SACRAMENTO, CA – Luther Burbank High School teacher Erinn Leone shared her story of being verbally attacked by a fellow teacher in a “racial slur-filled rant,” after Leone spoke out recently about a biology test with racist questions, according to the Sacramento Bee story.
Leone and several colleagues—calling themselves the “Alliance of Ant-Racist Educators at Sacramento City Unified School District”—joined in an effort to support the installation of a new policy to address racism among educators in the district.
Their draft suggestion, modeled after the principles of restorative justice, has not been publicly discussed by the board, wrote the Sacramento Bee, but they have established a new advisory committee that will “develop policy recommendations in different areas for the board to implement.”
Newly-elected board president Jasjit Singh appointed a civil rights attorney to be the committee liaison, and has said “every board member has been tasked with finding a community member form their district to join the committee alongside labor representative from SEIU [Service Employees International Union] and the teachers association plus student representatives,” reported the Sacramento Bee.
Leone has expressed skepticism about this committee and its goals and effectiveness, stating, “The fear is that this is just a performative committee that is going to continue to endlessly report to the board about things that are happening instead of focusing on creating an accountability framework.”
She fears that the creation of such an advisory committee could add “unnecessary bureaucracy” to, as the Sacramento Bee wrote, the process of establishing policy to address racism within the district.
Leone said after she was addressed using racial slurs by a fellow teacher, the teacher was back teaching following a short paid leave; meanwhile, Leone was assigned a presentation on why the word used was offensive, wrote the Sacramento Bee.
The accused biology teacher, Alex Nguyen, was covered by the Sacramento Bee following the instance of racially bigoted questioning on a biology exam, and Leone states that such coverage “shook the community,” but charged Luther Burbank administrators still did not appropriately address complaints of racism.
Leone called this event “a missed opportunity for learning and healing,” and noted that having a restorative justice policy in place at the time of the incident would have enabled the school district to more appropriately and effectively remove Nguyen from the classroom.
Leone’s proposed policy “recommends creating a panel composed of representatives from the teachers union, the district, administrators, and community members to determine the appropriate response if a staff member is found to be at fault for professional misconduct.”
Following this, the staff member would be required to complete sensitivity training, according to Leone’s plan, as well as consistent check-ins with the committee to ensure the teacher is willing to grow, accept, and fix the wrongs they have committed, the Sacramento Bee noted.
Leone’s concerns for the committee established by the board are shared by other members of the community, including those involved in the Community Advisory Committee for special education and the Black/African American Advisory Board, added the Sacramento Bee.
Worries that the committee lacks clear goals were addressed by Singh as she recognized that “communication between the board and district committees has not always been effective in the past.”
Singh said he wants committees to create detailed recommendations of which the board can act on, but also noted that committees are in charge of establishing the goals themselves, wrote the Sacramento Bee.
Singh regarded the Alliance’s proposal as a “helpful document” but noted his hopes that the committee be able to establish a “more encompassing and farther reaching” policy proposal.
He did however acknowledge the importance of Leone and the Alliance’s work on the issue of racism within the district, noting “if they hadn’t come forth with their idea then we wouldn’t be putting this idea forward as a board.”
Leone remains unsatisfied with the board’s actions, expressing specific concern with the “absent” nature, as she describes it, of committee liaison attorney Mark Harris.
Harris has allegedly been unresponsive when questioned by Leone, but Singh has been adamant that there will be no delay in the committee’s proceedings as the board searches for committee members in the coming weeks, instead noting that educational agencies are being slowed by new federal mandates, reported the Sacramento Bee.
From article: “Following this, the staff member would be required to complete sensitivity training, according to Leone’s plan, as well as consistent check-ins with the committee to ensure the teacher is willing to grow, accept, and fix the wrongs they have committed, the Sacramento Bee noted.”
It’s impossible to know what occurred here, without an accurate and complete description. But the proposal cited above would already cause me concern, at least.
(Just look at the wording of that quote – anyone should other than an extremist should be able to see why it’s a concern. It’s no wonder that the person who claims to have been “wronged” is not satisfied with the district’s response.)
The article says it will be modeled after a restorative justice program, if that’s the case, it will be very good.
Maybe, but my guess is that it won’t result in any honest conversations. Not when the “victim” starts out like this.
All of this seems like yet another good reason to not send your kid to Sacramento public schools – where even the teachers are fighting among themselves.
