Bias? Or depth? SC education panel hears debate over history course

The authors of the new Advanced Placement U.S. history course want students to dive deeper into U.S. history – analyzing documents and understanding diverse perspectives, a representative said Monday, defending the course before state education leaders.

But critics say the revamped U.S. history course’s guideline, new this fall from the nonprofit College Board, emphasizes negative portrayals of the United States, and leaves out important historical figures and events on purpose.

Representatives on both sides of the debate spoke Monday before a panel of the S.C. Education Oversight Committee, one of two state boards that oversees public education.

“Do you believe that America is an exceptional country that has been, is and will be a force for good in the world?” Larry Krieger, a leading critic of the course nationally, asked the Oversight Committee members. “College Board doesn’t believe that, and that explains everything we’ve talked about.”

Krieger said, for example, the updated guideline diminishes the U.S. military’s importance in world wars while emphasizing violence between the European settlers and Native Americans.

But Trevor Packer – a College Board senior vice president who oversees AP courses – disagreed.

The new guideline includes more references to historical figures and events than the previous guideline, Packer said. But it also emphasizes critical thinking over rote memorization of facts.

Teachers now can choose which figures or historical events to cover in greater depth, and the AP U.S. history test questions, written by college professors, include more essay questions, giving students the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, according to College Board.

Before the course was redesigned, 72 percent of the course’s teachers felt it covered too many topics in not enough depth, forcing teachers to create lessons that were “a mile wide and an inch deep” in an effort “to race through every little fact that could show up on an AP exam,” Packer said.

Under the revised course, only 6 percent of teachers feel that way, he said, adding College Board soon will release an update on how to use the guideline. It is not meant to be a comprehensive list of what teachers can and cannot teach, he said.

The course’s opponents said they would like the Oversight Committee, which took no action Monday, to adopt a resolution to pressure College Board into revising the AP U.S. history guideline. Next month, opponents are expected to go back to the State Board of Education with the same request.

Oversight Committee member Barbara Hairfield, the Charleston County School District’s social-studies curriculum specialist, said Monday she “wholeheartedly” supports the new AP history course.

Critics are taking examples from the guideline “out of context,” she said. “When we went to school, we had what I thought was a very whitewashed version of history.”

The new focus on critical thinking mirrors what’s happening in social studies courses at every level, she said, adding teachers still will cover the same broad scope of history and facts in their courses.

“If you teach students to think critically, they still have to know what (facts) to think about.”

This story was originally published September 22, 2014 at 10:12 PM with the headline "Bias? Or depth? SC education panel hears debate over history course."