The Iowa Legislature > Committees & Schedules > Meeting Public Comments Print Icon Print

Meeting Public Comments

Subcommittee meeting and times are as follows:
Attendance at subcommittee meetings by lobbyists and the public is via zoom or in-person. See agenda for zoom details. Only authenticated users are permitted access.
HF 2544
A bill for an act relating to education, including by modifying provisions related to the social studies instruction provided to students enrolled in grades one through twelve and the educational programs provided by the institutions of higher education under the control of the state board of regents, and requiring education related to the holocaust for students and teachers in school districts. (Formerly HF 2330.)
Agenda
Subcommittee members: Green-CH, Quirmbach, Rozenboom
Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024
Time: 10:00 AM - 10:30 AM
Location: Room 315
Comments Submitted:
The purpose of comments is to provide information to members of the subcommittee.
Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

03-10-2024
Elizabeth Brenneman []
Dear Subcommittee members, I am writing to dissuade you from continuing on proposed legislation HF2544. In particular, I suspect that educators were not included as expert consultants in the proposed curriculum. Do you realize that is tantamount to a lay person performing surgery? Or perhaps a better analogy would be a lay person proscribing the way professors at a medical college teach med students to perform all future surgeries. As a high school teacher and parent of a middle schooler, this bill proposes material that is not gradelevel appropriate. Specifically, I am baffled by the choices of original documents. When done well, analysis of original documents can be an incredible learning exercise. When done poorly, as this is, it will be beyond frustrating for everyone involved with little benefit. In my lifetime, I believe I have seen a dramatic shift in just how poorly each political party views the other. If we want to instill more patriotism in our students, we need to start by showing them the adults in this country can work together, that politicians are not bullies, and that there is hope for the future. Many students are disillusioned and anxious about the future (Gallup). Micromanaging teachers poorly will provide more evidence to students that politicians do not understand them and their needs. Thank you for your time,Elizabeth Brenneman
03-10-2024
John Monroe []
For the last twenty years, I've taught history at Iowa State University. Though I'm writing you here as a concerned private citizen, my concerns derive from my professional background as a teacher and researcher in the discipline of history. My regular teaching rotation includes classes on the Enlightenment and the French Revolution (17151815), the history of France from 1815 to the present, and Modern European Intellectual and Cultural History from the Enlightenment to the Present. I also teach the second half of our introductory Western Civilization sequence, which covers the period from 1500 to the Present. All of these courses engage directly with what HF 2544 calls "the history of the secular and religious ideals of the institutions of liberty" and "the cultural heritage of western civilization." You have already received a letter from the American Historical Association (AHA) laying out the primary objections professional historians have to HF 2544, a bill that seeks to micromanage primary and secondaryschool social studies education in the state. As the AHA letter makes clear, the bill is intellectually incoherent and obviously devised by a person with no actual classroom experience teaching elementary or highschool students. Implementing HF 2544 would ironically do nothing but hobble our state's teachers in their efforts to accomplish the bill's professed goal: increasing student understanding of and investment in the founding principles and fundamental institutions of our republic. There are many flaws in the bill, and the AHA letter lays most of them out very clearly. I write here to call attention to an additional, and to my mind very disturbing, problem: HF 2544's actual provisions negate the ideals the bill claims to support. As such, it's an ideological trap. If you are a patriotic layperson unfamiliar with the discipline of history or its teaching, it looks inoffensive and even noble; if you are an educator trained in the discipline, in contrast, it looks like a grave threat to the ongoing health of our civil society.If implemented, HF 2544 would transform social studies instruction into something akin to the classes in "Marxism" that students in the Chinese educational system are required to take. The goal of such courses is not to teach independent thinking, but to indoctrinate: to produce compliant subjects willing to do and believe whatever those in power tell them to do and believe. Cookiecutter thinking of that kind is exactly what the "secular and religious ideals of the institutions of liberty" in the United States aim to prevent. While the historical reality of the eighteenth century was complex and fraught with contradictions, the basic principles outlined by Jefferson, Franklin, and the other Founders shared a universalistic conception of human dignity that emphasized the ultimate importance of thinking rationally for oneself (this was why, for Jefferson, the "pursuit of happiness" derived from the fundamental rights to life and liberty). A capacity to act independently according to the dictates of one's reason is central to the vision of citizenship and civic life on which our republic depends: as I noted, in a very real sense, it is what the word "liberty" means in our founding documents. HF 2544 undercuts that vision of citizenship and civic life by attempting to impose an educational system in which students are taught not how to think about the national past, but what to think about it. Following that path would betray the daring experiment in universal rights and human liberation that our founders undertook, turning us from a nation distinguished by its steadfast commitment to the ideals of the Enlightenment into a standardissue nationalistauthoritarian state. On top of this, HF 2544 is sloppily drafted to the point of being absurd. As the letter from the AHA points out, the list of "required texts" for fifth and sixth graders is actually more properly a college undergraduate syllabus. Requiring fifth graders to read Paine's "Common Sense" or Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" is not realistic. Of course, as a historian and therefore somebody accustomed to reading texts critically with an eye toward whatever agenda is being advanced between the lines, it seems reasonable to conclude that whatever people are behind this bill don't give a fig about the practicability of the recommendations they are making, but are instead preoccupied with how they believe the act of supporting such recommendations will make them look. Posturing does not lead to good education policy. Instead what we need is trust in our state's Social Studies Teachers, who already take their responsibilities as educators of future free citizens very seriously.
