Perhaps my biggest frustration in running for Texas State Board of Education District 10 has been the way certain editorial boards have been unable to see the differences between me and my Republican opponent. These people look at us, two women with Ph.D.s in education, and conclude that the safer choice is to back the Republican in red-state Texas. Safer for their reputations, perhaps, but certainly not safer for Texas children. For the benefit of those editorial boards, I have highlighted key differences between me and my opponent below in bold.
The current State Board of Education has politicized the curriculum-writing process because of the narrow personal political agendas of a few extreme Republican members who have depended on advocates of voucher programs for financial and political support. We have an opportunity to prevent the extremists from reprising what they have done with science and history standards, but to do so will require strong leadership from someone willing to stand up to the extremists. Repeatedly, so-called moderate Republicans on the current Board have failed to do so. My Republican opponent Marsha Farney, unlike me, has refused to state she would not align herself with those who politicize the Board. Her investment choices provide a clear indication of her fundamental values and political preferences.
By the way Texas' State Board of Education acts, many might think that Texans' in general want an education system that spends more time teaching specific conservative ideological positions than genuinely preparing children for their future lives.
A poll conducted in May by the Texas Freedom Network suggests that those people are just the rowdy and loud minority. After extensive analysis, the Texas Freedom Network is going from city to city with pollster Anna Greenberg showing the good news: Texans are on our side.
Take a look at these stats:
"72 percent of likely Texas voters want teachers and scholars, not politicians, to be responsible for writing curriculum requirements for public schools."
"The overwhelming support for putting experts in charge of writing curriculum standards is bipartisan (84 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents) and evident in all of the state's major urban regions.
"Fifty-seven percent of voters oppose the SBOE's actions after hearing information about the changes being made to the initial recommendations, while just 29 percent support the revisions."
After hearing the description, likely voter groups that are expected to one day become a larger force in Texas politics (suburban voters, young voters, and Hispanic voters), were all opposed to the recent SBOE revisions by amounts of 56%, 61%, and 55% respectively.
A couple things of note, though.
First, Greenberg did her best to ensure that the poll wouldn't be weighted to get answers that liberals want to hear. The polling firm's likely voter model used in this poll takes into account an expected Republican/Conservative wave in 2010. The questions were all deliberately made as neutral, if not conservative, as possible. (For instance, a question that learned that 80% of Texans support comprehensive sex education specifically mentioned condoms.)
Second, the Democratic decision would not be for "majority rules." Progressive positions are not always favored by a majority of Texans, but our problems with the State Board are not that we cannot liberally brainwash students. Our problems are that some conservatives are trying to do such for their side. Look at the question that led to the first given stat: "Who do you think should be responsible for writing curriculum standards and textbook requirements for Texas' public schools: Teachers and academic scholars OR An elected state school board?"
Given both choices, Texans choose experts and teachers. Not only do Texans choose experts and teachers, Anna Greenberg has said that her further analysis showed that there is not a single subgroup of Texans, according to the poll, that would choose otherwise. That includes religious, even fundamentalist, conservatives in this state.
The State Board of Education is a sham. As we all know by now, they ignore the experts and go off on their own. But when even a majority of Texas Republicans disagree with the partisan process, you know it's time for a change.
Next session, let's take a tad bit of time to reform this school board. Until then, let's also elect board members who give a bit more respect to those who actually know what they're talking about. Because, after all, that's what Texans want.
When I was an undergraduate, I once changed majors because a professor criticized me in front of the class for smiling too much. I didn't know a whole lot about education back then, but I knew enough to be confident that humiliating students was NOT good educational practice.
Imagine my amusement when I recently read a conservative blog post that showed the photo I use in my campaign for Texas State Board of Education with the caption "ferociously smiley 'expert'". At fifty-something, I'm proud to be called ferocious, as well as smiley; in fact I think it's kind of cute. But I wonder, why is the word 'expert' is in quotes? Is it that expertise is something to be made fun of? Or is it that a Ph.D. doesn't really indicate expertise?
Perhaps the blogger believes that expertise is not really valuable. Recent comments and behaviors of members of the State Board make that a good possibility. When rewriting the science curriculum created by science teachers and approved by science experts, Don McLeroy, former chair, stated that someone had to "stand up to the experts." The Board's continued micro-managing of curriculum standards in various subjects for almost 4.7 million children in Texas certainly dismisses the expertise of the teachers and subject-matter experts who created those standards.
First of all, thank you to everyone who sent emails, signed petitions, spoke at the State Board of Education meeting, and did whatever they could to help save education in Texas. Unfortunately, the Board chose to ignore the pleas of thousands of historians, parents, and teachers to Put Our Kids First. Instead, they chose to make further ideological changes to the social studies curriculum. On Friday, the Board passed a curriculum that included amendments characterizing global organizations as "efforts to undermine U.S. sovereignty" through "forced redistribution of American wealth to third world countries." They also required that students be taught about "the solvency of long-term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare" (in the history curriculum!). They even spent time debating whether to include President Obama's middle name when referring to him.
