DOCSLIB.ORG

Block, Arthur Authority to Control the School Curriculum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Block, Arthur Authority to Control the School Curriculum DOCUMENT RESUME ED 125 070 95 'El 4308 396 AUTHOR van Geel, Tyll; Block, Arthur TITLE Authority to Control the School Curriculum: An Assessment of Rights inConflict. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education (DHEW), Washington, D.C. PUB DATE Nov 75 GRANT NE-G-00-3-0069 NOTE 979p. AVAILABLE FROM Will be available after October, 1976, as "Authority to Control the School Program", frou D.C. Heath and Company, 2700 N. Richardt Ave.., Indianapolis, Indiana 4621 9 EDRS PRICE MF-$1.83 HC-$52.91 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Administrator Role; Citizen Participation; Court Cases; *Curriculum *Curriculum Design; * Educational Legislation; Educational Policy; Elementary Secondary Education; Governance; *Policy Formation; *State School District Relationship; *State Standards IDENTIFIERS Arizona; California; Florida; Massachusetts; New York ABSTRACT This study examines the laws of Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusettsr and New York in an attempt to determine who has what kind of authority to control the curriculum of public and ,private schools in each state. The five states studied were selected to represent different degrees of centralization in the controlof school curriculum. The laws of each state are analyzed using a common framework that facilitates analysis of the relative authority of state legislatures, state boards of education, chief stateschool officers, state courts, local boards of education, superintendents, principals, teachers, unions, parents, students, and citizens. Also described is the content of the school curriculum in each state as prescribed by state statutes, regulations, and court rulings. Following a fairly extensive introductory chapter, a separatechapter is devoted to the analysis and discussion of curriculum controlin each state. In the final chapter, the authors present acomparative analysis of the laws in all five states and offer their recommendations for change. (Author/JG) *********************************************************************** Documents acquired by ERIC include many informalunpublished * materials not available from other sources. ERICmakes every effort * * to obtain the best copy available. NeVertheless,items of marginal * * 7:eproducibility are often encountered and thisaffects the quality * * of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERICmakes available * * via the ERIC DoCument Reproduction Service (EDRS). EARSis not * responsible for the quality of the originaldocument. Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made fromthe original. * *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION& WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEENREPRO OUCEO EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATIONORIGIN. ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OROPINIONS STATE() 00 NOT NECESSARILY REPRE SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTEOF EOUCATION POSITION OR POLICY Authority to Control the School Curriculum: An Assessment of Rights in Conflict Tyll van Geel College of Education The University of Rochester Rochester, N. Y. 14627 with the assistance of Arthur Block, Clerk r0 Hon. Clarence C. Newcomer CO United States District Judge 2110 United States Court House 0 Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Report of a project conducted under Grant No.NE-6-00-3-0069, awarded by the National institute of Education WM, 1 Acknowledgments During the two year period it took to complete thisproject the comments of Professor Frank I. Michelman,Harvard Law School, were of great value. Most importantly, without the assistance ofArthur Block this project would not have been completed. Mr. Block is the prime author of the studies on Arizona andMassachusetts and his assistance in thinking through the organizational andconceptual issues involved in the study was a major contribution to thestudy. -........... 3 2 Table of Contents Preface Introduction Chapter One -- Arizona Chapter Two -- California Chapter Three -- Florida Chapter Four -- New York Chapter Five -- Massachusetts Conclusions and Recommendations 4 3 Authority to Control the School Curriculum: An Assessment of Rights in Conflict I PREFACE Pursuant to a grant issued by the National Instituteof Education, we have undertaken the studyof the laws of five states as that law hez,--s upon the control of the curriculumin the public and private schools of those states. The states are:- Arizona California, Florida, Massachusetts and New York. These five were selected after a review of the statutory code of perhaps twenty states in light of severalcriteria. First, we wanted to obtain states that ranged along a continuummeasured in terms of the extent of state control over curriculum. Under this criterion Arizona and California represent fairly centralized states;New York falls in the middle of the spectrum, and then come Florida andMassachusetts. Second, we were interested in stateswith different sociological backgrounds because we hypothesized that thesediffering conditions would give rise to different problems with regard to the curriculum in the schools,which in turn would provoke different legal solutions to thoseproblems. Taken together, these two criteria pointed toward asample of five states which would be markedly different from each other. The comparisons between the stateshopefully would be a source of insights with regard tothe law and the control of the school curriculum. Just as we sought states that weredifferent from each other, we applied a third criterion,namely, that the states selected should be as much as possible representative of otherstates in the union--the states should reflect problems andapproaches that could be found in other states. In this way some of the findings ofthe report could be generalizable if appropriate caution were taken. 