Why California students do not understand Chicano/Latino history. 1987- 2011. By Duane Campbell
The morning paper includes an article by Jim Sanders entitled in the print edition, Schools’ history books are so 1998. Good article. Actually, the books are more like 1986. Assembly bill 1033 by Feuer (D- Los Angeles) encourages a small modification.http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/20/3640800/assemblyman-mike-feuer-urges-upgrading.html According to the testimony, his position was opposed by some Elk Grove teachers of Science. That is not even a start of the problem.
Textbooks for California schools are selected by the State Board of Education based upon recommendations of their Curriculum Committees and the state frameworks and standards. It is urgent that the History-Social Science Framework be revised to provide an accurate history of the contributions of Mexicans, Mexican Americans, Latinos and Asians to the history of the state and of the nation. The current Framework reflects the historiography of the 1950’s. It was written in 1986 by senior scholars, they in turn were educated in the early 1970’s or before. It is substantially out of date. Because the Framework is out of date- the text books are out of date. And, Mexican American/Latino history is not being taught.
Standards and frameworks are products of the people who make the decisions. Frameworks like standards pick winners and losers; the choices which committees make favor one group over another group- choices are based upon the political power of those represented on the committees. The Framework is supposed to be revised each 7 years but it has not been revised. The current Framework reflects the historiography of the 1970’s and the political balance of power of the 1980’s.
During the winter and spring of 2009, a committee of teachers and other educators appointed by the State Board of Education met to review the current History-Social Science Curriculum Framework and to recommend revisions. The committee met in a series of two-day public sessions which were well attended by professionals and civic advocates concerned about the content of history and social studies education in California.
A new draft Framework was prepared based upon the work of the committee- but the state budget crisis prevented the required review, revision, and adoption. In 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed $144, 000 that was to be used by the Curriculum Commission to complete the adoption process and a legislative effort to fund the review (SB 1278) was held in committee. Consequently, the 1987 Framework remains in effect as the policy guidelines for the state.
The current Framework was written in 1986 and published in 1987 after a great deal of controversy. The Framework is supposed to be revised each 7 years. The Framework, along with the standards, provides the guidelines for what is to be taught and what is to be included in the history and social science textbooks in California. In 2009, the History /Social Science Framework was up for re consideration but the process was halted by the budget crisis.
California has the largest population of any state, with more than 6,252,000 students in school in 2008. 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 purchasing. This makes the California adoption the largest single textbook sale in the nation. Gaining this 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. Publishers promote and try to sell books developed in California and Texas throughout the nation in an effort to increase their profits.
The 1980’s were the age of Ronald Reagan. As Governor he appointed members of the State Board of Education. His influence continued long after he became President of the U.S. The view of history that won the battle in California in 1987 was crafted by neoconservative historian Diane Ravitch and supported by Paul Gagnon and former California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Bill Honig, among others (Cornbleth & Waugh, 1995).
The 1987 Framework still in use today expanded African American, Native American, and women’s history coverage but remains totally inadequate in the coverage of Latinos and Asians. The only significant change between the 1985 and the 2005 adopted Framework was the addition of a new cover, a cover letter, and additions of photos such as of Cesar Chavez . Latinos currently make up 48.1 percent of California’s student population and Asians make up 8.1 %.
The dominant neo conservative view of history argues that textbooks and a common history should provide the glue that unites our society. Historical themes and interpretations are selected in books to create unity in a diverse and divided society, a unity from the point of view of the dominant class. This viewpoint assigns to schools the task of creating a common culture. In reality, television and military service may do more to create a common culture than do schools and books.
Conservatives assign the task of cultural assimilation to schools, with particular emphasis on the history, social science, and literature curricula. Historians advocating consensus write textbooks that downplay the roles of slavery, class, racism, genocide, and imperialism in our history. They focus on ethnicity and assimilation rather than race, on the success of achieving political reform, representative government, and economic opportunity for European American workers and immigrants. They decline to notice the high poverty rate of U.S. children, the crisis of urban schooling, and the continuation of racial divisions in housing and the labor force. In California they decline to notice that Mexicans, Mexican-Americans and Latinos as well as Asians contributed to the development of this society.
This consensus conservative viewpoint history dominates textbook publishing in California , but these partial and incomplete histories do not empower students from our diverse cultural communities. By recounting primarily a consensual, European American view, history and literature extend and reconstruct current White supremacy, sexism, and class biases in our society. When texts or teachers tell only part of the story, schools foster intellectual colonialism and ideological domination (Cornbleth & Waugh, 1995).
When the 48.72 % of students who are Latino , and the 11.5 % who are Asian do not see themselves as part of history, for many their sense of self is marginalized. Marginalization negatively impacts their connections with school and their success at school. It contributes to an over 50% drop out rate for Latinos and some Asian students. An accurate history would provide some students with a a sense of self, of direction, of purpose. History and social science classes should help young people acquire and learn to use the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that will prepare them to be competent and responsible citizens throughout their lives. Instead, the current history textbooks tell a fairy tale of what happened here in the Southwest.
In 1995, the author James Loewen described what students learn about history, “High school students hate history. Whey they list their favorite subjects, history invariably comes in last. Students consider history the most irrelevant of the 21 subjects commonly taught in high school.
Bor-r-ring is the adjective they apply to it. When students can, they avoid it even though most students get higher grades than in math, science, or English. Even when they are forced to take classes in history, they repress what they learn so every year or two another study decries what the seventeen year olds don’t know.
African American, Native American, and Latino students view history with a special dislike. They also learn history especially poorly. Students of color do only slightly worse than white students in mathematics. If you’ll pardon my grammar, non white students do more worse in English and most worse in history. “ Lies My Teacher Told me. P. 1. (1995.)
As a consequence of the outdated Framework, most schools fail to teach an accurate, complete, history of the Chicano- Latino people and of Asian Americans. This essentially means that the writers are choosing not to recognize reality. – not to tell the full story. This a problem created in part by the failure to revise the history/social science framework.
Textbooks for California schools are selected by the State Board of Education based upon recommendations of their Curriculum Committees and the state frameworks and standards. It is urgent that the History-Social Science Framework be revised to provide an accurate history of the contributions of Mexicans, Mexican Americans, Latinos and Asians to the history of the state and of the nation.
After providing testimony, and encouraging others to testify, I can report that the draft of the Framework for Grades 8 and 11 ( U.S. History) now included substantially improved coverage of the Chicano/Mexicano experience. Testimony was given by BMED Graduate Martin Ramirez and Dr. Lorena Marquez. For complete text see page; Why California Students do not understand Chicano/Latino history.
For this reason, further work on the frameworks for history-social science, science, health, and mathematics has been stopped. On July 17, 2009, the Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission (Curriculum Commission) approved the draft update of the History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools for field review. The draft framework has been posted on the CDE Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/hs/cf/, but the actual field review and online survey will not occur at this time. For more information go to the Curriculum Frameworks and Instructional Materials Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/index.asp.
When students do not seem themselves as a part of history, their sense of self is limited.
Marginalization negatively impacts their connections with school and their success at school. It Disempowers.
Accurate history provides a sense of self, of direction, of purpose.
Lack of history of self, does not commit students to democratic participation in the society.
An outline of Latino history is in my book, and on my web site along with lesson plans. I urge you teachers to teach your students the truth- Yes, come inconvenient truths, not just myths. For example, if a person is going to understand our society and the economy, they need to understand immigration. The history of Chicano/Mexicano people in California exists – but it was ignored by the writers of the current State Framework.
History classes should help young people acquire and learn to use the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that will prepare them to be competent and responsible citizens throughout their lives.