Thursday, September 15, 2016

Tucson Walk Out rough draft

John Chestnut
Dr. Brown
English 305
September 15, 2016
TUSD School Walkouts (Rough Draft)
In January of 2012, ethnic and Mexican American studies were stopped indefinitely in the Tucson Unified School District. The district would even go as far as to confiscate books about Mexican American history from children. An extreme action that checks off the Ethos of the whole situation. A super intended for the district would even go as far as to tell students to “go to Mexico” if they wanted to study their history. The cut was a controversial one that only happened because Arizona state superintendent, John Huppenthal, wanted to withhold millions of dollars from the district if they did not cut the programs. It was befuddling, and to almost every teacher and student, who worked or attended the schools wrong. Especially when you take in the fact that 60% of the school district was of Mexican descent. The students would lead a day long protest, by way of walkout on January 23rd, 2012. It would rock the district to its core.
                The Pathos in this whole protest comes from each and every student who participated in the day long walkout from schools. The walkout would make its way into the downtown Tucson area. Capturing the attention of TUSD administrators. Every student and even some teachers believed that it was not only just a class getting cut but it was part of their culture and part of their lives being cut out. The students believed that staging this walkout was a way to show that the classes were wanted and needed. It was a way of fighting for what they wanted and believed in.
                The walkouts would continue for the next few days but the classes would not see a return. This whole situation could be seen as a type of discrimination, and blackmail. Withholding money from a district that was already hurting was a dirty move and one that would be brought a federal appeals court. This story would reach not only hit in Tucson, but would hit national levels of news. Stars such as Eva Longoria would chime in and slam the way Arizona school district. There was another protest before this when the talk of cutting the Mexican American studies first started. On April 26th a group of nine students would interrupt a school board meeting and chain themselves to chairs. The whole reason for this sit in, was to at least force the school board to change the classes to electives. Of course that did not work and we found ourselves at the district wide walkouts.
On July 7th, 2015 a federal appeals court would see this case titled “Maya Arce vs Huppenthal”. Leslie Cooper, the attorney for Arizona who would represent Huppenthal, claimed that the ban only prohibits classes for an ethnic group, but not classes that are about the ethnic group. After hearing both sides of the argument the court pointed out that there is a law which prohibits courses that promote the overthrow of government. The problem with this ban, is that it only happened in one district. This would back up the claims of discrimination that so many people had started bringing up from when the district wide cut began.
This would have to be the logos in the whole story. As a court would think logically as to why the school would cut all these programs and classes, and then overturn the cuts. It was a time where everyone who protested the cuts came together and thought logically of a way to bring their studies back. Many people compare this case to another classic school court like “Plessy v Ferguson”. One that shows a restart for democracy.
I graduated from a TUSD school in 2009, and Mexican American studies were a huge thing. The school as a whole was proud of its Mexican heritage. Folklorico was and I believe still is offered and it’s one of the premiere things that the schools in the district offer to the students. Almost every teacher I had was fluent in both English and Spanish so the Mexican culture is something that you really get to experience. As someone who was raised in a white dominant family learning about the Mexican culture through my high school was something I’ll never want to give back.
My analysis of the walkouts was that was a necessary measure to take. The students, their parents, and everyone who participated in the walkout never wanted to incite any violence, they only wanted their voices to be heard. It’s unfortunate that the school board thought they would be able to get away with it, but as we see, democracy wins every time. If the school had been able to do this then what would have stopped them or any other district from banning any teachings about other cultures.
To me learning about different people’s cultures helps us understand one another better. It helps us as a civilization adapt and grow not only individually, but together. The best thing about this whole protest was that it was a peaceful one that everyone could easily get behind. During the case the judge has asked the attorney for Huppenthal about a Chinese language class helping Chinese students and if it would be illegal in AZ. The lawyer responded with a flat “yes”.
That is wrong on many levels. These classes that were banned helped Mexican students who might not have been fluent in English develop better English speaking skills by having students who might be fluent in both languages. I took a number of classes that had students who spoke English only but by the end of the semester could actually pick up on what was being said in English. These classes were not there to single out groups of student but instead were there to help students reach other equally. They were there to help all students grow and learn from one another. The walkouts brought every student closer and they brought the ban down. This was a success that people will be able to read about in a Mexican American class when I am hopefully teaching many years down the line.












Work cited
Biggers, Jeff. "Tucson School Walk Outs Grow: Protest School District's Folly and Mexican American Studies Banishment." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 23 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.

Tony_Diaz. "Arizona Gets Schooled: Update on Ban of Mexican American Studies #MayaVsAZ." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.

Herreras, Mari. "A Broken Community." Tucson Weekly. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.

Biggers, Jeff. "Tucson School Walk Outs Grow: Protest School District's Folly and Mexican American Studies Banishment." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web

4 comments:

  1. You did a good job outlining the discrimination of Mexican Americans in the Tucson School District and the racial prejudices in Arizona as a whole. However, I think you got a little caught up describing the history of the conflict and its outcome rather than describing its rhetoric and how it was a successful protest/ who the protest was directed toward. It is definitely important to give background information, especially in this case, due to the local issue, but the point of the assignment was to specifically state how and why the protest was influential. It was a valuable addition to the paper to add your own experiences at a Tucson school to show why the walkout was necessary, but you might have gotten a little carried away with your analysis as well and in the end, focused more on why hybrid classes are beneficial. In paragraph 6, you talked about the use of logos in the school walkouts, and how the protest appeals to logic, but you didn't say why it was effective or why it catered to the audience of administrators. My advice to you in writing another draft would be to put more emphasis on the ethos/logos/pathos of the protest and avoid turning the draft into a history paper. Focus on the audience of the walkouts and how the walkouts themselves aided in the court hearing for the advancement of Mexican studies. Being so close to the situation, your analysis is definitely valued, but I would also avoid forming too much of an obvious opinion on the matter. It shows a certain bias that doesn't really work with this genre of writing. In summary, if you focus on the rhetoric of the protest, give a little less background information, and use some more neutral language, this will be a strong paper.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really like what Jack said about using more neutral language. However besides that we write papers in pretty much the same format. I could see myself writing this with the same strength of words you chose. I like how you have multiple paragraphs to show what point is being made where.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The introduction to your first paragraph is so enticing to a reader and makes them question and want to read more. You can tell that you did extensive research and are passionate about this topic which I deem very interesting due to the fact that we go to school in this area. I like how you broke down each paragraph so I could tell what each one was regarding. I actually really like the fact that you put so much information in here because I had no idea that this was an event that happened. I feel as though your opinion and wording may allow your paper to look a bit bias. If you write more with neutral language and look as if you’re seeing both sides more I think that it would benefit your writing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. After reading and also talking to you guys, my main plan for the revision is to, make it more of a breakdown of the protest itself and not a history paper. Also take my analysis out of it, add a little bit of it, but not too much to make it seem so bias. Also include more outside thoughts of what some other people thought of it, and finally expand upon what this movement symbolizes and what it means going forward.

    ReplyDelete