JLF’s Terry Stoops provides a thoughtful look at the debate over the new Advanced Placement U.S. History course, why there are concerns about what it doesn’t include and therefore what it teaches students, and why competition would put an end to this issue.
The problem is that high school students often do not appreciate the nuances of historical interpretation. Except in those rare instances when the instructor highlights those differences explicitly, students are likely to mistake historical interpretation for historical consensus. As a result, those who ask different questions about the past are considered outside of the “mainstream” and, in the eyes of students, should not be taken seriously. At this point, the process of inculcating our nation’s highest-performing students with a liberal worldview is well underway.
In the end, legitimate concerns with the ideological slant of the revised AP U.S. History course are a problem only because there is no apparent alternative to the College Board’s Advanced Placement monopoly. Simply put, no other company or organization offers AP-type courses. Even if they did, it would be difficult to convince colleges and universities to accept successful completion of them for credit.
If the College Board had to compete for students, it would feel compelled to create AP curricula and exams that were balanced in a way that appealed to key segments of their audience. In a competitive environment, high school students who objected to the content or ideology of an AP course would be able to enroll in a course (of equal rigor and for college credit) with an alternative provider. Until that competition exists, the College Board, like any other monopoly, will do whatever it chooses.
Without competition, the debate over the course is moot, unfortunately. Time for choice.
