"War of the words"

A battle is looming in the Conejo Valley over how to define marriage in high school textbooks: man and woman or partners?
By T. Kisken
June 26, 2005

In a small Thousand Oaks boardroom dominated by debates over shrinking school budgets, five part-time politicians will face one of the nation's deepest divides Tuesday with a vote framed as a referendum on defining marriage.

All because two sentences in the newest edition of an 832-page health textbook refer to spouses as individuals and people rather than man and woman.

It's the type of controversy textbooks ignite quicker than Santa Ana winds rev up brush fires. Discussions of evolution, homosexuality and Islam's role in world history fuel wars over the influence of religion and politics on public schools as well as the role of books in teaching students how, or what, to think.

Often the battles pit people perceived as conservatives against those labeled as liberals. Each blames the other.

"When the public speaks up, it's called 'censorship,' " complained Neal Frey, leader of a Texas group that helped push successfully last year for schoolbooks that define marriage as man and woman and rely almost exclusively on abstinence in teaching birth control. " 'Censorship' is when the left loses its monopoly on textbook content."

The battleground in the Conejo Valley Unified School District is the 2005 edition of a ninth-grade textbook, "Glencoe Health." Recommended by a committee of high school teachers, the book covers issues such as nutrition, alcohol, HIV and stress.

Two short chapters include definitions of marriage, carefully crafted departures from the traditional male-female descriptions employed by the 1996 Glencoe edition currently in the district's schools.

"A commitment is a promise or a pledge that partners make to each other," the new edition says. "Marriage is a long-term commitment."

The wording captured the attention of Mike Dunn, a firefighter elected to the board in November after campaigning on his support of family values, President Bush and keeping the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. He argued the gender-less phrasing seemed an attempt at being politically correct in a state where voters five years ago overwhelmingly approved a proposition designed to insulate marriage against same-sex unions.

Sending e-mails to board members asking for support, Dunn proposed rejecting the recommended book. He wants schools to use the Texas version of the Glencoe book that uses almost the exact same definition of marriage as in California, including references to spouses as partners. But in two instances, the book refers to gender.

"When a man and a woman decide to marry, they sometimes attend premarital counseling sessions to build skills for a healthy, lasting relationship," the Texas edition reads.

The difference seems absolute to Dunn, who believes his view reflects a community mandate. He said he would also support using a health text from Holt, Rinehart and Winston publishing company, which describes marriage as between a man and woman. Or high schools could keep using the current book.

A majority of board members have at various points over the past two weeks voiced support for the book that the teachers liked because of its easy-to-read style. But if they vote for the book, Dunn contended, they'll pay.

"If they want to get re-elected, I would not be voting for that politically correct textbook," Dunn said. "Redefining marriage in the Conejo Valley is not going to fly with the voters."

Pat Phelps, a former software programmer and current PTA leader who's been on the school board for six years, understands she will be on the hot seat Tuesday. She's not sure why, noting that instead of voting on whether the book teaches students about diet and exercise, board members are being pressed to address same-sex unions.

"The issue they're bringing up is not a decision the school board should make," she said, noting it's up to legislatures, courts and the public to define marriage.

Besides, textbooks shouldn't impose one point of view in a state defined by its differences of opinion.

"I think (books) should give as much information as they have, keeping it as free of bias as they can," Phelps said, contending the fight is more about Dunn's conservative Christian agenda than teaching kids. "This is one sentence in a paragraph, in a chapter, in a book that kids never would have analyzed that deeply. ... They really think ninth-graders read their textbooks?"

Fighting over a nation's future

Similar wars break out all the time. Ventura County School Board member Ron Matthews has long advocated changing science books so that evolution and creationism are both taught as theories. Other districts and states battle over intelligent design, the theory that the universe's complexity proves it was planned by a guiding force.

Some debates deal with how textbooks present people of different races and ethnicities. A New York textbook researcher will spend his summer at the University of California, Santa Barbara, studying his premise that public school textbooks present whitewashed descriptions of Islam.

Sometimes, the controversies are spawned by supplemental materials. In Montgomery County, Md., a parents group went to court to stop a health education course that included a video in the 10th grade on condoms. It worked. The school board voted to kill the program six months after it had been approved in a unanimous vote.

The battles happen because textbooks and classroom videos offer access to children and, with them, the future, said Charles Haynes, a constitutional scholar who studies the interplay between public education and religion. He argues that public school systems were founded as a way to help children understand what it means to be an American citizen and how to sculpt a nation out of diversity.

"Public schools are traditionally where we define the nation," Haynes said. "There's a lot at stake. ... There's a great influence."

Some people see texts as a way to defend and preserve concepts, but others see a chance to introduce new ideas. So they fight, sometimes driven more by the agenda of making a point than getting a book changed.

William Bennetta, a writer and editor from Petaluma, grew so tired of what he believed were fallacies in schoolbooks that he formed a watchdog group called The Textbook League. Now, he fills a Web site and newsletter with often-seething critiques.

"Kids year after year read junk, garbage and outright lies that have been contrived to make the books appeal to certain adults who have power over textbook purchases," he said, suggesting much of that influence rests with conservative Christian groups.

