History Is Texas Reshaping American Education with Conservative Textbooks?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    History
Click For Summary
The Texas School Board is proposing significant changes to history and social studies textbooks, aiming to incorporate a more conservative perspective, which critics argue promotes ideological extremism. Key changes include the exclusion of Thomas Jefferson from discussions of the nation’s intellectual origins, instead highlighting figures like St. Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin, while emphasizing the founding fathers' Christian beliefs. These revisions could influence textbooks nationwide, as Texas is a major player in the educational publishing market, potentially affecting curricula in states with different political leanings. The debate reflects broader tensions over educational content and the perceived political biases in academia. The implications of these changes raise concerns about historical accuracy and representation in American education.
  • #121
CRGreathouse said:
Thanks for the reference, BobG. But the opinion seems to specifically deny the relevance of the 14th Amendment -- that the only objections that could be raised would be on 1st Amendment grounds:


Am I misreading this?

No, you're not misreading it. The 14th just provides the link so the 1st Amendment can be applied to a state government (as opposed to being restricted just to the federal government). The logic of the case still depends on the 1st Amendment.

The 1st Amendment originally only applied to the federal government. It was this clause from the 14th Amendment that made the Bill of Rights applicable to the individual states:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
  • #122
Nebula815 said:
Well that's actually what the public education system was designed for when one looks at its history and designers, problem is, teaching skills necessary to form a better qualified labor force isn't necessarily the same thing as educating people. The original goal of the educational system was to teach people to obey and follow orders. It was based off of the Prussian system, which was designed to produce soldiers and employees (with the idea that a classical education only be given to an elite few). It was not designed to enhance critical thinking skills and in certain ways was designed to retard them.

So you're saying that early public education was designed to produce people that would go the whole 450 Volts on the Milgram experiment.
 
  • #123
BobG said:
So you're saying that early public education was designed to produce people that would go the whole 450 Volts on the Milgram experiment.

~65% would go anyway with it :P

But regardless of this, its very convenient for a government to have high rates of obedience in population.
 
  • #124
mheslep said:
/SNIP/

Even if that is now the interpretation of US law, crediting him with any thing like 'separation' terms in the law as written is a mistake. Jefferson's rule as it was written (either time) does not use any separation wording. Instead it's clear that he wanted to prohibit another 'Church of England' popping up in America, or the clergy becoming a protected class of the state. In his Virginia Bill of Rights, the wording is "all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion", and in the US 1st amendment this became the establishment clause "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Period. There is no separation wording hiding somewhere in the fine print.

/SNIP/

This seemed to suggest he thought Jefferson never spoke the words...
 
  • #125
BobG said:
EVERSON v BOARD OF EDUCATION OF EWING TP in 1947.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=330&invol=1
The only contention here is that the State statute and the resolution, in so far as they authorized reimbursement to parents of children attending parochial schools, violate the Federal Constitution in these two respects, which to some extent, overlap. First. They authorize the State to take by taxation the private property of some and bestow it upon others, to be used for their own private purposes. This, it is alleged violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment....
Imagine that, they must have been a bunch of right wing "neocon" extremists on the side of the rich, huh?
 
  • #126
mheslep said:
It turns out that I was thinking of Jefferson's 'Stature for Religious Freedom', but that was 1779 when he was Governor and after Mason's 1776 VBR.

Are we really sure we want to endorse Jefferson's Statute for Religious Freedom?

Jefferson's Statute for Religious Freedom said:
that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions in physics or geometry

I'm not sure I agree with the "physics or geometry" part. :smile:
 
  • #127
BobG said:
How come Texas is so much more important than California when it comes to textbooks?

Because we rule.
 
  • #128
Brian_C said:
Because we rule.

Quatsch, my good man, Quatsch.

Everyone knows that it is Washington State who rules
 
  • #129
Char. Limit said:
Quatsch, my good man, Quatsch.

Everyone knows that it is Washington State who rules

A state so important that you have to remind people that you're talking about a real state every time you mention it.
 
  • #130
Well, Wash. State is more important, but D.C. is more famous.

Kind of like how Eric Holder is more important, but Tiger Woods is more famous.
 
  • #131
I always felt that one problem with vouchers which seems to be overlooked is that everyone can't leave the bad school and go to the good school simply because the good school would be so overcrowded it would become the bad school.
 
  • #132
dilletante said:
I always felt that one problem with vouchers which seems to be overlooked is that everyone can't leave the bad school and go to the good school simply because the good school would be so overcrowded it would become the bad school.
In a static world. I gather that what often happens in reality is the bad school is forced to make changes, drop its complacency, and improve. Similarly the existence of FedEx and UPS force the USPS to improve.
 
  • #133
BobG said:
Actually, much more than 50% of the country is Christian. However, that fact is irrelevant. The most heated debate is between a small number of atheists and an equally small number of fundamentalist Christians.
Equally small? According to Pew surveys, about 40% of respondents would prefer that Evolution not be taught at all in schools and be replaced entirely by Creationism. That's roughly the same fraction that also believe that humans and animals have retained the same essential form since the beginning of life, about 10,000 or so years ago. If that group is not what you mean by 'fundamentalist Christians", what is? Atheists make up no more than 10% of the population (closer to 1% by some http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/weblogs/AmericanReligionSurvey-ARIS/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf surveys)

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1107/polling-evolution-creationism
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #134
dilletante said:
I always felt that one problem with vouchers which seems to be overlooked is that everyone can't leave the bad school and go to the good school simply because the good school would be so overcrowded it would become the bad school.

You think that school problems are all caused by overcrowding?
 
  • #135
mheslep said:
It is so far out from the rest of the changes that I suspect the article has it wrong.
You suspect right ... I suspect.

Not a mainstream source nor anywhere close to independent, but I reckon it points out a big boo-boo in the other news stories on this:
http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=24183

Gail Lowe said:
“To say the State Board of Education has excluded Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum framework is irresponsible and untruthful.”
 
  • #136
Gokul43201 said:
Equally small? According to Pew surveys, about 40% of respondents would prefer that Evolution not be taught at all in schools and be replaced entirely by Creationism. That's roughly the same fraction that also believe that humans and animals have retained the same essential form since the beginning of life, about 10,000 or so years ago. If that group is not what you mean by 'fundamentalist Christians", what is? Atheists make up no more than 10% of the population (closer to 1% by some http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/weblogs/AmericanReligionSurvey-ARIS/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf surveys)

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1107/polling-evolution-creationism

The percentage of people that don't understand there's even a difference between creationism and evolution make up a sizable chunk of the population, as well.

Most Americans say they are familiar with creationism and evolution, but recent polling suggests that there is some confusion about the meaning of these terms. In an August 2005 Gallup poll, 58% of the public said that creationism was definitely or probably true as an explanation for the origin and development of life, but about the same number also said the same about evolution. Since creationism and evolution are incompatible as explanations, some portion of the public is clearly confused about the meaning of the terms.


Statistics like that bring back memories of scenes from "Rainman".

Still, I'd concede there's probably at least twice as many fundamentalist Christians as there are unaffiliated/agnostic/atheists, even if the more militant factions of both are small minorities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Reviewing Thesis Topic on Evolutionary Theory
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K