Tincy Miller’s Record As a Compromiser

Mar 2, 2012 by

Donna Garner taught English for decades in Texas public schools.

by Donna Garner –

 

An organization in the Dallas area asked me to send them questions for their vetting session of Tincy Miller, candidate for the Texas State Board of Education, District 12. Tincy was voted off the SBOE in Nov. 2010 but is running again for the same seat on the SBOE. Here is what I sent to the organization:

 

I hope that this information will help you as you vet Tincy Miller. I have spent hours going back through my past articles and reports to write this reply. Please read through this information and groom your questions for Tincy appropriately, knowing what is found in the documented evidence:

 

 

DEBATE OVER ENGLISH / LANGUAGE ARTS / READING TEKS

 

 

My concerns over Tincy Miller really began in 1997 although she had been on the SBOE for many years before that. In 1997 a group of current classroom teachers wrote an alternative document to the one pushed by the Texas Education Agency.

 

Our document was called the Texas Alternative Document (TAD) for English / Language Arts / Reading. We wrote it on our own time (late at night after teaching full-time in the classroom) and at our own expense (had to pay to have copies run off because this was before the easy exchange of information on the Internet) because we knew that the curriculum standards (TEKS) being powered through by the TEA would harm our Texas public school children. The TEKS were built upon the wrong philosophy of education which was to move our classrooms AWAY FROM traditional knowledge-based, academic instruction AND INTO the multicultural, politically correct, social justice agenda.

 

Because our TAD lost and the TEKS won, this is exactly what happened in our Texas public schools from July 1997 to May 2008. Tincy Miller should take the blame for that travesty. She was on the SBOE and was so busy trying to compromise, that she compromised our public schools down the slippery slope.

 

There are two types of education philosophies reflected in curriculum standards:

 

(1) Type #1 Philosophy of Education: Knowledge-based, academic, clearly worded, grade-level-specific content that is tested largely through objectively scored tests — These standards are built from the lowest grade to the highest — Pre-K through Grade 12 — and are taught mostly through direct, systematic instruction.

 

Type #1 standards could be referred to as the traditional method – the method of teaching that people perhaps 50 years old and older experienced when they were in school – phonics, grammar, correct usage/spelling, cursive penmanship, classical literature, expository/persuasive/research writing, the four math functions taught to automaticity, U. S. History, World History, fact-based science, etc.

 

Our Texas Alternative Document (TAD) followed the Type #1 philosophy but was not adopted in July 1997. Therefore, the following philosophy of education (Type #2) was adopted when the SBOE adopted the TEKS in 1997 and during the time that Tincy Miller was on the Board. It was that wrong-headed philosophy which prevailed in our Texas public schools until May 2008 when the new-and-improved English / Language Arts / Reading (ELAR) TEKS with the Type #1 philosophy was adopted.

 

(2) Type #2 Philosophy of Education — Project-based, subjective (emphasize cognitive domain – beliefs, opinions, emotions), subjectively assessed based upon value system of evaluator, multiculturalism, political correctness, environmental extremism, diversity, social justice agenda — These standards are built backwards from Grade 12 on down – and are taught mostly using the constructivist (project-based) approach.

 

The Type #2 Philosophy of Education was adopted when the July 1997 TEKS were passed by the SBOE. Tincy Miller was on the Board at the time, and she must bear some of the responsibility for helping to open the door to the social justice agenda that has inundated our public schools.

 

At the July 1997 SBOE meeting, I tried desperately to get the SBOE members to realize the significance of adopting the TAD over the TEKS. Randy Stevenson (who is running for the SBOE against Thomas Ratliff right now) understood and supported the TAD.

 

What did Tincy do? She came up to me at the SBOE meeting and said, “Donna, you need to marry both the TAD and the TEKS together.” I told her that there was no way to marry two completely different philosophies of education with two completely different goals. Type #1 is to help educate students by making sure they master a rigorous core knowledge foundation of knowledge and skills. Type #2’s real goal is to change the way students think, dumb down their educational backgrounds, and turn them into easily manipulated adults.

 

Because Tincy is such a compromiser and is always ready to compromise on almost everything, she went right along and supported the TEKS that reflected Type #2. Because the TEKS adopted in July 1997 were so broad and generic, teachers who had been teaching whole language and almost no grammar/usage/spelling, etc. kept right on teaching that way; and pretty soon Guided Reading swept over almost all elementary schools in Texas. Guided Reading is nothing in the world but whole language in disguise.

