|
August 11, 2003
Dr. C. Robert
Maxfield
Superintendent
Farmington Public School
32500 Shiawassee Street
Farmington,
MI 48336
Dear Dr. Maxfield:
Through the
parents of Farmington students and the Farmington Public Education
Network, I have learned that the Farmington Public Schools recently
revised the high school curriculum eliminating the requirement of
12th grade American Government and substituting a new required course
in International Studies. As the Assistant General Counsel for the
Center for Individual Freedom, I have been and continue to be involved
with the Centers efforts to inform public school officials
and parents about the necessities of maintaining rigorous and thoughtful
curricula that include coursework on American history and government
while reflecting balanced and unbiased viewpoints. As a result,
I now write to express my concerns with these changes to the Farmington
Public Schools curriculum.
The Center for
Individual Freedom is a non-profit, non-partisan constitutional
advocacy group whose mission it is to protect and defend individual
freedom and individual rights guaranteed by the federal and state
constitutions. As a result, the Center is particularly concerned
with the education our children receive in classrooms across the
country about our republican form of government and the place of
the United States in the world. After reading many materials specific
to the curriculum change made by the Farmington Public Schools,
I have deep concerns about both the elimination of 12th grade American
Government and the institution of the International Studies program.
The decision
to drop the senior-level capstone course in American Government
could not come at a worse time. As you might be aware, one prominent
agenda item discussed at the recent National Education Association
Conference in New Orleans was the failure of our schools to provide
adequate civics education, particularly with regard to U.S. history
and government. According to the National Assessment of Educational
Progress study from 2001, nearly six in ten high school seniors
(57 percent) could not even demonstrate a "basic" understanding
of American history, while only one in ten (11 percent) showed a
"proficient" level of understanding. Thus, it is not surprising
that, when asked to pick an ally of the United States in World War
II from a list, more than half of high school seniors identified
one of the Axis nations: Germany, Japan, or Italy. In fact, the
National Association of Scholars reported that todays college
seniors have roughly the same level of cultural knowledge as the
high school seniors of 1955 a fact that was confirmed
when the American Council of Trustees and Alumni gave a high
school history test to more than 500 college seniors
in 1999. Four out of five of the college seniors failed the
test by achieving only a D or F on the high school history
exam, and only one in three knew that President George Washington
was a general in the Revolutionary War, while only one in five knew
that the phrase "government of the people, by the people, for
the people" came from President Abraham Lincolns Gettysburg
Address.
Unfortunately,
these results are not at all shocking to me. I served as an associate
instructor for "Introduction to American Politics" at
Indiana University in 1993 and 1994, a required course for many
underclassmen. At the beginning of each semester, we (the teachers)
would gauge the knowledge of those enrolled in the course by giving
a test about the basics of the American political system. The poor
results were shocking to me then. Less than a third of these college
students at a competitive Big Ten university could identify the
term of a United States Senator or name a single United States Supreme
Court justice. Thus, a decade ago, I learned that American students
lagged far behind in rudimentary knowledge about our country and
its government. And while it may be humorous that Jay Leno can "score
laughs showing how people offer ridiculous answers to simple questions"
about United States history and government (see Ben Feller, "Dont
know much about history: Americas civics challenge,"
Associated Press, July 2, 2003), the factual basis for such humor
demonstrates the importance of continued civics education in the
areas of American history and government, not the elimination of
such courses.
I am also disappointed
to learn that the Farmington School Board believes that American
history and government is most appropriately only taught at the
9th grade level. Such shortsightedness not only has a negative impact
by taking away the advantages of cumulative learning over a course
of multiple years of study, but also reduces a students exposure
to American history and government to that of the freshman level.
Such a result is all the more cause for concern when studies are
showing that high school seniors the very year in which the
Farmington schools have decided to eliminate American Government
are more likely than not to have less than "basic"
knowledge of our American past and how to impact its future. It
seems as though, now more than ever, a senior-level course about
the American experience is the kind of course necessary for these
soon-to-be adults as they reach the age when they can cast their
first ballot, run for elected office, and be a part of American
society at-large. Moreover, there can be little question that the
depth of knowledge and understanding of a high school senior is
markedly and dramatically different than that of a high school freshman.
There is a good reason many psychologists call this adolescent period
the "formative years." High school students experience
tremendous growth, both personally and academically, over the course
of their secondary education, and to expose these growing students
to a subject as important as American history and government only
at the beginning of their personal and intellectual growth is to,
in essence, make the material only marginally relevant to their
budding adult lives. Eliminating the senior-level, capstone course
in American Government sends precisely the wrong message
it implies their civic and political involvement is far from important
(after all, the school board eliminated that course requirement).
