Texas: The flipper baby of our educational system

[RebelFencer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/e...on/13texas.html


N.Y. Times posted:
After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday voted to approve a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Father’s commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

The vote was 11 to 4, with 10 Republicans and one Democrat voting for the curriculum, and four Democrats voting against.

The board, whose members are elected, has influence beyond Texas because the state is one of the largest purchasers of textbooks. In the digital age, however, that influence has been diminished as technological advances have made it possible for publishers to tailor books to individual states.

In recent years, board members have been locked in an ideological battle between a bloc of conservatives who question Darwin’s theory of evolution and believe the Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles and a handful of Democrats and moderate Republicans who have fought to preserve the teaching of Darwinism and the separation of church and state.

Since January, Republicans on the board have passed more than 160 amendments to the 120-page curriculum standards affecting history, sociology and economics courses from elementary to high school. The standards were proposed by a board of teachers.

Efforts by Hispanic board members to include more Latino figures as role models for the state’s large Hispanic population were consistently defeated, prompting one member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out of a meeting late Thursday night, saying, “They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist.”

“They are going overboard, they are not experts, they are not historians,” she said. “They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world.”

The curriculum standards will now be published in a state register, opening them up for 30 days of public comment. A final vote will be taken in May, but given the Republican dominance of the board, it is unlikely many changes will be made.

The standards, reviewed every decade, serve as a template for publishers of textbooks, who must come before the board next year with drafts of their books. The board’s makeup will have changed by then because the leader of the conservative faction, Dr. Don McLeroy, lost in a primary to a more moderate Republican, and two others — one Democrat and one conservative Republican — have announced they are not seeking re-election.

There are seven members of the conservative bloc on the board, but they are often joined by one of the other three Republicans on crucial votes. There were no historians, sociologists or economists consulted at the meetings, though some members of the conservative bloc held themselves out as experts on certain topics.

The conservative members maintain that they are trying to correct what they see as a liberal bias among the teachers who proposed the curriculum. To that end, they made dozens of minor changes aimed at calling into question, among other things, concepts like the separation of church and state and the secular nature of the American Revolution.

“I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state,” said David Bradley, a conservative from Beaumont who works in real estate. “I have $1,000 for the charity of your choice if you can find it in the Constitution.”

They also included a plank to ensure that students learn about “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schalfly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.”

Dr. McLeroy pushed through a change to the teaching of the civil rights movement to ensure that students study the violent philosophy of the Black Panthers in addition to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s nonviolent approach. He also made sure that textbooks would mention the votes in Congress on civil rights legislation, which Republicans supported.

“Republicans need a little credit for that,” he said. “I think it’s going to surprise some students.”

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation. He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians were interned in the United States as well as the Japanese during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

Other changes seem aimed at tamping down criticism of the right. Conservatives passed one amendment, for instance, requiring that the history of McCarthyism include “how the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” The Venona papers were transcripts of some 3,000 communications between the Soviet Union and its agents in the United States.

In economics, the revisions add Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek, two champions of free-market economic theory, among the usual list of economists to be studied, like Adam Smith, Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teen suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

“The topic of sociology tends to blame society for everything,” Ms. Cargill said.

Even the course on World History did not escape the board’s scalpel.

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among the conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

“The Enlightenment was not the only philosophy on which these revolutions were based,” Ms. Dunbar said.

Mavis B. Knight, a Democrat from Dallas, introduced an amendment requiring that students study the reasons “the founding fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring the government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion above all others.”

It was defeated on a party-line vote.

Seriously, if you can't take a mostly objective look at something like history then we're in trouble. It is a tragedy that we are crippling kids like this. I mean even the most conservative here would agree that it's ludicrous to replace the term "Capitalism" with "Free-market."

[I_luv_saber]

I can only reply with a simple:



I will say though, I don't see anything wrong with objectively including Hayek and Friedman - they do represent a major side of economic debate. But, judging from all the other changes, I doubt they will be objectively introduced, so....

[Bayou Bum]

LOL. It's like Chase gets to choose what to teach all of your children.

[RebelFencer]

I can only reply with a simple:



I will say though, I don't see anything wrong with objectively including Hayek and Friedman - they do represent a major side of economic debate. But, judging from all the other changes, I doubt they will be objectively introduced, so....

