Well it appears that Arizona has done it again. As if reaching into the past and enacting Nazi immigration laws were not enough, they are now working to prevent people from learning about their own cultures. A new law passed and signed by Governor Jan Brewer suggests that ethnic studies are programs designed to instill hatred of other races. The Articlein the New York Times has now further gone down the road of Nazi Germany. Strong words one may thing! Not so. In addition to requiring people to now be able to show they are citizens if asked, just like the German Reich laws in the early 1930s, now the state wants to prevent the teaching of Ethnic Studies in high schools. As the article states the law was designed to Prohibits a school district or charter school from including in its program of instruction any courses or classes that:

•Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
•Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
•Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
•Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.

Well at least that is clear. Again we are going down that road isolating ethnic groups for not looking like an "American" and for their heritage. The problem is that like Texas almost 50% of the students in Arizona public schools are of Mexican, Latino, or Hispanic descent. So, learning about their own culture would teach them hatred of the state government? Why would they hate the state government? It has only placed every ethnic group under surveillance calling into question each person's "citizenship". Now, they want to prevent these same minorities from learning about their past? Their could be a good reason for this. After all the United States attacked Mexico in the 1840s to start a war that ended in obtaining most of the states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. The traditions that were in those states prior to US "purchase" were of mixed lineages already. The Spanish had over 200 years of governance before the US decided to free the peoples of those areas. Prior to the European discovery of America, the Natives had great empires such as the Aztecs, Myans, and the Inca. Are we now on the path to begin separating various ethnic groups to prevent "inter-ethnic" strife. The law that has now passed will begin a new era of strife, for the law will cause the exact problems it proposes to end. Instead of harmony and history, the law will only serve to make the vast population of the southwest second class citizens. In fact, a great majority of them are not. And when high school students in Tucson protested this law, the dressed up as several of their leaders has in the past. This led one legislator to use this as "proof" that the law needed to be passed. Ignorance works in mysterious ways. Mr Horne, who is running for Attorney General and making banning ethnic studies apart of his campaign, has hearkened back to a more sinister era. Like Herman Goebbels, he is attempting to show that the actions of his opponents are proof that he is right. Instead, what has happened is a reaction to laws that were passed. The laws had to occur "first". Otherwise, there is no reason to protest. Ethnic studies does not promote hatred of other races. Though true historical fact may show that they have every reason to have some animosity. As a nation, We cannot go back to the days of thematic historical interpretation were all was good and history books read like a child's first reading book. The truth is this type of history was the fiction. Times were never that good for working Americans. Women have been working in the labor forces for over 160 years to support their families. What this law aims to start is a process of indoctrination that cannot lead to a good ending. History is not a public relations tool. It is non-negotiable. It exists and, though it can be hidden and twisted, the truth does come out; the truth shall set us free.

Well the beat continues, as the Texas State Board of Education continues to rewrite the school curriculum for the nation. Again, as I have stated in the past, academics need to watch this continuing saga and be prepared to boycott the publisher(s) of these standards. In the name of education TSBOE is making children stupid. It is an education stopper. And it is not doing a favor for school children. They will graduate from high school and go to college to find out that their version of history is sadly lacking. Those who don't go on to a higher education will continue to facilitate falsehoods the rest of their lives.

If this were just Texas, I would be up in arms. Because this issue will affect many students who don't go to Texas Schools, I am outraged. I am suppose to just stand and listen to small breaches of historical fact? The oddest thing is that the TSBOE and its conservative members are doing the very things they claim that the left is guilty of. So 2 wrongs make a right? In an era where more education needs to be provided to prepare people for after school life, they are certainly lowering the standards of the intelligence of their students. Will these students be able to compete with other students from different states on an equal basis. No. So now we ill further place people in a straight jacket until they graduate and then when the straight jacket is taken off, we will find that students will need remedial classes. This is not fair.

Again, I will keep people abreast of this situation as much as I can. I do believe that the TSBOE has not finalized the standards as of yet, but they are due to be finalized at the end of May and will not be scheduled to be revisited until 2020. God save us all.

Update on the Potential Boycott of Texas Textbook publishers

Current List of Texas Approved Publishers

This link will take people to the current list of social study publishers for Texas. These publishers are NOT as of yet part of the new standards but one can imaging the implications here. What a surprise????

For Grades 1-12 the Social Studies and History Texts are from the largest publishing companies, any wonders here???

Harcourt, MacMillan, Pearson; Holt, Rinehart and Winston; McGraw-Hill. One has to scroll down to find the actual textbook approved but these are the publishers approved as of now. However, these are NOT the ones approved for the new standards. As the standards are now yet to be approved in their final form later in the year. I will keep track of this

Also a new issue has arisen about this issue that publishers are trying to stay neutral. No surprise there. I have a quote below from a New York Times Article concerning the Texas issue. ""We now have the ability to deliver completely customized content" to different states, said Joseph Blumenfeld, spokesman for Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, one of three major publishers that supply Texas with most of its social studies textbooks."

