After Hours of Testimony, Board Delays First Vote On Social Studies Textbooks

By Emily Mathis Wed., Nov. 19 2014 at 10:06 AM

These dudes were obviously thinking of Moses and King Solomon when they made the United States.

On Tuesday, the State Board of Education met for the final hearing on the adoption of new social studies textbooks. The board intended to cast the first vote on the textbooks, with the final vote scheduled for Friday. But after hours of impassioned testimony from both the right and the left, the board postponed any official action on the books until Friday.

The adoption process has been riddled with controversy. Critics were quick to point out that certain passages that alluded to climate change denialism. Moreover, many textbooks emphasized Christianity and Christian theology as not only the dominant religion in the United States, but implicitly the superior religion. Several books were plagued with misinformation and sloppy rhetoric.

Since the initial public testimony and outcry of criticism, the books have been improved. In a last-minute announcement on Monday, textbook publishers said they would revise the passages on climate change. Several allusions to inherent violence in Islam have been eliminated, as well as passages that downplayed the legacy of slavery.

Yet at the hearing on Tuesday, controversy and criticism remained. Textbooks still exaggerate the role of Judeo-Christian tradition throughout American history, and some passages still convey misinformation: For one, certain biblical figures, as well as "Judeo-Christian legal tradition" are listed as an influence on American founding documents.

Rumors are circulating that board members are still negotiating behind closed doors with textbook publishers. "It wouldn't be a Texas textbook adoption without a flurry of last-minute objections from board members and political activists without any expertise on the subject at hand," Kathy Miller, Texas Freedom Network president, said in a statement.

"On issues like bashing Islam and questioning the existence of global warming, we heard a lot of personal and political opinions but no actual facts that would justify revising what the textbooks currently say on those subjects." The board has between now and Friday to negotiate any changes.

We Recommend

riconnel8

I don't want to pay for textbooks that don't accurately depict our history. I don't think we should have to and would like to see a formal protest submitted. If certain educators and schools want to rewrite history they need to do it on their own dime. Entirely on their own dime...no tax dollars allowed for schools, educators or books.

Someone on a national board the other day was saying how Texan students will be the last people to be hired in the future. I see that as a truth.

TheRuddSki topcommenter

I'd wager the textbooks in question dont even mention that the US is one of the world's largest Muslim countries.

Montemalone topcommenter

I'm pretty sure I saw Jesus H. Christ's signature on the Constitution, right under Reagan's.

Catbird

"...exaggerate the role of Judeo-Christian tradition throughout American history..." how in the world is this even remotely possible? That is except for the last 8 years...

ThePosterFormerlyKnownasPaul topcommenter

In my opinion, it is not about human habitability as affected by changes in the climate, but rather human habitability as affected by economic changes due to changes in the climate.

After all in the geologic past, there are radically different climates and landscapes.

Some of these radically different climates and landscapes are not all that long ago.

everlastingphelps topcommenter

I read the report linked.

It's bullshit. It's like it was written by a bunch of Howard Zinn's students who only attended half the lectures. It's full of shit like this:

* Several world history and world geography textbooks include biased statements that inappropriately portray Islam and Muslims negatively.

* All of the world geography textbooks inaccurately downplay the role that conquest played in the spread of Christianity.

The best part? I didn't even put those together. They actually follow one with the other. Islam has pretty much only been spread by conquest, but don't say anything bad about them. Christians, on the other hand, must be portrayed at all times as militant conquerors.

I loved this part, too:

McGraw-Hill School Education– UnitedStatesGovernment

The text states: “Thomas Jefferson once referred to the establishment clause as a ‘wall of separation between church and state.’ That phrase is not used in the Constitution, however.’”

What’s Wrong?

The statement is factually correct, but it could give students the inaccurate impression that Jefferson’s view was personal and lacked significant connection to the First Amendment.

That is left-wing moonbat thinking at it's best. "The statement is factually correct but now I am going to insist that it is in fact wrong for another four sentences."

Catbird

Meat Puppets in the wilderness. That's what I'm talking about!

dingo

Let the inquisition begin:

https://www.redstate.com/diary/lifeofgrace/2014/11/17/must-believe-climate-change/

plainsman1

@Catbird

In fact, early colonial America was full of religious strife, with various sects striving for political power. From the earliest arrival of Europeans on American shores, religion was often used as a cudgel to discriminate, suppress, and even kill. Four Quakers were hanged in Boston between 1659 and 1661 for persisting in standing up for their faith. The framers of the Constitution, notably Madison and Jefferson were well aware of this grim history, and crafted the Constitution to be religion-neutral to curb the influence of religion on government and vice-versa.

everlastingphelps topcommenter

Oh lord, I didn't read far enough to get this howler:

Not all international terrorism is an outgrowth of Islamic fundamentalism; for example, ETA in Spain and the Irish Republican Army are unrelated to Islamic fundamentalism.

Those are your examples, huh? Here's the thing: THE IRA AND ETA ARE NOT INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS. THEY ARE DOMESTIC TERRORISTS. The IRA was a UK domestic terrorist groups. They only attacked targets inside Great Britain (which included Ireland at the time.) ETA is a Spanish group only attacks targets in Spain.

They are DOMESTIC TERRORISTS, not INTERNATIONAL terrorists.

You want to be taken seriously as critics? Make sure that your criticism claiming innaccuracy is actually accurate. (The best they could claim is that ETA is "international" because they claim basque separatism and therefore blame France as well, but that is a huge stretch.)

plainsman1

@dingo

Right off the bat this article is crap when it claims "they" (???) declare that no scientists in the world disagree with human caused climate change when the actual figure is 3% - impressive.

riconnel8

@plainsman1 @Catbird
Exactly Plainsman. And here it is:

"The Treaty of Tripoli (1796), states that "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" and was passed unanimously by the Senate and signed by President John Adams.

Go read that Catbird....It'll probably blow you socks off but it's our true history. :)