Back to mobile

A New Conservative Watchdog’s Big Textbook War Debut

by Published on
Truth in Texas Textbooks founder Roy White
Truth in Texas Textbooks
Truth in Texas Textbooks founder Roy White

When they write the history books about the State Board of Education, last week’s drama over our new social studies textbooks probably won’t go down as a high point.

After punting on a preliminary vote Tuesday, the board approved the textbooks on Friday despite receiving hundreds of pages of revisions at the last minute, which many members hadn’t read. Those revisions came partly in response to 1,500 worried letters from the public that were still arriving just last week. Though the 10-5 vote split on party lines, members agreed that this year’s textbook approvals had been a mess.

But the process was a big win for at least one man, Roy White, and his fellow volunteer textbook watchdogs.

White’s year-old group Truth in Texas Textbooks made an impressive entrance into Texas’ ancient and ongoing fight over what children learn in school, with a recently-released 469-page review of this year’s social studies textbooks. The review was cited widely by conservatives upset over the books and helped drive publishers to rework many passages—dozens of small changes like removing the word “nonpartisan” from a description of Rock the Vote and the League of Women Voters in a McGraw-Hill text. Republicans on the board agreed to scrap all the submissions from one publisher, Worldview Software, because the company seemed insufficiently deferential to public concerns—a decision Worldview’s president called “arbitrary and capricious.”

With an avid grassroots following, and conservative board members receptive to his concerns, White and his group have quickly become influential gatekeepers to the hot and everlasting debate over Texas’ schoolbooks.

Samples of most books and electronic materials are available for anyone to review online, but some are only available in-person in Austin or at a regional education center. And even then, reading through the texts is a lot of work. Most people only encounter the debate after it’s been framed by one of a few mediating groups with the motivation and the manpower to get through all the texts. The Texas Freedom Network has long been one of these, and succeeded this year in pushing back on climate change doubt, and language minimizing slavery’s role as a cause of the Civil War.

Truth in Texas Textbooks’ review offered ammunition to folks more concerned that Ronald Reagan gets the admiration he deserves, or that books don’t gloss over the dangers of militant Islam. Where one world history text describes Christianity in its glossary as “the religion based on the belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God,” a Truth in Texas Textbooks reviewer complains: “Fourteen words is hardly an adequate definition of the greatest and most powerful religion in the known world or all of history.”

Concerned citizens flooded board members and publishers with more than 1,500 emails about the social studies texts, and Truth in Texas Textbooks’ own volunteers provided much of the live public comment before last week’s vote. White alone spent more than an hour at the podium during his statement.

White tells the Observer that activists in other states, and longtime state board observers, were amazed to hear publishers made so many changes in response to his group’s review. “They started laughing when I said the publishers are talking to us,” he says. White figures it’s because he caught the publishers at the right time, at the end of a critical approval process with a board that values public comment.

“Everybody I have talked to—TEA, SBOE members, even lobbyists with the publishers—tell me, in the history of Texas they had never seen so many inputs from the public to the process. So that, I think, is a good thing,” White says.

White is a pilot with Southwest Airlines, a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force and a former public school teacher. He also chairs the Bexar County chapter of ACT! for America, which circulates news about the dangers of Islam. “It’s been described as an anti-Muslim group, which it is not,” White says. “It’s an education in radical Islam.”

In 2012, ACT! for America produced a report on Islam in textbooks nationwide, titled “Education or Indoctrination?” And last year, White says someone from ACT! for America asked him to lead a textbook review for Texas. He and his research director, a home-school mother named Pat Blair, put out calls for volunteers on tea party email lists, and sought input from conservative culture war veterans like Neal Frey and Common Core critic Sandra Stotsky.

Most of all, he says, his group is citizen-driven—all volunteers, regular folks, no paid reviewers. He’s not running a nonprofit; he’s funding the work himself. And together, over conference calls and online project management tools, they completed the monstrous task of a full textbook review. In Austin last week, his team met in person for the first time. “It’s another wonderful testimony to why I love living in Texas, and the spirit people have to really get things done,” he says.

“I’ve talked to some people in the media trying to put labels in front of people’s names, as they have with me. [It] doesn’t really help educate and lay the foundation for what the article should be about, which is improving textbooks. Who wouldn’t want better textbooks?” But White, who’s also been a spokesman for the Southwest pilots’ union, doesn’t let it get to him. “The media does what they do. I’ve been around long enough to understand that.”

Here’s how White’s group describes its mission instead: “The purpose of TTT is simple, to provide Social Studies textbooks that are truthful and factual that meet the Texas Education Knowledge Standards.” It’s the state standards, not White, after all, that include Moses as a leading influence on the founding fathers.

White says some volunteers bailed on the group early on, when the group’s training made it plain that their job was to remain objective. “We certainly see some ideology seep into there, and we have to kind of beat down our biases,” he says. “For us, we just said judge us on our work, judge us on the quality of our work.”

The group’s comments on each text are posted online as Word documents, plus a 52-page summary of their findings. They include grammar fixes and corrected dates, but dwell mostly on the usual questions of patriotism, religion, global warming and evolution—all the usual battlegrounds the State Board of Education is known for. Most of all in the reviews, you’ll find Islam—insisting that armies, not traders, spread Islam to new parts of the world, and that jihad can’t be defined as anything but violent struggle.

The Texas Freedom Network’s review of the new group’s reviews called its complaints “peculiar” and questioned whether the group’s reviewers were qualified for the job. A note on one Truth in Texas Textbooks’ review, TFN notes, suggests including information on Young Earth Creationism sourced to Conservapedia.com.

