For the 2020-21 school year, the Eanes School Board hired Dr. Mark Gooden, a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion consultant,. During that time, Dr. Gooden
- led some student focus groups,
- taught some professional development,
- met with the DEI advisory committee,
- created three equity leadership teams,
- conducted a staff climate survey, and
- wrote a 20-page report based on his survey.
For this work, the School Board paid Dr. Gooden $140,000.
Here is the link to his survey questions and his report.
Dr. Gooden administered two versions of his survey (mostly with the same questions). For easier readability, the questions are posted here with the extra formatting removed.
Thoughts About the Survey
As you review the surveys, notice that the questions are absolutely skewed to a woke point of view. School Board members claim that they are not implementing Critical Race Theory, but every question on this survey is grounded in applied CRT.
In fact, as you review the questions, you’ll see that Dr. Gooden believes in the validity of the following:
- applied Critical Queer Theory
- Ibram Kendi’s polarizing racist/anti-racist dichotomy
- the 1619 Project view of the founding of America
- a need to decolonize the curriculum
- rejection of a liberal, colorblind society
- rejection of the value of treating students equally, regardless of race
- the collectivist, illiberal view that we should judge people first by the color of their skin
- asking inappropriately personal questions about an employee’s views on race (akin to asking about politics and religion)
When exactly did the Eanes community agree to this woke agenda?
As you review this survey, consider also whether the questions reflect any kind of Ph.D.-level rigor. Given a copy of Kendi’s books, don’t you think you could crank out these questions?
Thoughts About the Report
Skewed. Thin. Lacking rigor.
TL:DR: According to Dr. Gooden’s scale, Dr. Gooden’s survey proves the District needs more of Dr. Gooden’s services. (Oh, we also learn that middle-school students are insecure and worried about being part of the in-crowd.)
Here’s an example: On page 7 of the report, Dr. Gooden so earnestly reports the overall “scores” from his survey. Campus leaders scored a 3.48 on Achievement while District Leaders scored 3.64 while Instructional Staff scored between a 3 and a 4 while Non-instructional Staff scored 3.9.
So what?
No, seriously. So what?
What on earth does this show? NOTHING. These numbers have no meaning.
No matter what the “results” of this survey were, Dr. Gooden and the School Board members were always going use them to justify two conclusions: (1) the District needs to Do More Work™ and (2) the District should extend Dr. Gooden’s contract.
Conclusion
Bottom line, as a student of Critical Race Theory, Dr. Gooden comes from an academic tradition that marinates in divisive, race-obsessed ideology. He has written this ideology into his survey and then, against his personal view of the world, he has found Eanes wanting.