The Board of Education is set to vote on a sweeping curricula overhaul that includes a revamped ethnic studies program for elementary and high school students. On paper, modernizing what kids learn sounds great. In practice, the district appears to be rushing the vote despite significant pushback about how the curriculum was actually developed — and what's in it.

Here's where it gets interesting. One SFUSD parent who also happens to be a 25-year college history professor reviewed the proposed textbook and came back with nearly 100 specific objections. Among her concerns: an introductory "identity wheel" exercise that asks students to classify themselves as either "powerful" or "marginalized" based on race, family income, gender, and other categories. Not analyze power structures. Not discuss history. Classify themselves. In a public school classroom.

You don't have to be a curriculum expert to see the problem. Telling a ten-year-old to sort themselves into "powerful" or "marginalized" boxes based on immutable characteristics isn't education — it's ideology wearing a textbook cover. As one Bay Area parent put it, the exercise is essentially forcing kids into predetermined categories before any actual learning begins.

And yet, despite documented concerns from qualified reviewers, SFUSD wants the board to greenlight the whole package anyway. Critics say there's been little room for meaningful public input — the district developed the curriculum through a process that left many stakeholders feeling shut out.

Look, ethnic studies done well is valuable. Understanding the full scope of American history — including the parts that are uncomfortable — makes better citizens. Nobody serious is arguing otherwise. But a curriculum developed behind closed doors, resistant to expert criticism, and built around exercises that sort children into identity hierarchies isn't rigorous education. It's a missed opportunity dressed up as progress.

The board should slow down, open the process, and actually listen. Twenty years with outdated textbooks is bad. Replacing them with something parents and educators can't meaningfully review might be worse.