REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Texas textbook war: 'Slavery' or 'Atlantic triangular trade'?

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Saturday, August 24, 2013 12:00
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 966
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, August 24, 2013 8:32 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Here we go again. Changes to social studies textbooks in Texas proposed by conservatives have resulted in an uproar:
Quote:

With a textbook industry that is often influenced by the standards in the largest states, the changes have influence beyond Texas.

“Decisions that are made in Texas have a ripple effect across the country,” says Phillip VanFossen, head of the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and a professor of social studies education at Purdue University.

Conservatives dominate Texas Board of Education

The root of the uproar is a regular process in which the Texas Board of Education revises the state’s standards. Far more than in most states, the elected board is entrusted to write standards itself, rather than merely approve them. With a 10-5 Republican majority, including a coalition of seven social conservatives, the board has pushed what some see as a particularly partisan agenda.

Among the changes: Students would be required to learn about the “unintended consequences” of Title IX, affirmative action, and the Great Society, and would need to study conservative icons like Phyllis Schlafly, the Heritage Foundation, and the Moral Majority.

The slave trade would be renamed the “Atlantic triangular trade,” American “imperialism” changed to “expansionism,” and all references to “capitalism” have been replaced with “free enterprise.”

The role of Thomas Jefferson – who argued for the separation of church and state – is minimized in several places, and the standards would emphasize the degree to which the Founding Fathers were driven by Christian principles.

Some say they are dismayed at the degree to which the standards seem to have been written without regard for scholarship.

Professor VanFossen, for instance, was bothered by a new requirement that students analyze the decline in value of the US dollar and abandonment of the gold standard, without input from economists, and by amendments that would try to cast a more positive spin on Sen. Joe McCarthy’s communist witch hunt.

“It’s ideologically driven,” he says, adding that he’s also bothered that many of the most important skills students need to learn – debate and discussion, constructing arguments, reconciling different perspectives – are being lost amid the highly proscriptive and detailed content. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2010/0519/Texas-textbook-war-Sl
avery-or-Atlantic-triangular-trade
]


The good news (for some of us, anyway):
Quote:

California this week passed a bill out of a Senate committee that would ensure no California textbooks contain any Texas-driven changes. Same


and
Quote:

Whatever the vote is this week, the conservative influence on the board may be waning.

Don McLeroy, the author of many of the most contentious amendments and a leader of the conservative coalition, was defeated in March in a primary by an opponent who was critical of his approach. Another key social conservative, Cynthia Dunbar, is not seeking reelection, and a more moderate candidate won the GOP primary in her district. Same



Like our educational system isn't screwed up enough already...slavery was "Atlantic triangular trade"?? What the hell does that MEAN, anyway?

For more:
Quote:

what happens when publishers eager to make a sale are willing to edit content that special-interest groups object to ? or even submit their books to those groups for input prior to publication?

The practice of self censorship is increasingly apparent here in Texas, where battles over textbook content are epic. For years, publishers have been held to the fire by conservatives who could make or break a textbook. But now, critics say, publishers are allowing conservative groups likely to raise the biggest fusstodiscuss content before the books are made available for public review.

"The publishers know the religious right will go after a handful of books every year and nobody wants it to be their book," says Samantha Smoot, executive director of the Austin-based Texas Freedom Network, a watchdog group that monitors the religious right. "Texas has really become a testing ground, when in comes to textbooks, for what the far right is able to get away with."

The annual textbook battle began last Wednesday as the State Board of Education opened public hearings to consider 2003 social studies texts for all grades ? a $345 million purchase.

Ever since well-known Texans Mel and Norma Gabler began pouring over textbooks in the '60s in search of anti-Christian bias, critics have charged that the conservative right was trying to interject its agenda into the classroom. Conservatives over the years have battled such things as a photo of a woman carrying a briefcase, the theory of evolution, and "overkill of emphasis on cruelty to slaves."

