December 8, 2025 • 40 mins
In this episode, Tudor sits down with former teacher and education advocate Erika Sanzi to unpack the growing concerns inside America’s public school system. They examine the expanding influence of teachers’ unions like the NEA, the shift from academic achievement to political priorities, and the rise of ideological activism in classrooms and teacher training programs. Sanzi shares firsthand insights on declining student performance, what parents and educators are up against, and why restoring balance in education is critical to putting students back at the center of learning. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. For more visit TudorDixonPodcast.com
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is the Tutor Dixon Podcast, and so often on
this podcast we start to get into some of the
things that are happening to our kids, that we don't
even know that are happening to our kids, and that
oftentimes has to do with public school. And now we're
finding out a lot about what goes on with the unions.
So we brought a former teacher and a former union
member NEA, union member, National Education Association on. Her name
(00:24):
is Erica Sanzy. She's here to talk to us. She
now is more of a political activist. She's with Defending Education.
We talked about this organization a few weeks ago. We
had Nikki Neely on, we talked about this, but I
saw this article that Erica put out about what is
going on with the teaching behind the scenes. The NEA,
(00:45):
the teachers' union, actually has these conferences and they invite
a bunch of teachers and they teach some pretty radical stuff. So, Erica,
thank you so much for being on today and telling
us what exactly is going on behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
What's going on behind the scenes is that the NEA
and teachers' unions more generally have always tilted to the left,
and they've always overwhelmingly supported Democrats. And even when I
was in the NEA in the late nineties and early
two thousands, I can remember them sending glossy mailers to
(01:20):
our homes telling us, you know who we should vote for. So,
for example, in the two thousand and four primary, they
wanted us to vote for Howard Dean, but I never.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I just want to stop you because I think it's
so funny. We've talked about this before we got on
and I was like, that's shocking, and you said that's
not even bad. And it's shocking to me because I
think if you haven't been in a public union like this,
I've worked in many different jobs. I've worked in at
big pr firms, I've worked in a foundry, I've worked
(01:51):
at a steel mill. Never in my career did anybody
say to me, this is who we suggest you vote for.
But to you, it was so normal.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Oh, you mean they didn't spend your membership dues that
you were forced to pay to send you over priced
glossy mailers telling you who to vote for.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Well at the time.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
I mean again, the difference is, at the time they
felt like a Democrat leaning organization, but they felt to
me at least, it seemed like they were tethered to reality.
They have morph over the past couple decades into what
I publicly have called an insane asylum.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
They are run.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
By radicals, They are totally ideological. Their focus if you name,
you know, all the hot button issues that that progressive
sort of fixate on. That those are their priorities. So
there will you will never hear about improving instruction. You
will never hear about student outcomes, You will never really
hear about learning. So you will certainly never hear about
(02:54):
like parents as partners.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Let me pick on that for a second, because we
have heard about out terrible reading scores across the country.
I mean it's not just you know, I talk about
Michigan a lot. Michigan is really bad, but really the
United States is below most Western countries. Our reading scores
are terrible, Our math scores are terrible. And the fact
that that that is shocking to me because that is
(03:19):
something at work every place I've worked. It's like, we
got to get better. We got to get better. The
product that we are delivering has to be better. Ultimately,
the product that teachers are delivering is an education and
yet this latest conversation at the NEA has been about
advancing LGBTQ justice and transgender advocacy.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
I mean, what, yeah, like to my point, that is
their focus. So and just for if listeners who aren't
or viewers I guess right, aren't familiar with the data
on student outcomes. I pulled a couple numbers before we
came on, just so I could let people know. So,
thirty one percent of fourth graders are currently considered proficient
(04:02):
at reading.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
So sad, twenty two.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Percent of twelfth graders are considered proficient in math. So
we're talking very very low numbers. But the other piece
that's really important here is that on these reading I'm sorry,
on these test results, you have proficient, you have proficient
with distinction, which is like the high achievers, that's a
small percentage. Then you have the proficient, which means that
(04:26):
they're meeting the benchmark. Then you have partially proficient, which
means like they're they're not in dire straits, but they're
not meeting the benchmark. And then you have something called
below basic. A very alarming part of the data is
that a very large swath of students are falling into
that below basic category, which means they're not even approaching proficiency. So,
(04:49):
for example, in reading in twelfth grade, thirty two percent
of seniors in high school fall into that below basic category,
which means they're not even approaching the benchmark. And that
is extremely alarming to have such a big number in
that bottom bucket. And again that is something it's like
(05:11):
a five alarm fire. The trajectory for student outcomes has
been going downward for a long time decades, and instead
we see the biggest you teachers' union in the country
that gives ninety over ninety nine percent of its money
now to Democratic candidates, focused on on, you know, providing
(05:34):
sample templates for teachers who want to change their gender,
you know, helping them share that with the rest of
the school community.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
It is stunning to me. And when you talk about
those math scores, I just want to point out when
I was traveling around to businesses in this state that
are usually getting skilled tradesmen, usually getting kids out of
high school, they said they had to actually take reading
a ruler off of their tests to get to just
(06:08):
hire their hiring exam because students couldn't do that. High
school students couldn't do that. I mean this you said
a far five alarm, five alarm fire. You are right,
this is a five alarm fire, and yet that's not
how the Union sees it. And if we talk about
this we get pushback from the progressive left. You also
(06:29):
said something else that I thought was interesting. You were like,
you know, it used to be that they were just
like I just thought this was like a normal group,
and they were just Democrats. That's how we thought democrats were.
They were just Democrats. But now they've gone to this
radical extreme and this stuff, this transgender advocacy, LGBTQ justice,
that was why they lost the last election. Why are
(06:52):
they doing this? Do they just figure they can get
the youth on board, We're all screwed.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
I mean, I am having a very hard time wrapping
my head around this as well. I mean, it is
a cult like ideology. So I actually do think that
for some people they are just true believers, right. This
is they've been marinating in this belief system in worldview
for a really long time. Also, when you are in
progressive circles, you cannot step out of line or you
(07:22):
will be sort of shunned and expelled from your group.
So if that's your world, right, then it's like, well,
I may know that it's ridiculous that a male just
won the women's powerlifting competition, but I can't say that
because if I do, like my whole like social circle
will implode.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
How welcoming and exclusion and include So I.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
Sort of think that you have like the true believers,
and then you have the people that know it's nuts,
but go along with it because they don't want their
whole again, like they're kind of like world to implode.
And just a quick little thing that I happen to
know is that preference falsification, this idea that like behind
the scenes you say what you really think, but then
(08:05):
like outwardly you pretend that you agree with things that
you don't.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
It's the highest for this issue around gender.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
That's where we see people the most unwilling to just
like I gain say the truth or just state like say,
I'm not gonna play make believe right like I'm not,
I'm not engaging in this game of make believe and
pretending that things aren't what they are.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
I noticed in one of these in one of these scenarios,
it's like one of these teachings that they have at
this conference. I think this is you guys pulled something
out of the teachings, and I know you're looking in
greater depth at this, but it says embrace replace, say
(08:48):
this our genders or genders instead of gender. And it
says because pluralizing genders enables a greater agreement with our
worldview and helps activate more expansive attitudes toward our genders
and transgender people. This is what they're saying to use
in class, right.
Speaker 3 (09:07):
This is the language that they want their members to
use again in pursuit of a political goal. So the
idea is that they are working on their messaging strategy,
and they want their messaging strategy to incorporate race, class,
engender at all times. Because these psychos think that it's
(09:31):
it's a useful and acceptable tactic to compare gender justice
to the civil rights movement, and so they want to
link race and class to this gender thing, thinking that
it'll be harder to go against them if they make
it seem more like a civil rights argument.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
But the other thing that's kind of crazy in.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Here, they use the word villains in their training to
describe anybody who ap you know, this ideology or this
messaging They specifically name Republicans as the villains, although they
seem to include all people in opposition, and they also
(10:12):
say that their opposition can only be explained by racism
and transphobia and racist dog whistles, oh I'm sorry, and
that they're fascists. This is These are words like every
word I just used is in the documents.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
That's another. So there's another. This is I've been told recently,
if you don't have racism, then on the left you
don't have much. So you've got to keep racism alive.
