I have given Mike Beebe credit where I think he deserves it. I promised to give him the benefit of the doubt and to not attack him just because of his party affiliation. I have done so, and now I have my first cause for complaint.
Arkansas students have traditionally been taught state history in the seventh and eighth grades. New guidelines now call for diluting the state history curriculum in favor of world history instead. This watering down comes despite the rather specific mandate of the legislature for the teaching of Arkansas History. These new standards were put forward by the state Board of Education. Teachers, historians, history professors, former Senator David Pryor, and others interested in Arkansas history have complained bitterly.
Governor Beebe supported the bureaucratic change to the standards at first. But then when the mini-firestorm erupted he backed off and gave lip-service to those opposed and promised to review the new standards.
That review is complete and the result is.......Governor Beebe supports the old standard, but it is too late to not implement the new standards for the upcoming year.
That is a weasel result. How can it be too late not to do something? Just revert to what was taught last year. It's like saying it's too late not to kill myself. This is a typical politicians answer.....I support you 100% but I have to screw you over anyway.
I will give credit to Governor Beebe for getting this far into his term before becoming a regular politician.
The truth is that we complain about our best kids leaving this state after graduation. That could be partially because our children do not have a strong and deep sense of being part of something. The money is better in Dallas so they go there because there is no difference of the heart between here or there. The feeling is that we are 49th in everything so its better to leave....not that we are 49th in everything and its necessary to stay.
But studying Arkansas History students can learn the sad history of our state, of its tragedies, and how it has struggled to overcome them. Our kids need to have a sense of what it is to be an Arkansan, to have a sense of responsibility to make the next 100 years be better, and to feel like they have the ability to have an impact. They cannot get that sense unless they are given a very good understanding of where they come from and who they are.
And even if they do leave us....we at least send them away with the understanding that they come from someplace unique and perhaps plant a seed for their return. Come on Governor Beebe....the legislature mandated the teaching of Arkansas History for this reason.....you should no faithfully execute that law. And to the Board of Education......listen to the historians on history, or be doomed to repeat it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Have you seen the new standards? If you do a point-by-point comparison witht he stand-alond Arkansas History standards, you will find that the content is the same. The concern about "watering down" is based on the idea that teachers will take the standards less seriously if they do not stand alone. Since the state law requiring the teaching of a unit of Arkansas History each year from K to 6 still stands, this seems unlikely.
The other concern -- that the full semester course on Arkansas History required by the law at some point during secondary school will be moved from middle school to higth school -- is about text availability and scheduling concerns, not about failing to teach Arkansas History at all. The law still requires students to take the course.
I have a great deal of respect for people on both sides of the controversy, including you, but I think that everyone ought to look at the standards before drawing conclusions. That doesn't seem to be happening.
Wow -- I should have proofread before publishing. Sorry for the typos.
I agree with you, but it's really an effort to get around the legislature's mandate to teach a specific Arkansas history block. The real danger here is that it will be moved to the high school level without having the infrastructure to teach the course properly.
The course also needs to stand alone or there is indeed a likelihood that it will be pushed aside.
The very fact that these concerns are getting as much play as they are is evidence that they have not been properly addressed and that new standards should not be implemented until they are. I am not in favor of dropping new standards and "fixing them later".
Post a Comment