Rating: 
Summary: How to by-pass text-book adoptions
Review: Check out the Letters to the Editor column in the July 14, 2003 Wall Street Journal. Four of them are about the censorship issue raised in Dr. Ravitch's excellent book, The Language Police. Three of them are from teachers who confirm what she writes in her book. Not surprisingly, though, former congresswoman and now Association of American Publishers President/CEO Pat Schroeder comes to the defense of the test and textbook censors, protesting the innocence and helplessness of these industries and suggesting that "Perhaps Dr. Ravitch has confused the process of textbook development with the forces in a free-market economy."Perhaps Ms. Schroeder should try reading (or re-reading?) Chapter Seven of Dr. Ravitch's book where the good professor clearly states: "Unlike general trade books, which are sold to millions of consumers, or college textbooks, which are sold to thousands of individual professors, textbooks prepared for the schools are not sold in an open marketplace. ... The buying and selling of textbooks is more akin to a government procurement process than it is to a real marketplace with consumer choices." It is precisely this difference that has enabled test-makers and textbook publishers to perpetrate the outrageous stealth censorship campaigns they've been conducting now for at least three decades. Unlike the apologetic Ms. Schroeder, Dr. Ravitch has a clear-eyed perception of just who really runs this particular dog and pony show. As she explains in Chapter Three of her book, "Bias guidelines are promulgated by four different kinds of agencies: educational publishers, the development companies, states (as in the United States), and scholarly and professional associations. None of these agencies is accountable to the public because they operate under the radar through a government-like procurement process. The awesome scope and complexity of this problem is probably nowhere more clearly described in Dr. Ravitch's book than in Chapter Seven ("The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Textbook Adoptions"). Here she recounts her own hands-on experience in 1985 when she was invited by then California state superintendent of instruction Bill Honig to help a committee of educators revise that state's history-social science framework, which "summarizes the curriculum and testing standards for each subject." Among the lessons she learned - "there is no regular independent scrutiny of textbooks other than the pressure groups that have made textbooks their business" (page 98) and the number and divisiveness of these pressure groups is almost infinite and always irreconcilable (pages 101-102). Dr. Ravitch is absolutely right - it's time for state and district-wide textbook adoptions to end. This solution may seem to some, as one Amazon.com reviewer has put it, "lamentably simplistic." But it's not nearly as simplistic as relying on "the local teacher" to know "what's best." As Dr. Ravitch and numerous others have pointed out, public school teachers rarely have any say in the text-selection process and very few of them know enough about the subjects they teach to exercise any judgment. As Dr. Ravitch observes in Chapter Nine, "Today, most teachers of history in grades 7-12 have neither a major nor a minor in history; instead, they have a degree in social studies education ... or a completely unrelated field" (page 140). For this appalling situation, of course, we have to thank state teachers college curricula and state teacher certification requirements.
It's encouraging to read the many favorable reviews of Diane Ravitch's book that have been posted to Amazon.com's website thus far. It shows there are people out there in the "general reading public" who really care about the First Amendment. Collectively, these reviews have already articulated much of what needs to be said about how important this book is (or should be) to parents and educators throughout the United States. A few points of clarification and emphasis may be in order, however. First, several reviewers do not seem to realize that textbook censorship has already done irrevocable damage to our nation's educational system. In the last paragraph of Chapter Six, Dr. Ravitch makes this unequivocally clear: "By the end of the 1980s, every publisher had complied with the demands of the critics, both from the left and the right." In addition, publishers base their decisions about textbook content and design primarily on standards set by only two states, California for grades K-8 and Texas for grades K-12. When you put these two facts together with the fact that only four major publishers now control the industry, you can only conclude that the "language police" are already in complete control! Second, although Dr. Ravitch's research is objective, the bulk of her evidence clearly faults the radical left. "While the censors on the right have concentrated most of their ire on general books," she writes on page 80, "the censors on the left have been most successful in criticizing textbooks." And on page 79 she observes, "The left-wing groups that have been most active in campaigns to change textbooks are militantly feminist and militantly liberal." I had a first-hand experience of this more than twenty-five years ago when I was hired by Random House to edit a multi-million dollar K-8 basal reading program called Random House Reading House. In April of 1976, the American Association of Publishers (AAP) - yes, the same organization run by Pat Schroeder today - issued its "Bias-free Materials Statement" proclaiming that educational literature should "represent proportionately the historic and current achievements of all people, especially women and members of minorities." Of course, our project director immediately ordered a a very costly affirmative action warlock hunt. After all, the voice of doom had come in the form of a report about threatened lawsuits against Houghton Mifflin for its 'sexist' 1973 basal reading program. (Sound familiar?) Clearly, the "radical left" has had our nation's educational system by the short hairs for a very long time. The good news is there's something we can do about it - simply create Web-based resources that totally by-pass the textbook publishing megalopoly? Once it's up and running, the test-makers will follow us, not them!
