-
Stegemans Testimony 1
Administrative Law Judge Hearing - Transcription Notes of
Testimony of TUSD Governing Board Member Mark Stegeman Date: pp.
34-101 Questioning by Mr. Murphy: State of Arizona Attorney (Q)
Answers by Mark Stegeman (A) Questioning by Ms. Smith: TUSD
Attorney (Q) (p. 34)[p. 57 of 286]. MR. MURPHY: Superintendent
calls Dr. Mark Stegeman. JUDGE KOWAL: Dr. Stegeman, please approach
and sit in the witness chair. When youre settled, if you can state
and spell your name for the record, please. DR. STEGEMAN: Mark
Stegeman, M-a-r-k S-t-e-g-e-m-a-n. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay Dr. Stegeman,
could you (p. 35)[p. 57 of 286] please raise your right hand? Ill
administer the oath to you. (the witness was duly sworn.) JUDGE
KOWAL: You may proceed. MR. MURPHY: Thank you, sir. MARK STEGEMAN,
called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn by the
administrative law judge, was examined and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MURPHY: Q: Doctor, I believe that you
have your Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology? A:
Yes Q: And that is in economics? A: Yes Q: What year did you
receive that, sir? A: 1987 Q: And since that time, have you been
continuously employed post graduate education? A: Yes Q: I believe
currently youre an associate professor at the University of
Arizona? p. 36 A: Yes. Q: And would you identify some other, oh,
schools of higher education which youve been a teacher as a
professor, assistant, or associate? A: Ive been a professor at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and at Virginia Tech.
Q: Now, have you throughout taught economics, sir? A: Yes. Q: I
believe, sir, that you joined the board of Tucson Unified School
District in January of 2009? A: Yes.
-
Stegemans Testimony 2
Q: And in January of 2010 you took over a one-year term as
president of that board? A: Yes. Q: And there are four other board
members, a total of five, including yourself? A: Yes. Q: Sir, you
are familiar with the Mexican American studies program in your
capacity as a director of the Tucson Unified School District, is
that correct? A: Yes (p. 37)[p. 58 of 286] Q: And that is a
standalone department of the district; is that correct? A: Yes. Q:
Im going to hurry through things that we covered in your
deposition, and if we need to stop and take a look at that, fine. I
believe that you acknowledged that its the responsibility of the
board of the Tucson Unified School District by statute to approve
curriculum and texts for its classes; is that correct? A: That is
my understanding of statute. Q: And theres also a regulation of the
board itself has promulgated requiring the board to examine, oh,
textual material to be used in classes and lesson plans for those
classes; is that correct? A: There is a policy IJJ and an
accompanying regulation IJJR. Q: Appreciating, sir, that youve been
on board for only two years, did you make a request Ill set a
foundational question. The board of TUSD is conducts its meetings
in, oh, open sessions pursuant to our open meeting laws; is that
correct? A: Yes, unless were in executive session. Q: An in
conjunction with that, a record by (p. 38)[p. 58 of 286] minutes of
minutes or resolutions is made of any board action; is that
accurate? A: Yes. Q: Did you request board staff members to search
for resolutions or minutes that reflected approval of the
curriculum for the Mexican American studies department? A: I asked
the governing board staff to find all board actions related to that
program. Q: And I believe that the conclusion you reached was that
some of the textbooks may have been included in consent agendas; is
that a fair statement? A: Yes. The board sometimes approves long
lists of books and consent agenda items, and I think some of the
books were on those lists. Q: But did not find anything to indicate
that the board had ever reviewed or approved curriculum or course
of study for the MASD program; is that a fair statement? A: No.
Board minutes generally indicate whether the discussion occurred,
and theres no evidence of that. Q: Let me do this sir: If you could
turn to our second binder that has Exhibits 9 through 25, and look
at Exhibit 19. (p. 39)[p. 58 of 286] A: Yes. Q: Do you recognize
that as a resolution of the board of TUSD that was adopted on
December 30th, 2010?
-
Stegemans Testimony 3
A: Yes. Q: That bears the signatures of all the board members,
including yourself? A: Yes, it was adopted unanimously. Q: And this
unanimous resolution adopted the language of ARS Section 15-112,
did it not, sir? A: Yes. The purpose was to incorporate that
language in the policy. Q: And so this the statute at issue, ARS
Section 15-112, has been adopted as the official policy of the - by
the board of directors of the Tucson Unified School District; is
that correct? A: These key parts of the statute. The statute is a
long statute. Q: That go you understand those are the issues, the
parts of the statute that are A: Yes. Q: - issued in these
proceedings? A: Yes. Q: Let me talk, sir and I think we may be able
to hurry through this. If you could take a quick look at Exhibit 4.
(p. 40)[p. 58 of 286] A: So this is back in the other book? Q: This
would be the first binder, the one that has Exhibits 1 through 8
with the red cover. A: Yes. Q: And take a look at Exhibit 4, if you
would. A: Yes. Q: I believe you reviewed this demographic chart
which related to the percentage of students in, oh, Mexican
American studies program at your deposition. Do you have a general
recollection of that, sir? A: Yes. Q: And rather than going through
that MR. MURPHY: I would offer Exhibit 4 into evidence. MS. SMITH:
I dont have any objection. JUDGE KOWAL: Exhibit 4 is admitted. Q:
BY MR. MURPHY: Rather than run through that, sir, I think we may be
able to work with the summary, of you could turn to the yellow
binder, which has Exhibit A. A: I dont see a yellow binder. The
white binder? Q: Oh, maybe it is a white binder. My mistake. I beg
your pardon. (p. 41)[p. 59 of 286] A: Thank you. Yes. Q: And if you
could turn to Pages 5 and 6. A: Yes. Q: This appears to indicate at
Page 5 that demographically, oh, in the Tucson Unified School
District during 2011, 60 percent of the students were Hispanic; is
that correct? A: Yes, thats approximately correct. Q: And if you
could turn to the next page, theres a separate chart with regard to
percentage of Hispanics enrolled in Mexican American studies
courses; is that correct? A: Yes. Q: And the percentage there was
90.32 percent?
-
Stegemans Testimony 4
A: Thats what it says here. MR. MURPHY: And before I forget, I
would offer Exhibit 19 into evidence, the resolution of the board
dated December 30, 2010. MS. SMITH: No objection. JUDGE KOWAL:
Exhibit 19 is admitted. Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Now sir, I want to go to
our binder and look at Exhibit 3, if you would. A: Yes. Q: And do
you recognize that, sir, as a portion (p. 42)[p. 59 of 286] of the
Web site maintained by the Tucson Unified School District, this
portion relating specifically to the MAS program? A: Yes. Q: And I
believe you had a chance to review that in the course of your
deposition, if not at other times? A: Yes. Ive seen the Web site,
and I saw it in my at the time of my deposition. MR. MURPHY: I
would offer Exhibit 3 into evidence. MS. SMITH: I dont have an
objection. JUDGE KOWAL: Exhibit 3 is admitted. Q: BY MR. MURPHY:
Sir, the very first page of Exhibit 3 recites Our Goals. Do you see
that there? A: Yes. Q: Add flipping the page to Page 2 of this
document, the goals include: (Reading) Providing and promoting
teacher education that are set within critical pedagogy, Latino
critical race theory, and authentic caring. Do you see that? A:
Yes. (p. 43)[p. 59 of 286] Q: You have some understanding of what I
think you noted in your deposition you dont consider yourself an
expert on these issues, but you have some, oh, appreciation of
critical race theory from your university involvement; is that a
fair statement? A: Critical theory generally, and to a lesser
extent critical race theory, yes. Thats part of the academic
discussion, although not so much in my field. Q: Understood. The
next bullet point on Page 2: (Reading) Is promoting and advocating
the social and educational transformation. That is one of the
publicized goals of the MAS program in the Web site; is that
correct sir? A: Yes. Q: Now, turning to Page 3, oh, theres a
statement Our Mission. And do you see that there? A: Yes. Q: The
last sentence in that paragraph reads, quote: (Reading) Lastly, the
department seeks to advance the understanding and interests of Raza
populations within TUSD, the United States, and the world in
general. (p. 44)[p. 59 of 286] Ending my quote.
