The Texas State Board of Education is reshaping how public schools will teach social studies for years to come, but its recent selection of the panelists who will advise members during the process is causing concern among educators, historians and both Democrats and Republicans, who say the panel鈥檚 composition is further indication that the state wants to prioritize hard-right conservative viewpoints.
The Republican-dominated education board earlier this year officially launched the process of redesigning Texas鈥� social studies standards, which outline in detail what students should know by the time of graduation. The group, which will meet again in mid-November, is aiming to finalize the standards by next summer, with classroom implementation expected in 2030.
A majority of the 15 members in September agreed on the schools will use in each grade to teach social studies, already marking a drastic shift away from Texas鈥� current approach. The board settled on a plan with a heavy focus on Texas and U.S. history and less emphasis on world history, geography and cultures. Conservative groups like Texas Public Policy Foundation and the Heritage Foundation championed the framework, while educators largely opposed it.
In the weeks that followed, the board selected who will offer feedback and recommendations during the process. The panel appears to include only one person currently working in a Texas public school district and has at least three people associated with far-right conservative activism. That includes individuals who have criticized diversity efforts, questioned school lessons highlighting the historical contributions of people of color, and promoted beliefs by historians that America was founded as a Christian nation.
That group includes , a far-right conservative Christian activist who gained national prominence arguing against common interpretations of the First Amendment鈥檚 establishment clause, which prevents the government from endorsing or promoting a religion. Barton believes that America was founded as a Christian nation, which many historians have disproven.
Critics of Barton鈥檚 work have pointed to his lack of formal historical training and a book he authored over a decade ago, 鈥淭he Jefferson Lies,鈥� that was due to historical details 鈥渢hat were not adequately supported.鈥� Brandon Hall, an Aledo Republican who co-appointed Barton, has defended the decision, saying it reflected the perspectives and priorities of his district.
Another panelist is Jordan Adams, a self-described independent education consultant who holds degrees from Hillsdale College, a Michigan-based campus known for its hard-right political advocacy and efforts to shape classroom instruction in a conservative Christian vision. Adams鈥� desire to flip school boards and overhaul social studies instruction in other states has drawn over recommendations on books and curriculum that many felt reflected his political bias.
Adams has that 鈥渢here is no such thing鈥� as expertise, describing it as a label to 鈥渟hut down any type of dialogue and pretend that you can鈥檛 use your own brain to figure things out.鈥� He has called on school boards to craft policies to eliminate student surveys, diversity efforts and what he considers 鈥渃ritical race theory,鈥� a college-level examining how racism is embedded in laws, policies and institutions. Critical race theory is not taught in K-12 public schools but has become a shorthand for conservative criticism of how schools teach children about race.
In an emailed response to questions from The Texas Tribune, Adams pointed to his as a teacher and said he understands 鈥渨hat constitutes quality teaching.鈥� Adams also said he wants to ensure 鈥淭exan students are taught using the best history and civics standards in America鈥� and that he views the purpose of social studies as forming 鈥渨ise and virtuous citizens who know and love their country.鈥�
鈥淓very teacher in America falls somewhere along the political spectrum, and all are expected to set their personal views aside when teaching. The same goes for myself and my fellow content advisors,鈥� Adams said. 鈥淥f course, given that this is public education, any efforts must support the U.S. Constitution and Texas Constitution, principles of the American founding, and the perpetuation of the American experiment in free self-government.鈥�
Republicans Aaron Kinsey and LJ Francis, who co-appointed Adams, could not be reached for interviews.
David Randall, executive director of the Civics Alliance and research director of the National Association of Scholars, was also appointed a content adviser. He has he felt were 鈥渁nimated by a radical identity-politics ideology鈥� and hostile to America and 鈥済roups such as whites, men, and Christians.鈥� Randall has written that vocabulary emphasizing 鈥渟ystemic racism, power, bias, and diversity鈥� cannot coexist with 鈥渋nquiry into truth 鈥� much less affection for America.鈥� He has the exclusion of the Bible and Christianity in social studies instruction 鈥渂izarre,鈥� adding that no one 鈥渟hould find anything controversial鈥� about teaching the role of 鈥淛udeo-Christian values鈥� in colonial North America.
Randall told the Tribune in an email that his goal is to advise Texas 鈥渁s best I can.鈥� He did not respond to questions about his expertise and how he would work to ensure his personal beliefs do not bleed into the social studies revisions.
Randall was appointed by Republican board members Evelyn Brooks and Audrey Young, both of whom told the Tribune that they chose him not because of his political views but because of his national expertise in history and civics, which they think can help Texas improve social studies instruction.
鈥淚 really can鈥檛 sit here and say that I agree with everything he has said. I don鈥檛 even know everything that he has said.鈥� Brooks said. 鈥淲hat I can say is that I can refer to his work. I can say that he emphasizes integrating civics.鈥�
The advisory panel also consists of a social studies curriculum coordinator in the Prosper school district and university professors with expertise ranging from philosophy to military studies. The group notably includes Kate Rogers, former president of the Alamo Trust, who recently from her San Antonio post after Lt. Gov. criticized her over views she expressed in a doctoral dissertation suggesting she disagreed with state laws restricting classroom instruction on race and slavery.
Seven of the content advisers were selected by two State Board of Education members each, while Texas鈥� Commissioner of Higher Education Wynn Rosser chose the two other panelists. Board member Tiffany Clark, a Democrat, did not appoint an adviser, and she told the Tribune that she plans to hold a press conference during the board鈥檚 November meeting to address what happened.
Staci Childs, a Democrat from Houston serving on the State Board of Education, said she had anticipated that the content advisory group would include 鈥渆xtremely conservative people.鈥� But her colleagues鈥� choices, she said, make her feel like 鈥渒ids are not at the forefront right now.鈥�
Pam Little, who is the board鈥檚 vice chair, is one of two members who appear to have chosen the only content adviser with active experience working in a Texas K-12 public school district. The Fairview Republican called the makeup of the advisory panel 鈥渄isappointing.鈥�
鈥淚 think it signals that we鈥檙e going in a direction where we teach students what we want them to know, rather than what really happened,鈥� Little said.
The board鈥檚 recent decisions show that some members are more focused 鈥渙n promoting political agendas rather than teaching the truth,鈥� said Roc铆o Fierro-P茅rez, political director of the Texas Freedom Network, a progressive advocacy organization that monitors the State Board of Education鈥檚 decisions.
鈥淲hether your political beliefs are conservative, liberal, or middle of the road really shouldn鈥檛 disqualify you from participating in the process to overhaul these social studies standards,鈥� Fierro-P茅rez said. 鈥淏ut it鈥檚 wildly inappropriate to appoint unqualified political activists and professional advocates with their own agendas, in leading roles and guiding what millions of Texas kids are going to be learning in classrooms.鈥�
Other board members and content advisers insist that it is too early in the process to make such judgments. They say those discussions should wait until the actual writing of the standards takes place, which is when the board can directly address concerns about the new framework.
They also note that while content advisers play an integral role in offering guidance, the process will include groups of educators who help write the standards. State Board of Education members will then make final decisions. Recent years have shown that even those within the board鈥檚 10-member Republican majority often disagree with one another, making the final result of the social studies revisions difficult to predict.
Donald Frazier, a Texas historian at Schreiner University in Kerrville and chair of Texas鈥� advisory committee, who was also appointed a content adviser, said that based on the panelists鈥� conversations so far, 鈥淚 think that there鈥檚 a lot more there than may meet the eye.鈥�
鈥淭here鈥檚 people that have thought about things like pedagogy and how children learn and educational theory, all the way through this panel,鈥� Frazier said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 always going to be hand-wringing and pearl-clutching and double-guessing and second-guessing. We鈥檝e got to keep our eye on the students of Texas and what we want these kids to be able to do when they graduate to become functioning members of our society.鈥�
The makeup of the advisory panel and the Texas-heavy instructional framework approved in September is the latest sign of frustration among conservative Republicans who often criticize how public schools approach topics like race and gender. They have passed laws in recent years placing restrictions on how educators can discuss those topics and pushed for instruction to more heavily emphasize American patriotism and exceptionalism.
Under the new framework, kindergarteners through second graders will learn about the key people, places and events throughout Texas and U.S. history. The plan will weave together in chronological order lessons on the development of Western civilization, the U.S., and Texas during grades 3-8, with significant attention on Texas and the U.S. after fifth grade. Eighth-grade instruction will prioritize Texas, as opposed to the broader focus on national history that currently exists. The framework also eliminates the sixth-grade world cultures course.
When lessons across all grades are combined, Texas will by far receive the most attention, while world history will receive the least 鈥� though world history would receive more time under the new framework than the one currently used.
During a public comment period in September, educators criticized the new plan鈥檚 lack of attention to geography and cultures outside of America. They opposed how it divides instruction on Texas, U.S. and world history into percentages every school year, as opposed to providing students an entire grade to fully grasp one or two social studies concepts at a time. They said the plan鈥檚 strict chronological structure could disrupt how kids identify historical trends and cause-and-effect relationships, which can happen through a thematic instructional approach.
But that criticism did not travel far with some Republicans, who argue that drastic changes in education will almost always prompt negative responses from educators accustomed to teaching a certain way. They point to showing less than half of Texas students performing at grade level in social studies as evidence that the current instructional approach is not working. They also believe the politicization of education began long before the social studies overhaul, but in a way that prioritizes left-leaning perspectives.
鈥淯nfortunately, I think it boils down to this: What鈥檚 the alternative?鈥� said Matthew McCormick, education director of the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation. 鈥淚t always seems to come down to, if it鈥檚 not maximally left-wing, then it鈥檚 conservative indoctrination. That鈥檚 my perspective. What is the alternative to the political and policymaking process? Is it to let teachers do whatever they want? Is it to let the side that lost the elections do what they want? I鈥檓 not sure. There鈥檚 going to be judgments about these sorts of things.鈥�
This is not the first time the board has garnered attention for its efforts to reshape social studies instruction. The group in 2022 revisions to the standards after pressure from Republican lawmakers who complained that they downplayed Texan and American exceptionalism and amounted to far-left indoctrination. Texas was also in the national spotlight roughly for the board鈥檚 approval of standards that reflected conservative viewpoints on topics like religion and economics.
Social studies teachers share the sentiment that Texas can do a better job equipping students with knowledge about history, geography, economics and civics, but many push back on the notion that they鈥檙e training children to adhere to a particular belief system. With challenges like budget shortfalls and increased class sizes, they say it is shortsighted to blame Texas鈥� academic shortcomings on educators or the current learning standards 鈥� not to mention that social studies instruction often takes a backseat to subjects like reading and math.
鈥淚 think we鈥檙e giving a lot more credit to this idea that we鈥檙e using some sort of political motivation to teach. We teach the standards. The standards are there. That鈥檚 what we teach,鈥� said Courtney Williamson, an eighth-grade social studies teacher at a school district northwest of Austin.
When students graduate, some will compete for global jobs. Others may go to colleges across the U.S. or even internationally. That highlights the importance, educators say, of providing students with a broad understanding of the world around them and teaching them how to think critically.
But with the recent moves requiring a significant overhaul of current instruction 鈥� a process that will likely prove labor-intensive and costly 鈥� some educators suspect that Texas leaders鈥� end goal is to establish a public education system heavily reliant on state-developed curricula and training. That鈥檚 the only way some can make sense of the new teaching framework or the makeup of the content advisory panel.
鈥淚鈥檓 really starting to notice an atmosphere of fear from a lot of people in education, both teachers and, I think, people higher up in districts,鈥� said Amy Ceritelli-Plouff, a sixth-grade world cultures teacher in North Texas. 鈥淲hen you study history, you look at prior conflicts and times in our history when there has been extremism and maybe too much government control or involvement in things; it starts with censoring and controlling education.鈥