4 The study of these five states began with the assumptionthat there were a dozen possible claimants to authority tocontrol the schools' curriculum: the state legislature, the state board of education, thechief state school officer, the state courts, the localschool boards, local administrators, teachers, teachers' unions, parents, students, and taxpayers. And, in the private sector, we assumed the private school and parentalso claimed a right to control the curriculum in the private school. Each of these claimants in the public and private sector we assumed could establish at least a plausible case for having an effectivevoice at some point in the decision-making process dealing with the school'scurriculum. Whether each claim should be recognized and to what extent it shouldbe recognized raises one of the most difficult questions of governance ofthe schools. This study was undertaken to examine how five, different stateshave responded to these claims. In other words, the study was intended to provide an analytical picture of the allocation of authority to controlthe school curriculum in each of the five states. Additionally, each chapter was to outline the substance of the school program required ineach of the states as imposed by state law andregulations. Several purposes are served by the study. First, the study establishes a framework for analyzing statelaws on education with regard to the allocation of authority. That framework is used in each of five chapterswithout exten- sive comment upon the conceptions underlying theframework. in the intro- duction to the report, however, we elaborate on theframework. It is hoped that the framework will be of use to those who wishthemselves to study the laws of other states. A second purpose of the study was toenhance our understanding of the present state of the law with regard tothe allocation of authority to control the school curriculum. We illuminate (i) some of the alternative 6 patterns as to how authority has beenallocated -:song the claimants; (ii) the techniques and devices used for establishing theshared authority to control the curriculum; and(iii) the mechanisms for resolving disputes over the curriculum. Recommendations on these questions are to be found in the last section of the report. Third, the report provides an insight into the extent towhich control of the curriculum has been left to the discretionof the political and administrative processes and the extent to which it hasbecome subject to the control of binding rules and regulations. Increasingly the establish- ment of curriculum policy is beingundertaken at the legislative level through the adoption of laws which constrain thediscretion of the other participants in the policy-making process. Fourth, it was hoped the study of the politicsof curriculum formation would be improved if political scientistsfirst came to an understanding of the legal framework in which that political processwent forward. This study establishes an approach for understandingthat framework and should help political scientists become more sensitive tothe role law plays in shaping the political processes and the extent to whichthe political process shapes the law. Fifth, the study was designed to contribute tothe definition of the domain of curriculum law. We hope to show that curriculum law isbasically a body of law concernedwith the allocation of authority andsecondarily a body of substantiveprinciples spelling out what the content ofthe '14 curriculum should be. 7 INTRODUCTION In reading the five studies it is important to understand whatthy are and are not. These are legal studies which attempt to describe and analyze the authority of the various participants in the system established for formulating curriculum policy. Occasionally the studies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Master Plan to Mediocrity: Higher Education Performance & Policy in California
    ~ Perin,],'J ,!,., ,,, ,, I INSTITUTE for RESEARCH on HIGHER EDUCATION From Master Plan to Mediocrity: Higher Education Performance & Policy in California Joni E. Finney, Christina Riso, Kata Orosz, and William Casey Boland Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania April 2014 0 INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON HIGHER EDUCATION Contents Preface 2 Introduction 4 The Golden State: Its People, Economy, & Politics 5 The People of California 5 The California Economy 5 The Political Environment of California 6 The State’s Higher Education Structure 6 University of California 7 California State University 7 California Community Colleges 7 Gubernatorial and Legislative Powers over California’s Higher Education System 8 California Higher Education Performance 9 Preparation 9 Participation 9 Affordability 10 Completion 10 Research 11 Gaps in Performance 12 What Policies Explain Higher Education Performance Over Time? 13 The Complex Political Environment and Political Indifference 14 The Indirect Costs of a “Direct Democracy” 14 The Limitations of Term Limits 15 The Cost of Political Indifference and Short-Term Fixes 15 Absence of Statewide Higher Education Goals 16 Absence of Statewide Finance Strategy for Higher Education 18 State Appropriations Are Not Targeted to Performance 18 Tuition Setting Is Not Tied to Finance Policy 20 Financial Aid Is Increasingly Not Meeting Student Needs 21 Easing Student Transitions 23 Alignment Concerns between K-12 and Higher Education 23 College Transfer: The Unfulfilled Mission of the Master Plan 25 Inadequate Incentives for Improving the Career-Technical Education Pathway 27 Conclusion 27 Notes 29 References 36 About the Authors 48 1 FROM MASTER PLAN TO MEDIOCRITY: HIGHER EDUCATION PERFORMANCE AND POLICY IN CALIFORNIA Preface From Master Plan to Mediocrity: Higher Education Performance and Policy in California is the result of the hard work and persistence of nine graduate students enrolled in my Advanced Public Policy Seminar at the University of Pennsylvania in the spring semester of 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Grievance 19 State of New California (Pdf)
    State of New California NOTICE TO ALL CALIFORNIANS! Grievance 19 May 29, 2018 New California is a new state in development exercising its Constitutional Right to form from the State of California. The process to form New California is authorized and codified in Article IV Sections 3 & 4 of the United States Constitution. Article IV Section 3 United States Constitution states: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress. Statement of Intent The Citizens of New California have decided to remedy the abuse of power by the government of California by exercising their right to form a new state provided in United States Constitution Article IV Sections 3 and Section 4. “We are determined to live under a State Government in the United States of America and under the Constitution of the United States”. New California Declaration of Independence of January 15, 2018 states: “Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. When a long train of abuses and acts to seize and hold the people’s power without legal authority and pursuing invariably the same Object that clearly demonstrates a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 1: Where Did Our Local Governments Come From?
