The American Historical Association has monitored with increasing concern Virginia\u2019s history and social studies standards revisions process. On February 2, the Virginia Board of Education (VBOE) will discuss whether to accept draft standards developed by the AHA and our collaborators for first review, or to move forward with an alternative put forward by the politically appointed state superintendent. We encourage testimony at the hearing and\/or to submit written comments in support of the AHA-endorsed draft document.<\/p>\n
Dear Colleague,<\/p>\n
The American Historical Association has monitored with increasing concern Virginia\u2019s history and social studies standards revisions process. On February 2, the Virginia Board of Education (VBOE) will discuss whether to accept draft standards developed by the AHA and our collaborators for first review, or to move forward with an alternative put forward by the politically appointed state superintendent. We encourage you to testify at the hearing and\/or to submit written comments in support of the AHA-endorsed draft document.<\/p>\n
The AHA, the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium (VSSLC), and the Virginia Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (VASCD) have shared our collective knowledge, experience, and expertise to draft proposed history and social science standards<\/strong><\/a> for K\u201312 schools. Our work responds to the VBOE\u2019s decision at its November meeting that neither of the two documents on the table were satisfactory; a new draft was needed that would combine the two proposals with reference to the existing (2015) standards.<\/p>\n How can you help? <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Background<\/strong><\/p>\n In January 2021, the Virginia Department of Education laid out a clear timeline<\/a> for history and social studies standards revisions as directed in state law. The multi-year standards process drew upon extensive contributions and rounds of revision from an impressive range of educators, parents, students, and subject matter experts. This process resulted in draft standards<\/a> that the VBOE considered at its August 2022 meeting. The AHA sent a letter<\/a> commending the document, which aligned well with the AHA\u2019s Criteria for Standards in History\/Social Studies\/Social <\/em><\/a>Sciences<\/span><\/em>, and urged the board adopt the standards.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, political pressure put the August draft standards in jeopardy. At its November meeting, the VBOE considered a new draft<\/a> presented by Jillian Balow, superintendent of public instruction. This deeply flawed document was developed at the last minute and lacked significant input from historians and our various partners in social studies education, and was rooted partly in the ill-fated federal 1776 Commission<\/strong><\/a> report (2021). The AHA\u2019s letter<\/a> to the VBOE warned this set of draft standards \u201cwould create substantial gaps in the knowledge, historical thinking skills, and habits of mind taught to Virginia students.\u201d The VBOE agreed with the AHA and the dozens of Virginians who testified that the new November draft standards were unacceptable, and recommended development of a new draft combining the August and November documents with reference to the existing (2015) standards.<\/p>\n The AHA has worked closely with the Virginia Social Studies Leaders Consortium (VSSLC) and the Virginia Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (VASCD) to review the draft standards and process. In December, the AHA, the VSSLC, and the VASCD drafted proposed history and social science standards for K\u201312 schools. You can download the draft document here<\/a>.<\/p>\n In January, Superintendent Balow submitted a new draft set of standards<\/a>, separate from the document developed by the AHA and its partners. The AHA and its partner organizations responded<\/a> to Balow\u2019s document, explaining, \u201cThe January draft standards issued by the Superintendent of Public Instruction are neither historically rigorous nor reflective of the established process previously approved by VBOE. Moreover, they are unrealistic, containing a vast quantity of rote memorization that is neither useful nor likely for content knowledge retention. . . . We urge VBOE to consider the December \u2018Collaborative Standards\u2019 as a viable option for first review.\u201d<\/p>\n Freedom to Learn<\/strong><\/p>\n Drawing on the AHA\u2019s position as the largest organization of professional historians in the world and the expertise of our members, the AHA\u2019s Freedom to Learn initiative offers resources to historians and others on how to advocate publicly for honest history education, responds directly to legislation and related efforts, and creates resources to help teachers directly affected by these bills think about how to maintain the professional integrity of their history classrooms.<\/p>\n The AHA, its members, and other historians find ourselves on the front lines of a conflict over understandings of America\u2019s past, confronting radical activists who are promoting ignorance in the name of unity. Please visit our Teaching History with Integrity<\/a> site for the most up-to-date information about AHA efforts to combat these bills and for resources and expressions of support for history educators. We hope that you will distribute widely our short videos on Teaching with Integrity: Historians Speak<\/a> and you\u2019ll consider participating in the VBOE\u2019s history-related activities.<\/p>\n Sincerely,<\/p>\n James Grossman <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The American Historical Association has monitored with increasing concern Virginia\u2019s history and social studies standards revisions process. On February 2,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":22296,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_seopress_titles_title":"%%post_title%%","_seopress_titles_desc":"On February 2, the Virginia Board of Education (VBOE) will discuss whether to accept draft standards developed by the AHA and our collaborators for first review, or to move forward with an alternative put forward by the politically appointed state superintendent.","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"aha-topic":[],"month":[552],"geographic-taxonomy":[],"post-type":[777,10,9,613],"thematic-taxonomy":[],"year":[105],"class_list":{"0":"post-26396","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"month-january","8":"post-type-action-alerts","9":"post-type-advocacy","10":"post-type-aha-announcements","11":"post-type-history-education","12":"year-105","18":"year-2023","19":"has-featured-image"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26396","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=26396"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26396\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":53943,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26396\/revisions\/53943"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22296"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26396"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"aha-topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/aha-topic?post=26396"},{"taxonomy":"month","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/month?post=26396"},{"taxonomy":"geographic-taxonomy","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/geographic-taxonomy?post=26396"},{"taxonomy":"post-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post-type?post=26396"},{"taxonomy":"thematic-taxonomy","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/thematic-taxonomy?post=26396"},{"taxonomy":"year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.historians.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/year?post=26396"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
\n
\nExecutive Director<\/p>\n