The American Future

In The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society, Schlesinger writes "The new gospel condemns Crevecoeur’s vision of individuals of all nations melted into a new race in favor of an opposite vision: a nation of groups, differentiated in their ancestries, inviolable in their diverse identities. The contemporary ideal is shifting from assimilation to ethnicity, from integration to separatism. The ethnic upsurge has had some healthy consequences. The republic has at last begun to give long-overdue recognition to the role and achievements of groups subordinated and ignored during the high noon of male Anglo-Saxon dominance - women, Americans of the South and East European ancestry, black Americans, Indians, Hispanics, Asians. There is far better understanding today of the indispensable contributions minorities have made to American civilization." (pg. 77-78)

As I was reading this selection out of Multicultural Education, I was thinking about my own curriculum. I will always look at anything in education through the eyes of a social studies teacher; specifically a United States History and Human Geography teacher. If you look through the lenses that I see education through I have mixed feelings about this passage. Do I believe that there have been “healthy consequences” or the “ethnic upsurge?” (p. 78) Yes. The new Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) set out by the state in 2010 have included the role and achievements of my minority groups. Specifically in the 8^th grade United States History course there was the inclusion of more African American, Hispanic and references (the addition of Crispus Attucks, first person to die in the American Revolution is a perfect example). However, with the addition of many of these new people and ethnic identities it has been at the expense of traditional American History people and events. Is this the right thing to do? Therein lies the debate. Do I think that people like James Madison, John Adams, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson’s contributions are far greater to our country than those of other women because I am white? Or because that is what my education taught me? And if so, is this something that I try and change about my own teaching as I teach these ideas to my students? In World Geography, it is easier to open up my students ideas to the contributions of other ethnic groups because that is what the class is all about. But still, I must be careful about how my own education influences the way I teach.

Later, Schlesinger goes on to say, “what students learn in schools vitally affects other arenas of American life – the way we see and treat other Americans, the way we conceive the purpose of the republic. The debate about the curriculum is a debate about what it means to be an American. What is ultimately at stake is the shape of the American future.” (pg. 78)

This increases the importance of WHAT I teach and HOW I teach it. I only see my students for 180 days a year. But what, Schlesinger says that what I teach can impact the future of America. That is a huge responsibility. One that I will consider when I begin to choose which ones of the TEKS I include and which ones I leave out.

References

Schlesinger, A. M.  (1992). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society.  In J. Noel    (Ed.), Multicultural Education (77-80).  New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.