant your neighbors are to you. TOTALLY BOGUS.]

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed. [BOGUS. Whites get followed in stores all the time, especially teenagers.]

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [TOTALLY BOGUS. What kind of white-supremacist newspapers or TV does this naive, sheltered "academic" woman read or watch? I guess she never actually watches TV or reads a real newspaper, because non-whites are widely represented, usually positively. Does this woman live in the 1950's?]

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. [BOGUS. Is this woman ignorant of history? Who created Western Civilization? Who wrote The Great Books of Western Civilization? Who wrote the great symphonies and invented the orchestras of Western Classical Music? Who founded the USA and wrote its constitution, became its senators, representatives, and presidents? Whites did. Are we supposed to re-write history to assuage her white-guilt or to massage the inferiority complexes of non-whites?]

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race. [BOGUS. Again, does this sheltered naive woman live in the 1950's? Tons of school curriculum materials are expressly about non-whites. "Black History Month" anyone?]

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege. [BOGUS. Since this woman is a liberal "academic", and since most "academics" and universities have a liberal political orientation, of course she could easily find a publisher. She is preaching to the choir, after all. Also, hate-whitey "academics" like Dr. Kamau Kambon, the former North Carolina University professor of African-American Studies, who called for the extermination of whites (on video, look it up), are readily accepted in academia.]

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race. [??? BOGUS. I bet this naive woman who lives sheltered in a 1% black town has NEVER been the "only member of her race" in a group. Perhaps she should go preach her dogma to a crowd of young black men on a street corner in Camden New Jersey and see how much her "voice is heard" by them, preferably at midnight.]

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person’s voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race. [BOGUS, this is simply a statement of this naive woman's subjective experience and faith-based quasi-religious dogmatic belief system.]

12. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair. [BOGUS. Again, does this sheltered naive woman live in the 1950's? Has she ever even been to a real city or music shop? This is probably the stupidest "proof" of "white privilege" I have ever seen.]

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability. [BOGUS. Who even uses checks anymore? People swipe credit cards or debit cards, which almost always require no ID to use. This "Invisible Knapsack" drivel is TOTALLY OUTDATED.]

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them. [BOGUS. Anyone of any race can do this too.]

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection. [BOGUS. White children are in put in much more danger caused by blacks than black children are from whites. Where does this woman live? Oh yeah, she is a sheltered naive "academic" who lives in an 80% white, 1% black town, and she is probably never actually around any blacks for any prolonged length of time, otherwise she would not be so naive.]

And so on and so on. I'm not going to bother with the other ones, most of them are just as stupid and bogus as the first 15. Many of the numbered points are also just re-wordings of other numbered points that she already made, which were also bogus and don't actually reflect REALITY at all.

Oh! I saw one more that is SO STUPID that I can't resist!

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in “flesh” color and have them more or less match my skin. [BOGUS!!!! AGAIN, does this woman live in the 1950's? I am 45 years old, and ever since my childhood, bandages and blemish cream have been available in a wide range of skin tones. There were even bandages with multicolored polka-dots on them, and other ones with green space aliens! This is probably the second-stupidest point she tried to make, next to the one about music stores and supermarkets.]

Anna,

My wife and I are the parents who filed the complaint you referenced in this article. I'd like to clear up a couple of misconceptions and misdirections here.

First, our complaint was filed against Mr. Greenberg for his personal actions in the classroom, not against the curriculum. We couldn't care less whether the Center School has a teaching unit on race and gender or not. That was not the issue in the complaint, as we made explicitly clear not only to Mr. Greenberg in our original meetings with him, but also with the District when we filed the complaint, and later with the investigators who handled the case.

This is about the highly-inappropriate behavior of a teacher in the classroom, not the content of the class he is teaching. The result of the District's investigation was that all of the claims we stipulated in our complaint were substantiated. As you note, Mr. Greenberg was found to have created a hostile, intimidating learning environment in his classroom. This was not just for one student as you imply.

