OK Law makers move to ban AP history courses

[werepossum]

I lived in OKC for about 3 years when I was in the Air Force. I met some nice people but the city and state are basically a shithole. OKC has, if memory serves, the lowest level of post-secondary education of any city in the US, or is at least near the lowest. I am disappointed, but not surprised, that the legislature there would do something this stupid.

I find the anti-intellectual streak in the current iteration of the Republican party really frustrating and I think it represents a major long-term problem for the party (actually David Brooks called this phenomenon, in referring to Sarah Palin in 2008, a "fatal cancer" for the party).

You're assuming that the proposed changes are politically neutral, whereas opposition to them is completely political. On what evidence do you so conclude? It's not like our history has changed or was not known previously; why then would you assume that radically revising it is either a good thing and/or a non-political thing?

 

[ttown]

Please expound on how the current AP history class hates the country.

I don't know anything about their current AP History class, but I strongly doubt that it does. And I never said that it did. I'm glad the republicans have allowed funding for it for so many years now. Hopefully the democrats/liberals don't ruin it for the tax paying (and non-tax paying) citizens for forcing such a radical change in curriculum (just going by the story). On a positive note, I doubt they will.

If the democrats/liberals really really want to teach hatred of America, maybe they should lobby Obama the super-rich millionaire to spend a little of his personal stash to do it. Win-win, kind of.

(full disclosure: I don't live in OK, so I really don't care how they spend their tax dollars. It just makes me happy to be affiliated with a party that is proud of the country.)

 

[Brainonska511]

I'm quite certain there will be an AP History class in Oklahoma. Just not one focused on hating the country. So you can quit worrying.

There are already several AP history classes from the College Board, including World History and European History. However (and obviously), neither are replacements for US History, and they are also generally taught at different grade levels in high school. So what "AP History" class are they going to invent to replace AP US History? Do you think that the College Board will license their AP trademark to Oklahoma for this special, more jingoistic class?

Do you also have proof that the current curriculum of AP US History is focused on "hating the country"? There's an awful lot of complaining with very little proof.

 

[Brainonska511]

Please expound on how the current AP history class hates the country.

I don't know anything about their current AP History class, but I strongly doubt that it does. And I never said that it did.

Really?

I'm quite certain there will be an AP History class in Oklahoma. Just not one focused on hating the country. So you can quit worrying.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

You're assuming that the proposed changes are politically neutral, whereas opposition to them is completely political. On what evidence do you so conclude? It's not like our history has changed or was not known previously; why then would you assume that radically revising it is either a good thing and/or a non-political thing?

You in turn are assuming that the proposed changes are "radical" and anti-American. Given that they have overwhelming support from academics, I doubt that. To me this sounds like a garden-variety case of a state legislature full of dopes effectively legislatively mandating ignorance. Other things being equal I will pretty much always side with the College Board over the Oklahoma legislature, based on my experience living in that backward state.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm quite certain there will be an AP History class in Oklahoma. Just not one focused on hating the country. So you can quit worrying.

Your certainty is based on what, exactly? The notion that conservatives can construct a whitewashed curriculum that will prepare students for institutions of higher learning?

AP courses are specifically constructed to prepare students for the AP test, obviously created by the cabal of ebil libruhl academia. If you don't know the anti-merricuhn stuff they teach you in the course, you won't do well on the test.

OTOH, OK conservatives want to sanitize the curriculum to achieve ideological purity, so their students won't know that stuff or won't be able to put it in the terms that will serve them when taking the test. It's not like they can say that the Civil War was really the war of northern aggression or that William Jennings Bryan's Cross of Gold speech was made because of the triumph of Capitalism. It's not like they can expound on the Labor Movement w/o understanding the events at Ludlow, either.

There's lots of stuff like that.

If we really want to talk about American Exceptionalism, we need to say we've achieved it despite our flaws.

 

[werepossum]

You in turn are assuming that the proposed changes are "radical" and anti-American. Given that they have overwhelming support from academics, I doubt that. To me this sounds like a garden-variety case of a state legislature full of dopes effectively legislatively mandating ignorance. Other things being equal I will pretty much always side with the College Board over the Oklahoma legislature, based on my experience living in that backward state.

Nope, I make no assumption either way. I'm just pointing out that this is NOT the right attempting to change the curricula, it's the right objecting to a change the left is making. And pointing out that some other changes the left has made have been totally agenda-driven, so that people should not automatically assume they are academically driven changes. I am assuming only that the changes are radical enough to rile the state legislature.

 

[ivwshane]

Nope, I make no assumption either way. I'm just pointing out that this is NOT the right attempting to change the curricula, it's the right objecting to a change the left is making. And pointing out that some other changes the left has made have been totally agenda-driven, so that people should not automatically assume they are academically driven changes. I am assuming only that the changes are radical enough to rile the state legislature.

And those lefty changes would be what exactly?

 

[DrPizza]

(full disclosure: I don't live in OK, so I really don't care how they spend their tax dollars. It just makes me happy to be affiliated with a party that is proud of the country.)

