Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Curriculum regulations and book bans: Modern day anti-literacy laws?

Curriculum regulations and book bans: Modern day anti-literacy laws?
iStock / Getty Images Plus

Katherine Kapustka is an Associate Professor of Education at DePaul University, the co-author of Integrating Social and Emotional Learning with Content: Using Picture Books for Differentiated Teaching in K-3 Classrooms, and a Public Voices Fellow at The OpEd Project.

“No person shall keep or teach any school for the instruction of negroes or mulattos, in reading or writing, in this State.” This quote from Missouri’s 1847 anti-literacy law is a stark reminder that in the 19th century, like today, education was a powerful tool wielded by people in power.


Missouri, like other slave states, passed anti-literacy laws, making it a crime for enslaved people or people of color to learn to read or write, or for anyone to teach them these skills. The reasoning was clear; an enslaved person who knew how to read could envision a life outside of slavery, and one who knew how to write could forge passes needed to travel north to freedom.

Education, as they knew, was empowering.

This troubling period in our history is rearing its ugly head again. Four days before the nation paused to commemorate the life and work of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida sent a letter to the College Board, the non-profit organization that oversees both the Advanced Placement (AP) Program and the SAT, explaining that a new AP African American Studies course would not be allowed in Florida.

This course that is piloted in 60 high schools throughout the nation for use beginning in 2024, uses an interdisciplinary framework to guide students as they “ explore the vital contributions and experiences of African Americans.”

This denial comes at the same time that “1619,” the project spearheaded by Nikole Hannah-Jones on the legacy of slavery in the United States, is streaming on television.

While DeSantis’s rejection is not surprising given his signature on the 2022 Stop W.O.K.E. (Wrongs to Kids and Employees) Act, it is essential to consider what King might have expressed about this turn of events.

Writing in his college newspaper in 1947, King asserted: “The function of education, therefore, is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically.” Interestingly, King wrote that sentence when he was 18, not much older than the high school students who would enroll in the AP African American Studies course.

What began as “Negro History Week” in 1926, 50 years later was first recognized as Black History Month by President Gerald Ford. In 1986, Congress passed Public Law 99-244, which designated February 1986 as "National Black (Afro-American) History Month” and that same month, President Ronald Regan issued a proclamation stating that this month “not only offers black Americans an occasion to explore their heritage, but it also offers all Americans an occasion and opportunity to gain a fuller perspective of the contributions of black Americans to our Nation.”

Presidents Ford and Reagan, both Republicans, were not what some critics claim are stereotypical “woke liberals.” They knew that everyone would benefit from understanding the history, experiences, and contributions of African Americans in the United States.

What has shifted in the minds of Americans that a course in African American studies becomes too problematic for the almost 900,000 high school students in Florida to take and when 427 books for children of all ages with protagonists of color, including King, are found on lists of banned books?

Fear is once again at the heart of the current anti-literacy agenda. While no one is denying people of color the right to learn to read or write, they are being denied a comprehensive education, and along with the detrimental effects on students of color when they do not see themselves reflected in the curriculum, white students are also denied an opportunity to learn the true and complex history of the United States.

The fear this time is about a changing country, and the role of the majority culture as the percentage of white people in the United States shrinks each year. These bans, like the anti-literacy laws during the time of slavery, are an attempt to maintain a status quo that is beneficial to the current majority population.

King stated he wanted schools to teach students to “think intensively and to think critically.” As the United States becomes increasingly polarized, this is needed more than ever, both in schools, and outside of them. In schools, students should be exposed to diverse perspectives and individuals.

And when a course, curriculum, or book is banned, restricted, or otherwise called out for its agenda, adults who care about the future of this country should read it, consider it, and identify what is being kept hidden.

Perhaps, again, fear will be at the heart of an anti-literacy movement: a fear of an educated populace that can think critically and question the status quo.

Policy makers, historians, educators, administrators, students, citizens, and anyone interested in the integrity of history must not allow for a repeat of this unjust history.