 

Because of Tincy’s compromising habits, she allowed Texas teachers to spend ten more years teaching the discredited whole language/balanced literacy/Guided Reading system to our Texas public school children.

 

PROOF POSITIVE ABOUT THE MISERABLE ELAR-TAKS TESTS

 

Tincy was also unapproachable when I tried to get her to read our three reports that exposed the ELAR-TAKS tests. The TAKS tests were built upon the July 1997-adopted TEKS. I wrote these three reports in conjunction with a psychometrician who was an expert on the TAKS tests and the way the scores were being manipulated by the TEA. No one to this day has ever said that anything in these three reports was in error. Please contact me offline if you would like for me to e-mail you a copy of these three reports: wgarner1@hot.rr.com

 

 

GOOD WORK BY DON MCLEROY AND THE OTHER SIX CONSERVATIVE SBOE MEMBERS

 

Even though Tincy refused to read and take action on our three TAKS reports, other policymakers did take the reports seriously. Don McLeroy became the chair of the SBOE when Tincy was ousted from the chair by Gov. Perry in 2007. Don led the other SBOE conservatives (7 conservatives in total — Tincy was not one of them) on a Board of 15 members to begin the rewriting and adoption of new-and-vastly improved curriculum standards to return our state back to the Type #1 Philosophy of Education. These new TEKS have led to new textbooks, new curriculum, and new STAAR and End-of-Course tests – all built upon the Type #1 Philosophy of Education.

 

TEXAS COMM. OF ED. ROBERT SCOTT – GOOD LEADER

 

Another positive occurrence was when Texas Commissioner of Education Robert Scott took over at the TEA and cleaned up huge problems there, turning the TEA into a trusted agency. He is the best Commissioner of Education whom I have ever known in my lifetime. Tincy Miller is not supportive of Commissioner Scott and would do everything in her power as an SBOE member to undercut his positive efforts.

 

TINCY BECAME EMBITTERED

 

So what did Tincy do after she was ousted as the SBOE chair by Gov. Perry in 2007? She grew more bitter and vindictive, taking out her wrath time after time on the conservatives on the SBOE. She made life miserable for them as they fearlessly pushed to adopt Type #1 curriculum standards.

 

When the conservatives on the SBOE began the process of adopting brand new ELAR curriculum standards (TEKS), I evaluated seven different drafts and sent these evaluations out widely including to the SBOE members and TEA staffers. It certainly was not Tincy who stepped up to the plate at the SBOE meetings to pursue the flaws found in those drafts; it was the seven conservative SBOE members who did.

Then when I offered an updated, revised version of the TAD (relabeled
“Substitute Amendment”) to the SBOE for consideration (free for the taking, of course), it certainly was not Tincy who saw the value of adopting a document that was built upon the Type #1 Philosophy of Education. Partly because of Tincy’s lack of support, the Substitute Amendment went down in defeat again.

 

However, the conservatives still kept plugging along; and eventually new ELAR/TEKS were adopted that contain knowledge-based, academic content (some coming from the TAD/Substitute Amendment), thus moving our state AWAY FROM the Type #2 AND INTO the Type #1 philosophy of education.

 

Tincy constantly railed at the conservative SBOE members who worked so hard to put our public schools back on the right track; and if a person had time to go through the TEA’s archive of SBOE meetings, countless examples of Tincy’s public tirades could be documented.

 

After one of Tincy’s public tirades where she railed at the conservative members of the Board, a man who had served in the Texas legislature told me that such behavior would never be allowed on the floor of the Legislature. The person showing that kind of lack of respect for his fellow members would be escorted out of the chamber.

 

DEBATE OVER SCIENCE TEKS

 

 

Next came the huge debate over the Science curriculum standards (TEKS). It was statements such as the following that caused conservative voters not to re-elect Tincy Miller to the SBOE in November 2010:

 

Tincy stated in Texas Insider (4.28.09 – http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=8365 ):
In a clever and misleading ‘sound bite’ argument, the Intelligent Design/Creationists were determined to insert religious discussion into the science curriculum of millions of Texas schoolchildren by forcing educators to teach ‘weaknesses of Evolution’ … which deliberately confuses ‘hypothesis’ with scientific theory.

 

The theory of evolution is universally accepted by all legitimate peer-reviewed scientists as the foundation of biology. As one scientist stated: ‘using broad, imprecise terms dilutes and misdirects the debate away from this central issue: — religion in the biology classroom’.

