E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Google Plus
YouTube
Flickr
PhotoBucket
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Mitch Daniels, Howard Zinn and "censorship" in education

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:30 AM (#)

As liberals in academia are up in arms about e-mails sent by former Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels regarding a controversial history textbook by Leftist activist Howard Zinn, we all need to chill out and contemplate a couple realities. First, education necessarily involves "censorship." Second, state government has a legitimate role to play in selection of materials for teacher training as well as what is taught in K-12 schools in the state.

The first claim might be a little shocking, but is self-evident. There is simply not enough time in the day, or in thirteen years in Indiana's government school system, to teach everything there is to know. Therefore, decisions must be made as to what materials are appropriate, what textbooks should be used in each course (which necessarily requires exclusion of textbooks not used) and what areas of study are most important to teach Hoosier children.

If one history textbook (or a textbook on any other course) is deemed to be less valuable from a scholarly standpoint than another one, is it "censorship" for schools to use the better textbook and not teach from the lesser one? Technically, the answer is "yes," but it is necessary. At some point a decision has to be made on what to use.

Indiana is an interesting state in that we have an elected Superintendent of Public Instruction as well as a State Board of Education appointed by the governor. Education always features prominently in both elections for governor and the policy agenda of the governor. Because the governor has a prominent role in education of Hoosier students, it is logical that he would be motivated to ensure that the best materials are available in the schools and that sub-par materials in classrooms are replaced by superior ones.

This is not to get into the value of Zinn's history textbook. I have not read it, I have no plans to read it, and I do not have an opinion on it. That subject can be explored and debated by others. My main point with this post is that selection of materials is entirely appropriate, and the governor (who is responsible for making the state's schools as good as possible) has a role in making sure that students are getting the best education from the best sources possible.

(0 Comments)

Note: All posts must be approved by the blog owner before they are visible on the blog.

Comments:

Post a Comment


Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name cannot be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you have to subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

  5. All moderation decisions are final. I may post an explanation or I may not, depending on the situation. If you have a question or a concern about a moderation decision, e-mail me privately rather than posting in the comments.

Thank you for your cooperation.