Thursday, June 12, 2003
The language police force our children to learn censored history
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn, by Diana Ravitch (Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 2003 $24) shocks the reader. The censors from the Right and the Left, including extremist ethnic and fringe cultural groups, have profoundly influenced the contents of textbooks, by gaining unquestioned review and revision rights in state education departments. The big extreme Left/Right states, California and Texas, by requiring that textbooks pass their bias and sensitivity committee standards, limit what is taught throughout the nation. It is not only Huck Finn and Catcher in the Rye that no longer pass the muster.
Diane Ravitch, historian, Assistant Secretary of Education under Bush41 and a member of the National Assessment Governing Board under Clinton, learned the realities when working on Clinton's Voluntary National Tests in 1998-2000. Developing test reading material for fourth-graders, she found that a reputable test contractor's (Riverside Publishing) own bias and sensitivity board rejected 15 stories that the NAGB, all educators, had found eminently acceptable. A story about a courageous blind climber of Mt. McKinley and another, about dolphins, had "regional bias" (unfamiliarity). A tale of owls ran into a Navajo taboo. Aesop's fable of the clever crow had "gender bias," Mary McLeod Bethune opened her school for Negro Girls with the aid of National Association of Colored Women (two biased words) and money from John D. Rockefeller (objectionable source). An African-American girl in summer school traded her rope-jumping skills for tutoring - the self-esteem values did not offset the purported negative stereotype. A tale of peanuts and George Washington Carver's discoveries had the faults of mentioning African slaves and European explorers defeating Brazilian tribes (correct use is "enslaved;" the history is accurate but conveys bias???)
Investigating further, Ravitch found these censorships deeply ingrained in the four textbook houses responsible for 75% of the $3 billion textbook industry. Historically, censors on the Right scrutinized textbooks, arguing against discourses of evolution, United Nations and Communism, eventually centering on family values (Falwell, Schlafly, Robertson, LaHaye). Mel and Norma Gabler in Texas were particularly successful. On the Left, Council on Interracial Books for Children (CIBC, NYC, 1966-1990 ) forced the American Library Association in 1979 to take a stand against racist and sexist books (Dr Doolittle, Uncle Tom's Cabin, fairy tales) in libraries, and, in tandem with NOW and other feminist groups, fought against Dick and Jane stereotypes, and for 50-50 male and female ratio in books. James and Cherry Banks wrote bias guidelines for two publishing empires. Book publishers, faced with the racist label, readily accepted the threats from the Left.
In the Appendix, one can measure the impact of the censorship. Banned words, usages, stereotypes and topics add to 420; there are 30 phrases and 15 expressions to be avoided in textbooks (do not mention mankind, "she thinks like a man;" balance Marys and Joes with Joses, Lashundas, Ches and Lings). Bad images (98) include mother sewing, cooking, in shock; men in stereotypical tasks (police, construction, playing ball while women watch). Images to avoid include people of color (15), African-Americans (29), Native Americans (25), Asian-Americans (35), Hispanic Americans (31), Jewish (6), people who are older (28), persons with disabilities (21), homosexual persons (6), miscellaneous stereotypes ( Irish police). Topics to avoid in textbooks (41) cover slaves, religion, divorce, drinking, drugs, crime, dialect, smoking. Foods to avoid (34) and to accept (29) are as you would expect. Nevertheless, one is shocked by the knowledge areas to be excluded in tests (108) - religion, evolution, law and technology terms, politics, crime, violence, race relations, sports, war, hurricanes, rock & roll and rap music; also masks (Halloween) and dinosaurs (evolution). The author cites 24 publisher and state education departments' publications of standards to substantiate her claims.
While we can accept the good intent behind many established standards fighting bias, racism and stereotypes, rewriting history is another matter. The early glorification of the American nation and neglect of the racial minorities and women has taken a drastic turn since the 1970s. America is now portrayed as the conflux of three civilizations. The Anasazis and Mayas had the greatest builder cultures. University of Timbuktu was a major cultural resource, and black Egypt was the cradle of civilization. History textbooks have fattened, to include biographies of new worthies. World histories often see Mao as emancipator of Chinese peasantry, forgiving the million killed and 20 million starved, and Islam somewhat like the silent majority here, with women having significant rights. Indian women have dignity; no mention of widows' self-immolation. In 1987 NY, and particularly CA (Charlotte Crabtree and Gary B. Nash at the National Center for History at UCLA) revised history curricula, with federal funding, to re-balance toward multiculturalism, and to de-emphasize the "great men" concept. This caused an uproar, the Senate passed a 99-1 resolution condemning it, and some radical language was cut. Now 14 states have strong standards, instructing schools what students should learn about, without prescribing interpretations. But the textbook bias and sensitivity boards persist.
The author proposes reform, by exposure of the censorship and the shrinking of knowledge and intellectual challenge that it carries. Our children are getting incomplete and distorted conformist education. Eliminate the state-wide textbook adoption process. Cast sunshine on the process; let educators evaluate, not identity politics pushers. Have textbooks reviewed, just like trade books. Let's move, our children's America is at stake.
