Oklahoma tries to ban APUSH (& possibly others AP classes)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This is exactly why no one in their right mind could support "states' rights"

And if the national government was doing something like this, would you then suddenly switch to be in favor of states rights?

[Grumpier Than Thou]

This is exactly why no one in their right mind could support "states' rights"

And if the national government was doing something like this, would you then suddenly switch to be in favor of states rights?

Can you cite an example of the federal government attempting to ban an AP course?

[bedstuy]

This is exactly why no one in their right mind could support "states' rights"

And if the national government was doing something like this, would you then suddenly switch to be in favor of states rights?

If the United States was as dumb as Oklahoma, God help us.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This is exactly why no one in their right mind could support "states' rights"

And if the national government was doing something like this, would you then suddenly switch to be in favor of states rights?

Can you cite an example of the federal government attempting to ban an AP course?

I can readily cite examples such as drug prohibition and capital punishment where federal policies are decidedly more conservative than some states. For that matter, assume that not only DOMA had been upheld, but that the Supreme Court had ruled that the States couldn't decide on their own to recognize SSM.  There are few people who decide whether they are for or against states rights without considering which would be more advantageous for their own policy preferences on specific topics.  Since you were apparently basing your position on how it affected another issue, I doubt that your opposition to states rights was based upon a sincerely held belief that centralized decision making is superior regardless of the results.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

This is disturbing. APUSH actually attempts to do what real history courses are supposed to which is present different ways to interpret and analyze our country's history.

Surprised this hasn't happened earlier.

You think the Right in this country wants people to even know of "different ways to interpret and analyze our country's history"?(nevermind whether students agree with them or not).

The purpose of education from the Right's perspective is to create loyal citizens and employees. They think questioning anything is a useless luxury at best, dangerous subversiveness at worst. This is nothing new.

How can a course made to fit a standardized test promote questioning of accepted interpretations of history? (not just rhetorical, I'm legitimately curious)

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

This is disturbing. APUSH actually attempts to do what real history courses are supposed to which is present different ways to interpret and analyze our country's history.

Surprised this hasn't happened earlier.

You think the Right in this country wants people to even know of "different ways to interpret and analyze our country's history"?(nevermind whether students agree with them or not).

The purpose of education from the Right's perspective is to create loyal citizens and employees. They think questioning anything is a useless luxury at best, dangerous subversiveness at worst. This is nothing new.

How can a course made to fit a standardized test promote questioning of accepted interpretations of history? (not just rhetorical, I'm legitimately curious)

It's not so much questioning history as critical thinking and piecing things together and using facts to back up opinions. The AP test itself requires 3 essay answers from what I remember. Nothing right or wrong so long as you use several historical facts to back it up.

[pbrower2a]

Denying the reality of separation of Church and State in early America is pseudohistory. Ironically it is because Americans at the time of the American Revolution were largely religious (Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Quakers, Congregationalists, and reformed Church (Dutch and Huguenot practice were identical) were not going to accept the authority of any one of them. (Catholics were a tiny minority until the mass settlement of Irish and German Catholics in the mid-19th century). Anyone who disbelieves in the separation of Church and State need ask which religious heritage other than their own they want determining how they are to think. How many Americans would like their religious heritage to be defined by Kiryas Yoel (a rigidly-orthodox Jewish community)?

Criticism of capitalism is inevitable because it never achieves all that it promises (unless one begins or gets filthy rich).  Any college student who gets no introduction to Karl Marx might have an excessively rosy view of capitalism at its harshest. "It's fine so long as the bad stuff happens to others" is a weak defense of capitalism. 

What good can we say of slavery, the Trail of Tears, Jim Crow practice, the incarceration of Japanese-Americans, and McCarthyism?

America is in flux. It will be until it fossilizes the rot of a gangrenous order.

[CapoteMonster]

Fools!

Anyway, I can't say I am at all a fan of this.  This idea that kids should be taught American history without it's bad qualities is just well wrong.  Teaching an exceptionalist view of History is not History.  It's Propaganda.

I know it's cliche, but if you don't learn your History you're doomed to repeat it.  If you are a remotely intelligent and rational individual your understanding of History informs your politics.  Getting rid of classes because they teach actual history instead of the feel good mail stamp version of it causes real damage to the psyche of this current generation.

This is not good at all.  In fact I am going to write a letter to the Oklahoma Legislature telling them exactly what I think in no small words about  their recent vote.  I hope that some wise guy in a federal court has the balls to strike this sh*t down.