Clearly you have never been involved in a restorative process
How many people do you suppose have been involved in one?
Below is what artificial intelligence has to say about it. So, what “crime” has occurred, here? And who needs to be held “accountable”?
Already, this description states that someone did something “wrong”. That’s probably not a good starting point.
“Restorative justice is a process that involves victims, offenders, and the community working together to address the consequences of a crime. The goal is to heal, restore accountability, and promote community safety.”
“How does restorative justice work?”
Victim needs: Focuses on the needs of victims and survivors
Accountability: Holds offenders responsible for their actions
Reintegration: Helps offenders reintegrate into the community
Community support: Creates a community that supports victims and rehabilitation
Root causes: Addresses the root causes of harm
Racial equity: Seeks to reduce racial inequities
That’s not a very good description of restorative justice. If you want a quick briefer, read Howard Zehr’s little book, it’s only 82 pages. The school’s discipline policy now runs through the Yolo Conflict Resolution Center, our oldest was involved in a fight with another kid, it was a great experience. Maybe you should check them out and learn more. I’ve seen it work at very high conflict cases – I was involved in a couple that involved murderers and the family of the victim. It’s one of the strongest processes I have seen for making sure that everyone’s needs are addressed and creates active steps to address harms
So, you’re stating that the artificial intelligence description is not correct. (Seems to me that you’ve used that yourself as a source, but that’s neither here nor there.)
But again, the process literally states that there’s an “offender”, when there may not even be one.
As far as murders (and even fights between kids), there usually is an “offender”. (The guy with the knife in his hand, in the former example.)
I didn’t say it wasn’t accurate, I said it wasn’t very good. Probably would have been improved by having it flesh out the process more.
It depends on the context. In VORP it’s a victim-offender reconciliation program. But often it’s simply conflict resolution, although usually there is a harm and one of the parties is harmed. But one of the things you often learn is that often both sides have grievances in a conflict and both sides feel wronged, that’s part of the restorative process
Regarding “actual” offenders, the key is whether or not the restorative justice process changes his behavior as a result.
Not necessarily. For example, often victims or victims family want to understand why something happened and finding out those answers doesn’t happen very well in a normal court context and that can help them get closure.
David says: “But one of the things you often learn is that often both sides have grievances in a conflict and both sides feel wronged, that’s part of the restorative process.”
That’s essentially what Trump said about Zelenski AND Putin. But only one of those parties invaded the other’s country.
That doesn’t really help us in this conversation.
David says: Not necessarily. For example, often victims or victims family want to understand why something happened and finding out those answers doesn’t happen very well in a normal court context and that can help them get closure.”
Closure is a “feeling” – maybe it helps victims understand why someone who harmed them is an a-hole.
But again, the victims aren’t the “problem”.
You’re thinking about this wrong. Victims need things too, they need don’t need the same thing. But a restorative process can help them victims better understand their feelings, their loss, the damage and that happens at times independent of whether the “offender” (I would prefer a better term) is restored to the community – although sometimes, it happens concurrently.
And that’s the reason I question “restorative justice” in this case.
We don’t know if there’s an actual “offender”.
We know that someone was “offended”, but it’s possible (in these type of cases) that the “problem” is the belief/attitude of the “victim”.
Now, if restorative justice dealt with THAT possibility, it might be helpful.
My suggestion would be to ask your AI to recommend a few books on restorative justice and explore this more.
David says: ” . . . the damage and that happens at times independent of whether the “offender” (I would prefer a better term) is restored to the community – although sometimes, it happens concurrently.”
And if the offender doesn’t change his behavior as a result, there will be future victims and more “restorative justice” so that these future victims can (as you state) “better understand their feelings, their loss, the damage . . .”
And that’s why we have prisons. Of course, one of the possibilities that future victims might “better understand” is that the justice system allowed a given offender to get out of prison, and hurt someone else again. (So I guess in that case, the justice system is part of the process – so that they can also hear about the victim’s feelings.)
RO say: “(Seems to me that you’ve used that yourself as a source, but that’s neither here nor there.)”
No, he used the whopper.
But the thing about descriptions from A.I., is you can use them when you like them, and not use them when you don’t.
It’s a tool. Like anything, you have to ask the right questions and under the context. You can’t just blindly apply something.
