Meeting Public Comments

Cory Young

I teach history at the University of Iowa but speak for myself. Theoretically, this bill would benefit me materially by creating more history courses that need teaching. Nevertheless, I urge you not to pass this bill: its provisions make a mockery of academic freedom; its pacing undermines the quality of instruction at Iowa; and it proposes to slow student progress toward graduation. If you want to support history education in our state, increase funding to our universities so we can hire more scholars and broaden our course offerings. Our students deserve to be able to learn about Iowa, the United States, and the world at large.

Landon Storrs

I agree with the bill drafters that college students should learn about American history and government, but I urge the subcommittee to oppose this bill, both on principle and on practical grounds. I am a university professor who has taught US history for 30 years in Texas and Iowa. If enacted, SF 322 would not improve Iowa undergraduates' learning in the desired areas, and it also would establish unnecessary, intrusive and costly government control over the content of college curricula.Practical problems: 1.Squeezing what is now covered in multiple courses (two halves of US history, various political science options) into a single required course will decrease, not increase the quality of what is now offered.2.Requiring all undergraduates to pass the class would require hiring many, many more instructors, if quality is a consideration. Having enormous inperson classes or online classes, taught by instructors without the requisite expertise, would not improve quality over what is taught now in college, or even in high school.3.Such requirements tend to be unpopular with students, inviting cheating rather than curiosity, and perhaps making students less inclined to choose Iowa colleges.There are better ways to encourage college students to learn more about US history and government. Please oppose this bill. Thank you.

James Grossman [American Historical Association]

The American Historical Association registers strong objection to core provisions of Senate File 322 (SF 322) and its companion House File 402 (HF 402). This legislation threatens to undermine the quality of history instruction at Iowas public universities and community colleges, tarnishing the reputation of these worldclass institutions of higher learning.The AHA endorses the expansion of history and civics education in Iowa. Many colleges and universities across the country incorporate these disciplines into general education requirements, as they should. Learning history can often be an effective strategy for producing wellrounded college graduates with skills necessary to succeed in the workforce and participate in public life.Unfortunately, HF 402/SF 322s glaring flaws far outweigh any potential educational benefit for Iowa students. The bill creates a new, threecredit survey course in American history and civil government as a requirement for the completion of any baccalaureate degree program, but imposes unwieldy and overly specific requirements that will constrain educators and undermine student learning. Yes, let us require students to learn American history and principles of civic participationbut not through a course that is weighted down with excessive baggage that would make it impossible to navigate the main currents of our nation's history.The onesemester course outlined in this bill fails to do justice to the rich and vibrant history of the United States. Faculty and departments across Iowa already teach twosemester sequences in US history. Many do so exceedingly well. History educators understand how to design compelling courses that engage students and prepare them for future success as citizens and as contributors to the economic vitality of the region. HF 402/SF 322 mandates that instructors cram twice as much content into half the time. Its extensive provisions require all faculty to assign at least 10 specific historical sources spanning the entirety of American history; impart an understanding of the landmark cases of the United States supreme court and their effects on law and society; and provide a careful review of 250 years of the development of the US government, all while somehow imparting devotion to American institutions and ideals. This hodgepodge of overly prescriptive mandates will leave students with neither time nor opportunity to read, think, contextualize, and analyze the past.The AHA is confident that history education rooted in professional expertise and disciplinary integrity can inspire patriotism in American students through deep and honest engagement with our nations past. But this bill rejects good history, demanding instead that faculty instruct students how they should feel about the nations past.HF 402/SF 322 is neither for nor about Iowa. Its many mandates have little to do with its distinctive regional history, the needs of Iowa students, or the realities of college classrooms across the state. It strips Iowa educators of most decisions about what college students should learn about US history. Thats because the text of HF 402/SF 322 is copied nearly verbatim from model legislation promoted by a national coalition of education activists headquartered on Madison Avenue in New York City.We suspect that many Iowans would prefer that students enroll in courses designed and taught by someone at their local university as opposed to outofstate activists.The AHA recommends more effective ways of improving the historical knowledge and civic awareness of college graduates. History faculty in Iowa need little encouragement to teach the founding documents of the United States. It would be far more productive to give them the instructional time and resources they need to do so in accordance with professional norms, or to engage them in discussions about how the state government can best support solutions tailored to the needs and aptitudes of Iowa students.We advise expanding this requirement to a twocourse (sixcredithour) sequence similar to what is already being offered at Iowa colleges and universities. Texas might provide a useful point of comparison. Decadesold legislation requires all undergraduate students at the states many public colleges and universities to complete a twosemester survey in US or state history, leaving control over most course content to individual faculty and institutions. To make a similar requirement feasible in Iowa, however, would also require funding to hire additional fulltime instructional faculty with appropriate expertise to teach sections of these courses.All students deserve the right to learn history and historical thinking. Students, faculty, and academic departments are much better situated than state legislators to make decisions about how we learn history and how best to assess that knowledge. Our organization urges your committee to heed the faculty at Iowas public institutions.With more than 10,500 members, the AHA is the largest membership association of professional historians in the world. Founded in 1884 and incorporated by Congress in 1889 for the promotion of historical studies, the Association provides leadership for the discipline, helps to sustain and enhance the work of historians, and promotes the imperative of historical thinking in public life.Everything has a history. If passed, HF 402 would waste time, money, and resources to undermine the quality of public higher education in Iowa.

