Liberty Forged

 

The last few days, at least in some quarters, people have heard about the furor created by the activities of elementary school children singing the praises of Barack Obama to the melody of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” in a New Jersey school. On one side of the controversy, people have said that it was just part of a school activity celebrating Black History month. The other side of the argument contends that it is nothing less than political, liberal indoctrination of young people. 

 

 

 

 

In recent years there have been numerous textbook and curriculum controversies on a number of issues: evolution versus creationism; complaints about anti-Christian and pro-Muslim bias in certain social studies textbooks; charges of political indoctrination in favor of Barack Obama in a Wisconsin adopted McDougal-Littell Literature textbook which contained fifteen pages about Mr. Obama and highlighting his 2004 Democratic National Convention speech as good literature; complaints about factual errors in textbooks, especially in history books; the inclusion or exclusion of curricula mandates about homosexuality and transgender lifestyles; the inclusion or exclusion of certain books in school libraries, such as the Harry Potter books; and questions about sex education in the schools. The above is certainly not an exhaustive listing.

 

Textbook and school curriculum controversies are not new phenomena. They date back many decades. For example, one of the earliest curricular protest dates back to the 1840’s when Irish immigrants in New York objected to the portrayal of the Roman Catholic Church in public school textbooks. Much of the current tidal wave of controversy centers on the teaching of United States, history, government and economics.

 

One group contends that most United States history textbooks used in public schools are too nationalistic and too Anglo-centric or Eurocentric. These critics also claim that the textbooks lack sufficient appreciation of and sensitivity to various ethnic groups and women, that the textbooks are sanitized from controversies so that textbook publishers can gain state adoption for their texts, and that textbooks are engaged in “heroification” as James Loewen describes it in Lies My Teacher Told Me. These critics also charge that the textbooks, in their effort to cover all of the history of our country, are so fact-filled, even though much of it might be erroneous, that they cannot delve deeply into specific issues and controversies. Loewen writes, “Because they try to cover so many things, textbooks, at least as currently incarnated, cannot effectively acquaint students with issues and controversies and thereby with historical argument, with its attendant skills of using logic and marshaling evidence to persuade.”

 

Of course, there is the flip-side of the argument! Many argue that the textbooks are, in fact, error-prone, but that the errors tend to be left-leaning, liberal lies or interpretations that smack of political indoctrination, if not outright subversive material that undermines our country’s heritage and traditional values. Larry Schweikart, in 48 Liberal Lies About American History, writes,

 

 

Additionally, it is argued that political correctness has run amok in textbooks and school curriculum—that certain words or images have been banned or considered offensive, while other images and topics must be included. For example, in California the word “jungle” has been replaced with “rain forest,” and health food advocates convinced lawmakers to prohibit the mention of “foods of low nutritive value” in textbooks.

 

These arguments and debates have lasted for decades. In 1934, Willard Givens, who served as the executive secretary of the National Education Association (NEA) from 1935 until 1952, issued a report entitled “Education for the New America.” Givens wrote,

 

 

Such statements as these certainly seem to give credence to the belief among many that the schools are, in fact, attempting to indoctrinate the youth of our country. Parenthetically, doesn’t Givens’ call for an equal distribution of income sound familiar to today’s advocacy, by many liberals, for a redistribution of wealth?

 

The issue of liberalism and left-wing bias in the classrooms of public schools is truly a multi-faceted issue encompassing textbook issues, state curriculum requirements for schools, teacher education and preparation, and hidden political and social agendas advocated by special interest groups. Muddying the problem is that these subcomponents are intricately inter-twined.

 

As noted above, textbooks have been criticized by both liberals and conservatives, and truthfully, there is merit to both sides of the argument. One essential element to the textbook controversy revolves around the selection process. While twenty-eight states allow local school districts to choose textbooks for their own school system, there are twenty-two states that maintain state-wide textbook adoption programs. In some of these states local districts are required to select textbooks from the state-adopted list of approved textbooks. In others, such as Georgia beginning in 1995, local districts are allowed to use state textbook funds to purchase any textbook, whether or not the textbook is on the state-adopted list or not. However, the selection process is more insidious.

