Textbooks should tell both sides of history

For years students have gone to school and have been given a generic textbook; one that is pro-American, supporting a very one-sided perspective of events that occurred throughout history.

However, this creates the controversy of whether or not schools should purchase textbooks that offer revised or alternative versions of historical events, instead of the typical one-sided version that we have come to know.

USD is one of many college campuses that encourages the teaching of what ethnic studies students refer to as the historical "counter-narrative" in school districts throughout the nation. This means changing the curriculum taught in history classes to study the perspectives of marginalized groups throughout history. USD history professor David Miller gave his perspective on the content of USD's history books, "The texts do have their limitations," Miller said. Generally these text books tell a larger narrative that includes minorities, but does not place them in the center of the narrative. In this sense they are included, but the traditional narrative tends to still be told. A truly alternative textbook  would focus on the minority stories and go from there. Two examples are Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and the text Who Built America? I do not know which professors, if anyone other than myself, use these."

College campuses should be seen as role models for secondary schools to observe and take action for change that would ensure marginalized groups' viewpoints are equally included in classroom discussion. In addition, history textbooks should offer detailed insight into the other side of historical events and movements for a broader and more in depth understanding of history itself.

Recently, Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation SB 48, which mandates that queer history and the many contributions of gay people, like Harvey Milk, must now be included in the state's school curriculum. This landmark law will make California the first state in the nation to require this much needed inclusion in their school lesson plans and textbooks.

"This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books," Brown said. "It represents an important step forward for our state."

The law requires that schools teach about the contributions of Pacific Islanders and the disabled. California Schools already require the teaching of the historical accomplishments of African-Americans, Native-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans and European-Americans.

Many will argue that there simply isn't enough time in the school year to teach in-depth, alternate viewpoints on historical events. My response: make time. The critics may very well be correct in this statement, but they fail to recognize that college campuses manage to teach a wealth of curriculum that is inclusive of all marginalized groups in the length of one semester. It is true that college coursework is more rigorous than secondary school curriculum; nevertheless, we find the time to glorify Christopher Columbus and a largely disproportionate amount of time educating our children about the Native American Red Power movement.

Opponents of the bill argue that it undermines the right of parents to protect their children from exposure to sensitive material and promotes sexual indoctrination.

The term "sensitive material" references any educational material parents deem unfit for their children's ears but the real question should be, why is this material not history-worthy? By excluding it from our country's history books we are encouraging GLBT sexual taboos as though this part of the population does not exist.

In Texas, a similar effort to change U.S. history text has been demonstrated in favor of altering textbooks to include more conservative ideas, including teaching America's Christian or biblical heritage.

This is a glaring double standard. Why is teaching students about the counter-narratives of marginalized groups less relevant than education about the Christian/Biblical heritage? For some parents Christian/Biblical heritage education is considered sensitive material.

California legislators have taken the initiative to protect Californians from the series of alterations the Texas school board presented with SB1451 proposed by Senator Leland Yee. California's board of education is against the Texas school board's proposition to include more conservative ideas like teaching America's biblical heritage, into newer versions of their textbooks. This bill would ensure that none of the Texas textbook standards are allowed to be used in California in any way. SB1451 is important because California, Texas, and Florida are major buyers of text books; therefore each state has a large impact and influence over the contents of history text used in other state schools

Terry Kemple with the Community Issues Council in Tampa, Florida agrees with what's happening in Texas, stating that both sides of the issue have an agenda. A decision needs to be made about which agenda is more beneficial for students.

"The thing is, which is the agenda that is most true to American history?" Kemple said. "And if you go back and review history, there's no question that the Christian underpinnings of our government is what we should be teaching our kids."

What Kemple fails to recognize is that historically, America is represented as a "melting pot" where many ethnic groups either immigrated to or were brought in chains to, inadvertently creating a multicultural society. Therefore, ignoring, failing to represent, and placing one group's agenda above another does our entire country a disservice because we are not effectively analyzing history from all viewpoints, which in turn significantly limits our knowledge base.