shades.gif

November 9, 2004

Warping fragile little minds

The great state of Texas has forced textbook publishers Holt and McGraw-Hill to change language in health textbooks for high school students regarding marriage. Prior to the changes, the textbooks used gender-neutral phrases like "individuals who marry" and "married partners." The Texas Board of Education is insisting that the textbooks strictly define marriage as occurring between a man and a woman, and the parties involved as husband and wife.

Although this story is interesting (if disheartening), it's merely a minor example of an ongoing outrage. Texas, as the second-largest purchaser of K-12 textbooks in the nation, has a huge influence on the content of those textbooks. A little over a year ago, I read the excellent The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn" by Diane Ravitch, an education historian at NYU. In it, Ravitch exposes how interest groups from the left and the right and state boards of education have forced textbook and standardized test publishers either to adopt the blandest possible language in many cases, or specifically to include language that interest groups see as supporting their agendas.

I don't think enough people are angry about this, so I strongly recommend The Language Police to anyone interested in how children are educated. Not convinced? Visit the link above, and read the excerpt there from the book's first chapter, which gives some bizarre, almost unbelievable examples of reading passages that were removed from a standardized test because of bias or lack of sensitivity. You'll want to read the whole book to learn how pervasive these practices are.

Posted by at November 9, 2004 4:15 PM
Comments

a lot of teachers are using novels instead of textbooks... it is near to impossible to get kids interested in stories that they can't relate to.

Posted by: becka at November 9, 2004 4:43 PM

Some teachers have that option, thankfully. You should read the Ravitch book. In some places, teachers aren't allowed to teach novels without the same kind of approval that textbooks must receive.

Posted by: Stacie at November 9, 2004 4:53 PM

oh sad! Just when I hoped that things might be progressing in the South, people try to keep things in place. I should read the book too. Does this mean that they won't read anything that has some sexual "deviance"? i.e. Lord of the Flies (the pig thing) or Catch-22 (there's a ton of sex!) let alone any book that makes a reference to a homosexual (in a positive manner)

Posted by: loverboy at November 9, 2004 6:12 PM

We're using novels,too in LD reading classes. My problem is good quality literature to read to 6th graders, that I can hook them on. I've been using some Newbery winners, my problem is one particular set of parents. Said parent came unglued at my supervising teacher when Harry Potter was mentioned. Previous groups have clammored for it to be read. I can't have wizards, witches, spells, spooks, ad nauseum. So many neat books eliminated. Up side is that I have discovered several really neat books/authors that I have thoroughly enjoyed reading myself.
The Texas textbook thing scares the liver out of me...

Posted by: becka's mom at November 9, 2004 6:16 PM

Of course this was referring to health textbooks...isn't it nice how we're slipping back to the pre-scopes monkey days! Sad days for us in the fact-based community.

Posted by: Doc Dregs at November 10, 2004 9:30 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?