Oh definitely. I don't have a problem with conservatives who have done important things being added or anything like that, just as long as it's done objectively. Same as if they had taken a ridiculously left slant.

[melensdad]

Oh definitely. I don't have a problem with conservatives who have done important things being added or anything like that, just as long as it's done objectively. Same as if they had taken a ridiculously left slant.

Strikes me that accuracy should be first. What is happening in Texas may simply be a backlash to a liberal slant? A conservative slant is no better than a liberal slant.

60% Say Their Kids’ Textbooks Place Political Correctness Above Accuracy
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...above_accuracy

Sixty percent (60%) of Americans with children in elementary or secondary school say most school textbooks are more concerned with presenting information in a politically correct manner than in accuracy.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 28% of adults with children in the schools disagree and think most textbooks are more concerned with accurately providing information.

Among all Americans, regardless of whether they have children in the schools or not, 27% say accuracy is paramount, while 55% disagree and believe most textbooks are more concerned about political correctness. Eighteen percent(18%) are undecided.

Thirty-one percent (31%) of adults say most school history textbooks portray American history accurately. But 43% say most U.S. history textbooks are not accurate, and another 26% are not sure.

Again, those with children currently in elementary or secondary school are even more skeptical. Just 28% think most school textbooks portray U.S. history accurately, while nearly half (49%) say they do not. Twenty-three percent (23%) aren’t sure.

[RebelFencer]

Strikes me that accuracy should be first. What is happening in Texas may simply be a backlash to a liberal slant? A conservative slant is no better than a liberal slant.

60% Say Their Kids’ Textbooks Place Political Correctness Above Accuracy
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...above_accuracy

Sixty percent (60%) of Americans with children in elementary or secondary school say most school textbooks are more concerned with presenting information in a politically correct manner than in accuracy.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 28% of adults with children in the schools disagree and think most textbooks are more concerned with accurately providing information.

Among all Americans, regardless of whether they have children in the schools or not, 27% say accuracy is paramount, while 55% disagree and believe most textbooks are more concerned about political correctness. Eighteen percent(18%) are undecided.

Thirty-one percent (31%) of adults say most school history textbooks portray American history accurately. But 43% say most U.S. history textbooks are not accurate, and another 26% are not sure.

Again, those with children currently in elementary or secondary school are even more skeptical. Just 28% think most school textbooks portray U.S. history accurately, while nearly half (49%) say they do not. Twenty-three percent (23%) aren’t sure.

Is that not exactly what I said? The goal of public education is supposed to present kids with the information and tools to make well informed decisions and to be able to articulate what they believe and why. The public schools system is falling terribly short, and not just in Texas (although it is the "city on a hill" of bad educational choices). It becomes increasingly difficult to get any useful information out of something if it is slanted, regardless of the direction. And I do agree that school in general has become too politically correct. I think that especially with discipline they are taking common sense out and running the schools like mini-prisons.

melensdad: could you give me some examples of the material being taught that is too politically correct? I don't recall getting any of that, but I graduated high school in 2003, so it's been awhile.

[phillipmj]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/ed...ucation&st=nyt

An updated link to the original article. The old one no longer works.

[erik_blank]

Strikes me that accuracy should be first. What is happening in Texas may simply be a backlash to a liberal slant? A conservative slant is no better than a liberal slant.

I wonder just how many of these people have actually READ the text books and how many are making their opinions based on the statements of 'leaders' from either side of the political debate. Personally I have three just starting school now, but I have not taken the time (nor created the opportunity) to read the history text books provided to the kids.

This, while giving me the opportunity to have an opinion, does not really justify anything on my part.

[Inquartata]

So...no one sees the tone of the article as...ah...slightly biased toward the "progressive" point of view?

I mean, it's rather "Tsk! Look what those darned conservatives are doing!", isn't it?

But that's alright, I guess?

[RebelFencer]

So...no one sees the tone of the article as...ah...slightly biased toward the "progressive" point of view?

I mean, it's rather "Tsk! Look what those darned conservatives are doing!", isn't it?

But that's alright, I guess?

I would have a tremendous problem with it if they attempted to present the facts in a positive light. The tone doesn't (fine, shouldn't) change whether or not something is factually correct. If it is not, then shame on the NY Times for bad journalism.

[lindajdunn]

I wonder just how many of these people have actually READ the text books and how many are making their opinions based on the statements of 'leaders' from either side of the political debate. Personally I have three just starting school now, but I have not taken the time (nor created the opportunity) to read the history text books provided to the kids.

