tv Seeking a Truce in the Civics History Wars CSPAN July 31, 2021 10:02am-11:01am EDT
. thank you for coming. i appreciate it. >> follow american history tv on twitter, facebook and youtube to learn what happened this day in history, watch videos of their more about the people and events that shaped the american story. find us, c-span history. >> i am michael petrilli and excited to welcome you to what should be a lively debate about american democracy. for those who don't know this is a national education think tank and we work in the great state of ohio, an advocacy group and we oversee a dozen charter schools most of them urban, one world.
we get to see how these deviates play out nationally. we are excited to be hosting this event today with the help and work they've done promoting the event. we expect 500, many 800 of you sitting in this morning and we are superexcited. i want to thank you, many of you for suggesting questions for today's dba, 200 of those came in. i have tried my best to incorporate the questions you have and to take a look at the q and a. can add more questions. needless to say this topic, how to teach us history is getting
a lot of attention with the backlash on critical race theory and on the heels of controversy over the 1619 project, donald trump's 1776 commission and more. no need to be depressed about another culture war at a time when it feels we have too many already. it can feel like we are headed towards a version of red history and republican states, blue history and civics and democratic states. many of us, i for one remain hopeful that there is more common ground, the we can figure out a way to teach young americans about the heritage they have in our civic institutions and our history in a way that does not polarize that brings together while allowing plenty of room to have all the conversations we have about debates in american history and civics.
findings at common ground was one of the key goals about the educating for american democracy project and roadmap in today's debate is to discuss whether the drafters of the roadmap found that common ground or one way or the other and that is what we are going to get into. with that, the main event is to get to our panelists. let me quickly introduce them. first of all, danielle allen, political philosopher, expert on democracy innovation, public health, equity, justice reform, education, she directs the democratic knowledge project and her books include our declaration, a reading of the declaration of independence in the sense of equality, american tragedy and talking to
strangers and guiding to citizenship and she was one of the principal investigators the educating for american democracy project. and we have mark bauerlein, an editor at first 14 magazine, his books include literary criticism, the authority, necrophilia, a race riot and the dumbest generation of the digital age, how young americans jeopardize our future, don't trust anyone under 30. he has written several articles critical of it. we start with a 5-minute overview of their roadmap, then get into the debate. please add those questions to the q and a. over to you. >> appreciate you hosting this important conversation.
educating for american democracy roadmap since early march is the progress of several years of work by a network of 300 scholars, educators, families that participated in the conversation sponsored by the department of education. and arizona state university. our goal was to provide a framework for rebuilding history and civics learning for all learners k-12. what exactly is in this? the first and most important thing is it offers an inquiry framework, a review of the question that all learners k-12 have a chance to encounter as they work to bring together the
historical understanding of narratives about the past and civics understanding about our government, institutions, the foundations of democracy, right and responsibility. bringing them together rather than giving people a list of what they should know, proposing questions every learner should have a chance to those questions are structured in 7 themes. i want to name those themes because it is important to understand what they are to understand the focus of the question. physics participations one. what is the? why do we evaluate it? the changing landscape. how is it the geography of this country is changing our borders and boundaries, how have we come to be? we the people, how to the multitude of us from different places and times come to form a single critical people? what is a political people anyway? wise democracy of, 4, and by
the people? what context is that? the third theme with the fourth is new government and constitution about the founding era and document and how the constitution came to exist and the context and meaning of the nature of the revolution and so forth. then institutional and social transformation, a series, how we think about change over time. much has changed. when and where did it lead to a new founding in the first place? noticed the questions all the way through the year. debate and inquiry, thinking for ourselves, then people in the world, everything in the constitutional democracy is a global context. we need to bring that context into view and then people of contemporary debate.
we have a lot of conflict in our society. our view is we should teach what we are disagreeing about and how do we support productive disagreement, civil debate. as we take learners through questions and themes we are working consistently throughout patriotism. this consists of honesty about our past good and bad. honesty about crimes in our past the leaders into cynicism, honesty about our accomplishments as well, we need to get the balance right and be honest about the good and the bad. questions were to engage love of country or other forces of love and country and how to connect other countries to the ability to criticize. it is about bringing those pieces together.
