ALJ Hearing Stegeman Testimony Transcription Notes.pdf

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.


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?


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?


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.


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?


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]


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.


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


(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.


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.


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]


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


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]


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.


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


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]


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?


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.


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?


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.


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.

Documents

ALJ Hearing Stegeman Testimony Transcription Notes.pdf