The new International
Studies curriculum raises its own concerns. Specifically, as of
yet, the only course to be approved for this requirement is a course
titled "International Affairs" that not only seems to
dramatically overreach the intellectual and critical skills of high
school students, but also raises the specter of indoctrination because
of a lack of balance and the presence of bias in the suggested materials.
There can be
simply no question that, at least as proposed, the "International
Affairs" course is beyond the abilities of some, if not most,
high school seniors. In just one semester, high school seniors will
apparently breeze through such "heady" topics as "how
individuals in history have had global impact on the modern world
through the solidification and influence of certain cultural norms,"
how the concept of human rights affects various people and societies
in different ways," "how globalization including economic
development, urbanization, resource use, international trade, global
communication, and environmental impact are affecting different
world regions," and "the influence of the American concept
of democracy and individual rights in international institutions
and in countries around the world," just to name a few of the
numerous benchmarks to be covered. In addition, these students will
read, understand, and even discuss materials that are consistently
used in college-level political science, international affairs,
and sociology courses. For instance, one of the two books designated
as an "essential resource, course text" is the Nations
and Governments: Comparative Politics in Regional Perspective textbook
that is designed for and regularly used in college and university
courses. (A simple Yahoo! or Google search confirms this fact.)
The reading list is daunting, even for college level students, not
to mention high school students. In each two- or three-week segment
the students are supposedly going to be exposed to multiple instructional
materials, many of which are in-depth articles written by academics
in scholarly journals detailing the latest in the areas of foreign
policy, geo-politics, international relations, cultural studies
and human rights. In short, it is doubtful that even college students
could fully grasp these materials in the short amount of time they
are being used in the "International Affairs" classroom,
much less the broad cross-section of high school 12th graders at
whom these ideas will be thrust with little or no background.
The overambitious
nature of the "International Affairs" course results in
even greater concerns. Todays generation of students already
live in a world of sound bites that inhibit deeper thought and inquisitiveness.
Any attempt to teach course materials as difficult and thought provoking
as those presented in the proposed curriculum in the short time
permitted likely will cause more harm than good to the students
learning experience because he or she may be confused or conflicted
by the materials in the absence of a sufficient background in international
politics and religion. Worse yet, in such situations where the depth
of the material is less than necessary to provide a good framework,
it is more likely that bias will creep in and indoctrination will
occur a result that should be unacceptable to all educators,
parents, and students. Moreover, if the course instructors are not
adequately trained in debate and conflict skills, the explosive
nature of the course materials, coupled with a superficial learning
experience, could result in a chaos beyond the expectations of any
educator. There can be no doubt that these "International Affairs"
materials touch upon the most combustible subjects nationality,
politics, religion, and even the meaning of humanity itself. Yet,
despite having to delve into such highly personal and controversial
subjects as "how culture may affect wom[e]ns and mens
perspectives" not to mention the even more inflammatory
subjects covered in the various optional segments, including "Religious
and Ethnic Conflict," "Developmental Issues: Health, Welfare,
and Education," "Terrorism," and "Warfare"
the course does little to ensure that balanced viewpoints
are introduced to the class. Such a failure will only fan the flames
of these controversial topics and does an educational disservice
by turning the students into little more than minds ripe for indoctrination.
As Thomas Jefferson said in his first Inaugural Address: "Error
of opinion may be tolerated when reason is free to combat it."
But in the case of the "International Affairs" course,
the slanted nature of the materials leaves students who may have
reasoned disagreements unable to muster the informed opinions necessary
to add their own perspective.
In summary,
the Farmington Public School Board should reconsider its decision
to replace the 12th Grade American Government requirement
with the International Studies program and, more specifically, the
approved "International Affairs" course. Beyond the serious
concerns outlined above, the School Board should consider the legal
ramifications of this change. Attached to this letter is a copy
of an article, currently appearing on the Centers website,
that outlines some of the legal reasons the school board should
tread lightly when it comes to subjecting students to courses that
clearly advocate a specific point of view. I hope the School Board
will reconsider its decisions, and if I can be of any assistance
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Reid Alan Cox
Assistant General Counsel
Enclosure
cc: |
Mr.
Jerry Fouchey, Director of Curriculum & Staff Development |
|
Ms. Karen
Bolsen, Board of Education |
|
Ms. Priscilla
Brouillette, Board of Education |
|
Mr. R.
Jack Inch, Board of Education |
|
Mr. Frank
Reid, Board of Education |
|
Mr. Gary
D. Sharp, Board of Education |
|
Ms. Cathleen
M. Webb, Board of Education |
|
Ms. Sue
Buck, Farmington Observer & Eccentric |
|
Ms. Joni
Hubred, Farmington Observer & Eccentric |
|
Ms. Julie
Edgar, Detroit Free Press |
|
Ms.
Delores Patterson, Detroit News |
|