The District undertook a review of the curriculum as a matter of policy, and I expect they will probably allow it to continue. I would like to point out that District claims that we, as the complainants, have been part of the curriculum review or its committee are false. We have not been part of any such process and have not been made privy to its deliberations.

Our objection, on the other hand, was to Mr. Greenberg's behavior. The District has not seen fit to discipline him appropriately for this, which we soon hope to remedy.

In the meantime, media exposure such as this and the KIRO piece are simply allowing the pattern of intimidating behavior to continue by proxy. We would appreciate it if you would refrain from pursuing stories like this without first determining what is at issue.

http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/gr…

@121, what did Greenberg do?

@121

Big deal. I took that class. I spent a lot of my time annoyed with my teacher not just because I had disagreements at certain intersections, but because of the somewhat overbearing tendency to create a charged atmosphere that yes, a student mind find intimidating if they excepted their feelings to be handled like glass. A student expecting to go on to university, where professors often operate on a mandate whereby they do not have to care at all about the feelings of their students.

Jon Greenberg has a powerfully, aggressively, loud mouthed, obnoxious, hyperactive and slightly maniacal tendency towards the emphatic, and the reason for this, so far as I have been able to tell, is not to underscore a dominant paradigm or make students fearful of questioning authority, it is a technique that is employed with the aim of creating a theatre of ideas. And also because the man is just high energy- and to my mind, it functions. The ideas and concepts are retained, the imprint is lasting, and you may have discovered you've stirred a nest of snakes in the form of former students, not all of whom saw eye to eye with Mr. G, but all of whom have a passionate vibrant example on which to base their objections. If your student wasn't so mollycoddled by "concerned parents", as is apparent, maybe they would learn that the issue at hand is not being intimidated by loud noises, but learning that loud noises are permitted, should be permitted, encouraged, and expressed.

This is a lesson your kid needs to learn now: not all teachers are easy to get along with, not all teachers are nice, not all of them are personable, tranquil or calm in their demeanor, or academically equitable- but your kid is old enough to have a job, to be forced to tolerate an obnoxious employer on a minimum wage job (are you going to show up there, and tell that kid's boss they need to be nicer?) old enough to probably move out and try and make a go of it in a pretty intimidating world, so if your kid can't make the proactive effort to communicate their insecurities with their teacher in an equitable setting with out the bureaucracy, if that kid needs you to hold their hand, then you can hardly expect them to ever gain the tools to confront life's challenges.

@121 Hi there. Please feel free to contact me if you'd like to talk further. My e-mail address is anna@thestranger.com. I've had no way to contact you so far, since your identity is private.

@121

I can't respond to your child's situation specifically since I graduated 3 years ago, but when I took Greenbergs unit there was one student who had views that were very much against the grain of the class. Greenberg never forced him to talk in relation to his views on racism or sexism (in fact he made it very clear at the start that it could be a deeply personal topic and no one would be singled out or berated for their views) and when the student said things that were very unpopular, to say the least, Greenberg always defended his opinion and kept the discussion civil (definitely loud, but always reasonable). I don't know what personal interactions you are referring to but I can say that I have never seen him harass or intimidate students. I was pretty shy back then and rarely spoke, yet I never felt like I was personally being attacked. And yes, it was an uncomfortable class for me, but that was because other students were sharing stories that were difficult to deal with, not because of teacher intimidation.

I dont know what appropriate discipline for Greenberg is in your mind, and while I understand your reluctance to tell us exactly what this "highly-inappropriate behavior" was it does seem very disproportionate to call for retribution against this "pattern of intimidating behavior" when nobody who has taken this class understands exactly what this pattern is. The worst charge from my classmates that I've heard against him was that they didn't like his style, but he was and continues to be a highly respected teacher. If there are grounds for these accusations I'd be completely open to hearing them, but I think a lot of his students (past and present) are wondering what prompted this.