So you have to create racism. And I think that
a lot of people from the gen X generation have
been like, what is happening. This is not how we
(10:49):
grew up. This is not people didn't talk this way.
There was not a focus on racism. And I've even
had I come from the suburbs of Chicago, we had
a very diverse high school. And even my high school
friends I've noticed have commented on Facebook like this, my
high school friends of color, They have said, this wasn't
(11:10):
how it was When we were in high school. We
did not feel racism, we didn't feel like this, But
now it's like one of these This is a quote
from the material. We see this in high schools. We
see this, wait, we see this in how high schools
tell black kids how to keep their hair or send
girls home from school for the clothes that they're wearing.
Like we keep talking about how we have to have
(11:34):
these laws, You've got Michelle Obama out there making telling
people that white people are telling black people how to
wear their hair. Now they're saying that you if you
send girls home from school for breaking dress code, I mean,
I gotta tell you, We've had kids sent home from
our school for wearing things that are inappropriate to school.
There are rules on whether or not you can wear
(11:55):
short skirts and many and crop tops.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
So one of the issues is some of us believe
that the that the way that we sort of respect
people is that we hold them all to the same standard.
Other people think that if you don't make special concessions
or you don't change the rules for certain people because
of some marginalized status that you believe that they hold,
(12:20):
then you're not you know, you're not engaging in equity
is what they would call it.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
So you're right, Like having.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
I've worked in I worked in very affluent school districts.
I worked in high poverty schools. I worked in public,
charter and parochial. Right, I have seen many students written
up for dress code, and I have seen many students
either sent home or mom or dad had to bring
(12:45):
something in.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
And that has always been.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Sort of not to use a very you know, controversial word,
but that was a colorblind.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Thing that absolutely when I was it was in important.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
Now if somebody I wanted to make the argument, well,
the style, you know, this style is more common with
this group, and therefore they are getting written up for
dress code more. I mean, people can have that conversation,
but that doesn't change the fact that, like, you have
the rule in place, and.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
I can't remember when it as a time.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
There may have been a time too, Like I'm not
positive about this, but there have been I think some
rules regarding hair that might have been a bit discriminatory.
But again that's a very small problem that can be
fixed versus oh, we're not going to talk about reading, math, literacy, civics.
(13:37):
We're going to obsess over this tiny little thing that
might be an issue in some school because they didn't
allow kids to have dreads.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
But see that's the thing. It's not about that. The
title of this is actually architecture of a race class
gender narrative. So this is like we're creating. This is
how we create the architecture. This is how we build
the narrative that there is a race class gender issue here.
And I can tell you I can remember when I
was in high school and junior high and we would
(14:06):
have to watch Degrassi Junior High in school, and I
can remember an exact episode where the girl would leave
and she would change her clothes in the car on
the way to school, and then she got in trouble
at school, and it was like the lesson there was,
don't do that. This is not there's nothing new. Students
aren't doing anything new. We're always trying new.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Like all the girls I get out of the school
with their car, well they used to maybe not so
much anymore, with their skirts like the right length. And
then they get out of the car and they get
out of sight and they roll them until they're like
basically as long as they're underwear. So it's just advertised
that this happens a lot because you can usually find
one example of a bad thing that happened. So what
(14:49):
they do is they find one example and then they
make it as if this is a common thing happening everywhere,
and then they decide we need to focus on this,
talk about this, make this the narrative. Why Because it's
a new, shiny object that shifts the focus from what matters,
which is that students are not learning well enough. It
means it's, you know, shifted from the fact that schools
(15:11):
are hiding information from parents about their own children. It's
like they know that if they shift to this new
stupid thing, then the focus and because it is true,
like there's the people. The media, for example, in many
cases will immediately go to that dumb, small thing and
make it a g giant issue and not talk about
(15:33):
the fact that the vast majority of school districts in
the United States have written policies to withhold information from
parents about their own child new gender and new gender
accommodations at school.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. When you talk about them saying
we're not going to dress code kids, this is a
slippery slope into you are right, you can do anything,
there are no rules, and don't let anybody hold you back.
Be your true self. If that is wearing a tiny
(16:10):
skirt or changing your gender, because then it does go
into and exploit the lack of familiarity with transgender people.
And then in quotes it says and how certain politicians
exploit lack of familiarity with transgender people excluding trans kids
from healthcare, school or sports. So now you really are
(16:33):
this is to the teachers, this is what they're learning.
Now you really are injecting full indoctrination politics into not
only the teacher, but the teachers. Meant to then bring
that to the school and tell the students this politician
is bad, a specific politician is bad because they are
stopping your friends from getting healthcare, which we know other
(16:57):
countries have banned what they're calling healthcare because it is
so it is so mutilating to these children, and then
excluding them from sports. This is to protect women.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
It's again, notice how benign the language sounds. They're not
talking about, you know, potential sterility of kids. They're not
talking about the irreversible damage that occurs when you pause
and stop puberty and put children on cross sex hormones
(17:32):
that five years later they are very likely to regret.
And they're not talking about the fact that the only
reason we have a women's division in the first place
is because they can't compete obviously at an elite level
against the men. I mean, I had a school board
member in my own town say to me, and by
(17:52):
the way, the worst people on this issue of sports
are the ones who never played any sports and don't
like sports and don't watchboards and don't have kids who
play sports. Because they literally don't think there's a difference.
They really don't. They just like so the school board,
the elected school board might have been the chair actually
said to me on the phone, I don't understand why
(18:13):
we can't just have tryouts for the swim team and
everybody just goes together, all the boys and the girls together,
and then just the best kids make the team. This
is what he said. Like does he not we don't
understand that much about it, never compete against Michael Phelps?
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Does he not know this? But the reality is he
doesn't know this.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
So my new So my new proposed Like, you know,
if I ever want to write a book for fun,
one of my proposed rules is going to be like,
you can't be on a school board if you haven't
played sports. I mean, I'm joking, but I'm joking, but
you can't have a school board full of people that
that were nobody did.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
That's the problem. It's at the point where there is
no voice of reason, no experience, no life experience brought
to this and so often. I mean, we had person
on one of the local school boards here, not a parent,
had no kids, not involved with the school at all,
a young guy who I think ended up getting caught
(19:11):
in bezzling or something, but a young twenty something year
old guy who for some reason joined the school board
and was saying all these radical things. But this is
kind of teaching this. They have a campaign lab. They're
teaching teachers to be activists. And to me, I mean
right now in our state, this is something that I
think people don't realize is these are the types of
(19:34):
groups that get these these radical ballot initiatives into laws.
So they have this campaign lab. So all of a sudden,
in a swing state, you have all these teachers that
are just ready to go out and knocked doors and
campaign for you. Well, they have something on the back
or they're trying to put something on the ballot that
would say that candidates can't get money from any corporations.
(19:57):
But unions are exempt from this. So think about all
of money that would go into Democrat candidates and you
have an entire system that is ready to go out
and do the ground game, be the grassroots built into
a system that is paid for by tax dollars. That's
the real kicker.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
Well, and also like I don't I mean, you know,
most people in the country are independents, but it's fair
to say that we're about fifty we're a split country. Well,
the Teachers Union, the largest teachers union for public school
teachers in the country, is essentially saying that half the
country that the parents of the students that their members serve,
(20:37):
are villains, transphobes, fascists and engaging in racist dog whistles.
