Melissa Amy Maestri | The Myth of a Multicultural Curriculum: An Analysis of New York State U.S. History Regents | The History Teacher, 39.3

The Myth of a Multicultural Curriculum: An Analysis of New York State U.S. History Regents

Melissa Amy Maestri
Le Moyne College

IMAGINE AN OUTLINE for the teaching of American history in which women, African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics make only a fleeting appearance.¹ Although that may be difficult to fathom, it remains a reality in many American schools. The research for this study was undertaken to analyze the New York State eleventh grade United States History Regents exams through conducting a content analysis of the types of multiple-choice questions asked in Part I of the tests with a particular emphasis on the variety of questions asked regarding women and race. Because these tests stand at the pinnacle of social studies education in the state of New York and are required of all students, it stands to reason that the questions indicate the type of social knowledge officially sanctioned by its citizens. This study demonstrates that very few questions on the New York State United States History Regents Exam deal with race or minority issues; and that of those that do, similar themes reappear from year to year, with only slight variations. The same is true about women's history questions. So, despite claims to the contrary, the Regents exams show that little knowledge of race and women's issues is required and therefore likely not being taught. This has important possible implications for society at large.

Before presenting these findings, some background is needed. When education reports of the 1980s revealed that American students were falling behind the youth of other countries, the federal government attempted to push for more demanding standards. In 1987, a new curriculum was set in place for the state of New York in an attempt to compete with educational systems in other parts of the world. Also in the 1980s and 1990s, states across the country were considering how to implement principles of multiculturalism within their curriculums. Thomas Sobol, the New York State Commissioner of Education during the 1980s and mid-1990s, created a Task Force on Minorities in 1987, which recommended the inclusion of more information on race in the curriculum. The work of the Task Force caused a storm of controversy from critics across the nation. There was further dissension over what should be taught in social studies in the early 1990s. At that time, during the administration of George H.W. Bush, an impressive symposium was organized to create National History Standards for a Social Studies curriculum. This move was endorsed by Diane Ravitch, Lamar Alexander, the then-Secretary of Education, and by the Chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), Lynne Cheney. However, absent from the creation of the History Standards was the National Council for the Social Studies, which was left out because its members wanted standards that would include current issues and ethnic studies in the curriculum, as opposed to focusing specifically on a more fact-based narrative approach to the study of the United States and the world.²

The first set of National History Standards, which came out in 1994, was met with furious protests from critics who claimed that the standards included too much information on race and gender but not enough data on the traditional "facts" of American History. The Standards were also denounced as too negative, providing an anti-Western critique of America with little emphasis on important figures such as George Washington. In conjunction with changes at the national level, Thomas Sobol was working at this time to revise the New York State Social Studies Standards and curriculum. In November 1994, he was about to bring a second "final draft" of a tentative Social Studies multicultural curriculum before the New York State Board of Regents, but at the last moment he decided to back away from the measures suggested in his proposed draft curriculum. He told the Board that "part" of the reason he decided not to present his Social Studies curriculum was the backlash against the National History Standards. He also observed that in the past, New York State had encountered many controversial moments in making changes to its Social Studies framework and curriculum.³

Then in 1995, after twelve years as the New York State Commissioner of Education, Sobol resigned. This immediately followed the election of Republican Governor George Pataki, an event that paralleled the Republican control of Congress at the national level. That August, Richard Mills became the new State Commissioner of Education, pledging to restructure New York's education system. Mills wanted to move New York State in the direction of more "high stakes" testing with a rigorous curriculum. He set the wheels in motion for changes in the approach of the New York public schools curriculum and assessments. Mills phased out what he perceived to be the easier Regents Competency Testing, and focused on the implementation of a more rigorous Regents exam system for all students in New York's educational system. Mills succeeded in the revising the curriculums, standards, and Regents exams in every subject area.⁴ The changes in 1998 also proposed an increased study of multiculturalism. Two of the Eight Learning Dimensions in the Social Studies Standards were "Unity and Diversity and Multiculturalism" and "Multiple Perspectives." New York State had a reputation as a leader in implementing curricular issues involving multiculturalism, race and gender, but Lynn Cheney's disapproval was obvious in her observation, "New York has often been the leader in doing things badly."⁵

But have the changes, especially in content areas, really been all that ground-breaking? What does the content of the Regents exams in United States History and Government tell about what is likely being taught? As Richard Mills correctly stated, "Instruction won't change until the tests change."⁶ And Diane Ravitch echoed this, observing, "Tests drive the curriculum...teachers teach what they think is likely to be on the standardized tests that their students will take."⁷ By looking at how many of the multiple-choice questions are asked, as well as the content of Regents questions on these topics, one can determine whether New York State needs to focus more on women and race, if women and race are being left out of the curriculum, and if the state needs to reexamine its curriculum and Regents exams to include more content and questions in dealing with these issues. For educators and policy makers who are seriously responsible for the present and future generations, examining "real" data is important for understanding how children construct the image of their worlds.⁸

