The Texas State Board of Education: A Case of Abuse of Power

7/31/2019 The Texas State Board of Education: A Case of Abuse of Power

1/30

TheTexasState

BoardofEducation:

ACaseof

AbuseofPower

May13,2010

E d i t o r Frank Knaack, Legal Advocacy Coordinator, ACLU of T


2/30

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................... 3

I. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................5

II. THE VULNERABILITY OF THE TEXAS ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS (TEKS)REVIEW PROCESS.....................................................................................................................6

A.TEKSStandardsWhatTheyAreandWhyTheyMatter.............................................................6 B.TheBoardsTEKSMandate..................................................................................................................7 C.TheBoardEstablishesandManipulatesItsOperatingProcess..................................................9

1.ReviewCommittees................................................................................................................9 2.ExpertReviewers...................................................................................................................10 3.AmendmentProcess...............................................................................................................11

III. EXPLOITING POWER, SERVING IDEOLOGICAL INTERESTS...................................................12 A.TheBoardsHistoryoSacrifcingEducationtoIdeology............................................................12 B.GoingromBadtoWorseTheBoardsCurrentReviewotheSocialStudiesCurriculum.....14

1.DictatingHistory....................................................................................................................14

a.PresentinganIdeologicallyDrivenHistoricalNarrative..................................15 b.StigmatizingMuslims................................................................................ .. .. ........16 c.DevianceandtheCriminalJusticeSystem.........................................................17

2.LackoGovernmentAccountabilitytothePeople.........................................................17IV. ABSENT LEGISLATIVE INTERVENTION, TEXAS FUTURE IS AT RISK...................................19 A.TheFinancialandSocialCostsoStudentDropout....................................................................19 B.ImpactonBusinessDevelopment....................................................................................................19 C.PastattemptsbytheTexasLegislaturetoStopBoardAbuseHaveFailed...........................20

V. RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................................................................................21 A.TheBoardshouldimmediatelystopthecurrentSocialStudiesTEKSreviewand startoverwithacommitmenttoprioritizeeducationoverideology........................................21 B.TheTexasLegislatureshouldinterveneduringtheorthcoming82ndLegislative

SessiontoestablishstatutoryparametersontheBoardsauthority.......................................21 1.Thecreationominimumqualifcationsorallpersonsinvolvedin thesubstantivedevelopmentotheTEKS.......................................................................21

2.TheremovalotheBoardsauthorityoverthedevelopmentandadoption otheTEKS..............................................................................................................................21 3.Thecreationoanappointmentprocessorallpersonsinvolvedin thesubstantivedevelopmentotheTEKS......................................................................21

VI. ENDNOTES ............................................................................................................................23

ta b l E o f c o n t E n t s

The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of a Buse of Power 2


3/30

3 The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of aBuse of Power

E x E c u t i v E s u m m a r y

that all students should be able to demonstrateand that will be used in evaluating textbooks and addressed on the assessment instruments . When granting the Board this power, theLegislature was clear that it intended the Board

to cra the required curriculum, textbooks, andassessment instruments in a way that wouldprepare and enable all students to continue tolearn in postsecondary educational, training, oremployment settings.

However, the Legislature provided minimalstatutory guidance or oversight to govern theBoards work. With a ew minor exceptions, theLegislature le the substantive development andadoption o the curriculum solely in the handso the Board. Te Legislatures ailure to limit

the Boards power has enabled an ongoing abuseo process and power.

Te proposed revisions to the Social Studiescurriculum represent the most systemic abuseo discretion to date. By relying on unqualiedexperts and abusing its amendment power, theBoard has manipulated the Social Studiescurriculum to endorse a single historicalnarrative and a specic, limited philosophytoward the role o government in protectingconstitutional rights and civil liberties that

coincides with the ideological outlook o someo its members.

I adopted, this curriculum will allow agovernmental entity to transorm its subjectiveviews into objective acts. As a result, studentswill be taught a one-sided history that willnegatively impact their ability to engage anddevelop their analytical skills. Almost 4 in 10exas public school students ail to graduaterom high school, and this curriculum mayexacerbate exas dropout problem by ailing toengage students. exas cant aord to allow theBoard to continue its abuses.

The Texas State Board of Education,the body charged with determining exaspublic school curriculum standards

or exas 4.7 million public school children,is scheduled to vote on the adoption o new

Social Studies curriculum standards on May 21,2010. I the current proposal is adopted, exasschoolchildren will soon be subjected to anunbalanced and ideologically driven curriculumthat risks leaving them unprepared or basiccollege level work. In addition, this curriculummay also negatively impact exas already poorhigh school graduation rate, as the proposedcurriculums narrow viewpoint is unlikely toengage those exas public school students mostat risk o dropping out.

Te Board has a long track-record o abusingthe discretion and power granted to it by theexas Legislature and the people. From approv-ing a health textbook that provides medicallyinaccurate inormation, to injecting religioninto public school science classes, to ignoringtheir statutorily mandated duties, the Board hasrepeatedly shown that it places personalpriorities above the needs o exas school-children. Unortunately, the Boards actionshave gone rom bad to worse.

Te Boards long-running ability to engage inthese actions stems rom the almost completepower over the creation o academicrequirements and materials granted to it by theexas Legislature. While the Boards existenceis mandated by the exas Constitution, theLegislature retains control over establishing theduties, i any, o the Board in all areas except orcontrol over aspects o the Permanent SchoolFund and textbook unding issues. Under theexas Education Code, the Board is chargedwith identiying the essential knowledge and

skills o each subject o the required curriculum


4/30

E x E c u t i v E s u m m a r y

The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of aBuse of Power 4

recoMMendaTions:

A. Te Board should immediately stop or delay the current Social Studies EKS review process andstart over with new review o the Social Studies EKS that prioritizes education over ideology.

B. During the orthcoming 82nd Legislative Session, the exas Legislature must establish parameterson the Boards power, mandate that Board Members prioritize education over ideology, andimplement a statutory system o checks and balances to prevent uture abuse. 1. Establish minimum qualications or all persons involved in determining the substance o

the EKS.2. Remove the Boards authority over the development and adoption o the EKS.

We recommend that the Legislature take up one o the ollowing three options:a. Limit the Boards authority to only those duties required by the exas

Constitution. Create a new body charged with the development and adoption othe EKS, and its related concerns including textbook adoption and assessmentstandards.

b. Limit the Boards role to non-substantive matters in the development andadoption o the EKS, and their related concerns including textbook adoption andassessment standards.

c. Limit the Board to non-binding recommendations related to the developmentand adoption o the EKS, and its related concerns including textbook adoptionand assessment standards. Persons charged with the substantive developmentand adoption o the EKS must retain complete authority over the EKS.

3. Create checks and balances in the appointment process or all persons involved in thesubstantive development and adoption o the EKS.


5/30

5 The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of aB use of Power

A general diusion o knowledge being

essential to the preservation o the liberties

and rights o the people, it shall be the duty o

the Legislature o the State to establish andmake suitable provision or the

support and maintenance o an efcient

system o public ree schools.1

The Texas ConsTiTuTion, arTiCle 7, seCTion 1

>> i . i n t r o d u c t i o nresident o this great state. Yet the state bodycharged with determining public schoolcurriculum standards or exas 4.7 million publicschool children, 9 the State Board o Education(Board), has recently reduced exas alreadychallenged public education system to a nationallaughingstock. 10 Te Board, which is thepolicy-making body o the exas EducationAgency, has become nationally inamous or itsrecent work developing new social studiescurriculum standards (exas Essential Knowledgeand Skills, or EKS) based on personal belies,biases, and prejudices. 11

While the Board is no stranger to controversy,its latest attempt to inject ideologically driven

subjective content into public school classroomshas shown that it continues to abuse the powergranted to it by the Legislature. I adopted, thenew Social Studies EKS, which cover theteaching o history, government, economics,sociology, psychology, and world geography tokindergarteners through high school seniors,will create a curriculum that projects anaggressively ideological viewpoint, sties debate,and risks leaving exas schoolchildren unpre-pared or college level coursework. Or, in thewords o Patty Quinzi o the exas AmericanFederation o eachers, the proposed EKS aresubstandard standards. 12

As set orth in greater detail below, the Boardsability to so routinely abuse the power and trust itholds stems rom the broad discretion granted tothe Board by the exas Legislature. Although theelected members o the Board are ultimatelyresponsible or the EKS they approve, thisprocess is and will remain vulnerable to contin-ued abuse until the Legislature intervenes. Te

legislature has the power to create saeguards andminimum standards to guarantee that education-al, not ideological, priorities govern the curricu-lum review process. For the sake o our childrenand our uture, exas cannot aord to wait.

oday, education is perhaps the most important

unction o state and local governments.