-
Stegemans Testimony 5
What do you understand by reference to the phrase Raza
populations? A: My understanding is not precise, but I think that
approximately Chicano populations. Thats probably not exactly
right. Something close to that. Q: In the next paragraph theres a
statement, oh, third sentence: (Reading) Critically compassionate
intellectualism provides curriculum using counterhegemonic content,
pedagogy, and student-teacher interaction, authentic caring, as a
model for increased academic achievement for all students with an
emphasis on Latino students in particular and students of color in
general. Ending my quote. That is on the Web site, sir? A: That
corresponds to my recollection of the Web site. Q: And that A: I
dont have their website memorized. Q: Understood. A: I have seen
that Web site. Q: Understood. (p. 45)[p. 60 of 286] And so it
recites pointblank that the emphasis of the program is on Latino
students in particular and students of color in general; is that
correct? A: Yes. Q: And I would gave you turn to theres handwritten
numbers at the bottom, handwritten number Page 6. A: Yes. Q: And
under the heading Mexican American studies model, the last textual
paragraph on that page reads: (Reading) For Latino students, each
of those components creates both a Latino academic identity and an
enhanced level of academic proficiency. The end result is an
elevated state of Latino academic achievement. For Latino students,
the model serves as a mirror. For non-Latino students, the model
serves as a window into cultural, historical, and social
understanding. Ending my quote. This is a part of the Web site; is
that not correct, sir? A: Yes. Q: And the focus there is on Latino
academic (p. 46)[p. 60 of 286] identity, Latino academic
proficiency, Latino academic achievement; is that correct, sir? A:
Thats a fair characterization. Q: And underneath that is a chart,
sir, which talks sort of summarizes the model. That includes at the
heading: (Reading) Increased academic achievement for Latino
students. Is that correct? A: Yes. Q: And it includes reference to
academic proficiency for Latino students; is that right? A: Yes. Q:
Plus academic identity for Latino students A: Yes Q: - is that
correct, sir?
-
Stegemans Testimony 6
A: Yes. Q: Based on this sir, would it be your understanding
that according to the Web site put together by the Mexican American
studies program, that these courses are designed primarily for
Latino students? A: That word has a legal implication in the
present context that I dont feel qualified to judge in a lay sense.
As I would commonly use that word, yes. (p. 47)[p. 60 of 286] Q:
Very good. Now, let me shift subjects, sir, to your involvement in
classroom observation involving the MAS program. I think you
testified in your description that in your capacity as a member of
the directors, you from time to time sit in on classes throughout
the district; is that correct? A: Yes, I have been in many
classrooms. Q: And you on two occasions, during the year 2011, sat
in on courses that were part of the Mexican American studies
department, correct? A: Yes. Q: And why dont we go ahead and turn
to your notes of those, which youll find, I believe, as Exhibit 20.
A: Yes. Q: And the first question I would ask you, if you could
take a look at what we have marked as Exhibit 20 and confirm that
all of the materials there are either your handwritten notes or
materials that you received in conjunction with course reviews. A:
Yes. These are my notes, something I picked up in the classroom,
and some material from outside the wall of the classroom, although
that was the last item was given to me indirectly. Q: Given to you
indirectly. Thats the photograph? A: Yes. Q: And Ill get to that in
sequence. A: That is from 2010. Q: Sir, you labeled it 2010. I was
of the impression, however, that was posted in 2011. Am I
incorrect? A: The teacher who gave me this photograph said that was
in 2010. Q: Very good. And do you know where that photograph was
taken? A: At Pueblo High School. Q: And was that in an MAS
classroom? A: It was outside the door of an MAS classroom,
according to the teacher who gave me that paragraph. Q: And what
teacher was that? THE WITNESS: Im am I bound to answer? JUDGE
KOWAL: Well, if theres no objection, and, as far as I know, I don't
know of any- THE WITNESS: Im going JUDGE KOWAL: - confidentiality.
THE WITNESS: to have to look. JUDGE KOWAL: Do you have something
that would (p. 49)[p. 61 of 286]
-
Stegemans Testimony 7
provide THE WITNESS: Yeah JUDGE KOWAL: - you with that
information? THE WITNESS: - I believe so. JUDGE KOWAL: Wait. Just
tell me before you proceed, what is it that youre going to look at,
and Ill see if theres any objection to that. THE WITNESS: An
e-mail. JUDGE KOWAL: Do you know if its an intended exhibit? Have
you had a chance to look at any of these exhibits to know if its
included? THE WITNESS: The e-mail itself? JUDGE KOWAL: The one that
youre going to look at. THE WITNESS: No, the e-mail no, I dont
believe I ever provided this specific e-mail, so I doubt it was an
exhibit. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Before you refer to it, Im going to ask
you to show it to see if theres any objection to counsel. MR.
MURPHY: And my position would be if it refreshes his recollection,
thats all I know. JUDGE KOWAL: Do you want to see it or (p. 50)[p.
61 of 286] MS. SMITH: Id like to see it. JUDGE KOWAL: And all I ask
and this is for you counsel when you approach, just make sure you
dont say anything until youre in front of a microphone, because I
know counsel is used to court reporters, but we need to be in front
of a microphone just for the audio record. So youve had a chance to
look at that. Any objection for the witness looking at that
document to refresh his recollection? MS. SMITH: No, I dont have
any. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay, Go ahead. Did you THE WITNESS: That was
received from Travis Klein, teacher from Pueblo High School. MR.
MURPHY: Sir, with that clarification. I would offer Exhibit 4 into
evidence. JUDGE KOWAL: Im sorry, what was that last MR. MURPHY: Oh,
I beg your pardon. Exhibit 20. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Well, Im sorry,
just getting the name, but then MR. MURPHY: Travis Klein, I believe
it was, sir. THE WITNESS: K-l-e-i-n id that last name. JUDGE KOWAL:
And youre offering (p. 51)[p. 61 of 286] MR. MURPHY: Exhibit 20
into evidence. JUDGE KOWAL: Any objection? MS. SMITH: No. JUDGE
KOWAL: Exhibit 20 is admitted. Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Sir, to set the
stage, I believe from reviewing your notes that you visited a
social justice education project class at Rincon High School on
March 4 of 2011; is that correct? A: Yes.