Since further changes to the United States history exams in June 2001, there are now 50 multiple-choice questions on each exam. (There were 46 to 50 questions prior to 2001.) Each multiple-choice question offers four responses, and students must pick the best answer. In this study I performed a content analysis of the January, June, and August Regents exams in United States history between 1998 and January 2005. The questions in these categories were counted according to their frequency (Figure 1): questions about women only; questions about African Americans, Natives, Asian Americans or Hispanics only. Each category was tabulated and percentages of the total number of questions on the exams were calculated. A second table does a more specific subject matter analysis looking for the obvious and common questions asked and shows in which years they appeared on exams (Figure 2). This study allows one to assess what, if any, changes have been made over time, especially after the 2001 curriculum alterations.⁹ Based on the assumption that assessment questions drive what is taught, the lack of attention being given to minorities and women has wider implications for society that must be examined. By analyzing the U.S History Regents exams, this article studies the questions asked about women and race and whether there have been any significant changes to the exams over time.¹⁰

The research results reveal two things. First, that there are not many questions dealing with race and women's history on the tests. Second, that the questions on race and women have the same themes which are merely asked in different ways. Comparing the two sets of "averages" in Figure 1 shows, further, that the total number of questions on women and ethnic groups did not substantially change with the promised reforms of June 2001. The details show that the range of the total number of questions dealing with women and race reached a high of ten on the June 1998 exam and a low of two questions on the January 1998 exam. Note that this high in January 1998 was also before the promised changes of 2001. The high of ten questions dealing with race or women (June 1998) and low of two (January 1998) were the two extreme cases. On average, the total number of questions dealing with women's history and race was only six questions.

An examination of the treatment of each minority shows that not a single question has ever been asked of Hispanics even though approximately nineteen percent of students attending public schools in New York State are Hispanic. Although some might claim this lack of representation as justified because large percentages of Hispanics have become mainstream, this ignores contributions to our history made by Hispanics in the last several years that most high school students do not even know about. The number of questions asked about Native Americans has actually dropped since the push for a more multicultural curriculum in June 2001, and there has never been more than one question about American Indians on a single exam. Twelve of the past twenty-three exams have not even asked one question dealing with Native Americans. Even after the push for more multicultural testing was announced in June 2001, seven Regents tests have had no questions on American Indians. If we turn to Asian Americans, we find that they also receive little attention. Between January 1998 and June 2005, there have never been more than two questions on the Regents exam dealing with people of Asian descent, and on eleven Regents exams during this period, there have been no questions. Ten tests have had only one question. Asian American questions have actually shown up less frequently since the "changeover" in 2001, with zero questions on seven of the Regents exams between June 2001 and June 2005.

African American questions, while less than adequate, have been more numerous. They have ranged from only one or two questions on the exams to seven on two tests. Note, however, that when there were seven questions pertaining to African Americans, there was only one other question dealing with minorities on the test. For example, on the June 2002 Regents exam, there were seven questions on African Americans, but only one query on Asian Americans, and zero questions on both women and Native Americans. On six of the Regents exams there have been three questions dealing with African Americans, on five of the tests there have been four questions, and on seven of the tests there has been five questions.

If one turns to questions on women's history we find the number embarrassingly low, ranging from zero to three questions between 1998 and 2005. Only two Regents exams have had as many as three questions (the January 2004 and June 1998 Regents), while six Regents exams have had zero questions on women's history. On nine Regents exams there have been only one question, while six tests contained two multiple-choice questions.

In Figure 2, which reveals a content analysis of the common questions asked on the exams, we find that the range of concerns about race and women's history is problematic because the Regents exams ask essentially the same questions year after year, though they are worded differently. The most common questions or subtopics on these topics were tabulated as to how many times they were asked between 1998 and 2005. At the end of each of the subtopics, an analysis of the number of "other" questions was conducted. It is interesting to observe that the only questions dealing with Native Americans have been on the Dawes Act, Native American removal, and the late 19^th century Indian Wars; the only questions that have been asked about Asian Americans have been on the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Gentlemen's Agreement, Japanese Relocation, and the Korematsu v. United States Supreme Court case.¹¹

By examining the United States History and Government Regents exams taken mostly by 11^th graders, one can clearly see that although Richard Mills and the New York State Education Department proposed a more rigorous, multicultural curriculum in 2001, the end result was little if any change in the multiple-choice questions on the state assessments. Moreover, it is also true that the percentage of questions asked between 1998 and 2005 about minorities and women is really no different than it was between 1965 and 1969.¹² The number of multiple choice history questions stabilized at fifty and what had been a choice of completing two out of five essay questions was dropped in favor of a document based question section. However, the move to a DBQ does not, as S.G. Grant demonstrates, necessarily mean a more rigorous test.¹³ While the state standards have been criticized, mostly because every student must now pass at least five exams, there has not been a lot of controversy over the content of what is in the social studies standards and on the Regents history exams.

Although the New York State curriculum for United States History and Government may list several women's names and events, and note some African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics, this does not ensure that these topics are being adequately taught. The problem is that the actual curriculum is so long and detailed that there is no way teachers can cover everything listed. The result is that teachers must either cut out or spend little time on material that will have few questions or not appear on the Regents exams. Moreover, the study of women and race has not only received scant attention in New York State, but across the country as well. The 1994 debate over the National History Standards revealed the problems with integrating the study of women and race into the United States history curriculum in public schools around the nation. Teachers are under a great deal of pressure from administrators, as well as the increasing scrutiny of the media which present state test results in the newspapers on local news channels, and on the Internet. This leads to teaching to the test both in New York State and across the country.