Compulsory school attendance laws and the great

expenditures or education both demonstrate our

recognition o the importance o education to our

democratic society. oday it is a principal

instrument in awakening the child to cultural

values, in preparing him or later proessional

training, and in helping him to adjust normally to

his environment. 2

Bw v. B ect (1954)

Public education is the bedrock o our democracy.Our states continued political, cultural, and eco-nomic progress is directly tied to our success in

preparing our children to lead us into the uture.Indeed, as the exas Legislature has observed,exas public education system is essential orthe welare o this state . 3 Absent an adequateeducational oundation, the next generation oexans will be unprepared to ully engage in thecivic and political aairs o their communities,4exercise the rights and reedoms guaranteed tothem as exans and Americans, 5 or compete ina global economy. 6 Education, quite literally, isserious business. 7 In act, exas troubled publiceducation system is part o the reason or exas

poor showing on Forbes Magazines state Qualityo Lie rankings: exas was 39th in the nation. 8

Accordingly, ensuring our school children receivean optimal education is in the interest o every


6/30

i i . t H E v u l n E r a b i l i t y o f t H E t E x a s E s s E n t i a lK n o W l E d G E a n d s K i l l s ( t E K s ) r E v i E W P r o c E s s


Te state o public education in exas presentsserious challenges. Our dropout rate isshockingly high, with only 61.3% o public highschool students graduating - placing exas 43rdin the nation in graduation rates. 13 o makematters worse, the exas Legislature will ace di-cult choices related to education unding with anestimated $11-15 billion budget shortall. 14 Giventhe crises in resource allocation and graduationrates, the State Boards ocus on battling culturewars through the curriculum process isinexplicable and indeensible. Far romremedying exas unacceptable dropout rate, theBoards actions may exacerbate it. As Rod Paige,Secretary o Education under George W. Bush

(2001-2005), told the exas Education Agency,curriculum must be relevant to students i wehope to curb student dropout rates. 15 Followingthis logic, Rita Haecker, President o the exasState eachers Association, warned that

Determining how to get the State Board oEducation back on track requires an understand-ing o where it went o the rails, and what laws,regulations, and policies exist or are needed toassure that the Board ullls its mandate to createa policy that promotes, rather than diminishes,our childrens preparation or the uture.

a. TeKs sTandards -whaT They are andwhy They MaTTer

Te EKS are the state curriculum require-ments set orth in the exas Administrative

Code and are the basis or everything studentswill learn through their primary and secondarycareers. Tese curriculum requirements are theknowledge and skills students must demonstrate

mastery o to progress in school. Te requiredcurriculum includes: English language arts;mathematics; science; social studies, includingexas, United States, and world history,government, sociology, psychology, andgeography; languages other than English; health,with emphasis on the importance o propernutrition and exercise; physical education; nearts; economics, with emphasis on the reeenterprise system and its benets; career andtechnology education; technology applications;

and religious literature, including the HebrewScriptures (Old estament) and New estament,and its impact on history and literature. 17 TeEKS are also the criteria used or evaluatingpublic school textbooks. 18 Te EKS, in eect,will govern the inormation learned by publicschool students in exas.

Te sheer number o textbooks exas purchasesmeans curriculum decisions here aect thecontent o textbooks used in other states. Inaddition to being the second largest market or

K-12 textbooks in the nation, exas centralizedcurriculum standards provide a huge incentiveor textbook manuacturers to ollow exasstandards. 19 In the next ew years, exasinuence will be even greater ollowing theannouncement that Caliornia would notpurchase new textbooks until 2014, at theearliest, due to budget shortalls. 20 According toJim Kracht, Associate Dean and Proessor inthe College o Education and HumanDevelopment at exas A&M University, when itcomes to the content o textbooks

[t]hese social studies EKS are not relevantto Hispanics and Arican Americans. Unlesschanged, this irrelevant set o EKS will help

worsen the states alreadyserious dropout problem..16

exas governs 46 or 47 states.21


7/30

7 The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of a Buse of Power

rule identiy the essential knowledge and skills oeach subject o the required curriculum that allstudents should be able to demonstrate and that

will be used in evaluating textbooks and

addressed on the assessment instruments . 32

In issuing this mandate, the Legislature madeclear that it has high expectations or theresulting curricular standards:

It is the intent o the legislature that the essentialknowledge and skills developed by the State Board

o Education under this subchapter shall require allstudents to demonstrate the knowledge and skillsnecessary to read, write, compute, problem solve,

think critically, apply technology, and communicate

across all subject areas. Te essential knowledgeand skills shall also prepare and enable all studentsto continue to learn in postsecondary educational,

training, or employment settings. 33

Yet despite these loy aims, the Legislature lethe Board with almost complete discretion overthe ormulation o standards. Te Legislatureprovided little statutory guidance or oversightto govern the process or determining the EKSor to evaluate the Boards success in developingEKS, leaving the Board with almost complete

discretion over the ormulation o the standardscontent. While Education Code 28.002(c)permits the Board to appoint advisorycommittees to assist with the EKS reviewprocess, or example, these committees are notrequired and there are no legislative provisionsregulating the specics o their ormation andmake-up. Moreover, though the EducationCode also grants the exas Commissioners oEducation and Higher Education the power todevelop and recommend to the Boardthe EKS or specic college preparatorycourses,34 the Board need not accept theserecommendations. 35 Te ew exceptions to theBoards discretion include a statutory require-ment that the Board emphasize the ree enter-prise system and its benets,36 as well as a broad

B. The Boards TeKs MandaTe

Te exas Constitution establishes the StateBoard o Education and specically requires that

it control aspects o the Permanent School Fundand textbook unding issues. 22 Te Constitu-tion grants the exas Legislature the power todetermine whether Board members are electedor appointed and the power to determine theadditional duties, i any, o the Board. 23 TeLegislature codies its decisions in the exasEducation Code (Education Code).

Much o the structure o the Board is set outin the Education Code. Currently, theEducation Code provides that the Board

comprises 15 members elected rom single-member districts.24 Members o the Board areelected to our-year terms,25 except or thegeneral election ollowing a redistricting.During these elections, all Board seats are upor election, with seven members elected ortwo-year terms and eight members elected orour-year terms. 26 Te Board is required tomeet our times per year in Austin. 27 Te Chairo the Board is selected by the Governor, withthe advice and consent o the Senate. 28

Additional Board Ocers, including the Vice

Chair and Secretary, are elected by Board vote. 29

Te exas Education Code mandates that theBoard develop and update a long-range planor public education in exas.30 o ulll thismission, the Board has the authority to setthe curriculum and graduation requirements,review and adopt textbooks, determine studentassessment standards, create rules to develop thecurriculum, establish guidelines or academiccredit testing, and approve the creation ocharter schools. 31 Specically, the Education

Code charges the Board with the important tasko developing the EKS:

Te State Board o Education, with the directparticipation o educators, parents, business andindustry representatives, and employers shall by


8/30

curriculuM review Process

The Texas sTaTe Board of educaTion: a case of aB use of Power 8

requirement that the Board remember that [a]primary purpose o the public schoolcurriculum is to prepare thoughtul, active citi-zens who understand the importance opatriotism and can unction productively in aree enterprise society with appreciation or thebasic democratic values o our state and nationalheritage.37 No appeal process exists to ensurethe EKS meet the state goals o the exasConstitution and the state legislature.

Te exas Administrative Code, in which thecurrent EKS are set orth, and the BoardsOperating Rules likewise provide minimalguidance and oversight or the EKS reviewprocess. Te only substantive mandate related

to the Social Studies EKS is a requirement thatall public school social studies courses or grades3-12 include a Celebrate Freedom Week. More-over, rom a procedural standpoint the only rulesgoverning the amendment o the EKS are thosethat apply to the Boards alteration o any sec-tion o the Administrative Code. Te process oraltering the Administrative Code is establishedunder the Boards Operating Rules. Tis processrequires that proposed rules rst appear on theBoards meeting agenda or discussion and thenon the agendas o two later Board meetings or aFirst and Second Reading. However, the Boardmay vote to ignore this ormal process. Aer theFirst Reading, the Board may have the proposedrule published in the exas Register (aprerequisite to Board action on the item). Atthe Second Reading, and ollowing a mandatory30-day public comment period, the Board mayvote to adopt the proposed rule as nal, unless aBoard committee decides to consider asubstantial revision o the material.38

As the ollowing sections will show, the lack oclear guidelines and minimum standards orpreparing the states high school graduates orcollege or a career has allowed some members othe Board to manipulate and abuse the process.

