Over at The National Review, Stanley Kurz claims that U.S. history textbooks are anti-conservative. Here is a taste:
The most underappreciated political story of our time is the changing content of K-12 textbooks in history, civics, social studies, and related subjects. Yes, I said political story. Why are Millennials so receptive to socialism? Why are today’s Democrats dominated by identity politics? Why have movements on the political right shifted from a constitutional conservatism symbolized by the Boston Tea Party to a populist nationalism? All these changes, and more, are connected to what today’s history textbooks are, and are not, teaching. Yet we’ve barely noticed the link.
Almost any Advanced Placement (AP) U.S. history textbook has more influence on American politics than 90 percent of the books reviewed in our leading newspapers and political magazines. Yet when was the last time you read a review of a high school history textbook? Never, I’ll bet. That’s partly because these thousand-page monstrosities are tough to read, and even tougher to judge for anyone but professional historians. And with growing academic specialization, even historians find it difficult to assess an entire text.
Liberals needn’t bother keeping track of history textbooks because they’re the ones who write them. But conservatives have dropped the ball on this issue so essential to their survival. Conservative politicians, institutions, and donors focus far more on short-term electoral politics and policy than culture. History textbooks don’t even register. Over the long haul, that’s a recipe for political exile and social ostracism.
Conservatives saw the tip of the enormous textbook iceberg earlier this April when a radio host tweeted out pictures a Minnesota student had sent her of an AP U.S. history (APUSH) textbook. The student had photographed pages of the not yet formally released update of James W. Fraser’s By the People, an APUSH textbook published by the international education giant Pearson. Those pages covered the 2016 election and the Black Lives Matter movement. Their blatantly partisan bias set off a conservative media firestorm. (I commented here, and Joy Pullman’s important take is here.)
Read the entire piece here.
I don’t know if Kurtz is correct about Fraser’s textbook because I have not read it. But it does seem clear to me that Kurtz has no clue about how history is actually taught–or should be taught–in schools.
First, Kurtz’s entire argument rests on the fact that students actually read the textbook.
Second, and more importantly, most students learn history from their teachers. In other words, Kurtz assumes that American history textbooks are the only way students learn history. The best teachers know that all textbooks, like all history, are subjective. They thus use the textbook to teach bias or to show how the textbook matches-up with their students’ work in the primary sources. Show me a teacher who believes that his or her textbook represents received wisdom from on high and I will show you a bad history teacher.