@126 Exactly. It's an underhanded attempt to manipulate the conversation by premising an argument with "he did this really bad thing that was so bad that we're not even going to tell you what it was." Apparently their representation cautioned them against being explicit, but not against attempting to push their agenda by trying to elicit sympathy on slog, of all places. Which makes me think that it is more of a personally motivated, emotional objection rather than a qualitative, legitimate complaint. And causes me to severely question the legitimacy of their motivations, given they've just stepped outside the bounds of professional discourse into the court of character assassination and rumour mongering that is this here forum.

What exactly did they hope to gain by trying to impress a private agency with their need to have their views honoured in an admittedly biased setting? They brought this controversy on themselves by not choosing to privately and in a communal setting address what they consider to be a problem, instead of making a big public whiny deal about it.

Racism and sexism are intimidating...Not Jon Greenberg. Current and past students started this fight thinking they were defending their right to discuss these hard topics. Now that the focus of the arguments are being changed to the manner in which Jon Greenberg teaches this class, it must be said that all current and past students rallied behind fighting for their curriculum BECAUSE of the way Greenberg teaches. If he had been only an adequate teacher, we would not be so fired up. We rallied for his class, his way of teaching these subjects, and we still fight for him. This man is incredible. He is strong and intense and that is what I want most in my educators.

However, I cannot help but also believe this complaint still stems from the subject matters of the class because, if this was only about Greenberg's style of teaching, then the not yet introduced sexism unit would still be happening and the letter from the Superintendent of Schools would have demanded a change in Greenberg’s teaching while they investigated. The parents are simply attempting to find ground footing on their side of the issue while we rip the carpet out from under them. They likely never imagined they would face an army of students fighting for these issues and their teacher because they do not understand that this class taught us all to be engaged and motivated adults. They woke the sleeping dogs in their inane attempt to thwart our education.

Racism and sexism are intimidating...Not Jon Greenberg.

Current and past students started this fight thinking they were defending their right to discuss these hard topics. Now that the focus of the arguments are being changed to the manner in which Jon Greenberg teaches this class, it must be said that all current and past students rallied behind fighting for their curriculum BECAUSE of the way Greenberg teaches. If he had been only an adequate teacher, we would not be so fired up. We rallied for his class, his way of teaching these subjects, and we still fight for him. This man is incredible. He is strong and intense and that is what I want most in my educators.

However, I cannot help but also believe this complaint still stems from the subject matters of the class because, if this was only about Greenberg's style of teaching, then the not yet introduced sexism unit would still be happening and the letter from the Superintendent of Schools would have demanded a change in Greenberg’s teaching while they investigated. The parents are simply attempting to find ground footing on their side of the issue while we rip the carpet out from under them. They likely never imagined they would face an army of students fighting for these issues and their teacher because they do not understand that this class taught us all to be engaged and motivated adults. They woke the sleeping dogs in their inane attempt to thwart our education.

Never owned a slave. Never bashed a gay. Don't feel I should be punished in lieu of those who did.

Please note the many posts of current and former students of Mr. Greenberg and their parents who are reeling in amazement at the content of the "life-changing" character of the class. This means few of their families taught racial and sexual values, ethics, morality, fair play or tolerance at home, or they mightn't have been so blown away. It is well to remember that the meme "social justice" originated in the Catholic and Methodist churches, but the phrase has now been overtaken by Marxists who are demonstrably intolerant of anyone with a sincere religious reason for extending tolerance to others. We must also reflect that "one complaint" has been responsible for changing our culture dramatically and rapidly from the Left for the past century: Roe v. Wade was about one woman. Removing prayer from schools originated with one woman. The individual rights enshrined in our founding documents have given way to individual licence, until now our jurisprudence is completely disconnected from the roots of our Constitution; and anyone can object to anything and sue and ruin a cultural institution of value for many, many others. In time, such oppression circles around and bites the oppressors, as Tolstoy observed long ago. Sounds like some of the Left Coast is starting to feel bitten. At last.

VAWA: Because only women are abused by their partners. Abused men just suck it up. Or are pussies. Equality at last!