in addition to tracing the ark about mentally important content the roadmap recommends approaches to learning in the constitutional democracy, approaches that of a full and complete narrative of america's story, approaches celebrate healthy compromises needed to make constitutional democracy work and honesty and patriotism, space for love and approaches that teach history and civics in the timeline of events and themes that run through that. it is important to say the roadmap is not a national curriculum even full scope and sequence. it is a framework of questions the district leaders and educators use to generate business, implementation of the roadmap depend on everybody
switching heads, how educators and schools and district leaders begin to build up the resources and context for diving into the question. >> thank you. a lot of today's the bait is critiquing the roadmap and danielle defending it, on behalf of the drafters but before we get into that let me let daniel make a positive case. the concern that a few conservatives are involved but this is leaning left but what would you say? >> it is not accurate. let me explain the process. as we worked we started from
the beginning. at every level from 162230, everything we pull together we talked to ensure diversity of viewpoints and demographic and geographic through the structure of the network and diversity of all dimensions. as we had the conversation we bring to the surface issues that reflect perspectives. in some cases we present them as design challenges. as an example of the first we talk to education for democracy, the country splits according to those who describe the system that we have. those who advocate democracy
and egalitarian futures, they public on order and structure and concepts like that. we brought to the surface both of those opinions and put them together in a constitutional democracy. throughout the writing of the roadmap was emphasis on constitutional democracy understanding how that structure brings them together with a structure that brings in participation. that was a compromise in the early days and then design challenges we've got to invite one another into experimentation. the idea of narrating histories of the past failings without
falling into cynicism and accomplishments without adulation. those are guardrails. we have to experiment to get to the place of those narratives to permit a reflection of our history. we didn't think we should say here's the solution to achieving that. we articulate the guardrails and the design challenge for educators to take their best shot at it and talk about how they get that narrative. >> mark, can you respond to what danielle said? do you think the roadmap succeeded on any friends? a good faith effort to bridge the ideological divide? >> when you look at the resulting document you see elements one would identify with a conservative or traditionalist position and we can go into that.
in terms of the demonstration of bipartisanship what is most extraordinary to me is the machinery that accompanies the roadmap. the listing of 300 scholars, some of whom are distinguished conservative figures. the listing organization, the champions listing 139 organizations, and a major scholarly organization in the country, is downright daunting. the rhetorical effect, it puts opponents of the roadmap into the position of looking like grouches, kermit, professional naysayers, people who can't take yes for an answer. it is downright overwhelming what you see here.
that many of us but those who have critiqued the argument sounds like groucho marx, whatever it is i'm against it. it is extraordinary the labor, the coordination of the designer to put this assemblage of people together. my envy is showing. we can get into matters of substance but right off the bat we almost see the self evidence for the roadmap's accreditation. >> does that mean ideological bias or it is representative because it includes the left and the right? >> there are elements in the
result that would please conservatives like myself. those questions from the roadmap, asked about specific features of the constitution, the directives of knowledge, ideas, documents, big events, historic, notable personages. when you see questions like what key texts and songs help us understand the values and virtues of citizenship. that is a good question as long as no rock 'n roll, no rap but a new government and constitution which had questions like analyze the ideas and debates about rights, powers, decision-making the shape the revolution. all of those -- unfortunately i do not believe those elements are much more grounded as the
roadmap design is moved into item units, curriculum, texts as it moves into the classroom. giving an example from common core. let me stop there if you want to proceed. range the rock control and wrap it part is a joke? you're coming off as a imagine -- curmudgeon. >> i have to be what i am. i am 62. >> we are going to get to that. it does bring back memories of common core. there is a debate about what is in the common core versus what was done in the name of it.
that is something we have to wrestle with so we will talk about those concerns. let's focus for now -- >> i don't think it is necessary us in this. i wouldn't say that. it is a matter of hear the orientation of teachers, curriculum administrators who will look at the roadmap and draw certain implications from it. i don't want to talk about anything underhanded. that is not what i mean to imply. >>, jumping on this? what mark is getting at is we have a diverse -- we just do. we have to accept -- we disagree which is an indication of our diversity and that is
true as well with regard to education so when we started this project it is true that we expected different communities would ultimately shape the curricula in their context differently from one another. we do not expect a 1-size-fits-all result. however, our view was if we could gather around shared questions we would be in the same conversation. it would be a starting point. will some communities have some questions more than others? that is inevitable. however, can we build a community of practice, bringing diverse educators together to make sure there's a chance to reflect together on success, yes we can. in that regard what this
roadmap does is provide an opportunity for a new organizational practice. collaboration across our differences where we can lift up what we are doing, share with each other and make sure everybody is exposed to the full array of work. as we work on implementation we are seeking to support that. we are working to have everybody elevate questions on the constitutional questions in the roadmap about history and how we teach hard history, enslavement and inequality and the like. in that regard there are people on the left to say isn't this a nefarious cover? they disregard questions and the answer is the same as in your direction. every single person teaches everything but what we can do
is a practice that insists on the question of the constitution and hard history come together for shared inquiry. >> in your writing you argue the roadmap relentlessly focuses on group identity, access and inclusion. what is the evidence of that relentless focus and explain and other conservatives find that emphasis. >> the idea of foundings. >> back to that. >> the group identity focus. >> we see these questions, kindergarten, first graders, what groups am i part of? how do i know i'm part of the group? what are my responsibilities?