-
Stegemans Testimony 8
Q: And that was taught by an instructor named Jose Gonzalez? A:
Yes. Q: And then you also visited a literature class at Tucson
Magnet High School on March 23, 2011? A: Yes. Q: And Im going to
try and hurry through the observation of Mr. Gonzalez class. I
believe, to summarize your prior testimony, he put a cartoon up
regarding a Supreme Court decision fro class discussion at the
beginning of the class; is that correct? A: Yes. Q: And he invited
discussion from the students (p. 52)[p. 61 of 286] about the
Supreme Court and which you observed? A: Yes. He asked them to
write a reaction to the cartoon, and then they discussed those
reactions. Q: And then there were some group breakout sessions
where students broke into smaller clusters? A: There was some
discussion of current events, and then there were breakout
sessions, yes. Q: Sir, I believe in the course of your visit you
believe you saw a PowerPoint presentation that was on Mr. Gonzalez
computer screen but was not shown to the class; is that correct? A:
Yes. During the breakout sessions I wanted to get away from the
student area, and I went up to his desk. Q: And why dont you go to
your notes of the March 4 observation of Mr. Gonzalez class. Oh, I
beg your pardon. I may not have marked those, sir, so I will
withdraw that. A: I have the notes with me, but I dont see them
here in the binder. Q: Well, let me ask this question, sir, and we
can refer to your deposition if it will be helpful. I believe the
PowerPoint slide that you saw said as follows: (Reading) To expose
the faade put forth by (p. 53)[p. 62 of 286] educational
institutions and society in order to maintain segregation among
students and citizens. That was the phrase you saw on the slide; is
that correct? A: Yes. That matches what I have in my personal notes
here. Q: And although that slide was on his computer screen, he did
not show that to the class while you were present? A: Yes. Q: Now,
toward the end of the class, Mr. Gonzalez asked students, What made
this class different? And three students got up, and each of them
said, Social Justice; is that correct? A: Im not sure it was
exactly three, but several students from these groups commented
that what made his class special was emphasis on social activism or
emphasis on social justice. I dont remember exactly the words used,
but that was the general meaning. Q: And you at the time thought
that might have been for your benefit, i.e., thats because you were
in the classroom; is that correct? A: That was my impression, but
its just an
-
Stegemans Testimony 9
(p. 54)[p. 62 of 286] Impression. Q: Understood. And at your
deposition I believe that you testified that you speculated that he
might have changed his game plan because you were there as an
observer; is that a fair statement? A: I did. Its speculation. Q:
Let me go, then, to class with Mr. Acosta on March 23 of 2011 at
Tucson Magnet High School, and I believe you noted that, oh, there
were 22 children in the classroom that day. And your notes are in
evidence A: Yes. Q: - so you can feel free to refer to those. A:
Uh-huh. Q: And you eventually learned that one of this children
sort of self-reported he was one half Anglo (p. 55)[p. 62 of 286]
and one half Hispanic; is that correct? A: These notes, as I said
in the deposition, were intended only for my use. They werent ever
intended to be a public record, although, of course, I understand
that legally all such things are public records, so my initial
impression of the class what that it was entirely Latino, with one,
as I wrote here to myself, Anglo, but then during the discussion he
self-identified as Mexican, and that was the meaning of that note.
Q: Very good. A: As half Mexican, something to that effect. Q: You
noted that the course started with clapping and chanting; is that
correct? A: It started with clapping and chanting, and then what
Ive written here is something like a prayer, so a rote statement.
Q: It appeared to have been memorized by the students; is that
correct? A: Yes. The students clearly knew it. It was occurred in a
fashion similar to how we often say the Pledge of Allegiance,
though it was much longer than that. Q: And the clapping that they
were engaging in was a rhythmic clapping, coordinated? (p. 56)[p.
62 of 286] A: Yes, clapping in unison. Q: I believe you described
this as a ritualized beginning to the class. A: Again, thats an
impression, but that was my impression at the time. Q: And the
chant you I think you said you did not hear most of it, but you
heard the ending phrase, which was, and I quote, We must be willing
to act in a revolutionary spirit, end quote. Is that what you heard
in class? A: What Im referring to as a prayer, and thats somewhat
misleading, because I didnt think it was religious, but, again,
these are just noted to myself that Im thinking as I go along. This
phrase I had difficulty understanding much of what was said during
the ritualized expression. I felt I could understand maybe half of
what was being said. And this particular phrase was something that
I happened to hear clearly. It wasnt at the end. It was in the
midst of that ritualized expression.
-
Stegemans Testimony 10
Q: You mentioned that you had read a book, I believe, in
graduate school by Eric Hoffer called The True Believer. Is that
had you read that to me at some (p. 57)[p. 63 of 286] Time? A: Yes.
Yes. Q: And in the class, as a the ritualized beginning was
observed, you thought of Eric Hoffers book on cult behavior, didnt
you? A: I think it was a bit later in the class. I think I can see
that from my notes, although I dont reference that in the notes. I
had, during the class, I guess, and epiphany which reflected what I
was seeing in the class and all the observations I had made
connected with this program since the start of the year. Q: What
was that epiphany? A: Eric Hoffer wrote Im this is just what
happened in the deposition. I have difficulty with this. Eric
Hoffer wrote a seminal textbook not a textbook a seminal book in
sociology in the early 50s, which you have referenced, about cult
psychology. And at this point in the lecture, I had an epiphany
about this book that I had not thought of in many, many years, and
that was what I was seeing and it also reflected a little bit of
observations I had previously since the start of the year, aligned
with much of what Eric Hoffer talked about, and then later I (p.
58)[p. 63 of 286] went back and actually looked back at the book.
Q: Describe the observations prior to that point that joined into
this, oh, sense that you had in the course of this class
experience. A: Eric Hoffers book is about Im sorry, I really I
don't know why it has an effect on me. Eric Hoffers book is about
collective action, about mass movements, which he defines as having
essential characteristics of collective action and self-sacrifice,
and then he describes in his book the circumstances that produce
these conditions. And there are numerous categories that he talks
about, and I felt over the past six months that Ive observed many
do you want me to state some of those, or am I Q: If you would be
so kind. A: And this is reflecting at the time I simply, as I say,
had an epiphany. That's the only way I know had to describe it. And
then I went back and looked at the book again. Elements which he
speaks of as being crucial for mass movements are include JUDGE
KOWAL: Excuse me. What are you looking at? THE WITNESS: Im looking
at notes which I (p. 59)[p. 63 of 286] have brought. I also
actually brought the book. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Thats fine. Its just
that for any witness when youre going to look at something and its
not I don't know if that's an exhibit. If its not, then, once
again, it needs to be identified to see if theres any objection
from referring to it. THE WITNESS: Im sorry. Ive never been JUDGE
KOWAL: I know. That's why Im mentioning it. MR. MURPHY: Judge, my
perspective would be, if hes using this to refresh recollection, I
have no need to review it.