So what is I mean that to me is a
is almost a bigger problem. They are vilifying half at
least half of the country, and that means that they
(21:00):
see the parents of the students of their members as
the enemy.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Who are the people that it's not all teachers that
go to these conferences. And that's the thing I think
that is also challenging because as we talk about this,
I don't want people listening to this to be like
every teacher at a public school feels this way and
they want to indoctrinate my kids. There is a small
group that is this far left political activism group that
(21:29):
is in our schools. Now, that's not to take away
their power. They are powerful. I mean, the NEA and
the AFT together contributed more than forty three million dollars
between twenty two and twenty four to left wing political advocacy.
So they are they are trying to do this. It's
not everybody, though, who is going to these So.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Yeah, this has to be a nuanced thing because for
some reason, two teachers and I say this as a
former one, so I witness it a lot. Any critique
of a teacher or teachers, it lands on the ears
of teachers that you're talking about all of them. It's
like it's this one group for some reason, just like
you can't you can't converse about them without it being
(22:10):
you know that something that you said if totally unfair
because you're you're smearing all of them. There's a couple
of things going on. One is the leadership of the
union is absolutely run by radical ideologues.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
They are far leftists. They are obsessed with these causes.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
It is who they are I don't think it used
to be like this, but there is no question. Again,
like for me, even from the late nineties and the
early two thousands to now, I find this just the
messaging coming out of them, the issues that they focus on,
they are completely different and very extreme. I'm not like,
(22:53):
this isn't hyperbole. I don't normally use the word radical
because I think it's overused, but in the case of
the leadership of this organization, it is the correct word.
They are far left radical ideologues. The rank and file
members who really have no choice, it's like you just
you are. I mean, now, there are these ways that
you can kind of opt out of the union, but
it's hard to do, and most people don't do it.
(23:16):
I shouldn't say it's hard to do, it's just you
have to take an extra step. Most people don't do it.
They don't know that their union is even doing this.
They probably never think about their union. And the other
thing that's very important to know is that oftentimes even
the leader of a union misrepresents their members. So for example,
(23:38):
during COVID, when my local schools were closed, the head
of the local union got up and said that the
majority of the teachers wanted didn't want to go back
to in person schooling.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
That was a lie.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
We had an overwhelming majority of students that want I
mean teachers, I'm sorry, teachers, teachers wanted to go back.
She was saying, my members don't feel safe, they don't
want to go back. That wasn't even true. We knew
that we had about seventy percent of teachers that wanted
to go back. So number one, they lie. Number two,
teachers that are more my age, I'm gen x are
(24:19):
they didn't marinade in this ideology in their teacher prep programs,
so they are now saying to themselves, what the hell
is going on with these brand new teachers coming out
of school that are saying, we were taught in school
that teaching is a political act. We were taught in
(24:39):
school that our responsibility is to be activists.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
That's what we thought.
Speaker 3 (24:44):
That's what we're just hearing, and we're like, what if
you look, and we actually did at Defending Education, We
did a report on this, so people can look at
the documents. It tells them your job is to be
an advocate and an activist for social justice, and here's
how we define that. So that means that if a
person is a bit more conservative or apolitical and their
(25:06):
idea like for example, I would argue that social justice
is literacy. In teaching children to read, no matter their background,
no matter their zip code, it's making sure that children
can read. I would argue that is social justice, right.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
But for the.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
Teachers coming out of these programs, it's all equity, it's inclusion,
it's queer theory based stuff. It's climate justice all the time.
It's all the evils of whiteness and white privilege and
all of these buzzwords. That's what they're hearing. So it's
not just that they think they have to be political
(25:43):
and be activists. They have very specific causes that they
believe they have to push as classroom teachers, which to
a forty five year old, fifty year old teacher fifty
two if you're my age, it sounds insane. Yeah, and
they're thinking, that's not your role. What are you talking about, Like,
that's not the job. But to the twenty two year old,
(26:06):
they've been taught in their teacher prep programs that that
is the job, and that is a something that I
still think the larger public does not realize. Does this
hagend and has changed in teacher ed Does that make.
Speaker 1 (26:22):
The union more powerful? Because there seems to be in
this younger generation and these new teachers, but not just teachers,
this generation coming out of college today, it feels like
they have a sense of wanting to be a part
of a bigger group. They love political activism, they love
to be a part of something bigger than them. They're
not always a part of a church, so it seems
(26:44):
like they're looking for something that kind of feels that
same way, like I'm a part of this and I'm
a leader in this. Are they the ones that are
more prone to going to these conferences? And is that
the future?
Speaker 2 (26:57):
I actually don't know the answer to that question.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
I feel like a lot of times when I see
like photos of like union people out with signs, they
actually often see middle age. But uh, I'm I'm not
actually sure about that. I will say it may sound controversial,
but it's just a fact as teaching has become increasingly female.
(27:20):
I mean, the numbers are I mean, the male teacher
numbers have really just kind of dropped off a cliff,
especially at the elementary level. You're also just young females.
Skew left. Yeah, yes, so you're gonna see more of that.
Whereas like, like I'm thinking right now of some of
(27:40):
some young guys. I know they've coached my kids in
the past, so they're, you know, in their twenties, and
their teachers and coaches, they're they're.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Down with any of this.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
I don't if I asked them about it, I don't
know if they would know about it. I certainly have
heard them say, oh, my gosh, like you know, all
this pro they the gender pronoun stuff. They think it
is super dumb, very annoying, ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
But I think they kind of keep their heads down.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
I think so many people are keeping their heads down
because this is your career. And I get that from
the standpoint of I don't want to rock the vote.
I don't want to get kicked out, I don't want
to get fired. I don't want to be ostracized. I mean,
you're in a group. These are the people you see
every day, and you don't want to be on the
outside of that. And you're young, and you're in the
beginning of your career, and you don't feel like you
(28:25):
can come out and say these things. And I am
not making excuses. I think that this is human nature
and its reality, and we have to understand that when
you see these things, when people are coming back with gosh,
this stuff that is written in these trainings is so extreme.
It's like, share your pronouns. If we want to get
(28:45):
out of the habit of assuming pronouns, then we need
to introduce with our pronouns. This is I thought we were.
It's funny to me because I thought after the last
election that Democrats were like, oh, maybe this stuff isn't
the way. And we're hearing on the news affordability, affordability,
let's talk about that. But the radical left, and maybe
(29:07):
not even so radical, is still pushing no, we've got
to accept. And I'll never get it. I don't understand
why the confusion. Why do they love the confusion, the
confusion of pronouns. And that's at a very young age.
I mean, the other day we were listening to Rosie
O'Donnell talking about her kid, and she's talking about her
(29:28):
and she's saying she this, and she's like, now they
are sleeping with me and they're doing this. And the
girl that was sitting with me, she goes, who are
she talking about? And I said the kid, and she
was like and like another person, and I was like, no,
just the kid. This is the confusing. I mean, it's
not even proper grammar. Nobody knows what people are saying.
Speaker 3 (29:48):
But at least with that, it's her own life, yes,
and it's her private if that's what she wants to do.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
My issue is.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
You're telling public employees a publicly funded school.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
System, that's what I means, and they have to.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
I mean, it just it says, add your pronouns to badges, emails, documents,
and system use pronoun pins if your school ID can't
be changed. So now now you have a lanyard with
an ID and a little dumb pin. And it says,
and this is another reason why they're keeping their head down.
The people who don't agree. It says misgendering should prompt
(30:25):
corrective action and or consequences. So if you're a young
teacher and you're told that to not go along with
this qualifies as harassment and you should be you know, punished.
I mean again, there are those out there that are
always going to just sort of be that brave type
(30:46):
when they're gonna be like, I'm not going along with this.
But it's not human nature to your point. And it's
also like they don't want to put their job at risk.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. Is teaching not hard enough? I mean,
I see the kids today. Even so, we moved our
kids during the pandemic. We went from public school to
private school. Even in the private school, we have kids
that are talking back to the teachers, getting sent out
(31:16):
of class, and it's so much different than the public school.
The public school kids are so much harder to deal
with today than when you and I were in school.