Whenever the State Board of Education revises the public school curriculum standards, the new standards should be clear, rigorous, and flexible enough to allow for classroom innovation. Unfortunately, the Social Studies TEKS just approved by the SBOE meet none of these objectives.
Instead, the new Social Studies TEKS offer:
* a cumbersome list of names and dates that will stifle creativity and encourage "teaching to the test";
* individual standards that favor political posturing over sound scholarship;
* individual standards that are virtually unteachable in a real-world classroom environment because they are incoherent or hopelessly vague; and
* individual standards that are plagiarized from dubious sources.
If one of my Trinity University students handed in this work, then he or she would receive a D for the quality of ideas and an F for academic dishonesty. Texas schoolchildren deserve a first-class education, not plagiarism or politics-as-usual from the SBOE.
Throughout my campaign and, should I be elected, once I am seated in public office, I will consult with concerned parents, teachers, scholars, community and business leaders, and textbook publishers. Together we can and will work to identify and correct the errors that were incorporated into Texas' new Social Studies TEKS.
As a member of the State Board, I will work tirelessly to repeal and revise the the Social Studies TEKS so that our schools position Texas students for college and career success. And I will insist that social studies textbooks are based on sound scholarship; they must reflect the rich diversity of Texas and U.S. society as well as the intricate and splendid past that is Texas and U.S. history.
History is usually written by the victors. Not so when it comes to social studies standards here in Texas, where Don McLeroy - a dentist from College Station and a defeated, outgoing member of the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) - would rather have public school attendees talk about fictional characters from a coffee table book than historicallysignificantAmericans. As Phillip Martin wrote about earlier, Dr. McLeory recommended a change to curriculum (page 3) that prominent American history muckrackers and reformers like Upton Sinclair, Susan B. Anthony, Ida B. Wells and W.E.B. DuBois be contrasted against "the optimism of immigrants including Jean Pierre Godet as told in Thomas Kinkade's The Spirit of America." Dr. McLeroy did not mention that Jean Pierre Godet is a character in a work of fiction written in 1998. And that's only one point on a long list of mistruths the current SBOE wants to write into public school curriculum.
But there is still hope for the kids of Texas. Just like Texas science textbook purchase in Texas might be delayed, so might social studies textbooks. In fact, the textbooks will likely be purchased by the next SBOE elected this coming November, which means we have a chance to elect people who have education credentials and possibly save history in Texas. Here's what you can do to help...
Donate directly to the campaigns. Support two candidates running for the SBOE by donating directly to their campaigns. Dr. Judy Jennings (running for SBOE District 10) and Dr. Rebecca Bell-Metereau (running for SBOE District 5) are running in districts that - if you put the two districts together - are geographically the size of Mississippi and total about 1.8 million registered voters. Judy and Rebecca are both committed to Saving History and you can donate to both candidates at their Save History ActBlue site.
Help spread the word through Facebook, Twitter and your blog of choice. Those of us supporting Judy, Rebecca and others in Texas are using the #savehistory hashtag on twitter, as well as using that same tag on our posts.
Be heard - join us in the Twitterbomb. Forget to submit your personal comment on the current standards up for review? We found a (non-official) way to submit a comment. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is on Twitter and we'd like to let them know how we feel about the proposed curriculum changes while they're voting on those changes. Please join us on Thursday, May 20th at 9am Central Standard by tweeting:
.@teainfo Do right by TX kids & public school kids everywhere. Reject distorted Social Studies curriculum changes. #SaveHistory
Also let TEA know which historical figures and heros you'd like the SBOE to save by tweeting your favorite folks (for instance, Dolores Huerta) using the #savehistory hashtag all week.
We're closing in on May, and that means that the State Board of Education is closing in on finalizing a disastrous revision of our social studies curriculum. Our public schools need a world class education if we are going to lead the country for the next few decades, as I know all our leaders hope, but right now they are being set up for something that is, well, less.
Bill White, who wants to drive us back in the right direction, weighed in today.
Bill White called on Rick Perry today to ask his appointed chair of the State Board of Education (SBOE) to delay the May vote on curriculum standards until newly elected board members are in office.
Delaying action until next year could save money on new textbooks and allow new board members to provide leadership that will not allow political interference with education.
"Texas voters have voted against those who are extreme and hyper-political," said campaign spokesperson Katy Bacon. "If Rick Perry won't show some leadership about the process, he should at least respect Texans who've said they don't want the current, controversial SBOE making decisions about their children's future."
Perry's previous appointed chair of the SBOE, Don McLeroy, engaged in such extreme antics that the Texas Senate refused to confirm him the second time Perry appointed him in 2009. McLeroy was defeated in his party's primary this spring.
Nearly a month ago, White called on Perry to ask the current chair to send amendments back to the original curriculum review teams. Perry responded, saying of the SBOE that he was not going to "try to outsmart them."
Since White's comments about bringing revised standards back to expert review teams, the Texas Council for the Social Studies and the Texas Social Studies Supervisors Association have weighed in saying, "state education standards should be balanced and neutral and not reflective of political viewpoints."
But this isn't just a political move. State legislators are getting in the act, too. They know that there's a major policy problem.
