If Textbook Authors Are Truly Scholars . . . 4

4 comments

1. Rhymes With Right

   August 22, 2009 at 12:19 pm

   I put to you the following question that I have asked so many other folks making negative comments on this subject based upon one newspaper article/blog post — have you read the proposed standards, or just an article/blog post making an assertion about what they require.

   As a Texas social studies teacher, I’ve commented on the matter at my site, and provided links to the revised standards for folks who want to make an actual informed comment on the subject.

    
2. Frank

   August 22, 2009 at 1:02 pm

   I have not read the proposal.  Too little time too much to read.
   I also realize these are merely drafts, the start of a long progress.
   But in a sane world, these ideas would not even have made it into a draft.

    
3. Rhymes With Right

   August 22, 2009 at 1:31 pm

   Really?  You are going to teach about the last 30 years without mentioning the what has been the defining political force of the period, namely modern conservatism?

   Let me guess — you would be equally open to the notion that we should teach the period of 1950-1975 without mentioning the civil rights movement, too?

    
4. Rhymes With Right

   August 22, 2009 at 1:35 pm

   Oh, and the standards from the particular course you mention run only 15 pages, including annotations and the cover page.  It isn’t that extensive a read.  But i will help you by putting the particular standard that seems to offend you in its context:

   <blockquote>10) History. The student understands the circumstances of the U.S. as it emerges into the 21st century. The student is expected to:
   (A) describe U.S. involvement in world affairs including the Persian Gulf War, Balkans Crisis, 9/11, and global war on terror; and
   (B) identify significant conservative advocacy organizations and individuals, such as Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly, and the Moral Majority.
   (C) discuss the rise of domestic terrorism
   (D) discuss the role of third party candidates, such as Ross Perot and Ralph Nader.</blockquote>
    
   In that context — and without your needing to read the entire 15 pages — does the standard in question make a bit more sense to you?