Rating:
Summary: The dilution of American education
Review: For over twenty years, publishers of textbooks in the United States have been whittling away at what is actually taught in schools. What began as well-intentioned modifications have become sometimes ludicrous and often inaccurate texts that bore students with blandness. In order to placate both the religious right and minority groups, textbook publishers have been censoring themselves and no one has really been noticing. Diane Ravitch's insightful critical analysis of this censorship is a breathtaking view of what is happening right now in America, even though it seems to be right out of George Orwell's "1984". Exploring how this began and the political climate that keeps it going, Ravitch passionately argues for change in this system because of the devastating effects it is causing in today's educational system by sanitizing information and actually hindering learning.
Rating:
Summary: Long Overdue
Review: Ravitch's LANGUAGE POLICE is a long overdue look at what goes on inside the world of textbook selection and the construction of testing formats.
Taking on the "politically correct" and Right Wing Christian Fundamentalist elements that make up "bias and sensitivity" committees, this incisive commentary demonstrates how pandering to the multiple censorship interests has undermined the quality and breadth of education in the U.S.
Timely, because it coincides with the testing mania that is sweeping the nation, Ravitch's examination is valuable, and sure to be controversial. It should provoke inquiry into the entire textbook selection and test making apparatus that is being dominated by special interest groups and ideologues.
The central thesis, is that textbook publishers and testing services have been intimidated into producing bland and anti-historical products that leave little to promote discussion and genuine intellectual curiosity. This has led to a dismantling of an agreed upon core curriculum, and a diminishing in development of necessary and interactive comprehension reading skills.
Citing example after example of the inane nitpicking that goes on in determining content for students, Ravitch confronts the issues and offers suggestions for overhauling the process. There is also a useful Appendix, that provides a good sample of entertainment in its own right.
More than just promoting a pause for thought, this is a call for action. Anyone who has a stake in education and its future, will find this book informative and well worth the read.
Rating:
Summary: American education
Review: Diane Ravtich excellent book only goes to prove that underfunding of schools,poor teachers and class sizes have little to do with the poor performance of public education in the United States today. If every student in America's public schools got straight 'A's tomorrow, the'd still be uneducated. If they don't know anything about the brilliance of Western Civilization,the history and acievements of European and American Civilizations, and the great earth-shaking ideas and principles generated in these cultures, then how can they be called "educated?" If, in order to pass an examination, they have to be able to discuss some 5th rate, illiterate, tribal group in Africa as an example of man's highest achievements, or to be able to identify correctly that Washington's and Jefferson's only claim to fame is that they were slave owners, then where's the "education?"
As Ravitch's book tells us, there isn't any "education, there's only Brain-washing by the social activist' that control our school systems, who believe that truth is any fact, no matter how bogus, that encourages a minority student to feel good about himself.
Rating:
Summary: Evenhanded
Review: Ravitch argues convincingly that elementary and high school textbooks in America today are censored, not by government edict, but by commercial publishers as a result of pressure groups (Left and Right) exerting strong influence behind-the-scenes in the selection process. "Censorship occurs," Ravitch says, "when school officials or publishers... delete words, ideas, and topics from textbooks and tests for no reason other than their fear of controversy." Such prior restraint by publishers afraid to lose any market share because of any possible controversy has long been known, vaguely, and often condemned as the excesses of a few "politically correct" zealots on the Left and religious fundamentalists on the Right. A generation ago, I wrote a few paragraphs (in The Pep Talk, 1984), noting this trend in general, but I couldn't get the specific documentation. Now, Ravitch has done the homework and has ferreted out the details, including in-house memos of the industry. She documents and specifies this self-censorship, in excruciating detail, not only using many examples of the work of "bias reviewers," but also adding on a huge glossary of banned words, images, and topics - as found in the editorial "guidelines" of textbook publishers. Unlike trade books (or even college texts selected by individual professors), the textbook marketing process, she explains, is dominated by a few players: four huge corporations producing texts, two state (Texas and California) adoption committees with great power, a few testing companies, and a few vocal and active pressure groups. Evenhanded, (in two long, elegantly parallel paragraphs, p.63) Ravitch points out that both Left and Right are well intentioned: "Censors on the right aim to restore an idealized vision of the past, an Arcadia of happy family life.... Censors from the left believe in an idealized vision of the future, a utopia in which egalitarianism prevails in all social relations." But, good intentions often have bad results: now we have texts that are bland, dull, dumbed down, distorted and deceptive by their omissions. As the century begins, we have a new status quo: CYA, don't rock the boat, don't make waves, don't displease anyone, for fear of losing a sale. Ravitch also puts these issues in a wider context: she reviews past censorship in American textbooks (e.g. after the Civil War, publishers printed both "North" and "South" editions), and she discusses the contemporary media environment of our students, glutted with conflict and violence. Although the glossary alone is worth the price of the book, don't miss her extended rationale about the harms such censorship does, for example, relating to the study of science, history, and literature. Furthermore, a democratic society needs people who have realistic information, practical attitudes, and ways to understand and to cope with conflicts. Ravitch offers three suggestions for reform: competition (disestablishing the current adoption system, allowing individual teachers and schools to select appropriate texts); teacher education (to emphasize their education in subject matter - science, history, literature); and "sunshine": the public needs to know what the publishers, test makers, states, and their advisors are doing now behind closed doors. "Because the censorship process developed so gradually and with so little public attention, there has been no debate about whether it should be there at all. This is an issue which needs the light of day...." In The Language Police, Ravitch has turned on a light, turned over a stone.
