Historical Perspectives

In my message to employees last week, I reminded them to be mindful of the fact that February was Black history month. The week prior to that message, I had watched a documentary on the History Channel about the Tuskegee Airmen that was quite good. I used that opportunity to pass along a few resources I thought might be useful in the classroom. I also opined that a lot of network television programming lately had focused more on diversity and race relations in our country. I wrapped up my message with a brief mention of a piece of legislation that is working its way through the state legislature right now that seeks to ban the use of the 1619 Project in Iowa schools. I mentioned the legislation not as an endorsement of the material, but as an observation of the ongoing racial tension we are experiencing in our country. 

For those of you who don't know, the 1619 Project is a curricular resource published by the New York Times that contextualizes the story of slavery and juxtaposes it with the founding of America. If you have been following the discourse, the use of the material in schools around the country has been met with some very strong feelings. My mention of it in the weekly staff newsletter spurned a discussion with a faculty member who asked a very sincere question. What were my thoughts and opinions on the Project? 

Admittedly, my knowledge is somewhat limited since the material is not used here in Hudson. I haven't investigated or studied the collection of essays other than through a cursory examination to gain a 'working knowledge' of the resources. It was within that paradigm where I explained that I was not at all equipped to offer an accurate assessment as to the veracity of the material. 

The broader question however, is what role should legislators play in dictating what should or should not be used as curriculum in the classroom? I would argue very little. While it is wholly appropriate for our elected representatives to provide a basic framework that includes such things as the Iowa Core Academic Standards (what it is that children should know and be able to do when they graduate), mandating the textbooks that are or are not used is bridge too far. They are out of their lane and don't fully understand what it is they are tinkering with. In this particular case, I have questions about whether or not legislators have undertaken the type of serious study that is needed to make good decisions about the usefulness of this or any other material used as curriculum in our classrooms. 

In most school districts, a process already exists for the adoption of curriculum that includes multiple steps over many months from inception to adoption. Right here in Hudson, we have a whole series of policies dedicated to the development, implementation, and evaluation of our curriculum. You can read all about them here. We even have a process for parents to object to instructional material. Simplistically, curriculum promulgation is implemented on a rotation as determined by administration. Once up for adoption, the research, alignment, and review is delegated to the content experts and building administrator. This study and research takes multiple months before the committee makes a presentation to me with a recommendation. Often times I'll ask for additional clarification or have other questions that need to be answered before I am ready to move the adoption forward. After all those questions are answered to my satisfaction, I'll craft a recommendation for the board. 

Ultimately, oversight is placed squarely where it belongs: with the local school board. They can either accept that recommendation, ask for further clarification, or reject the material. Granted, I haven't recommended anything controversial, but if parents or members of the local community disagree with material that is being used in the classrooms, they can do so following our policies. It is much more appropriate to bring those concerns to bear with the school board as opposed to running to the legislature for relief. Truth be told, if you don't like the answer the board gives, the local community can keep that in mind the next time they visit the ballot box. Frankly, we are seeing way too much of this (running to the legislature) right now, and as I mentioned a few weeks back it appears the entire state is being held accountable for the perceived 'sins' of a few. 

But alas in this instance, we should consider the point of teaching history. Is it the rote recitation of facts, figures, and events? Well, even if that were the goal in the industrialized model of education under which many of us grew up in, one would be hard pressed to suggest so today. With a focus on critical thinking skills and problem solving; context, debate, and perspective would seem to have role to play. Like many of you, I was taught in school to believe the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria caused World War One. While it may have been the immediate cause of the war, it was not the sole cause. 

Facts and dates are obviously undebatable and of critical importance in the study of history. There is no dispute the Declaration of Independence was adopted by the second continental congress on July 4, 1776. Nor will anyone argue the US Constitution was adopted on September 21, 1787 to create a stronger national government with checks and balances among three co-equal branches of government. But to suggest facts are the only thing(s) that should be taught is a gross oversimplification of the discipline. I rhetorically asked the question about how the American Revolution is taught in Great Britain and received a surprising answer: it's not. That in and of itself tells us something.