ALA Double Standard on Accuracy in Texas State Board of Education Proposal on School Book Content; ALA President Plagiarizes to Promote Matter Outside ALA Purview

The American Library Association [ALA], which "provide[s] leadership for the development, promotion, and improvement of library and information services and the profession of librarianship," has decided to weigh in on something outside its mission, namely, what children are to be taught in Texas public schools.  ALA President Camila A. Alire has written to the Texas State Board of Education [Texas SBOE] expressing "deep concern regarding the new social studies and history curriculum standards being considered by the Texas [SBOE]."  Why?  A lack of accuracy: "These changes appear to emphasize particular viewpoints while de-emphasizing or deleting competing viewpoints, at the expense of balance and accuracy."

The ALA Has No Standing in the Educational Arena

First of all, the ALA has no standing to interfere in this matter.  Promoting library services and librarianship has nothing to do with "the quality of history and social studies education in Texas and many other states."  Yet the ALA president states conclusively, after providing no facts while promoting the ALA and school libraries generally:

If the changes proposed by the Texas [SBOE] are adopted, ALA fears that the new standards will not only impair the quality of history and social studies education in Texas and many other states but will also have a chilling effect on school libraries' ability to provide access to in-depth and diverse materials that promote free inquiry, critical thinking, and essential information literacy skills.

What a thinly-veiled excuse to imply standing.  Even an ALA Council member acknowledges the ALA may be acting outside its purview, emphasis mine:

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Carrie Gardner wrote:

Hello,

I just returned from the Spring meeting of the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee.

We had a very heated discussion regarding what Texas is considering as far as school curriculum

If one checks this website: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/

It seems as if the vote was preliminary and that a comment period will be held in the near future.

Make no mistake about it, I personally disagree with the proposed direction of the Texas curriculum.  However I question if the ALA or ALA IFC should send a critical statement to the Texas folks.

*They are not censoring information.  They are selecting to highlight information that many find objectionable. 

*Most state department of educations have created state standards and curriculum documents that hightlight (emphasis) some information over others.  My example of this comes from the state of Virginia.  A few years ago I trained educators to work in this state.  I used the official Virginia documents in my classes.   They teach about famous Virginians that I felt had less impact on American history than others from other states. Virginia, like Texas has the right to do that.

[Yes I am aware that in the last two months the Obama administration has started to discuss a national curriculum. Those issues are preliminary.]

I feel that ALA has a long standing tradition of fighting for all speech and opinions including those that many members would not entertain as facts in their own minds.

Carrie Gardner
At large

The ALA Double Standard on Accuracy

More seriously, however, is the double standard the ALA uses on the issue of "accuracy."  In Texas, the ALA is complaining that the Texas SBOE is tossing aside "balance and accuracy."  The ALA is opposing the Board's decision by feigning interest in the laudable goal of improving "accuracy."  But that's in Texas.  In Florida, it's the total opposite.  In Florida, it's a double standard.  You see, in Florida, the ALA opposes accuracy in public schools!

In Florida, the Miami-Dade School Board decided to remove a book about Cuba because the book was factually inaccurate.  The matter ended up in federal court where a district judge decided against the school but the appellate court reversed that decision and the US Supreme Court denied certiorori.  The appellate decision ruled the Board had "the right to apply accuracy as a criteria for educational purposes."

The "right to apply accuracy."  That is what the ALA claims to be seeking in Texas.  But, in Florida, the ALA opposed that right!  The ALA decided to submit a brief to the US Supreme Court to have it overturn the appellate court and the "right to apply accuracy."  So, regarding Texas's efforts to improve education for its children, the ALA demands accuracy as its means to prevent any changes it opposes; but when it comes to efforts to propagandize children about Cuba, suddenly the ALA opposes the right to apply accuracy and opposes local control of the public school library.  The ALA, by the way, loves Cuba.

The ALA said in the Florida matter:  "It is difficult to image a more blatant exercise of a school board's political motivations than this case."  The 11th Circuit US Court of Appeals apparently disagreed and ruled against the ALA/ACLU's position.  I predict the ALA is about to see another community reject its similarly false message.

See my previous blog posts on the Miami-Dade School Board matter to find the factual support for the statements I have made above:

• Humberto Fontova, the Media's "Book Banning" Claims, and the ALA's Opposition to the "Right to Apply Accuracy" in Public Schools, 17 February 2009.