Rating:
Summary: The Language Police
Review: Just finsihed this book and its scary as hell. If you care about your childrens education at all you must read this book. I am buying another copy just to send to our new State Superintendent of Schools. It is incredible what is going on under the surface of the education system. I had no idea our history was being rewritten. The words man, mankind, men, any masculine pronoun, or varition of these words were taboo and to be avoided at any cost. That according to the SFAW, a leading bias and sensitivity committee that rewrites you childs school book, "Children of European American decent need to have their pride reduced."
Rating: 
Summary: Old News
Review: Ravitch re-visits a topic James Loewen covered quite well in 1996 with his "Lies My Teacher Told Me : Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong." Ravitch tries her best but falls back on left bashing. This is all a been-there-knew-that if you follow education.
Rating: 
Summary: Shocking--for the son of a teacher
Review: OK, my dad's a math teacher for over 30 years, but a teacher nevertheless. I think he'd be blown away by the notions made in this engrossing book. I heard about the book on "Savage Nation" and I thought I had to have this. I was blown away by the information Mrs. Ravitch gives and how things have to be PC these days. One of my college profs, a liberal mind you, did warn me about so called "Doublespeak." Well, this book exposes Doublespeak and then some. If you belong to a teachers union you'll probably slam this book. If not, you'll be shocked possibly into taking action. I RECOMMEND the book.
Rating:
Summary: Efforts To Remove Bias Suffer From Mission Creep
Review: Diane Ravitch did her homework before she wrote The Language Police. The book details efforts from both the left and the right to remove anything from textbooks, standardized tests, and school libraries that might be remotely offensive to the people in their respective constituencies. She acknowledges that most of these efforts started out with noble intentions - Dick shouldn't always be the bread-winner with Jane barefoot and pregnant at home and materials showing prejudice towards ethnic minorities have no place in a classroom - but goes on to document how these efforts have suffered from severe mission creep and have turned textbooks and tests into pablum. I wish she had spent more time on the religious right's efforts to remove evolution from science textbooks [a subject near and dear to my heart] and there were moments when her rhetoric began to sound a little too much like the aging white guys who go around trumpeting the literature of the so-called western canon [fear not - her view of what constitutes good lit from the past is a lot broader than the western canon guys], but overall I found The Lanuage Police a fascinating read. I recommend this book to anybody interested in the future of public education in the United States. In addition to the three suggestions Ms. Ravitch makes at the end of The Language Police, I have a [small] suggestion on how to stop the language police - donate books to your local public school library [age appropriate, of course]. This may be the best way to get good books into the hands of young people, especially if your school librarian subscribes to the philosophy expressed in the ALA's Library Bill Of Rights: Library Bill of Rights The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services. I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.
II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.
V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.
VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Adopted June 18, 1948.
Amended February 2, 1961, and January 23, 1980,
inclusion of "age" reaffirmed January 23, 1996,
by the ALA Council.
Rating:
Summary: See Jane read, see Jane get shortchanged
Review: In this text Ravitch eloquently argues what myself and other free thinkers have long known: Public School textbook adoption and editing processes are inherently political. Although commonly exhibited by the right (who blanch at any hint of sexuality or multiculturalism) the left is also guilty of this activity. Because it would be easier to lay the blame sqaurely with one political ideology, the book is a policy milestone. Instead of balancing student's perspectives and preparing them to become better informed about the world they are prepared to inherit, the colaborative censorship has dumbed down our textbooks to the point where they do not impart much. Long term impacts also leave students in college prep programs unprepared for these environments where they wil have to come into regular contact with new theories and 'controversial' information challenging the perception of America as a wise and benevolent nation. It is thus a disservice to encourage students to view their world as benign and safe.
|
