A Reply to The Troubled Corinthian

Note to DoveMountaineers: You may have noticed, in the sidebar on the right, that I follow a blog called The Troubled Corinthian, by a brother at Catalina Foothills Church. In his blog last week, he threw me a challenge to comment on an article about a new curriculum adoption in Texas, which you can read about here. And today's blog, though a slight departure from some of the things I usually post here, is my reply to his challenge.

As Paul Harvey (may he rest in peace)would know, there is more to this story.

Not only has Texas endorsed a more conservative social studies curriculum, as explained in the article you cited, but even more significantly, Texas is one of only two states (Alaska is the other) who are refusing to endorse the new draft of a national curriculum that will standardize math and English textbooks and testing throughout the nation. Of his state’s recalcitrance, Texas Commissioner of Education Robert Scott wrote in a letter to U.S. Sen. John Coryn, R-Texas, "Texas has chosen to preserve its sovereign authority to determine what is appropriate for Texas children to learn in its public schools. It is clear that the first step toward nationalization of our schools has been put into place." You can read the full story here.

This legacy of Texas resistance can be traced back to Mel and Norma Gabler of Longview, who gained national fame in the 1980’s by “blowing the whistle” on potential textbook adoptions in Texas. They critiqued textbooks on several criteria, including (1) dogmatic statements about evolution as fact (and humans as animals); (2) revisionist U.S. history, which over-emphasized pop culture and under-educated on the principles of American liberty; (3) outright factual errors, of which they found abundant examples. Though ridiculed by liberals, the Gablers were very effective in blocking the adoption of many faulty textbooks in Texas, which was significant because it represents the second (to California) largest textbook market in the nation. If Texas doesn’t adopt a textbook, publishers tended to think it not economically feasible to produce.

One might then wonder why, with such success by the Gablers, U.S. public schools have continued moving virtually unchallenged toward a liberal social agenda in the years following their crusading efforts. The answer lies in the universities, particularly the colleges of education. Textbooks, though a vital factor, are still in the hands of teachers. And since American pedagogy tends to favor listening over reading, teachers can easily color the view that children take away from the classroom. The teacher training programs of this country are relentlessly liberal, and Luke 6:40 explains the rest (“A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone who is perfectly trained will be like his teacher.” NKJV).

There are other contributing factors, of course. Why have teacher colleges remained so liberal? Many reasons, but an important one is that it suits the agenda of the powerful teacher unions. And since it is an unquestioned assumption that teacher training programs in this country exist only to prepare teachers for the government schools (where teachers will be coerced into joining the unions), it follows that the teacher education programs are not authentic education (allowing logic, debate, and objective research), but union shop incubators.

Another contributing factor is the indifference of parents. One might think, by the acceptance of conservative talk radio in the late 80’s and the attention that has been garnered by conservative scholars like Dinesh D’Souza, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, and the late William Buckley, that the public is better educated on the conservative view of American history. And from that, one might deduce that these conservatives, who helped elect George W and his father, would have demanded that schools reflect their views, at least in some balance. But ninety per cent of the parents in this nation (including those whom we might assume are conservative, politically) are still unblinkingly sending their children to the union-controlled schools - without questioning the curriculum or the education of the teachers, and with little effect for change or balance. In contrast, those of us in private schools have noticed that the minute a family switches a child to one of our schools, they become activists. That’s because they are paying directly for their child’s education, and they want to hold the school accountable. Too bad taxpayers don’t feel the same way about the dollars they throw away on the government schools.

Someday I’ll write the definitive analysis of U.S. education in my lifetime, with virtually every phrase a hyperlink to a host of illustrations and anecdotes I have collected over thirty-six years of teaching and administration in both public and private schools, as well as ten years in graduate school at a state university (which required hours of observations in public schools). But before I invest hours and hours in such a project, I would have to be convinced someone would pay attention. Besides my friend, the Troubled Corinthian.