Centering Diverse Parents in the CRT Debate

Black parents matter. Diverse perspectives are essential. Today, less than half of children in the United States under age 15 are white, yet critical race theory (CRT) opponents normalize bigotry and ignore racially and culturally diverse parents’ thoughts on education. For more than a century, education has misrepresented and purposely distorted the history of Black, Indigenous and other people of color, along with the narratives of additional communities that have been marginalized.

The U.S. educational system has roots in exclusionary practices that once made it illegal to teach most Black people to read. Even after the 13th Amendment, Jim Crow laws forced Black children into substandard schools with inadequate resources. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that “separate but equal” schools were unconstitutional, yet de facto segregation persists in many school districts across the country. The reality of racism must be honestly confronted for our society to build a more equitable future for all children.

Most U.S. Adults Support Inclusive Education

A recent NAACP co-sponsored survey of 1,625 adults reveals that most people believe parents “should have the most say in deciding how race and history [are] taught in public schools.” Survey participants equally represented—325 each—Black, Asian American/Pacific Islander, Latine/x, Indigenous and white adults. Interestingly, the majority of white survey respondents indicated teachers should have the least say in how race and history are taught, placing educators beneath governors and state lawmakers.

The same survey found that over 39% of all participants have a favorable opinion about CRT, while 29% have an unfavorable view, and 32% have no opinion (“didn’t know”). Among white adults, 28% have a favorable opinion and 43% an unfavorable, compared to 50% of Black respondents with a favorable view and 21% unfavorable. In both groups, 29% report no opinion on CRT. And although more than one-third of Latine/x, Asian and Indigenous adults did not know about CRT, the majority of participants from these groups (39%) view CRT favorably. The lack of information to form an opinion—as indicated by more than one-third of participants—reveals a gap in knowledge about CRT that is being exploited by some politicians.

While nearly half of the white survey participants (46%) believe too much attention is paid to race and racial issues in the U.S., 56% of Black respondents believe too little attention is paid. And overall, the majority of all participants felt too little attention is paid to race and racism. Among all participants, the majority, over 60%, felt that the government addressing racism would have a positive impact on the country. The findings of this survey support other media polls—USA Today poll, 2021; Reuters poll, 2021; Slate poll, 2021—that illustrate that most adults in the U.S. support teaching honest history and the effects of slavery and racism.

The NAACP findings underscore a trend. Nationally, some politicians are focusing on “parents’ rights” to disrupt efforts to create more equitable and inclusive education environments. In Virginia, for instance, Gov. Glenn Youngkin set up an email tip line for parents to report “divisive practices” in schools. Similarly, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis backed legislation that prohibited public schools from teaching aspects of history that make people feel “discomfort.” Politicians like Gov. Youngkin and Gov. DeSantis marginalize parents of color and parents of conscience when they warn “parents” about CRT in school. This insidious strategy normalizes prejudiced white parents, casting them against phantom teachers who are “indoctrinating their children with CRT.”

Critical Race Theory and Systemic Racism

CRT explains how systems—like education—can have racist outcomes even after racism becomes illegal. CRT is an analytical tool, not a body of facts. And CRT offers ways of understanding how racism manifests in social institutions, helping to explain why some groups are disadvantaged while others hold institutional power.

The practice and enforcement of whose perspective is prioritized and whose is erased creates a clearer picture of the harm intended by anti-CRT legislation. For example, when I was an 11th grader, I felt immense discomfort when my U.S. history teacher taught us that slavery was a “system of a different time” and many enslaved people, “slaves” in her words, “had good relationships with their ‘slave masters.’” Her lesson caused me so much angst that I became combative. Because of my confrontational behavior, the teacher sent me to the principal’s office to be disciplined. I was humiliated and ashamed that I had been disruptive in class, but I was also angry. My parents had instilled in me a love of learning and a respect for educators. They also taught me to be proud of my Black heritage. So, when my history teacher minimized the experiences of my enslaved ancestors, I could not stay silent. These intense feelings of discomfort among students of color should be considered in these legislations, but they are disregarded.

The relationship between the intent and enforcement of these laws will disadvantage diverse learners. A parent’s “right to know” what their child is learning can quickly become weaponized to silence educators who are having honest conversations about race with their students. To counter these legislations, we need to recenter the arguments around CRT in schools on the experiences and perspectives of the racially and culturally diverse parent majority in public education, to unify, rather than divide, parents, caregivers and teachers.

Like most African Americans, I can trace my lineage back to the same racist enslavers whose crimes Gov. DeSantis is trying to minimize. My great-great-great-grandfather was a white enslaver in Kentucky who raped an enslaved African woman on his plantation. She gave birth to my great-great grandfather, Granderson Conn. Conn’s white half siblings taught him to read after his enslaver father moved his children—including those conceived from rape—to North Louisiana. Conn became free as a young adult and volunteered to fight for the Union Army in the Civil War. After the war, he returned to Louisiana and had a daughter (my great-grandmother) who had a son named John Henry Scott (my grandfather). My grandfather became a civil rights activist and father to many children, including my mother, civil rights activist Johnita Scott.

Unlike me, Gov. DeSantis most likely did not have an ancestor who enslaved Black people in the U.S. His ancestors were Italian immigrants. Undoubtedly, the intent of the white “discomfort” legislation is not to conceal the actions of white racists from the past; it is to facilitate the agenda of white racists in the present. The legislation is designed to protect the biased, white-centered lens of education that permeates our current system. As a great-great-great grandson of a white enslaver and rapist, I am sensible enough not to feel discomfort from my family ancestry; I expect nothing less from my distant white cousins. Instead of pacifying our ancestors who oppressed, we can celebrate our ancestors of all races who fought to make the world better.