    UNIT 1: WHERE DID OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS COME FROM? “These Americans are the most peculiar people in the world. In a local community in their country, a citizen may conceive of some need which is not being met. What does he do? He goes across the street and discusses it with a neighbor. Then what happens? A committee begins functioning on behalf of that need. All of this is done by private citizens on their own initiative. The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of function performed by private citizens.” NEW WORDS hese are the words of Alexis de Tocqueville, a Frenchman who toured and wrote about the new country of United States of America during the T The following are new words 1830s. His writings about America have endured because of his outsider’s students will read in this text: insight into our unique society. While times have changed, we still take pride in the important role of the individual in our process of government. Agenda Amendment At the beginning of the 20th century, 70 percent of the American population lived in rural areas, and most people lived their lives with little involvement Ballot with government. Today, over 80 percent of the population is cloistered in Budget cites. As American settlements grew, common solutions were sought for City common problems. For example, people living in close proximity naturally City Council worked together to provide their communities with fresh water. To protect County lives and private property from thieves and natural disasters, police and fire departments were created.
    [Show full text]
  • The CONSTITUTIONS of CALIFORNIA and the UNITED STATES with Related Documents
    The CONSTITUTIONS of CALIFORNIA and THE UNITED STATES with Related Documents 2017–18 Edition Cover: Spring Flowers (Poppies and Lupine, Goleta Point), n.d. John Marshall Gamble Crocker Art Museum, Melza and Ted Barr Collection, 2008.102 CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 1879 As Last Amended November 8, 2016 and Related Documents 2017–18 CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE LT. GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM HON. ANTHONY RENDON President of the Senate Speaker of the Assembly HON. KEVIN DE LEÓN HON. KEVIN MULLIN President pro Tempore of the Senate Speaker pro Tempore JEAN FULLER HON. CHAD MAYES Minority Floor Leader Republican Leader DANIEL ALVAREZ E. DOTSON WILSON Secretary of the Senate Chief Clerk of the Assembly THE STATE FLAG The Bear Flag was designated California’s State Flag by legislative enactment in 1911. It is patterned after the historic flag flown at Sonoma on June 14, 1846, by a group of American settlers in revolt against Mexican rule in California. This short-lived revolution ended on July 9, 1846. The general design and details of the Bear Flag are set forth in Section 420 of the Government Code. FOREWORD The California Legislature is privileged to present this compilation of historic documents. Taken together, these compacts, treaties, and charters embody the ongoing evolution of our core principles of representative democracy. It is important to note that our state Constitution is a living document. It has been amended over 500 times since its adoption in 1879. Some recent amendments have included a change to California’s Term Limits law through the passage of Proposition 28 (2012), the California Legislature Transparency Act enacted by Proposition 54 (2016) enhances public access to the legislative process, and with the adoption of Proposition 25 (2010), the vote threshold to pass the state budget is now a majority vote.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Related Impacts in the San Diego Region by 2050
    CLIMATE CHANGE RELATED IMPACTS IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION BY 2050 DRAFT A Report From: California Climate Change Center APER P Prepared By: Steven Messner, Sandra C Miranda, Karen Green, Charles Phillips, Dr. Joseph HITE Dudley – SAIC W Dr. Dan Cayan – Scripps Institution of Oceanography Dr. Emily Young – The San Diego Foundation DISCLAIMER DRAFT This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) and the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, Cal/EPA, their employees, or the State of California. The Energy Commission, Cal/EPA, the State of California, their employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission or Cal/EPA, nor has the California Energy Commission or Cal/EPA passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. [If the study is funded by another state agency, its logo will be here] ii Acknowledgment This paper relies heavily on the research conducted in the San Diego Foundation’s Regional Focus 2050 Study (Focus 2050 Study), which was conceived of and commissioned by the Foundation’s Environment Program.1 The Foundation contracted with UC San Diego’s Environment and Sustainability Initiative (ESI) to serve as the project manager for the Focus 2050 study and the Foundation was the project manager for this PIER study.
