U.S. history textbooks could soon be flavored heavily with Texas conservatism

[yellow_peril]

The nation’s public school curriculum may be in for a Texas-sized overhaul, if the Lone Star state’s influential recommendations for changes to social studies, economics and history textbooks are fully ratified later this spring. Last Friday, in a 10-to-5 vote split right down party lines, the Texas State Board of Education approved some controversial right-leaning alterations to what most students in the state—and by extension, in much of the rest of the country—will be studying as received historical and social-scientific wisdom. After a public comment period, the board will vote on final recommendations in May.
Don McElroy, who leads the board’s powerful seven-member social conservative bloc, explained that the measure is a way of "adding balance" in the classroom, since "academia is skewed too far to the left." And the board's critics have labeled the move an attempt by political "extremists" to "promote their ideology."

The revised standards have far-reaching implications because Texas is a huge market leader in the school-textbook industry. The enormous print run for Texas textbooks leaves most districts in other states adopting the same course materials, so that the Texas School Board effectively spells out requirements for 80 percent of the nation’s textbook market. That means, for instance, that schools in left-leaning states like Oregon and Vermont could soon be teaching from textbooks that are short on references to Ted Kennedy but long on references to conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly.

Here are some of the other signal shifts that the Texas Board endorsed last Friday:

- A greater emphasis on “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s.” This means not only increased favorable mentions of Schlafly, the founder of the antifeminist Eagle Forum, but also more discussion of the Moral Majority, the Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association and Newt Gingrich's Contract With America.

- A reduced scope for Latino history and culture. A proposal to expand such material in recognition of Texas’ rapidly growing Hispanic population was defeated in last week’s meetings—provoking one board member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out in protest. "They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist," she said of her conservative colleagues on the board. "They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world."

- Changes in specific terminology. Terms that the board’s conservative majority felt were ideologically loaded are being retired. Hence, “imperialism” as a characterization of America’s modern rise to world power is giving way to “expansionism,” and “capitalism” is being dropped in economic material, in favor of the more positive expression “free market.” (The new recommendations stress the need for favorable depictions of America’s economic superiority across the board.)

- A more positive portrayal of Cold War anticommunism. Disgraced anticommunist crusader Joseph McCarthy, the Wisconsin senator censured by the Senate for his aggressive targeting of individual citizens and their civil liberties on the basis of their purported ties to the Communist Party, comes in for partial rehabilitation. The board recommends that textbooks refer to documents published since McCarthy’s death and the fall of the Soviet bloc that appear to show expansive Soviet designs to undermine the U.S. government.

- Language that qualifies the legacy of 1960s liberalism. Great Society programs such as Title IX—which provides for equal gender access to educational resources—and affirmative action, intended to remedy historic workplace discrimination against African-Americans, are said to have created adverse “unintended consequences” in the curriculum’s preferred language.

- Thomas Jefferson no longer included among writers influencing the nation’s intellectual origins. Jefferson, a deist who helped pioneer the legal theory of the separation of church and state, is not a model founder in the board’s judgment. Among the intellectual forerunners to be highlighted in Jefferson’s place: medieval Catholic philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas, Puritan theologian John Calvin and conservative British law scholar William Blackstone. Heavy emphasis is also to be placed on the founding fathers having been guided by strict Christian beliefs.

- Excision of recent third-party presidential candidates Ralph Nader (from the left) and Ross Perot (from the centrist Reform Party). Meanwhile, the recommendations include an entry listing Confederate General Stonewall Jackson as a role model for effective leadership, and a statement from Confederate President Jefferson Davis accompanying a speech by U.S. President Abraham Lincoln.

- A recommendation to include country and western music among the nation’s important cultural movements. The popular black genre of hip-hop is being dropped from the same list.

None of these proposals has met with final ratification from the board—that vote will come in May, after a prolonged period of public comment on the recommendations. Still, the conservatives clearly feel like the bulk of their work is done; after the 120-page draft was finalized last Friday, Republican board member Terri Leo declared that it was "world class" and "exceptional."

—Brett Michael Dykes is a national affairs writer for Yahoo! News

While I think the article is heavily biased, damn this. Half, if not all of these proposals are crap.

