Public Hearing on Social Studies Standards

Tonight I went to a public hearing at the Minnesota Department of Education about the proposed changes to the state social studies standards. This is basically Minnesota's version of a textbook review panel; they do not have a formal body that reviews or approves textbooks for classroom use, but there is a set of state standards about what should be taught in each subject area. I am familiar with the old social studies standards, a bulky and disjointed document that was difficult to follow with an odd mix of micromanagement and vagueness. The new standards are a huge improvement, in my opinion; much easier to follow, streamlined, with sensible guidelines and benchmarks that leave appropriate space for adaptation by the teacher.

But I digress. I went to the hearing because I wanted to see who was there, and hear other thoughts and opinions. I had no idea what to expect, other than the fact that there would probably be a panel of people in suites. I was pretty much right about that.


What I was curious about was whether there would be any Texas-style ideologues out to inject the social studies standards with a particular "type" of history.


The first person to speak was a middle aged white woman, and as she started I thought that I might be witnessing the beginning of a political rant. She introduced herself as the representative of a citizens organization that had a distinctly right-wing feel to it (Citizens for Freedom in Education or something like that). Her comments were very specific. She began by pointing out a reduction in times that the "founding fathers" are mentioned within the standard; she talked about the number of times the values of "freedom" and "prosperity" were written (yes, she had sifted through and counted); and stated their concern about capitalism not being presented in a positive enough light. All in all, it was quite respectful and although I didn't agree with a lot of what she was saying, I was actually really happy to see the public comment process working in that it allowed her to voice her opinions peacefully and meaningfully.

The rest of the comments came from teachers, professors, or other people in the education field and were interesting from an education perspective but not particularly political at all. All in all it made me feel pretty good about Minnesota's ability to keep politics out of curriculum development.