03-11-2024
Sara Russell []
As the bill reads, it states that students would be required to take 4.5 units (years?) of social studies classes in high school including U.S. history (2 units/years), western civilization, government, and civics. These requirements will not allow students the opportunity (because of scheduling and teaching availability) to take economics, psychology, sociology, geography, or a world history course that covers more than western civilization. Additionally students would no longer have the opportunity/space in their schedules to take advanced placement classes (Iowa students routinely perform very well on AP exams, well above the national average) or dual credit classes (that allow many students to earn college credits while in high school). The high school I teach at already requires students to take a full year of American history, a year of world history, and a semester of both American government and economics with many students opting to take additional courses their fourth year. As stated earlier, many students in our school currently earn college credits with dual credit sociology and psychology courses. I would kindly ask for clarification of the units referenced in the bill. I do not deny the importance of Civics ideas and content for our students. In our school, civics ideas are already integrated into our American government course. How many Iowa high schools are already doing this? How would the other new requirements prepare our students to be global citizens and engage in an increasingly global economy? Agricultural and agribusiness, central to Iowa's economy, are global industries. Our students need an understanding of the world today, beyond just the history of our nation and its founding, to be able to compete on a global stage. Thank you for your time and consideration.
03-11-2024
James Grossman [American Historical Association]
Dear Senators Green, Quirmbach, Rozenboom:HF 2544 would severely undermine the integrity of history and social studies education in Iowas public schools. This legislation directly encroaches on the authority and expertise of the members of the Iowa State Board of Education, sidestepping statutory minimum requirements for the educational program and bypassing the states mandated process for developing social studies standards. The American Historical Association urges you to reject this attempt to replace this thoughtful process with politically inspired standards that will weaken Iowas public K12 education to the detriment of Iowas students.Iowas protocols for creating social studies standards draw on insights from both professionals and relevant public stakeholders. In his Executive Order 83 (2013), Governor Terry Branstad initiated a multistage process for the revision of academic standards to allow ample opportunity for public scrutiny and input. In 2017, the State Board of Education adopted revised K12 Iowa Core Standards in Social Studies. Owing to pandemicrelated delays, implementation is still ongoing. Throughout this process, Iowa Department of Education staff have incorporated input from committees of educators, academic historians, parents, and a variety of community stakeholders. This democratic process, which emphasized contributions from a wide range of Iowans, accords with guidelines from the American Historical Association, the National Council for the Social Studies, and other leading professional organizations.The education system in Iowa is built around respect for local and districtlevel priorities. HF 2544 proposes to sidestep this wellestablished process for curriculum development to impose dramatic changes in mandated content, adding so many new requirements as to leave little room for substantive focus on state and local concerns. If enacted, this measure would disrupt the implementation of Iowas current academic standards. The result is likely to disorient Iowa teachers and do a disservice to Iowa students, all while elbowing Iowans out of their own educational policymaking.To what end? The text of the bill cobbles together clauses copied from five separate pieces of politically oriented model legislation, all originated by a coalition of education policy activists headquartered on Madison Avenue in New York City. HF 2544, for instance, insists that fourteen historic sourcessome of them quite lengthymust all be included in the program of study for fifth and sixth grade. Seems fair enough. But this list is copied verbatim from a bill designed for undergraduate college students in other states. The lengthy list of American role models is lifted entirely from model legislation as are most of the other clauses in this hodgepodge of a bill. A few added references to Iowa are insufficient to tailor these generic templates to the precise needs of the states students. HF 2544 leaves no room for input from teachers, administrators, historians, or parents.By not following its own mandated (and appropriate) processes, Iowa does a disservice to its students. As the AHA has documented through our extensive work on career preparedness in history classrooms, the aspect of history education employers value most is students ability to communicate with and understand people from different backgrounds. The elision