(This snarky sardonism was brought to you by people who support gender equali-- er, I mean, scumbag rape-culture misogynists.)

My kid will go to private school for smaller class sizes and more individual attention. I'm also an educator, and it is not true that adding a few "privileged" kids will help all the others. While race, class, and money are extremely tangled in our society, my choice for my kid has nothing to do with wanting her to just be with white kids (and why is rottentomatoes acting like everyone is either white or black? Other races/multiracial people exist!) but everything to do with wanting my kid to love learning.

Hey @ 133, if you think you didn't get that job or opportunity or whatever because of anti-male gender discrimination, you are mistaken. It was because you gave the impression that you are an asshole.

@121, Can you please clarify your position?

You write "We would appreciate it if you would refrain from pursuing stories like this without first determining what is at issue." but you refuse to tell people what, if anything, is at issue. So you are setting an impossible standard for reporters to meet.

You have made a cloaked reference to something Mr. Greenberg did which you characterize as "highly-inappropriate behavior" but won't say what it was. You say - and the District agreed - that it constituted violations of the District's policies against intimidation and discrimination. That's your truth - and it has been confirmed by District officials - so I won't deny it. But I'm sure that you'll understand how confusing it is for others that, somehow, the other students in the class didn't notice the intimidation or discrimination. No one else seems to know what triggered the complaint. What makes this particularly odd is that it occurred in a class that was supposed to heighten awareness of exactly this sort of thing. I'm sure you'll acknowledge that it's a curiosity.

You write: "I would like to point out that District claims that we, as the complainants, have been part of the curriculum review or its committee are false." but I don't see any claims by the district that indicate your participation in the curriculum review. Where are these false claims made?

Again, you made a complaint based on your view and the District upheld the complaint, so your view clearly has some merit - at least in their eyes. The rest of us, however, don't have your view and only want to be able to see what you see. Right now, we're not seeing it.

@133: Did you wander into the wrong thread?

Just got this in my electo-post-office-box:

Dear concerned Center School community and those who value education as a vehicle for social change:


As of last Friday, I am unmuzzled and I am unhappy.


Throughout all the events that have unfolded since January, I, despite the host of aggressive accusations and campaign by exactly one white family, have been forced to stifle my perspective from the public. No longer.


But I need to start with this: let us spend zero of our energies on the identity of the student who filed the complaint. This student has every right to dissent. Let us measure ourselves by how we treat the dissenting voices in the classroom, which needs to be a sanctuary for all students. My heart goes out to this student, though I fear any words of comfort would only exacerbate the situation.


This student’s parents are another matter. They are the primary architects who leave students without a conclusion to the Race Unit and a beginning to the Feminism Unit, a unit of study only included in Citizenship and Social Justice as a result of student activism back in 2003. After all, could one student ever have navigated the system so deftly and achieved such startling results—the suspension of not one but two curricula based on only one complaint? The following is what you do not know because I was silenced by Human Resources during the investigation of these parents’ accusations:


· I never once in class singled out or called out the complainant. I only ever called on this student when this person chose to participate by raising a hand. Throughout the first few weeks of the Race Unit, this student (whose identity we still aren’t concerned with please) always seemed engaged, interested, and participatory. It was only after the parents demanded a meeting that this dynamic started to change. Until I received this very hostile email, I had no reason to believe that this student was struggling.


· I met with these parents to try to problem solve the student’s experience in the classroom. The parents continually diverted the discussion from the student so that we couldn’t even discuss possible accommodations. Instead, they tag-teamed a litany of yes-or-no questions in a manner akin to a courtroom cross examination in hopes, I believe, that I would say something to incriminate myself of violating some policy or law. They recorded the meeting (leading me to follow suit). I repeatedly tried to focus on the well-being of the student and they repeatedly rebuffed my efforts. I offered curricular materials to them and they left them on the table.


