Raleigh, NC – The North Carolina State Board of Education has approved new social studies standards for state kindergarten through 12th grade that underscore the study of more diverse perspectives on history.
The board voted 7-5 for the standards, which opponents feared did not overemphasize the study of the country’s progress towards racial equality. Proponents argued that the new standards would ensure a more comprehensive and fair history of the US was taught.
Chairman Eric Davis, Vice Chairman Alan Duncan, Reginald Kenan, Jill Camnitz, Donna Tipton-Rogers, J. Wendell Hall and James Ford voted in favor.
Votes against were Lt. Governor Mark Robinson, Secretary of State Dale Folwell, Olivia Oxendine, Amy White and Todd Chasteen.
The difference between the current standards and what the board endured Thursday is largely the degree of specificity of the different perspectives that students have to consider. Current standards often state a “variety” of perspectives. The new ones often specify different races, religions and other groups. Students will be asked to discuss racism, marginalized groups and the impact of policies on different populations. Students will be asked to compare stories from different perspectives, criticism systems and practices or explain how inequalities persist today.
Examples of topics students can compare their perspectives on include – according to a snapshot of supporting documents to be delivered to the board later – the Trail of Tears, the Wilmington Coup, the Haymarktet Riot, and the Occupation of Alcatraz.
Social studies standards were revised in preparation for the upcoming consolidation of American History I and II into just one course. The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction began work on it in 2019, seeking public input on the fourth design.
The motion approved by the board on Thursday includes a new preamble to the standards written by Chief Inspector Catherine Truitt, stating that the standards are a framework intended to teach the full spectrum of history to best assist students learn and use the information. It also stipulates that the board must approve the supporting documents that will help educators prepare their social studies curriculum.
The Board approved draft 5 of the standards, removing the terms “systemic racism”, “systemic discrimination” and “gender identity” from the document and replacing them with “racism”, “discrimination and“ identity. ”Truitt replaced them with arguments that the broader terms allow my types of racism, discrimination and identity to be taken into account.
Prior to the vote, Ford filed a replacement motion to approve the Draft 4 standards, which are identical to Draft 5, but the term changes. That motion failed 2-10, with Ford and Kenan being the only votes in favor.
Ford has argued that the existence of systemic racism in the United States is not in question. As an example he cites existing differences in housing and housing value and the coexisting history of discriminatory actions and housing policy.
“I was really convicted for this,” Ford said before handing out his motion.
The board has been debating the language change since early January, when Draft 4 was presented at their monthly meeting. The board debated it for nearly two hours on Wednesday morning, after extensive discussion at a specially convened meeting last week.
Changing the three terms has the potential to negate some of what the standards’ writers intended, Rodney D. Pierce told WRAL. Fierce is an 8th social studies teacher at Red Oak Middle School in Nash County, and volunteered to help review 8th grade social studies in 2019.
Changing the three terms could give some teachers room to feel like they don’t need to address systemic racism, systemic discrimination or gender identity, Pierce said.
“It seems that certain members of the board don’t trust the expertise or the intent of the people who are raising the children of North Carolina, but frankly, I’m not surprised,” he said.
THE DEBATE
Many teachers have argued before the board that students ask to learn more different perspectives on history.
Students will be better prepared to meet their current society and future society with an education that includes perspectives from different races, ethnicities, religions, abilities or other angles, Pierce told WRAL.
“And if we don’t learn, all they have to do is go to their phones,” he said. Educators and parents cannot stop children from watching videos, going on social media, learning things from the Internet, or talking about what they see and hear with their friends.
“So why not teach them about it and teach them to critically analyze the information they are presented on and decide for themselves whether something is right or wrong, or should be done or not?” Pierce asked.
On Thursday, the board spent little extra time discussing proposed standards for social studies, which were on Wednesday’s agenda.
But Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson reiterated his concern that more than 30,000 people had signed his online petition expressing concern about what was in the standards.
People are just starting to learn the standards and have too many questions, he said, once again urging the council to start the design process over.
May’s opposition Wednesday concerned whether the additions to the standards – of more study of diverse perspectives and persistent inequalities – skewed the standards too far.
Oxendine, White and Chasteen were against the proposed standards and said they wanted to add more history to it.
Oxendine and White said they want more references to the more recent progress the country has made toward racial equality, including advances in the diversity of people holding public office.
Chasteen said the proposed standards were skewed as written and specific only in references to different perspectives and inclusion. If the norms are to endure the ills of history, he said, they must include specific references to fascism and socialism.
Others who were in favor of the proposed standards were not so afraid of how students would respond to education under the proposed standards framework.
Ford called the idea that adding to the norms for social studies would create divisions a “paradox.”
Davis said he understood how negative history can fuel negative emotions.
But he said he is confident that students can process the history they are taught.
WHAT’S IN THE STANDARDS
For the most part, the state’s standards of social studies will not change, but the objectives in them have been added or expanded, especially at the high school level.
Current standards for social studies, reviewed by WRAL, repeatedly state that students will study history from different perspectives. The new standards extend instances to do this and specify different groups to include. They also broaden topics for students to master and evaluate, such as slavery, forced migration, and other discriminatory practices in US history.
For example, the new standards add more objectives for students in the Founding Principles course at the high school level. To meet the standard of understanding how individual rights and the U.S. system of government have evolved over time, educators now have two more goals for Founding Principles students:
“Explain how the experiences and achievements of minorities and marginalizing people have contributed over time to the protection of individual rights and ‘equality and justice for all’.”
“Give an example of ways in which individuals have shown resistance and resilience over time to inequality, injustice and discrimination within the US system of government.”
That is in addition to four existing objectives for students. One objective – to explain what led to the Founding Fathers’ development of the democratic republic – has not changed. Three others have been modified to be more specific:
“Summarize the historical development of the governments of both the United States and North Carolina” has been edited to “Compare competing stories of the historical development of the United States and North Carolina in terms of how each race, women, tribes, identity , ability and religious groups. “
“Interpret historical and current perspectives on the evolution of individual rights in America over time” has changed to “Interpret historical and current perspectives on the evolution of individual rights in America over time, including women’s, tribal, racial, religious , identity, and ability. “
“Explain the impact of social movements and political groups on government change, both now and in the past” has changed to “Explain the impact of social movements and reform efforts on government change, both now and in the past.”
The new standards remove an objective from another high school level course, American History, and replace it with two new objectives, under the standard of understanding movement, establishment, and expansion:
‘Explain the impact of movement and settlement on the environment and culture of different places and regions’ has been removed. Under that standard, two new objectives have been added:
“Explain the reasons for and the consequences of forced and voluntary migration for societies, individuals and groups over time.”
“Explain how slavery, forced migration, immigration, re-concentration and other discriminatory practices have changed population distribution and regional culture.”
In the eighth grade, the purpose of explaining injustice and response to injustice in North Carolina and the US has been changed to specify injustices: “slavery, segregation, voter oppression, re-concentration and other discriminatory practices.” The goal also states that students can explain how those practices have been used to “oppress and exploit certain groups” rather than explain how those practices “shaped” the state and nation.