20 Feb 2015

Now, more recently, states have started trying to ban the teaching of U.S. history. Yes, U.S. history. Specifically, the bits of our history that might be uncomfortable, unflattering or even shameful — or, as some politicians call it, “unpatriotic.”

It seems strange to organize an educational system around what can’t be taught to children.
But for large chunks of the country, that is exactly how public educational standards seem to be set: by demarcating and preserving blind spots rather than promoting enlightenment.
It started at least 90 years ago with evolution, when Tennessee banned the teaching of any theory that contradicted the biblical story of the divine creation of man, leading to the infamous Scopes monkey trial. The Supreme Court ultimately struck down such laws, but battles over teaching, or not teaching, evolution in public schools continue to this day. Many parts of the country that have relaxed their objections to teaching evolution have now pivoted to try to ban or sabotage teaching about climate change. Sex ed — at least the kind that actually educates kids about sex, rather than its absence — has come under similar attacks. Now, more recently, states have started trying to ban the teaching of U.S. history.
Yes, U.S. history. Specifically, the bits of our history that might be uncomfortable, unflattering or even shameful — or, as some politicians call it, “unpatriotic.”
This week an Oklahoma legislative committee voted overwhelmingly to effectively ban the teaching of Advanced Placement U.S. history classes. The bill’s author, Rep. Dan Fisher (R), said that state funds shouldn’t be used to teach the course — which students can take to receive college credit — because he believes it emphasizes “what is bad about America” and characterizes the United States as a “nation of oppressors and exploiters.” Fisher’s proposal to replace the ready-made, nationally used, college-recognized AP curriculum — studied by hundreds of thousands of high school students each year — with a homegrown substitute would cost the state an estimated $3.8 million.
After facing national criticism, Fisher withdrew his bill this week and saidhe plans to submit a new one requiring a state “review” of the AP course rather than its complete defunding. But Oklahoma is far from alone in wanting to reinvent the wheel by creating its own, allegedly more patriotic version of advanced coursework. Policymakers in GeorgiaTexasSouth CarolinaNorth Carolina and Colorado have agitated to scrap or doctor the AP course, citing its “liberal bias” and supposed focus on U.S. “blemishes.” The Republican National Committee likewise called on Congress last year to withhold funding from the nonprofit that developed the course, the College Board, because its AP course “emphasizes negative aspects of our nation’s history while omitting or minimizing positive aspects.” In Colorado, where a local school board proposed revamping the AP curriculum to make sure it does “not encourage or condone civil disorder [or] social strife,” some brave students decided to demonstrate the virtues of civil disorder and social strife by peacefully protesting.
In some states, U.S. history isn’t the only AP course to come under attack. In both Oklahoma and Kansas, legislators have threatened to bar or defund any curriculum not developed locally, which could disqualify all AP and International Baccalaureate classes from being taught in the public schools.
The objections here are not just about insufficiently patriotic content but a bizarre, almost obsessive paranoia about federal encroachment upon states’ rights. Some legislators seem convinced that the educational standards set by the Common Core and AP and IB tests are a manifestation of federal tyranny — an odd concern, given that (A) none of these curricula was developed by the feds (Common Core was a state-led effort, and AP and IB programs are overseen by independent nonprofits) and (B) none of these curricula has actually been mandated by the federal government.
AP and Common Core standards also give teachers and schools quite a bit of discretion in what they teach, setting broad critical-thinking goals rather than providing a concrete syllabus, textbook or packet of lesson plans. If an AP U.S. history teacher wants to highlight the heroism of our Founding Fathers, he very much can.
All said, it’s unclear what problem these states are trying to solve by making it harder to offer classes that will help driven and ambitious students succeed.

14 comments:

  1. I agree. I don't want Judeo-apartheid Marxism taught as American history. This is 2015, so we already heard. Founding fathers are terrorists, the Constitution is goyim filth. Yes, ban foreign funded religious fake history classes, yes, even if they are so very Jewish

    ReplyDelete
  2. Think about how insane modern creationists are...go back through every text book until you find the origin of the, "...earth is six thousand years old," claim. Ultimately you will arrive at Catholic translations of Roman works commenting on the cultural beliefs of the Estruscans. These are the prehistoric people who inhabited western Italy and had their own distinct culture and language.

