Ӱ

Explore

How Students’ AP Courses Could Clash With Laws Targeting Critical Race Theory

Lawmakers have passed many laws that seek to control how teachers educate students about racism in the U.S.

Getty Images

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for Ӱ Newsletter

Scientific theories to . and that denied Black people equal rights. The imperialist view that Anglo-Saxons were called upon by God to .

These topics might all sound like material from a course on systemic racism or critical race theory, which includes the .

In reality, these topics are all part of the framework for the College Board’s .

At a time when have passed a , I worry that AP courses like U.S History and U.S. Government and Politics could be in jeopardy. The danger is posed by those who support the various and critical race theory.

I raise this concern as a researcher who and the ways educators can .

Recent developments show my concerns about the are not unfounded. For instance, two school districts in Oklahoma had their accreditation . While those cases didn’t involve AP coursework, they both show that people really are going after school districts on critical race theory-related issues.

Educators in , , and elsewhere have been fired or forced to resign for discussions of race and racism. Teachers across the country are .

The fear may be heightened for educators who teach AP courses, which – by their very design – require teachers to deal with sensitive and controversial subjects that deal with matters of race.

Preparing for a showdown

These controversial subjects would include Martin Luther King Jr.‘s famous “.” In that 1963 letter, King – who had been during anti-segregation protests in Birmingham, Alabama – critiques what he refers to as an “unjust law.”

“Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application,” King wrote. He added that such laws exist when those in power impose laws against a minority that they don’t abide by themselves. and view King’s letter as an early example of critical race theory. The letter is featured in AP English Language and Composition.

I’m not the only one who is taking seriously how AP course requirements might contradict laws against critical race theory.

Consider an that the College Board itself put out in March 2022. The advisory states that courses that do not cover topics in the required curriculum will lose their AP designation.

This could affect the college plans of large numbers of America’s students, who rely on AP courses to while still in high school. This enables students to save money by skipping certain courses in college.

The Advanced Placement program has been widely adopted throughout the country. As of fall 2021, that require colleges to award credit to students who score high enough on their AP exams.

The College Board reports that in the class of 2021 – 34.9% – took at least one AP exam. Despite the disruptions from the pandemic, that figure is up from the roughly 898,000 – or 28.6% – who did so in the class of 2011.

Despite the laws that seek to control how teachers can discuss race and the history of racism in the United States, the College Board plans to in the fall of 2022 at about 60 schools.

Precautions taken

Anticipating the potential for conflicts with the College Board, the Yorba Linda school board in Orange County, California, from restrictions it enacted regarding classroom conversations on race.

A College Board official told me that as of yet, there have been no cases of schools removing content in AP history. How long that will be the case remains to be seen.

Historically, there have already been cases in which from the reading list for AP classes. For instance, in 2007, Jefferson County Public Schools – a school district that covers Louisville, Kentucky – at Eastern High School. “Beloved,” along with other books authored by Toni Morrison, is among the texts on the AP Literature and Composition exam.

When states ban critical race theory, it potentially affects more than just AP history and AP English. , for example, requires educators to teach students about race-based gerrymandering and different perspectives on affirmative action. The includes conversations about how race affects criminal trials.

Vague and contradictory

Some of the new laws that ban critical race theory are confusing and contradictory. A , for example, includes systemic racism as a “divisive topic” that “any curriculum … may not teach.” However, the bill explicitly allows teachers to address how “the enactment and enforcement of laws” can lead to “oppression, segregation, and discrimination.”

This contradiction has the potential to create uncertainty and uneasiness among AP teachers.

A states that “no teacher shall be compelled … to discuss current events or widely debated and currently controversial issues of public policy.” Controversy, however, is a centerpiece of . The curriculum requires teachers to consider controversial issues and to help students “develop a critical and informed understanding of the controversy and the authority to enter the conversation themselves.”

Critical choices

If people complain that AP courses violate laws against critical race theory, the College Board may have to show that it is serious when it says it will strip AP designation from schools that remove required material from the AP curriculum.

Research is on the College Board’s side. Studies show that discussions on race and racism help . There are academic benefits as well. A found that a ninth grade ethnic studies course boosted Black and Hispanic students’ GPA by 1.4 points and their attendance by 21 percentage points. The authors of that study say the findings point to wider academic benefits of lessons that are culturally relevant to students, such as lower dropout rates.

Since many parents and members of the public , this could force opponents of critical race theory to make a crucial choice: Do they want to constrain classroom discussions about race? Or do they want to keep AP and all its benefits intact for the sake of America’s students? The College Board has made it clear they can’t have it both ways.The Conversation

is an assistant professor of education at The

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

Did you use this article in your work?

We’d love to hear how Ӱ’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.

Republish This Article

We want our stories to be shared as widely as possible — for free.

Please view Ӱ's republishing terms.





On Ӱ Today