 

[Cutlass]

"We are a Christian nation founded on Christian principles. The way I evaluate history textbooks is first I see how they cover Christianity and Israel. Then I see how they treat Ronald Reagan -- he needs to get credit for saving the world from communism and for the good economy over the last 20 years because he lowered taxes."
-- Dr. Don McLeroy, chairman of the Texas Board of Education, which recently approved a controversial new school curriculum

Clearly we need people who have studied US history to write the books on it. People like the above who have no knowledge of even recent American history need to be take out and tied to trees where they can't spread lies to America's youth.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

While I think the article is heavily biased, damn this. Half, if not all of these proposals are crap.

While the proposals are certainly partisan, this is a tactic that the Left with their "Dead white males" complaints about how education is biiiiaaaaaaased and demands as to how the textbooks must be rewritten to conform to proper cultural standards have been using for years. It's like politics: you do it, then complain when the other guy does it... so meh.

 

[Tekee]

While I think the article is heavily biased, damn this. Half, if not all of these proposals are crap.

This the worst they got?

- A greater emphasis on “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s.” This means not only increased favorable mentions of Schlafly, the founder of the antifeminist Eagle Forum, but also more discussion of the Moral Majority, the Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association and Newt Gingrich's Contract With America.

Of which currently, in my candian textbook at least, Guns kill people and need to be regulated so they are for hunting purposes only. Overall, these sections are very small. Like one or 2 sentences.

- A reduced scope for Latino history and culture. A proposal to expand such material in recognition of Texas’ rapidly growing Hispanic population was defeated in last week’s meetings—provoking one board member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out in protest. "They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist," she said of her conservative colleagues on the board. "They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world."

I think Mary sucks, we don't need to learn the history of every minority. What is important is American history. In fact, teaching latino's about latino culture just makes them lazy, because otherwise they will never know the history of the country they now live in. Mary just plain sucks .

- Changes in specific terminology. Terms that the board’s conservative majority felt were ideologically loaded are being retired. Hence, “imperialism” as a characterization of America’s modern rise to world power is giving way to “expansionism,” and “capitalism” is being dropped in economic material, in favor of the more positive expression “free market.” (The new recommendations stress the need for favorable depictions of America’s economic superiority across the board.)

Haha about time, everything we do its "imperialism". America is under the section "The Age of Imperialism". Capitalism is explained from a marxist perspective that is out of touch with reality. Free market is much better term. But capitalism seemed neutral enough to me. meh.

- A more positive portrayal of Cold War anticommunism. Disgraced anticommunist crusader Joseph McCarthy, the Wisconsin senator censured by the Senate for his aggressive targeting of individual citizens and their civil liberties on the basis of their purported ties to the Communist Party, comes in for partial rehabilitation. The board recommends that textbooks refer to documents published since McCarthy’s death and the fall of the Soviet bloc that appear to show expansive Soviet designs to undermine the U.S. government.

Right now, it is called the "McCarthism created a societal anti-communist witchhunt, that targeted intellectuals in universities, as well as the theatre. Which were accused of supporting communists. "
Needs a rewrite.

- Language that qualifies the legacy of 1960s liberalism. Great Society programs such as Title IX—which provides for equal gender access to educational resources—and affirmative action, intended to remedy historic workplace discrimination against African-Americans, are said to have created adverse “unintended consequences” in the curriculum’s preferred language.

Now they are grasping for straws, if the worst thing they can find is that affirmative action has caused "unintended consequences". Previously, from reading our textbooks you would be under the impression that blacks and minorities have no power to get a job because they are discriminated against. Now we at least we know that it has caused "unintended consequences". (aka, if you are black you can skip ahead of the line)

- Thomas Jefferson no longer included among writers influencing the nation’s intellectual origins. Jefferson, a deist who helped pioneer the legal theory of the separation of church and state, is not a model founder in the board’s judgment. Among the intellectual forerunners to be highlighted in Jefferson’s place: medieval Catholic philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas, Puritan theologian John Calvin and conservative British law scholar William Blackstone. Heavy emphasis is also to be placed on the founding fathers having been guided by strict Christian beliefs.

Thomas Jefferson wrote a book? Never heard of it. Heard of Thomas and John, but never heard of William. So 50/50?
I want them to give a specific example of what they beleive is "heavy emphasis" on "strict christian beleifs"
If it is as religious as "unintended consequences" I'll claim this is violating separation of church and state.