· In the recorded meeting, these parents expressed that they did not see the merit in asking students to analyze their race-based prejudices and biases, despite sending their child to a school adorned with “Ways to Be an Ally Against Racism” posters encouraging our community to do exactly that. They explicitly advocated a colorblind approach to race, even though the color of many students is core to their identities. They seemed to imply that racial labels, such as “white,” are inherently discriminatory. In short, it was evident from this meeting that the parents do not believe that open dialogue on race is appropriate for a school setting.


· In the investigation with Human Resources, I was questioned about at least one lesson that didn’t even directly involve the complainant. Rather, the experience of another student was offered as evidence of a hostile classroom environment, but this student has been openly supportive of the curriculum and, when I later questioned him about that specific lesson, did not support the complainant’s interpretation. To my knowledge, Human Resources did not interview any other senior as a direct witness to the lessons in question. The current principal, Oksana Britsova, was interviewed but she did not directly witness anything I was asked about during the investigation, with the exception of that contentious parent meeting.


While this set of parents may be framing their campaign as protecting their student from some radical teacher (who has never received a word of critical feedback in principal evaluations, by the way), I simply don’t see how the current situation is at all in the best interest of their child: enraged, empowered classmates fighting to save the curriculum on one side and entitled, privileged parents fighting to kill it on the other—an impossible position. These lessons have been transforming lives since 2002, when our current crop of seniors was 6-8 years old. I am surprised that this family with so many means didn’t better research the school to which they sent their child.


While I’ve been accused of facilitating lessons on race that disrupt the learning environment, I’ve never seen the Center School learning environment more disrupted in its 12-year history than it has been in the wake of Superintendent José Banda’s letter ordering me to cease the race and gender units while the curriculum is under review.


While this white family is claiming that the student felt intolerable discomfort, students of color leave the Center School every year, often citing that our school culture is both isolating and alienating to them because of their race. Many of those who stick it out do so despite the racial discomfort felt on a daily basis. But I see no complaint filed on the behalf of these students. And would it be taken seriously if it were?


I am writing this statement not just as a defense but also as a call to action.


The committee reviewing the curriculum will make its recommendation on Monday to Shauna Heath, Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction. According to the process outlined in the Instructional Materials Complaint Procedure (http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/gr…), Shauna Heath’s decision is final and cannot be appealed. While she has up to 10 days to decide, she could do it as early as Monday. I encourage you to direct your thoughts and opinions about the curriculum and process to her by Monday. The time to act is now:


slheath@seattleschools.org


In your communication, I also encourage you to carbon copy (cc) a host of others, all of whom I believe would greatly benefit from the pressure you apply:


José Banda

Superintendent of Seattle Public Schools

superintendent@seattleschools.org


Michael Tolley

Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning

mftolley@seattleschools.org


Marni Campbell

Executive Director of Schools—Northwest Region

macampbell@seattleschools.org


Oksana Britsova

Current Principal of Center School

oabritsova@seattleschools.org


I urge you to send them any feedback you have time to offer. If you have already communicated with the Oksana Britsova or Marni Campbell, I urge you to forward that communication to Shauna Heath.


I also urge you to take your thoughts and opinions to the School Board members, who may not be aware of all that has transpired, including Superintendent José Banda’s decision to cease current and future curricula while they are under review. A number of Center School staff members, primarily through the dedication of Gerardine Carroll, have repeatedly asked building and district leadership for documentation that the superintendent indeed has this power to cease curricula and circumvent the Instructional Materials Complaint Procedure, but we have yet to receive such evidence. Also know that Human Resources personnel reported to me that the parents are not satisfied with Superintendent José Banda’s action—he did not go far enough in their eyes—and they will be elevating their complaint to the next level: The School Board. Thus, the pressure we must now urgently apply to Shauna Heath must be extended to the School Board.


Many students have discussed signing up to testify at next Wednesday’s School Board meeting on March 6th. Started at 5:00 pm, the School Board hears 20 two-minute testimonies on any topic that affects our schools; if you are interested in testifying, you must call (206) 252-0040 at 8:00 am on Monday morning, March 4th. In my experience, the 20 slots fill up fast, so you should call as close to 8:00 am as you can. I know I will.


