Friday, September 15, 2023

Public Schools Pick Teachers Based on Allegiance to Cultural Marxism

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

The kinds of commitments public school systems are making these days aren’t simply words on a page. They inform everything the district does, including who gets to teach there.

While much attention has been turned to identity politics infiltrating American classrooms, less focus has been paid to the influence of the people schools are hiring to impart this indoctrination to students. A recent survey shows that DEI departments and administrative positions have become more common, especially in large districts. What about classroom teachers?

Public schools are picking teachers based on their allegiance to cultural Marxism.

Be informed, not misled.

The goal is indoctrination, not education.

The National Opportunity Project, a nonprofit government watchdog and education organization, has produced the nation’s first survey and overview of the DEI hiring process in K-12 education. If Americans are concerned about political indoctrination in their children’s classrooms, NOP must start by understanding how public school districts hire teachers to impart such politics.

According to a survey of nearly 70 public schools by the National Opportunity Project (NOP), public schools nationwide are using politically one-sided questions to ideologically screen potential teachers. Instead of merely selecting the most qualified candidates, these discriminatory hiring practices evaluate would-be teachers by their alignment with so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) goals.

Documents obtained by NOP show public schools advertised ideological requirements in their job postings with coded language seeking “equity-literate educator[s]” who will work at “dismantling systemic racism” with a “commitment to social justice.” Denver Public Schools dictated that applicants should “have an anti-racist mindset and will work to dismantle systems of oppression and inequity in our community.”

These standards invite educators of a particular ideological affiliation to pursue jobs in public schools while deterring other candidates. “They position teachers as soldiers who share responsibility for upending societal barriers,” the report noted. “Their message to applicants is clear: Be prepared to join our crusade, or don’t apply.”

Kristen Williamson, communications director at the National Opportunity Project, told The Federalist that schools are “possibly breaking the law” by ideologically filtering potential teachers.

Profile of the model teacher.

The vetting continues in the interview process, in which candidates may be asked “loaded and presumptive” questions. Some of the questions NOP uncovered asked applicants how they would lead conversations about race in the classroom and incorporate unscientific fads like “gender diversity.”

“Perspectives that diverge from or fail to mesh with the district’s views on equity” are “judged poorly,” NOP concluded.

According to a Fairfax County Public Schools screening rubric, an “outstanding candidate” is someone who “provides concrete examples of strategies of their commitment to serve to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion” and understands “their role in breaking down barriers.”

One prompt from City Schools of Decatur in Georgia asks how applicants would shut down parents who object to their racially divisive curricula:

An upset parent emails you regarding a classroom discussion with your students about Critical Race Theory. They accuse you (the teacher) of anti-Americanism, changing ‘real history,’ and of making White children feel marginalized and attacked. Please discuss your course of action and draft a response to this parent.

The hiring team must then ensure “that there is at least one person of color and one woman or gender-fluid person” in scoring the response. NOP uncovered several other identity quotes for hiring panels and committees like this one.


The effect of these policies is that teachers in many of the country’s K-12 schools are selected partly based on subjective, quasi-political, and sometimes illegal criteria that have nothing to do with reading, writing, and math. These teachers are handpicked based at least in part on their acceptance and evangelism of one side’s political and social orthodoxy.

Sometimes applicants aren’t just filtered by their beliefs, but by their physical characteristics. Hinsdale Township High School District 86 in Illinois insists that employees reflect the student body in terms of “race, cultural background, linguistic skill, physical abilities, disabilities, sex, and sexual identity.”

The Federalist concludes: “Parents and taxpayers must hold school districts accountable regarding teacher hiring standards,” Williamson said. “Ultimately, these same teachers are recruited to be partisan political activists for teachers unions, forcing policies they teach in the classroom on the rest of the country through strikes, lobbying, and electioneering.”

The National Opportunity Project concludes with this:

What to do:

If certain political and social activists and allies are privileged in the teacher hiring process—and skeptics discouraged from applying, or from disclosing views that don’t conform—students are being robbed of diverse viewpoints, skilled teachers, and a quality education.

Local scrutiny and resistance to teacher-hiring practices that put applicants at an ideological disadvantage is crucial. Specifically:

  • All hiring practices should be transparent and subject to public feedback.
  • School board policies must be revised, if necessary, to prevent potential ideological or identity bias in the teacher hiring process.
  • Only research-based qualifications and skills most relevant to impactful teaching should be emphasized and sought.
  • Policies should be re-evaluated to ensure they stand up to legal scrutiny in the face of recent court decisions outlawing discrimination.

School boards and administrators must also be held accountable for the impact of hiring practices on teacher quality and student achievement. Do politically oriented questions and criteria yield teacher hires that end up having a positive impact on what and how much students learn? Do “identity quotas” for interview panel members result in hiring teachers who teach all students well? Unless such hiring goals and practices at least achieve their educational goals, they fail to pass their own test. 

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.