-
Stegemans Testimony 11
JUDGE KOWAL: Do you want to look at it? MS. SMITH: No, I don't
need to. JUDGE KOWAL: No objection? MS. SMITH: I don't. JUDGE
KOWAL: Okay. Then you may proceed. THE WITNESS: The elements which
Hoffer talks about are identification with a collective whole,
fostering hatred indirectly by reference to the hatred of others,
using doctrine as substitute for fact, deprecation of present
circumstances, use of action as a unifier, use of theatrical and
make-believe displays, and inflaming of passions. (p. 60)[p. 63 of
286] And I have felt I knew very little I don't know what latitude
I have here. Q: Sir, would you like to describe having reviewed
this, did you have concern that those conditions were met in the
class that you observed on March 23? A: Some of those; not all of
them. Q: And you mentioned that you had information both before and
after the course that related to your concerns about this cult
psychology feeling. What would you describe what youre talking
about, sir? A: May I set a context? JUDGE KOWAL: Well, what you
should do, to the extent possible, is directly respond to the
question. If counsel wishes for you to expound upon it, youll hear
another question that will ask for clarification. THE WITNESS:
Okay. That's fine. So the question was referring to the class in
particular or observations overall? Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Observations
overall. A: The rhetoric in the classroom and much of the rhetoric
outside of the classroom by students, by teachers, and by advocates
for the program have emphasized the social justice agenda of the
program and have I believe in my perception of course, much of it
objective (p. 61)[p. 64 of 286] of this is just to a great extent
subjective perception, create a frame in which there is a dominant
class and an under class, although Im not saying those particular
phrases are used, and there is language, such as in the class Mr.
Acosta said, We are in a struggle. When he asked students how they
reacted to the Precious Knowledge film and these are just small
anecdotes their reaction want not to the content of the film but
the fact that we were all together. That was the importance of the
film, that they grew strength from the group. And very many
anecdotes such as these which created an overall impression to me
that an important part of what happens to the administration of
collective identity. One of the strongest single anecdotes was that
after Mr. Acostas class, I was approached by a student who
discussed with me her perceptions of my opposition to this program,
or skepticism about this program, and during this discussion she
expressed great concern for Mr. Acostas professional future, for
his wife, who she said was pregnant, and came close to weeping at
that point discussing his family circumstances. We are, as
educators, the caregivers, and I (p. 62)[p. 64 of 286]
-
Stegemans Testimony 12
felt that this indicated to me that this relationship had been
to some extent reversed or that some symmetry was being promoted by
this program where the students and the teachers are part of the
unified group. And I could as I say, this language, I think,
permeates the rhetoric surrounding this program. I could go on
through each of these points and cite many anecdotes. I dont know
if thats really what you want, sir. Q: Sir, I think that's
important testimony, and I would ask you to do so, if you could
refer to your note and identify the subject and then refer to an
anecdote A: All right. Q: - supporting that. A: All right. Part of
whats made this period of months difficult is that the rhetoric
from program supporters and this includes students and teachers
other supporters suggests that opponents of the program hate the
program, dislike the program, in some cases are racist. One
supporter who is not one of the staff members, I should emphasize,
posted what do you call it, the circle of hate, which included a
number of persons, including myself, but I think I can react to (p.
63)[p. 64 of 286] this personally. There was a great amount of
rhetoric. Although I have consistently, in my written and public
statements, oral statements, supported the idea of ethnic studies,
supported the idea of Mexican American studies, Ive repeated this
feeling through offense through other communications. There was a
great deal of rhetoric suggesting that I wanted to destroy the
program. Some of the rhetoric was directed to the superintendent of
the district even after he adopted a conciliatory attitude. I think
the picture which we referred to earlier, although thats from the
year before, is another example, so I think that anyone who has
observed this controversy in detail would say that there have been
many examples, not of stating hatred, but of stating hatred coming
from the other side, which Hoffer identifies specifically as a
mechanism to generate hatred. Ill go on until Im stopped. Q: Sir,
if you could go to the next point in A: Doctrine as a substitute
for fact. There are many things about this progression of this
issue over the past few months that have been strange in my mind.
The resistance when the district proposed to (p. 64)[p. 64 of 286]
have a forum, a community forum with two sides, the resistance from
program supporters to having both sides present at forums so they
could organize their own forum. Again, these are all anecdotes
which are individually small, but there are so many of them that I
guess by the end of this period created overwhelming impression in
my mind. When Mr. Acosta introduced me to his class, he pointed out
that I had written an op-ed hostile to the program, and he said,
This is the person who wrote this op-ed, and lets not carry forward
the negative energy from that discussion, which is fine. That's
perfectly fine for people to disagree with something I write.
-
Stegemans Testimony 13
But it was, I think, a very natural opportunity to engage in
discussion of those issues. I cant criticize him for doing that.
But I have consistently observed an unwillingness to engage in
substantive discussion or remove this inclination to engage in
substantive issues surrounding this program. When I was I have had
many meetings with the advocates for this program over the past few
months to educate myself about this. I have met with the teachers
at their request. I met with and this is (p. 65)[p. 65 of 286] to
establish the source of these observations. I have met with the
teachers, some of the teachers in the program, at their request. I
went to the community forum. I met with an outside group of
advocates at their request. O met with the Mexican American studies
board at my suggestion. I had the discussion with the student from
Anitos, et cetera. So I deliberately made tried to make a lot of
observations. And I consistently had difficulty engaging them with
the facts of the program. For example, I heard consistently that we
needed to expand the program and get more students into it, and I
would point out that most of the classes were underenrolled, simply
there was empty space in the classes, and so it wasn't an issue
that we werent offering enough classes, which is just a small point
among points. But consistently these sorts of discussions, I
couldn't attract a logical response. I couldn't it was very
difficult to engage in dialogue with them on contrary facts, even
if facts werent necessarily devastating. I remember having
discussions when people said, Why are you bringing forward a
proposal to change the program before you know the position of the
(p. 66)[p. 65 of 286] Arizona Department of Education? and then in
a minute later the same person would be saying, Why are you
compromising with their position? Why do you want to compromise
with their desire to destroy the program? which is just
contradicting what they said before. And I was unable to get
engagement. So I don't think any of that individually, those facts,
mean much, but my overall impression is the idea here and I got
this especially at the forum, which was a one-sided forum, did not
have both sides of the community, is to isolate contrary facts and
to exclude contrary facts in what we would normally consider as
standard debate in the policy context After a fact that struck me
very strongly was after the April 26 takeover of the board meeting,
which was obviously very controversial, the persons associated with
the program celebrated that paper takeover both in press afterwards
and said, This is only the beginning. This is an excellent example
of social action. At the forum, many weeks later, again, this
takeover was celebrated, and this sort of thing, as well as the
rhythmic clapping which I observed in both classes, the ritualized
expression, the very strong encouragement that Mr. Acosta made
during his class to (p. 67)[p. 65 of 286] encourage the students to
attend a Cesar Chavez march, and other examples, they had been
required to attend the movie, are all consistent with the idea of
unifying people through physical action.
-
Stegemans Testimony 14
Again, individually, some are minor, although some even
individually very much struck me. I felt there was some degree of
coercion to do outside activities that I observed in that class.