Thanks so much to all who have who have mobilized this past week. When this is over—and this does not end with Shauna Heath’s decision—I am looking forward to writing many heartfelt thank-you letters, regardless of the outcome. And, depending on that outcome, I am considering selling the rights to this story in hopes of making millions (and that was verbal irony).


Peace,

Jon Timins Greenberg


March 3, 2013

Well,dumb-down comes to Seattle. Next stop, Texas - a return visit. How said. We cannot be a thriving democracy if people can't visit issues that make them uncomfortable. Hell, everything makes someone uncomfortable. If I had been in charge, I'd have told them to move to Texas . . . or Mississippi . . . or even Idaho. Mmmmm. . . eastern WA perhaps?

I just read the parents response to this thread. They seem to think they're the only ones who know what is right. Given the testimony of all the kids who have had that class, perhaps you - dear parents - need to sit down and think about your actions. "Intimidation" comes in many forms. As a teacher myself, I'm not always sweet and fuzzy. Getting kids to think demands difficult strategies. "Discomfort" is a sign that learning is happening and attitudes are being questioned. I'm sorry you don't get that when so many others do. You are perpetuating the unfortunate attitude that so many in our society have who cannot come to terms with the hostility faced by several generations of people earlier in our history. Antonin Scalia being the most notorious and current. Those who dismiss history or choose to forget or ignore it (because it is uncomfortable) are doomed to repeat it. That so many students have found it life-changing that they've actually become advocates for societal change and understanding is all the proof I need about your agenda.

I have no sympathy for you nor do I have any respect for your need to put asunder what so many people have found to be life-changing for them. But then, they came to learn. And learning is change. If you don't like what your child learned or how that may have changed them, then you are the problem. You are society's problem. You are the kind of people who perpetuate the hate.

I recall a teacher of first graders many years ago who divided her class between the blue-eyes and the brown-eyes. Imagine the discomfort those kids faced as they became angry and hurt because they were treated unfairly. That was a time when parents wanted children to understand the injustice that so many have endured for so long. Golly gee, that teacher would be on the bench if she were around today. Because you don't want your child to endure a single moment of soul searching or discomfort. Well, discomfort is part of growing and learning and opening your mind. I'm disgusted that people like you always seem to win these days. In the end, we all lose.

I recall a teacher of first graders many years ago who divided her class between the blue-eyes and the brown-eyes. Imagine the discomfort those kids faced as they became angry and hurt because they were treated unfairly. That was a time when parents wanted children to understand the injustice that so many have endured for so long. Golly gee, that teacher would be on the bench if she were around today. Because you don't want your child to endure a single moment of soul searching or discomfort. Well, discomfort is part of growing and learning and opening your mind. I'm disgusted that people like you always seem to win these days. In the end, we all lose.

@121: I understand that you do not want your kid to feel intimidated and why the recent media involvement would worry you. I am a current student at the center school and would like you to know that none of this is an attempt to harm or scare your child, in fact, the vast majority of the students have agreed not to turn this into a "witch hunt," so to speak, or seek out the identity of your child. We are simply trying to do the same as you, fight for what we believe in, and those fighting, petitioning, and showing support believe that both Greenberg and the class are important to center and center students.

As for the class itself, I am a white student and have, yes, felt uncomfortable at times in our discussions, however, that discomfort never came from Greenberg or even the class, it came from what was unearthed within myself. Something Greenberg always reminded us, "let the truth come out how it wants to come out..." and it would, sometimes in outbursts during discussions, sometimes in small voices reading an essay or poem, my point is, most of what effects students in that class is neither forced nor planned or ever could be. Hearing a stranger on a screen talk about racism in daily life is one thing, but to have someone you've known for 3-4 years stand up and share their feelings strikes you to the bone. What Greenberg does is try to start the ball rolling, get us talking, analyzing, questioning our surroundings, questioning ourselves. If the class was ever an intimidating environment, to me, Greenberg is not the cause.