 

School textbook publishing is big business; a $4.3 billion business! Since many of the well-known, larger publishing companies have been merged, it is estimated that four or five companies dominate seventy percent of the textbook market for grades K-12 and those companies, like any other business, are looking to make a profit. In order to do so, they must make sure that their textbooks are approved for selection in the adoption states. Without question, Texas, California and Florida have unparallel clout in the adoption process. Collectively, these three states have almost 50% of the students in grades K-12 among the adoption states and in 2004 these three states allocated more than $900 million for instructional materials which accounted for more than a quarter of all the money spent nation-wide on textbooks. Despite the tremendous influence that California, and to a lesser extent Florida, have on textbook publishing, Texas is the state with the most influence. Although Texas has fewer students than California, Texas spends just as much money on its public schools, and more importantly, Texas allocates a significant amount of their educational budget specifically for textbooks which must be spent on textbooks within the adoption year. Additionally, Texas has particular influence when it comes to high school textbooks because, unlike California which adopts textbooks state-wide only for grades K-8, the Lone Star state adopts state-wide for grades K-12.

 

Consequently, textbook publishers work diligently to meet the needs or expectations of Texas and California and this means that the other states are generally left in the position of choosing textbooks that have been designed to achieve success, I mean adoption, in those two states. It is simply not economically feasible for publishers to have textbooks that are tailored for one group of states and have other sets of textbooks for other groups of states. 

 

So what about states like Georgia where local systems can purchase textbooks that are not on the state-adopted approved list?  Again, the process is insidious. Given the work load of teachers and administrators, few have the time, or perhaps even the inclination, to seek out materials that are not on the approved list to make additional recommendations to the local boards of education which must approve the purchases. It is easier for everyone involved to just use the materials on the state-adopted list. Also, local school systems feel a certain amount of security and comfort when receiving complaints from parents and students about curriculum materials when they can simply respond that “the materials are on the state-approved adoption list.”

 

 

 

Furthermore, textbook adoption states have established processes that allow for state adoption hearings and citizen review of proposed materials. This quite naturally leads to watchdog groups, both conservative and liberal, who attempt to influence, if not shape, curriculum and textbooks. Perhaps, the most famous, or infamous depending upon one’s point of view, are the Texas couple Mel and Norma Gabler who four decades ago established the non-profit corporation Educational Research Analysts. This organization continues to review textbooks and lobby against liberal content. Of course, it would be foolish to believe that there are not liberal counterparts.

 

Of course, the textbook demands of Texas and California are not uniform and they seldom coincide with one another. As Joan DelFattore, University of Delaware professor, writes, “Not all Texans are conservatives, and not all Californians are liberals….but Texas generally favor older textbook orthodoxies, while California…tends toward progressive social views and innovative teaching strategies.”

 

Tamim Ansary, a former textbook editor, contends that “Anyone who stays in textbook publishing long enough develops radar for what will and won’t get pass the blanding process of both the conservative and liberal watchdogs” and, therefore, publishers become self-censors. So, we wonder from what sources political correctness derives? 

 

Finally, it comes down to the individual classroom teacher and the individual school where a multiplicity of factors converge. How qualified is the teacher? What is the particular prism or point of reference through which the teacher presents his or her classroom instruction? What is the school district or individual school social milieu in which the teacher must exist?

 

It must be acknowledged that not all high school history and government teachers are equally prepared or trained in their subject matters. While significant improvements have occurred, there was a time, not too long ago, that many teachers possessed broad-field social studies certification. While there was certainly great variation from state to state, in some cases teachers, particularly relatively new teachers, were able to be certified even though they really had no great in-depth college coursework in the specific disciplines, such as history, political science, economics, etc. that they might be teaching in high school. Consequently, those teachers were very reliant on the adopted textbook for their own class preparation and class instruction. Even when the teacher has sufficient discipline-oriented preparation, it must be recognized that given the student class loads, ever increasing bureaucratic-driven paperwork, before and after school duty assignments and extra-curricular duties, and the demands to reach specific curriculum requirements and state, system and school assessment goals, teachers are still textbook-bound more often than not.