T sc st TeKs vw bg wt

pbc tct t vw pc by t

T ect act (Tea).

T B mt v TeKs

rvw Cmmtt.

Cmmtt ppt w t t

pptmt t Cmmtt by t Tea.

T B ppt pt.

T Tea t t pt cp t

ct sc st TeKs. T pt w

cg wt pvg t t bck

cmmt t t B.

Fwg t pt t vw, t

Cmmtt w tk wt pvg t

cmmt t w TeKs g t

pt cmmt t b t

vw.

Cmmtt mmb wk tgt t

cmpt t cg.

Fwg t cmpt t Cmmtt

t t cmmt, t Tea pt t

cmmt m

bck.

T pt pv w t cmm-

t b t Cmmtt t t.

at t pt pv t w

cmmt, t B ttmy

m t pt cmmtt mmb

m c Cmmtt.

1

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2


9/30


Such legislative saeguards are critical becauseneither the Education Code nor the Adminis-trative Code, nor the Boards Operating Rules,present any opportunity or appeal o nal EKS

decisions.

c. The Board esTaBlishes

and ManiPulaTes iTsoPeraTing Process

On November 20, 2009, the Board approved a20-step process or the adoption o the SocialStudies EKS. 39 With minor exceptions, thisis the same process that the Board ollowed orcontentious adoption o the Science EKS lastyear. Te Board is ree to divert rom the process

at its discretion.

On paper, this process appears to encourage acollaborative EKS adoption process in whichexperts assist the Board in creating the bestpossible curriculum or our schoolchildren. Inpractice, Board Members have abused thisprocess to achieve their ideologically driven goals.

1. r cmmtt

As required by the Education Code, the Boardselects educators, parents, business leaders, andemployers to review the EKS as part o theEKS Review Committee (Committee), and eachsubstantive section o the Social Studies EKShas its own Committee. But, there are no ormalrequirements or minimum qualicationsgoverning the Boards selection process orCommittee members.41 Tis disregard orrelevant qualications has enabled some Boardmembers to nominate Committee memberswhose ideological missions trump their

commitment to quality education. Te prob-lematic results o these Committees will becomeclear during the review o the proposed EKS.

>> >> >> >>

at t B mtg, Tea t cv

w m bck.

Tea t w t mt, g

wt t pt w cmmt, t tB.

T Cmmtt cv t mk

v t t t cmm TeKs.

T B c t Cmmtt

pt cmmt ct Tea t t

pp t tt wt y qt

v/t.

T B pbc g

cmpt t t g g

tzt, wc c t 30 y fc

pbc cmmt p.

T B c c pbc g

p t t t 30 y pbc cmmt

p.

at t 30 y pbc cmmt p, Tea

mmz t pbc cmmt pv

mm t t B b t c

g pt.

B mmb vw cmmt

wk pp mmt.

B mmb pp m-

mt b t c g pt.

Fwg t cmpt t pbc

cmmt p, t B c c

g t pt t TeKs g wt pcc

TeKs mpmtt t. 40

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20


10/30


2. ept r

In addition, the Board is permitted to appointadvisory committees to assist with the EKSreview process.44 Similar to the ReviewCommittees, there are no ormal requirementsvis--vis the appointment o EKS ExpertReviewers (experts) by the Board. Underthe Board established EKS review process,the Board may appoint a maximum o sevenexperts.45 o be considered, a potential expertmust be nominated by a minimum o twoBoard members, and each Board member maynominate only one expert.46 In addition, the

Board may not reject proposed experts whoreceive two or more nominations.47

Te experts provide eedback and recommen-dations to the Board.48 But the lack ostatutorily established minimum standards orexperts has provided the Board with anopportunity to hijack a process meant to helpensure accurate and high quality curricularstandards or our teachers to ollow. Whilemany well-qualied individuals with relevantacademic training have been appointed as

experts, some Board members have used theopportunity to select appointees with norelevant qualications or academic backgroundbut who share their desire to place ideologyabove education. Tese Board members areabusing the expert process to provide expertcover or their personal agendas.

For example, two o the Boards selected SocialStudies experts are religious ideologues whohave no experience in the arena o educationand social studies, or indeed, any qualications

that would render them educational specialists.Upon being selected, both openly and explicitlysaid that their goal is to insert Christianity intoexas public school curriculum.49 Tus, someBoard Members have taken it upon themselves

Underthereviewprocess

establishedbytheBoard,the

Committeeischargedwithrecom-

mendingnewTEKSstandards.42Todoso,Committeemembers

should:

UsethecurrentTEKSastheoundationdocument;

Considerthegeneralcourseostudy,notwhatmightbecoveredin

anAdvancedPlacementcourse;

ConsidercollegereadinessstandardswhenrevisingtheTEKS;

Ensurerevisionsareincompliancewithallrelatedstatutes;

Providejustifcationorallsuggestedrevisions;

Trackallrevisionstoshowwhathasbeenchanged;

BasedecisiononExpertReviewPanelrecommendations;and

Provideinvitedtestimonyata

Boardmeeting. 43

>>


11/30


to insert their personal belies in place othose o parents, ministers, or other leadershipgures in the direct lives o exas school-children. Tat the Board saw t to employ the

services o these two experts illustrates the direneed or binding legislative guidance throughoutthe EKS process generally, and morespecically, minimum, baseline appointmentqualications or experts.

Both ederal and state law, including exasReligious Freedom Restoration Act, assure thatexans have the reedom to worship as theychoose. Putting public school curriculumdecisions in the hands o religious ideologuesrepresents an impermissible delegation o state

power to unqualied, sectarian communitymembers. Te state o exas, including theLegislature, cannot leave decisions impacting theuture o exas to unqualied individualsoperating rom their own personal agendas.

3. ammt P

Even with the Boards unettered discretionin dictating both the process or, and peoplecharged with, EKS review, some Board

members have still ound it necessary to urtherinject their personal belies into the curriculumvia their amendment power. Tis power wasapproved by the Board in its EKS reviewprocess. 50 Te abuse o the amendment powerby these Board members is evident by theiractions: they have clearly chosen to insertideologically driven, subjective content as actand ignored viewpoints that conict with theirideological worldview. Tese amendmentshave included requirements that studentsunderstand the poor record o collectivist,

non-ree market economic systems todeliver improved economic development overnumerous contemporary and historicalsocieties. 51 Tis requirement projects apredetermined belie that collectivist and/or

non-ree market economic systems have apoor record. In another amendment, the Boardapproved a requirement in the U.S. History Since1877 section ocused on the impact o political,

economic, and social actors in the U.S. role inthe world rom the 1970s through the 1990s thatstudents describe the causes, and keyorganizations and individuals o theconservative resurgence o the 1980s and 1990s,including Phyllis Schlay, the Contract withAmerica, the Heritage Foundation, the MoralMajority, and the National Rie Association.52 Inaddition to elevating specic intellectuals,non-governmental organizations, and think tanksto the level o key organizations and individuals,this amendment ocuses solely on one narrowviewpoint without discussing those withcompeting ideas anywhere in this requirement.Instead o deerring to educational or subjectmatter experts, the Board members who oeredand/or approved arbitrary and subjective amend-ments such as these conrmed their inability tohandle the great power bestowed upon them.

Board members reliance on subjective rationalesor their amendments was even questioned bytheir own colleagues. For example, Mavis Knight,a Board member rom District 13, warned,

As this process makes clear, some Boardmembers have prioritized their ideological belies

over a curriculum that creates well-inormedstudents. In doing so, the Board providedadditional evidence that the discretion granted toit is not compatible with the Legislatures intentor the Board.

[A]s a State Board o Education I think we needto give more solid kinds o rationales why thingsshould be included or deleted as opposed to the

subjective, personal, I like, I dont like, myavorite, those kinds o issues.53


12/30

i i i . E x P l o i t i n G P o W E r , s E r v i n G i d E o l o G i c a li n t E r E s t s


a. The Boards hisTory

of sacrificing educaTion

To ideology

Beginning in the late 1980s, a concerted eortwas launched to stack the Board with memberswhose goals were to inject their ideologicalagendas into classrooms across exas.54 By themid- 1990s, these activists began to realize theirgoal, and thus began the Boards now long-running abuse o power.

