Ethnic Studies in US High Schools: Contrasting Approaches in California and Arizona
The integration of ethnic studies—the interdisciplinary study of race, ethnicity, and power—into American high school curricula has become a focal point of educational and political debate. While some states have moved toward mandating these courses to promote diversity and inclusion, others have historically sought to restrict them. The divergent paths taken by California and Arizona illustrate the complex tension between educational goals and political ideologies.
Ethnic Studies in California Schools
California has taken a proactive approach to integrating ethnic studies into its public education system. A 2021 law mandates that all public high schools offer an ethnic studies class by 2025. Furthermore, the law aims to make an ethnic studies credit a requirement for graduation by 2030, contingent upon the appropriation of funding. As of March 14, 2025, it remains unclear if this requirement has fully taken effect due to a lack of allocated funding. However, as early as 2020, half of the state's students attended high schools that offered such courses.
While the state provides a model curriculum, local school districts maintain the autonomy to decide whether to adopt it. This has led to two primary pedagogical philosophies:
- Liberated Ethnic Studies: Focuses on imagining post-imperial possibilities and promoting collective narratives of transformative resistance and radical healing.
- Constructive Ethnic Studies: Aims to equip students with the skills to analyze multiple viewpoints and develop evidence-based arguments.
Several districts have led the way in implementation. The El Rancho Unified School District (ERUSD) became the first in the state to require an ethnic studies class for graduation in 2014, an effort spearheaded by board members Aurora Villon and Jose Lara to expose students to global perspectives. Similarly, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) integrated these courses into its A-G graduation requirements following a 2014 resolution by board members Bennett Kayser, George McKenna, and Steve Zimmer. In February 2021, the California Board of Education further expanded these efforts by approving a curriculum featuring 33 optional lesson plans highlighting the contributions of Black, Latino, Native American, and Asian Americans.
ไม่มีภาพประกอบ
Ethnic Studies in Arizona Schools
In contrast to California, Arizona experienced a period of significant restriction regarding ethnic studies. On May 11, 2010, Governor Jan Brewer signed House Bill 2281 (A.R.S. §15–112). This law prohibited school districts or charter schools from offering courses that promoted the overthrow of the government, fostered resentment toward any race or class, advocated ethnic solidarity over individualism, or were designed specifically for a certain ethnicity.
The law did provide specific exceptions: Native American classes (to comply with federal law), academic performance-based grouping, classes on ethnic history open to all students, and discussions of controversial history remained permitted.
The Conflict in Tucson Unified School District
The primary target of HB 2281 was the Mexican American Studies (MAS) program in the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD). Then-Superintendent Tom Horne argued the program taught "destructive ethnic chauvinism." Despite a June 2011 audit that found no evidence of the district violating the law, Superintendent John Huppenthal discredited the findings and maintained that the program was non-compliant.
Under the threat of losing 10% of its annual funding, the TUSD board voted to cut the program on January 10, 2012. This resulted in the removal of various texts from classrooms, including Paolo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, William Shakespeare's The Tempest, and Bill Bigelow's Rethinking Columbus: The Next 500 Years.
ไม่มีภาพประกอบ
Impact and Resistance
Supporters of the MAS program viewed the ban as a targeted attack on the Hispanic population, noting that other ethnic studies programs were not cut. The documentary Precious Knowledge highlighted the program's success, noting that while 48% of Hispanic students generally dropped out, 93% of MAS students graduated, with 85% attending college. Resistance took many forms, from the student group UNIDOS speaking to legislators to a 165-mile community run from Tucson to Phoenix.
The Legal Appeal of the Arizona Ban
The battle over HB 2281 eventually moved through the court system. An initial appeal filed in October 2010 challenged the law on First Amendment (viewpoint discrimination) and Fourteenth Amendment (void-for-vagueness) grounds. After several years of litigation and the graduation of most original student plaintiffs, the case Maya Arce vs Huppenthal reached a federal appeals court.
Judge Rakoff found that HB 2281 was created specifically with the MAS course in mind, noting that it did not target African American Studies or similar courses outside TUSD. Consequently, the court found the bill partially unconstitutional regarding First Amendment rights. Finally, in August 2017, a federal judge struck down the ban entirely, ruling that the law was motivated by "invidious discriminatory racial purpose and a politically partisan purpose" rather than legitimate educational goals.
Key Facts
- California Mandate: Public high schools must offer ethnic studies by 2025; graduation credit is targeted for 2030 (pending funding).
- California Diversity: The state approved 33 optional lesson plans covering Asian, Black, Latino, and Native American contributions.
- Arizona HB 2281: A 2010 law that banned courses promoting ethnic solidarity or resentment toward races/classes.
- TUSD Outcome: The Mexican American Studies program was cut in 2012 after the state threatened to withhold 10% of funding.
- Legal Resolution: In 2017, a federal judge ruled Arizona's ban unconstitutional, citing discriminatory intent.
| Feature | California Approach | Arizona (HB 2281 Era) |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Stance | State-mandated offering/credit | State-mandated prohibition |
| Primary Goal | Inclusion and global perspectives | Prevention of "ethnic chauvinism" |
| Implementation | District-led (e.g., ERUSD, LAUSD) | Program removal (e.g., TUSD) |
| Current Status | Expanding requirements | Ban struck down as unconstitutional |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between liberated and constructive ethnic studies?
Liberated ethnic studies focuses on transformative resistance, radical healing, and building new possibilities for post-imperial life. Constructive ethnic studies emphasizes the development of skills to analyze multiple viewpoints and present evidence-based arguments.
Why was the Mexican American Studies program in Tucson cut?
The program was cut after Arizona's House Bill 2281 prohibited courses that advocated ethnic solidarity. Despite an audit finding no violations, the state threatened to withhold 10% of the district's annual funding, leading the TUSD board to terminate the program.
Which California school district was the first to require ethnic studies for graduation?
The El Rancho Unified School District (ERUSD), serving the Pico Rivera area, became the first to make an ethnic studies class a graduation requirement in 2014.
How did the federal courts eventually rule on Arizona's HB 2281?
After years of appeals, a federal judge ruled in August 2017 that the ban was unconstitutional, stating it was passed for discriminatory racial and politically partisan purposes rather than legitimate educational ones.
What specific books were removed from TUSD classrooms?
Books found in violation of the law included The Tempest by William Shakespeare, Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paolo Freire, and Rethinking Columbus: The Next 500 Years by Bill Bigelow.