California Education to Latinos: Sorry, we forgot that you exist !
After 20 years of using a California History-Social Science Framework which is ahistorical and misses the significant contributions of Mexicans, Latinos, and Asian to U.S. and California history, the State Board of Education will hold hearings on whether the current framework should be revised. I hope that you have an opinion.
California has the largest population of any state, with more than 6,286,000 students in school in 2006 California students make up more than 11 percent of the United States total. California, along with some 16 other states, adopts textbooks for the entire state instead of district by district. This makes the California adoption the largest single textbook sale in the nation. Succeeding in market is an important goal for textbook publishers. Many publishers write and edit their books in a targeted attempt to win control of the large and lucrative California and Texas markets. In an effort to increase their profits, publishers promote and try to sell throughout the nation books developed in California and Texas.
The election of 1982 began 16 years of conservative, Republican control of the California governorship. Governors appoint the members of the State Board of Education. The conservative control changed the history–social science, language, and reading curricula and textbooks for the state, and influenced textbook decisions throughout the United States.
The 1987 draft of the History-Social Science Framework (a guide for teachers and textbook selection still in use today ) excluded an accurate history of Latino and Native American settlement of the Southwest and did not cover the substantial Asian history in the West (see Almaguer, 1994). By electing to concentrate on a melting pot, consensus point of view, the History-Social Science Framework assumed that telling the history of European immigrants adequately explains the experiences of Mexicans, Native Americans, and Asians.
The Framework does not describe the displacement and destruction of Native American, Mexican, and Mexican American communities from 1850 to 1930 throughout the Southwest, including in Los Angeles and San Diego. The authors—among them, educational historian Diane Ravitch—failed to note that the present mosaic of Southwest culture was created by the subjugation and domination of previously existing groups, both Native American and Mexican American.
The California document won the praise of conservative reform advocates around the nation. Honig and Ravitch and numerous funded advocacy organizations such as the Brookings Institute cited it in their writings and speeches as a positive example of the kind of multiculturalism they supported.
In California, committees and the State Board of Education select texbooks for all the students in public schools. The U.S. history books submitted for the 1990 California adoption, and readopted in 1998 and 2005, were required to be based on the Framework. The 1987- 2005 document expanded African American, Native American, and women’s history coverage but were totally inadequate in their coverage of Latinos and Asians—both significant population groups in the development of history of the West. The only significant change between the 1985 and the 2005 adopted Framework was the addition of a new cover, a cover letter, and a photo of Cesar Chavez. Latinos make up 48.1 percent of California’s student population and Asians make up 8.1 %. Coverage of Native Americans in fourth-grade books was embarrassingly Euro-centric. The books do not accurately describe the interactive and interdependent nature of the African, European, Native American, Latino, and Asian communities. (For a detailed analysis of this curriculum conflict, see Cornbleth & Waugh, 1995. For an opposing view, see Gitlin, 1995.) Above Excerpt from Choosing Democracy: a practical guide to multicultural education. (2004)
Focus group: Friday, May, 9,2008. Sacramento.
An agenda for the focus group meetings are posted at the CDE Web site athttp://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/hs/cf/.
is there hearings on this exclusion of Chicano history in L.A.? or is it only in Sacramento? Did the LAUSD take a stance?
ReplyDeleteThere will be a hearing in Los Angeles.
ReplyDeleteHere is the schedule:
Frameworks are updated periodically as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Education, Section 9511(c), to ensure that they reflect the most current and confirmed research on education in the subject area. The focus group meetings will be open to the public, and comments made at each meeting will be forwarded to the Curriculum Development and Instructional Materials Commission and the State Board of Education for consideration. The focus group meetings will be held at the following locations:
Location
Date
Santa Clara County Office of Education, 1290 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose
May 30, 2008
Los Angeles County Office of Education, 9300 Imperial Highway, Downey
June 5, 2008
San Diego County Office of Education, 6401 Linda Vista Hwy., San Diego
June 6, 2008
The California Department of Education is also soliciting nominations for members of the focus groups. Each focus group will include between 10 and 15 invitees, who will be selected to ensure balanced representation of regions, types of schools, and grade levels experience. County and district superintendents and charter school administrators are invited to nominate educators for service on one of the above focus group meetings. Educators are defined by the California Education Code Section 44013(a), a certificated person holding a valid California teaching credential or a valid California services credential, is employed by a local education agency or by a special education local planning area, and is not employed as an independent contractor or consultant.
At the Sacramento hearing there were 11 teachers; 10 Anglos and 1 Vietnamese.
So, you can guess how it went.
I encourage you to try to get on the focus group, or to testify at the Los Angeles hearing.
I can be reached at campd227@pacbell.net
Good to hear from you.