The Core Knowledge Language Arts program was piloted in 10 public schools in New York City and an additional 7 schools throughout the country, including rural and suburban schools. The 172 classrooms, 200 teachers and 4,466 students in these schools were wonderfully diverse. From school to school, the percentage of students receiving free and reduced lunch ranged from 30 to 99%, and the percentage of students for whom English is a second language ranged from 15 to 60%."

Over 20 years ago--in response to practices promoted by educators such as E. D. Hirsch (1987) who is the originator of Core Knowledge Curriculum--educators in New York State and across the country contested school curricula that presented the history and literature of Europeans and their descendants to the exclusion and/or denigration of the cultural productions of all others (Cornbleth & Waugh, 1995; Swartz, 1992; Wynter, 1992). In response, Arthur Schlessinger, Jr. (1992), Dianne Ravitch (1990), George Will (1989), and others referred to efforts to develop inclusive and representational curriculum as "feel good" curriculum--as filiopietistic or excessive veneration of ancestors--as if that isn't the character of the mainstream curricula our students have been failing (or resisting) to learn. Below is list of concerns related to grades K-2 of Core Knowledge Curriculum: The character and content of curriculum are an essential factor as to whether students engage or disengage with the learning process. Core Knowledge Curriculum has essentially the same curricular content used in American public schools since before people of African ancestry were allowed to go to school. It is conceptually the same curriculum that was in use as urban districts became predominantly Black and Latino. And, it is conceptually the same curriculum that has resulted in Rochester's current student outcomes. Where is the logic in acting as if Rochester or any other urban district will get different outcomes by instituting the same Eurocentric curriculum model over and over again? • There is no dispute among educators and psychologists over the developmental concept that learning for very young students should begin with themselves, which includes their families, communities, and ancestral origins. However, in Core Knowledge Curriculum, young students primarily learn about Europeans and their ancestors. When African and other Indigenous civilizations are included, their anteriority and prior accomplishments-which are well documented--are denied (Diop, 1974; Hilliard, 1978). From a developmental standpoint, examples for young students in our district would largely come from the best of the African world and Diaspora, past and present. Once grounded in self and cultural knowledge, children are ready for exposure to the worlds around them. This was and still is the approach for white students, now mostly in the suburbs, but when it comes to Black and Latina/o students, this approach is highly resisted. • The race, class, and gender stereotypes in the stories, fairytales, and myths included in Core Knowledge Curriculum teach--either directly or subliminally--violence, fear, a male power-over model of leadership, and misogyny as norms for human life and behavior (Buras, 2008). This kind of programing is harmful and we are now dealing with the consequences of remaining on this path, even after mass failure has become undeniable. • A review of the Core Knowledge ELA Curriculum Maps for grades K-2 reveals massive disregard for our students and families of color who rarely appear in it, and when they do, are presented either as victims (not people with agency); as invisible; inaccurately as following Mesopotamia rather than being descendants of the earliest civilizations in Africa; coming to the Americas over a land bridge (which is only a theory and not one supported by Indigenous beliefs); as omitted or objectified in colonial America; and as inheritors of a Greek legacy presented as foundational to this country, its institutions, and its people (Asante, 2007; Diop,1974; Tehanetorens, 1970/1999). These omissions, distortions, and inaccuracies result in an exclusionary curriculum that obstructs critical thinking. • No matter how often a monocultural curriculum is repackaged or how well it is aligned with state standards, it remains a monocultural curriculum. While the more complete review in Appendix A exemplifies how the content of the E. D. Hirsch Core Knowledge Curriculum can be thoroughly critiqued, time would be better spent showing teachers how to use materials and develop materials and lessons that include and accurately represent their students, families, and communities. The Committee went on to make recommendations concerning the CKLA curriculum. The suggested the following: Suggested Board Resolution #3: Whereas, the Board of Education recognizes the importance of bridging the substantial cognitive and general development gains accrued by children in Rochester UPK programs into the primary grades and beyond; and Whereas, early childhood expert educators have expressed concern regarding developmentally inappropriate characteristics of the Core Knowledge Foundation, Inc. offerings for kindergarten through 2nd grade on the NYSED supported EngageNY resource website; and Whereas, local and national expert educators have expressed concern regarding cultural incompetence in some of the Core Knowledge Foundation, Inc. offerings for kindergarten through 2nd grade on the NYSED supported EngageNY resource website; and Whereas, educators with expertise is both special education services and in teaching English language learners have expressed alarm regarding the detrimental impact of highly paced and scripted lessons associated with implementation of the Core Knowledge Foundation, Inc. offerings for kindergarten through 2nd grade on the EngageNY website; and Whereas, EngageNY resources have not been proven to support effective, comprehensive implementation of the Common Core State Standards nor do they have a clear track record of supporting improved academic achievement; and Whereas, in general, according to education law, it remains the purview of local Boards of Education to adopt textbooks, curriculum, and educational policy, and Whereas, in particular, common core state standards implementation guidance emphasizes that local educational agencies have clear decision-making authority over the adoption of curriculum materials and instructional practices, therefore be it Resolved that no later than February 1, 2015 RCSD kindergarten through 2nd grade teachers shall be collaboratively, systemically and effectively supported to select and implement the most developmentally appropriate and engaging curriculum and approaches available to them including, but not limited to elements from HighScope teacher practices successfully used in UPK; Rochester Curriculum; Rochester Teacher Center lessons and modeling; Expeditionary Learning resources; and other approaches that align with common core standards including continued use of selected resources from the EngageNY website; and be it further Resolved, that RCSD kindergarten through 2nd grade teachers shall rely primarily on locally selected and developed curriculum and approaches no later than September 1, 2015; EngageNY resources may be used as supplements such as, for example, skills strand exercises or to address state standards where gaps in local curriculum may exist, but shall not be used as the primary curriculum or source for text and other material in kindergarten through 2 grade.