Thread by @TracyNovick

Massachusetts, how is it that we're okay with our Secretary of Education thinking we don't have to require the teaching of race relations since the Civil Rights era in U.S. history?

This has been weighing on me since Tuesday.

I think Jack encapsulates it well here:

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @Edu_Historian view original on Twitter

Video is here: livestream.com/accounts/22459… (33:16 to start)

I went back and looked at what's going on with the #MAEdu U.S. history standards as proposed, and this gets even more outlandish.
(they're here: doe.mass.edu/bese/docs/FY20… Check p.115)

#34 looks at the U.S. Civil Rights movements, its accomplishments, and how it served as a model for later movements.

#35 (God bless us every one) is desegregation and bussing.
So, no, Massachusetts, we're not going to miss that particular part of our history.

#36 is a whole list of movements coming out of the 1960's and 70's

And #37 (the one under discussion) is "Analyze the significance of the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first African American president of the United States and its impact on race relations."

Thus as it stands (which I think is @chriscmartell's point here: christophercmartell.com/BESERemarks05.…) the Civil Rights movement shows up, does some stuff in the 1960's, (bussing), inspires others, and BOOM, Barack Obama.

I have lived the last forty years (yes, as a white person, but still), and I'm gonna tell you that wasn't it.

I am quite sure there will come a "But it doesn't mean you CAN'T teach it!" retort.
To which I'm going to tell you to please go visit your local U.S. history class right about now and see what they're squeezing in.

If it matters, you'd best put it in the standards.

I thought perhaps we could crowdsource #PeysersPurge to collect what we'd be missing if we omit race relations since 1970 from our #MAEdu U.S. history teaching.
Any takers?

#PeysersPurge would leave out the Vietnam War's impact on race and race relations (see, for example, the @washingtonpost here: washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-h…)

Or the @nytimes from just last year: nytimes.com/2017/07/18/opi… #PeysersPurge

#PeysersPurge would leave out how the Roe v. Wade (1973) decision impacted different groups of women and what that has to do with health care disparities theatlantic.com/health/archive…

#PeysersPurge would not have us talk of the disparate impacts of the crack cocaine epidemic and how that interacted with the federal legal system
("three strikes")

There's tons of writing on that, but you can start with the @chicagotribune from last year: chicagotribune.com/news/columnist…

No "wet foot/dry foot" policy around Cuba (1995) and the contrast with other countries in central and south America under #PeysersPurge

If you skim down to #43, 9/11 comes in but in an international context, so #PeysersPurge would leave out how the attack and response impacted anyone who was brown, spoke a different language, or dared to dress in a fashion considered "other"

(Please tell me y'all don't need a link for that one)

All of which is to say:

The past 40 years of race relations has an enormous amount to do with where we are as a country.
Leaving that out poorly serves our kids.

And the Massachusetts Secretary of Education absolutely should not be arguing against its inclusion.

unroll