• Cert Denied: Vamos a Cuba; Cuban-Americans Lead Way for Districts to Back Parents Rights Against ALA/ACLU False Claims of Banning and Censorship, 17 November 2009.

The ALA's Unclean Hands:  Plagiarism by the ALA President

Let alone the ALA has no standing in the educational arena, let alone the ALA has a double standard in requiring accuracy, the ALA, President Camila A. Alire herself, has signed a letter to the Texas Education Agency that is nearly 100% plagiarized.  That's theft.

Shocking as this statement of the ALA's wholesale copying may be, I am just the messenger, not the plagiarizer.  The ALA president's letter is over her signature and is dated 13 May 2010.  It is a near complete copy of a letter dated 11 May 2010 by Martin Garnar, Chair of the ALA's Intellectual Freedom Committee:

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Garnar, Martin wrote:

Greetings Councilors.  After much discussion and deliberation, the Intellectual Freedom Committee has developed the attached statement as a response to the proposed curriculum standards in Texas.  Our strategy was to focus on the benefits of having the widest range of viewpoints available to students and to highlight the crucial role played by school librarians and libraries in providing access to "complete and full information and diverse points of view."

I would like to thank the IFC members and liaisons for their careful consideration of this issue, as well as the OIF staff for their invaluable support and assistance during this process.

Martin Garnar
Chair, Intellectual Freedom Committee
---
Martin Garnar
Trustee Emeritus, LeRoy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund -- www.merrittfund.org
Reference Services Librarian and Associate Professor of Library Science
Dayton Memorial Library, Regis University -- www.regis.edu/library
[Attachment reprinted below.] ....

Camila A. Alire is not on the Intellectual Freedom Committee.  She has clearly plagiarized.  Both Alire's letter and Garnar's letter are reprinted below.  Go ahead, compare them.  See for yourself.  It's truly disgraceful and I predict there will be no consequences whatsoever.

Note that the ALA's Executive Director Keith Michael Fiels did not predict or expect this wholesale plagiarism.  Instead, he expected Garnar's letter would be sent with a separate letter from Alire.  In a 11 May 2010 email to many ALA members, he said, "The Board has been waiting to hear from the Intellectual Freedom Committee.  President Camila Alire will be sending a letter including the statement to the Texas DOE this week.  We'll share with Councilors and the membership as soon as it goes out."

But later, on 17 May 2010, Mr. Fiels did not complain about the plagiarism: "Attached is the letter which ALA President Camila Alire sent to the Texas State Board of Education with regard to the proposed changes to the social studies curriculum there.  The letter reflects the statement developed by the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee."  It does more than "reflect," Mr. Fiels.  You see?  No consequences.  Plagiarism is a-okay with the ALA.

By the way, plagiarism is not new to the ALA.  See "Plagiarism by ALA Executive Board Member Diane Chen," 6 July 2009.  Admittedly, Diane Chen's plagiarism was far less serious.

Even Camila Alire's Signature is Plagiarized

Oh my.  I went looking for a graphic of Camila Alire and I found a postcard sent to Renewing Members.  The handwritten signature of Camila A. Alire on the postcard is the exact same signature on the plagiarized letter sent to the Texas SBOE!  What a fraud!  Camila A Liar!  I know people use autopens and that's perfectly legal, but on a plagiarized letter evidencing intellectual theft from the intellectual freedom experts?  Well I don't know for sure due to the picture quality but it sure looks like the same signature to me.  How about you?

Conclusion: The ALA is Not Authoritative on Education Standards for Multiple Reasons

The ALA wishes to be considered authoritative on the proposal before the Texas SBOE. Yet it has no standing, it uses double standards on accuracy in school books, and it plagiarizes and condones plagiarism and fakes signatures.  I'll venture a guess some of these observations apply to a number of other parties opposing the proposal.  Further, the ALA has lost on similar issues in other communities.

Good luck to the Texas SBOE navigating the political shoals.  Its members will need luck with statements such as those from the ALA.  But the goal of presenting school children with accurate information makes the effort worth all the trouble.

I wonder if there are criminal consequences for submitting plagiarized material with faked signatures to Texas state agencies.

I have reprinted certain relevant sources below.  And please add your comments to this blog post of my opinion.

(Double standards graphic credit.  Plagiarism graphic credit.) 



NOTE ADDED 16 MARCH 2011:

To date the ALA has taken no action vis-à-vis the ALA President's plagiarism.  The ALA clearly condones such plagiarism.  In the real world, plagiarism is not condoned.  See "Washington Post: We 'Borrowed' Material," by Burgess Everett, Politico, 16 March 2011.

