Circuit Writer

I’d like to dedicate this blog post to Bobbie Tetley, my high school AP American History teacher who instilled in me a love of history, and even though I am on the eve of completing graduate school, she remains one of the most challenging, demanding, and respected voices not only of my educational career, but of my life.  Thank you, Mrs. Tetley.  – cwc

————

This first came to my attention through an action alert from the United Farm Workers, an organization I’ve become connected to through my denomination’s participation in the National Farm Worker Ministry.  I received an email asking me to “Stop Texas from erasing Cesar Chavez and Hispanics from school books.”  It provided information about an upcoming session of the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) that will be voting on new curriculum standards for social studies for the state of Texas.  UFW asked me to compose an email to Gail Lowe, the chair of the Texas SBOE demanding that they not further marginalize the voices of Latina/os within the history curriculum.

This call to action is one that I’m only too happy to answer.  In case you weren’t aware, as the Texas curriculum goes (which is known as Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills or TEKS), so goes the textbook publishers.  As the textbook publishers go, too often, so goes the nation.  Brian Thevenot offers his insights as to the importance:

Hijacking History  |  Texas Tribune

Following earlier clashes over curricula in other disciplines, the social studies debate will test whether the SBOE can cut through the fog of extremism and find a neutral mainstream. Though its appointees spent countless hours drafting the new standards, the board can toss or overhaul portions at any point, as it did with English standards in 2008 and science standards last year. And so a fifteen-member elected board dominated by social conservatives, few of them educators, will once again decide what will and won’t be taught in Texas public schools. Their influence will be magnified exponentially, as usual, because the content of textbooks in the lucrative Texas market drives what publishers peddle in other states.

Thevenot’s implication is clear: there’s even more at stake than the representation of Latina/os in the history curriculum.

The threat to Chavez’s inclusion in the curriculum is only one of many minority names that may be removed or downgraded to “recommendation” status in the curriculum.  Notable among the list of figures targeted for removal is Thurgood Marshall, the first African-American Supreme Court Justice and lawyer who successfully argued Brown v. Board of Education before that same court.

Lowe to guide education board through hot issues  |  AP

Two experts on a board-appointed advisory panel say Chavez, a civil rights activist who supporters say greatly improved conditions for Hispanic farm workers, and Marshall, who argued the landmark case that resulted in racial desegregation and was the first black U.S. Supreme Court justice, receive too much attention.

Panelist David Barton, an evangelical Republican activist who was appointed by Lowe, said Chavez “lacks the stature, impact and overall contributions of so many others.”

Social Studies “Experts” Don’t Know Much About History  |  Austin Chronicle

In another section on history studies, Peter Marshall downplays Thurgood Marshall as not being a “strong enough [example] in light of the multiplicity of persons who have impacted American history.”

…

“This has all been grossly misconstrued,” replied Peter Marshall in an interview with the Chronicle. “My point … is simply one of comparison. … If you’re trying to adduce examples for these guidelines of famous Ameri­cans that ought to be included in the teaching of American history, to pair those two men is silly. Chavez doesn’t begin to compare in terms of his impact on American history with Ben Franklin.” But he made it clear that his objections are also political. “My own personal guess is that the reason he was included in that is that it reflects the leftist bias of the people who wrote the guidelines last time. I don’t know; I don’t know who wrote them. But I’m suspicious of that. … In comparison with [other figures], Chavez doesn’t warrant much attention. … He’s just not real high on my list.”

In their criticisms, both Barton and Marshall along with fellow expert panelist Daniel Dreisbach argue in favor of focusing more on the “Founding Fathers,” and specifically, their religious convictions.  This turn toward what I can only politely describe as a pernicious blending of American civil religion with a particularly aggressive form of evangelical Christianity presents a threat to our national history of religious tolerance and the growing pluralism of this nation of immigrants.  The opinions of the alleged experts are basically echoed by the current chairperson of the Texas SBOE, Gail Lowe:

Lowe to guide education board through hot issues  |  AP

“This country was founded on Judeo Christian principles and to say otherwise is to deny what is very unique about our country.”

Hijacking History  |  Texas Tribune

The question of American superiority likely will come up again at next week’s SBOE meetings, Lowe said. “The state board members had given them (committee members) clear direction in the spring that we wanted that concept included, so it’s surprising they voted it down,” she said. “We don’t have to tell students what to think, but any educated person should have learned about American exceptionalism.”

These attitudes of American exceptionalism, along with its silent partner Christian exceptionalism, are simply inconsistent with our history.  Advocates of this misconception that the “Founding Fathers” were all Christian conveniently forget that many of them were Deists, a theological proposition that evangelical Christians roundly deny.  I doubt that either of the aforementioned religious leaders on the panel would subscribe to the tenets of deism. (David Barton is the founder of WallBuilders and Peter Marshall is founder of Peter Marshall Ministries.)  Yet beyond the religious realm, we often fail to see that American exceptionalism extends benefits to Americans who are white.  The exclusion of Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall in favor of James Madison or Andrew Jackson is obvious on its face: the replacement of two figures of color by two white figures.  Yet in Oklahoma the racial implications of featuring Andrew Jackson in favor of a person of color should become even clearer, as we cannot forget the man who defied the Supreme Court and unconstitutionally uprooted Native Americans in a forced march across the country to their “reservations.” We have to be reminded that “American exceptionalism” all too easily morphs into “white exceptionalism,” the apathetic and unthinking accomplice of white supremacism.

This curriculum meeting should present as a moment for pause.  Yes, we may soon see a flood of deficient U.S. history textbooks that represent a narrow, rather sectarian point of view.  However, as a barometer of attitudes and currents within our nation, it indicates the presence of religious supremacy, structural racism, ethnic bigotry, and international indifference.  To make matters worse, groups and individuals exhibiting these attitudes are often belligerent, self-confident, and self-righteous; offering an understanding of dialogue that looks more like the evangelism of conversion than the engagement of conversation.  If the Texas SBOE approves these very narrow and ahistorical changes to the social studies curriculum in their meeting tomorrow, it will be a travesty on history.  The fact that so many people continue to hold to these inaccurate and dehumanizing ideals right now is a travesty on humanity.

————

As a note of gratitude, I am indebted to the Texas Freedom Network for their extensive coverage of the curriculum changes in their state.  Hats off to them for all of the good work they do on behalf of not only Texans, but the rest of us as well.  I also want to extend my thanks to Brian Thevenot for his article of the same name, whose title I have selfishly co-opted as my own.

Also, if you’d like to send in your comments at the last moment, you can still link here to the United Farm Workers advocacy page and email your comments to SBOE chair, Gail Lowe.

Cross posted at the Xenia Institute.