@121: I understand that you do not want your kid to feel intimidated and why the recent media involvement would worry you. I am a current student at the center school and would like you to know that none of this is an attempt to harm or scare your child, in fact, the vast majority of the students have agreed not to turn this into a "witch hunt," so to speak, or seek out the identity of your child. We are simply trying to do the same as you, fight for what we believe in, and those fighting, petitioning, and showing support believe that both Greenberg and the class are important to center and center students.

As for the class itself, I am a white student and have, yes, felt uncomfortable at times in our discussions, however, that discomfort never came from Greenberg or even the class, it came from what was unearthed within myself. Something Greenberg always reminded us, "let the truth come out how it wants to come out..." and it would, sometimes in outbursts during discussions, sometimes in small voices reading an essay or poem, my point is, most of what effects students in that class is neither forced nor planned or ever could be. Hearing a stranger on a screen talk about racism in daily life is one thing, but to have someone you've known for 3-4 years stand up and share their feelings strikes you to the bone. What Greenberg does is try to start the ball rolling, get us talking, analyzing, questioning our surroundings, questioning ourselves. If the class was ever an intimidating environment, to me, Greenberg is not the cause.

As a parent of a student in the class I have taken an interest in the issue. I have talked to my student, several other students and their parents, Mr. Greenberg, the Principal and read the @121's comments. Ironically, as best I can tell is it is what Mr. Greenberg didn't do as what he did do that "created a hostile, intimidating learning environment in his classroom." As best I can tell the "intimidation" came during a discussion between student, where non-white student were opening up about intimidation they felt frequently in their lives. Mr. Greenberg didn't intercede. It is very interesting that no one I have talked to and nothing I have read, including @121, has said that Mr. Greenberg made threats, raised his voice, berated the student or was directly involved in anyway. There are many misconnects in this issue. If nothing else, the Superintendent should reinstate the curriculum immediately. The senior class who are scheduled graduate in 14 weeks are the greatest victims in the mishandling of this affair.

@144

I have to disagree. I was a student of Greenberg's around 2005, and the real subtext in that class is to prepare you to confront injustice in your real life. This is, while on one hand a pretty pathetic excuse to try and extend the bureaucratic nose into the affairs of education on the part of the School Board members (who are not following standard procedures according to their own policy, so there's a lot of attempts at ass covering going on) but it presents a pretty exceptional opportunity for Greenberg's students, past and present, to make a difference in a small but meaningful way.

It gives them a chance to participate in advocacy on their own behalf and to address what is not only an issue of manipulation by parents who expect to be treated like customers- and indeed, without recognizing that a public school is accountable to the public- but what appears, as we go deeper into the District's own rule book to be a systemic abuse of authority. They are not supposed to suspend programs until after a review is complete- and then, only in cases where they are reviewing education content, which the board and the parents vehemently denied.

They ostensibly found on the side of the complainants that Greenberg created a "hostile" environment but failed to post an observer in the classroom, or consult the rest of the students on their feelings- whereby we can only conclude they are basing all of these actions on the complaints of a single family. They are emphasizing that the contention is not about the issues or content of the curriculum but rather the attitudes of the teacher, but the policies they are following are intended to reflect the a complaint about the former rather than the latter.

No, I think the child of these parents are the biggest loser. He's going to be marked after this experience, devalued in the minds of his fellow students even if he decides to try and stick it out. Teenagers do not always make sound judgments, and they are not always wise in expressing confidences, but I think I'd be very much mistaken if this student doesn't regret taking a different path (or having his feelings appropriated by his overzealous, self-important parents) in dealing with this problem.

Additionally- I think it's a hopeful sign that at least this group of students has and will go on to be superior members of society than the members who are currently shaping it.

