A backlash is brewing against the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Educationโ€™s (NCATE) decision, last June, to drop โ€œsocial justiceโ€ as one of the โ€œdispositionsโ€ it suggests education schools employ in assessing aspiring teachers. The protest, which surfaced at a recent business meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), was led by an assembly of activist scholars, including once Weatherman, now professor of education, William C. Ayres. The aggrieved, who were also upset by AERAโ€™s unwillingness to insert detailed injunctions against anti-gay sentiments in its own diversity standards, pushed for AERA to officially rebuke NCATE. Although both AERAโ€™s departing and incoming presidents expressed sympathy with the protest, the association declined to act on the grounds that it was inappropriate โ€œexcept in the rarest of circumstancesโ€ for it to comment on the positions of another organizations. Notable during the debate, however, was a comment from a representative of NCATE itself, Senior Vice President Donna M. Gollnick to the effect that โ€œwe would welcome the kind of statement that youโ€™re calling for. It would be very helpful to us as we think through our standards to have statements from professional organizations about what we ought to expect in teacher education related to sexual orientation and gender identityโ€.

When NCATE announced the elimination of โ€œsocial justiceโ€ from its assessment protocols, it did so amidst a chorus of disavowals that the phrase was anything other than the blandest of bromides. Who, after all, doesnโ€™t believe in social justice? Gollnickโ€™s words will be worth remembering should NCATE ever decide to backtrack or, for that matter, the next time anyone tries to fool the innocent with this shabby and evasive dodge.