Hey ALA, this is how your response to the plagiarism might appear: "Editor's Note:  An Apology," by Editor, The Washington Post, 16 March 2011.

---

Letter from ALA President Camila A. Alire to Texas Education Agency

Texas Education Agency
Texas State Board of Education
1701 North Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701

May 13, 2010

Dear Board Members:

I am writing on behalf of the American Library Association to express our deep concern regarding the new social studies and history curriculum standards being considered by the Texas State Board of Education. Throughout the process of developing the new curriculum standards, State Board members have proposed changes to the standards that had been submitted by trained, professional educators. These changes appear to emphasize particular viewpoints while de-emphasizing or deleting competing viewpoints, at the expense of balance and accuracy.

Because schools and school libraries need to prepare young persons to address the diversity of ideas and experiences they will encounter and to think
critically for themselves, students have a right to accurate, balanced, comprehensive, and objective educational materials. The American Library Association (ALA) therefore joins with the Texas Library Association and REFORMA (The National Association to Promote Library and Information Services to Latinos and the Spanish-speaking) in urging the Texas State Board of Education to adopt balanced history and social studies curriculum standards that are drafted by educational professionals and scholars and that reflect the diversity of people and ideas in our society.

ALA affirms that intellectual freedom is a fundamental human right. In fulfillment of this principle, it defends the right of individuals to read, seek information, speak freely, and to hold any belief on any subject, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Libraries of all types foster the right to intellectual freedom by providing library services that assure free access to all ideas through which any and all sides of a question, controversy, cause, or philosophy may be explored. By making available the widest possible range of viewpoints, opinions, and ideas, libraries ensure that each person has the opportunity to become an informed and literate person capable of self-government and self-education.

The school library plays a unique role in promoting intellectual freedom by serving as a point of voluntary access to information and ideas and as a learning laboratory for students as they acquire critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed in a pluralistic society. School librarians provide resources and services that create and sustain an atmosphere of free inquiry and educate students in the use of critical thinking skills to empower them to pursue free inquiry responsibly and independently.

School libraries support the mission of the school district by developing collections that are consistent with its philosophy, goals, and objectives. Resources in the school library are an integral component of the curriculum and provide access to complete and full information and diverse points of view on both current and historical issues not always available through textbooks or classroom instruction.

The ability to access library resources and services free of constraints resulting from personal, partisan, or doctrinal disapproval is critical to the school library's mission of fostering intellectual freedom and of preparing students to be active civic participants who are information literate and able to find, evaluate, and use information for both personal and academic pursuits. These educational goals are best achieved when scholars, educators and librarians with specialized knowledge of their field develop standards and curricula without reference to their personal, political, social, or religious views.

If the changes proposed by the Texas State Board of Education are adopted, ALA fears that the new standards will not only impair the quality of history and social studies education in Texas and many other states but will also have a chilling effect on school libraries' ability to provide access to in-depth and diverse materials that promote free inquiry, critical thinking, and essential information literacy skills.

For these reasons, we urge the Texas State Board of Education to approve the social study standards as originally recommended by the expert reviewers. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

/s/

Camila A. Alire
President
American Library Association

---

Statement by the American Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee on the Proposed Social Studies and History Curriculum Standards Being Considered by the Texas State Board of Education

by Martin Garnar

11 May 2010

The American Library Association is deeply concerned about the new social studies and history curriculum standards being considered by the Texas State Board of Education.  Throughout the process of developing the new curriculum standards, State Board members have proposed changes to the standards that had been submitted by trained, professional educators. These changes appear to emphasize particular viewpoints while de-emphasizing or deleting competing viewpoints, at the expense of balance and accuracy. 

ALA affirms that intellectual freedom is a fundamental human right.  In fulfillment of this principle, it defends the right of individuals to read, seek information, speak freely, and to hold any belief on any subject, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Libraries of all types foster the right to intellectual freedom by providing library services that assure free access to all ideas through which any and all sides of a question, controversy, cause, or philosophy may be explored.  By making available the widest possible range of viewpoints, opinions and ideas, libraries ensure that each person has the opportunity to become an informed and literate person capable of self-government and self-education.

The school library plays a unique role in promoting intellectual freedom by serving as a point of voluntary access to information and ideas and as a learning laboratory for students as they acquire critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed in a pluralistic society.  School librarians provide resources and services that create and sustain an atmosphere of free inquiry and educate students in the use of critical thinking skills to empower them to pursue free inquiry responsibly and independently. 

