The Opinionator

History is Bunk

The theory of "Intelligent Design" is neither intelligent nor a design

When the states decide to get involved in educational reform, particularly curriculum reform, they invariably get bogged down and run in circles when it comes to the history curriculum. This is because they are attempting to define what history is and they are attempting to choose facts and interpretations of facts to constitute what they call the content of history.

There may be minor skirmishes over the new math versus traditional math, but everyone can agree quite easily that addition, subtraction, multiplication and division are the basics of math. There will also be algebra, trigonometry, geometry and calculus but there will be little dispute about the facts. We can generally agree. The same hold true for science. There are true scientific facts and there are errors. Of course there are scientific theories but the only one from that area which seems to cause trouble is evolution versus intelligent design.

Curriculum decisions in English are more difficult. While people can generally agree on what is good and great literature as opposed to junk, there will be some debate on coverage, writing and grammar. New editions are generally developed without much conflict or fanfare. There seems to be a consensus.

One of the most intriguing questions in the Bible came from the lips of Pontius Pilate when Roman authorities were shuffling Jesus around prior to executing him. Someone asked Pilate if the things Jesus said were true. Pilate replied, in his best Clintonesque style, “What is truth?

The big trouble spot in curriculum development is history because it goes after Pontius Pilate’s question most directly. Some special interests have issues they want included and other special interest feel strongly about issues which should be left alone.

In the past 20 years much curriculum work has been done in Massachusetts. They have defined a common core of learning and developed frameworks on which to place elements of the common core.  THen they have invented tests to measure how well students learn the content. In these efforts, hundreds of citizens and teachers throughout the Commonwealth have worked hard for years. The history effort has had the rockiest road. There have been panels, commissions, advisory groups and ad hoc tasks forces formed and reformed repeatedly to produce the documents we call the Massachusetts history curriculum framework.

Now comes a new law in Florida, signed by Governor Jeb Bush which attempts to say clearly what can and cannot be taught in American history. The new law ( known as Florida’s Education Omnibus Bill (H.B. 7087e3) seems to provide a reason why state legislatures can be the subject of ridicule. Legislators fear teachers who might teach the wrong thing, so they have prohibited the interpretation of US History and have insisted that only facts be taught.

The problem with this, however, is that they don’t do very well in saying whose facts. Will it be the facts as seen by Columbus or the Indians? There is some mention of the Federalist Papers, so the question comes as to whether the teacher who covers the anti-federalist sentiment which pervaded the country in 1776 will be in violation of the statute.

All history is interpretation. When authors and publishers choose the chapter headings of history textbooks they are interpreting historical fact. When a teacher who enjoys military history spends two days on the Viet Nam war while the teacher across the hall gets it in one day, that is interpretation of history.

When I was a young soldier in the Army we were told that the United States had never lost a war. Do they say that today, and if not, is someone trying to undercut the image of the United States? In the 1950’s, when I was in fourth grade I asked my teacher why it is illegal to be a Communist if this is a free country. She said it was because Communists wanted to overthrow our government by violence. That seemed good enough for me at the time. Would it be good enough for a fourth grader today?

These laws come into being because people fear revisionist history will be taught and that the American consensus will be weakened or will disappear. They fear newfangled theories of moral relativism or post modernism; some are comfortable with George Washington never telling a lie or the United States never losing a war. They do not want to hear about Thomas Jefferson owning slaves or, worse, possibly fathering a child with a slave. They certainly do not want to hear that the 2000 Florida presidential election resulted in the throwing away of 57,700 ballots supposedly because they were convicted felons and not eligible to vote. Later the fact was shown that 90% of the ballots were not felons, but Democratic leaning black African-Americans.

The Florida law directs teachers to instruct students “on the nature and importance of free enterprise to the United States economy” and then tries to legislate out of existence any ideas to the contrary.

There surely are apparent abuses of academic freedom. Lately in the news we read about college professors in at least two different American universities who have told students that they believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by the American government. People are screaming that these professors be dismissed. Academic freedom is not valued if the freedom in question reveals appalling positions.  I personally think I learned the most from some of my wacky professors.

Some law makers are saying that their history is the best history. They fail to understand that history, like the law, changes and evolves over the decades. If they loved history more, they would understand this. Perhaps they don’t love or even understand history. Perhaps they agree with the American cultural giant Henry Ford, whose 143^rd birthday we celebrate today. He once said, “History is bunk.”