Seriously, this is just wrong.

This. I'm taking the revised APUSH curriculum right now at a Christian High School and my teacher rightfully laments treating America like a God and how that's been used to justify all of our country's atrocities throughout history. American Exceptionalsim screams militarism and racial superiority.

[Indy Texas]

I'm sure they'd have a heart attack (particularly if they're all as fat as Bushie) if they knew that some schools in Texas were using this book in APUSH...

[Mechaman]

To expand upon further:

Truth is that if history was objectively taught (which might not be possible) very few people would come out looking like winners.  Southern slavers would look like human rights violators, but so would northern industrialists whose working conditions were far from our modern standards.  The white supremacy espoused by 19th century Democrats would be impalpitable to many, but so would the cultural elitism and anti-ethnic bigotries of northern Federalists, Whigs, and Republicans.  The anti-Irish racism of many New England Yankees would be seen as hypocrisy, and so would the anti-black racism of many Irishmen.  And on and on and on and on.

The only people who would truly come out of this looking remotely good are nonwhites and women, and that is before we start talking about Aztec human sacrifices, Commanches attacking unarmed settlements, the involvement of black strikebreakers in helping quell white labor union strikes, and womens rights advocates being key in pushing for Prohibition.

Far from teaching exceptionalism for any group, courses like APUSH teach that people in the past were very flawed individuals and what we can learn from their mistakes.  Again, there are no real winners in "History".  If there were we wouldn't need to be learning from their mistakes and failures.

Of course I realize these are very controversial points and probably a few of these work right into the hands of the same people who do want to ban AP US History courses.  The main point isn't some cynical "there are no good guys" kind of post, but merely that courses like APUSH allows for kids to use critical thinking skills to UNDERSTAND the lessons of the past and apply those lessons to prevent (again) repeating the same mistakes of the past.  Of course I believe a lot of these flaws are the fault of traditions and systems (namely Capitalism) that allow such flaws to exist in the first place.

Which is why I fully support any course that doesn't welcome the kind of exceptionalism that some people want to keep in place.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Literally thought this was an Onion story.

[Brittain33]

How can a course made to fit a standardized test promote questioning of accepted interpretations of history? (not just rhetorical, I'm legitimately curious)

This is a semantic problem around the word "accepted." A standardized test can ask students to compare different interpretations of an event in an essay or in multiple choice questions. 

[Adam Griffin]

My only surprise is that Oklahoma hasn't been beaten to this by other astates. The South sucks, exhibit number 378 12

Hate to break it to you...

At least in this other case, it was only a resolution "condemning" the action rather than an attempt to ban it. There have also been other actions similar to this at the local level, most notably the one that resulted in the Jefferson County, CO mass student walkouts.

[Smash255]

Literally thought this was an Onion story.

Oklahoma Republicans come up with more crazy stuff than the Onion writers.

[IceSpear]

Stuff like this is exactly why I'm happy all those fake Oklahoma "Democrats" are switching parties. If Democrats are even remotely competitive in Oklahoma then something is very, very wrong.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

How can a course made to fit a standardized test promote questioning of accepted interpretations of history? (not just rhetorical, I'm legitimately curious)

This is a semantic problem around the word "accepted." A standardized test can ask students to compare different interpretations of an event in an essay or in multiple choice questions. 

I can understand how an essay could do this. For a multiple choice question its not as clear to me. I remember when I took the SAT subject test on history - it just struck me as completely enmeshed in unreflective conventional wisdom. I don't like the College Board and their monopoly on this sort of thing, but I guess it's possible they did a decent job on this one.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

How can a course made to fit a standardized test promote questioning of accepted interpretations of history? (not just rhetorical, I'm legitimately curious)

This is a semantic problem around the word "accepted." A standardized test can ask students to compare different interpretations of an event in an essay or in multiple choice questions. 

I can understand how an essay could do this. For a multiple choice question its not as clear to me. I remember when I took the SAT subject test on history - it just struck me as completely enmeshed in unreflective conventional wisdom. I don't like the College Board and their monopoly on this sort of thing, but I guess it's possible they did a decent job on this one.

I took them on back to back days and there was no difference in question style for multiple choice. Oddly, one was 95% post Civil War and the other was like 80% pre Civil War. But mostly straight forward factuals. That's just how the US is though with tests.

[RedSLC]

Horrible legislation, and the latest even in the disturbing of attempting to rewrite our nation's history.

Hopefully, some judge somewhere will strike this down.