I mean, I look at the way they behave would
never have happened when we were in school. You're dealing
with that already. You were already dealing with that. You're
dealing with all the gentle parents out there that are like,
don't say we had I just have to say this
(31:37):
because I still can't believe it. We had a teacher
who said she was asked by the parent to and
this is in first grade. She was asked by the
parent to only reprimand her daughter while having a puppet
on her hand, and she brought the puppet to school
and told the teacher that only the puppet could talk
to her and tell her that she had done something wrong,
and the teacher was like, what do I even do
(31:59):
with that? I hear stories like that. I'm like, this
generation of parents is challenging, this generation of kids is challenging,
And then you have to worry about this crap and
having to like navigate around all the emotional teachers and
teachers union people. What how do people even stand doing
the job. That's why we can't get people to teach
(32:19):
the barely.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
I mean what we have seen teachers are one hundred
percent at the end of their rope in terms of
behavior and discipline for a variety of reasons. One is
the behavior is much worse just societally. It was getting
worse anyway, but the pandemic really blew that up.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (32:36):
Number two, schools were under a lot of pressure to
make sure that their discipline stats all looked the same
in terms of like race and identity groups. So they
had to juke the stats to avoid, you know, becoming
under investigation by the federal government. So suspensions went way down,
(32:58):
which meant that students that were very disruptive and or
violent and or putting the safety and well the safety
at risk and just the basic learning at risk. They
had to kind of be kept in the building. That's
obviously a huge problem private schools. Of course, they obviously
also have bad behavior, but because they have much more
(33:21):
ability to expel kids. I mean, a public school basically
cannot expel a student unless they commit a felony. I mean,
it's very difficult for public schools. And if a child
has an IEP, you know, for being in the special
education designation, I'm pretty sure that the federal law says
(33:43):
they can't be removed from school more than ten total
days in a school year. So when people hear of
classrooms where they're like, there's a student that's so disruptive
and violent, the classroom gets evacuated.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
You know, let's just say twice a week.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Let's just say other kids suffer because all the other.
Speaker 3 (34:02):
Kids have to they suffer, they can't learn, it's total chaos.
And then people say, oh my gosh, you know, why
don't you kick them out, expel them, to spend them. Well,
these administrators have their hands tied because of federal regulations
and federal laws, and so it's not again like all
of this is so complicated, it's not like an easy
just do X, just do Y. Because on the one hand,
(34:25):
you want to meet the needs of the child that's
having some sort of serious behavioral disturbance, right, but you
can the same time you cannot put an inclusion. You
cannot say inclusion. The priority is inclusion to the extent
that we're going to make sure that that student gets
to be in a mainstream classroom where everything goes off
the rails all the time for everybody, because if you
(34:47):
think about it, in addition to the all the kids
who's learning is disrupted, that child with this severe issue
going on, their needs aren't being met either.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
So you're really not disturbing.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Anybodre Because I am such a fan of our public schools.
I'm a public school student, and I think they're so
critical to our communities. But to hear this and we
took our kids out, and our kids have they have
thrived at the school that they're at, and it just
is so hard because I want to be like, it's
(35:17):
your kids, it's your greatest investment, it's your legacy. Do
everything you can to get them the best possible education,
and it stinks that that's not happening at public school
and that this kind of stuff. I mean, I look
at this and this advancing LGBTQ plus justice and transgender advocacy.
Those are words that don't even go together. I don't
even know what that means. You know, I'm like, what
(35:39):
I'm on earth? Is this? It shocks me. I know
that you guys are gonna I know you're gonna do
more and more research on this, and you're gonna have
more and I would love to have you back. I've
so enjoyed this conversation, not because this is an enjoyable topic,
but because you understand it at a level that most
people don't and are able to explain it at a
level that people can't do without getting angry or putting
(36:03):
their own opinion in it. But you're just such the
straight facts is so wonderful to hear. So I appreciate
you for doing this. Thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (36:12):
And it's complicated, right, like you just can't like people
just want things to be black and white and they
never are, but especially when you're talking about K twelve education,
they're just not. And also, it's in all of our
best interests to have thriving, strong public schools in our communities. Right.
We want parents to have options. We want parents to
have options regardless of their income in their zip code.
One of those options needs to be a robust, thriving
(36:35):
public school system, because that's what most families are going
to choose, either because it's all they can afford, it's
the most convenient they have nostalgia afford, or their kid
wants to play football, or you know, be in the
marketings right.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Yes, absolutely, I mean that is that is what we
gave up. There's no football team at the school.
Speaker 3 (36:53):
You know.
Speaker 1 (36:53):
We gave that traditional high school experience up to ensure
their safety. And that makes me sad that that's how
it has to be and to ensure that they're actually
getting an education. And suddenly I think that we're going
to see a massive switch where all of these colleges
are putting the SAT back into play and all these
(37:14):
kids actually have to have shown that they've learned, because
suddenly these kids get to college and they do testing
and they're like, oh my gosh, these kids don't know anything.
But they have had no SATs SAT scores for five years.
So this year that all gets switched back on it.
Most of these universities and I just have a feeling
that this is, this COVID crash is coming to a head,
(37:35):
and it's going to be ugly for everyone across the
board totally.
Speaker 3 (37:39):
And I think that one thing that people who opene
or comment on all of this needs to understand is that, like,
there's always trade offs, yes, And I think that's often
missing from a lot of the conversation, certainly the online conversation,
is that, you know, whatever parents decide to do, you know,
or whatever a teacher decides to do in terms of
like speaking up or not speaking up, or staying in
(38:01):
this environment that's getting increasingly chaotic or whatever it is,
it's everybody's dealing with trade offs. And so I would
love it if we could like all, like, I mean,
this sounds kind of corny, but it's also true. Like
can't we just have a conversation where we're all saying
we want what's best for students and families without immediately
you know, like my here's my favorite. If you loved
(38:23):
your kids, you would take them out of public school.
Speaker 1 (38:27):
I know what I know.
Speaker 3 (38:30):
I actually no, that's my second favorite. My most favorite
is if you loved your kids, you'd homeschool them and
I'm always like, guys, I know I love my kids,
and I also know I would never do that.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
No, I'm my kids. We wouldn't survive, Like I'm not
a teacher. That is not that. That would not be
me loving my kids. And I know that, and I'm
healthy enough to say I know that. But I do
think that this is putting a massive amount of pressure
on young parents, like what am I going to do?
And that has been a message that has you know,
these big conference have people and they're like, this is
(39:01):
the perfect this is the ideal situation. There's no ideal situation,
and when you put people in that box, then that's
what you when you start to have people experiencing depression
and anxiety, like I'm not providing the ideal situation. I
legitimately know on a daily basis, I'm like, oh my gosh,
I just want to get through this day. That's parenting
every day. There's no ideal situation. But that's why when
(39:23):
we see things like this, I think that we need
to call it out because it's not just a problem
for parents. It's a problem for the teachers who are
in the classroom and they have parents that are going, oh,
you're teaching this and they don't want to be that's
not what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (39:37):
You know. And and they're not or they're not that's
what I mean. They're not even know.
Speaker 3 (39:42):
That their union is putting out this insane you know,
these insane training materials and they kind of want to
be like, listen, I am a member because I kind
of have no choice, but like, I'm.
Speaker 2 (39:52):
Not downe with this.
Speaker 1 (39:54):
I know it's such it is such a challenge, and
I so appreciate having you on, and I definitely want
to have you back and talk about what else you
find out and how we can support everybody. I think
that you make such a great point because we are
we are on this train of like step away, crush
it all, and that's not the answer. It doesn't. You
(40:15):
would have so many kids and so many families that
would have no solution. So we need to figure out
how to make it all work. And I love that
you're out there doing that. Erica Sansey, thank you so
much for being on the podcast.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
Thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (40:30):
Absolutely and thank you all for listening to this episode
and for this episode and others. As always, you can
go to the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you
get your podcasts. You can also watch it on Rumble
or YouTube at Tutor Dixon and join us next time.