Martin Lohrmann

I teach history at a private graduatelevel institution in Iowa. I oppose this bill because it does not enhance current practices but limits ways to teach the riches and depths of American and Iowan history. This bill also adds government requirements without providing resources for fulfilling those new requirements.

Rebecca Conard

As a historian who taught US survey courses for many years, I share legislators' concerns about the lack of historical knowledge among the general population, and students in particular, especially when it comes to understanding our nation's founding documents and our system of governance. At the same time, I also know how difficult it is to engage most students in critical thinking about complex issues. To require educators to forcefeed specific content to students is, at best, a questionable strategy that likely would lead to greater student apathy, which is not what anyone wants. Required courses are among the hardest to teach precisely because they are mandatory, and most students don't want to be there in the first place. Please do not advance this bill

C Holland

The requirement for a onesemester survey course on American history and civil government is likely to dilute the quality of education. Faculty members at Iowas public institutions of higher education typically offer comprehensive twosemester sequences in U.S. History. Condensing this rich subject matter into a single semester risks oversimplifying complex historical narratives, leaving students with a fragmented understanding of their nations past. This approach could ultimately degrade the educational standards that Iowans expect from their institutions of higher learning. SF 322 imposes rigid content requirements that restrict educators academic freedom. By dictating specific materials and perspectives that must be included in the curriculum, the bill undermines the professional autonomy of history faculty. Educators should have the liberty to design courses that reflect their expertise and engage students in critical thinking, rather than being forced to adhere to a predetermined syllabus dictated by external groups.The bill seems to stem from concerns over historical knowledge among the general populace, yet imposing a standardized course is unlikely to resolve deeper issues related to civic literacy. Instead of mandating a onesizefitsall solution, it would be more effective to encourage diverse educational approaches that foster critical engagement with history across various disciplines, rather than confining it within a single mandated course.In summary, Iowa SF 322 poses significant challenges to educational quality, academic freedom, and student progression while potentially serving external interests rather than the genuine educational needs of students. Opposing this bill highlights the importance of maintaining high standards in higher education and ensuring that curricula are developed by educators rather than legislative mandates.

John Williams

I teach American history at the University of Northern Iowa, but these comments are my own (personally and professionally). I support requiring Iowa undergraduate students to take an American history course as a requisite for obtaining a degree from a regent university. However, I urge lawmakers to oppose the current iteration of this bill due to its infringement on academic freedom, wording which suggests a goal of promoting nationalistic mythmaking over professional historical consensus, and lack of funding to effectively teach the number of students required for the proposed bill. Academic freedom is essential in the United States. This is a right guaranteed under the US Constitution (see First Amendment), and foundational to making the United States a global epicenter of higher education. Professional historians, such as myself, value the importance of historical documents and use them as tools for teaching history. I myself already use many of the "required" documents proposed in the bill. However, the lengthy list of required documents in the proposed bill present challenges to incorporate in a single, semesterlong course covering the entirety of American history and leave little room for teachers to create meaningful lesson plans which reflect professional, historical consensus, or adapt to various interests of students.The proposed bill further suggests a goal to promote nationalistic mythmaking over professional historical consensus. In particular, the wording under 27a ("The study of and devotion to American institutions and ideals"), suggests an ideological bent to this bill which ignores the knowledge and skills of professional historians and the inability for instructors to meaningfully teach students about American civics and prepare them for the challenges of today. American history is filled with triumphant stories, no doubt, but it also contains lessons about discrimination, injustice, and the failure to fulfill the promises laid out by the founding documents this bill emphasizessomething still seen today, especially with the removal of civil rights for segments of the population. Without proper definition of the language proposed in this bill, it leaves a vague criteria which, as with my previous point threatens academic freedom, but also hinders the goals of teaching Iowa students a full picture of the struggles in American historysome of which remain today.Lastly, the proposed bill ignores the financial cost required to implement it. At UNI (my current institution and, again, I am speaking as a citizen of Iowa), there are only three fulltime American historians (myself included). I am a termed employee, and while there will be a new hire starting next fall, another faculty member will be leaving by the end of the year, leaving only two fulltime, US historians at UNI. To offer a required course on American history and civics, of course, will require a substantially larger number of professional historians, yet this bill seems to ignore that fact. Simply put, it is impossible for UNIor any of the other regent schoolsto fulfill the requirements of this bill without allocating additional funding to hire new faculty.I am from Iowa and earned an undergraduate and masters degree from a public school here. I returned and accepted a termed position to teach American history with the goal of making an impact on Iowa students and preparing them to be active citizens. I feel like I have accomplished this goal. However, I am concerned with how the state at largeincluding many members in the legislatureseem to have a lack of basic knowledge. Again, I strongly oppose this bill while supporting the promotion of American history and civics as a required part of undergraduate education in Iowa. I also strongly suggest for lawmakers to do the same.