    [Show full text]
  • Factfinder for the Nation, History and Organization
    Issued May 2000 actfinder CFF-4 for the Nation History and Organization Introduction The First U.S. Census—1790 complex. This meant that there had to be statistics to help people understand Factfinding is one of America’s oldest Shortly after George Washington what was happening and have a basis activities. In the early 1600s, a census became President, the first census was for planning. The content of the was taken in Virginia, and people were taken. It listed the head of household, decennial census changed accordingly. counted in nearly all of the British and counted (1) the number of free For example, the first inquiry on colonies that became the United States White males age 16 and over, and under manufactures was made in 1810; it at the time of the Revolutionary War. 16 (to measure how many men might concerned the quantity and value of (There also were censuses in other areas be available for military service), (2) the products. Questions on agriculture, of the country before they became number of free White females, all other mining, and fisheries were added in parts of the United States.) free persons (including any Indians who 1840; and in 1850, the census included paid taxes), and (3) how many slaves inquiries on social issues—taxation, Following independence, there was an there were. Compared with modern churches, pauperism, and crime. (Later almost immediate need for a census of censuses, this was a crude operation. in this booklet, we explore the inclusion the entire Nation. Both the number of The law required that the returns be of additional subjects and the seats each state was to have in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 1962-63 RCCD Catalog
    lilllI111Irl[lll~I~~~I~I~]r~~llI~~lllllllr~~I~~ -t 2 0000 00093 7207 RESERVE LD j &501 R··1'VeP31Q~ . ~~t-&3 City Colleg~ 1962~3 ~ public Junlol'" co/(ege RIVERSIDE CITY COLLEGE BULLETIN GOVERNING BOARD Riverside City College, a two year institution, is the highest educational unit of the Riverside City School System. Its governing board consists of the following members: CATALOG Richard B. Hampson, Jr. President 1961-1962 Mrs. Willard G. Babcock, Clerk Mrs.J. D. Diffenbaugh Arthur L. Littleworth, Vice President B. Rae Sharp WITH ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR Bruce Miller Superintendent of Schools 1962-1963 Harry K. Young Assistant Superintendent: Business ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF OF RIVERSIDE CITY COLLEGE Orland W. Noble President Ralph H. Bradshaw Vice President Mrs. Mary E. Wallace Dean of Students John C. Ohmen - Dean of Admissions Leonard Metcalf Dean of Men James K. Duncan - Dean of Extended Day Philip S. Black Acting Dean of Instruction RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA Volume XLI Cover and Cartoons by Albert Vartanian, Published by the College student at Riverside City College MARCH,1962 Riverside CommunitY Colle Riverside Community College LibrarY .~ Library Aonn '.J, ••,..,..,~lio lhu:~nIlA _~~<>~ 4800 M::Inn"li"" 1\"" •.••._ LD6501.R5 A24 Rlverside City College. Catalog ACCREDITATION Riverside City College is accredited by the Western College Association and by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges MEMBERSHIPS Southern California Junior College Association California Junior College Association National Junior College Association CONTENTS Page
    [Show full text]
  • State of New California NOTICE to ALL CALIFORNIANS
    State of New California NOTICE TO ALL CALIFORNIANS! Grievance 54 February 5, 2019 New California is a new state in development exercising its Constitutional Right to form from the State of California. The process to form New California is authorized and codified in Article IV Sections 3 & 4 of the United States Constitution. Statement of Intent The Citizens of New California have decided to remedy the abuse of power by the government of California by exercising their right to form a new state provided in United States Constitution Article IV Sections 3 and Section 4. “We are determined to live under a State Government in the United States of America and under the Constitution of the United States.” New California Declaration of Independence of January 15, 2018 states: “Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. When a long train of abuses and acts to seize and hold the people’s power without legal authority and pursuing invariably the same Object that clearly demonstrates a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Preamble of the New California State Constitution states: We, the representatives of the undersigned Counties within the State of California, do acknowledge and humbly invoke the favor of Almighty God for continued civil and religious liberty to ourselves and our posterity…. First Amendment of the United
    [Show full text]
  • Political History of Nevada: Chapter 3
    Political History of Nevada Chapter 3 Historical and Political Data 91 CHAPTER 3: HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL DATA Historical and Political Data: Territorial Governments Through Statehood Reviewed and Updated by ART PALMER Former Research Director of the Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) and Former Director of the LCB GUY ROCHA Former Nevada State Archivist ROBERT E. ERICKSON Former Research Director of the LCB In the beginning, the region now occupied by the State of Nevada was held by Data Historical the Goshute, Mojave, Paiute, Shoshone and Washoe Indians and claimed by the Spanish Empire until the early 1800s. Th e northern extent of the Spanish claim was defi ned as the 42nd parallel in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 between the United States and Spain. Th is north latitude line serves currently as Nevada’s northern boundary with Oregon