Hmm. Now this is interesting. An article posted today on WorldNetDaily discusses how the majority of Americans feel History textbooks are too PC:
"Rasmussen Reports reveals a full 49 percent of the parents say most U.S. history textbooks are not accurate while 28 percent say most school history textbooks portray it accurately. Another 23 percent said they are not sure."
This discussion was started because the Texas Board of Education is meeting to determine changes for their textbooks. Since California and Texas are the largest consumers of textbooks in the nation, their conclusions have the potential to alter history books for the rest of the U.S. One of the issues they will discuss is using the term 'global citizen' instead of 'American'. (please refer to the article to read the other points being addressed)
I know now that I don't agree with everything I was taught as a child. I was given a foundation. That foundation touched on some of the ugly truths of history, but promptly cured those ills with Disney-like versions of Babe the Blue Ox, Pocahantas, and Christopher Columbus. As I grew up, I accumulated more context, learned there are several sides to everything, read more books, and understood a different layer of history with each bit of info gathered. I still continue this process. Our life experiences constantly inform us and our perceptions.
I don't have children, so this doesn't directly affect me, but it begs contemplation by everyone. I enjoy being an American and don't mind learning how I became one, historical warts and all. I also recognize the importance of living as a global citizen, but would I have grasped that idea as a child? I'm not sure. Is there room for both concepts? A Glo-Merican?
What is your preference for elementary level textbooks? How do you feel about some of the issues they're raising?