Texas allows months of public comment on these books, which generates weeks of blow-by-blow news coverage. But in practice our textbook adoption process is still pretty opaque because of the sheer volume of material it produces: thousands of pages of original text to review, and thousands more pages of back-and-forth between reviewers and publishers. Even White isn’t sure how many of the group’s recommendations made it into the texts approved on Friday.

But he and his group are still hard at work, sorting through the last-minute revisions to find out. And when they do, they’re ready to make textbook purchasing a whole lot simpler—because the state board’s decision is only a prelude to the real show: a final Truth in Texas Textbooks review complete with one simple letter grade for each book. Once they know which book is an “A,” a “B,” or a “C,” they’ll know which books to lobby their local school board to purchase.

“I think that’s the misconception—for us, how they voted, up or down was just another day on the calendar for us. Most people think when you’ve done the review process, that’s it,” White says. “Our goal all along was not to just do the reviews, but to give the customer, the parent, the school board member a tool to assess what material they should purchase.”

Patrick Michels is a reporter for the Texas Observer and a former legislative intern. He has been a staff writer and web editor at the Dallas Observer, and a former editor of the Texas Independent. He has a bachelor's in journalism from Northwestern University, a master's in photojournalism from the University of Texas at Austin, and is a competitive eating enthusiast.

  • 1bimbo

    thank God for roy white

  • schafersman

    Roy White tries to push false and perverted forms of history and world religions into the social studies instructional materials that match his own political, religious, and ideological agenda. His claims of objectivity and balance are nonsense. He promotes Young Earth Creationism, climate change and global warming denial, anti-Muslim hysteria, Christian Nationalism, American Exceptionalism, and similar forms of nonsense. He is doing precisely the same thing now that Mel and Norma Gabler did in the 1970s and 1980s. Both the Gablers and Roy White achieved some success, and that explains why Texas textbooks suffer from so much bias and distortion.

    The Gablers were called censors and I’m sure White will be, too, but let’s make sure we understand that they are not censors. The censors are the radical religious right-wing Republican members of the State Board of Education who use Gabler (now Educational Research Analysts) and White materials to help them decide which publishers to pressure to make changes.

    Public education policy and programs are horribly politicized in Texas when ignorant, aggressive, and extreme agenda-driven public officials use the power of their state offices to force false and educationally unwanted religious and political beliefs onto unsuspecting Texas school children as “facts” in their textbooks. Yet this has been happening since the 1970s (and probably earlier) and is still happening today. Is this a primary reason that Texas students do so poorly on national and international academic achievement tests? Of course it is!

    • Chris Jonsson

      Holy Moly! Roy White is scary. He is not an educator and misinforms everyone he touches. How in the world did this man get access to textbook publishers and be allowed to directly interfere with the publishing and purchasing processes? Who is in charge at th TX State Board of Education? Obviously no one. Is Roy White on the State payroll? Who contributes to his organizations? What are their objectives? Taypayers deserve to have that information. Too much is at stake.

  • Mike435

    The major oil companies have stated that climate change is
    real and that we need to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, especially
    CO2. If the climate science was flawed or a hoax or
    whatever, these companies surely have the resources to expose this. Denialism
    is dead. Reporters need to start asking GOP leaders why so many Republicans are
    still in denial when even the big oil companies admit the problem is real.

    Shell

    http://www.shell.com/global/environment-society/environment/climate-change.html

    “…CO2 emissions must be reduced to avoid serious
    climate change. To manage CO2, governments and industry must work together.
    Government action is needed and we support an international framework that puts
    a price on CO2, encouraging the use of all CO2-reducing technologies.”

    Chevron

    http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/climatechange/

    “Chevron shares the concerns of governments and the
    public about climate change risks and recognizes that the use of fossil fuels
    to meet the world’s energy needs is a contributor to rising greenhouse gases
    (GHGs) in the earth’s atmosphere. We believe that taking prudent, practical and
    cost effective action to address climate change risks is the right thing to do.
    Mitigation of GHG emissions, adaptation to climate change and continuation of
    scientific and technological research should all be considered.”

    BP

    http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/sustainability/the-energy-future/climate-change.html

    “According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
    Change (IPCC), warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and is in large
    part due to an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human
    activities. The IPCC believes that warming of the climate will probably lead to
    extreme weather events becoming more frequent and unpredictable. Its latest
    report makes clear that limiting climate change will require substantial and
    sustained reductions of GHG emissions.”

    ConocoPhillips

    http://www.conocophillips.com/sustainable-development/environment/climate-change/Pages/global-climate-change.aspx

    “ConocoPhillips recognizes that human activity, including
    the burning of fossil fuels, is contributing to increased concentrations of
    greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphere that can lead to adverse changes in
    global climate.”

    ExxonMobil

    http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/climate-policy-principles/overview

    “Keeping in mind the central importance of energy to
    economies of the world, ExxonMobil believes that it is prudent to develop and
    implement strategies that address the risks to society associated with
    increasing GHG emissions.”

    Even the World Coal
    Association accepts the scientific position on climate change.

    http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-the-environment/climate-change/

    • schafersman

      Thank you, Mike, for posting these. The U.S. military services also accept the fact of anthropogenic global climate disruption, as do, of course, all European and Asian governments. All of the leaders of these organizations, nations, and corporations are realists who accept scientific conclusions about nature and can’t afford to live in a fantasy word up dat river in Egypt (you now where: “Da Nile”). The only major exception are reactionary ultra-religious Republicans, the Tea Party wing plus the others, who will soon control both branches of the U.S. Congress.