Often when school systems are evaluated, however, it is the published curriculum and testing program that receive attention, yet a more thorough analysis of the content of the questions may reveal that important elements are being left out of state standards. For example, in a May 2003 survey conducted by the Fordham Foundation, the United States history or social studies standards of the fifty states and the District of Columbia were ranked based on their own standards. New York State was ranked number two, behind only Indiana, as having the second best standards in the country for United States history. In this rating, New York State received a grade of an "A," with a total score of 28 out of 30, a Comprehensive Historical Content score of 9 out of 10, and a Sequential Development score of 10 out of 10. All of this despite the fact that so few questions dealing with race and gender are to be found on the New York State Regents Exams.¹⁴ However, if tests drive the curriculum, the results of the content analysis on race and gender in this study indicates that New York still has a long way to go before achieving an inclusive history of the United States. If the state has the second best U.S. History standards in the country, with so little being tested on race and gender, there is a clear message that all of the states need to improve their curriculums and assessments on issues involving race and gender.

At first glance, one might not see a problem pertaining to gender on the assessment given to 11^th grade students because the test scores achieved by males and females are similar. The results of the scores on the Regents exams tests for United States History and Government achieved by 179,000 males and female on the August 2002 and January 2003 tests were nearly even. Of those tested, 37 percent of females received between and 85-100 on the test, while 39 percent of males received grades of 85-100. For females, 46 percent received grades between 65-84 while 45 percent of males scored between 65-84; among females 9 percent scored between 55-64, among males 8 percent scored between 55-64, and among females 7 percent fell below 55, compared to 8 percent among males.¹⁵

Similar male and female history test scores on the Regents exams may disguise the failure of what is being taught to attract girls to the field of history, and the under-representation of females in the curriculum should not continue. A National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) study of the effort put forth by 12^th grade males versus females across the country revealed that 31.3 percent of males view schoolwork as "seldom or never meaningful," whereas females see it this way only 22.4 percent of the time. Also, 35.2 percent of males view courses to be "very or slightly dull," while only 29 percent of females do. Forty-nine percent of females find their high school courses fairly interesting, while only 43.9 percent of males do. The NCES statistics also reveal that fewer females drop out of school, which shows that they are more conscientious regarding their education and may study harder for their state tests because they care more about their grades.¹⁶

Looking at what men and women choose to do in higher education, we find that although there are more females compared to males in college, NCES statistics for 2001-2002 show that 15,259 bachelor's degrees in history were earned by men, while 10,742 were obtained by women. Also, 1,336 males received a master's in history compared to 1,084 women and 561 men compared to 363 women received a doctoral degree.¹⁷ There is also a significant variation in the number of male social studies education degrees compared to female social studies degrees. In degrees earned across the country in 2001-2002, 1,022 men earned a bachelor's in Social Studies Education, while only 787 women did, and 300 men compared to 249 women earned a master's degree in Social Studies Education. While statistical evidence may not prove why more women than men might choose to major in other fields or seek professions outside of history, it does suggest that the way history is frequently taught in high schools fails to inspire women to major in history in college or pursue careers in the field. By comparison, many young women move into fields that attract their attention early on, such as English, business, or medicine.

The failure of the schools to adequately teach history involving African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics may also have depressed the overall high school performance of minority students and influence their choice of careers. The New York State Department of Education's report on Minority Issues shows that, while 81.8 percent of white students received a passing grade of 65 or better on the Regents history exams, this score was achieved by only 77.6 percent of Asian, 63.7 percent of American Indians, 52 percent of blacks and 48.6 percent of Hispanic students. This may show that for Hispanics and blacks at least, the way that American history is being taught in New York State public schools is less meaningful than it is to white students. Whatever the cause, these figures would be tragic anywhere in the country but are especially so in New York City which has the greatest concentration of minority students in the public schools.¹⁸

A growing trend among college history professors over the past decades has been to integrate more social history, specifically the study of women and race into the curriculum. They are not "rewriting" history as some may claim, but rather examining groups within the history of America who have been left out or have not received adequate study and analysis in the past. An examination of the titles of papers given at academic history conferences such as the American Historical Association or the Organization of American Historians, a look at recent books that have been published, or an examination of scholarly journals such as the Journal of the Early Republic, the Journal of American History, and the Journal of Southern History, shows that the trend in academia is to study the lives of people previously ignored. Although the United States Regents ask few questions dealing with women and race, the wave of the present and future in colleges and universities includes the study of just such groups. Many history professors contend that most students do not come to college with even basic historical knowledge and know even less about topics involving women and race. So while the New York State Regents program has always been deemed a college preparatory track, it appears that students going on to college may be ill prepared, because the way history is taught in the New York public schools as opposed to colleges and universities is on two divergent roads.

