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

Vote pins

Vote pins

Photo provided

Sharp Gender Divide Among Latino Voters

A new analysis from the UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Institute (LPPI) and the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) reveals significant political differences between Latinas and Latino men in California — especially among younger voters and those without bachelor’s degrees. The findings, drawn from the May 2026 Berkeley IGS Poll of 1,912 Latino registered voters, challenge the notion that California’s Latino electorate behaves as a single political bloc.

California Latinas are more likely than Latino men to prioritize protecting immigrant communities, opposing the Trump administration’s agenda, and defending democracy and voting rights. According to the report, 69% of Latinas say protecting immigrant communities is “very important,” compared with 52% of Latino men. On “fighting the Trump agenda,” the gap is identical: 68% of Latinas versus 51% of Latino men. Democracy and voting rights receive the strongest support across both groups, with 87% of Latinas and 77% of Latino men rating the issue as very important.

Keep ReadingShow less
unrecognizable businessman giving speech to professional audience

Brain science explains why voters reward charisma over results — and why the leaders who "fix" the most get credit for the least. A behavioral look at elections.

alvaro gonzalez/Getty Images

The Résumé Should Outvote the Smile

There's an old joke about a couple who finally solved years of arguing over decisions. "Since you're the man of the house," the wife said, "you handle the big things -- our stance on foreign wars, who we send to the Senate. I'll take care of the small stuff: groceries, the mortgage, where we live, what we eat." The husband agreed happily, certain he had won the better half of the deal. A few years later he realized the trade had gone entirely the other way. He held forth on geopolitics at dinner parties while his wife quietly ran every detail that actually touched his life: what he ate, where he lived, how his money was spent. What looked like ultimate authority was, in practice, near-total abdication over the things that shaped his days.

Voters make the same trade, and pay for it the same way. We keep hiring leaders for the qualities we would want in a spouse -- warmth, charm, a commanding voice, the sense that they see us -- instead of the qualities we would want in a mechanic: someone who can find what is broken and fix it before the whole system fails. We evaluate candidates the way we choose intimate partners, not the way we hire people to run complex, high-stakes systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gavel on top of binders

A full rundown of this week's congressional action: 7 bills headed to the President, a stalled data center bill, and the votes lawmakers wanted on record.

May Lim / 500px/Getty Images

House Crams in Votes Before Extended Break

The House wasn’t expected to stay in session past this week and, in fact, they left a day early after Rep. Massie (R-KY4) introduced an impeachment resolution against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Nonetheless, they powered through many more votes than usual. We’ll cover the seven soon-to-be new laws and the bills of interest we highlighted in this week’s preview. As is its usual function, the Senate mostly acted as a break on legislation that had passed the House.

New Laws

These bills have all passed both chambers in identical form, so they next go to the President for signing.

Keep ReadingShow less