So, you're implying that you're fine with something like, "White man brought civilization and technology to the American Indians." And would prefer that the AP curriculum leaves out "white man intentionally gave American Indians blankets from small pox victims in an effort to intentionally cause the death of many Indians to help eradicate them." God forbid students learn that while there's a lot for our country to be proud of, there are some things in our history that we should be ashamed of.

 

[brycejones]

Nope, I make no assumption either way. I'm just pointing out that this is NOT the right attempting to change the curricula, it's the right objecting to a change the left is making. And pointing out that some other changes the left has made have been totally agenda-driven, so that people should not automatically assume they are academically driven changes. I am assuming only that the changes are radical enough to rile the state legislature.

So far in this whole dang thread not a single person taking any position remotely resembling support for this proposed measure has been able to site a single specific thing they would take out of the class or articulate how its from leftists.

You guys should at least understand what you're fighting for or against before posting.

 

[zinfamous]

Maybe not concrete, since I haven't read the bill. But in general: Anything that spreads Obama's hatred of America.

So...you're basically an idiot.

got it.

Obama hates America? This type of claim requires evidence. (I'll trust that you are capable of separating objective fact from impassioned bias--LoL! JUST KIDDING!)

 

[zinfamous]

I'm quite certain there will be an AP History class in Oklahoma. Just not one focused on hating the country. So you can quit worrying.

never was one, and never would be one. Stop being a toolbag.

 

[MongGrel]

So, you're implying that you're fine with something like, "White man brought civilization and technology to the American Indians." And would prefer that the AP curriculum leaves out "white man intentionally gave American Indians blankets from small pox victims in an effort to intentionally cause the death of many Indians to help eradicate them." God forbid students learn that while there's a lot for our country to be proud of, there are some things in our history that we should be ashamed of.

+1

Though I'm not even sure civilization ranks up there either.

 

[MongGrel]

I don't know anything about their current AP History class, but I strongly doubt that it does. And I never said that it did. I'm glad the republicans have allowed funding for it for so many years now. Hopefully the democrats/liberals don't ruin it for the tax paying (and non-tax paying) citizens for forcing such a radical change in curriculum (just going by the story). On a positive note, I doubt they will.

If the democrats/liberals really really want to teach hatred of America, maybe they should lobby Obama the super-rich millionaire to spend a little of his personal stash to do it. Win-win, kind of.

(full disclosure: I don't live in OK, so I really don't care how they spend their tax dollars. It just makes me happy to be affiliated with a party that is proud of the country.)

I just have to call you a Twit to get it out of my system.

 

[zinfamous]

You're assuming that the proposed changes are politically neutral, whereas opposition to them is completely political. On what evidence do you so conclude? It's not like our history has changed or was not known previously; why then would you assume that radically revising it is either a good thing and/or a non-political thing?

Not a single america-loving patriot of the god-and-country-loving GOP here has given one--ONE--example of how the proposed changes are completely political, and damaging to this country.

Not a single example. Yet, of course, the opposition to them, in their minds, is completely neutral?

Why is that? When challenged about this, all we get is one empty talking point: "Liberals and Obama hate America."

You're smart enough to know that such a statement is pure shit, and not worthy of any type of discussion. Why the hell would you not call that out, from your supposed allies in political ideology? It makes the entirety of the right look exceedingly stupid and weak.

Regarding the way this thread has progressed, I would be fucking embarrassed to find myself on the same side as vapid talking point generators like ttown.

 

[zinfamous]

So, you're implying that you're fine with something like, "White man brought civilization and technology to the American Indians." And would prefer that the AP curriculum leaves out "white man intentionally gave American Indians blankets from small pox victims in an effort to intentionally cause the death of many Indians to help eradicate them." God forbid students learn that while there's a lot for our country to be proud of, there are some things in our history that we should be ashamed of.

Dude, wtf, you America-hater!

My North Carolina public school learned me that those were "friend pox!"



seriously though--the Civil War was interesting, in 8th grade. The "States rights issue was heavily, heavily enforced. There was plenty of discussion of slavery, Brown, Kansas, every thing leading up to that, including the economic arguments, and it wasn't so much that we were being taught that "the Civil War was not fought over slavery," but that slavery was one of many issues of states rights being argued, and that it was...states rights.

Of course, well, you know: any enterprising 8th grader would spend a few minutes, and think "Gee, all of those states rights were actually related to slavery...so...um. OK. slavery."

 

[werepossum]

Not a single america-loving patriot of the god-and-country-loving GOP here has given one--ONE--example of how the proposed changes are completely political, and damaging to this country.

Not a single example. Yet, of course, the opposition to them, in their minds, is completely neutral?

Why is that? When challenged about this, all we get is one empty talking point: "Liberals and Obama hate America."

You're smart enough to know that such a statement is pure shit, and not worthy of any type of discussion. Why the hell would you not call that out, from your supposed allies in political ideology? It makes the entirety of the right look exceedingly stupid and weak.

Regarding the way this thread has progressed, I would be fucking embarrassed to find myself on the same side as vapid talking point generators like ttown.

None of us have read the course. However, neither have we forgotten the Howard Zinn movement. For almost half a century we've been seeing attempts to shift the narrative in schools from American exceptionalism to American evil; this may (or may not) be part of that.

