The battle lines are drawn. A new front in the “culture wars” has opened in Texas with the state’s new social studies curriculum, the result of a political and controversial process. The standards reflect a decidedly conservative and Christian slant on American history, winning praise from right-wing activists while sparking outrage on the left.
Are you in favor of the new Texas history standards?
What's at Issue: The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) tentatively adopted the new standards in March 2010. The 10-member Republican majority passed the more controversial standards over the objection of the five Democratic SBOE members. The standards embody a conservative history that is openly nationalistic, dominated by white male figures, and laced with moral lessons and the Christian interpretation of the past. Progressives and multiculturalists see the standards as a throwback to a nostalgic and unrealistic story of triumph and patriotism rather than a challenging, more inclusive and more realistic account that embraces the struggle for social justice and political progress while recognizing the contributions of women and minorities. Humanists and liberal theologians are troubled by perceived intrusion of religion into public education.
Pro: Republicans and social conservatives see the proposed standards as a response to perceived liberal bias in existing texts, and as an antidote to increasing “politically correct” and multicultural works that undermine an understanding of shared American ideals and values.
Social conservatives argue that it is essential to frame American history in terms of the Judeo-Christian beliefs of the Founders. SBOE member Dr. Don McLeroy, a vocal social conservative, envisioned a version of history “like Superman; truth, justice and the American way.” The venerable conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly lauded the partisan, Republican-controlled SBOE for reflecting taxpayer beliefs and correcting “liberal bias” in textbooks.
Con:
Progressives and multiculturalists argue that the proposed curriculum standards shortchange students by presenting a simplistic and outdated view of a paternalistic and triumphal past while ignoring the contributions of minorities and women, and downplaying important social and political movements from the New Deal to the Civil Rights movement. In addition, liberals and civil rights advocates are concerned about bringing religion and an arguable history of religious influences into public education for fear that students’ freedom of religion may be infringed.
The politicized curriculum adoption process has also been criticized for permitting a panel of partisan politicians rather than teachers or historians to create ideological standards that students are required to know to pass required state tests. Some critics have mulled over alternatives to the present partisan board including a non-partisan board or a completely new panel, or groups of experts who actually draft the technical curriculum rules. Many historians, such as Prof. Keith Erekson, urge the teaching of multiple viewpoints about historical events while developing critical thinking skills such as analysis and problem solving.
