social study standards from some of them will end up state university system, some of them will attend usc and potentially being taught by someone whose claim to fame, her signature project is 1619 project so over the years, it seems like there will be an acceptance of an alternative view of our country's founding which could literally shape a generation or more in fact seems to be concerning that we want to make sure our kids are being taught are facts. whatever they want to think about it is another issue. we often come to our own conclusions about what we think is good or bad about our country but we need to know what factually is about our country. >> that is very troubling but also nothing new k-12 schools and colleges have been using history of the united states for years. that book intentionally look through the lens of the oppressed sort every term, it points out the flaws in our country and of course there are flaws but it does not show the purpose from of the principles from the traditions that built our country on the other side so that is nothing new in the other thing is that

the one hand you're talking about today which is a big controversy of nicole hannah jones as hired by usc chapel hill based in project, 1619 that is completely different matthew from what you're describing about american history that is chronicled in the 1776 commission report. to what seems to be diametrically opposed sets of information about our founding so what is a person supposed to do and believe is accurate? >> are often asked whether the 1776 commission should be done to respond to the 1619 project with my answer was it wasn't. it makes note of it in one footnote but otherwise that's not the intention at all. what it was was to make an argument for the principles behind, the guiding principles of american history and to point us towards developing an understanding of american history which teaches civic's but also preparing for the anniversary of the declaration of independence that is fair and accurate and honest and teaches it works and all so that despite all its flaws we cansee the principles behind it . and i point out earlier, we don't look at it as 1619 versus 1776. that's

standard, those kids some of them will end up in the state university system and they will be attending usc chapel hill and being taught by someone who claims the same with the signature project is 1619 project, over the years it seems there will become an acceptance of an alternative view of our country's founding which can shape the generation or more and that seems pretty concerning that we want to know what kids are being taught and what facts and what they want to think about as a whole another issue we come to her own conclusion for good or bad about her country and we need to know what is actually good about our country. >> i think that is very troubling but it's also nothing new schools and colleges have been using howard's then of the united states for years and that intentionally looks through the lens of the oppressed, at every turn he points out the flaws in our country and of course there are flaws but it does not show the purpose and the principles in the tradition that build our country on the other side, that of course is nothing new in the other thing i want to point out in