Read More

Construction worker


Low angle view of male construction workers framing a new house

Getty Images

Latino Workers Are the Backbone of America — But Inequities Persist

WASHINGTON — As the nation pauses today to mark Labor Day 2026, a glaring spotlight is shining on the massive economic influence, historical legacy, and evolving challenges of the Latino labor force. Once relegated to the margins of the broader American labor narrative, Latino workers are stepping into the national conversation as the indisputable backbone of the modern United States economy.

According to recent findings from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the overall labor market has shown unexpected strength, with a stable baseline keeping the Hispanic and Latino unemployment rate hovering around 4.8%. While this reflects a significant drop from the 5.3% peak recorded a year ago, advocacy groups argue that the metrics mask deeper inequalities that holiday celebrations tend to overlook.

Keep ReadingShow less
ball under basketball ring
ball under basketball ring
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Fairness and Inclusion in Women’s Sports

Two former NBA players have said they want to play in the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA). Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White announced their intent to enter the WNBA draft, claiming—falsely—that they identify as women to force the WNBA to clarify its policy, which restricts participation to women without defining what it means to be a woman. The players’ announcement followed closely on the heels of WNBA player Sophie Cunningham’s public comments that it was “common sense” that only “biological women” be permitted to compete in the WNBA. Cunningham’s comments drew competing rallies to her games, either supporting or denouncing her stance. Her statement was preceded by the first Supreme Court ruling on eligibility for female sports competitions at the school and college level, a ruling that does not apply to professional sports. In West Virginia v. B. P. J., the Supreme Court affirmed that U.S. states may legally bar transgender girls and women from female school or collegiate sports teams, leaving states to decide.

Public discussion of this issue has been deeply polarized. Some on the political left have asserted that “trans women are women” and that anyone who opposes their participation in elite women’s sports is a bigot. Meanwhile, some on the political right have presented trans women athletes as male athletes stealing women’s trophies. This is a classic case of affective polarization—a phenomenon in which people feel their identities, values, or rights are at stake. They become less willing to consider alternative perspectives and demonize those with opposing views.

Keep ReadingShow less
 In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus.

In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus is seen on August 26, 2026 in Abilene, Texas

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Is AI Worth the Cost to Communities?

Picture a family living on a quiet street in an idyllic small town. Then a data center moves in next door. Trees are knocked down for a sprawling industrial campus, an enormous windowless building rises, and a maddening hum continues day and night. The family closes its windows, abandons the backyard, and struggles to sleep. Open space disappears, electric bills rise, and the company announces plans to expand—all in the name of jobs, tax revenue, and so-called progress.

While the family is fictional, its experience is not. Across the country, communities are confronting noise, rising electricity demand, water consumption, lost open space, and data centers approved with little public discussion. These costs raise a question the technology industry would rather avoid: Are the promised benefits of the artificial-intelligence boom worth what communities are being asked to sacrifice?

Keep ReadingShow less
Judge's hand holding wooden hammer

A lawyer breaks down 'rule of law' using everyday analogies—sports, board games—to explain why recent government actions threaten this founding principle.

naruecha jenthaisong/Getty Images

The Rule of Law Is Simple—and Essential to American Democracy

This series from Lawyers Defending American Democracy connects the words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to current events that threaten democracy and the justice system. Each piece highlights the unique responsibility lawyers carry—through their oath, professional obligations, and roles in their communities—to help the public understand what’s at risk and to speak out when democratic principles are under threat. LDAD’s call to action is straightforward: as the Founders once did, we must recognize threats to constitutional values, demand accountability, and act to defend them.

Before the first No Kings rally last year, I carefully hand-lettered a sign that I thought perfectly encapsulated the day's theme. On one side, it read “IN THIS COUNTRY, THE RULE OF LAW IS KING." On the other, it read, "A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS, NOT OF MEN (John Adams)." I carried my sign proudly, certain that it would be a big hit. But the only reaction I got was someone asking me, “Are you a lawyer?” I wonder what gave me away.

Keep ReadingShow less