For example, during its consideration o healthtextbooks in 1994, the Board had a breastsel-exam illustration removed. Te illustration,

Te controversy surrounding the adoption o theSocial Studies EKS is just the latest episode oBoard abuse. As articulated above, the processor the adoption o EKS suers rom a lack o

statutory saeguards to protect against theBoards abuse o the discretion conerred by theLegislature. Te Boards abuse o processbecomes an abuse o power when looking at thesubstantive result o the Boards Social Stud-ies EKS review process. Yet, while the Boardsproposed Social Studies EKS provide ampleammunition on their own or legislative eortsto curb the Boards authority over setting cur-riculum standards, its abuse is ar rom a novelrevelation.

TEEN PREGNANCY RATES IN THE UNITED STATES

STATE

RANK STATE RATE

1NewMexico93

2Nevada90

3Arizona89

4Texas885Mississippi85

6Delaware83

7Arkansas80

8Georgia80

9SouthCarolina79

10Tennessee79

11Florida77

12NewYork77

13NorthCarolina76

14Oklahoma76

15Caliornia75

16Alabama7317Hawaii71

18Louisiana70

19Colorado69

20NewJersey68

21Illinois6722Kentucky66

23Maryland65

24Wyoming65

25Missouri63

26Indiana62

27Ohio62

28RhodeIsland62

29WestVirginia62

30Alaska61

31Virginia61

32Kansas60

33Michigan6034Washington59

35 Connecticut 57

36 Oregon 57

37 Montana 56

38 Idaho 5539 Pennsylvania 53

40 Iowa 51

41 SouthDakota 51

42 Nebraska 50

43 Massachusetts 49

44 Utah 47

45 Wisconsin 47

46 NorthDakota 45

47 Maine 43

48 Minnesota 43

49 Vermont 40

50 NewHampshire 33

STATE

RANK STATE RATESTATE

RANK STATE RATE

TeenPregnancyRatesper1,000GirlsAged15-19

Source:U.S.TEENAGEPREGNANCIES,BIRTHSANDABORTIONS:NATIONALANDSTATETRENDSANDTRENDSBYRACEANDETHNICITY,GUTTMACHER

INSTITUTE15(Jan.2010)availableathttp://www.guttmacher.org/sections/index.php?page=reports.


13/30


the purpose o which was to teach students howto properly conduct a breast exam, was ound

by some Board members to be embarrassingand objectionable.55 Furthermore, as the exasFreedom Network documented in its report,

Just Say Dont Know, the Board approved ahealth textbook that provides medically inac-curate inormation with regard to the use ocondoms.56 Tus, some Board Members haveclearly demonstrated that the need to achievetheir agenda overrides students health and theneed to combat teen pregnancy. In addition toundermining the well-being o exas children,individual Board members used their leverage

with a textbook publisher to orce removal o apicture o a woman carrying a briecase becausethe Board elt that the photo undermined theproper role o women.57

In addition to abusing its authority to approve

textbooks, the Board has also ignored itsstatutorily required duty to establish

constitutionally permissible EKS or publicschool Bible classes. On June 15, 2007, HB 1287was enacted into law. Te law states that publicschools may oer an elective course on the Bible.Te law states, [b]eore adopting rules identiy-ing the essential knowledge and skills o a courseoered under this section the State Board oEducation shall submit the proposed essentialknowledge and skills to the attorney general.Te attorney general shall review the proposedessential knowledge and skills to ensure thatthe course complies with the United StatesConstitution .58 Unortunately, the Boardchose to ignore this mandate and simply appliedthe general EKS or Special opics in SocialStudies or or Independent Study in English.59In doing so, the Board eectively le local school


14/30


districts to determine the standards and contentor these courses, making it more likely that suchclasses will be taught in a manner that violatesthe Establishment Clause rights o students and

parents. Tis process has led to concerns thatunconstitutional curricula will pop up acrossexas leaving local districts liable to civilliberties lawsuits, simply because the Boardreused to comply with its statutory obligation. 60

Last year, the Board revised exas ScienceEKS.61 Te Committee charged with reviewingand recommending changes to the curriculumsuggested that the requirement that studentsstudy the strengths and weaknesses oscientic theories be replaced with a requirement

that students analyze and evaluate scienticexplanations using empirical evidence.62 Whilea requirement to study the strengths andweaknesses o scientic theories appears, on itsace, to encourage serious academic debate, inreality this language was inserted to appeasereligious ideologues.63 As Kevin Fisher, a pastpresident o the Science eachers Associationo exas, stated: [i]ts an attempt to bring alseweaknesses into the classroom in an attemptto get students to reject evolution.64 Whileultimately unable to retain the strengths andweaknesses language in the Science EKS, theanti-evolution wing o the Board was able to pushthrough amendments that will serve a similarpurpose, including requirements that studentscritically evaluate, among other well-establishedscientic principles, the Big Bang theory65 andcell ormation66.67 A review o statements madeby then-Board Chair Don McLeroy,68 and theconcerns by scientists69 and academics,70 makesclear that this language is a continuation o theBoards attempt to inject religion into public

school science classes.

B. going froM Bad To worseThe Boards currenTreview of The social sTudies

curriculuMAs currently constructed, the Social Studies EKSwill continue the Boards record o undermin-ing the educational uture o exas public schoolstudents by impeding their preparation orcollege-level work, both substantively andanalytically. Tis conclusion is echoed in a lettersigned by approximately 80071 college historyproessors rom exas and around the nation. Inthis letter, the proessors concluded that theproposed EKS do not meet student needs.

Te ideologically driven nature o this contentwas recognized by exas largest public schoolsystem, the Houston Independent School District(HISD). In a resolution passed by HISD thatcriticizes the Boards proposed Social StudiesEKS, the HISD Board stated that the EKS

Unortunately, the Boards proposed EKSails this basic test.

As a review o the EKS clearly establishes, thereare a number o troubling interrelated thematictrends. First, the Board has narrowed historyto a specic ideologically based historical nar-rative throughout the curriculum. Second, theBoard pushed the perspective that the govern-

ment is a neutral actor relating to social issues.Tese trends, i adopted, will enable the Board, agovernmental entity, to transorm its subjectiveviews into objective acts. Tus, students will betaught a one-sided narrative and their ability to

must reect accurate historical content, sound

scholarship, and consist o standards thatare balanced, coherent and ree

rom political biases72

.


15/30


develop analytical skills will be inhibited. In theend, both students and the state will suer or theBoards abuses.

Reading the proposed Social Studies EKS, aspecic historical narrative or global and U.S.history becomes clear. In this narrative, theU.S., its allies, and societies historically tied tothe U.S. have consistently acted with benevolentintentions nationally and internationally. Tehistorical events and policies that conict withcertain Board members preconceived notion othe role o government are ignored or minimized.

Favored leaders, organizations, and policies arediscussed in strictly positive ways, while dislikedleaders, organizations, and policies are thoroughlyanalyzed or their pros and cons. And nally, theimpact o social movements and historical eventsunavorable to some Board members ideologicalviews are minimized and/or revised. Whetheryou agree with this historical ramework, thecurriculum risks leaving exas 4.7 million schoolchildren underprepared or college level workthat requires a certain base knowledge o historyalong with the analytical tools gained through awell-rounded educational curriculum.73

Te Boards abuse becomes more troubling whenlooking to the uture. As the nation and worldbecome increasingly interconnected, utureU.S. political and business leaders will need acomprehensive understanding o our past, thegood parts and the bad, as well as the historyo nations that are ever shiing rom allies toadversaries and back again.74 While people candisagree about the need or or reasoning behinddiscrete historical events, we cannot ignore theevents existence. As Winston Churchill warned,those that ail to learn rom history, are doomedto repeat it. A comprehensive historicaleducation will better enable uture leaders to

avoid past mistakes.