For those who want more information, the driving force can be seen at media.collegeboard.com

I've spent twenty minutes or so (all I could spare as I was working today) going over the Course and Exam Description. It looks fine to me, but I don't know to what specifically the Oklahoma legislature objects.

 

[cliftonite]

None of us have read the course. However, neither have we forgotten the Howard Zinn movement. For almost half a century we've been seeing attempts to shift the narrative in schools from American exceptionalism to American evil; this may (or may not) be part of that.

For those who want more information, the driving force can be seen at media.collegeboard.com

I've spent twenty minutes or so (all I could spare as I was working today) going over the Course and Exam Description. It looks fine to me, but I don't know to what specifically the Oklahoma legislature objects.

I looked up Howard Zinn and saw that he wrote a book on American history.

He wrote a history textbook, A People's History of the United States, to provide other perspectives on American history. The textbook depicts the struggles of Native Americans against European and U.S. conquest and expansion, slaves against slavery, unionists and other workers against capitalists, women against patriarchy, and African-Americans for civil rights. The book was a finalist for the National Book Award in 1981.[21]

You don't think a history book should cover any of that?

 

[brycejones]

None of us have read the course. However, neither have we forgotten the Howard Zinn movement. For almost half a century we've been seeing attempts to shift the narrative in schools from American exceptionalism to American evil; this may (or may not) be part of that.

For those who want more information, the driving force can be seen at media.collegeboard.com

I've spent twenty minutes or so (all I could spare as I was working today) going over the Course and Exam Description. It looks fine to me, but I don't know to what specifically the Oklahoma legislature objects.

Just fess up, you all have nothing.

 

[brycejones]

You don't think a history book should cover any of that?

Those are "unpatriotic" moments in American history. Some people would seem to prefer that history be as sanitized as a Leave it to Beaver episode.

 

[Jhhnn]

For almost half a century we've been seeing attempts to shift the narrative in schools from American exceptionalism to American evil; this may (or may not) be part of that.

Pretty slick way to introduce jaundiced opinion as fact wrt "attempts" you fail to document. Give us some concrete examples of what you've been "seeing" over the last half century. You know, influential leftists besmirching America's good name with lies.

Try to remember that when you hear something you don't like doesn't mean it isn't true, OK?

Or just try to slip away as usual.

 

[werepossum]

I looked up Howard Zinn and saw that he wrote a book on American history.

You don't think a history book should cover any of that?

It's a bit more than that. Zinn's book universally concentrates on the bad things in our history, so that anyone reading it would be convinced that America is worse than Nazi Germany. This is not surprising since Zinn is an unabashed communist, but it is disturbing how many people agree with him.

Here's an article from Newsweek on what conservatives dislike about the College Board's new AP history course.

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-driving-conservatives-mad-about-new-history-course-264592

If you feel that the important points about America in World War II are Japanese internment, infringement of civil liberties, and debate about whether we should have dropped the bomb, you will love the new curriculum. If you think that rather misses the point, you will not.

It's also worth pointing out that these are mostly the same people that brought us Common Core, so if you think that's a good idea you'll likely approve of this too.

 

[nickqt]

It's a bit more than that. Zinn's book universally concentrates on the bad things in our history, so that anyone reading it would be convinced that America is worse than Nazi Germany. This is not surprising since Zinn is an unabashed communist, but it is disturbing how many people agree with him.

Here's an article from Newsweek on what conservatives dislike about the College Board's new AP history course.

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-driving-conservatives-mad-about-new-history-course-264592

If you feel that the important points about America in World War II are Japanese internment, infringement of civil liberties, and debate about whether we should have dropped the bomb, you will love the new curriculum. If you think that rather misses the point, you will not.

It's also worth pointing out that these are mostly the same people that brought us Common Core, so if you think that's a good idea you'll likely approve of this too.

Ignoring the bad things while accentuating only the positive things isn't a very good or accurate way to represent history.

Zinn wrote his history book because there are hundreds of books that do nothing but celebrate the inerrant infallibility of the US and our exceptionalism.

Being critical sure isn't as fun as ignoring reality, but there it is.

 

[brycejones]

If you feel that the important points about America in World War II are Japanese internment, infringement of civil liberties, and debate about whether we should have dropped the bomb, you will love the new curriculum. If you think that rather misses the point, you will not.

Interesting those are called out. Those were all aspects when I took AP American history 26 years ago.

What I also find interesting is that to some degree these have been used as examples in arguments that have been made by conservatives and civil libertarians within the last decade as they express fears about government over reach. If you're really concerned about those things I would think you would kids to learn about those events.

 

[werepossum]

Interesting those are called out. Those were all aspects when I took AP American history 26 years ago.

What I also find interesting is that to some degree these have been used as examples in arguments that have been made by conservatives and civil libertarians within the last decade as they express fears about government over reach. If you're really concerned about those things I would think you would kids to learn about those events.

They are certainly significant issues, but not compared to the scope of the war. Let kids learn why we fought the war before you teach them what we did wrong while fighting it.