- Excision of recent third-party presidential candidates Ralph Nader (from the left) and Ross Perot (from the centrist Reform Party). Meanwhile, the recommendations include an entry listing Confederate General Stonewall Jackson as a role model for effective leadership, and a statement from Confederate President Jefferson Davis accompanying a speech by U.S. President Abraham Lincoln.

Half of America is southern, at least pretend that they exist.

- A recommendation to include country and western music among the nation’s important cultural movements. The popular black genre of hip-hop is being dropped from the same list.

(notice that they use the word "popular black genre".... not every black feels pride in "hip-hop"... the liberals are fortifying a stereotype unintentionally)
American black "gangsta" culture needs mention too. Seriously it exports better then "American country" music.
Plus more white kids listen to gangsta music then country music.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Texas has always had a pervasive influence on half the textbooks published in this country. See a number of posts by Downtown for details on that particular subject.

But you have to love their revisionist history attempts, especially in trying to rationalize the acts of one of the most bigoted anti-Americans of all time: Sen. Joseph McCarthy.

I really don't understand who decided to let a bunch of local yahoos decide which textbooks should be used, and what the curriculum should be taught in school. Who could possibly think that was a good idea, other than people who want to continue to perpetuate exactly the same prejudices and provincial attitudes into the next generation?

 

[Patroklos]

There isn't really anything wrong with what they are removing or including. You might think their motives suspect, but there is nothing that is being included that is not important to American history.

 

[Quackers]

I like tekee's analysis

 

[Dreadnought]

This is a great contrast to the Liberals who wanted textbooks to no longer teach aspects of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or any other pre-1877 history. I'd rather have students worshiping Newt than forgetting the liberties of the Constitution (making a tyranny more possible)

 

[Bill3000]

There isn't really anything wrong with what they are removing or including.

...removal of Thomas Jefferson?

 

[Patroklos]

Clearly we need people who have studied US history to write the books on it. People like the above who have no knowledge of even recent American history need to be take out and tied to trees where they can't spread lies to America's youth.

An over reaction and a sign that you know little about American history. The changes all concern adding or emphasising American history that is at the moment not a part of the current books or barely touched on.

Honestly, how could adding a speech from Davis opposite of Lincoln, both opposites during one of the most important events in American history, not be completely relevant to the class?

 

[Cutlass]

This is a great contrast to the Liberals who wanted textbooks to no longer teach aspects of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or any other pre-1877 history. I'd rather have students worshiping Newt than forgetting the liberties of the Constitution (making a tyranny more possible)

Show me where that's happening.

 

[Patroklos]

...removal of Thomas Jefferson?

At no point does it state he will be removed, only that he is being axed from that specific portion. Which means he is joining a dozen other major philosophers and contemporary movers and shakers equally as important as Jefferson who are not mentioned in most textbooks period.

Hell, besides noting that he got shot Hamilton is an after thought, and he was far more important than Jefferson ever was in formulating our national character.

 

[Dreadnought]

Show me where that's happening.

Let me Google that for you.

 

[Cutlass]

Let me Google that for you.

In what manner does that answer the question of what liberals have rewritten textbooks for ideological reasons?

 

[Dreadnought]

In what manner does that answer the question of what liberals have rewritten textbooks for ideological reasons?

No no, you have to click on the links Google gives you, then you read the articles.

 

[Bill3000]

Let me Google that for you.

...Google debunks you.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=8203

Fox: “So one of the proposed changes is to start history class in the year 1877.”
The truth: Texas has and always will teach U.S. History from the beginning until present day. U.S. History through Reconstruction is taught in the eighth grade and those standards can be found in the middle school standards, which are called Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Here is a link to the middle school standards: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/teks/social/MS_TEKS_amended.pdf. U.S. History since 1877 is taught in 11th grade.

Try watching Fox less.

 

[Dreadnought]

...Google debunks you.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=8203



Try watching Fox less.

Fox must be pulling it out of their .... noses!

 

[Cutlass]

No no, you have to click on the links Google gives you, then you read the articles.

1) It's your job to make your point. Not mine.

2) Most of the links are Fox news. And that's an explicitly partisan source. So what have you got other than that conservative partisans support conservative partisans?

 

[Dreadnought]

2) Most of the links are Fox news. And that's an explicitly partisan source. So what have you got other than that conservative partisans support conservative partisans?

Under that logic, the opening article for this thread should not even be considered. So, we are at a standstill.

 

[Karalysia]

Rewriting history textbooks? Why that seems so.... communist