The deprecation of the present. A consistent message that I have
heard in this program is because of this class structure, that it
is impossible to succeed in the status quo. That status quo is
loaded against you. Hoffer speaks to that particularly. In that
context he speaks to the glorification of the past and the promise
of an optimistic future, all of which is part of denigrating the
present. And in connection with this program, I do constantly hear
rhetoric, such as the Chicanos are the majority in the future. The
Hispanic population will be the majority population Q: Going to the
past, sir, theres often reference to the former paradise of Azetlan
(sic), which is a focal point of the Aztec consciousness element of
this course (p. 68)[p. 65 of 286] A: Yes, I feel that in the
materials that I have seen were getting ahead of ourselves there is
a presentation of the historical record, which perhaps is not
inaccurate, but imposes a frame which is not, I think, a reasonable
representation of the history of this area, which is really one of
continual migration by different groups, continual conquest of one
group by another group. This has been going on for centuries. And I
think there is - I perceive an attempt to put a historical frame on
that, and that talks about a glorified past. I let me can I read
something from that e-mail? Q: From the e-mail that you previously
A: Yes. Q: - showed counsel? Yes, you may, sir. JUDGE KOWAL: Well
MR. MURPHY: Oh, I beg your pardon. Its not my decision. If I were
the judge, the answer would be yes, but Im not. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay.
The thing is, if you want to go ahead and ask questions about it,
if you want to look at it, thats fine, but Im not going to I don't
know if this is directly in response to your direction for the
witness to go ahead and give examples, so I don't know. I havent
seen that e-mail (p. 69)[p. 66 of 286] myself. So if you want to
take a look at it and then proceed by questioning the witness, I
think that's the more preferable route. MS. SMITH: And if I could
look at if I could just glance at it about the issue. JUDGE KOWAL:
You can both look at it. I dont know how extensive it is. I don't
know of THE WITNESS: Im just going to read one sentence. JUDGE
KOWAL: Okay. But I think counsel wants to look at the entire
e-mail. THE WITNESS: Well, you can look at the entire e-mail. Im
reading from this segment. MS. SMITH: The one that's circled? THE
WITNESS: This is the particular part I was going to read, about
course content.
-
Stegemans Testimony 15
MS. SMITH: The problem I have with it is that I think its to
layers of hearsay, because I think what hes going to read is
someone else relaying to him what someone else relayed to staff.
JUDGE KOWAL: Well, first of all, my ruling was that the witness
wasn't going to read it. The point about it was I wanted counsel to
look at it to see if number one, if its in response to the (p.
70)[p. 66 of 286] direction of having the witness go through
certain examples. Thats number one. And, number two, if you want to
elicit the testimony, you can ask the questions, if you want to
look at the e-mail again, but the point about it is, with all due
respect, I know youre trying to be helpful and provide information,
but the way the procedure works is that witnesses just don't
volunteer information. It needs to be elicited from counsel. And,
again, without looking at it, I don't know of its directly in
response to, you know, directives of Mr. Murphy. So, Mr. Murphy has
seen it. Im going to place it in his hands in terms of how he
wishes to proceed, and if he doesn't address it, well just be
moving on. Q: BY MR. MURPHY: And, sir, to reset the stage, you had
been talking about one of the features of Mr. Hoffers book was a
glorification of the past. Have you received information from
constituents in the TUSD system indicating that that has been
occurring with regard to the Aztec movement? A: Yes. Q: And is that
the e-mail reference that you were talking about; is that part of
the equation? A: Yes. (p. 71)[p. 66 of 286] Q: Would you describe
what was said? And that was, again, from Travis Klein, sir? A: Yes.
MS. SMITH: Now I object on what I said before. JUDGE KOWAL: I know.
For me to make a ruling, Im going to have to hear it. MS. SMITH:
Okay. JUDGE KOWAL: Because I understand the nature of your
objection. I don't know how I make a ruling if I don't hear it. MS.
SMITH: Okay. JUDGE KOWAL: So go ahead. THE WITNESS: So then, I
should read from the e-mail? JUDGE KOWAL: Well, does the portion
that you Im going to ask you this: The portion that you circled or
highlighted that you showed counsel, is that the only portion that
youre reading? THE WITNESS: Yes. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. And does that
contain information that forms the basis of your objection? Does it
give me the information I need to make the ruling? MS. SMITH: Yes.
(p. 72)[p. 66 of 286] JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Go ahead and read it. THE
WITNESS: (Reading) One student who was transferred out to ethnic
studies class into my class said he was disappointed because he
didn't learn about Mexico but about Aztec gods and religion
instead.
-
Stegemans Testimony 16
JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. You just is that THE WITNESS: Thats it. JUDGE
KOWAL: - continuing? THE WITNESS: No. That's it. Instead is the
end. Im sorry. JUDGE KOWAL: That's okay, but Im going to ask you to
stop there. THE WITNESS: Okay. JUDGE KOWAL: And you've heard the
objection. Do you have a response? MR. MURPHY: I think that is
simply offered not for the purpose of proving the truth of the
matter, but that is part of the decisional calculous that the
president of the board is going through, and I would consider it as
admissible for that purpose. MS. SMITH: Well, I disagree. I think
my I have the same objection. I think its offered for the truth of
whats going on in the class and why the (p. 73)[p. 67 of 286]
student had the reaction they - JUDGE KOWAL: I guess, Mr. Murphy,
how is it not being asserted for the truth asserted if its going to
be considered by the witness as being true? MR. MURPHY: The next
step I would make, Judge, is that this is an admission by a party.
This is the president of the agency that has appealed this
decision. JUDGE KOWAL: But the source of that the witness can
testify in terms of his impressions what hes observed and what
someone has told him, unless theres an objection to that, in which
case Ill hear from the parties and issue a ruling. You know, this
as indicated, theres an inherent unreliability, and unless you can
establish the reliability, Im going to sustain the objection. MR.
MURPHY: And what I would propose is, instead of worrying about this
more is that we move down the path, sir. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. So MR.
MURPHY: I withdraw the offer of the evidence. JUDGE KOWAL: And you
know what? Im just having it stricken. Its not going to be
considered, though everyone needs to know, its fine for the court
(p. 74)[p. 67 of 286] reporters transcript, but cant do anything
with the audio record. It is what it is, but Ive made my ruling,
and Im not going to consider it. MR. MURPHY: And I respect that.
JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. You may proceed. Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Sir, I
believe you were in the course of reviewing the bullet points in
Eric Hoffers book related to, oh, the cult mentality concerns youve
expressed. Have you finished your answer with regard to that sir?
A: Not quite. Q: Would you please continue with the next point and
the anecdotal information you have to support that? A: I feel in an
awkward position. Q: I can appreciate that, sir. A: Let me make a
may I make a summary of JUDGE KOWAL: Well, youre being asked to go
through if you you know, you state youre in an awkward position. Im
not going to ask you to clarify that.
-
Stegemans Testimony 17
But the point that I want to know is, are you able to go through
in looking at your notes and respond to the question, or are you
having difficulty with that? And I mean to be reading the notes and
then to (p. 75)[p. 67 of 286] be responsive to the question. THE
WITNESS: I would I can continue Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Sir, I want to
respect your preferences, and I withdraw the question and ask you
if you would summarize for me what you intended to describe. JUDGE
KOWAL: Go ahead. THE WITNESS: Stop me if Im out of line here.
