As the new school year begins, many parents and organizations are closely examining educational content, particularly in Pittsburgh, where the North American Values Institute (NAVI) has raised concerns about a new ethnic studies course for high school seniors in Pittsburgh Public Schools (PPS). NAVI, which operates as a nonpartisan education watchdog, argues that instead of conveying historical knowledge, the course appears to promote political activism.
“My philosophy is straightforward: Teach kids about revolutions, but don’t recruit them to be part of one,” said NAVI Pennsylvania Director Steve Rosenberg.
Rosenberg’s concerns stem from documents obtained via right-to-know requests, which indicated potential issues with how the course was structured and noted an absence of opposing viewpoints in the materials provided. NAVI shared these documents with a news outlet.
When asked to verify the accuracy of the documents, Dr. Ann Fillmore, executive director of K-12 Literacy, Humanities, and Library Services for PPS, responded that they provided only an overview rather than the complete curriculum, noting that some documents were individual course outlines created by teachers.
Fillmore clarified that some syllabi were for a College in High School dual-enrollment course affiliated with LaRoche University, not directly from the district’s curriculum materials. She also mentioned that the unit overviews have been updated for the 2026–2027 school year.
The course reportedly consists of five units:
- Unit 1: Developing Our Identities: Using Language and History to Create Community
- Unit 2: The Journey of Cultural Legacies: Exploring, Honoring, and Embracing Diverse Histories
- Unit 3: Barriers and Bridges: Navigating Systems of Power
- Unit 4: From the System to the Self: How Society Shapes Identity, Opportunity, and Power
- Unit 5: Making an Impact
Each unit is designed to be taught over several weeks, with the first two laying the groundwork around identity, cultural heritage, and historical migration. NAVI primarily focuses its concerns on the latter segments of the course, namely Units 3 and 4.
In Unit 3, students explore the structures of power and learn how to “challenge, resist, and restructure” these systems to be more equitable. The intended outcomes include discussions about how power dynamics confer privilege to certain groups and tools for marginalized communities to shift these dynamics.
Unit 4 delves into the drawbacks of power systems, analyzing their impact on access to opportunities and resources. Students are expected to devise and propose strategies to advocate for change in social systems that yield unfair results for different ethnic groups. Rosenberg remarked that this focus is significantly different from simply learning about historical experiences.
Unit 5 encourages students to apply their knowledge practically. They must create an action plan addressing a community issue linked to race and diversity, collaborating with peers in their school or neighborhood.
Fillmore countered NAVI’s portrayal, asserting that the curriculum aims to foster civic reasoning rather than political activism. “We’re not training students for activism; we want them to think critically and develop their own perspectives based on inquiry-based learning principles,” she remarked.
Regarding concerns raised about Jewish identity and antisemitism, Rosenberg criticized the curriculum for including materials on Whiteness and privilege that, he argues, misrepresent Jewish experiences by implying that they could be classified as oppressors. He emphasized the need for counter-narratives to reflect the realities of Jewish history.
Fillmore disputed this characterization, maintaining that the course does not label any groups as “oppressor” or “oppressed.” She stated that Jewish history and culture are integrated throughout the curriculum and stressed the importance of understanding the complexities of identity. This includes acknowledging the historical experiences and resilience faced by Jewish Americans.
Fillmore expressed confidence that the course encourages diverse perspectives and does not neglect counter-narratives, asserting that teachers draw from various sources, including primary materials and oral histories.
Nevertheless, Rosenberg voiced apprehension that students might feel pressured to suppress alternative viewpoints due to concerns about grades or bias from teachers and peers. He advocates for parental vigilance in reviewing course content and emphasizes the importance of asking the right questions about what their children are learning.
