Dear editor:

In Leonard Pitts’ column on the teaching of Black history (Feb. 27), he raises some important questions but mostly comes up with the wrong answers. Inevitably, there is a difference between the teaching of history and that of science or math. An element of subjectivity is unavoidable. Suppose three intelligent, capable individuals were assigned, independently, to write a sixth-grade textbook on U.S. history: a retired Navy admiral, a passionately committed evangelical pastor, and an equally passionate activist for social justice. Chances are, a reviewer would have little difficulty guessing who wrote which draft.

Which is why, especially in an era when we demand so much of our schools, the limited time we give U.S. history has to be used optimally. And at the lower levels, that means middle-of-the-road, hammered-out compromise positions — the agreed-upon least common denominator, if you will. Black history is a fascinating, important part of our history that should be part of any curriculum. But local authorities would be remiss in abdicating to current-day activists the hard work of shaping the final product. Because elementary-level education inevitably shapes as well as teaches, at the end of the day it needs to convey an overall positive — yes, patriotic — appreciation of our deeply flawed but great country. It is important that children learn what happened here in 1619 (the arrival of the first slave ship), but it is even more critical that they learn, and understand, what happened in 1776.

Later, in high school — the natural arena for dawning skepticism and rebellion — there should be more room for presenting differing interpretations. The “1619 Project” view of slavery as central to U.S. history is an unproven, controversial thesis, but intelligently presented at the secondary level, and contrasted with an equally well-articulated, more conservative interpretation, it could powerfully spur in young minds the almost-lost art of independent, critical thinking. But you can’t get there if every hint of doubt or disagreement is viewed as proof of racism.

Sincerely,

Joseph Kimpflen

Tupper Lake