Ethnic classes are a way for students to learn American history through the perspective of people or races who are not from the United States. These people or races have played a role in the progression of the United States' history with their contributions and ideas. Many schools across the country have adopted ethnic studies as an alternative way for students to learn history. However, some school districts are less favorable towards ethnic studies, such as a school district in Arizona. In 2010, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed House Bill 2281. The House bill banned all Mexican American classes and books from students of Tucson high schools. There are several stakeholders that have either agreed or disagreed with the existence of House
…show more content…
The majority of news media has not picked a side, but rather shows what each side is fighting for. News media has broadcasted videos explaining the controversy by dissecting the House bill. They have shown video footage of students in an outrage by which they have protested against the law. The media has not only been spread across the state but also by the whole country. Non-Arizona news broadcasters have picked up the controversy to gain consciousness for their viewers. Multiple comedic shows have done interviews with board members to expose them in a comical presentation to bring laughter and consciousness out of the controversy (The Daily Show with Jon Stewart). Like news media, many articles are written solely on facts and not opinions. There are many opinionated pieces that have a focused goal of only persuading their audiences into believing that their side of the controversy is correct. The audience of the articles are people who are concerned with the meaning of the bill and those who want to gather more knowledge so they can fight against it. Their intention is to write about the current situation that the state has stumbled upon and how it affects its citizens. They persuade by using guilt to trigger an emotion that makes the audience feel bad for the students. However, several stakeholders use their own tactics to persuade their …show more content…
Those constraints are students who are not actively engaged in a group or organization that is fighting against the ban, like UNIDOS. The students who were in school at the time of the ban did not have a clue. According to one student who took the class, the students did not receive a fair warning that their teacher would not return to teach them Mexican American studies (Interviewed by C. Rocha, 2017). They were also unaware of why their teacher was no longer returning. These students consider this to be an act of injustice. Superintendent Pedicone wrote in the Arizona Daily Star, "Adults used students as pawns in TUSD ethnic studies protest” (Pedicone, 2011). He argues that school officials did not consider how the students would feel about the ban, nor did they investigate the positive effects in had on them. A true error of judgement, according to Pedicone. The voices and needs of the students are unheard by the officials in charge. Many students choose to remain silent while others stay true to their right to protest. This raises the question of if every students speaks up, will the ban be abolished or will the students' plea be
The majority of news media has not picked a side, but rather shows what each side is fighting for. News media has broadcasted videos explaining the controversy by dissecting the House bill. They have shown video footage of students in an outrage by which they have protested against the law. The media has not only been spread across the state but also by the whole country. Non-Arizona news broadcasters have picked up the controversy to gain consciousness for their viewers. Multiple comedic shows have done interviews with board members to expose them in a comical presentation to bring laughter and consciousness out of the controversy (The Daily Show with Jon Stewart). Like news media, many articles are written solely on facts and not opinions. There are many opinionated pieces that have a focused goal of only persuading their audiences into believing that their side of the controversy is correct. The audience of the articles are people who are concerned with the meaning of the bill and those who want to gather more knowledge so they can fight against it. Their intention is to write about the current situation that the state has stumbled upon and how it affects its citizens. They persuade by using guilt to trigger an emotion that makes the audience feel bad for the students. However, several stakeholders use their own tactics to persuade their …show more content…
Those constraints are students who are not actively engaged in a group or organization that is fighting against the ban, like UNIDOS. The students who were in school at the time of the ban did not have a clue. According to one student who took the class, the students did not receive a fair warning that their teacher would not return to teach them Mexican American studies (Interviewed by C. Rocha, 2017). They were also unaware of why their teacher was no longer returning. These students consider this to be an act of injustice. Superintendent Pedicone wrote in the Arizona Daily Star, "Adults used students as pawns in TUSD ethnic studies protest” (Pedicone, 2011). He argues that school officials did not consider how the students would feel about the ban, nor did they investigate the positive effects in had on them. A true error of judgement, according to Pedicone. The voices and needs of the students are unheard by the officials in charge. Many students choose to remain silent while others stay true to their right to protest. This raises the question of if every students speaks up, will the ban be abolished or will the students' plea be