School libraries support the mission of the school district by developing collections that are consistent with its philosophy, goals, and objectives.  Resources in the school library are an integral component of the curriculum and provide access to complete and full information and diverse points of view on both current and historical issues not always available through textbooks or classroom instruction. 

The ability to access library resources and services free of constraints resulting from personal, partisan, or doctrinal disapproval is critical to the school library's mission of fostering intellectual freedom and of preparing students to be active civic participants who are information literate and able to find, evaluate, and use information for both personal and academic pursuits.  These educational goals are best achieved when scholars, educators and librarians with specialized knowledge of their field develop standards and curricula without reference to their personal, political, social, or religious views. 

If the changes proposed by the Texas State Board of Education are adopted, ALA fears that the new standards will not only impair the quality of history and social studies education in Texas and many other states, but will also have a chilling effect on school libraries' ability to provide access to in-depth and diverse materials that promote free inquiry, critical thinking, and essential information literacy skills.

Because schools and school libraries need to prepare young persons to address the diversity of ideas and experiences they will encounter and to think critically for themselves, students have a right to accurate, balanced, comprehensive, and objective educational materials.  The American Library Association therefore joins with the Texas Library Association and REFORMA in urging the Texas State Board of Education to adopt balanced history and social studies curriculum standards that are drafted by educational professionals and scholars and reflect the diversity of people and ideas in our society.

---

Texas Library Association

Resolution on State Curriculum Standards

Whereas, The Texas State Board of Education recently gave initial approval for the state’s new social studies curriculum, and the Board approved a document that contained several changes from the proposal submitted by educators; and

Whereas, The changes proposed by Board members have garnered national attention, and many educator groups believe that the proposed changes (some of which have been incorporated) degrade the quality of historical balance and accuracy; and

Whereas, Texas is one of the two largest markets for textbooks (and the largest currently adopting new standards), and the decisions finalized on the social studies curriculum will affect other markets, as publishers determine what editions they will produce; and

Whereas, The full curriculum standards will be posted on the Texas Education Agency (TEA) website for review by mid-April, and the public will then have a 30-day window to comment on the proposed standards; and

Whereas, The TEA can revise those standards based on public comment and then send revised rules back to the Texas State Board of Education for a final vote; and

Whereas, The Texas Library Association (TLA) believes strongly that education is best achieved by a broad and balanced approach and that few things are more fundamental to a child’s perception and understanding of history and life than the views reflected in primary textbook materials; and

Whereas, For this reason, curriculum standards must be the product of a deliberative and rigorous process that relies on the best trained professionals – educators and those with specialized knowledge of the field—and the input of the public; and

Whereas, The Texas Library Association maintains that such curriculum standards should promote the most comprehensive, accurate, and balanced assessment of the topical area under question; and

Whereas, State Board members nominated educators and others to advise on the creation of standards, with an extended review process that occurred during the drafting stage of the proposed social studies curriculum to insure balance; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Texas Library Association urges educators and interested members of the public to respond during the comment period of the newly approved draft of social studies standards and to contact the State Board of Education members and elected officials; and, be it further

Resolved, That the Texas Library Association urges the State Board of Education to approve the social studies curriculum standards drafted by educational professionals and knowledgeable parties and to rely on the collective judgment of educators when determining specific content areas; and, be it further

Resolved, That the Texas Library Association urges the State Board of Education to assure that the children of Texas benefit from professionally-crafted and balanced textbooks free of any influence outside of the educational arena.

Adopted by the Texas Library Association Executive Board

---

Education Board Seeking Objectivity in Standards
By ROBERT C. KOONS
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
May 13, 2010, 8:34PM

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7004327.html

The State Board of Education's proposed revisions for K-12 social studies curricula have come under fire from the radical left.  Contrary to what an irresponsible media campaign would lead you to believe, the board has taken a few small steps in the direction of promoting objectivity in our educational standards, and it is their critics who are seeking to perpetuate a biased and one-sided treatment of our nation's history.