Have a blessed day.
This is the Tutor Dixon Podcast, and so often on
this podcast we start to get into some of the
things that are happening to our kids, that we don't
even know that are happening to our kids, and that
oftentimes has to do with public school. And now we're
finding out a lot about what goes on with the unions.
So we brought a former teacher and a former union
member NEA, union member, National Education Association on. Her name
(00:24):
is Erica Sanzy. She's here to talk to us. She
now is more of a political activist. She's with Defending Education.
We talked about this organization a few weeks ago. We
had Nikki Neely on, we talked about this, but I
saw this article that Erica put out about what is
going on with the teaching behind the scenes. The NEA,
(00:45):
the teachers' union, actually has these conferences and they invite
a bunch of teachers and they teach some pretty radical stuff. So, Erica,
thank you so much for being on today and telling
us what exactly is going on behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
What's going on behind the scenes is that the NEA
and teachers' unions more generally have always tilted to the left,
and they've always overwhelmingly supported Democrats. And even when I
was in the NEA in the late nineties and early
two thousands, I can remember them sending glossy mailers to
(01:20):
our homes telling us, you know who we should vote for. So,
for example, in the two thousand and four primary, they
wanted us to vote for Howard Dean, but I never.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I just want to stop you because I think it's
so funny. We've talked about this before we got on
and I was like, that's shocking, and you said that's
not even bad. And it's shocking to me because I
think if you haven't been in a public union like this,
I've worked in many different jobs. I've worked in at
big pr firms, I've worked in a foundry, I've worked
(01:51):
at a steel mill. Never in my career did anybody
say to me, this is who we suggest you vote for.
But to you, it was so normal.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Oh, you mean they didn't spend your membership dues that
you were forced to pay to send you over priced
glossy mailers telling you who to vote for.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Well at the time.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
I mean again, the difference is, at the time they
felt like a Democrat leaning organization, but they felt to
me at least, it seemed like they were tethered to reality.
They have morph over the past couple decades into what
I publicly have called an insane asylum.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
They are run.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
By radicals, They are totally ideological. Their focus if you name,
you know, all the hot button issues that that progressive
sort of fixate on. That those are their priorities. So
there will you will never hear about improving instruction. You
will never hear about student outcomes, You will never really
hear about learning. So you will certainly never hear about
(02:54):
like parents as partners.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Let me pick on that for a second, because we
have heard about out terrible reading scores across the country.
I mean it's not just you know, I talk about
Michigan a lot. Michigan is really bad, but really the
United States is below most Western countries. Our reading scores
are terrible, Our math scores are terrible. And the fact
that that that is shocking to me because that is
(03:19):
something at work every place I've worked. It's like, we
got to get better. We got to get better. The
product that we are delivering has to be better. Ultimately,
the product that teachers are delivering is an education and
yet this latest conversation at the NEA has been about
advancing LGBTQ justice and transgender advocacy.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
I mean, what, yeah, like to my point, that is
their focus. So and just for if listeners who aren't
or viewers I guess right, aren't familiar with the data
on student outcomes. I pulled a couple numbers before we
came on, just so I could let people know. So,
thirty one percent of fourth graders are currently considered proficient
(04:02):
at reading.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
So sad, twenty two.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Percent of twelfth graders are considered proficient in math. So
we're talking very very low numbers. But the other piece
that's really important here is that on these reading I'm sorry,
on these test results, you have proficient, you have proficient
with distinction, which is like the high achievers, that's a
small percentage. Then you have the proficient, which means that
(04:26):
they're meeting the benchmark. Then you have partially proficient, which
means like they're they're not in dire straits, but they're
not meeting the benchmark. And then you have something called
below basic. A very alarming part of the data is
that a very large swath of students are falling into
that below basic category, which means they're not even approaching proficiency. So,
(04:49):
for example, in reading in twelfth grade, thirty two percent
of seniors in high school fall into that below basic category,
which means they're not even approaching the benchmark. And that
is extremely alarming to have such a big number in
that bottom bucket. And again that is something it's like
(05:11):
a five alarm fire. The trajectory for student outcomes has
been going downward for a long time decades, and instead
we see the biggest you teachers' union in the country
that gives ninety over ninety nine percent of its money
now to Democratic candidates, focused on on, you know, providing
(05:34):
sample templates for teachers who want to change their gender,
you know, helping them share that with the rest of
the school community.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
It is stunning to me. And when you talk about
those math scores, I just want to point out when
I was traveling around to businesses in this state that
are usually getting skilled tradesmen, usually getting kids out of
high school, they said they had to actually take reading
a ruler off of their tests to get to just
(06:08):
hire their hiring exam because students couldn't do that. High
school students couldn't do that. I mean this you said
a far five alarm, five alarm fire. You are right,
this is a five alarm fire, and yet that's not
how the Union sees it. And if we talk about
this we get pushback from the progressive left. You also
(06:29):
said something else that I thought was interesting. You were like,
you know, it used to be that they were just
like I just thought this was like a normal group,
and they were just Democrats. That's how we thought democrats were.
They were just Democrats. But now they've gone to this
radical extreme and this stuff, this transgender advocacy, LGBTQ justice,
that was why they lost the last election. Why are
(06:52):
they doing this? Do they just figure they can get
the youth on board, We're all screwed.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
I mean, I am having a very hard time wrapping
my head around this as well. I mean, it is
a cult like ideology. So I actually do think that
for some people they are just true believers, right. This
is they've been marinating in this belief system in worldview
for a really long time. Also, when you are in
progressive circles, you cannot step out of line or you
(07:22):
will be sort of shunned and expelled from your group.
So if that's your world, right, then it's like, well,
I may know that it's ridiculous that a male just
won the women's powerlifting competition, but I can't say that
because if I do, like my whole like social circle
will implode.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
How welcoming and exclusion and include So I.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
Sort of think that you have like the true believers,
and then you have the people that know it's nuts,
but go along with it because they don't want their
whole again, like they're kind of like world to implode.
And just a quick little thing that I happen to
know is that preference falsification, this idea that like behind
the scenes you say what you really think, but then
(08:05):
like outwardly you pretend that you agree with things that
you don't.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
It's the highest for this issue around gender.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
That's where we see people the most unwilling to just
like I gain say the truth or just state like say,
I'm not gonna play make believe right like I'm not,
I'm not engaging in this game of make believe and
pretending that things aren't what they are.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
I noticed in one of these in one of these scenarios,
it's like one of these teachings that they have at
this conference. I think this is you guys pulled something
out of the teachings, and I know you're looking in
greater depth at this, but it says embrace replace, say
(08:48):
this our genders or genders instead of gender. And it
says because pluralizing genders enables a greater agreement with our
worldview and helps activate more expansive attitudes toward our genders
and transgender people. This is what they're saying to use
in class, right.
Speaker 3 (09:07):
This is the language that they want their members to
use again in pursuit of a political goal. So the
idea is that they are working on their messaging strategy,
and they want their messaging strategy to incorporate race, class,
engender at all times. Because these psychos think that it's
(09:31):
it's a useful and acceptable tactic to compare gender justice
to the civil rights movement, and so they want to
link race and class to this gender thing, thinking that
it'll be harder to go against them if they make
it seem more like a civil rights argument.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
But the other thing that's kind of crazy in.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Here, they use the word villains in their training to
describe anybody who ap you know, this ideology or this
messaging They specifically name Republicans as the villains, although they
seem to include all people in opposition, and they also
(10:12):
say that their opposition can only be explained by racism
and transphobia and racist dog whistles, oh I'm sorry, and
that they're fascists. This is These are words like every
word I just used is in the documents.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
That's another. So there's another. This is I've been told recently,
if you don't have racism, then on the left you
don't have much. So you've got to keep racism alive.
