There is a “carnival” of economics posts that I rarely link to because I find the topics often far out on the right wing end of the scale, offensively so to me, the Economics and Social Policy Carnival.
In the current issue of the Carnival there is this post from :textbook evaluator, discussing complaints about history texts and their treatment of the attack on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, and the aftermath. It is a serious, thought-provoking post. It raises deep questions about the purpose of a history text:
What dismays me most about the arguments over “what history should be covered” or “how it should be covered,” is that we never arrive at the thought that kids themselves should “do” history. We don’t trust our teachers or kids enough to give them many sides or perspectives on an issue, and let them try to make sense of it. We don’t teach them historical thinking skills: we instead argue over what “truths” to feed them.
Criticism of texts of such high quality is in short supply — and, considering the process for textbook approval in Texas, we need a lot more, high quality criticism of texts.
I may pay more attention to the Economics and Social Policy Carnival from now on.
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
[…] I may pay more attention to the Economics and Social Policy Carnival from now on. I think it’s good. what about you?Link to original article […]
LikeLike
Thanks Ed for steering me towards another blog site to go into and get into fierce arguments. I’ll get busy right away.
LikeLike
Thanks for reading my post on history texts. I’m interested to know your thoughts on the textbook adoption process in Texas, and how it might be improved.
Best,
Mark
http://www.textbookevaluator.com
LikeLike