This, while giving me the opportunity to have an opinion, does not really justify anything on my part.

It's been twenty years since I volunteered at a PTA meeting to be on the textbook committee. In a nutshell, we examined the possible textbook selections and this is when I learned that what was chosen in Texas, was what the rest of us had to deal with. The problem has existed for a long time.

[Inquartata]

I would have a tremendous problem with it if they attempted to present the facts in a positive light.

How about a neutral light, then?

The tone doesn't (fine, shouldn't) change whether or not something is factually correct.

Indeed. But it's tones that give the impression of "liberal media bias" in the first place. Then that charge occasions still more articles with such tones, decrying the criticisms of liberal media bias...

Where does it all end?

Where is Cronkite when you need him? ( After his retirement it became clear that he was...ah...rather "progressive" in his own views. But I can seldom if ever recall those personal views---or those of his producers---creeping into his reporting. )

"Where is the news that late I read?
Where is it now? Totally dead.
Where is the fact I used to find?
Where has it gone? Gone with the wine.
This modern news is opinion-based
Each media pest
Throws a bias-fest
Of his own belief.
So I repeat what once I said:
Where is the news that late I read?

[phillipmj]

But that's alright, I guess?

Got it right the first time! Must've been a lucky guess.

[RebelFencer]

How about a neutral light, then?




Indeed. But it's tones that give the impression of "liberal media bias" in the first place. Then that charge occasions still more articles with such tones, decrying the criticisms of liberal media bias...

Where does it all end?

Where is Cronkite when you need him? ( After his retirement it became clear that he was...ah...rather "progressive" in his own views. But I can seldom if ever recall those personal views---or those of his producers---creeping into his reporting. )

"Where is the news that late I read?
Where is it now? Totally dead.
Where is the fact I used to find?
Where has it gone? Gone with the wine.
This modern news is opinion-based
Each media pest
Throws a bias-fest
Of his own belief.
So I repeat what once I said:
Where is the news that late I read?

This is one of those times that I completely and totally agree with you.

[jessicasimpson]

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among the conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state."

After re reading the OP, I have decided that this is worth fighting for. I have decided to do my part in suppressing anything Jefferson. All of these people in Texas need to look through their wallets, and send me everything they have with Jefferson's picture on it. I will personally make sure they never have to see them again. Come to think of it, Grant and Franklin were total bastards that did not believe in the divinity of Jesus. I will also take any pieces of paper that have their likeness.

[I_luv_saber]

Woodrow Wilson was a commie.

[Inquartata]

This is one of those times that I completely and totally agree with you.

First Gav, now you. This is too much! Too much, I tell you!

[Emfuser]

It's a damn shame that politics entered the classroom, but it didn't just happen recently. Each side of the political spectrum has an agenda they want to see institutionalized at every level of our society. It's too bad that so few people have an agenda of simply teaching the most accurate information we have instead of something that has been put through a spin cycle.

[Gav]

It's a damn shame that politics entered the classroom, but it didn't just happen recently. Each side of the political spectrum has an agenda they want to see institutionalized at every level of our society. It's too bad that so few people have an agenda of simply teaching the most accurate information we have instead of something that has been put through a spin cycle.

QFT.

Well said.

It's even creeping in over here too.

[melensdad]

melensdad: could you give me some examples of the material being taught that is too politically correct? I don't recall getting any of that, but I graduated high school in 2003, so it's been awhile.

How about teaching EBONICS in school? Can't get much more politically correct than that. Rethinking Schools Inverview: http://www.rethinkingschools.org/arc...ebsecret.shtml

Oakland Ebonic's Debate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland...cs_controversy

Chicago Tribune: Ebonics as a 2nd Language: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~jmw22/ChicagoTribune122096.html

Ebonics: Study Skill or Slavery Setback: http://www.pub.umich.edu/daily/1997/...7/news/ff.html

It is a decisive topic, many advocating it while others suggest that correct language skills are needed to climb the ladder of success.

It's a damn shame that politics entered the classroom, but it didn't just happen recently. Each side of the political spectrum has an agenda they want to see institutionalized at every level of our society. It's too bad that so few people have an agenda of simply teaching the most accurate information we have instead of something that has been put through a spin cycle.

Very well said.