Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Curriculum Ethnic Studies topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenter urges St. Francis board to resist 'ideological' ethnic-studies rollout, recommends 'American Experience' curriculum

St. Francis Area Schools Board of Education · September 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the Sept. 8 board meeting a resident, Richard, criticized Minnesota's new ethnic-studies requirements and urged the district to adopt an "American Experience Curriculum;" the board acknowledged the remarks but offered no substantive response.

Richard, a community member who spoke during public comment, urged the St. Francis Area Schools Board of Education to reject what he described as an ideological implementation of ethnic-studies requirements and instead adopt an "American Experience Curriculum." He said recent Minnesota statutory changes require ethnic-studies coursework in K–12 by 2027–28 and that administrative actions require implementation at all grade levels by 2026.

"Ethnic studies is not inherently illiberal by nature," Richard said, "but it is easily politicized...the legislature chose to define the new K through 12 ethnic study requirements in a straightforward identitarian way." He argued the change promotes grievance-focused framing and urged the board to prioritize unity and civic traditions in curriculum choices.

Richard cited what he identified in materials as Minnesota statute "120 b.25" and other section references describing ethnic-studies content and licensure changes for teachers. He also recommended the board consider a vetted alternative he called the "American Experience Curriculum," which he described as a civics-focused program that he said is "outstanding." The board thanked him for his remarks and accepted his packet of materials; no formal board action or rebuttal occurred in response during the meeting.

Why it matters: State-level curricular requirements and administrative rules shape district course offerings and teacher licensure; public comment signals local concern about how those rules will be interpreted and implemented at the district level. Board members did not debate the substance of the claims at the meeting; any formal consideration of curriculum or policy changes would appear on a future agenda.