 

On August 5, 2009, in Texas Insider (http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=13035), Tincy Miller also stated:

 

Under consideration was the question of whether to insert religious discussion into the curriculum, weakening the theory of evolution.

 

As always, this issue was passionately contested, debated & discussed – but after three days I, along with two other SBOE members, brokered a compromise that assured academic freedom and critical thinking by ensuring that all sides of scientific evidence are examined.

 

Here is what actually happened at the March 2009 meeting when the theory of evolution was being discussed. It was Bob Craig, Tincy Miller, and Pat Hardy, working with the Democrats, who forced the social conservatives to drop the much clearer wording that would have required teachers to teach both the “strengths and weaknesses” of leading scientific theories, including evolution. If the three RINO’s had stood with the social conservatives, the clearly worded “strengths and weaknesses” language would still be in the new Science TEKS.

 

However, because the social conservatives did not have a majority without the three RINO’s votes, then a compromise measure came forth.

 

This amendment was offered by Cynthia Dunbar. Bob Craig then offered a language insertion with the “all sides” wording in it. That is when the 13 members came together and passed Cynthia’s amendment.

 

Actually it was Bob Craig who offered the “all” sides wording that is ambiguous, and Bob Craig as a lawyer should have known better. He was trying so desperately to water down Cynthia’s amendment which had the phrase “supportive and not supportive” in it, that he crafted the ambiguous “all.” When a person says a teacher is to present “all sides,” then this wording technically means every opinion/report ever written. How could a teacher actually teach “all sides” of any issue? However, it was better for the social conservatives to accept the ambiguous “all” rather than to lose the debate completely.

 

We need to remember that it was Tincy (the compromiser) voting along with the other two RINO’s that caused the ambiguous language to be put into the Science TEKS rather than the clear wording of “strengths and weaknesses.”

 

THE SOCIAL STUDIES RESOLUTION AGAINST PRO-ISLAM/ANTI-CHRISTIAN CONTENT

Randy Rives, a private citizen, presented his Resolution to the Texas State Board of Education at its September 22-24, 2010 meeting. Rives was concerned that the Social Studies TEKS (Texas’ curriculum standards) tell publishers what must be put in textbooks but do not mandate what is prohibited from being placed in them.

In his Resolution, Rives presented definite examples from World History books used in Texas until 2003 that contained pro-Islam/anti-Christian statements; but because the World History books adopted in 2003 (and currently used in Texas’ public schools) were published by many of the same publishers, Rives was concerned that the same type of pro-Islam/anti-Christian content might still be in our current public school textbooks. The Rives Resolution was to make sure that publishers understand such pro-Islam/anti-Christian content is prohibited by the SBOE.

Tincy voted against the pro-Islamic, anti-Christian Resolution presented at the Sept. 22-24, 2010 SBOE meeting. Thankfully the Resolution passed on a vote of 7 to 5 (Lawrence Allen left early). Tincy justified her vote against the Resolution by publicly stating in Texas Insider (http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=36035#more-36035 ) that the Resolution was based upon “old textbooks published in 1999 (prior to 9/11)…some of the publishers looked over the resolution at the meeting and found several errors.”

 

In the Texas Insider article, Tincy let it slip that she relied upon the publishers to verify the bias in their own textbooks – as if these publishers would admit to such bias! The real truth is that there was a statement in the Resolution that showed examples of pro-Islam/anti-Christian bias from the World History book published by Houghton Mifflin-Harcourt, a company partly owned by the royal family of Dubai. However, by the date of the SBOE meeting (9.22.10), HMH was in the midst of restructuring; and that reference in the Appendix to the Resolution had to be removed. This did not, however, nullify the Resolution itself; and Tincy should have voted for it.

 

 

The examples presented by Randy Rives, a private citizen, in his Resolution were not from “old” textbooks as stated in Tincy’s Texas Insider quote. The SBOE Chair Gail Lowe carefully explained to the entire SBOE in the meeting that the explicit examples brought forth in the Resolution were taken from World History books in adoption from 1999 through 2003; but by SBOE Board rules (passed years ago), the Board could not address textbooks in the classrooms at that time (9.24.10) because the current texts had been under Texas adoption for more than 90 days. SBOE chair Gail Lowe ruled the Board could appropriately pass the Resolution citing the older books because Board members had themselves also found many of the same flaws in currently-adopted high school World History books.

 

Tincy should have voted with the other 7 to pass the Resolution. Instead, she thought she could vote against the Resolution and fool the public with her misinformation as stated in the Texas Insider.

 

Tincy is always the compromiser and never wants to take a courageous stand that could cause her to be publicly criticized. Thank goodness for the true conservatives on the SBOE who choose to do the right thing at their own peril.

 

I have posted at the bottom of this e-mail the examples presented in the Rives Resolution that clearly showed the pro-Islam/anti-Christian bias in the World History textbooks.

 

Recent investigations of a curriculum called C-SCOPE, used in over 900 Texas public schools, and produced by Texas Regional Service Centers still contain similar pro-Islam/anti-Christian bias. Tincy should have done everything in her power as an SBOE member to align herself with the members who voiced their concerns over the indoctrination of our public school children.

 

TINCY’S STATEMENT ABOUT 7,000 TEXTBOOK ERRORS

 

From what I have been told, Tincy is telling voters that she is responsible for finding 7,000 mistakes in textbooks.

 

To my knowledge, Tincy has never read a textbook, evaluated it line by line, and documented the errors and page numbers. It is public citizens who have done that and then have given their evaluations to the SBOE.

 

Educational Research Analysts for many years has done the grunge work of going laboriously through each textbook line by line, documenting the errors, and sending that documentation to the SBOE members. Then the conservatives on the Board (not Tincy) have spent hours verifying the public’s evaluations to make sure they are accurate before coming before the Board to present them to publishers.

 

According to Texas regulations, publishers then have to pay a fine if they do not correct the SBOE-approved list of factual errors. Tincy may have voted for the list, but she did nothing on her own to allow her to say she corrected 7,000 textbook errors. In fact, what Tincy did frequently while on the SBOE was to argue incessantly against the conservatives when they would present their concerns over textbook content to the Board.

 

PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND

 

Yes, Tincy did support the fiduciary responsibility of the SBOE to protect the Permanent School Fund; but the conservatives also supported that and were much more vocal in their support than was Tincy Miller. Ken Mercer took a chance of public retribution for speaking out time after time and telling the public that the PSF had plenty of money to pay for students’ textbooks.

 

LAPTOP COMPUTERS

 

Yes, Tincy did go to the Capital and verbalized her concerns over putting all school children on laptops and digitized textbooks. However, many other people (including the SBOE conservatives and people such as myself) have also been involved in the outcry against taking the authority over textbooks away from the elected members of the SBOE. Texas has a well-organized and well-executed public process for textbook adoptions, and HB 4294 and SB 6 have definitely undercut that authority, allowing the term “textbooks” to be changed to “instructional materials” and voiding the SBOE’s scrutiny over such.

 

 

APPENDIX TO RIVES RESOLUTION:

 

 

 

Appendix I-A

WORLD HISTORY: Patterns of Interaction (McDougal, 1999), approved for Texas high schools from 1999 to 2003, devoted 120 student text lines to Christian beliefs, practices, and holy writings, less than half its 248 on Islamic beliefs, practices, and holy writings; and dwelled for 27 student text lines on Crusaders’ massacre of Muslims at Jerusalem in 1099 while censoring Muslims’ massacres of Christians there in 1244 and at Antioch in 1268.
SE 40, bottom right par., lines 1-3 and 6-9 7 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 138, lower left, “Religious and Ethical Systems,” lines 9-12 4 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 153, par. 5, lines 2-8 7 lines on Jesus Christ’s work and teachings
SE 154, par. 1, lines 3-10 8 lines on Jesus Christ’s teachings, including a 5-line quote from Luke’s Gospel
SE 154, par. 3 6 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 155, par. 3, lines 6-10 5 lines on Christian beliefs, including a 2-line quote by Paul
SE 156, par. 1, lines 2-7 6 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 157, par. 3, line 5 – par. 4 10 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 201, par. 1, lines 3-4 2 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 230, top left, “Religious and Ethical Systems,” line 1 1 line on Islamic beliefs
SE 234, par. 4, line 4 – par. 5 11 lines on Islamic beliefs, including a 3-line quote from the Koran
SE 235, ” SPOTLIGHT ON ,” par. 2, lines 1-6 6 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 236 – SE 237, par. 4, line 6 87 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices, including a 3-line quote from the Koran
SE 236, left margin, picture caption 13 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 236, right margin, picture caption 9 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 237, right box, “Daily Life” 23 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 243, par. 1 12 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices, including 3 lines of quotes from the Koran
SE 243, par. 3, lines 8-11 4-line quote from Mohammed
SE 246, “A VOICE FROM THE PAST” 8-line quote from Islamic religious literature
SE 246, par. 6, lines 3-5 3 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 248, bottom right box, “Religion,” lines 1-7 7 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 254, top par., lines 4-7 4 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 254, right par., “Ritual” 8 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 254, bottom, “The Cross” 3 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 255, top and middle par. 26 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 255, bottom right, “A Cross of Palms” 5 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 258, top par., lines 4-9 6 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 258, right par., “Celebration” 14 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 258, bottom right, “Crescent Moon” 5 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 259, par. 1-2 17 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 259, bottom left, “Prayer Rug” 5 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 264, chart, col. 2, “Christianity,” lines 2 and 7-24 19 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 264, chart, col. 4, “Islam,” lines 2 and 6-21 17 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 347, center col., “William of Tyre “ 27 lines on Crusaders’ massacre of Muslims at Jerusalem in 1099, nothing on Muslim massacres of Christians there in 1244 and at Antioch in 1268

 

 

Appendix I-B

In WORLD HISTORY: Connections to Today (Prentice, 1999), approved for Texas high schools from 1999 to 2003, Christian beliefs, practices, and holy writings received 82 student text lines of coverage, just over half of Islam’s 159. Three passages charged medieval Christianity with sexism; one said the Church “laid the foundations for anti-Semitism.” It described Crusaders’ massacres of European Jews but not the Muslim Tamerlane’s massacre of perhaps 90,000 fellow Muslims at Baghdad in 1401 and of perhaps 100,000 Indian POWs at Delhi in 1398.
SE 144, col. 2, par. 5, line 4 – SE 145, col. 1, par. 5 SE 145, picture caption, lines 1-6 SE 145, col. 1, par. 6, lines 2-7 66 lines on Christian beliefs and teachings, including 7 lines from the Sermon on the Mount; reference to Jesus’ miracles, resurrection, and ascension; indirect reference to incarnation; eternal life to believers in Jesus.
SE 146, col. 1, par. 1, lines 6-17 12 lines on Christian beliefs, including a 6-line quote from St. Paul
SE 255, picture caption, lines 2-3 2 lines on Muslim beliefs
SE 256, col. 1, par. 1, lines 6-13 8-line quote from Mohammed
SE 256, col. 2, par. 2, lines 2-4 3 lines on Muslim beliefs
SE 256, col. 2, par. 4, line 4 – SE 257, col. 1, par. 1 22 lines on Muslim beliefs, including a 7-line quote from the Koran
SE 257, col. 1, par. 3, lines 2-4 3 lines on Muslim beliefs
SE 257, picture caption, lines 6-8 3 lines on Muslim practices
SE 257, col. 2, par. 1 – SE 258, col. 2, par. 2, line 10 76 lines on Muslim beliefs and practices
SE 258, col. 2, par. 4 – SE 260, col. 1, line 3 21 lines on Muslim beliefs and practices
SE 259, chart, row 5, “Christianity” 4 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 259, chart, row 6, “Islam” 6 lines on Muslim beliefs
SE 262, col. 2, par. 1, lines 4-7 4 lines on Muslim beliefs and practices
SE 268, col. 1, lines 1-11 11 lines on Muslim beliefs
SE 197, col. 1, par. 3 Medieval church entertained a dualistic stereotype of women as especially weak and sin prone, yet purer and higher in spirit.
SE 197, col. 1, par. 4, lines 3-6 Medieval church followed “a double standard” of justice, punishing women more severely.
SE 199, col. 1, par. 4 Late medieval church increasingly restricted women’s’ rise to prominence.
SE 200, col. 2, par. 1, lines 5-8 Medieval church “laid the foundations for anti-Semitism” by blaming Jews for Jesus’ death.
SE 222, col. 1, par. 2, lines 6-8 Crusaders massacred some European Jews.
SE 266, col. 1, par. 1 Brief discussion of the Muslim Tamerlane, no mention of his massacres at Delhi and Baghdad

 

 