So you have to create racism. And I think that
a lot of people from the gen X generation have
been like, what is happening. This is not how we
(10:49):
grew up. This is not people didn't talk this way.
There was not a focus on racism. And I've even
had I come from the suburbs of Chicago, we had
a very diverse high school. And even my high school
friends I've noticed have commented on Facebook like this, my
high school friends of color, They have said, this wasn't
(11:10):
how it was When we were in high school. We
did not feel racism, we didn't feel like this, But
now it's like one of these This is a quote
from the material. We see this in high schools. We
see this, wait, we see this in how high schools
tell black kids how to keep their hair or send
girls home from school for the clothes that they're wearing.
Like we keep talking about how we have to have
(11:34):
these laws, You've got Michelle Obama out there making telling
people that white people are telling black people how to
wear their hair. Now they're saying that you if you
send girls home from school for breaking dress code, I mean,
I gotta tell you, We've had kids sent home from
our school for wearing things that are inappropriate to school.
There are rules on whether or not you can wear
(11:55):
short skirts and many and crop tops.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
So one of the issues is some of us believe
that the that the way that we sort of respect
people is that we hold them all to the same standard.
Other people think that if you don't make special concessions
or you don't change the rules for certain people because
of some marginalized status that you believe that they hold,
(12:20):
then you're not you know, you're not engaging in equity
is what they would call it.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
So you're right, Like having.
Speaker 3 (12:25):
I've worked in I worked in very affluent school districts.
I worked in high poverty schools. I worked in public,
charter and parochial. Right, I have seen many students written
up for dress code, and I have seen many students
either sent home or mom or dad had to bring
(12:45):
something in.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
And that has always been.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Sort of not to use a very you know, controversial word,
but that was a colorblind.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Thing that absolutely when I was it was in important.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
Now if somebody I wanted to make the argument, well,
the style, you know, this style is more common with
this group, and therefore they are getting written up for
dress code more. I mean, people can have that conversation,
but that doesn't change the fact that, like, you have
the rule in place, and.
Speaker 2 (13:15):
I can't remember when it as a time.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
There may have been a time too, Like I'm not
positive about this, but there have been I think some
rules regarding hair that might have been a bit discriminatory.
But again that's a very small problem that can be
fixed versus oh, we're not going to talk about reading, math, literacy, civics.
(13:37):
We're going to obsess over this tiny little thing that
might be an issue in some school because they didn't
allow kids to have dreads.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
But see that's the thing. It's not about that. The
title of this is actually architecture of a race class
gender narrative. So this is like we're creating. This is
how we create the architecture. This is how we build
the narrative that there is a race class gender issue here.
And I can tell you I can remember when I
was in high school and junior high and we would
(14:06):
have to watch Degrassi Junior High in school, and I
can remember an exact episode where the girl would leave
and she would change her clothes in the car on
the way to school, and then she got in trouble
at school, and it was like the lesson there was,
don't do that. This is not there's nothing new. Students
aren't doing anything new. We're always trying new.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Like all the girls I get out of the school
with their car, well they used to maybe not so
much anymore, with their skirts like the right length. And
then they get out of the car and they get
out of sight and they roll them until they're like
basically as long as they're underwear. So it's just advertised
that this happens a lot because you can usually find
one example of a bad thing that happened. So what
(14:49):
they do is they find one example and then they
make it as if this is a common thing happening everywhere,
and then they decide we need to focus on this,
talk about this, make this the narrative. Why Because it's
a new, shiny object that shifts the focus from what matters,
which is that students are not learning well enough. It
means it's, you know, shifted from the fact that schools
(15:11):
are hiding information from parents about their own children. It's
like they know that if they shift to this new
stupid thing, then the focus and because it is true,
like there's the people. The media, for example, in many
cases will immediately go to that dumb, small thing and
make it a g giant issue and not talk about
(15:33):
the fact that the vast majority of school districts in
the United States have written policies to withhold information from
parents about their own child new gender and new gender
accommodations at school.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. When you talk about them saying
we're not going to dress code kids, this is a
slippery slope into you are right, you can do anything,
there are no rules, and don't let anybody hold you back.
Be your true self. If that is wearing a tiny
(16:10):
skirt or changing your gender, because then it does go
into and exploit the lack of familiarity with transgender people.
And then in quotes it says and how certain politicians
exploit lack of familiarity with transgender people excluding trans kids
from healthcare, school or sports. So now you really are
(16:33):
this is to the teachers, this is what they're learning.
Now you really are injecting full indoctrination politics into not
only the teacher, but the teachers. Meant to then bring
that to the school and tell the students this politician
is bad, a specific politician is bad because they are
stopping your friends from getting healthcare, which we know other
(16:57):
countries have banned what they're calling healthcare because it is
so it is so mutilating to these children, and then
excluding them from sports. This is to protect women.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
It's again, notice how benign the language sounds. They're not
talking about, you know, potential sterility of kids. They're not
talking about the irreversible damage that occurs when you pause
and stop puberty and put children on cross sex hormones
(17:32):
that five years later they are very likely to regret.
And they're not talking about the fact that the only
reason we have a women's division in the first place
is because they can't compete obviously at an elite level
against the men. I mean, I had a school board
member in my own town say to me, and by
(17:52):
the way, the worst people on this issue of sports
are the ones who never played any sports and don't
like sports and don't watchboards and don't have kids who
play sports. Because they literally don't think there's a difference.
They really don't. They just like so the school board,
the elected school board might have been the chair actually
said to me on the phone, I don't understand why
(18:13):
we can't just have tryouts for the swim team and
everybody just goes together, all the boys and the girls together,
and then just the best kids make the team. This
is what he said. Like does he not we don't
understand that much about it, never compete against Michael Phelps?
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Does he not know this? But the reality is he
doesn't know this.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
So my new So my new proposed Like, you know,
if I ever want to write a book for fun,
one of my proposed rules is going to be like,
you can't be on a school board if you haven't
played sports. I mean, I'm joking, but I'm joking, but
you can't have a school board full of people that
that were nobody did.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
That's the problem. It's at the point where there is
no voice of reason, no experience, no life experience brought
to this and so often. I mean, we had person
on one of the local school boards here, not a parent,
had no kids, not involved with the school at all,
a young guy who I think ended up getting caught
(19:11):
in bezzling or something, but a young twenty something year
old guy who for some reason joined the school board
and was saying all these radical things. But this is
kind of teaching this. They have a campaign lab. They're
teaching teachers to be activists. And to me, I mean
right now in our state, this is something that I
think people don't realize is these are the types of
(19:34):
groups that get these these radical ballot initiatives into laws.
So they have this campaign lab. So all of a sudden,
in a swing state, you have all these teachers that
are just ready to go out and knocked doors and
campaign for you. Well, they have something on the back
or they're trying to put something on the ballot that
would say that candidates can't get money from any corporations.
(19:57):
But unions are exempt from this. So think about all
of money that would go into Democrat candidates and you
have an entire system that is ready to go out
and do the ground game, be the grassroots built into
a system that is paid for by tax dollars. That's
the real kicker.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
Well, and also like I don't I mean, you know,
most people in the country are independents, but it's fair
to say that we're about fifty we're a split country. Well,
the Teachers Union, the largest teachers union for public school
teachers in the country, is essentially saying that half the
country that the parents of the students that their members serve,
(20:37):
are villains, transphobes, fascists and engaging in racist dog whistles.
So what is I mean that to me is a
is almost a bigger problem. They are vilifying half at
least half of the country, and that means that they
(21:00):
see the parents of the students of their members as
the enemy.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Who are the people that it's not all teachers that
go to these conferences. And that's the thing I think
that is also challenging because as we talk about this,
I don't want people listening to this to be like
every teacher at a public school feels this way and
they want to indoctrinate my kids. There is a small
group that is this far left political activism group that
(21:29):
is in our schools. Now, that's not to take away
their power. They are powerful. I mean, the NEA and
the AFT together contributed more than forty three million dollars
between twenty two and twenty four to left wing political advocacy.