i find this question inappropriate in several ways. 7-year-olds don't have the mental equipment to start reflecting on their group identity. the public school classroom also misses all different kinds of people, we are not in the sunday school classroom are people are voluntarily putting their children into a single group identity. orientation. and ask students to think to themselves in group terms that develop over the course of the roadmap, the identity focus continues and the
disenfranchised group, the excluded group, wrote down a series of assertions of disempowerment. those without full political rights, those long denied justice, who loses when a country expands. why does marginalization happen, groups about formal decision-making, power. when you add those up ica plot, a literary plot, a narrative. the story of america, the central story of america is press groups claiming their rights, press groups deny earlier through protest activity, incidents and education obtaining those rights. the frame here is again a progressive frame. i have no desire to overlook that story.
you mention my book negrophobia, i spent years in archives going over court documents and council records and newspapers, black-and-white newspapers, reading white supremacists, the novels of thomas dixon and journalism, tom watson, legislation about lynching, put together an hour by hour account of an episode of white supremacy and white violence. when i came out in 2001, local educators in georgia, the first book account of what happened. educators in georgia developed item units, put them into the georgia history curriculum. it altered social studies in the state afterwords.
here is where danielle and i don't disagree on the characterization. i don't think that is the central story of america. the story of america is a stunning assertion of individual freedoms, not group identity and there's a tradition of anti-group identity in united states history. think of all the figures who are individualists, rogues, runaways, orphans, benjamin franklin, emerson, self-reliance, the road heading off to the wood dancing leave me the hell alone, emily dickinson going into her room and shutting the door, ralph ellison's invisible man, all the way to those motorcyclists in easy rider, one of the nicknames is captain america. anti-group identity.
ask them what group, no, not part of any group. i don't want to be part of any group. that individualist lineage, where is that in the roadmap? >> lots to go back. >> let me start by disputing mark's characterization. he misunderstood the early question. we did not have group identity in mind to think about different kinds of communities, a church, a neighborhood, a town, that is a misreading. and the rest of those accounts. it is the case that we don't think it is possible to peace through that history without the context of power, without concept of race. there is an invitation to
educators to ask questions to engage students in questions around that theme but there is also the question around individual liberty. the territorial expansion of the united states shaped by economic liberty and economic equality. both traditions in the country are there throughout the roadmap. we had the individual liberty tradition from the very beginning, or what are the costs and benefits, with different ideas of economic prosperity for different people in the united states. or ideas of religious and economic liberty and race in the shape of people's migration over time. how to principles of liberty and equality contribute to the fight of the american people. the presence of liberty is here throughout but if there is a
narrative to mark's point it is the concepts of liberty and equality always had a place in the meaning of america, questions about both are woven through the book. >> this gets to the heart of this debate and the other larger debate going on. .. >> to teach with the now, hard history, we have to talk about injustice and oppression and the role that racism plays and then
we have jim crow and others. so help us begin to understand is a just a matter of focus. >> first, i don't think of mischaracterizing it is, i would encourage people to look at those questions to the group identity and ask with they're asking the little kids pretty. >> or not about group identity read it's not a space used in the roadmap rated socrates, all kinds of groups it is not about group identity. >> the distinction of how do i know that i'm part of a group, you don't think that in the classroom classes, as the discussion proceeds, that you can say that i am part of the socrates okay. fine, but as we proceed to come you will see everyone look more and more breakdowns, you will find european americans,
african-americans, different women, different minorities be consistent to the vision of being american people. it is built in. i am sure that in a discussion it in second grade, when group membership comes up, do you really think that the demographic identity will not be part of the discussion. >> let me get in here something market, that if somebody else, why is it that you think the teachers are going to be teaching the students the same and that is gotten a lot of well is this the case that you spend your career in higher ed. and it may be, freshman seminars and emory and that sort of thing is discussed but maybe is an impossible the second grade teachers in america are not
ideology call or interested in going there. what would you say to that. michael: you would know more about those lower grades than i would like. it do you think the social studies teachings and the professions is nonpartisan. but there is not an ideological slant the social studies teachers, the professional organization. >> look at, i think when people are teaching kids and katie - two there trying to help them learn norms of productive behavior and practice to try to help the right responsibility that their part of including the passions it is that basic. politics is at the end of the day about people coming together to establish rules in the norms and we do things selectively do