In 1995, the legislature intervened and passed a law that said the State Board of Education could only reject books based on factual errors, not ideology.

But the board is also mandated by state law to approve books that are made of quality materials and that promote democracy, patriotism, and the free-enterprise system. And conservative board members are finding ways to stretch the definitions to suit their beliefs.

Two recent examples: The state board rejected an environmental science book last year, in part, because it put the US and the free enterprise system in a bad light as significant players in global warming. And, earlier this year, a history text was withdrawn by the publisher after board members objected to references of rampant prostitution in the American West in the 1800s.

Conservative groups contend ideas such as these are un-American or anti-free enterprise and should not be taught to children.

That would be fine, critics say, if decisions by the State Board of Education solely affected children in the Lone Star State. But because the textbook market in Texas is so large and financially attractive ? with 4.1 million public school children it is second only to California in volume of books purchased ? publishers often use books approved here nationwide.

"We're the 900-pound gorilla in the room," says board member David Bradley, referring to the clout Texas has in the publishing industry. "It's nice to be king."

Mr. Bradley revels in one tactic he tried to use to reject a math text in 1997. He objected to the book's discussions of poetry, the Vietnam War, and jalapeño recipes. Because his objections involved no factual errors and the new law prevented him from objecting on ideological grounds, he attacked the quality of the book by ripping its binding off.

The 29 publishers that submitted textbooks this year were all on hand at last week's first public hearing, anxious to know how their books will fare and what will be asked of them. .

At least some of the publishers provided their books prior to public review to the Texas Citizens for a Sound Economy, says Peggy Venable of that conservative group.

"Some folks here today disagree. They don't want American values reinforced in our schools," said Rep. Rick Green at the hearing. "But the vast majority of Texans think it is the right thing to do, that it is the primary purpose of our education system."

Some, however, believe the primary purpose of education is to embrace differences of opinion and encourage critical thinking.

The first book to be rejected by the state board since its new directive in 1995 was one such book: "Environmental Science: Creating a Sustainable Future." Used in colleges for the past 20 years, it was submitted for advanced-placement science classes. It received preliminary approval by the textbook committee of the Texas Education Agency. But school-board members rejected the text after a the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) report criticized it for statements about global warming and destruction of the environment ? especially those that pointed the US role in these problems.

Dean DeChambeau, of the book's Massachusetts publisher, Jones and Bartlett, says the company agreed to fix the three factual errors found in the book. But of the other changes suggested by the TPPF report on the book, he says, "We steadfastly refused ... because they wanted us to replace what they perceived as biased material with their own biased material."

Mr. DeChambeau believes the school board was heavily influenced by the TPPF. http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0722/p03s01-ussc.html



Pertinent remark: "Some, however, believe the primary purpose of education is to embrace differences of opinion and encourage critical thinking", as opposed to indoctrinating our kids while lessening their chances to get a proper education.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 24, 2013 9:23 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Well, as I remember being taught it, Slave trade was part of the triangle trade, in fact one entire leg or 1/3: Rum and goods from New England to Africa; Slaves from Africa to the South; sugar and cotton from the South to New England.

As long as they want to emphasize that 1/3, that should still be acceptable, but, of course, I'm sure they want to ignore that entire leg. It's also handy as a Southern technique, to emphasize the guilt of the New England ship owners in the process.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 24, 2013 12:00 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Well, as I remember being taught it, Slave trade was part of the triangle trade, in fact one entire leg or 1/3: Rum and goods from New England to Africa; Slaves from Africa to the South; sugar and cotton from the South to New England.

As long as they want to emphasize that 1/3, that should still be acceptable, but, of course, I'm sure they want to ignore that entire leg. It's also handy as a Southern technique, to emphasize the guilt of the New England ship owners in the process.



" Let's not be excluding anyone. That'd be rude "

I see no problem in teachin folks the whole story.

Why all the fuss ?

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL