In teacher college, there was a heavy emphasis on evidence-based learning. As an educator, I’m disheartened when I become subjected to non-evidence based professional development. These trainings usually don’t result in the acquisition of additional skills that will help students to improve reading or math skills.

I attended a training which seemed more like a Maoist struggle session than educational development, starring representatives from the Fayette County office of Unity, Belonging & Student Efficacy. One was a black man who said he represented BIPOC males and a black woman who represented BIPOC females. A slide was presented showing the other representatives from this office. One represented LGBTQ students and the other represented the “Brown Kids.” What stood out to me the most was the absence of a representative for white kids.

It’s easy to recognize an indoctrination session because the presenters use unfamiliar language and acronyms but make the underlying assumption that everyone understands and agrees with these things. One of the presenters said that it’s offensive to call kids “colored.” I asked, “What does BIPOC mean?” The presenter said it stood for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color. I then said, “People of color? What is the difference?” The other presenter said, “One of them is offensive and the other one isn’t.” I then asked, “If it’s so offensive, why is there an organization in existence called the National Association for the Advancement of…” “Hey! We’re not getting into that right now,” yelled one of the presenters, cutting me off mid-sentence.

The presenters then showed a video where FCPS students gave their personal accounts of various types of discrimination in the district.  My first thought was if the experience of these students was happening district wide, how could any students expect to learn anything? After the video, the room was silent. The male presenter folded his arms and said, “This is the typical response after we show this video. Why do you think this is?” Another silence.

I explained, “I can’t speak on behalf of anyone else, but from my perspective, this video is one-sided. We have the allegations of racism, sexism, and religious discrimination from the students, but as a viewer, we have no objective evidence that any of it is true. Hypothetically, a student could have been singled out due to behavior or work ethic, but because the teacher was a member of a different group, the student interpreted the actions as negative.” The presenter then said, “That may be true, but we have to always validate student feelings.” I then said, “If their feelings are wrong, couldn’t we do more harm by validating those feelings?” He said, “We believe it’s always better to validate student feelings.”

As the program concluded, the presenters spoke of the success of their program headed into their second year. I asked, “By what empirical standard do you use to determine if your program is successful?” He appeared stunned and offered no coherent response.

After this faux training took place, I received an email from the district requesting my assistance to participate in a program. I noticed the qualifications were sex and skin color. At the school where I work, we have staff who may not racially align with the majority black population we have, but they absolutely relate to those students on multiple levels independent of and far deeper than race.

I asked my white male counterparts if they received the same email and they did not.

I’m no attorney, so I don’t understand how this practice isn’t in direct violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.