you need to work for that and groups are the words that kids understand and that is what is going on those rooms. >> daniel obviously the critical race theory, is very hot right now. good anybody make the case that this critical race theory in this, especially given there is talk about between groups and for example, is her talk about how is it handled this idea of white diplomacy and maybe talking about oppressions and anything in there that to become the sort of thing in the history of the united states represents all story about oppression what would you say that. daneille: i would start by saying that at this point, it means so many things to so many different things. i don't think it's particular helpful. actually have no idea what they're talking about at this point when they asked the question about the critical race theory. but let me and said talk about how the roadmap engages with
race and how it engages with the patriotism and first, but most important think the people need to know is the structure. that will tell you about the organization we start by what does it matter. when we care about having parents hurt his patent democracy in the changing landscape. in the same of a new government in the constitution. in the theme of transformation. in the global context and then to our contemporary date police and without any question, that's what were saying. and it is given the highest priority of historical moment in our country. so that should answer the question of whether or not it is prioritized. we look at the founders. i do not see how that would not be visible and everything else
goes from that. and you pass the question of what counts as a founding, that's important question prayed the oldest questions in the history of political philosophy. question that plato had in his local public brightest always been a question of how do you know that actually defines a society. as of the laws the economy is a social structure, how do you know. every student deserves a chance to engage in that question and see it through and come to their own judgment. this is just a fundamental question. yes people do have different views in our society about how to judge different moments in our country's history with regard to their definition. lincoln's call the work of the civil war and identified that is rebounding any thought is a significant enough for a redefinition. so it is a super important question, every child in every learner deserves to have a chance of that engagement with
it. you'll notice white supremacy does not appear roadmap not once, that will open us up to significant criticism. the leaders on the left for sure. yes there's marginalization. and we encourage histories the really integrate the perspective of the americans from all backgrounds. however, that point, unlike point out that we are doing innovative, we basically moved to different cycles in our country in terms of think about how different people's perspectives are pertinent to the stories we tell about ourselves. if you look back at older history books, the conventional space that you really get the sort of history of the great men's writings and thinking in this for 50 years we've had people bring hidden narratives to the stories of women in the stories of neighbors and people of color and indigenous americans friday for many years,
i've had an approach of a holistic approach, personal these groups make sure that they're spending time. we do in two instances say that we want to think about diversity and here's an example of it. religion, app, military status, all kinds of features. and only twice do we do that. and instead what we are doing throughout is asking people to think about the given question of how they'd people look at the british government. and ask that are considered that from my perspective until an integrative story. but that is the stories actually for america. to figure out how to integrate this into a shared narrative. that is new, that is not been asked of educators. we are proud of that commitment of integrating this perspective
in trying, you will notice a lot of vocabulary as well. >> you mentioned there daniel, the various question points in our history people talked about including lincoln. in market, you have written that you are concerned about that, such a focus on the recounting over the original founding. help explain concern. mark: re- founding is a change in law. first understand that is fundamental enough to count as entrance formative subsidence renewal of the first founding and given that the miraculous nature of the founding, the conservative approach would be that we would be cautious about
characterizing changes in re- founding party believing that each one of pilot to the re- value of the original. and that the historical context of the founding took place, is extraordinary that took place and it was understood to be an exceptional moment and just that catholics in maryland in 1789, with a part of the first amendment. and here's the problem, roadmap has way too many re- founding sprayed after the civil war lincoln's reframing emanation is a sacred union going back to the declaration it before the constitution. that makes the founding. that is a live debate. but when we have this is a recounting, we have gone to for if the 26th amendment giving
18 -year-olds the right to vote, marking kind of generational re- founding in 1972, we went from 20 went out to 18. i regard that is a disaster giving reference to any political voices about idea like a we should raise it from 30 to 31 but apart from that, what is the recounting still as there is a purpose behind it that are needed transforming the united states into evolving policies. in developing and if you look at a roadmap, the evolutions flow and a progressive direction is there any into the roadmap than any of these punitive recounting's work terrible advents. but they have come at a great cost. presented changes pretty much always good. daneille: so i have say market, you just gave an exhibit of the
power, we do not define that moment of the change as a family. we ask the question, is it. the question can be answered in any direction, just offer answer pretty great. now let's let other step up to the plate and offer their answers and have a country that is written full of debate. and it achieves serious pause about who we are and what we want. that is the purpose of the roadmap to inspire by the conversation. we do not say anything in particular savannah, we point to debates and bring them to the surface and put the teachers and the students to enter into those debates just as you yourself just did every student should it be able to offer an answer in the that you just did.