Appendix I-C

WORLD HISTORY: The Human Odyssey (West, 1999), approved for Texas high schools from 1999 to 2003, devoted 176 student text lines to Islamic beliefs, practices, and holy writings but only 139 to Christian beliefs, practices, and holy writings. It said that Islam “brought untold wealth to thousands and a better life to millions,” but that “because of [Europeans’ Christian] religious zeal … many peoples died and many civilizations were destroyed” in the 1500s. It contrasted “the Muslim concern with cleanliness” with the Swedish Rus, who were “the filthiest of God’s creatures.”
SE 181, col. 2, par. 3, line 5 – SE 182, bottom section, col. 2, line 7 19 lines on Christian beliefs, including 10 lines of quotes by Jesus in the Gospels
SE 182 – SE 183, “The Sermon on the Mount” 67 lines on Christian beliefs and practices, including a 53-line quote from the Sermon on the Mount
SE 183, bottom section, col. 1, lines 1-3 3 lines on Christian beliefs, including a 2-line quote by Jesus
SE183, bottom section, col. 2, lines 5-9 5 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 184, col. 1, par. 1, lines 4-13 10 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 185, col. 1, par. 1, lines 6-7 and 9-13 7 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 185, col. 2, lines 2-8 7 lines on Christian beliefs
SE 185, col. 2, line 13 – par. 1, line 5 12 lines on Christian beliefs and practices
SE 185, col. 2, par. 2 9 lines on Christian beliefs and practices, including a 3-line quote from Paul
SE 224, col. 1, line 28 – col. 2, line 2 12-line quote from the Koran
SE 226, col. 2, par. 1, line 5 – SE 227, col. 1, line 4 14 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 227, col. 2, par. 2, lines 9-14 6 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 228 – SE 230, col. 1 49 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 228, top, picture caption 4 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 228, bottom, picture caption, lines 1-5 5 lines on Islamic practices
SE 229, top, picture caption, lines 1-2 2 lines on Islamic practices
SE 229, col. 1 23 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 230, col.2, par.1, lines 3-7 5 lines on Islamic beliefs
SE 239, col. 2, par. 1 9 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices
SE 244 47 lines on Islamic beliefs and practices, including a 40-line quote from the Koran
SE 249, col. 2, par. 2, lines 6-7 “… Islam also brought untold wealth to thousands and a better life to millions.”
SE 366 – SE 367, col. 1 Swedish Rus were “the filthiest of God’s creatures,” versus “the Muslim concern with cleanliness.”
SE 495, “SECTION REVIEW,” no. 5, lines 3-5 “Because of [Europeans’ Christian] religious zeal … many native peoples died and many civilizations were destroyed” in the 1500s.

 

Appendix II

Gilbert Sewall’s Islam in the Classroom: What the Textbooks Tell Us (American Textbook Council, 2008)

identifies these problems in ten 2005-07 copyright middle and high school Social Studies textbooks. William Bennetta finds some of the same defects in the high school textbook World Cultures: A Global Mosaic (Prentice, 2001). Mr. Sewall chairs the American Textbook Council in New York City . Mr. Bennetta, a Californian, is president of The Textbook League and edits The Textbook Letter.

 

 

 

 

TWO ARTICLES WRITTEN RECENTLY THAT CONTAIN MORE INFORMATION ABOUT TINCY MILLER

 

 

12.13.11 — “Texas State Board of Education Seat – Not for Sale”

by Donna Garner —

http://libertylinked.com/posts/9077/texas-state-board-of-education/View.aspx

 

=========================

 

1.23.12 — “Tincy Miller – Trying To Make Herself Larger Than Life”

by Donna Garner —

 

http://educationviews.org/2012/01/24/tincy-miller-trying-to-make-herself-larger-than-life/

 

 

LIST OF CONSERVATIVES ON THE SBOE IN 2008

 

David Bradley

Barbara Cargill

Cynthia Dunbar

Terri Leo

Gail Lowe

Don McLeroy

Ken Mercer

 

LIST OF CONSERVATIVES ON SBOE PRESENTLY

 

David Bradley

Barbara Cargill

Charlie Garza

Terri Leo

Gail Lowe

Ken Mercer

 

 

SLATE OF CONSERVATIVES PRESENTLY RUNNING FOR SBOE

Charlie Garza – District 1 – El Paso

Ken Mercer – District 5 – San Antonio

Donna Bahorich – District 6 – Houston

David Bradley – District 7 – Beaumont

Barbara Cargill – District 8 – The Woodlands

Randy Stevenson – District 9 – Tyler

Jeff Fleece – District 10 – Liberty Hill

Gail Spurlock – District 12 – Richardson

Gail Lowe — District 14 – Longview

Marty Rowley – District 15 — Amarillo

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Related Posts

Tags

Share This

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.