The End of History, Part II
The new Advanced Placement U.S.
history exam focuses on oppression, group identity and Reagan the warmonger.
By Lynne V. Cheney in the Wall Street Journal
If you seek peace, if you seek
prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization:
Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down
this wall!
—President Ronald Reagan, speech at
the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin, 1987
President Reagan’s challenge to
Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev remains one of the most dramatic calls for
freedom in our time. Thus I was heartened to find a passage from Reagan’s
speech on the sample of the new Advanced Placement U.S. history exam that
students will take for the first time in May. It seemed for a moment that
students would be encouraged to learn about positive aspects of our past rather
than be directed to focus on the negative, as happens all too often.
But when I looked closer to see the
purpose for which the quotation was used, I found that it is held up as an
example of “increased assertiveness and bellicosity” on the part of the U.S. in
the 1980s. That’s the answer to a multiple-choice question about what Reagan’s
speech reflects.
No notice is taken of the connection
the president made between freedom and human flourishing, no attention to the
fact that within 2½ years of the speech, people were chipping off pieces of the
Berlin Wall as souvenirs. Instead of acknowledging important ideas and
historical context, test makers have reduced President Reagan’s most eloquent
moment to warmongering.
The AP U.S. history exam matters.
Half a million of the nation’s best and brightest high-school students will
take it this year, hoping to use it to earn college credit and to polish their
applications to competitive colleges. To score well on the exam, students have
to learn what the College Board, a private organization that creates the exam,
wants them to know.
No one worried much about the
College Board having this de facto power over curriculum until that
organization released a detailed framework—for courses beginning last year—on
which the Advanced Placement tests on U.S. history will be based from 2015
onward. When educators, academics and other concerned citizens realized how
many notable figures were missing and how negative was the view of American
history presented, they spoke out forcefully. The response of the College Board
was to release the sample exam that features Ronald Reagan as a warmonger.
It doesn’t stop there. On the multiple-choice
part of the sample exam, there are 18 sections, and eight of them take up the
oppression of women, blacks and immigrants. Knowing about the experiences of
these groups is important—but truth requires that accomplishment be recognized
as well as oppression, and the exam doesn’t have questions on subjects such as
the transforming leadership of Martin Luther King Jr.
The framework requires that all
questions take up sweeping issues, such as “group identity,” which leaves
little place for transcendent individuals. Men and women who were once studied
as inspirational figures have become examples of trends, and usually not
uplifting ones. The immigrant story that the exam tells is of oppressed people
escaping to America only to find more oppression. That many came seeking the
Promised Land—and found it here—is no longer part of the narrative.
Critics have noted that Benjamin
Franklin is absent from the new AP U.S. history framework, and perhaps in
response, the College Board put a quotation from Franklin atop the sample exam.
Yet not one of the questions that were asked about the quotation has to do with
Franklin. They are about George Whitefield, an evangelist whom Franklin
described in the quote. This odd deflection makes sense in the new test, considering
that Franklin was a self-made man, whose rise from rags to riches would have
been possible only in America—an example of the exceptionalism that doesn’t fit
the worldview that pervades the AP framework and sample exam.
Evangelist Whitefield, an Englishman
who preached in the colonies, was a key figure in the Great Awakening, an
evangelical revival that began in the 1730s. Here, however, he is held up as an
example of “trans-Atlantic exchanges,” which seems completely out of left field
until one realizes that the underlying notion is that we need to stop thinking
nationally and think globally. Our history is simply part of a larger story.
Aside from a section about
mobilizing women to serve in the workforce, the sample exam has nothing to say
about World War II, the conflict in which the U.S. liberated millions of people
and ended one of the most evil regimes in the history of the world. The heroic
acts of the men who landed on Omaha Beach and lifted the flag on Iwo Jima are
ignored. The wartime experiences that the new framework prefers are those
raising “questions about American values,” such as “the internment of Japanese
Americans, challenges to civil liberties, debates over race and segregation,
and the decision to drop the atomic bomb.”
Why would the College Board respond
to criticism by putting out a sample exam that proves the critics’ point?
Perhaps it is a case of those on the left being so confirmed in their biases
that they no longer notice them. Or maybe the College Board doesn’t care what others
think.
Some states are trying to get its
attention. The Texas State Board of Education, noting that the AP U.S. history
framework is incompatible with that state’s standards, has formally requested
that the College Board do a rewrite. The Georgia Senate has passed a resolution
to encourage competition for the College Board’s AP program. If anything brings
a change, it is likely to be such pressure from the states, which provide the
College Board with substantial revenue.
Some 20 years ago, as chairman of
the National Endowment for the Humanities, I made a grant to a group to create
voluntary standards for U.S. history. When the project was finished, I had
standards on my hands that were overwhelmingly negative about the American
story, so biased that I felt obliged to condemn them in an op-ed
for The Wall Street Journal called “The End of History.”
I learned an important lesson, one
worth repeating today. The curriculum shouldn’t be farmed out, not to the
federal government and not to private groups. It should stay in the hands of
the people who are constitutionally responsible for it: the citizens of each
state.
Mrs. Cheney, a senior fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute, writes about history. Her most recent book is
“James Madison: A Life Reconsidered” (Viking, 2014).
Corrections & Amplifications
An earlier version misstated George
Whitefield’s country of origin.
No comments:
Post a Comment