America is an increasingly diverse society. Everyone will encounter a woman or someone of a different race in the workforce or at some point in their lives. It is important that citizens know about all groups that make up the United States. This article reveals that teachers teach to the test, and shown that even in a state such as New York a major examination has not asked a significant number or variety of question about minority and women's history to ensure that students are adequately prepared to be good citizens. While students should be able to identify more female and non-white historical individuals, social history is more than just names. The entire point of social history is to explain the history of society. While the New York State U.S. History core curriculum makes some social history references to women and race, they rarely if ever test the students about what life was like in general for non-elites in America. Merely including the names of people who may not have been famous, for example Martha Ballard, in comparison to more well-known individuals such as Frederick Douglass or Martin Luther King Jr., does not really do much to explain the black, Native American, Asian American, Hispanic, and female experience in America. Rush Limbaugh contends that students need to know only "traditional" American history and that "History is real simple.... It's what happened. It's no more." He adds, "why what happened shouldn't have much of anything to do with what happened."¹⁹ But how should teachers respond to students who ask about causation? Clearly, many conservatives believe that the history of women and race is simply not important. Yet slaves in Thomas Jefferson's Virginia comprised nearly forty percent of the population. Also, slaves were everywhere in early America, not only in Jefferson's life, but all across the thirteen colonies. The influence that the slaves had on the United States is instrumental in understanding American history, as is the study of women who comprise of half of the population.

Sadly, in 2005 the level of student knowledge about women and race has not changed significantly from what was true in the late 1980s. The NAEP national history test shows that the scores on national tests conducted in the 21^st century have not improved that much since the 1980s. So it seems worth looking back at an analysis by Diane Ravitch and Chester Finn, of the 1986 National Assessment of History and Literature test which, although its concern was about what students knew about American history generally, nevertheless also indicates the lack of student knowledge about the history of women and minorities.²⁰ For our purposes, however, it is most interesting to note that the questions on the national test constructed in 1986, parallel many of the questions that appear on the New York State United States History and Government Regents exams. They are fact-based questions with similar themes on race and gender, such as those involving the Seneca Falls Convention, the Dred Scott decision, Plessy vs. Ferguson, and Brown vs. Board of Education.

Ravitch and Finn found that in the first national assessment given to 17-year old students in 1986, most students knew who George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Edison were, but they did not know about slavery, Reconstruction, and Joseph McCarthy. While not given to all 17 year olds, the test had a racial and gender makeup representative of all students across America. The students were given 141 multiple choice questions on American history that required no analysis but were simple fact-based questions which allowed them to guess at the answers. The results were dismal. The national overall average of all the students who took the test was 54.5 percent correct. Students scored an average of 52.6 percent correct on questions dealing with women, and 58.2 percent on Civil Rights. However, in the section on Important People, 95.2 percent of 17 year olds could identify Thomas Edison and 91.1 percent could identify secondary figures such as Alexander Graham Bell, yet when it came to women such as Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem, only 22.8 percent of students knew who they were. Worse yet, only 25.8 percent of students correctly answered the question on the Seneca Falls Convention.²¹

On history pertaining to African Americans, only 48.9 percent of students knew that Martin Luther King Jr. was involved in the Montgomery bus boycott of 1955. Four out of ten students could not identify either the Plessy vs. Ferguson or the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court cases. The test was divided into time periods from the Colonial Era to World War II. Two of the questions that students knew the most about included the era of Washington's presidency on which 87.9 percent of students knew the correct answer, and 87.4 percent correctly answered that Thomas Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence. However, only 39.5 percent of students knew about the Dred Scott decision and 38.2 percent about the Emancipation Proclamation, although a surprising 42.4 percent knew what the term nullification was. In terms of eras, students knew the least about the Reconstruction period, with only 49.5 percent of the questions answered correctly. Yet Reconstruction was a time when many major events dealing with African Americans occurred.²² On both this 1986 test and a later national assessment in 2001, Ravitch and Finn show that boys performed better than girls, a situation that might have been reversed if more women's history had been taught.²³

In comparing the scores of blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans and white students on the 1986 exam, Ravitch and Finn found that on average black students performed better than other students on questions dealing with African Americans. For example, 90.1 percent of white students knew that George Washington was president between 1780-1800, while only 79.5 percent of black students answered the same question correctly; but when asked about Harriett Tubman, only 84.2 percent of white students answered correctly, while 92.4 percent of black students did so. This leads one to conclude that more emphasis in the high school American History curriculum is needed on the contributions of African Americans not merely to improve their test scores, but because blacks have made great contributions to American history and have gone unnoticed and underrepresented for far too long.²⁴

When considering the impact of tests upon what is taught and what students learn it is worth noting that the questions asked on both the New York State U.S. History Regents exams and national tests dealing with race in particular are for the most part negative. The test questions mention demeaning things that were done to minorities, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act, Japanese relocation, slavery, and Native American removal. For the most part, all of the degrading situations that happened to these groups are taught, but what about the positive contributions? Furthermore, women, African Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans only pop in and out of history at certain places in the curriculum and then fade away. Students in high school learn about blacks as slaves when they first come to America, and then they vanish only to reappear during the Civil War and Reconstruction, after which they completely vanish until the Civil Rights Era, and then they disappear again. Native Americans are granted a cameo at the beginning of the year when European settlers come in contact with them and then are not mentioned again until Andrew Jackson is president and they are forcibly removed from their lands. American Indians are then discussed in connection with the Dawes Act and again when they were granted citizenship rights in 1924,²⁵ but those are the only times when they receive any attention. It is as if the Chinese came to America only to be excluded by the Gentlemen's Agreement and the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Japanese only to be relocated during World War II. Often women and minorities appear most prominently in history when they are problems for white men.