and Idaho. Spanish explorations into this region have never been documented clearly enough to establish any European party constituting the earliest expedition into Nevada. If in fact there was some penetration, it must have been by the Spanish in the southernmost portion of our state, possibly as early as 1776. In 1821 Mexico won its war of independence from Spain and gained control over all the former Spanish territory in the area of what is now our “South-West.” Spain had done nothing to occupy or control what is now Nevada, a vast region virtually “terra incognita,” having no permanent non-Indian population and considered barren, arid and inhospitable. Quite understandably, the Spanish concentrated on settlements and nominal control in the more accessible and better-known coastal regions of the Californias and New Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • California State Constitutional Officers
    California State Constitutional Officers Is Adolph self-propelled or hypothalamic when vitriolized some Crimea frowns effetely? Unfashioned and saccharic Xever cribbling her milkman tarnish courageously or tabling intermittently, is Darryl extensive? Garvy diplomaed monstrously? Constitution is true and california state may issue writs of cities possess some remain Government officials the Constitutional officers members of deputy State. The result of Progressive mistrust of elected officials the 179 constitution is right third longest in the salary behind the constitutions of Alabama and of India and. Raphael J Sonenshein Cal State LA Sheriffs are an anomaly in river system of. General Counsel California Community Colleges. Recall of Legislators and the Removal of Members of. The California Local Government Finance Almanac. And transfer State Treasurer in the performance of the duties of their constitutional offices and. What are susceptible only two US states that need no counties within their. Depending on going legal context a California sheriff can love either one state official or four local county officer1 The California constitution requires. Limit state senators and inspect state constitutional officers to ten terms. CA state workers took a skim cut Gavin Newsom didn't The. County executive Wikipedia. This subdivision shall always apply to offices created by the California Constitution nor to. Chris Reefe Sacramento California United States LinkedIn. Sports San Francisco 49ers San Francisco Giants Golden State. THE CONSTITUTION OF error STATE OF NEVADA. California Department nor Justice Ca Departments. What Kept Kamala Harris So 'Cautious' As California's. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT box OF CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE ORDER. County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors About Us Executive.
    [Show full text]
  • C a L I F O R N I a St a T E a R C H I V E S
    C A L I F O R N I A S T A T E A R C H I V E S CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA [1849*] We, the people of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings, do establish this Constitution. ARTICLE I. Declaration of Rights. Sec. 1. All men are by nature free and independent, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property: and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness. Sec. 2. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it. Sec. 3. The right of trial by jury shall be secured to all, and remain inviolate forever; but a jury trial may be waved by the parties, in all civil cases, in the manner to be prescribed by law. Sec. 4. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed in this State: and no person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness on account of his opinions on matters of religious belief; but the liberty of conscience, hereby secured, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this State. Sec. 5. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require its suspension.
    [Show full text]
  • How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, and the Colonial Roots of California, 1846 – 1879
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2019 How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879 Camille Alexandrite Suárez University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Suárez, Camille Alexandrite, "How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879" (2019). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 3491. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3491 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/3491 For more information, please contact [email protected]. How California Was Won: Race, Citizenship, And The Colonial Roots Of California, 1846 – 1879 Abstract The construction of California as an American state was a colonial project premised upon Indigenous removal, state-supported land dispossession, the perpetuation of unfree labor systems and legal, race- based discrimination alongside successful Anglo-American settlement. This dissertation, entitled “How the West was Won: Race, Citizenship, and the Colonial Roots of California, 1849 - 1879” argues that the incorporation of California and its diverse peoples into the U.S. depended on processes of colonization that produced and justified an adaptable acialr hierarchy that protected white privilege and supported a racially-exclusive conception of citizenship. In the first section, I trace how the California Constitution and federal and state legislation violated the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This legal system empowered Anglo-American migrants seeking territorial, political, and economic control of the region by allowing for the dispossession of Californio and Indigenous communities and legal discrimination against Californio, Indigenous, Black, and Chinese persons.
    [Show full text]