So they are they are trying to do this. It's
not everybody, though, who is going to these So.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Yeah, this has to be a nuanced thing because for
some reason, two teachers and I say this as a
former one, so I witness it a lot. Any critique
of a teacher or teachers, it lands on the ears
of teachers that you're talking about all of them. It's
like it's this one group for some reason, just like
you can't you can't converse about them without it being
(22:10):
you know that something that you said if totally unfair
because you're you're smearing all of them. There's a couple
of things going on. One is the leadership of the
union is absolutely run by radical ideologues.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
They are far leftists. They are obsessed with these causes.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
It is who they are I don't think it used
to be like this, but there is no question. Again,
like for me, even from the late nineties and the
early two thousands to now, I find this just the
messaging coming out of them, the issues that they focus on,
they are completely different and very extreme. I'm not like,
(22:53):
this isn't hyperbole. I don't normally use the word radical
because I think it's overused, but in the case of
the leadership of this organization, it is the correct word.
They are far left radical ideologues. The rank and file
members who really have no choice, it's like you just
you are. I mean, now, there are these ways that
you can kind of opt out of the union, but
it's hard to do, and most people don't do it.
(23:16):
I shouldn't say it's hard to do, it's just you
have to take an extra step. Most people don't do it.
They don't know that their union is even doing this.
They probably never think about their union. And the other
thing that's very important to know is that oftentimes even
the leader of a union misrepresents their members. So for example,
(23:38):
during COVID, when my local schools were closed, the head
of the local union got up and said that the
majority of the teachers wanted didn't want to go back
to in person schooling.
Speaker 2 (23:53):
That was a lie.
Speaker 3 (23:55):
We had an overwhelming majority of students that want I
mean teachers, I'm sorry, teachers, teachers wanted to go back.
She was saying, my members don't feel safe, they don't
want to go back. That wasn't even true. We knew
that we had about seventy percent of teachers that wanted
to go back. So number one, they lie. Number two,
teachers that are more my age, I'm gen x are
(24:19):
they didn't marinade in this ideology in their teacher prep programs,
so they are now saying to themselves, what the hell
is going on with these brand new teachers coming out
of school that are saying, we were taught in school
that teaching is a political act. We were taught in
(24:39):
school that our responsibility is to be activists.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
That's what we thought.
Speaker 3 (24:44):
That's what we're just hearing, and we're like, what if
you look, and we actually did at Defending Education, We
did a report on this, so people can look at
the documents. It tells them your job is to be
an advocate and an activist for social justice, and here's
how we define that. So that means that if a
person is a bit more conservative or apolitical and their
(25:06):
idea like for example, I would argue that social justice
is literacy. In teaching children to read, no matter their background,
no matter their zip code, it's making sure that children
can read. I would argue that is social justice, right.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
But for the.
Speaker 3 (25:23):
Teachers coming out of these programs, it's all equity, it's inclusion,
it's queer theory based stuff. It's climate justice all the time.
It's all the evils of whiteness and white privilege and
all of these buzzwords. That's what they're hearing. So it's
not just that they think they have to be political
(25:43):
and be activists. They have very specific causes that they
believe they have to push as classroom teachers, which to
a forty five year old, fifty year old teacher fifty
two if you're my age, it sounds insane. Yeah, and
they're thinking, that's not your role. What are you talking about, Like,
that's not the job. But to the twenty two year old,
(26:06):
they've been taught in their teacher prep programs that that
is the job, and that is a something that I
still think the larger public does not realize. Does this
hagend and has changed in teacher ed Does that make.
Speaker 1 (26:22):
The union more powerful? Because there seems to be in
this younger generation and these new teachers, but not just teachers,
this generation coming out of college today, it feels like
they have a sense of wanting to be a part
of a bigger group. They love political activism, they love
to be a part of something bigger than them. They're
not always a part of a church, so it seems
(26:44):
like they're looking for something that kind of feels that
same way, like I'm a part of this and I'm
a leader in this. Are they the ones that are
more prone to going to these conferences? And is that
the future?
Speaker 2 (26:57):
I actually don't know the answer to that question.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
I feel like a lot of times when I see
like photos of like union people out with signs, they
actually often see middle age. But uh, I'm I'm not
actually sure about that. I will say it may sound controversial,
but it's just a fact as teaching has become increasingly female.
(27:20):
I mean, the numbers are I mean, the male teacher
numbers have really just kind of dropped off a cliff,
especially at the elementary level. You're also just young females.
Skew left. Yeah, yes, so you're gonna see more of that.
Whereas like, like I'm thinking right now of some of
(27:40):
some young guys. I know they've coached my kids in
the past, so they're, you know, in their twenties, and
their teachers and coaches, they're they're.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
Down with any of this.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
I don't if I asked them about it, I don't
know if they would know about it. I certainly have
heard them say, oh, my gosh, like you know, all
this pro they the gender pronoun stuff. They think it
is super dumb, very annoying, ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
But I think they kind of keep their heads down.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
I think so many people are keeping their heads down
because this is your career. And I get that from
the standpoint of I don't want to rock the vote.
I don't want to get kicked out, I don't want
to get fired. I don't want to be ostracized. I mean,
you're in a group. These are the people you see
every day, and you don't want to be on the
outside of that. And you're young, and you're in the
beginning of your career, and you don't feel like you
(28:25):
can come out and say these things. And I am
not making excuses. I think that this is human nature
and its reality, and we have to understand that when
you see these things, when people are coming back with gosh,
this stuff that is written in these trainings is so extreme.
It's like, share your pronouns. If we want to get
(28:45):
out of the habit of assuming pronouns, then we need
to introduce with our pronouns. This is I thought we were.
It's funny to me because I thought after the last
election that Democrats were like, oh, maybe this stuff isn't
the way. And we're hearing on the news affordability, affordability,
let's talk about that. But the radical left, and maybe
(29:07):
not even so radical, is still pushing no, we've got
to accept. And I'll never get it. I don't understand
why the confusion. Why do they love the confusion, the
confusion of pronouns. And that's at a very young age.
I mean, the other day we were listening to Rosie
O'Donnell talking about her kid, and she's talking about her
(29:28):
and she's saying she this, and she's like, now they
are sleeping with me and they're doing this. And the
girl that was sitting with me, she goes, who are
she talking about? And I said the kid, and she
was like and like another person, and I was like, no,
just the kid. This is the confusing. I mean, it's
not even proper grammar. Nobody knows what people are saying.
Speaker 3 (29:48):
But at least with that, it's her own life, yes,
and it's her private if that's what she wants to do.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
My issue is.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
You're telling public employees a publicly funded school.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
System, that's what I means, and they have to.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
I mean, it just it says, add your pronouns to badges, emails, documents,
and system use pronoun pins if your school ID can't
be changed. So now now you have a lanyard with
an ID and a little dumb pin. And it says,
and this is another reason why they're keeping their head down.
The people who don't agree. It says misgendering should prompt
(30:25):
corrective action and or consequences. So if you're a young
teacher and you're told that to not go along with
this qualifies as harassment and you should be you know, punished.
I mean again, there are those out there that are
always going to just sort of be that brave type
(30:46):
when they're gonna be like, I'm not going along with this.
But it's not human nature to your point. And it's
also like they don't want to put their job at risk.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. Is teaching not hard enough? I mean,
I see the kids today. Even so, we moved our
kids during the pandemic. We went from public school to
private school. Even in the private school, we have kids
that are talking back to the teachers, getting sent out
(31:16):
of class, and it's so much different than the public school.
The public school kids are so much harder to deal
with today than when you and I were in school.
