Everyone,

I am not versed on the New Jersey standards that are criticized in the news
story below, but the larger issue when educational standards are discussed,
at least from a historian's point of view, is whether social science
standards are history-based or not. Virginia's much-discussed Standards of
Learning are history-based. The argument is that history provides a
grounding for all the social sciences. From there, of course, we can
disagree on whether Virginia 4th-graders should know about the Pilgrims, et
al.

For more on these issues, check out the National Council on History
Education, at http://www.history.org

There is an active Virginia Council for History Education, which is holding
its annual conference in Richmond on Saturday, 23 March 2002, at the
Virginia Historical Society. I could not find a Web site for the Virginia
Council, but perhaps someone else on VA-HIST can help with contact
information.

John

John T. Kneebone [log in to unmask]
Acting Executive Director, Virginia Center for the Book
Director, Publications and Educational Services
Library of Virginia http://www.lva.lib.va.us

-----Original Message-----
From: Laura Fortune [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 11:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Our Founding Fathers?


As a Virginia citizen and a retired sixth grade teacher, I certainly hope we
won't eliminate the study of our founding fathers in either Virginia history
or American history.  Future generations need to know about their roots in
this country.  It's unfortunate that we've used some terminology in teaching
history that doesn't give an accurate portrayal.  However, teachers,
especially elementary teachers that cover all required subjects, can't be
expected to lmow first hand all the details of every discipline and
consequently must lean heavily on standards, curriculum, and textbooks for
information.  Personally, I learned far more teaching the sixth grade than I
learned in my formal education through a master's degree.

Laura Catherine D. Fortune

----- Original Message -----
From: John Maass <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:50 AM
Subject: Article: No Founding Fathers? That's our new history


I came across this today; it is an interesting news piece blended with
commentary.  Not all will agree with it so I am not posting it as if it
were representative of my own sentiments 100%; however since this is a
discussion forum, I thought it might be good to provoke some discussion!!
Please take it in that spirit.
John Maass
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________
No Founding Fathers? That's Our New History, by Ellen Sorokin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Published 1/28/2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

     George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin are not
included in the revised version of the New Jersey Department of Education
history standards ? a move some critics view as political correctness at
its worst.
     The Pilgrims and the Mayflower also are excluded, as well as the word
"war," which has been replaced with "conflict" in lessons about the early
settlers, colonization and expansion.
     Also gone are most references to the inhumane treatment many American
soldiers endured in wars overseas during the 20th century. However, the
standards specifically note that students should identify slavery, the
Holocaust and modern Iraq as examples "in which people have behaved in
cruel and inhumane ways."
     The latest revisions to the state standards have disappointed
educators across the country, who said the board's exclusion of the
Founding Fathers' names is "political correctness at the end of the nth
degree."
     "This is what you call a historical irresponsibility," said David
Saxe, a Penn State University education professor who reviews state history
standards nationwide for the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in Washington.
The foundation gave the New Jersey history standards a failing grade the
last time it reviewed them.
     New Jersey's current history standards, which also exclude most
historical figures, were approved in 1996. Those standards were revised
earlier this month and have not yet been approved by the state.
     State school officials argue they do not need to list all the
well-known historical figures ? like other states' history or social
studies standards do ? because teachers will know they have to talk about
the country's first president and the other Founding Fathers when the
lesson on American history comes up.
     "It's pretty obvious what needs to be taught," said Jay Doolan, the
acting assistant commissioner of the state's Division of Academic and
Career Standards.
     State educators said the standards do include a requirement that
students "recognize the names of some major figures in American history" ?
a generalization that Mr. Saxe said is a "cop out."
     "It's unimaginable to us why teachers wouldn't teach students about
George Washington when they talk about the new nation," Mr. Doolan said.
"It's also hard to imagine that when our students learn about Thanksgiving,
that they won't learn about the Pilgrims, who they were and why they came
here. ... We don't intentionally exclude certain names. But how long should
the list of names be? Who do we include or not include?"
     Some states like Virginia and Indiana also don't include the Pilgrims
in their standards. In some cases, the Pilgrims are referred to as early
settlers, early Europeans, European colonizers or newcomers, although most
textbooks still call them Pilgrims.
     "[The word] Pilgrim implies religion," said Brian Jones, vice
president for Communications and Policy at the Education Leaders Council in
Washington. "It's getting more difficult to talk about the Bible and the
Puritans."
     But if the state leaves out specific names and events in its
standards, then teachers must defer to history textbooks that are written
by national and state committees, Mr. Saxe argued.
     "We're still at the mercy of the textbook, and that defeats the
purpose of standards," Mr. Saxe said. "This pretty much lets classroom
teachers do what they want. I have no trouble with that if it's a competent
teacher. But what about those who are not?"
     Mr. Doolan said the state board does not set a state curriculum but
rather a general guideline, which local school districts then use to come
up with their own lesson plans.
     The state also writes a curriculum framework, which includes a
"Suggested Topics" section recommending what teachers should teach. The
current framework, adopted in 1999, suggests that teachers teach about the
administrations of Washington, John Adams and Jefferson.
      The 1999 framework will most likely be revised when the new history
standards are adopted.
     "Our standards have always been fairly general because it's up to the
districts to follow up on them," Mr. Doolan said. "The districts will take
the standards and flesh out what contents should be taught."
     Although state board officials did not include any Founding Fathers or
other well-known American figures, they did add, in their first draft, the
names of slavery opponents Theodore Dwight Weld and Angelina and Sarah
Grimke in the section about the Civil War and Reconstruction period.
     Why include them and not Washington or Jefferson? "We wanted to make
sure to include those three names because they're not readily known to most
and we don't know whether the teachers will know to teach them," Mr. Doolan
said.
     John Fonte, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington,
charged that the state of New Jersey is not interested in getting to the
core of American history. "Obviously, there are anti-patriotic forces at
work at the New Jersey legislature."
     Mr. Fonte is referring to the 13-year-long debate that has gone on in
the state legislature on whether to allow public school students to recite
a passage from the Declaration of Independence.
     Last summer, the New Jersey state legislature rejected the measure,
which would have required students to recite a 56-word passage from the
document every day.
     Some opponents said reciting the passage would do little to improve
students' understanding of history. Others argued the passage ? which
begins "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal" ? was insensitive to women and blacks. That phrase was written at a
time when slavery was legal in the United States.
     Mr. Doolan said the new history standards are only in their first
draft and will undergo 20 public hearings before approval. "If people are
that upset, then they should let us know at the public hearings," he said.
"If we get feedback from people who think we should include the names of
George Washington or Thomas Jefferson in the standards, then we'll do it."


Copyright © 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html