A New York State Department of Education publication asks "Why Study Social Studies?" and in answering the question the authors contend that a concentration on history should work towards "democratic values that are necessary to function effectively in American society," and that students should learn to be "active contributors to a society that is increasingly diverse."²⁶ The state acknowledges that an even more diverse society is emerging, yet little has changed on the Regents exam in United States history to reflect this "diverse" nation. In "Does Democracy Still Live?" O.L. Davis supports the idea of a curriculum that discusses and analyzes the history of all Americans, white Americans, African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics as the only way to have a true democracy in today's education system.²⁷ Davis argues that if there were more teaching about democracy in the classroom the result would be superior classes with lots of discussions, students reaching above their potential, and a group effort to achieve and succeed in schools. The key to a successful classroom involves democratic problem solving instituted by teachers in their daily lesson plans designed to make students think for themselves and come to their own conclusions about historical events and interpretations.²⁸

Many claim that dicussing the negative aspects of American history, such as slavery and the mistreatment of various groups, is anti-western and anti-democratic and should not be included in the curriculum. However, students need to understand that injustices have happened in the past and what better way of having the next generation work towards a true democracy than to teach them how far we have come and how they can help their country work towards an even more perfect union. By teaching students about slavery, Japanese relocation, or Native American removal, teachers are not being anti-western, but instead wish their students to become informed citizens about what happened in the history of the United States so that they too can work towards cooperation and progress for all ethnicities in America.²⁹ On history involving women and race, students should be debating issues, taking sides, conducting research, and presenting their findings to the class in a structured, open forum, and comprehensive exams should embrace debatable topics.

A careful examination of the New York State Regents exams and their probable consequences should alert educators at all levels to re-examine their own testing programs. There are several possible solutions to work towards a more inclusive curriculum and assessments. Teachers can be proactive by letting the state education department know that they want the assessment questions to more adequately reflect the roles of race and women in our history. They can also try to find time to work towards a more inclusive study of American history within their classes. One possible model of a more comprehensive curriculum can be found in the National History Standards of 1994. While these Standards were instantly criticized and voted down by the United States Senate, they provide a guideline for teachers to follow and a balanced history including race and gender. The Standards were the work of no less than six thousand people with an array of beliefs and opinions including educators, business people, and representatives of professional organizations. According to Barry Bienstock, "The achievement of the National Standards is that they integrate social history into the larger political and economic narrative, in the process asking students to formulate questions, interpret data, and assess sources in a way that should satisfy critics who think social history is simply fluff."³⁰ Each of the states should model their curriculums and assessments based on a balanced history that includes political, economic, diplomatic, and social history with the proper consideration of all groups throughout the history of America. Another reason to support the National United States History Standards from 1994 is that several prominent groups including the Rockefeller Foundation and the Organization of American Historians endorsed them.³¹ Furthermore, the reason that those involved in the National project included so much information on gender and minorities is because those groups have previously been left out of the curriculum, so the authors required more space within the Standards to explain who these people were and what they did, while any social studies teacher should know that Washington was the first president. The National Standards have prompted history teachers from public and private schools to colleges and universities to set up workshops and conferences to work towards the improvement in the teaching of history. College professors and public school teachers have come closer together as a result of a move to implement a more balanced curriculum within their classes.

Other ways to achieve a more inclusive curriculum include selecting Social Studies textbooks that include social history and the history of women and race,³² including more primary source documents into the curriculum, and providing teachers with opportunities to be involved in national history and/or social studies programs.³³ Possible examples of national organizations to turn to for help include the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History and the Organization of American Historians.³⁴ These groups foster collaboration between secondary school teachers and college professors to help bridge the gap between high school and college, leading to more dialogue and a move towards a similar direction in both public schools and college. In creating a more inclusive curriculum for students around the country, appropriate questions to ask include how much time do white in comparison to non-white teachers instruct their students on American History involving African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics? How much time do male teachers compared to female instructors devote to women's studies as part of the American history curriculum? How much do other states incorporate the history of race and women within their American History classes? Why are women and race left out of U.S. History not only in New York, but across America?

Figure 1—Number of Multiple Choice Questions on U.S. History Regents on Women and Race:³⁵

Regents Exams: Month/Year	# of Questions on Women's History Only	# of Questions on African Americans Only	# of Questions on Native Americans Only	# of Questions on Asian Americans Only	# of Questions on Hispanics Only	Total # of Questions on Women's History AND Race	% of Total Questions on Women & Race