michael: any response of the mark. mark: i think it raises the question whether 26 amendment of recounting is that contentious move and i think that will be a ridiculous question to pose even to pose the question in a classroom. to insert an idea of possibility there. it's like the sexual revolution in the gender re- founding. and again, the questions, the nature, i don't think that that gives two way to become the suggestiveness of it. and again, we will see on the proof of this will be what kind of item unit for curriculum will be built out of these questions.
michael: let's talk about that. some people criticized the roadmap for not having hard that it is built around these questions. and that means that leaves out a certain amount of detail. and just last week at the thomas b. fordham institute we just released a major review of u.s. history. you can check that out. and for some good news, five states did a great job, both red and blue state predict the 20 states in those days, they didn't or they whoever got together decided it would be easier to write, not to get into this and therefore not getting the guidance. and mark daniel and her team have gone further and into all of the details. it would look more like a
national curriculum afraid are they damned if they do are damned if they don't, what take what you do on this. mark: i agree in danielle for wise to put this and the more tentative motive, the inquiry approach printed there's probably necessary way of avoiding it accusation of prescriptive sense. i would say that the question the best questions for me are those with concrete answers. they're just how did the declaration make the case for self-government. that's a great question. i think only drift into questions and get more speculative and controversial subjects such as this one elementary school, what constitutes a family, and were going to get into trouble. michael: okay, daniel what you say to teachers who look this roadmap for the really confused on and what i do with this. what to teach in september.
daneille: is truly it's a big ask and what's interesting to me is i think we've spent a lot of time talking about governments empowering the decision-makers yet when there's an opportunity it seems to cause anxieties. were just hearing anxieties. make sure that we know how it will come out and i don't think that's actually not having control here. and for me are we ready to experiment at the same thing. at this work of simultaneously engaging in questions about their philosophical foundations and engage in explaining narratives from a diversity perspective and engage in honesty about our histories. this what we need to
exterminate. we tell the educators to start with what you are already teaching and take a look at it and pulled it up against the roadmap about which questions that you're not addressing partied so maybe are not paying much attentional to the constitution may be at start bringing in. maybe not the range of the perspectives on our differences at the moment. maybe bring more of that in. important thing is the practice of educators from around the country and working in very different contexts is to understand themselves as part of a shared enterprise. that is that the question about what you people can do together and whether we can learn together in a positive to try to solve these problems. whether we can build practices and working together and despite differences. michael: and mark my understanding is the conservatives are worried of the implementations and a lot of
those curriculum standards are the textbooks and the materials are going to mean less. is there anything that daniel and her colleagues to to keep that from happening. what kind of guard rails can be put into place to try to keep this under bear lake. mark: i think the roadmap will move forward. the preparations, the supports. that is done. and so the issue here again is implementation. what kind of curricular units will we see. will we see educators making the questions and again, moving them heavily in a progressive manner or direction. as i said, i think a lot of romantic being encourages that. i would like to see not continue the language of honesty about
crimes in the past. i think this is hazardous, the m and assumption of the presence of improvements over the past and without acknowledging that there may be some ways in which we lost some honesty at the current time. for every greater honesty, live issues when we have greater dishonesty about issues. and i think it is just a more humility in the face of the past. for 15 and 16 -year-olds were not talking about college freedom talking on the educators and the teenagers and who are learning about the country, they're so oriented towards this that more humility toward the past makes them more amendment a
bowl actually two learning. and part of that means that we've got to get more greatness into the curricular unit. they come out. michael: when they support the common core out there defending if in the early days they started to be some pretty crazy stuff the people were doing something a label, koran it. and we were saying it was really not common core. been really did damage and we figure out a way to address the real concerns printed there were bad practices out there. there will be pretty somebody take this roadmap do something crazy different crazy with that most likely partied because were a free country and can you imagine finding some constructive ways to say hey, that is really not part of the roadmap. and especially ideological too
far away lift away right. we would talk about this. we don't want anybody to feel donated get to the public school. how do you think about that. it. daneille: one thing that mark said to go back to the conversation, you remember that i said that the honesty about the bad and the good. about the wrongs and honesty about the accomplishments prayed and just for the record i want to make the point. in terms of implementation, yes, core, it's important and that was a of the governors association. so have we connected already to be of limitations rated with a certain responsibility from the top down efforts to control. this is not true for this effort. it is a network of collagen