This could be both a blessing and a danger. Publishers for years have been able to provide "customized" textbooks. As one who has been an adjunct in the State of New York, I found that many Community Colleges in that state have customized texts. However, as long as the underlying structure of the content remains factually correct, this is not a problem. The issue at this point is merely what chatper(s) to include. For those who teach introductory courses this is an issue of time and of what to include and what to leave for higher level classes. If publishers start to use customization to "exclude" content that is objectionable, but not factually incorrect, then the issue becomes one of content. This is a problem. If a publisher states that they can just publish a book just for Texas and then a different one for others states for their "customized content," then issue is not solved. It becomes an issue of, dare I say it, censorship and exclusion.

If I, as a college teacher, taught US History I, an introductory class covering everything from 1492 to the War of the Rebellion and did not include slavery and its presence on the North American continent because I might be "uncomfortable" about the issue, I am withholding relevant information from students that they have a right to know. In the Texas case, withholding the knowledge that Thomas Jefferson was influenced by Enlightenment Thinkers like John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, is not a choice of convenience. It is altering the historical record. Jefferson got his phrase "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" from John Locke's notion of "Life, Liberty, and Property."

All this tells me is that Texas Board of Education members should start reading history before they start rewriting and censoring it.

Boycott Texas History Book Publisher

Calling all college history professors and instructors. It is time to use our clout as history professors to make a statement. According to the New York Times article the Texas Board of Education is making significant changes to the history curriculum for high schools students. We need to come to the aid of Mary Helen Berlanga and use our clout as academics to boycott the rewriting of history for political purposes. If it were just Texas, I may not suggest such a boycott. However, because publishers have become so economical in the past years, the book published according to the Texas guidelines will be used by other states for their classes. It is time to say ENOUGH to this blatant attempt at censorship and academic political correctness. Censorship on the part of the publisher and censorship on the part of the Texas Board of Education who did not even have, according to the CBC news broadcast on March, 23, 2010, an academic historian suggesting changes. We need to show our support for Mary Helen Berlanga by emailing her our support at this email address here.I am proposing to spread the word to all historians who teach at the college and public school level. If they we have the power to choose our textbooks, we need to boycott the publisher, and their subsidiaries, of the textbook for Texas public schools. Show them that we will not accept the rewriting of history. These are not just changes to a curriculum these are calculated extractions of American history. The claim by many is that history is some leftist tool to twist facts. I am sorry but both VanRanke and Droysen would argue with that. What qualification does a dentist and a preacher have to determine historical standards? I will need your help here academics and graduate students. Boycott the publisher of this book and their subsidiaries. Let's illustrate that historians can use their clout to stop the abuse of history by agenda seeking loons who think that history is merely interpretation. It is not just interpretation. It is an informed analysis determined by factual evidence. I shutter to think what they will want to exclude next, the holocaust? That will be the next step if we do not take a stand now. All those who support this issue can make a comment below and I will respond. Let me know what more we as historians can do to prevent this gross malfeasance of history on the part of the Texas Board of Education.

It must be stated that censorship is NOT academic freedom. Academic freedom means that one should be able to choose resources for inclusion within an academic setting. What the Texas School Board is doing is excluding, that is censorship.

4 Basics of Web Design

In reading Dan Cohen & Roy Rosensweig’s Digital History,  it has become apparent that web design becomes an element in the historical information that historians are attempting to convey.  This is something that the profession has not had to consider in writing their dissertations.  Up to now, the concern was over what pictures can go into the book and do I have the proper copyright information.  Not to mention that all the primary sources are quoted correctly.  Cohen and Rosensweig provide great advice to their digitally challenged colleagues

1.  Emphasize the importance of contrast on the page “as elements are set off against each other in a pattern that allows the eye to explore different features, draw conclusions or simply appreciate the pattern itself (Digital History p. 120).

2.  Using proximity to illustrate connections will allow the user to make a connection (inferred or otherwise) to a photographic image or a passage.

3.  Feeling the Order/Disorder.  This rule appears to be an extension of the previous rule.  Basically to ensure that your presentation on the internet appears to be aligned with other elements. 

4.  Unity,  this is not what they call it but I thought a word would be better here.  Ensure the like elements are UNIFIED through similar texts, font size, and color.  Hence, ensure you repeat or use the same font size/text/color to make a point.

While these rules appear basic,  I do think that it can make a difference between a good website that can covey the information and a confusing one.  At the same time, this could also be used as guidelines for publishing articles online.  Fancy fonts are ok, but if they are not being used to convey a point, or being used badly to convey a point, then what is the point???  I think the authors are trying to reign in many of us who like the neat colors and fonts warning us not to get carried away.  It is worth while to consider this.

New Wiki

New experiment on how to spark conversation

in reference to: http://vanrankeanddroysen.wikidot.com/digital-history (view on Google Sidewiki)

Gmail

Gmail