June-05	1	2	0	1	0	4	8%

January-05	1	5	1	0	0	7	14%

Aug-04	0	3	1	2	0	6	12%

June-04	1	4	1	1	0	7	14%

Jan-04	3	5	0	0	0	8	16%

Aug-03	2	1	0	0	0	3	6%

Jun-03	2	5	0	1	0	8	16%

Jan-03	2	4	1	0	0	7	14%

Aug-02	2	4	1	0	0	7	14%

Jun-02	0	7	0	1	0	8	16%

Jan-02	0	3	0	1	0	4	8%

Aug-01	1	7	0	0	0	8	16%

Jun-01	1	3	0	2	0	6	12%

Averages:	1.2	3.7	0.46	0.62	0	6.4	13%

Regents Exams Before Changes

Jan-01	1	5	0	0	0	6	13%

Aug-00	2	3	1	1	0	6	13%

Jun-00	0	5	1	0	0	6	13%

Jan-00	2	4	0	1	0	7	15%

Aug-99	1	3	1	1	0	6	13%

Jun-99	0	3	1	0	0	4	8%

Jan-99	1	4	0	1	0	6	13%

Aug-98	1	5	0	0	0	6	13%

Jun-98	3	5	1	1	0	10	20%

Jan-98	0	1	0	1	0	2	4%

Averages:	1.1	3.7	0.5	0.6	0	5.9	13%

Figure 2, Part A—Content Analysis of the Regents Questions:
Common Questions Asked on The US History Regents Dealing with Women's History and Race³⁶

	Topics
Date of Regents Month/Year	Women: Seneca Falls/Eliz Cady Stant.	Susan B. Anthony	Betty Freidan	Women's Vote	Women Wartime	Women Workforce	OTHER

June-05							X

January-05							X

Aug-04

June-04				X

Jan-04	X			X		X

Aug-03	X	X	X

Jun-03					X	X	X

Jan-03				X		X

Aug-02	X	X

Jun-02

Jan-02

Aug-01	X

Jun-01					X

Changes In US History Regents Exams

Jan-01	X

Aug-00			X

Jun-00

Jan-00				X		X

Aug-99	X

Jun-99

Jan-99			X

Aug-98						X

Jun-98	X						XX

Jan-98						_____	_____

Total Times Question Asked Between 98-05	7	2	3	4	2	5	5

Figure 2, Part B—Content Analysis of the Regents Questions:
Common Questions Asked on The US History Regents Dealing with Women's History and Race

	Topics
Date of Regents Month/Year	Native Americans: Dawes Act	Relocation/Removal	Indian Wars	OTHER	Asian Americans: Chinese Ex.Act	Gent. Agreement	Korematsu v. U.S.	Japanese Internment	OTHER

June-05							X

January-05		X

Aug-04		X				X	X

June-04		X						X

Jan-04

Aug-03

Jun-03								X

Jan-03	X

Aug-02			X

Jun-02							X

Jan-02								X

Aug-01

Jun-01					X	X		X

Changes In US History Regents Exams

Jan-01

Aug-00	X				X	X

Jun-00	X

Jan-00								X

Aug-99	X				X	X

Jun-99	X				X	X

Jan-99

Aug-98

Jun-98			X				X

Jan-98							X

Total Times Question Asked Between 98-05	5	3	2	0	4	5	5	5	0

Figure 2, Part C—Content Analysis of the Regents Questions:
Common Questions Asked on The US History Regents Dealing with Women's History and Race³⁷

	Topics
Date of Regents Month/Year	African Americans: Slavery	MO Comp K-N Act	14th/15th Amendment	Black Codes	Reconstr.	Dred Scott	Jim Crow	Plessy v. Ferguson	W.E.B. DuBois

June-05	XX

January-05	X	X						X	X

Aug-04						X

June-04	X							X	X

Jan-04	X	X				X		X

Aug-03		X

Jun-03		X		X

Jan-03	X				X

Aug-02							X	X

Jun-02	X		X	X	X		X		X

Jan-02	X				X				X

Aug-01			X				X	X

Jun-01					X

Changes In US History Regents Exams

Jan-01			X		X				X

Aug-00			X

Jun-00					X

Jan-00	X				X

Aug-99	X		X		X

Jun-99									X

Jan-99		X

Aug-98					X	X			X

Jun-98		X			X

Jan-98

Total Times Question Asked Between 98-05	10	6	5	2	10	3	3	5	7

	Topics
Date of Regents Month/Year	African Americans: Booker T. Washington	Harl. Ren. Ellington/Hughes	Brown v. Bd. of Ed.	Civil Rights	Martin L. King, Jr.	Blacks at Wartime	Affirm. Action	Other

June-05

January-05		X	X

Aug-04			X			X

June-04					X		X

Jan-04						X		X

Aug-03

Jun-03		X	X	X

Jan-03		X					X

Aug-02		X		X	X

Jun-02					X

Jan-02	X

Aug-01	X	X		X			X	X

Jun-01			X		X	X

Changes In US History Regents Exams

Jan-01				X	X

Aug-00			X				X

Jun-00			X		X		X	X

Jan-00			X	X

Aug-99

Jun-99	X		X		X

Jan-99					X	X		X

Aug-98	X	X

Jun-98	X						X	X

Jan-98		X

Total Times Question Asked Between 98-05	5	7	8	5	8	4	6	5

Notes

^1. Lynne Cheney, "The End of History," Wall Street Journal, 20 October 1994. In this editorial, Cheney began the article by saying: "Imagine an outline for the teaching of American history in which George Washington makes only a fleeting appearance and is never described as our first president." In writing this essay I would like to thank Stephen C. Fleury, Douglas R. Egerton, and Robert F. Kelly. Dr. Fleury spent an enormous amount of time reading over the article and gave me extremely insightful advice, discussion, and support in completing this work. Many thanks also to Dr. Egerton for reading over the piece in its entirety and giving me words of wisdom on the historical aspects in particular. He also deserves thanks for teaching me everything I know about Early American history and spreading the passion of the era on to me. And finally, thank you to Dr. Kelly for discussing the statistical aspects of this paper and supplying sound advice in how to configure the charts and analyze the statistics used to compile my research.