    According to Romans the Estruscans believed that the history of the world was only six thousand years old. Read that back slowly to yourself;

    "...the HISTORY of the world is 6,000 years old.."

    Meaning writing is six thousand years old. As of 1,000 B.C. writing, the recording of HISTORY, began in 7,000 B.C. or thereabouts. Right in line with all the known science you find writing systems beginning with logogrammic, or symbols and becoming characters by 4,000 B.C. and anthropological studies have confirmed that mythology tales can last up to one thousand years using the old shamanic system of appointing someone each generation as the next tribal shaman from childhood. That puts the historical written accounts beginning in 4,000 B.C. but containing unadulterated material from 5,000 B.C. only slightly changed or improved upon since 6,000 B.C.

    Catholics have used semantics to alter history and now they want to use semantics to rewrite it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When the Islamic Caliphate declared independence from the modern world government system it was considered terrorist threats instead of an inspired move towards a new system of governance which our Founding Fathers declared was an inalienable right of humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ...yes...let us just fill the kid's head with lies, distortions and outright BS...like the idea that FDR was surprised by Pearl Harbor...or that LBJ had nothing to do with JFK's killing.....no, wait...why don't we tell the folks that The Gulf of Tonkin incident really happened....you people are idiots... all governments lie...including local idiots....state idiots and the federal fascists......screw all of them....
    RJ O'Guillory
    Author-
    Webster Groves - The Life of an Insane Family

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have never encountered a single creationist one time in my life. Aside from the fact that it is a JEWISH CREATION MYTH FROM THE HEBREW TORAH, not Christianity, I have never seen one. I have seen countless thousands of Judeo-atheists pretending to battle them, like they pretend to battle Hitler two generations after his death. Never seen a fake 'flat earther' which also don't really exist.

    I HAVE ENCOUNTERED people who pretend to be against Creationism and pro Evolution, but all those people are NEO CREATIONISTS who teach all men are equal, and that evolution does not happen in humans, and all humans have the same genetic potential for IQ or any other trait...

    you found REAL EVOLUTION was 'too racist' for you, and offended your RELIGIOUS TRUTH...

    because sadly, real science? OFTEN has real answers that are not the ones we WANTED TO HEAR... they were the truth instead....

    go battle pretend creationists to hide your NEO CREATIONISM that race can't exist because it would be MEAN AND SAD AND UNFAIR... nature is not allowed to be mean or unfair in your religion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Ministry of Truth is hard at work
    www.veritasmc.org/downloads/.1984zip for the entire 1984 book

    ReplyDelete
  7. www.veritasmc.org/downloads/1984.zip

    ReplyDelete
  8. From what is learned in History class might as well for they leave out very important items. Ask any American about the Cuban missile crisis and they will say Russia was putting nukes in Cuba...yet there is never mention that it was the US that first put missiles in turkey that caused the crisis and the US agreed to pull them out is when Russia puled there's out.......it is always said that Russia backed down because of the us navy blockade...countries with thousands of nuclear missiles aren't intimidated.....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Didn't your Momma teach you that shouting is really bad mannered?

    ReplyDelete
  10. And espe ially when the official ...."History" is a lot of myths, in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You can find the quoted source from the Italian author and expert, Massimo Pallottino in his seminal work, "The Estruscans."

    History of the earth is six thousand years old taken by Catholics to mean the earth itself is six thousand years old. They, the Catholics, make no distinction between ancient and modern time in today's debates but rely on a mistranslation of this source material for their determination that historically the world has been know to be six thousand years old.

    Roman culture and religion was greatly influenced by Estruscans and Etruscan families were some of the wealthiest in all of Italy. Their people become the priests for Italy in all religions because they practiced ritualized religion long before the Latins. Rome simply adopted their ideas and folded their culture into their own.

    No matter who you go to they will ultimately rely on a Catholic source for this and that source is Estrusca and it is a misunderstanding or mistranslation.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It has nothing to do with Etruscans and everything to do with this scholar.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
    His chronology of the Bible was the generally accepted version of the time up until the mid 19th century rise of archeological studies.

    ReplyDelete
  13. David John Mowers22 February 2015 at 08:41

    Again, the source for this claim comes from a 500 B.C. assertion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. David John Mowers23 February 2015 at 03:44

    My source is quoted in 500 B.C.

    ReplyDelete