. Pt i

d ht nt

Along with inserting its own conclusions abouthistory into the EKS, the Board has pushedthrough a proposal that successully shiedormative historical events and/or policies othe page. Te Board has replaced an acceptedacademic term or a euphemistic term:expansion rather than imperialism todescribe U.S. actions abroad.75 Students o U.S.History Since 1877 will be required to explainthe signicance o the ollowing years as turningpoints:1898 (Spanish-American War), 1914-1918 (World War I), 1929 (the Great Depression

begins), 1939-1945 and (World War II), 1957(Sputnik launch ignites U.S.-Soviet space race),1968-1969 (Martin Luther King Jr. assassinationand U.S. lands on the moon), 1991 (Cold Warends), 2001 (terrorist attacks on World radeCenter and the Pentagon), and 2008 (election orst black president).76 Tis timeline omits anumber o important events, including theKorean War, the Vietnam War, the ProgressiveEra, the New Deal, and the Civil Rights Era.While these issues are covered in laterrequirements, none according to the Review

Committee or the Board merit a place amongthe turning points o post 1877 U.S. history. osome, the proposed list makes sense, toothers it omits some o the greatest triumphs andtragedies o this period. Especially in light o theneed to make the EKS relevant to students, thisrequirement highlights the need or substantiveexperts to oversee the EKS adoption process.

It is clear that all o this is part o a plan to ensurea particular view o history emerges. During thediscussion o the McCarthy Era, students mustdescribe how McCarthyism, the HouseUn-American Activities Committee (HUAC),the arms race, and the space race increased ColdWar tensions and how the later release o the Ve-nona Papers conrmed suspicions o communistinltration in U.S. government.77 Although this

1. dtt ht


16/30


standard includes a review o Cold War issues,hidden in the text lurks another purpose. Byadding the Venona Papers to this requirement,the Board has attempted to, according to one

Board member, vindicate[] Senator JosephMcCarthys un-American actions.78

Attempts to vindicate one o the mostcontroversial and divisive American gureso at least the 20th century was only thebeginning. Te Board amended the EKS torequire students to describe the leadershipo President Reagan with regard to oreign anddomestic policy, whereas the originally proposedrequirement asked students to describe Reganspolicies.79 Tus, the Board took it upon itsel to

shi and elevate the ocus rom Reagans policiesto that o his leadership. Again, while manymay agree with the Boards viewpoint, suchclaims are contentious.80 Tis serves as anadditional example o the need or expertcontrol over the EKS process. Finally, but byno means exhaustively, students mustunderstand[] the concept o Americanexceptionalism[, including] how Americanvalues are dierent and unique rom those oother nations. 81 As with the aboverequirements, this requirement will spoon-eedthe conclusion to students without allowingthem to analyze history on their own. Tiscurriculum could also alienate students whosehistorical outlook diers rom the Boards oennarrow interpretation o history, and in doingso could lead exas vastly sub-par high schoolgraduation rate in the wrong direction.

Yet, predetermined conclusions are not a part oall EKS. When looking into issues orpolicies that conict with the stated viewpointso many Board members, we nd variations osome Board members approach towardevolution: strengths and weaknesses. Studentsare required to compare the New Deal policiesand its opponents approaches to resolving theeconomic eects o the Great Depression .82

In addition, Students are required to evaluatethe pros and cons o U.S. participation ininternational organizations and treaties. 83While the requirement to study an issue rom

multiple perspectives is a welcome addition tosocial science curriculum, its use should bedeployed in a uniorm manner, and not justwhen the policy at issue conicts with someBoard members ideological outlook.

Students in World History will be required tounderstand[] the development o radical Islam-ic undamentalism and the subsequent use o

terrorism by some o its adherents[, including]the development and impact o radical Islamicundamentalism on events in the second hal othe 20th century, including Palestinian terrorismand the growth o al Qaeda .84 Tis singlerequirement, recommended by the ReviewCommittee and modied by the Board, suersrom a number o intellectually dishonest and/orinaccurate claims. Troughout the entireproposed Social Studies EKS, the onlynational group specically linked withterrorism is the Palestinians, a subjective claim

that uses a loaded term to single out a specicgroup or criticism. 85 In addition, this claiminaccurately implies that all Palestinians areMuslim, thus urthering the notion o animplied religious conict. 86 Furthermore, theonly religion specically linked with terrorismand undamentalism throughout the EKS isIslam. Tis requirement singles out one religionor acts and doctrinal belies that occur and existin many o the worlds great religions. 87 Inaddition, as with the discussion o thePalestinians, the use o the word terrorism inthis requirement is subjective.88 I adopted,these requirements will project a narrative oconict between monolithic civilizations. Withestimates o the exas Muslim populationranging rom 120,000 to 400,000,89 such

b. stmt Mm


17/30

education could not only exacerbate articialinternational divisions, but also misinorm ourstudents, make a sizeable portion o ourpopulation eel unwelcome, and harm the states

image as a welcoming international businessdestination.

. d t

cm Jt stm

Students enrolled in exas sociology courseswill investigate deviance through the lens othe criminal justice system. Te ReviewCommittee inserted, and the Board approved,a requirement that students explain the natureand social unction o deviance[, including by] interpret[ing] dierences in crime andarrest rates by social categories such as ethnicity,gender, socioeconomic status, and age andanalyz[ing] the criminal justice system in theUnited States in relation to deviant behavior.90As numerous studies have shown, AricanAmericans and other minorities in the U.S. acearrest and conviction rates that are vastlydisproportionate to their relative proportion othe population and the airly uniorm requencyo criminal behavior across ethnic or racial lines.

Tis disparity is clear when looking at the rate odrug use by race compared with the rate oarrests or drug use by race. In 2008, the U.S.Department o Health and Human Servicesound that 10.1% o Arican Americans and8.2% o whites used illicit drugs.91 Yet, whilethe rate o drug use between whites and AricanAmericans is relatively equal, their arrest ratesor drug use are vastly disproportionate. WhileArican Americans make up only 11.9% oexas population,92 they made up 31% opersons arrested or drug possession, almostthree times their percentage o the population.93At the same time, white persons made up 82.4%o exas population 94 and comprised 69% othose arrested or drug possession, a percentagegreatly below their percentage o the


population.95 And, such disparities do not endat the level o arrest. As the Brennan Center orJustice ound: Racial disparities have been doc-umented at every stage o the criminal justicesystem. Arican Americans and other racial andethnic minorities are more likely to be arrestedthan white citizens, more likely to be chargedonce arrested, and more likely to be convicted

and imprisoned once charged. 96 Tus, by bas-ing their analysis on inherently awed statistics,students who simply ollow the curriculum willbe subjected to vastlymisleading picture o deviance in the U.S. thatconorms to stereotypes about drug use andcrime in the Arican American community.

2. lk mt tbt

t t pp

Troughout the proposed EKS, the require-ments consistently address the obligations o thepeople to the state, but ail to address any cor-responding state obligation to the people. In act,the EKS imply that protecting rights requiresminimal government intervention, as the EKSrequire students to understand the roles o lim-ited government and the rule o law in the

protection o individual rights. 97 On the otherhand, students are told to understand theresponsibilities, duties, and obligations ocitizenship, such as being well inormed aboutcivic aairs, serving in the military, voting,serving on a jury, observing the laws, payingtaxes, and serving the public good. 98 Teserequirements paint an incomplete picture o therelationship between the government and the peo-ple. From providing Medicare and Social Securityto our elderly, to ensuring our national security, to

responding to natural and manmade disasters, thegovernment plays a major role in ensuring publicsaety and the realization o basic rights.

Perhaps most troublesome is the way in whichthe EKS cover government actions designed to


18/30


Tis requirement ails to include a discussiono the reason or these programs. Any soundanalysis o the Great Society, armative action,or itle IX must look at the barriers to employ-ment and education that women and peopleo color ace without these policies in eect. 100Students should be encouraged to analyze thesepolicies critically, but in doing so, they shouldengage in a ull exploration o the societalconditions that necessitated the creation o thesepolicies. Students should also evaluate the prosand cons o whether the policies were eective,

and not solely the unintended consequence oeach. o negatively rame these policiesinsinuates that these programs have only hadnegative results, whereas many historians andanalysts would argue that these policies playeda critical role in allowing women and people ocolor equal opportunity to advance in society, aswell as enabling our society to better advance asa whole. 101

As the above proposed curriculum makes clear,the Board mixed up its understanding o actversus opinion. When reviewing the ScienceEKS last year, some Board members sought toinsert language implying serious debate vis--visvalid scientic theories, such as evolution, even i

no such serious debate existed within thescientic community. And this year, whenreviewing the Social Studies EKS, the Board, inmany instances, has proposed language thatimplies universal agreement on contentioushistorical issues, ignores or revises historicalevents and limits the obligation o the govern-ment to the people. Instead o ormulating acurriculum that urthers the interests o exasschool children, the Board has again shown thatit is incapable o acting in the best interests o itsmost important constituents: our children.

achieve equality in act. When such actions arediscussed, the requirements are ormulated in amanner that calls the government actions intoquestion. For example, when covering theeconomic eects o World War II and theCold War , students are required to

>>identiy actions o governmentand the private sector such as theGreat Society, afrmative action, and Title IXto create economic opportunities or citizens and

analyze the unintended consequences o each .99


19/30

a. The financial and socialcosTs of sTudenT droPouTTe importance o a relevant curriculum to

curbing minority high school dropout is wellestablished.102 As a 2007 report looking at theLatino male dropout crisis ound, [t]hearticulation o a history and culture that isamiliar and personal to the Latina/o student has,historically, proved to anchor the student inthe educational setting. 103 In addition topotentially under-preparing high schoolgraduates or college, the curriculums narrowand ideologically driven ocus could increaseexas already unacceptable high school dropoutrate. With approximately 4 out o 10 studentsalready not graduating, exas cannot aord toexacerbate this crisis.