During the cumulative effect of these various observations, some of
which were before I went to Mr. Acostas class, some of which where
afterwards, were that many things occurred I think Im within the
bounds of answering your question. If Im not, someone, Im sure,
will tell me. But they formed the foundation of my assessment. It
did not make any sense from the viewpoint of preserving this
program. The stance early expressed early on is no compromise was
possible. The celebration exposed to a very controversial event
which was not a positive event for the program and the promise of
further such events. The resistance to having a two-sided forum
after the superintendent invested political capital in this. The
criticisms of me, which I understand may (p. 76)[p. 67 of 286]
sound like a personal response, but really is not, even though I
have consistently supported the general concept of the program.
Intense personal criticism. And the same actually applies to the
superintendent. Didnt make much sense to me, and it was hard for me
to understand this course of events on the frame of defending and
promulgating a coherent curriculum with an educational goal as we
usually understand with K-12. But it was much easier, and this was
the epiphany that I had, to understand that whole pattern of events
in Eric Hoffers frame. And I would may I read a passage from
Hoffer, a short passage, or not JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Well THE
WITNESS: - which I think will then conclude that point? Q: BY MR.
MURPHY: I would appreciate that, sir, and then we can move on. MS.
SMITH: I have an objection to it. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. See, this is
the thing about volunteering the information part. Each witness
thats called to testify just has to directly respond to questions,
and sometimes those questions (p. 77)[p. 68 of 286] questions that
a witness may not prefer to answer, but is required to answer, but
volunteering information, again, while it may not be helpful, thats
not this is not a public forum where everyone gets to provide
input, including witnesses. You only get to respond to the
question. So, you know, at this point my ruling is, no, youre not
going to do that. Im going to have counsel proceed.
-
Stegemans Testimony 18
Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Let me do this, sir: Id like to return to
Exhibit 20, your notes, and use that as a base point, if you have
that in front of you. A: Yes. Q: And Im looking at the page stamped
TUSD000344, and, again, these are your notes of your observation of
Mr. Acostas class in March 23, 2011. A: Yes. Q: And, oh, on the
first page, two-thirds of the way down, youve noted, This is a
cult. That was a note you made at the time, sir, correct? A: Yes.
Q: Next A: To myself. Q: Yes. Next is a quote, I believe, from a
statement (p. 78)[p. 68 of 286] made by Mr. Acosta, quote, we are
still in the struggle, unquote. A: Yes. Q: And that statement made
in the class at that time? A: Yes. Q: Next line, an observation of
yours, This is pure political proselytizing. That was your note and
impression at the time, correct, sir? A: To myself. Q: And the next
line, another note to yourself, This is a political rally? A: Yes,
that's accurate. Q: And you then mention, sir and Ill go get into
the social activism aspect that Mr. Acosta was encouraging students
to go to a Cesar Chavez March the following Saturday; is that
correct? A: It was the next day Q: Oh, the next day. A: - which was
Saturday. Q: And you believed, in fact, that he was pressuring
students to attend that; is that a fair characterization? It was a
hard sell? A: Yes. He doesn't specifically require it, but he did
repeatedly indicate that he would like to see the (p. 79)[p. 68 of
286] students there. Q: And, sir, I want to enlarge on an issue
with regard to the political activism that you've described in
brief so that the judge has the context. On April 26 of 2011, there
was a scheduled meeting of the board of directors of TUSD; is that
correct? A: Yes. Q: And one of the items on the agenda that day was
whether the MASD program courses would be moved out as core
curriculum classes and would be elective classes instead; is that
correct? A: That was one part of a much larger proposal to be
considered that evening. Q: And prior to the time that meeting got
underway, a series of approximately eight students rushed forward
to the stage and changed themselves to the chairs of the board
of
-
Stegemans Testimony 19
supervisors; is that correct? A: Yes. Q: And that effectively
ended the meeting; is that correct? A: We decided to cancel the
meeting at that point. Q: And that was the incident that you
described (p. 80)[p. 68 of 286] where subsequently teachers in the
MAS program had celebrated that conduct by their students; is that
a fair statement? A: That yes. Q: And had did you have a sense that
the students were rewarded for their conduct by the teachers, of
you have information in that regard? A: I don't know, although one
student was given a place at the dais at the forum, the ethnic
studies forum, and was congratulated, so that particular incident
might could be redarded as an award. Q: And were those
congratulations made by teachers in the MASD program? A: Teachers
and others. Q: Sir, turning to the next page of your notes, second
line was an observation you made yo yourself. This should be a
club, not a class. That was your perspective at the time; is that
right, sir? A: Yes, that was my note to myself. Q: And, oh, three
lines, four lines under that, He is mostly is it relating to kids,
not educating them? A: Yes. Q: And, oh, approximately 5, 10 lines
down from there, you noted, Were 45 minutes in, and no (p. 81)[p.
69 of 286] education is happening. That was the note you made. Is
that correct so far? A: Yes. Q: Now, sir, this was a literature
class? A: Yes. Q: And you had gone 45 minutes in. There had been no
discussion of a book of literature up to that point in your
attendance; is that correct? A: Not completely correct. Q: How
could that be wrong, if you would be so kind? A: They had a little
bit of discussion about the book The Devils Highway at that point,
but at that point the discussion seemed to be simply the small
amount of discussion that happened seemed to be largely recycling
things they had covered before, and that was the context of that
comment. Q: And three, four lines underneath that, you made a note
to yourself: (Reading) This is not critical thinking. It does teach
resentment. Ending my quote. That was your impression at the time;
is that correct, sir? A: Yes. (p. 82)[p. 69 of 286]
-
Stegemans Testimony 20
Q: Would I be fair in characterizing this as an us versus them
environment, the us being the Hispanics and the them being white
society? A: Not exactly. My impression of the intellectual
foundation of the curriculum is that there is an upper class and a
lower class which is substantially but not exactly identified with
ethnicity. Q: And when you said promote resentment, were you
concerned that there was racial resentment being promoted in the
classroom? A: I think my strongest reaction is resentment toward
what Im calling this is my language, not the language of the
instructor- what Im calling the ruling of the oppressor class. I
think and my impressions here are a bit amalgamated with other
impressions I had from the program. Its hard to completely
disentangle whats coming from this class, and I certainly would
feel that that resentment was going that direction. I think that
ethnic question is a little more complicated, because, as I say,
the oppressor class is (p. 83)[p. 69 of 286] substantially but not
exactly identified with ethnicity. So, in other words, white
persons can understand the situation and fight against this, and
then, obviously, they are no longer the oppressors, and Chicanos
can turn against themselves or against other Chicanos because of
the environment created by the oppressors, and they then become
part of the oppressed apparatus, so the resentment is not exactly
ethnically identified. Q: If you would turn to the next page,
TUSD000346, I think theres some information that relates to the
subject. You have three-quarters of the way down the page a heading
Writing Prompt. That was a slide that was posted in the classroom
by Mr. Acosta for the students as a subject for them to compose a
written paragraph; is that right, sir? A: Yeah, thats correct. Q:
And let me read your note. (Reading) The audience encounters
Mexican and Chicano individuals that exploit or views their own
people of their own cultural and ethnic heritage. Simultaneously,
the immigration laws of this country, which are (p. 84)[p. 69 of
286] largely crafted by middle-aged European American men, serve as
the framework which creates this environment for exploitation and
abuses. In a well-conceived essay, compare the ethical issues along
ethnic lines. Ending my quote. That focused squarely on immigration
laws crafted by middle-aged European American men, did it not sir?
