Senator Debbie Clary

Recently, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction released its first draft for a set of standards that would expand Social Studies requirements in middle school while at the same time curtailing the course of study in our high schools. Such a proposal has attracted national media attention and generated constituent comments and concerns throughout the state. Although the “rationale” behind these changes is that students, under this new proposal, would have already had multiple opportunities to study the pre-Reconstruction time period in grades 4, 5, and 7, and focusing on the years following 1877 would allow teachers to delve deeper into “modern American history.” I am extremely disappointed in these proposed changes.

Any change in the Essential Standards for United States History curriculum should be an enhancement. It is already embarrassing to admit that the NC Department of Public Instruction standard course of study for US History begins at 1789 and excludes colonial settlement and development, the American Revolution, and the writing of the Constitution. Without an understanding of this basis of American History, it is foolish to believe that our high schoolers could comprehend subsequent events and issues. Likewise, it is unreasonable to expect these students to have a sufficient background to assist them in addressing the tragic and complex periods of our history such as slavery and the Civil War.

Even though the expansion of the history curriculum in middle school is a needed change, middle-schoolers will not be able to adequately understand, appreciate fully, or retain this information until their upper years of high school. The pre-teen brain simply cannot digest or make mature judgment of the complexities of this part of our history. Consequently, such a policy of starting a high school US History course in 1877 would be equivalent to picking up a novel and beginning at the halfway point. It is impossible to understand what is going on in chapter 18 if you have skipped the previous 17 chapters. These standards reveal an astonishing and deeply troubling lack of appreciation for the study of history, and I remain positive that we can avoid such a disastrous change in our high school curriculum.

In speaking with my colleagues in the NC Senate, we feel strongly that this issue will be addressed during the session in May if the Department chooses not to correct prior to the convening of the General Assembly. In most cases, I do not support micro-management of education curriculum but this is unique and we feel that the history of sacrifice in the formation of our government is a history we should not deny our children.

Senator Debbie Clary Cleveland & Rutherford