He criticizes books that teach history, science and world politics. As far as defining marriage, he asserted a health book has no business taking sides.

"Clearly that question is in flux," Bennetta said. "If the book doesn't say that, obviously the book is scamming, pandering to the far right."

But state standards mandate that high school health classes deal with the dynamics of marriage and family life. If relationships are discussed, they have to be defined, said Frey, who sees nothing wrong with describing spouses as man and woman. He's irked by textbooks that use words such as partners or other examples of what he calls asexual stealth phrases.

"A stealth phrase refers to marriage in sex-neutral terms," he said. "The intent is to legitimize same-sex marriages."

Frey is a one-time U.S. history professor who leads Educational Research Analysts in Longview, Texas. The conservative group reviews textbooks and supported the Texas Board of Education in forcing textbook publishers such as Glencoe to describe marriage in terms of a husband and wife. Frey's efforts are sometimes labeled as censorship, but he thinks of himself as a voice of the people, noting that while states review textbooks, everyday citizens have little input.

"This is a democratic check and balance on otherwise unaccountable editors and authors," Frey said. "They have no monitoring from the public. Why should they have that kind of authority?"

Dancing around controversy

Others suggest conservative and liberal interest groups have too much influence, intimidating publishers into providing books worded so cautiously that they teach little more than how to avoid controversy.

Schools in California, Florida and Texas command about one-third of a textbook and curriculum industry that sells about $7 billion worth of products each year. And if educational leaders in the power states want a book revised, publishers often have no choice but to make the changes.

"They're damned if they do and damned if they don't," said Stephen Driesler, executive director of the Association of American Publishers. "If you don't get adopted in a state like California, that's a significant loss of revenue. After you've invested tens of millions of dollars on a product, you don't want to pass up the chance of selling that in the nation's largest state."

In California, the state reviews and adopts a list of textbooks for elementary and middle schools. High schools choose their own books but must meet guidelines that dictate what issues are taught and in what manner. The state also weighs in on the way texts deal with race, gender and religion. One standard recommends that publishers avoid using terms that specify gender for fear men will be represented differently than women. If a book includes illustrations, about as many women should be shown as men.

"If you're not in compliance, you don't get adopted," Driesler said, adding that California has more guidelines that exert more pressure on publishers than any other state. "California is the worst case in the country in terms of its compliance guidelines."

Publishers respond by dancing around controversy or avoiding it altogether, according to Diane Ravitch, a former U.S. assistant secretary of education who wrote the 2003 book, "Language Police."

"Pick up any major newspaper ... and you will see stories about murder, suicide, war and abortion. You might even see stories about athletically superior black athletes," she said in an e-mail interview. "Yet the textbook editors would remove almost all of those references for fear of enraging some parent or pressure group."

The books are dumbed down so much that students may make fun of what they're reading, understanding it has been "neutered to remove anything that anyone might not like," Ravitch said.

Some people argue bias has a place in textbooks as long as it's labeled. Take away opinions and attitude from reading material and kids are no longer taught how to distinguish fact from opinion, said Jack Farrell, who helps train teachers in the Conejo Valley Unified School District.

"They accept everything as given," Farrell said. "There's no controversy and there's really no discussion."

Pointing fingers

Debate is one thing that isn't lacking as Conejo Valley board members argue over marriage. They've been told by Dunn's supporters they're obligated to reflect state law and portray marriage as a union between a husband and wife. And they've been told by opponents that excluding gays and lesbians is an attempt to keep students from seeing the world as it is.

Scott Veres, who teaches health at Thousand Oaks High School, said he doesn't see defining marriage as that important of an issue, at least not in a ninth-grade class.

"It really doesn't come up that much," he said. "They're freshmen. They're a long way from marriage."

Dunn blames the controversy on the textbook's publisher, Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, for changing its description of marriage. A McGraw-Hill spokesman said the revisions evolved over six years of review and are tailored to meet changing sensitivities. He said about 30 other California school districts have accepted the edition that Dunn wants to reject.

But members of some school boards outside of the Conejo Valley seemed relieved to find their districts use texts that describe marriage as man and woman.

"That's the traditional definition," said Simi Valley School Board member Greg Stratton, noting that he sides with Dunn. "That's the law in California."

In the Moorpark Unified School District, teachers have recommended the Glencoe text that has sparked controversy in the Conejo Valley. Moorpark board member Tom Baldwin thinks his board will approve the book, describing Dunn's proposal as an effort to put a wedge between people.

Some people say debates about definitions miss the point. Like Dunn, Wayne Jacobsen of Moorpark said he believes that marriage is limited to a man and woman. But schools and textbooks shouldn't offer a conservative or liberal definition of marriage because that excludes and alienates, he said.

Instead, schools should focus on the conflict, teaching students about nationwide battles over same-sex marriage in a way that doesn't take sides, Jacobsen said. He leads an organization called BridgeBuilders that tries to find middle ground in school battles over sex education, prayer and evolution.

Haynes, the constitutional scholar, argues that textbook wars focus not only on how schools teach children but on how democracies deal with different opinions.

"If care isn't taken to consider the minority viewpoint, to consider the voices of people who feel left out, then schools will be deeply hurt," he said.