 

Improvements clearly have been made in this area as states have taken measures to insure that teachers have more adequate discipline-specific college coursework preparation. However, one must consider the context of their college coursework preparation. It is generally known and acknowledged that the vast majority of college professors are liberals, not conservatives, and this is particularly true in the social science discipline areas. Consequently, whether it is through specific class lectures, Socratic-method class discussions, required course reading assignments or the selection of the main course textbook, a great deal of what these college students are exposed to is liberal-oriented, liberal interpretations of the subject matter. Zachary Elder writes, “From the beginning of our education, the teaching of American history influences our beliefs because it is the place that we learn about our past heritage, which in turn influences our self-image and our future thinking.” It is not an astronomical leap of logic to believe that this same conclusion extends to other areas of history or other social science disciplines. Is it any wonder, then, that so many high school social studies teachers have a liberal interpretation or bias even when they are adopted textbook-bound?

 

Yes, all of us are influenced by our environment, education, life experiences, and family, as well as community, values and mores. We all have our own specific set of preconceptions, biases, and predispositions to be open or closed minded.  

 

It is not realistic to believe that the factors influencing textbook adoptions, teacher preparation or political-social biases in public schools are going to be drastically altered, if at all, in the near term. So, what courses of action are moderates and conservatives, who believe that political correctness and liberal bias has overrun schools, to take? 

 

There are no easy answers. Many individuals will probably feel uncomfortable or overwhelmed with some of the suggestions offered, but here they are:

 

 

Finally, educate yourself about the history and government of our country and make additional sources of information other than the class textbook available to your student. This can be extremely difficult. It can be overly time consuming. It is especially difficult for most people given that the majority of Americans have never taken a United States history course beyond the high school level, and those who have were likely exposed to liberal professors and liberal college textbooks. As daunting as this may seem it is not insurmountable. Read a variety of basic U.S. history textbooks from the college ranks as well as histories of specific events and eras. These should be supplemented with biographies. It is important to incorporate primary sources, as well as secondary sources, into your reading. With today’s internet, many primary sources are available to people who do not have the time or money to visit museums, research libraries or archives. By reading primary sources, you will be able to interpret for yourself rather than being entirely dependent upon the professional historian.

 

There are merits on both sides of the textbook controversies pertaining to social studies. For parents who are interested in sources other than the adopted school textbook for U.S. history, the following suggestions are offered, but it should be noted that they encompass basic reference materials as well as books that have conservative, as well as some liberal, authors. Additionally, some of the reference books are old and out of print, but are still obtainable in used conditions through some bookstores and Barnes & Noble on-line.

 

Bennett, William J. America- The Last Best Hope- Volume I: From the Age of Discovery to a World at War.

 

Bennett, William J. America- The Last Best Hope - Volume II: From a World at War to the Triumph of Freedom.

 

Schweikart, Larry, and Michael Allen. A Patriot’s History of the United States: From Columbus’s Great Discovery to the War on Terror.

 

Schweikart, Larry. 48 Liberal Lies About American History (That You Probably Learned in School).

Loewen, James W. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.

Morris, Richard B. et al. Encyclopedia of American History.

 

Hurwitz, Howard L. Dictionary of American History.

 

Handlin, Oscar et al. Harvard Guide to American History.

 

Freidel, Frank et al. Harvard Guide to American History, Volumes I and II.

 

Boatner, Mark M.III, ed. Encyclopedia of the American Revolution.

 

Plano, Jack C. and Greenberg, Milton. The American Political Dictionary.

 

Plano, Jack C. and Greenberg, Milton.  American Political Dictionary

 

Napolitano, Andrew P. The Constitution in Exile.

 

Hall, Kermit L. ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Schwartz, Bernard. A History of the Supreme Court.

 

Lieberman, Jethro K. A Practical Companion to The Constitution: How The Supreme Court Has Ruled on Issues from Abortion to Zoning.

 

Semonche, John E. Keeping The Faith: A Cultural History of The U.S. Supreme Court.

 

 

 

Signed,