COUNTERPOINT
History standards show both sides
Chuck Chalberg ("Is this any way to teach U.S. history?" Dec. 1) is not actually objecting to the Common Core Standards, which promote, through English and math, the very critical-thinking skills he wishes students to practice. His objections are to the recommended content outline for Advanced Placement (AP) U.S. history. It's not clear where the two programs intersect.
As for Chalberg's objections to the curriculum, it is more nuanced than he would lead us to believe. For example, one key concept states: "The emergence of an industrial culture in the United States led to both greater opportunities for, and restrictions on immigrants, minorities, and women." The outline reflects both positive and negative aspects of our history.
Chalberg's conservative politics are showing. He believes the curriculum misrepresents the impact of the U.S. capitalist system. He objects to the suggestion of U.S. imperialism. As for social Darwinism, the suggestion that it was more characteristic of progressive reformers than of the "robber barons" is ludicrous. Big businessmen of the time expressed their social Darwinism publicly (Andrew Carnegie, to name one) and persuaded state and federal governments to use troops to help them in the ruthless suppression of strikes and unions.
But Chalberg knows all this. I wonder how many Americans do. The recommended AP U.S. history content presents a more complex, realistic picture of our history than the rosy-hued "patriotic" story with which most students come to high school.
Of course, students should be introduced to conflicting interpretations of U.S. history. To succeed in the essay portion of the AP exam, students must analyze sources, account for bias and create reasoned support for their own interpretations. The content curriculum Chalberg decries will not prevent any conscientious history teacher from encouraging analysis of conflicting theories about our past. Rather, the whole curriculum requires it.
