The UC Assembly of the Academic Senate is set to vote over the Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies on April 23 following five years of consideration
By KHADEEJAH KHAN — campus@theaggie.org
Ethnic Studies is the only academic field that has manifested from student activism, with a history rooted in student movements from San Francisco State University and UC Berkeley. Today, UC students continue to advocate for ethnic studies in K-12 education, but its supporters are concerned about the lack of structures that encourage student participation in university governance.
The Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies proposal would require high school students to take a non-additive, one-semester ethnic studies course for admission into any of the University of California’s nine undergraduate campuses.
Following the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020, students like Dan Ma, a 2021 UC Berkeley alumnus, began advocating for an ethnic studies curriculum in his old high school. Alongside local high school students and alumni, he founded a group called “Education Organizers for Racial Equity” to promote ethnic studies at school board meetings.
“There was a nationwide reckoning of racial injustice, and it was the energy that was just permeating among students that we needed to do something,” Ma said. “I saw a lot of that energy, not just among college students, but in high school students.”
Students who have taken ethnic studies courses prior to college have higher standardized test scores, grade point averages and increased school attendance, according to 2021 research by Stanford University’s Center for Education Policy Analysis.
Despite nationwide opposition to ethnic studies, as seen with Arizona’s 2010 ban on Mexican American Studies, Ma believed that “California was in a unique position to take the lead.” Inspired to advocate for Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies within the UC Academic Senate, he joined two systemwide committees.
To attend committee meetings, Ma would take the bus from Berkeley to Oakland — a time commitment he found necessary to advocate for the proposal. While the proximity of the two cities made it possible for Ma to attend meetings, they were not as accessible for students from other UC campuses — a structural flaw of the Academic Senate that Ma believes hinders more students from participating.
“There’s no real mechanism to educate students about how the system works,” Ma said. “It almost feels like it’s structurally meant to be that way. The environment needs to be set up for students to take advantage of that opportunity and be empowered.”
After five years and multiple votes on the proposal, the Assembly of the Academic Senate is set to vote on the Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies once again on April 23.
There are no means of student representation within the Academic Council, the administrative arm of the assembly. The primary way students have participated in the Academic Senate is by joining systemwide Senate committees like Ma did. Presently, seven of 20 systemwide Senate committees include undergraduate student representatives.
Currently, the only way students can provide input on the proposal is by submitting petitions.
While the Academic Senate is a body that primarily enables faculty to participate in shared governance, Ma believes that student representation should not be “just a figure,” as the body’s deliberations greatly impact student life.
Both the UC Student Association (UCSA) and GenerationUp, a student-led education policy group, have widely supported the proposed requirement to bring equitable curricula to California high schools. Currently, four UC student governments have passed resolutions supporting Area A-G/H Ethnic Studies, including UC Davis.
“The fact that many campuses’ student governments have already passed resolutions and [given] support illustrate the large student desire to see ethnic studies being put in the A through G requirements,” UCSA President Aditi Hariharan said. “But the fact that the Academic Senate has forced this to be voted on almost three times illustrates the huge divide between what students on the ground want versus what folks in power proceed to be the next decision to make.”
Shortly after the 2011 pepper spray incident at UC Davis, UC Regents discussed the possibility of increasing opportunities for students beyond public comment sessions at their meeting. Over a decade later, public comment is still the primary method of student involvement at the Regent level. For Hariharan, public comment feels performative as there are no follow-up conversations to comments within meetings.
“[The lack of follow-up] illustrates ways in which concerns are brought up but never fully addressed,” Hariharan said. “Meeting after meeting, students don’t see their advocacy, their emotions, real-life stories and their soul that they’re putting into this work ever lead to actionable change.”
The UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council has noted that while some 80% of California’s K-12 student population are students of color, 64% of UC management is white. Additionally, only 10% of UC ladder-rank faculty are from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups.
“As long as free speech is being undermined and Ethnic Studies does not get passed, students of color are clearly being shown that they aren’t being prioritized,” Hariharan said.
When asked about student concerns regarding the structure of the Academic Senate, Academic Senate Chair Steven W. Cheung, a professor-physician at UC San Francisco, said that he hears the voices and concerns of students amid the upcoming vote. Yet he said that he acknowledges that the faculty’s views, especially at Davis, are very split.
“UC’s review process is designed to ensure that UC community members will have an opportunity to share input and feedback on this important and complex subject,” a spokesperson for the UC Office of the President (UCOP) said.
Faculty systemwide have expressed concerns about implementing the requirement in low-income school districts, as well as accessibility for out-of-state students at the Dec. 12 meeting of the assembly, according to Cheung.
However, in a white paper from the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty website, Area A-G/H, as a non-additive requirement, can be fulfilled through already existing A-G coursework.
A separate white paper from GenerationUp notes that rural districts in California are “leading the way in ethnic studies implementation,” complying with AB101, a piece of pre-existing legislation that makes ethnic studies a California graduation requirement. The white paper also states that Area A-G/H only applies to California residents, so adding a requirement should not impact out-of-state applications.
Two contingencies may impact the outcome of the vote: California’s state budget and federal executive orders, according to Cheung. If the proposal is approved by the assembly on April 23 by a majority vote, UC President Michael V. Drake will present the requirement to the UC Provost and Regents, who would have the final vote on the proposal.
The UCOP spokesperson said the UC is “closely monitoring developments and potential impacts from recent actions from the federal administration.”
“We need to move forward despite the contingency, and we must honor the contingency,” Cheung said. “We will defend academic freedom in what we teach and how we teach it.”
Written by: Khadeejah Khan — campus@theaggie.org
