Category Archives: Social Studies

Give me the lesson without the spin

From the Los Angeles Times
Give me the lesson without the spin

A high school student finds conservative bias in his American government textbook.
By Matthew LaClair

April 27, 2008

Throughout my life, my teachers have told me that school is a neutral environment where my classmates and I can count on teachers and textbooks to provide us with the factual and unbiased information that will equip us for life. Lately, though, I’ve begun to wonder whether they really mean it.

In my junior year of high school in New Jersey, my U.S. history teacher used the first week of class to preach his religious beliefs. He told students, among other things, that they “belong in hell” if they reject Jesus as their savior, that evolution and the Big Bang are ridiculous and unscientific theories, and that there were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark.

When I confronted him in the principal’s office, he denied making the remarks. What he didn’t realize was that I had recorded the classes. But even after I informed school officials what had happened, they ignored my concerns. So after more than a month, my parents and I took the news to the media.

At first, I was harassed and intimidated by other students. School officials ignored the harassment and even a death threat I received.

Only after the story became national news did the school district begin to take us seriously. After lengthy negotiations (and against continuing opposition from the school board), we finally persuaded the district to address the teacher’s false and inappropriate remarks. The Anti-Defamation League was brought in to teach the faculty about the separation of church and state, and experts in the fields of church-state separation, evolution and cosmology came to our school to conduct assemblies.

After that, I thought I was done with controversy for a while. But now, in my senior year, I am back in the midst of it. In one of my classes, we use the 10th edition of “American Government” by James Q. Wilson, a well-known conservative academic, and John J. DiIulio, a political scientist and former head of President Bush’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. (2005). The text contains a statement, repeated three times, that students may not pray in public schools. In this edition of the text, the authors drive the point home with a photograph of students holding hands and praying outside a school. The caption reads: “The Supreme Court will not let this happen inside a public school.”

I knew this was false. In fact, students are allowed to pray in schools; courts have ruled many times that a student’s right to pray may not be abridged. What’s generally impermissible is state-sponsored prayer, in which school officials lead prayer or students are called on or required to pray. It seemed clear to me that the purpose of the discussion in the textbook was to indoctrinate, not to educate.

Continued reading revealed numerous other instances of bias, as well as erroneous and misleading statements. For example, the section on global warming begins with a few well-chosen words to set the tone: “It is a foolish politician who today opposes environmentalism. And that creates a problem because not all environmental issues are equally deserving of support. Take the case of global warming.”

The authors neglect to mention the growing scientific consensus on this subject. They dismiss those who are concerned about global warming — that is, the overwhelming majority of scientists — as “activists” motivated not by data but by “entrepreneurial politics.” Those who deny or downplay it are described as “skeptical scientists.”

Pointing out dissent within the scientific community is appropriate. Suggesting that the majority, but not the minority, is politically motivated is not appropriate. If a controversy truly exists, then the authors should not instruct students which side to “support.”

I contacted a not-for-profit group called the Center for Inquiry. It enlisted support from scientists, including James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientist, and organizations, including Friends of the Earth and People for the American Way, to address concerns about the textbook.

What is most distressing is not that some public school teachers preach their religion, or that some authors put politics ahead of education. It is that it is so rare for anyone to call them on it. This text is widely used. Yet to my knowledge, no one has challenged these incorrect and misleading statements.

As Americans, we should stand up for our common values. We should champion education and settle for nothing less than the best. Our teachers should do the same and should not misuse their positions to promote their personal agendas.

Matthew LaClair is a high school student in Kearny, N.J.

I’m sure Guy Debord is rolling over in his grave just now

The Chronicle of Higher Education is reporting that the widow of Guy Debord is demanding that Alexander R. Galloway, an associate professor of culture and communication at New York University, cease and desist from distributing his online war game, claiming that the game infringes on the copyright of Debord’s estate.

Debord—the Marxist/anarchist French philosopher who died in 1994—was a founder of the Situationist International, a group of avant garde artists and academics closely connected to the May 1968 Paris uprising.

“SI promoted a revolutionary program that included the elimination of all forms of representation: the undermining of all authority, the destruction of all symbols of power, the elimination of art and all other forms of cultural spectacle, the regaining of the reality of life that had been expropriated by a society of consumption and commodities—in short, the struggle against late capitalist dispossession.”

So, ahem, it’s not surprising that “ABOLISH COPYRIGHTS” was one the Situationist inspired graffiti messages scrawled on university walls during May 1968.

Galloway’s game, Kriegspiel, is a “two-person computer game he developed based on Debord’s board game, the Game of War. Debord, who was an avid student of war strategy, released a few handcrafted copies of the board game in 1978. The goal of the game, which resembles chess, is to corner and destroy the opponents’ pieces.” The Chronicle of Higher Education http://chronicle.com/free/2008/04/2499n.htm

Today’s News

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Defending the Property of an Anti-Property Marxist Scholar

By ANDREA L. FOSTER

Guy Debord, the Marxist and French philosopher who died in 1994, may be rolling over in his grave.

A lawyer representing his widow has threatened Alexander R. Galloway, an associate professor of culture and communication at New York University, with legal action. Mr. Galloway said the lawyer sent him a letter demanding that he cease and desist from distributing his online war game, claiming it infringes on the copyright of the Debord estate. The philosopher had created a similar war game.

But copyrights and intellectual property were anathema to Debord, said Mr. Galloway. The Situationist International movement that Debord founded in 1957 is a mix of anarchism and Marxism. Its followers scrawled, “Abolish copyright” on building walls during the May 1968 student uprisings in Paris.

The irony of defending the property rights of Debord, a Marxist, has not been lost on scholars, who have publicized the case on their blogs.

Mr. Galloway does not deny that the two-person computer game he developed is based on Debord’s board game, the Game of War. Debord, who was an avid student of war strategy, released a few handcrafted copies of the board game in 1978. The goal of the game, which resembles chess, is to corner and destroy the opponents’ pieces. Debord wrote a book about the game, with his wife, that was translated into English last year.

One of Debord’s games, cast in silver and copper, is on display at Columbia University’s Buell Center for the Study of Architecture, alongside Mr. Galloway’s online version, called Kriegspiel. The goal of Kriegspiel, German for a generic 18th-century war game, is the same as Debord’s game.

A computer programmer, Mr. Galloway said he spent about a year designing the digital game, which can be downloaded from the Web for free.”It’s part of my scholarly research into how antagonism is simulated in war games and computer games,” he said. “It’s also part of my research into the work of Debord.”

Despite the similarities between his creation and Debord’s, Mr. Galloway disputed that he was breaking the law. “I don’t think I’m infringing on anyone’s copyright in the creation of this game,” he said. He declined to discuss his legal quagmire further.

John Beckman, a spokesman for New York University, said the university received a similar cease-and-desist letter. The university responded to it, he said, but he declined to elaborate.

Wendy M. Seltzer, a fellow at Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society who is familiar with Mr. Galloway’s case, believes the Debord estate is overreaching in accusing Mr. Galloway of copyright infringement.

The idea for a game is not copyrightable, she said, only the expression of a game. Mr. Galloway’s game used the idea of Debord’s game, she added, but it did not duplicate the artistry and detail of Debord’s board game.

Ms. Seltzer, who is also a visiting assistant professor at Northeastern University School of Law, sees similarities between Mr. Galloway’s case and one involving the Facebook word game, Scrabulous. In the latter case, the owners of the board game, Scrabble, have accused the developers of Scrabulous of infringing on their copyright. Ms. Seltzer believes that infringement claim is without merit as well.
Copyright © 2008 by The Chronicle of Higher Education