A: Yes. Q: And you understood European American men that to be a
reference to a Caucasian male; is that correct? A: I think that
would be the common understanding. Q: Flipping two pages back, sir,
you grabbed some class material that was present in the classroom
that day which has your handwriting at the bottom, Acosta class
material, didn't you? A: Yes. I took that off a pile of handouts in
the class.
-
Stegemans Testimony 21
Q: And so thus was actually in use during 2011 in Mr. Acostas
class; is that A: It was in the class. I cannot directly say (p.
85)[p. 70 of 286] whether it was ever used. Q: Lets go to the
content of that, sir. This includes a series of definitions. Does
it not? A: Yes. Well yes. Q: And, oh, each of these is then
accompanied by reference to an author who I guess would be the
source of that definition; is that a fair statement? A: I have no
information beyond what I can see here. Thats the obvious
inference. Q: Going to the middle of the page, theres a heading
Inequality of Language Theory, Richard Delgado. A: Yes. Q: And, oh,
the second the third sentence in that paragraph reads: (Reading) If
you are white, English-speaking, and your ancestors come from the
right region of the world, all of the equality amendments and civil
rights statutes apply to you. If you are of a different hue or
origin and/or prefer to speak a language other than English, you
cannot insist on equal treatment or equal protection of the law.
That was the material in the classroom that day, (p. 86)[p. 70 of
286] sir? A: Yes. Q: And the second sentence reads: (Reading) These
expectations continue to influence they ways these immigrants
perceive and respond to their treatment by white Americans and
social and societal institutions controlled by the latter. Is that
correct? A: And, oh, the final entry in that page, Resistance
Theory, Paulo Freire, and I quote: (Reading) The challenge of
American schools ostensible rule is democratic institution that
functions to improve the social position of all students, including
if not especially, those that are subordinated by the American
system of racism. Ending my quote. The course materials that you
picked up that (p. 87)[p. 70 of 286] day in that classroom refer to
racism and repeatedly emphasized white Americans as the cause of
discrimination. Is that a fair statement, sir? A: Thats a
reasonable characterization. Q: And, sir, are you familiar from the
enactment of the resolution that was admitted into evidence from
December 30, 2010, and from your subsequent, oh, involvement in
this issue with the provisions of ARS Section 15-112; isnt that
correct, sir? A: Im sorry. Could you restate that question? Q:
Sure. Youre familiar with the statutory provisions
-
Stegemans Testimony 22
A: Yes. Right. Q: - that are at issue here? A: Right. Q: And you
appreciate that one of the statutory provisions prohibits a course
that would promote resentment based on race or another class or
group; is that correct? A: Yes. Theres I don't remember the precise
language, but theres language to that general effect. Q: And you
have personal concerns that the course of study in the MAS program
promotes racial resentment, (p. 88)[p. 70 of 286] don't you, sir?
A: There is clearly resentment of the kind I described earlier. I
think there is an ethnic component to that resentment, as indicated
in the writing prompt, and I think there is other evidence to this
as well. Again, I could go through the anecdotes such as we have.
Q: Sir, the statute oh, have you finished your answer? I beg your
pardon. A: Yes. Q: The statute also prohibits classes that would
advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treatment of pupils as
individuals. Do you believe do your have personal concerns that the
course of study advocates ethnic solidarity as opposed to
individual education of pupils? MS. SMITH: Object to the form I
just as to what course of study hes referring to. Q: BY MR. MURPHY:
The MAS program, sir. JUDGE KOWAL: Does that satisfy your
objection? MS. SMITH: If he can answer that broad of a question,
then JUDGE KOWAL: Well, Ill just have it (p. 89). MR. MURPHY: Sure.
Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Do you have personal concerns, sir, that the MAS
program is, in fact, advocating ethnic solidarity as opposed to
encouraging the individual education of pupils? A: There is some
vagueness in that language, and different persons may interpret
that differently, but and I don't know of a legal interpretation.
As a layperson, do I have some concern? Yes. Q: Sir, I will ask you
a pointblank question: Do you believe that the MAS program should
be shut down and reconstituted in the matter that Mr. Stollar
described, as you were present to hear his testimony today? A: Does
that question have a legal component, or is that a policy question?
Q: That is a policy question, sir. A: Ive stated that position
publicly. Q: And that remains your position here today? A: Oh, Im
sorry. Yes. I should explain why or just answer yes. JUDGE KOWAL:
Just answer yes THE WITNESS: Yes. JUDGE KOWAL: - and well go from
there. THE WITNESS: Yes. (p. 90)[p. 71 of 286]
-
Stegemans Testimony 23
Q: BY MR. MURPHY: Sir, I would like the explanation, if you
would be so kind. A: It is a combination of concerns about the
content of the course which, for me, is mainly an educational
issue, not a legal issue, combined with the apparent procedural
inadequacies in the creation of the program, and it is the
combination of these two facts or that fact and that concern which
led me late in the spring, which was not my original feeling led me
late in the spring to the conclusion that the best policy response
was to shut it down and start over. Q: Sir, the TUSD board has made
a commitment to honoring the statute as we established at the
beginning A: Yes. Q: - is that correct? Has the board been able to
honor that commitment in light of the conditions in Tucson that you
described? MS. SMITH: Im going to object to the form. THE WITNESS:
That's a legal question. JUDGE KOWAL: Theres an objection. THE
WITNESS: Sorry. (p. 91)[p. 71 of 286] MS. SMITH: Can you can we
just have it read back? JUDGE KOWAL: Can you read it back please?
(Requested portion of record read) MS. SMITH: Im going to object to
the form of the question. MR. MURPHY: I just it seems okay to me,
and I will accept the Courts ruling. JUDGE KOWAL: Are you able to
answer that question? THE WITNESS: Can I get clarification as a
clarifying question about the question or not? JUDGE KOWAL: Well,
let me ask you this: The question called for you to respond on
behalf of the board, so the question I have is, are you able to
respond on behalf of the board? THE WITNESS: No. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay.
Q: BY MR. MURPHY: And with that I respect that distinction. Ill ask
you a personal question, sir, appreciating that the board can only
act collectively. Do you personally have a concern that the TUSD
board cannot honor its commitment to comply with the statute in
light of the conditions in Tucson that you described? (p. 92)[p. 71
of 286] A: I don't feel qualified to interpret the legal meaning of
the statute, so I guess I can answer questions as a layperson, but
that's legally phrased, and I don't feel I can answer. Q: And I
will conclude with this question, sir: The last page of Exhibit 20
is the photograph of the artwork that you mentioned. A: Yes. Q: Are
you able to translate the text Spanish text at the bottom of that
page? A: It says my knowledge of Spanish is just a little more than
none, but it says something to the effect of JUDGE KOWAL: Wait a
second. Do you feel that you can translate that or not?