^2. Gary B. Nash, Charlotte Crabtree, and Ross E. Dunn, History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998) 38-39.

^3. S.G. Grant, "Appeasing the Right—Missing the Point?" Social Education 61.2 (February 1997) 102-106.

^4. Elizabeth DeBray, "Richard Mills and the New York State Board of Regents, 1995-2001, Parts A & B," <http://www.ucea.org/html/cases/V7-Iss2/pdf/debray%20copyedited%205-6-04.pdf#search='Debray,%20Richard%20Mills'>.

^5. Catherine Cornbleth and Dexter Waugh, The Great Speckled Bird: Multicultural Politics and Education Policymaking (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995) 187.

^6. S.G. Grant, "Teachers and Tests: exploring Teachers' Perceptions of Changes in the New York State Testing Program," <http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n14.html>, 7; Joseph Berger, "Now the Regents Must Decide if History Will Be Recast," New York Times, 11 February 1990, E5. Berger says that "Teachers can teach what they want, but they must use the guidelines if they want their students to perform well on statewide tests like the Regents exams..."

^7. Diane Ravitch, "The Case for National Standards and Assessments," Clearing House 69.3 (Jan/Feb 1996) 134.

^8. Stephen C. Fleury, "Social Studies for an Empire: Thoughts on Where Did Social Studies Go Wrong?" The Social Studies 96.4 (July/August 2005) 163-170. I focused on the Multiple-Choice section of the test because that is most consistent with the tests throughout New York's history of Social Studies exams, also because the format of the essays changed between 1998-2005. From 1998-2001, students had choices on the essay exams for both Parts II and III and could ultimately skip an essay given on race and gender. On the Document Based Question part of the U.S. History Regents exams, students must complete all parts. Between June 2001 and June 2005, there have been aspects of women and race on the DBQ part of the test, yet several of the DBQs during that time period had nothing to do with the history of women and race. Also, in Part III between 2001 and 2005, students have a choice to complete one of two essays, and there was not one Regents exam that had both of the questions on women and/or race, so a student could ultimately choose to complete the essay that was not on women and/or race. Prior to the changes in June 2001, students had a choice of picking two essays out of five for part II, and could choose to do the essays that had nothing to do with women and/or race.

^9. While I performed the content analysis, I also consulted with an academic historian, Douglas R. Egerton of Le Moyne College, regarding the multiple-choice questions.

^10. The way that I conducted the study was to analyze each Regents exam multiple-choice question per test. I then focused on counting the number of questions dealing with the history of women and race. I used the following five categories: women's history, questions dealing with African Americans and slavery, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. I went through each Regents exam given between 1998 and 2005 and counted up how many questions were asked for each of the five categories (women's history, questions dealing with African Americans and slavery, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics). After I tabulated the amount of questions asked on each exam dealing with the five sections, I then analyzed each of the questions individually asked on the five groups. I studied the types of questions asked about women and race and looked at what specifically the state asking questions about for these groups.

^11. While there can be several questions posed on the broad topics of Slavery, Reconstruction, and the Civil War, when those topics arise on the Regents test, they repeat similar themes for questions asked on those topics.

^12. Consult forthcoming "Frozen in Time," Maestri 2006. I analyzed the percent of questions on women and race between 1965-1969 and 2001-2005, and the total percent of questions asked between those time periods came to 13% of the questions for both periods.

^13. In S.G. Grant, Jill M. Gradwell, and Sandra K. Cimbricz," A Question of Authenticity: The Document-Based Question As An Assessment of Students' Knowledge of History," in the Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, Summer 2004, Vol. 19, No. 4, 309-337, the authors examined the structure of the DBQ for the Global Studies Regents, which is the same structure for the U.S. History Regents, and while the DBQ questions appear to have the students engage in analysis and higher level thinking skills, the state arranges the questions in a very finite way so that the students will come up with similar answers as if they are answering fact-based essay questions.

^14. Sheldon M. Stern, "Effective State Standards for U.S. History: A 2003 Report Card," <http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/publication/publication.cfm?id=320&pubsubid=941>. Proved by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

^15. New York: The State Of Learning: A Report to the Governor and the Legislature on the Educational Status of the State's Schools, July 2004 Edition, "Part VI: Gender Issues," <http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts/655report/2004/Volume1/9-VI_Gender_ Issues.pdf>, 196.

^16. All National Council of Education Statistics were taken off their website: <http://nces.ed.gov/>.

^17. NCES: <http://nces.ed.gov/>.