The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn, by Diana Ravitch (Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 2003 $24) shocks the reader. The censors from the Right and the Left, including extremist ethnic and fringe cultural groups, have profoundly influenced the contents of textbooks, by gaining unquestioned review and revision rights in state education departments. The big extreme Left/Right states, California and Texas, by requiring that textbooks pass their bias and sensitivity committee standards, limit what is taught throughout the nation. It is not only Huck Finn and Catcher in the Rye that no longer pass the muster.
Diane Ravitch, historian, Assistant Secretary of Education under Bush41 and a member of the National Assessment Governing Board under Clinton, learned the realities when working on Clinton's Voluntary National Tests in 1998-2000. Developing test reading material for fourth-graders, she found that a reputable test contractor's (Riverside Publishing) own bias and sensitivity board rejected 15 stories that the NAGB, all educators, had found eminently acceptable. A story about a courageous blind climber of Mt. McKinley and another, about dolphins, had "regional bias" (unfamiliarity). A tale of owls ran into a Navajo taboo. Aesop's fable of the clever crow had "gender bias," Mary McLeod Bethune opened her school for Negro Girls with the aid of National Association of Colored Women (two biased words) and money from John D. Rockefeller (objectionable source). An African-American girl in summer school traded her rope-jumping skills for tutoring - the self-esteem values did not offset the purported negative stereotype. A tale of peanuts and George Washington Carver's discoveries had the faults of mentioning African slaves and European explorers defeating Brazilian tribes (correct use is "enslaved;" the history is accurate but conveys bias???)
Investigating further, Ravitch found these censorships deeply ingrained in the four textbook houses responsible for 75% of the $3 billion textbook industry. Historically, censors on the Right scrutinized textbooks, arguing against discourses of evolution, United Nations and Communism, eventually centering on family values (Falwell, Schlafly, Robertson, LaHaye). Mel and Norma Gabler in Texas were particularly successful. On the Left, Council on Interracial Books for Children (CIBC, NYC, 1966-1990 ) forced the American Library Association in 1979 to take a stand against racist and sexist books (Dr Doolittle, Uncle Tom's Cabin, fairy tales) in libraries, and, in tandem with NOW and other feminist groups, fought against Dick and Jane stereotypes, and for 50-50 male and female ratio in books. James and Cherry Banks wrote bias guidelines for two publishing empires. Book publishers, faced with the racist label, readily accepted the threats from the Left.
In the Appendix, one can measure the impact of the censorship. Banned words, usages, stereotypes and topics add to 420; there are 30 phrases and 15 expressions to be avoided in textbooks (do not mention mankind, "she thinks like a man;" balance Marys and Joes with Joses, Lashundas, Ches and Lings). Bad images (98) include mother sewing, cooking, in shock; men in stereotypical tasks (police, construction, playing ball while women watch). Images to avoid include people of color (15), African-Americans (29), Native Americans (25), Asian-Americans (35), Hispanic Americans (31), Jewish (6), people who are older (28), persons with disabilities (21), homosexual persons (6), miscellaneous stereotypes ( Irish police). Topics to avoid in textbooks (41) cover slaves, religion, divorce, drinking, drugs, crime, dialect, smoking. Foods to avoid (34) and to accept (29) are as you would expect. Nevertheless, one is shocked by the knowledge areas to be excluded in tests (108) - religion, evolution, law and technology terms, politics, crime, violence, race relations, sports, war, hurricanes, rock & roll and rap music; also masks (Halloween) and dinosaurs (evolution). The author cites 24 publisher and state education departments' publications of standards to substantiate her claims.
While we can accept the good intent behind many established standards fighting bias, racism and stereotypes, rewriting history is another matter. The early glorification of the American nation and neglect of the racial minorities and women has taken a drastic turn since the 1970s. America is now portrayed as the conflux of three civilizations. The Anasazis and Mayas had the greatest builder cultures. University of Timbuktu was a major cultural resource, and black Egypt was the cradle of civilization. History textbooks have fattened, to include biographies of new worthies. World histories often see Mao as emancipator of Chinese peasantry, forgiving the million killed and 20 million starved, and Islam somewhat like the silent majority here, with women having significant rights. Indian women have dignity; no mention of widows' self-immolation. In 1987 NY, and particularly CA (Charlotte Crabtree and Gary B. Nash at the National Center for History at UCLA) revised history curricula, with federal funding, to re-balance toward multiculturalism, and to de-emphasize the "great men" concept. This caused an uproar, the Senate passed a 99-1 resolution condemning it, and some radical language was cut. Now 14 states have strong standards, instructing schools what students should learn about, without prescribing interpretations. But the textbook bias and sensitivity boards persist.
The author proposes reform, by exposure of the censorship and the shrinking of knowledge and intellectual challenge that it carries. Our children are getting incomplete and distorted conformist education. Eliminate the state-wide textbook adoption process. Cast sunshine on the process; let educators evaluate, not identity politics pushers. Have textbooks reviewed, just like trade books. Let's move, our children's America is at stake.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 3:00 PM 