For example: “ A standard restorative justice response to harm is a “peace circle,” which brings together victims, the people who’ve done harm, families of each, and community members (or some combination of these), with the goal of working toward understanding, healing, and, in many cases, reconciliation and reparations.”
DG say, “My suggestion would be to ask your AI to recommend a few books on restorative justice and explore this more.”
Reminds me of years ago when you recommended I read “White Fragility”, LOL
The only point of commonality is my recommending someone read a book or books.
” a restorative justice program, if that’s the case, it will be very good. ”
If you believe in “restorative justice” as a thing that works, rather than a get-bullys-out-of-jail-free card.
That’s a long conservation perhaps, but I don’t see restorative justice as a means to get out of jail free, I see it as a means to help both victims and “offenders” address harms and trauma
“It’s impossible to know what occurred here, without an accurate and complete description. ”
I always love me a good ‘racism occurred’ without a description, leaving it up to the reporter to decide for me, what racism is.
Yes Alan, this story was missing many facts.
As often with Vanguard articles you have to do your own digging to get to the bottom of the story. Here’s an article about the incident that occurred:
“In February 2020, during her first year teaching at Luther Burbank High School, Leone came into a training session when another teacher abruptly stood and said she needed to vent about an incident with a student that happened during the class period before the meeting.
The teacher said that as a student walked past her classroom’s propped open door, he said, “What’s up, [n-word]?”
The teacher, who is not Black, was visibly angry and upset as she addressed the other teachers in the meeting. “What right does he have to say this to me?” she said. “So I tell him, ‘No, that’s what you are.’”
Leone was shocked by the teacher’s use of the racial slur. “What right do you have to tell a student that?” she asked.”
https://sacobserver.com/2024/08/racial-slurs-at-luther-burbank/
Seems like one thing that everyone can agree on is that the Sacramento school system is a lovely place to be for students. First class education, no doubt.
And that’s why middle-class (mostly white/younger families) people from the Bay Area and elsewhere move to places like Roseville and Folsom – instead of Sacramento. I’d mention Davis as well – but that’s pretty much a flyover town for that particular group.
Spring Lake as well – white (probably the largest group), Asian, and Hispanic. Relatively few black people in Woodland at all, it seems.
I suspect that Elk Grove is sort of “in-between” Sacramento and the foothills, regarding demographics.
But I would say that responding with “No, that’s what you are” is (at best) highly unprofessional. As is any defense of it.
And that would go for pretty much anything that the student first said.
That incident is embarrassing for that entire system.
David says: “A standard restorative justice response to harm is a “peace circle,”
Without even reading a single recommended book, I’m absolutely certain that singing Kumbaya is part of this, as is some type of incessant bongo drumming and incense. (Along with some drugs that shall remain unspoken.)
Which results in a brotherhood and sisterhood of personkind.
I visited Golden Gate Park in the 1970s, so I’m already familiar with this.
Was just reading this: “(Frances Perkins) remembered a time when she had argued that women workers needed seats with backs to support their spines and (Frank) Roosevelt had roared with laughter at her idea. Frances had been incensed, and told him so. “You don’t know anything about women’s backs,” she told him. “They ache like thunder from sitting up perfectly straight at a machine with no support for the small of the back.”
You don’t know anything about restorative justice. Come back and talk to me when you do.
In intended that as a humorous comment, not a serious one. I’m not opposed to the concept of restorative justice – but I don’t see it as a “replacement” for the criminal justice system.
In any case, I do know that (out of the two parties you mentioned), Roosevelt is the one who needed physical restoration.
Perhaps I’ll start off with “White Fragility” (mentioned above), if you watch Matt Walsh’s movie in which he humiliated that author by enticing her to pay on-the-spot reparations from the cash she was carrying.
Why are you focused on a book I read and suggested probably four or five years ago? I’ve literally read hundreds of books since.
Maybe that’s the problem. It certainly doesn’t seem to be helping, at least.
Maybe instead of reading White Fragility (which you seem to embody), you should read Richard Hofstadter’s classic, “Anti-Intellectualism in American Life”
I’ll wait until they make it into a movie.
Seriously (for some reason), I’ve never liked reading books – despite being a super-genius. I do read the Vanguard, so I’m not sure if that supports my claim, or implies the opposite.
But I actually don’t think I’m “fragile”, especially regarding racial issues. I don’t feel defensive at all, if that’s what that’s supposed to mean.
My sense of humor doesn’t translate well over messages, so I apologize for that.