On Faith: Serious Flaws in Textbook Adoption Process  

Minneapolis, MN (September 2, 2009) - As a regularly featured blogger on the Washington Post/Newsweek's "On Faith" blog, Dr. Aseem Shukla, member of HAF's Board of Directors, has the opportunity to provide a Hindu viewpoint on various issues of faith.  Below is Dr. Shukla's latest blog. Please post your comments directly on the Washington Post/Newsweek "On Faith" site by clicking here. 

 

 

Polemical confrontations, rhetorical disputations and theatrical combat -- not over the spirited academic study of history at an Ivy League school, but rather a textbook for a sixth grader! On one side is a liberal wing sold on the idea of unfettered multiculturalism, and on the other are the strident calls for the Christianization of history education. A culture war declared in our classrooms. Perhaps none of us are smarter than a fifth grader after all!

 

Texas follows California in the volume of textbook purchases, and the critical comment period for curriculum changes has commenced. It is a fascinating study into the psyche of a movement in its symbolic last throes that the three right-wing consultants push for a narrative that sings of a Christian America, very different from the reality that we all know. America is in the midst of change, and the version of our country they long for is nothing more than a sepia-toned, portrait of a bygone era.

 

Head firmly in sand, the three reviewers bay for a central discussion of Biblical narratives in the founding of our nation; that our founding fathers were diverse in their religious views--from Deists to Quakers and Protestants to Catholics--and pluralists to the core escapes them. What of the impact of Native Americans, or secular humanists--of a Thoreau or an Emerson? They insist that ours is a "Christian" nation, but forget that according to the Pew Forum Survey on Religious Life, the fastest growing religion in our country is "unaffiliated." The reviewers ignore and demean the lives of Cesar Chavez, Thurgood Marshall or Anne Hutchinson, but incredibly propose the names only of White men to define our history; in thirty years, non-Hispanic Caucasians will be a minority in this country: is the Texas response a frantic, reactionary endeavor to ignore this reality? 

 

Assuredly, an empty multiculturalism that tries to paint all religions, all peoples and all cultures with the same vapid stroke of political correctness is equally inaccurate and even injurious. The dualities of extremism-innovation, progress-decay, belligerence-peace--all of these define some countries, some cultures, and their historical and religious roots must be understood. While each of our religious traditions are exceptional to us, any attempt to exceptionalize one over the other in a textbook cannot be accepted. 

 

For years, Hindu Americans have grown increasingly frustrated with a portrayal of their religion that is divorced from the reality of their daily practice. In fact, the Hindu American Foundation, of which I am a co-founder, prevailed in a lawsuit against the State Board of Education in California in 2007, when the state court found that the Board had acted illegally by adopting books through an underground process that specifically excluded Hindu Americans, while input from other faiths was accommodated. We learned firsthand of the rampant politicization, contrasting agendas and inherent political nepotism that infects the entire system. We also know now that grade school textbooks are written based on the curriculum and frameworks passed by the Board of Education, and change in textbooks begins at that level. Large publishing houses will follow these guidelines to ensure that their books are purchased and distributed. 

 

The Texas board must not politicize what should be an academic/public collaboration when religion is discussed in textbooks. The Hindu American Foundation's suggestions based on its experience in California: 

 

1) Systemic bias must be eliminated--case in point, California. Our own lawsuit originated after an ideologically motivated academic, with little or no training in the study, teaching and practice of Hinduism, was allowed to derail the process of vetting textbooks and dictate how that religion would be taught--and the Board ignored entreaties from professors teaching Hinduism as a career. The resultant biases and inaccuracies were glaring. 

 

2) Rely on a panel of academics involved in the study of the specific religion to be discussed to guide the curriculum process. This panel should be representative of mainstream belief and practice. The three far right panelists in Texas do not represent Christian belief and practice in America, just as the linguist in California was repudiated by mainstream Hindu Americans. 

 

3) Allow appointed representatives of all religious communities included in textbooks to review the suggestions of the academic contributors and offer revisions. The Board would be the final arbiters, but at least all perspectives would be considered.