Trustees of the San Mateo Union High School District adopted an updated US history curriculum last week. It aims to give students a broader perspective of what role marginalized communities have played in the evolution of the country.
“Our new course focuses on this idea of historical empathy, a very good skill for our students to develop through the course of this class,” said Associate Director of Curriculum and Instruction. Dr. Julia Kempkey said at the board meeting on Thursday, April 20th.
In a 4-to-1 vote, the Trustees adopted the updated U.S. History Course Outline, including updated course objectives content goals, student achievements, and enduring themes. This document is intended to provide teachers with a framework and multiple entry her points for discussing various points in American history.
This update was prompted by requests from students to integrate more alternative perspectives into the course so they could see themselves in the country’s history. In 2021, we began work to update courses approved by the previous Board and formed a task force in early 2021 to review course biases and propose changes.
Under an updated course outline, students will be able to draw from history while contextualizing contemporary issues and events, analyze power structures and associated social justice movements across national history, and analyze U.S. history. Develop the historical thinking skills to do so and gain the ability to challenge the antiquity. A dominant narrative that strengthens power structures in modern American history.
Chair Greg Rand, a former history teacher, has described what he described as an important course of study that helps students build on the areas of history they have learned in previous grades and delve deeper into issues than before. Kudos to the staff for creating the previous model.
“We talk about a common core. It’s the same concept, but as you go up the stairs, so to speak, to a deeper intellectual level. Nothing really has changed. At a more sophisticated level. We just do that,” says Land. “I wasn’t drawn to it either, but it helped clarify and flesh out what this course of study was important for me to take to the next level. Thank you very much.”
Jennifer Jacobson of the Management Committee was the only person to vote against the renewal of the course. After evaluating the current curriculum and proposed updates and talking to the district’s history teachers, Jacobson said the 2016 edition will provide teachers with an opportunity to discuss marginalized groups while addressing the nation’s fundamental ideals. He said he was confident that there was a balance in giving to
“Those who oppose the new version find great strength in current policy. They also believe, as one parent put it, that the proposed version is important to some of the basic fundamental teachings of American history.” They have expressed concern that they have lost their philanthropic aspects and replaced them with contemporary political and social analyzes that should be conducted in other classes, such as government, ethnic studies, and universities. It builds on the basic information I learned in my historical research course,” Jacobson said. “On this point, I agree. Others may disagree, but that is why there are five of us. You need to get the basic core events of modern history in high school without the filter of power and privilege.”
Some share Jacobson’s point of view. Two parents spoke at a recent study session on the change and urged the board not to adopt the update. Another parent, Andrew Nicola, who was the only parent to speak out at last week’s meeting, shared a similar request.
Nicola argued that the curriculum seemed to tell students what to think rather than giving them tools to analyze problems. He specifically pointed to the course’s goal of enabling students to identify and challenge hegemonic or dominant narratives throughout history. The goals he said were not specified in the state curriculum or the American Historical Association.
“We encourage all students to form their own perspectives on controversial topics, not mine or the specific perspectives of other parents, not that of the Board or that of a parent, We need to equip them with the skills to develop specific classroom teachers. Our students deserve that intellectual freedom, ”Nicola said.
Kempkey said he wanted to avoid discussion of the wording while arguing that the concept was referenced in the State’s Framework for Historical and Social Sciences, a document adopted by the California Board of Education in July 2016. rice field. The updated curriculum is aligned with the Historical and Social Sciences Framework. According to Kempkey, the California Content Standards, a document adopted by the state of California in 1999.
While the board ultimately endorsed the updated course outline, supervisor Randall Booker said he appreciated the feedback from the community.
“Engagement is good. No,” said Booker. “Thank you for all your engagement. I don’t always agree with different points of view, but that doesn’t mean I’m not listening, and it doesn’t mean I’m not learning.”