^18. New York: The State Of Learning: A Report to the Governor and the Legislature on the Educational Status of the State's Schools, July 2004 Edition, "Part V: Minority Issues," <http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts/655report/2004/Volume1/8-V_Minority_ Issues.pdf>, 148.

^19. Ronald W. Evans and Valerie Ooka Pang, "National Standards for United States History: The Storm of Controversy Continues," Social Studies 86.6 (Nov/Dec 1995) 270.

^20. Diane Ravitch and Chester E. Finn Jr., What Do Our 17-Year-Olds Know: A Report on the First National Assessment of History and Literature (New York: Harper and Row, 1987).

^21. Ravitch and Finn, What Do Our 17-Year Olds Know, 44-84.

^22. Ravitch and Finn, What Do Our 17-Year Olds Know, 46-84.

^23. Ravitch and Finn, What Do Our 17-Year Olds Know, 130-132.

^24. Ravitch and Finn, What Do Our 17-Year Olds Know, 132-139, 263-269.

^25. Even though teachers may mention that Native Americans received citizenship rights under the U.S. Constitution in 1924, there was never a test question on that topic between 1998-2005.

^26. Social Studies Resource Guide with Core Curriculum, Albany, New York State Education Department, 1998, <http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/socst/ssrg.html>.

^27. O.L. Davis, Jr., "Does Democracy in Education Still Live?" Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 19.1 (Fall 2003) 1-4.

^28. Davis, "Does Democracy," 3-4.

^29. Nash, Crabtree, and Dunn, History on Trial, 15-16, 276-277.

^30. Barry W. Bienstock, "Everything Old is New Again: Social History, The National History Standards and the Crisis in the Teaching of High School American History, Journal of Social History 29 (1995) 60.

^31. Nash, Crabtree, and Dunn, History on Trial, 251 and 271.

^32. When examining textbooks, teachers should pay special attention to the author or authors of the book. What are the credentials of the author(s)? Is(are) the author(s) still alive? Some textbooks were written years and even decades ago and the textbook publishing companies slightly change newer editions, which is a sign that the material in the book may be outdated. If your school does not have textbooks that include social history and your school cannot afford them, buy one textbook for yourself and read it and try to implement the material that provide for a history rich in the study of all Americans.

^33. One fantastic Internet site for primary sources infused with women and race is the Library of Congress website where students can look up photos, maps, exhibits, documents, audio and video, and many more tools to explore the world of history. The Internet site for the Library of Congress can be located at <http://www.loc.gov/>.

^34. To further examine the Gilder Lehrman Center and the Organization of American History, examine the following websites: <http://www.gilderlehrman.org/> and <http://www.oah.org/>.

^35. All U.S. History Regents between June 2001 and June 2005 contained 50 multiple choice questions. The January 2001 Regents had 48 questions, August 2000 had 47 questions, the June 2000, January 2000, August 1999, June 1999, January 1999, August 1998, and June 1998 all contained 48 multiple choice questions, while the January 1998 Regents 46 multiple choice questions.

^36. The January 2005 Regents exam marked "Other" deals with women in sports. In the June 2004 exam, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and the Women's Right to Vote all appeared in the same question. In the August 2003 exam, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton appeared in the same question. In the June 2001 Regents, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Gentlemen's Agreement appeared in the same question. In the June 2001 Regents, women and minorities during wartime appeared in the same question. In the August 2000 Regents, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Gentlemen's Agreement appeared in the same question. In the August 1999 Regents exam, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Gentlemen's Agreement appeared in the same question. In the January 1999 Regents exam, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Gentlemen's Agreement appeared in the same questions, AND the August 1999 and January 1999 Regents exams had the same exact question on the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Gentlemen's Agreement. The "Other" in the June 1998 Regents exam refers to a question on Abigail Adams and gains made by women in general.

^37. Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education were both used in the same question, which is why there is a total of 7 questions on the January 2005 Regents exams, but X's are marked both for Plessy and for Brown. In the June 2004 Regents, W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington appeared in the same question. In the January 2004 Regents, Dred Scott and the Kansas Nebraska Act appeared in the same question. The January 2004 Regents question marked "Other" under African American deals with Harriet Tubman. The August 2002 Regents contained Jim Crow and Plessy v. Ferguson in the same question. In the January 2002 Regents, W.E.B. DuBois and Booker T. Washington appeared in the same question. In the August 2001 Regents exam, Jim Crow and Plessy v. Ferguson appeared in the same question. The "Other" question in the August 2001 Regents deals with African Americans leaving the South during the first three decades of the 20th century. The "Other" question on the June 2000 Regents deals with a poem about Africans Americans. In the June 1999 Regents exam, Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois appeared in the same question. In the January 1999 Regents exam, the "Other" question under African Americans pertains to a poem by Mother Jones. In the August 1998 Regents exam, W.E.B. Dubois and Booker T. Washington appeared in the same question. In the June 1998 Regents exam, the question "Other" refers to migration of African Americans North after World War I. In general, regarding questions about slavery, Reconstruction, and civil rights, while those are broader topics, similar questions on those themes have arisen year after year.

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.

The Myth of a Multicultural Curriculum: An Analysis of New York State U.S. History Regents

Melissa Amy MaestriLe Moyne College

Notes

Melissa Amy Maestri
Le Moyne College