Many parent(s) are missing this important social venue - i would like to suggest to host a session on the topic with parent(s) and students. I also suggets viewing Race, the Power of Illusion. Also, see City of Seattle web site to Seattle Office of Human Rights for more on Race and Social Justice Inititative . Thank you

First of all, this is not reporting. Ms. Minard wears her bias on her sleeve - proudly and quite naively. Shame on the Stranger to let its standards slip like this. And what a poor reflection on the Center School she is. @121, I cannot let you hang out there alone. This school is one hot mess. And Jon Greenberg reigns over it. I am writing because I read his indirect statement that this is the first complaint lodged against him. Not true. In the 2010-2011 school year, our child and we complained about Jon Greenberg. He is an intellectual bully. The fact that he has whipped the student body and alums into this frenzy - when none has the full story - is evidence of this. I gave up with the school district. Our child moved on (i.e. dropped out). Of course it is dangerous to complain about Jon Greenberg if you are a current student in his class a parent of that student. College next year? Not if Mr. Greenberg does not support you. A significant point I have not seen highlighted here: this school in many ways reflects the Seattle population: white, over-fed, and liberal. The curriculum in Greenberg's class ? Yawn. He and the school have more vanity over it than it deserves. You can find something spicier on any page of The Stranger or listening on the # 7 bus for more than 3 minutes. The curriculum is NOT the problem. Greenberg and the fact that there is no check on Greenberg at this school are the problems. "Greenberg," as the students call him, is a white male wielding power in the traditional way. With hubris, intellectual insecurity and bullying. None of us knows what the parents complained about. But I am here to tell you, those parents are not alone.

I'm a 50 year old African American, male that spent most of my professional career living and working in Seattle. Several years ago, the City of Seattle had the audacity to embark on a Race & Social Initiative that would eliminate racism in its city. In short, the initiative empowers each city employee to understand the impact of their decisions in multicultural communities, as well as, the workplace. Also, there is an element of education and training that is voluntary. A posting earlier whereas these conversations are suncomfortable, its what I have unearthed within myself that is uncomfortable. Since then, I have quit smoking entirely, become a better parent to my kids and have a better understanding of myself as a simple man in multicultural society. I just wished that I had this kinda of instruction many years ago.

@25 @23 @22 @20 @19

I just want to let you know that @4 is not the parent that filed the complaint, but is the parent of another Center School student who HAS complained about Greenberg in the past. This has gone overlooked by all of the "reporters" and has been omitted by Greenberg himself. The complaint is not about the curriculum, because we agree it is valuable. What seems to be looked over is that the issue is GREENBERG not what he is teaching. It is his methods. Greenberg made my last quarter of highschool so miserable that I ended up switching schools before graduation. I filed a complaint and was bamboozled into signing a former that relinquished my position at the center school in an effort to protect their significantly high drop out right. I was still in highschool and was not aware of what was being signed.

I also would look at your responses and see how unintelligent you look... Swearing and telling somebody's to shut up? You seem like you think you know everything and have all the answers to this situation but the truth is you don't really know half of the things going on behind closes doors.

You are either the most uncouth parents I have ever met or students that are so far over their heads you don't know which way is up.

Maybe if you hadn't gone to The Center School you could have gone to a college and learned how to make a valid point. I fully intend to let my opinions be known in the highest forum available.

Please excuse my typos I wrote this on my phone. ^

Well it seems we have ten years of teaching, hundreds of life changing stories from students who acknowledge the tuff situations exposed in Greenbergs class, but who also say that is what led to self discovery and change in their lives for the better. And then out of all the blogs and writing I have read not just this one I see two complaints. Wow in ten years two students and it sounds like one of them may have simply been a student who shared with her parents and the parents took it to the limit on her behalf whether she may have wanted that or not is unclear. And the person claiming Greenberg runs the school is this an assumption because Greenberg actually enjoys an overwhelming amount of support from students, fellow teachers, and administrators? And does he enjoy this support because he actually has an impact in learning and promoting value and change in the lives of those he teaches? Most likely yes, as in ten years of teaching this is all that can be drudged up is two people speaking out that essentially the reality of the real world situations and personal growth that was happening was too much for them and most likely the parents were and are a contributing factor to the students inability to cope with the classroom environment.