Drop-out rates are correlated to unemploy-ment and low earnings. In a recent Northeast-ern University report, the authors ound that[s]lightly less than 46 percent o the nationsyoung high school dropouts were employed onaverage during 2008. 104 Tis unemploymentrate is 22 percentage points below that o highschool graduates. 105 In terms o earnings, thishigh unemployment rate or dropouts translatedto a mean annual earning o just $8,358 in 2007,versus $14,600 or high school graduates with nopost-secondary schooling and $24,800 or thosewith a bachelors degree. 106

Dropping out o high school is a signicant riskactor or adult incarceration. In addition totheir minimal contribution to the economy, highschool dropouts also ace a substantially higherrate o institutionalization. As theNortheastern University report ound: Nearly1 o every 10 young male high school dropoutswas institutionalized on a given day in 2006-2007versus ewer than 1 o 33 high school graduates,1 o 100 o those out-o-school young men whocompleted 1-3 years o post-secondary school-ing, and only 1 o 500 men who held a bachelors


i v. a b s E n t l E G i s l a t i v E i n t E r v E n t i o n ,t E x a s f u t u r E i s at r i s K

or higher degree. 107 When actoring in thecombination o poor economic contributions orpersons not institutionalized coupled with theaverage incarceration cost o $49.40 per inmateper day (in 2008) the economic losses add upquickly. 108 In act, a recent study rom the exasA&M Bush School o Government and PublicService estimated that [t]he total o thepredicted cost [to exas] o dropouts rom thecohort o the senior class o 2012 is between $6.0billion and $10.7 billion over their lietimes. 109

Te Boards choice, in the ace o exas dropoutstatistics, to endorse a one-dimensional view ohistory illustrates its members indierence tothe challenges exas public school teachers and

administrators ace in engaging and retainingat-risk students.

B. iMPacT on BusinessdeveloPMenT

Te Boards undermining o the publiceducation system not only harms our children,but also the states ability to recruit and retainbusinesses and the viability o our economy. Asthe states economy relies increasingly onglobalized industries, the need or exas

businesses to attract a highly educated workorcewill increase. Such necessary recruitment o ahighly educated workorce will be negativelyaected i these potential workers view theexas public school system as unable to providetheir children with a high quality educationaloundation. Tis, in turn, could thwart exaseorts to attract new businesses, as such busi-nesses will be concerned i the public educationsystem harms their eorts to attract and retaintop-notch employees. Such concerns over thequality o public education in exas have alreadycome to light, and this is beore the addedconcerns that will be realized i the Boardsproposed Social Studies EKS are adopted. AsTe New York imes reported during the Sci-ence EKS debate, [b]usiness leaders [have]


20/30

Fail to meet Board approved physicalspecications;

Contain material covering less than hal o theelements o the EKS o the subject and grade

level in both the student and teacher version othe textbook; and

Contain actual errors. 113

Te goal o this legislation was to rein in theBoards consistent abuse o its authority byrejecting proposed textbooks simply becausethe content conicted with members personalbelies. But this x with regard to the textbooksapproval process is ar rom perect, as Boardmembers have simply begun to rameideological disagreements in terms o actual

disagreements. 114

While the Board members abuse o the textbookapproval process has been addressed on paper,and partially in reality, Board members continueto aunt their unchecked power to constructEKS as they see t. Fortunately, a number olegislators have recognized this ongoing threat.During the 2009 Legislative Session, a numbero bills were introduced to remedy the problem.Tese bills included proposals to:

ranser the authority or textbooks

adoptions and curriculum approval to the EA;ranser the authority or adopting

curriculum standards and textbooks to theCommissioner; and

ranser the authority or adopting textbooksand approving curriculum standards to a newLegislative Education Board. 115

Te start o the 82nd Legislative Session is justew months away. Te exas Legislature mustcomplete the reorms it began back in 1995. Itis time or exas to reverse the nations image o

the state as an educational wasteland and reclaimits proper place as the model or what a superiorpublic education system should look like.


said exas would have trouble attracting highlyeducated workers and their amilies i the statesscience programs were seen as a laughingstockamong biologists. 110 Unortunately or the

states economy, the Board succeeded inundermining the science curriculum. Withthe Board again in the global spotlight or thewrong reasons, it is logical to assume that exasbusiness climate could suer because the Boardinsists on placing personal priorities above theneed to construct a second-to-none publiceducation system.

Tus, by providing exas 4.7 million school-children with an insucient education, Boardmembers are setting the state up or a less-than-

promising economic uture. As Dr. Jason L.Saving, a senior economist at the FederalReserve Bank o Dallas, wrote,

c. PasT aTTeMPTs By The Texas

legislaTure To sToP BoardaBuse have failed

As this report makes clear, the problems withthe Board are nothing new. And neither areattempts to x these problems. Prior to 1995,the Board enjoyed both the unchecked powerto establish the EKS, as well as the uncheckedpower to approve or deny proposed publicschool textbooks. But, aer the Boards abuse otheir textbook approval power became too muchor the Legislature, lawmakers passed Senate Bill

1.112 Since 1995, the Boards power to rejecttextbooks has been limited to three narrowcategories. o be rejected, a textbook must:

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

[e]ducation improves human capital and makespeople more productive, which pays dividends in

the orm o higher gross domestic product (GDP).111


21/30


v . r E c o m m E n d a t i o n s

Te curriculum o almost fve million school children shouldnt be decided on the political belies oeight people on the State Board o Education. We must develop a system that takes the politics out o thecurriculum setting process and bases the education o students on best thinking o our best teachers and

scholars, not the political muscle o a small group o people. 116

riTa haeCKer, PresidenT,

Texas sTaTe TeaChers assoCiaTion

a. The Board should iMMediaTelysToP The currenT social sTudiesTeKs review and sTarT over wiTha coMMiTMenT To PrioriTizeeducaTion over ideology

B. The Texas legislaTure shouldinTervene during TheforThcoMing 82nd legislaTivesession To esTaBlish sTaTuToryParaMeTers on The Boards au-ThoriTy 1. Under current law, persons chargedwith the development and adoption o EKS arenot required to possess any academic or teachingqualications. o remedy this deciency, theLegislature must create minimum qualicationsor all persons involved in determining thesubstance o the EKS. Such minimumqualications could include: . A doctorate in a relevant eld; or b. A certied teacher with ten plus yearso relevant public school teaching experience.

2. As this report claries, the Board hasabused its power to develop and adopt the EKS.Tis abuse necessitates that the Legislature act toremove the Boards authority over the

development and adoption o the EKS. Werecommend that the Legislature take up one othe ollowing three options:

. Limit the Boards authority to onlythose duties required by the exas Constitution.

Create a new body charged with the develop-ment and adoption o the EKS and theirrelated concerns including textbook adoptionand assessment standards. b. Amend the Boards role in the

development and adoption o the EKS, and itsrelated concerns including textbook adoptionand assessment standards, to include authorityover non-substantive matters only. Tesematters could include: . Ensuring that personscharged with the development and adoption othe EKS have the resources necessary to carryout their unction; or . Ensuring that textbooks meetminimum physical requirements. . Limit the Boards authority over thedevelopment and adoption o the EKS, andits related concerns including textbook adop-tion and assessment standards, to providingnon- binding recommendations only. Personscharged with the substantive development andadoption o the EKS must retain completeauthority over the EKS.