21 state representatives and senators are scheduled to gather on April 28 in E2.012 in the Capitol as they schedule a hearing on the State Board of Education. Representative Trey Martiniez Fischer, chair of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, said, the members intend to send a message that "either they operate within the confines of statute or be ready to explain to the Legislature why not."
The Mexican American Legislative Caucus is hosting the event, but they've teamed up with other leadership groups in the legislature: the Legislative Study Group, the House Black Caucus, and the Senate Hispanic Caucus. The hearing will include both students and educators. Even some Republicans are likely to show, such as Republican SBOE candidate Thomas Ratliffe, who was invited for testimony.
It's not just these legislators, either, though. It's not just the elites who run this state and want to run this state. Pretty much everyone has noticed that the SBOE is ruining things, as 1,000 historians have signed a letter of protest, and the University of Texas' student Save our History! Coalition has had an Action Week against the board, which will culminate in a rally in the UT Campus' South Mall on Sunday.
Rick Perry, who appoints the chair of the board and likely holds all sorts of influence, is a statewide elected politician. All 15 members of the board are elected, too. They were elected by Texas voters, but the Texas Voters are now being ignored.
Ken Mercer and the other extremist members of the State Board of Education claim that the United States was established as a Christian nation and seek to bring down the wall of separation between church and state. This extremist cabal seems to have forgotten their history lessons regarding one of the primary reasons that many European colonists came to America. We all learned that the Pilgrims came here seeking to escape religious persecution.
The Founding Fathers were not so far removed from the European religious wars between Catholics and Protestant sects all over Europe that they could fail to understand the value of separating religion and the state. In the years 1553 to 1660 there was religiously inspired violence or war between Christian sects somewhere in Europe each year almost without exception.
Mary I, Queen of England (1553-1558), restored Catholicism and in the process had almost 300 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian Persecutions.
In France between 1562 and 1598, there were eight civil wars and other outbreaks of violence that were clearly motivated by religious differences.
The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), began in Bohemia when Ferdinand II became the king in 1617 over Protestant fears he would recatholicize it.
The English Civil War (1640-1660) involved various Protestant denominations and Catholics and included the beheading of Charles I in 1649.
Ken Mercer doesn't understand that separation of Church and State protects his freedom of religion and our children's, but our founders did.
The radicals on the State Board of Education have shown that they don't value religious freedom. At their last meeting the members proposed and discussed various aspects of the proposed social studies curriculum which was developed by volunteer teachers and subject matter experts. Board member Mavis Knight offered the following amendment: "examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others." Knight pointed out that students should understand that the Founders believed religious freedom was so important that they insisted on separation of church and state.
Board member Cynthia Dunbar argued that the Founders didn't intend for separation of church and state in America and claimed instead that the Founders intended to promote religion. She called the amendment "not historically accurate."
Almost all constitutional scholars agree that separation of religion and state is clearly expressed in Article VI paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution which states: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Ken Mercer voted with the rest of the historical revisionists to defeat the amendment. If you value your right to practice your religion and teach your children that religion Rebecca Bell-Metereau must be elected to the State Board of Education.
I'm exactly the kind of person who should have known about what's been developing at the Texas State Board of Education regarding textbook curriculum.
I'm a product of the public schools of Texas, I have two children in public schools and another who recently graduated from a public high school, and I'm politically active. Yet, like many of my fellow Texans, I just haven't paid close enough attention to what many would consider to be a not-so-glamorous elected panel.
So thanks to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and just about every other working comedian, I am now more than just aware of the ludicrous actions regarding textbook selections being undertaken by the SBOE; I'm fired up.
At first I thought I was seeing yet another round of the ongoing racism we still haven't completely evolved from in our great state, but I quickly came to realize the SBOE actions go way beyond racism. Their plans are much more pervasive and actually affect school children all over the country.
In short, members of the SBOE are systematically engaging in an extreme ideological agenda in an effort to skew history, science, literature, and any other area of study they can come across, to fit their own narrow views and beliefs. I would call it Orwellian, but that would be an insult to George Orwell. And the SBOE would probably try to ban his books from Texas public schools if they haven't already thought of it.
Members of the SBOE are free to believe anything they want, but when they start forcing their beliefs on the rest of us using the very textbooks my children and many of your children (or nephews, nieces, cousins, friends...) are being taught from, then they've crossed the line. So we have to stop these school yard bullies!
Thankfully, State Representative Richard Peña Raymond has started the Thomas Jefferson Movement to stop the SBOE from succeeding with their agenda. http://thomasjeffersonmovement...
The online organization, named for just one of the many great Americans who are being historically revised by the SBOE, has been formed to educate, inform and mobilize the vast majority of Texans who disagree with the current SBOE members' radical views.
Additionally, the Thomas Jefferson Movement, in the spirit of Jefferson himself, will be a forum for open, honest discourse on the subject. The site is built on a Ning platform and allows for anyone who doesn't cross the line into hate speech and extreme profanity to express their points of view for or against the SBOE. But make no mistake, the creators of the site do not agree with the current majority on the SBOE. Neither do the majority of Texans.