educators. in the public of education but not directly connected to government structure. that's important thing to register. so what is a mean in terms of how we support people maintaining the quality standards of our operations partied what we are working to do is to try to start building it a small set not a gigantic set of the pilots are the country to say look, this is what we are looking for. and as we do that, will be working on evaluation and a variety of ways going out what counts as a success or not. but this is work in progress. just be straightforward and honest about that is that we are working progress we've really had the entirety of the nation's community of educators to come to the space. the website, available to the
resources and information process that's absolutely try to find a wide-field coming from the diversity of viewpoints. but that also has some of those core design principles to know those core people arguing roadmap and what's important. that's a place where you can really see the guard rails and were using to try to make quality. michael: great, and one payment, inc. mark: in the literature, and one conservative element, traditionalist element in common core, the literature is the standard demonstrate knowledge of foundational word is of the 18th and 19th and early early 20th century literature,
that is a standard that requires a heavy curricular support. m cte, put out a book a year later telling high school english teachers how to implement common core. that standard did not appear in the entire book. it was ignored. i don't know of any assessments that were directly find that standard either and this is my fear that the traditionalist element in the roadmap will be ignored worried it happened in common core. the tendencies of, or work fantastic read several states approved the common core standard it did not approve the other. so, what we need to do is as
daniel mentioned the pilots, not see if the pilots retain those, and was a balance. just the perspective. t-mac that's important point, things can be done with one on the roadmap. all right i will give you guys a chance to finish up in just a few minutes were almost at the end of the time. first, you are talking about constructional materials, there is a bill floating through congress of a billion dollars into civics. to provide federal resources from some of the kind of work in construction materials. this got caught up in the car debate as well partied and again daniel, this is something that
we can get right. daneille: ead is not involved in the bill. were really focused on content. they are blinded for teachers basically. so from a personal matter, i do think the bill would be useful and helpful. and the investments into the public education and learning and that we need investments in the support. that said, and you bring a principal that i call collaborative federalism of you about how it's helpful and what that means is gravity for shaping the work to be done in education should be at the state and district level. so i think that we need federal for only a few things. we need that investment of resources and the development of research and special developments and also needed to support the development of the state structures.
they really go to the interests printed not by the federal government, that's in thinking that it's what happened. [inaudible]. michael: flow market, that blew up when they put their finger in the pile. it will that help predict. mark: will the legislation, with this bill and again as a conservative i look at one element of the bills. hundred $50 million per year to get a schools of education. there will be a process and that means that the elite schools will probably get a good chunk of the money and i am very happy to see let's say, a good chunk going to some of the top and schools. like columbia college, like if they don't do that, columbia can't put together civics
education and training for teachers because their endowment is 11.26 money were all they find the money without federal government and the taxpayers coming in to support columbia university putting civics together and the other elite schools doing it as well and also of course giving school of education yourself nonpartisan. they were 50/50 republican democrat registrations on the faculty of schools of education. that is very open to conservative positions. michael: all right, thank you market. it while it is time for a closing statement. some are appointed to go first targeted back to the roadmap predict. mark: civics is a different think in terms of chemistry. there is a my nation myself, for these students and what we want to do is build a good and positive relationship.
and i don't think that the reflective patriotism it is for most, for most students, we need something more common than that and something more that we need to work harder. the tired brick curriculum has have an inspiring, becoming the correct and current curriculum. he has come to be filled with american greatness. the students have to know and of course they have no stonewall jackson fought for the wrong guard side. of course and they should also know jackson did and what happened to him that night. that is a story to read about apart from the moral problems here and they need everything masterpieces of american literature and
the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. challenge us, mighty god, when we are too well-pleased with ourselves, when our dreams come true because they are too small, when we arrive safely simply because we have sailed too close to the shore. challenge us, mighty