3. Te appointment process or allpersons involved in the substantive developmentand adoption o the EKS must include a system

o checks and balances. For instance: . Te Board may nominate persons todevelop and adopt the EKS but allnominees must rst receive the consent o aspecial committee o the Legislature; or


22/30


b. Te Commissioners or Education

and Higher Education may nominate persons todevelop and adopt the EKS but the House Pub-lic Education and Senate Education Committeesmust approve all appointees.


23/30

1. .X. Const. art 7, 1.2. Brown v. Board o Education, 347 U.S. 483, 493 (1954).3. EX. EDUC. CODE 4.001(a).4.Brown v. Board o Education, 347 U.S. 483, 493 (1954).5..X. Const. art 7, 1.6. WILLIAM SCHWEKE, SMAR MONEY: EDUCAION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN(2004); see also Jason L. Saving, Keys to Economic Growth: What Drives exas?, SOUHWESECONOMY, First Quarter 2009, available at http://www.dallased.org/research/swe/2009/swe0901c.cm (last visited on Apr. 22, 2010).7. Forbes Magazine lists education as a top actor in determining its annual list o the Te Best PlacesFor Business And Careers. Kurt Badenhausen, Te Best Places For Business And Careers, FORBES,Apr. 14, 2010 available at http://www.orbes.com/2010/04/13/orbes-best-places-or-business-washington-best-places-or-business.html.8.Kurt Badenhausen, Te Best States For Business, FORBES, Oct. 23, 2009 available at http://www.orbes.com/2009/09/23/best-states-or-business-beltway-best-states_table.html.

9. exas Education Agency, SBOE History and Duties, available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=4214 (last visited April 19, 2010).10. See, e.g., Mark Morord, Dear exas: Please Shut Up. Sincerely, History. SAN FRANCISCOCHRONICLE/SF GAE, March 17, 2010, available online at http://articles.sgate.com/2010-03-17/entertainment/18835338_1_liberal-media-civil-war-god.11.See, e.g. Russell Shorto, How Christian Were the Founders? NEW YORK IMES, February 11,2010 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/magazine/14texbooks-t.html.12.Patty Quinzi, Legislative Counsel, exas American Federation o eachers, Statement to theMexican American Legislative Caucus (Apr. 28, 2010) available at http://www.unionvoice.org/t/notice-description.tcl?newsletter_id=29797087.13. LEGISLAIVE BUDGE BOARD, 2010 EXAS FAC BOOK 19 (2010) available at www.lbb.state.tx.us/Fact_Book/exas_FactBook_2010.pd.

14. exas budget shortall predicted to be $11B, ASSOCIAED PRESS, Mar. 8, 2010 available at http://www.reporternews.com/news/2010/mar/08/budget-shortall-predicted-to-be-11b/.15. Rita Haecker, President, exas State eachers Association, Statement to the Mexican AmericanLegislative Caucus (Apr. 28, 2010) available at http://www.tsta.org/news/current/#Haecker.16. Id.17. EX. EDUC. CODE 28.002(a).18. Id. 28.002(c).19. Mariah Blake, Revisionaries: How a group o exas conservatives is rewriting your kidstextbooks, WASH. MONHLY, Jan./Feb. 2010, available at http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/eatures/2010/1001.blake.html.20. Id.21. Shorto, supra note 11.

22. .X. Const. art 7, 3(b)&5()23. Id. 8.24. Id. 7.101.25. Id. 7.104(b).26. Id. 7.104(c).


v i . E n d n o t E s


24/30


27. Id. 7.106.28. Id. 7.107(a).29. Id. 7.107(b).

30. Id. 7.102(c)(1).31. Id. 7.102(c)(4),(5),(9),(11),(12).32. Id. 28.002(c).33. Id. 28.001.34. Id. 28.014(a).35. Under the Education Code, the exas Commissioners o Education and Higher Education arecharged with orming Vertical eams o public school and higher education aculty to ensure thatstudents are able to perorm college-level course work at institutions o higher education. See, EX.EDUC. CODE 28.008(a). In doing so, the Vertical eams evaluate the EKS and determine i theyare suitable to prepare students to succeed in college level coursework, and recommend how EKSstandards could be amended to meet this goal. See, Id. 28.008(b)(2)(3). In addition, the Verticaleams are tasked with incorporating college readiness standards, which have been approved by the

Commissioner or Education and the exas Higher Education Coordinating Board, into the EKS.See, Id. 28.008(d). Furthermore, beginning with the 2008-2009 school year, the Board is chargedwith incorporating college readiness standards into all oundation curriculum standards. See, Id.28.008(d-1). Unortunately, the Board has the discretion to ignore Vertical eam recommendations.See, Id. 28.008(e) (Notwithstanding any other provision o this section, the State Board o Educationretains its authority concerning the required curriculum.).36. Id. 28.002(a)(2)(E).37. Id. 28.002(h).38. SAE BOARD OF EDUCAION OPERAING RULES 5.2(a)&(c)(1)(2) (Amended Nov. 20,2009).39. exas State Board o Education, Process or Review and Revision o exas Essential Knowledgeand Skills (EKS), November 2009 (approved on November 20, 2009).

40. Id.41. Id.42. Id.43. Id.44. SAE BOARD OF EDUCAION OPERAING RULES 6.1(a) (Amended Nov. 20, 2009) &EX. EDUC. CODE 28.002(c).45. exas State Board o Education, Process or Review and Revision o exas Essential Knowledgeand Skills (EKS), November 2009 (approved on November 20, 2009).46. Id.47. Id.48. Id.49. Rev. Peter Marshall, whose lie and ministry is dedicated to helping to restore America to itsBible-based oundations. See, Peter Marshall Ministries, http://petermarshallministries.com (lastvisited on Apr. 20, 2010). When interviewed about his role as an Expert, he was quite straightorwardregarding his concern with the current Social Studies curriculum. Rev. Marshall stated that [t]heguidelines in exas were seriously decient in bringing out the role o the Christian aith in the ound-ing o America. See, e.g., Shorto, supra note 11. In the same interview, Rev. Marshall proposed


25/30


that children be taught that the separation-o-powers notion is rooted in the Founding Fathers clearunderstanding o the sinulness o man. See, e.g., Shorto, supra note 11. See also David Barton, theFounder and President o Wallbuilders, an organization dedicated to educating the nation concerningthe Godly oundation o our country . See, Wallbuilders, Overview, http://www.wallbuilders.com/ABOverview.asp (last visited on Apr. 20, 2010). In his rst review o the proposed Social Studies EKS,Mr. Barton wrote that [t]he principles set orth [in the Declaration o Independence] and subsequentlysecured in the Constitution and Bill o Rights include: 1. Tere is a xed moral law derived rom Godand nature; 2. Tere is a Creator; 3. Te Creator gives to man certain unalienable rights; 4. Governmentexists primarily to protect God-given rights to every individual; 5. Below God-given rights and morallaw, government is directed by the consent o the governed. See, David Barton, President,WallBuilders, Review o First Dra Social Studies EKS, Social Studies experts, available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=6184. Mr. Bartons Expert recommendations continued, [s]tudents mustalso understand the Framers very explicit (and very requent) denition o inalienable rights as beingthose rights given by God to every individual . See, Id.50. exas State Board o Education, Process or Review and Revision o exas Essential Knowledge

and Skills (EKS), November 2009 (approved on November 20, 2009).51. EX. EDUC. CODE 113.18(b)(9)(D) (color coded version).52. exas State Board o Education, Committee o the Full Board, Report o the State Board oEducation, Jan. 15, 2010, available at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/minutes_all/2010/january/cof_01_15_10.pd (last visited on Apr. 21, 2010).53. Mavis Knight, Member, exas State Board o Education, EA Committee o the Full Board, Mar.10, 2010, available at http://www.texasadmin.com/cgi-bin/agenda.cgi?location=tea&savele=EA_FB031010.54. Shorto, supra note 11; see also EXAS FREEDOM NEWORK, HE SAE BOARD OFEDUCAION: DRAGGING EXAS SCHOOLS INO HE CULURE WARS 22 (2008), available athttp://www.tn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=rrreportarchive#SORR2008.55. exas Freedom Network, Id. at 32-35; see also Evan Smith, Te exas Curriculum Massacre,

NEWSWEEK, Apr 16, 2010, available at http://www.newsweek.com/id/236585.56. EXAS FREEDOM NEWORK, JUS SAY DON KNOW: SEXUALIY EDUCAION INEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS 9 (2009), available at http://www.tn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=SexEdReportIndexPage.57. exas Freedom Network, supra note 54, at 35; see also Kris Axtman, exas wrangles over bias inschool textbooks, HE CHRISIAN SCIENCE MONIOR, July 22, 2002 available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0722/p03s01-ussc.html.58. EX. EDUC. CODE 28.011(e).59. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 74.36(d).60. errence Stutz, exas State Board o Education approves Bible course or high schools, HEDALLAS MORNING NEWS, July 19, 2008, available at http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/071908dntexbibleclass.6a4407.html.

61. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 112.62. James C. McKinley, In exas, a Line in the Curriculum Revives Evolution Debate, NY IMES, Jan.21, 2009, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/education/22texas.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=exas%20State%20Board%20o%20Education&st=cse.63. Id.


26/30


64Id.65.19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 112.36 (c)(4)(A).66. Id. 112.34 (c)(7)(G).67.Michael Brick, Deeat and Some Success or exas Evolution Foes, NY IMES, Mar. 26, 2009,available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/education/27texas.html.68. Laura Heinauer, Education board leader set to challenge evolution, AUSIN-AMERICANSAESMAN, Mar. 08, 2009, available at http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/08/0308mcleroy.html.69.Id.70.Id.71.Kate Alexander, Historians decry social studies revisions, AUSIN-AMERICAN SAESMAN,Apr. 15, 2010 available at http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/historians-decry-social-studies-revisions-570593.html.72. Houston Independent School District, Resolution, o Encourage the State Board o Education toAdopt Fair and Accurate Social Studies EKS, Apr. 22, 2010.

73.An Open Letter From Historians to the exas State Board o Education, Apr. 12, 2010, available athttp://sensiblehistory.blogspot.com/p/letter.html (last visited on Apr. 21, 2010).74. Peter N. Stearns, Why Study History?, AMERICAN HISORICAL ASSOCIAION, available athttp://www.historians.org/pubs/ree/whystudyhistory.htm (last visited on Apr. 29, 2010).75. For e.g., see 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.41(c)(4)(A)(B).76. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.41(c)(2)(D).77.19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.41(c)(8)(B).78.Blake, supra note 19.79.EX. EDUC. CODE 113.41(c)10(A)(B) (color coded version).80.For criticisms o President Ronald Reagan see, e.g., Reagans mixed White House legacy, BBC, June6, 2004, available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/213195.stm; see also, Peter Dreier, ReagansLegacy: Homelessness in America, SHELERHOUSE ONLINE (NAIONAL HOUSING INSI-

UE), Issue 135, May/June 2004, available at http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html; seealso, Jesse Jackson Jr., Reagan: A Legacy o States Rights, HE NAION, June 16, 2004, available athttp://www.thenation.com/article/reagan-legacy-states-rights.81. EX. EDUC. CODE 113.41(c)10(A).82.Id. 113.41(c)(16)(D).83.Id. 113.41(c)(19)(E).84. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.42(c)(14).85. See, e.g., Cameron W. Barr, In Mideast, one weapon o choice is a loaded word, HECHRISIAN SCIENCE MONIOR, July 31, 2001, available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0731/p1s3.html; see also Seumas Milne, error and tyranny: What powerul states call terrorism may bean inevitable response to injustice, HE GUARDIAN, Oct. 25 2001 available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/25/aghanistan.terrorism9; see also Michael Slackman, Disentangling Layers

o a Loaded erm in Search o a Tread o Peace, NY IMES, Feb. 25, 2009 available at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/world/middleeast/26terror.html.86. Guide: Christians in the Middle East, BBC, Dec. 15, 2005, available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4499668.stm.87. For a discussion o terrorism undertaken in the name o many o the worlds great religions,


27/30


see BRUCE HOFFMAN, INSIDE ERRORISM (2006); see also Peter I. Rose, Disciples o religiousterrorism share one aith, HE CHRISIAN SCIENCE MONIOR, Aug. 28, 2003, available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0828/p15s02-bogn.html.88. See, e.g., Kim Campbell, When is terrorist a subjective term?, HE CHRISIAN SCIENCEMONIOR, Sept. 27, 2001 available at http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0927/p16s2-wogi.html; seealso Glenn Greenwald, errorism: the most meaningless and manipulated word, SALON, Feb 19,2010, available at http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/02/19/terrorism.89. See exas State Historical Association, exas Almanac, Church Membership Figures or exas,1990 and 2000, available at http://www.texasalmanac.com/religion/ (last visited Apr. 27, 2010); seealso Sam Hodges, exas urning Muslim?, HE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, May 20, 2006, availableat http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/religion/stories/DN-texasmuslims_20rel.AR0.State.Edition1.3a08dc.html.90. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.46(c)(9).91. U.S. Department o Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health ServicesAdministration, Oce o Applied Studies, Results rom the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and

Health: National Findings (2009), available at http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k8NSDUH/2k8results.cm#Ch2 (last visited Apr. 27, 2010).92. U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts, exas, available at http://quickacts.census.gov/qd/states/48000.html (last visited Apr. 27, 2010).93. EXAS DEPARMEN OF PUBLIC SAFEY, CRIME IN EXAS 2008 41 (2008) available athttp://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/crimestatistics.htm (last visited Apr.27, 2010).94. U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts, exas, available at http://quickacts.census.gov/qd/states/48000.html (last visited Apr. 27, 2010).95. EXAS DEPARMEN OF PUBLIC SAFEY, CRIME IN EXAS 2008 41 (2008) available athttp://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/crimestatistics.htm (last visited Apr.27, 2010).

96. JAMES E. JOHNSON, RACIAL DISPARIIES IN FEDERAL PROSECUIONS II (Mar. 2010).97. 19 EX. ADMIN. CODE 113.44(c)(13)(A).98. Id. 113.44(c)(14)(C).99. Id. 113.41(c)(17).100. See, e.g., LALEH ISPAHANI, RACE AND EHNICIY IN AMERICA: URNING A BLINDEYE O INJUSICE, ACLU 131-159 (Dec. 2007) available at http://www.aclu.org/human-rights/race-ethnicity-america-turning-blind-eye-injustice101. See, e.g., Id.; see also, Who Supports Armative Action?, ACLU, available at http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/armative-action-get-acts; see also Fast Facts About Armative Action and theSo-Called Civil Rights Initiatives, ACLU, available at http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/armative-ac-tion-get-acts.102. ROBER A. SOZA, PAHWAYS O PREVENION: HE LAINO MALE DROPOU

CRISIS 7 (June 2007); see also Jon Reyhner, American Indians Out o School: A Review oSchool-Based Causes and Solutions, Vol. 31, No. 3 J.o American Indian Edu., (Jan. 1992), available athttp://jaie.asu.edu/v31/V31S3ind.htm; see also NAIONAL ASSOCIAION FOR HEADVANCEMEN OF COLORED PEOPLE, BROWN FIFY YEARS AND BEYOND: PROMISEAND PROGRESS ADVOCACY REPOR 16 (2004).


28/30


103. ROBER A. SOZA, PAHWAYS O PREVENION: HE LAINO MALE DROPOU CRISIS7 (June 2007).104. ANDREW SUM, E AL. HE CONSEQUENCES OF DROPPING OU OF HIGH SCHOOL2 (Oct. 2009) available at www.clms.neu.edu/.../Te_Consequences_o_Dropping_Out_o_High_School.pd.105. Id.106. Id. at 6.107. Id. at 9.108. Marc A. Levin, Corrections Budget & Prison Operations, exas Public Policy Foundation (Nov.2008).109. ROMAN ALVAREZ, E AL., HE ABCDS OF EXAS EDUCAION: ASSESSING HEBENEFIS AND COSS OF REDUCING HE DROPOU RAE 57 (May 2009).110. McKinley, supra note 62.111. Saving, supra note 6.112. Partially incorporated into the exas Education Code as 31.023.

113. EX. EDUC. CODE 31.023.114. exas Freedom Network, supra note 54.115. exas Freedom Network, Bill Recap: 2009 exas Legislature, available at http://www.tn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Bills2009.116. Haecker, supra note 15.


29/30


>>t H E s t at E b o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n


30/30

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	progresstx
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

The Texas State Board of Education: A Case of Abuse of Power

Documents