Studies have revealed how unbalanced America's humanities departments are.  Democrats outnumber Republicans by a large margin.  In the history department at the University of Texas at Austin, out of 50 registered voters, only one is a Republican.  Moderate and conservative Democrats are also rare.  This political slant is reinforced by the economics of scholarship: Academic historians have been trained and have invested their careers in a profession that counts as legitimate only those subfields that support the leftist orthodoxy.  Military history, for example, has almost entirely died off; not a single professor of history at UT-Austin lists military history as a primary specialty, while dozens list sexuality, ethnicity and anti-colonialism.  This bias expresses itself in the selection of events, persons and movements by textbook authors, who tell a simplistic narrative in which an ever more powerful federal government is the sole engine of progress and equality.  Thus, robber barons, the New Deal and the civil rights movement are in, but the contributions of inventors and entrepreneurs, the decline of the family and the failures of welfare programs and public education are out.  The new standards represent real progress.  They don't go far enough in challenging orthodoxy, but they are a step in the right direction.

The board has strengthened the curriculum standards in ways that any scholar should recognize, adding the following:

• Greater attention to the importance of the Declaration of Independence.
• Inclusion of neglected Founders, including Jay, Carroll, Muhlenberg, Witherspoon, and Trumbull, representing the religious diversity of early America.
• Inclusion of the fine arts and culture, and the contributions of scientists and inventors.
• Emphasis on our common-law tradition, epitomized by the Commentaries of William Blackstone, the most widely used law textbook in our country for more than a century (used by everyone from Hamilton to Lincoln).

The opposition is relying on the big lie, offering example after example of misinformation.  This cynical effort will fail to influence the vast majority of Texans for one simple reason: the Internet.  Texans can go to the Texas Education Agency web site and read the new standards for themselves. 

Opponents claim that the new standards neglect the contributions of women and ethnic minorities.  In fact, the opposite is true: in every subject and at every level, the new standards increase their prominence.  Just a few examples of the names added include Crispus Attucks, Jose Bernardo Guillermo de Lara, Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca, Wentworth Cheswell, Francisco Coronado, Bernardo de Galvez, Juan de Onate, W.E.B. DuBois, Carmen Lomas Garza, Henry B. Gonzalez, Raul A. Gonzalez, Maria Mitchell, Ellen Ochoa, Jose Antonio Navaro, Irma Rangel, Juan Seguin, Phillis Wheatley, Lulu Belle White, Diane Gonzales Bertrand, Simon Bolivar, Bessie Coleman, Tomie de Paola, Marcus Garvey, Lydia Mendoza, Kadir Nelson, Danny Olivas, and Raymond Telles. 

The opposition has claimed, most preposterously of all, that the new standards eliminate Thomas Jefferson.  To the contrary, the new standards place greater emphasis than ever on Jefferson's drafting of the Declaration of Independence.  In fact, Jefferson's political philosophy is now covered in U.S. government instead of world history. This was a sensible change that critics have distorted for cheap political gain.

Much has been made of the board's substitution of “free enterprise system” for “capitalism” and of “representative” or “constitutional republic” for “democracy.”  The board's language is more precise in both cases.  The term capitalism was introduced by Karl Marx, referring to a system in which the owners of capital control absolutely both the government and culture.  Whether America is or ever has been capitalist in that sense should be an open question — the Marxist answer shouldn't be imposed on students by the uncritical use of the word.

Similarly, scholars on both the right and left will agree that the Founders did not intend to create a democratic system, defined as a system in which the government always and immediately reflects the will of the majority.  Our constitution includes many counterdemocratic institutions, including the Senate (in which unequal states receive equal representation) and federal judges, appointed for life.  Students should be encouraged to reflect on whether, and to what extent, this republic has evolved in the direction of greater democracy.

This artificially inflated controversy points to a larger issue: The people must not develop the habit of blind deference to so-called academic experts.  Listen to the experts, yes, but only when the experts employ their knowledge to develop persuasive arguments grounded in facts.  Just as war is too important to be left entirely to the generals, so history education is too important to be left to the historians.  It is through our conception of our history that we define ourselves as a country.  The fundamental question is this: Shall we continue to have a government ruled by the people, or shall we instead yield to a self-perpetuating caste of quasi-official experts?

Koons is a professor of philosophy at the University of Texas.  This article was written in his capacity as a private citizen and not as a representative of the university.


NOTE ADDED 13 FEBRUARY 2013:

I just found this blog post cited/linked by author Daniel Dagan as a perfect example of plagiarism saying, "Safe Libraries:  THIS IS IT!":

• "Margarita Mathiopoulos, Duncan McCorquodale & Alice Hutchison: No Statute of Limitations on Plagiarism," by Daniel Dagan, Daniel Dagan: Vor Ort, 12 April 2012.

.