-
Stegemans Testimony 24
THE WITNESS: Approximately, but not precisely, so JUDGE KOWAL:
Well, okay. MS. SMITH: I don't object with since hes already said
that its an approximate JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Go ahead. MS. SMITH: -
translation. I don't object to him JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. MS. SMITH: -
doing that. (p. 93)[p. 72 of 286] THE WITNESS: And Im sure this
isnt exactly right, but it says something to the effect that
instead of the star of the state, this is the sign of the Nazis,
which indicates racism. MR. MURPHY: No further questions of this
witness. JUDGE KOWAL: This is for the court reporter: Do you need a
recess? THE COURT REPORTER: Im okay. JUDGE KOWAL: Youre okay? Okay.
And this is for the witness: Do you need a recess, or are you fine?
THE WITNESS: Id rather get it over if MS. SMITH: I was going to ask
if we could take a quick recess. THE WITNESS: Oh, that's fine. MS.
SMITH: Just a couple of minutes. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Then well take
a five-minute recess. MS. SMITH: Thank you. (Recess taken from 3:11
to 3:24 p.m.) JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. The hearing is reconvened. Were
back on record. You may proceed with cross-examination. MS. SMITH:
Thank you. (p. 94)[p. 72 of 286] CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. SMITH: Q:
Dr. Stegeman, you would agree with me that these classes, the
classes in the program weve been discussing, it's a very
emotionally-charged issue in Tucson, isnt it? A: Yes. Q: And the
students are strongly in support of the classes that theyre in? A:
Many of them are. Q: I mean, that's what you observed? A: Yes. Q:
And theyre emotional about their support of the classes? A: Yes. Q:
Now, you testified that you observed two classes within the Mexican
American studies program, but we really only spent significant time
talking about one of those two classes, correct? A: Mostly, we
talked about Mr. Acostas class, yes. Q: The other class that you
observed was an (p. 95)[p. 72 of 286] American government social
justice education project class; is that right? A: Yes.
-
Stegemans Testimony 25
Q: And it was taught at Rincon High by Jose Gonzalez, correct?
A: Yes. Q: And there was a you were asked a couple of questions
about what happened in the class. There was a discussion of a
political cartoon and some current events, and then the students
broke into some groups, but there was nothing in the discussions
that you heard that related to race or ethnicity; is that right? A:
Nothing that I remember, no. There was political content, but it
wasn't ethnically based that I remember. Q: And when the teacher
asked the students to tell you what they liked about this
classroom, what made it special to them, they spoke about it
emphasis on social justice, right? A: Yes. Q: They didn't talk
about it being Chicano-centric or A: No, they did not. Q: An
overall impression that you took from the visit to that class was
that you did not take away (p. 96)[p. 72 of 286] any impression
that it was promoting resentment on the basis of race? A: No. There
was no ethnically-charged language in that class, as far as I
remember. Q: And you don't take away so I assume, then, this will
follow too, that you didn't take away the impression that the class
was promoting ethnic solidarity instead of treating students as
individuals? A: No. I mean, I agree. JUDGE KOWAL: Excuse me. MS.
SMITH: Yes. JUDGE KOWAL: I just want to make sure, you testified
that in Mr. Acostas class there was rhythmic clapping, correct? THE
WITNESS: (No oral response) MS. SMITH: You have to say yes. JUDGE
KOWAL: You have to respond verbally. THE WITNESS: Yes. JUDGE KOWAL:
Okay. And I think at some point and this is the point that I want
you to understand. I think at some point you later on you sort of
interjected your testimony a reference to the fact that there were
rhythmic clappings in both classes, and thats what I just wanted to
make sure if (p. 97)[p. 73 of 286] that if I understood that to be
the case, whether it was in Mr. Acostas class or in both Mr.
Acostas and Mr. Gonzalez THE WITNESS: It was in both can I
elaborate or not? JUDGE KOWAL: Well, no, that was my that was my
THE WITNESS: The answer is yes. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay. Well. Ill just
have counsel proceed. Q: BY MS. SMITH: Was there a distinction in
what you witnessed in those two classes in terms of the
clapping?
-
Stegemans Testimony 26
A: For whatever reason, I did not get the same sense in Mr.
Gonzalez class of a ritualized activity. That class I observed
earlier than Mr. Acostas, but I didn't pick up that feeling. Q:
Okay. Is that the elaboration you were hoping to make about the
clapping? A: Yeah. Its a matter of interpretation. I think in Mr.
Acostas class there were many things (p. 98)[p. 73 of 286] wrapped
together that created an overall impression. Q: Okay. Now,
obviously, as a member of the board and president of the board,
youve looked at the findings by the superintendent of public
instruction related to ethnic studies classes? A: Yes, I read those
findings. Q: Okay. And do you understand the statute to prohibit
courses or classes that promote resentment, promote ethnic
solidarity, instead of treating students as individuals, or are
designed primarily to students of a particular race? A: It
prohibits doing those things in any class. Q: In and does has the
does the superintendents finding give you any roadmap as a board
member as to what classes specifically the superintendent believes
are in violation of the statute? A: I don't recall that the
findings indicated that. Q: It doesn't break it out by it just
talks about the programs in general, correct? A: As far as I
remember, yes. Q: Okay. Do you want to look at it? Because we can
turn to that exhibit if it will be helpful to you, but (p. 99)[p.
73 of 286] A: Unless it contradicts my impression Q: It doesn't A:
No, I do not remember anything like that. Q: And you've spoken
about kind of a policy-oriented opinion about what one way to
address these issues, but you would agree with me that the
superintendents findings doesn't give you, as a board member, a
clear enough description of the violation to know what is required
to come into compliance with the statute? A: Yes, I mean, yes, it
did - did not give guidance. Q: I think you've said that the
finding was conspicuous for its lack of guidance; is that correct?
A: I felt so at the time. I was surprised by that aspect of the
finding. MS. SMITH: Thats all I have. JUDGE KOWAL: Any redirect?
MR. MURPHY: A quick follow-up. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MURPHY:
Q: Sir, does the statute require the superintendent to tell TUSD
what it must do to cure the problem? (p. 100)[p. 73 of 286] MS.
SMITH: Objection; calls for a legal conclusion. MR. MURPHY: Ill
withdraw it and reframe it. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay.
-
Stegemans Testimony 27
Q: BY MR. MURPHY: To your understanding, sir, does the statute
include any language that requires the superintendent to tell you
what must be done to cure the problem? A: No. MR. MURPHY: Nothing
further. JUDGE KOWAL: Anything else? MS. SMITH: No. JUDGE KOWAL:
Okay. May this witness step down and be excused? MR. MURPHY: Yes.
JUDGE KOWAL: Yes? MS. SMITH: Yes. Sorry. JUDGE KOWAL: You may step
down and be excused. THE WITNESS: Thank you. JUDGE KOWAL: You can
just leave that. THE WITNESS: Okay. JUDGE KOWAL: Just take I think
you had some notes. THE WITNESS: Yeah. (p. 101)[p. 74 of 286] JUDGE
KOWAL: Make sure you take that material with you. THE WITNESS: Yes,
Ill clean up my campsite. Left it as it was. JUDGE KOWAL: Okay.