I mean, I look at the way they behave would
never have happened when we were in school. You're dealing
with that already. You were already dealing with that. You're
dealing with all the gentle parents out there that are like,
don't say we had I just have to say this
(31:37):
because I still can't believe it. We had a teacher
who said she was asked by the parent to and
this is in first grade. She was asked by the
parent to only reprimand her daughter while having a puppet
on her hand, and she brought the puppet to school
and told the teacher that only the puppet could talk
to her and tell her that she had done something wrong,
and the teacher was like, what do I even do
(31:59):
with that? I hear stories like that. I'm like, this
generation of parents is challenging, this generation of kids is challenging,
And then you have to worry about this crap and
having to like navigate around all the emotional teachers and
teachers union people. What how do people even stand doing
the job. That's why we can't get people to teach
(32:19):
the barely.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
I mean what we have seen teachers are one hundred
percent at the end of their rope in terms of
behavior and discipline for a variety of reasons. One is
the behavior is much worse just societally. It was getting
worse anyway, but the pandemic really blew that up.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (32:36):
Number two, schools were under a lot of pressure to
make sure that their discipline stats all looked the same
in terms of like race and identity groups. So they
had to juke the stats to avoid, you know, becoming
under investigation by the federal government. So suspensions went way down,
(32:58):
which meant that students that were very disruptive and or
violent and or putting the safety and well the safety
at risk and just the basic learning at risk. They
had to kind of be kept in the building. That's
obviously a huge problem private schools. Of course, they obviously
also have bad behavior, but because they have much more
(33:21):
ability to expel kids. I mean, a public school basically
cannot expel a student unless they commit a felony. I mean,
it's very difficult for public schools. And if a child
has an IEP, you know, for being in the special
education designation, I'm pretty sure that the federal law says
(33:43):
they can't be removed from school more than ten total
days in a school year. So when people hear of
classrooms where they're like, there's a student that's so disruptive
and violent, the classroom gets evacuated.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
You know, let's just say twice a week.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Let's just say other kids suffer because all the other.
Speaker 3 (34:02):
Kids have to they suffer, they can't learn, it's total chaos.
And then people say, oh my gosh, you know, why
don't you kick them out, expel them, to spend them. Well,
these administrators have their hands tied because of federal regulations
and federal laws, and so it's not again like all
of this is so complicated, it's not like an easy
just do X, just do Y. Because on the one hand,
(34:25):
you want to meet the needs of the child that's
having some sort of serious behavioral disturbance, right, but you
can the same time you cannot put an inclusion. You
cannot say inclusion. The priority is inclusion to the extent
that we're going to make sure that that student gets
to be in a mainstream classroom where everything goes off
the rails all the time for everybody, because if you
(34:47):
think about it, in addition to the all the kids
who's learning is disrupted, that child with this severe issue
going on, their needs aren't being met either.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
So you're really not disturbing.
Speaker 1 (34:57):
Anybodre Because I am such a fan of our public schools.
I'm a public school student, and I think they're so
critical to our communities. But to hear this and we
took our kids out, and our kids have they have
thrived at the school that they're at, and it just
is so hard because I want to be like, it's
(35:17):
your kids, it's your greatest investment, it's your legacy. Do
everything you can to get them the best possible education,
and it stinks that that's not happening at public school
and that this kind of stuff. I mean, I look
at this and this advancing LGBTQ plus justice and transgender advocacy.
Those are words that don't even go together. I don't
even know what that means. You know, I'm like, what
(35:39):
I'm on earth? Is this? It shocks me. I know
that you guys are gonna I know you're gonna do
more and more research on this, and you're gonna have
more and I would love to have you back. I've
so enjoyed this conversation, not because this is an enjoyable topic,
but because you understand it at a level that most
people don't and are able to explain it at a
level that people can't do without getting angry or putting
(36:03):
their own opinion in it. But you're just such the
straight facts is so wonderful to hear. So I appreciate
you for doing this. Thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (36:12):
And it's complicated, right, like you just can't like people
just want things to be black and white and they
never are, but especially when you're talking about K twelve education,
they're just not. And also, it's in all of our
best interests to have thriving, strong public schools in our communities. Right.
We want parents to have options. We want parents to
have options regardless of their income in their zip code.
One of those options needs to be a robust, thriving
(36:35):
public school system, because that's what most families are going
to choose, either because it's all they can afford, it's
the most convenient they have nostalgia afford, or their kid
wants to play football, or you know, be in the
marketings right.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Yes, absolutely, I mean that is that is what we
gave up. There's no football team at the school.
Speaker 3 (36:53):
You know.
Speaker 1 (36:53):
We gave that traditional high school experience up to ensure
their safety. And that makes me sad that that's how
it has to be and to ensure that they're actually
getting an education. And suddenly I think that we're going
to see a massive switch where all of these colleges
are putting the SAT back into play and all these
(37:14):
kids actually have to have shown that they've learned, because
suddenly these kids get to college and they do testing
and they're like, oh my gosh, these kids don't know anything.
But they have had no SATs SAT scores for five years.
So this year that all gets switched back on it.
Most of these universities and I just have a feeling
that this is, this COVID crash is coming to a head,
(37:35):
and it's going to be ugly for everyone across the
board totally.
Speaker 3 (37:39):
And I think that one thing that people who opene
or comment on all of this needs to understand is that, like,
there's always trade offs, yes, And I think that's often
missing from a lot of the conversation, certainly the online conversation,
is that, you know, whatever parents decide to do, you know,
or whatever a teacher decides to do in terms of
like speaking up or not speaking up, or staying in
(38:01):
this environment that's getting increasingly chaotic or whatever it is,
it's everybody's dealing with trade offs. And so I would
love it if we could like all, like, I mean,
this sounds kind of corny, but it's also true. Like
can't we just have a conversation where we're all saying
we want what's best for students and families without immediately
you know, like my here's my favorite. If you loved
(38:23):
your kids, you would take them out of public school.
Speaker 1 (38:27):
I know what I know.
Speaker 3 (38:30):
I actually no, that's my second favorite. My most favorite
is if you loved your kids, you'd homeschool them and
I'm always like, guys, I know I love my kids,
and I also know I would never do that.
Speaker 1 (38:40):
No, I'm my kids. We wouldn't survive, Like I'm not
a teacher. That is not that. That would not be
me loving my kids. And I know that, and I'm
healthy enough to say I know that. But I do
think that this is putting a massive amount of pressure
on young parents, like what am I going to do?
And that has been a message that has you know,
these big conference have people and they're like, this is
(39:01):
the perfect this is the ideal situation. There's no ideal situation,
and when you put people in that box, then that's
what you when you start to have people experiencing depression
and anxiety, like I'm not providing the ideal situation. I
legitimately know on a daily basis, I'm like, oh my gosh,
I just want to get through this day. That's parenting
every day. There's no ideal situation. But that's why when
(39:23):
we see things like this, I think that we need
to call it out because it's not just a problem
for parents. It's a problem for the teachers who are
in the classroom and they have parents that are going, oh,
you're teaching this and they don't want to be that's
not what they're doing.
Speaker 2 (39:37):
You know. And and they're not or they're not that's
what I mean. They're not even know.
Speaker 3 (39:42):
That their union is putting out this insane you know,
these insane training materials and they kind of want to
be like, listen, I am a member because I kind
of have no choice, but like, I'm.
Speaker 2 (39:52):
Not downe with this.
Speaker 1 (39:54):
I know it's such it is such a challenge, and
I so appreciate having you on, and I definitely want
to have you back and talk about what else you
find out and how we can support everybody. I think
that you make such a great point because we are
we are on this train of like step away, crush
it all, and that's not the answer. It doesn't. You
(40:15):
would have so many kids and so many families that
would have no solution. So we need to figure out
how to make it all work. And I love that
you're out there doing that. Erica Sansey, thank you so
much for being on the podcast.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
Thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (40:30):
Absolutely and thank you all for listening to this episode
and for this episode and others. As always, you can
go to the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you
get your podcasts. You can also watch it on Rumble
or YouTube at Tutor Dixon and join us next time.
Have a blessed day.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com