of world history from this extensive list of social studies requirementsinsisting instead upon a much narrower emphasis on Western civilizationwould greatly diminish the career preparedness of Iowas students. This, too, contradicts the Iowa Codes requirement that global perspectives shall be incorporated into all levels of the educational program (Iowa Code Section 256.11). At a time when Iowa should be offering its students the best and broadest educational opportunities to stay competitive in the world economy, these standards instead have the potential to hobble students with a parochial worldview and deprive them of the chance to become tomorrows global leaders.Content aside, the curriculum presented in this legislation is simply impractical. Although Iowas Educational Standards legislation (Iowa Code Section 256.11) specifically requires attention to ageappropriate intellectual development of children (as well it should; a teachers job is hard enough), this legislation sets requirements that bear little resemblance to cognitive development among children. Even the brightest fifth graders will struggle to comprehend Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville or Thomas Paines Common Sense. The overwhelming quantity of material enumerated in this new curricular mandate will leave little time and space to contextualize these documents or explore their origins and implications. Good history education helps students learn to explore issues from multiple perspectives.These flaws and shortcomings are the results of politically motivated efforts to reject established legislative and education policy procedures. This bill is a Frankensteins monster constructed out of disembodied portions of five outofstate model bills sharing little more than the support of a small group of lobbyists with an overt political agenda. Iowa has plenty of historians at its firstclass public universities to provide the kinds of expertise that this legislation ignores. Instead of turning to language sourced from New Yorks Madison Avenue, Iowa should consider adopting its own homegrown standards. With 11,000 members, the AHA is the largest membership association of professional historians in the world, representing every historical era and geographical area. 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 critical role of historical thinking in public life. Everything has a history.Sincerely, James R. GrossmanExecutive Director
Attachment
03-11-2024
Colleen Kollasch []
I strongly oppose this bill. I stand in agreement with the Iowa Council for the Social Studies when they state: Dear Colleen Kollasch,On Wednesday 28 February 2024, the Iowa House of Representatives will be debating HF 2544 which calls for substantial changes to the teaching of social studies in the state of Iowa. The Iowa Council for the Social Studies does not support this legislation for the reasons stated in the attached statement. ICSS encourages our members to read the legislation and contact their representatives with their thoughts on this legislation. The text of the legislation is available here. Other information related to this billsponsors, lobbyist positions, and history of the bill is available here. Note: this legislation was originally known as HF 2330. Members can find their representative here.Iowa Council for the Social Studies statement regarding HF2544The Iowa Council for the Social Studies does not support HF 2544 for the following reasons:The required curricular changes are not educationally sound. The list of documents named as important to the history of the United States, while correctly identifying documents important to any study of early U.S. history or government, requires students, beginning in the 5th grade, to read and comprehend texts that are well beyond their reading comprehension skills. In fact, most of the documents in their original forms are too challenging for high school students. The same list of documents and topics is required at grades 5 and 6, grades 7 and 8, and grades 912. Students at each grade level would be repeating the same information.The list of topics for most of the required units of study are so extensive that only the most cursory coverage of each topic will be possible. Students may learn this content briefly for an assessment but will be unlikely to retain this knowledge for the long term.The overwhelming emphasis is on the Revolutionary and Early Republic period. For example, the latest date of any of the important documents is 1863 with the Emancipation Proclamation. This implies that no documents since 1863 are of any importance for students to know or study.The legislation states The concept that United States history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence. Ironically, this legislation itself is proof of the constructed nature of history because of what has been included and, more importantly, what has been excluded from study.This legislation seems to require the teaching of religion, which is explicitly prohibited by the First Amendment.On p. 4, lines 910 (pdf version), the bill states, The study of and devotion to the United States exceptional and praiseworthy history. Teaching devotion to any idea or belief is teaching religion. Underline added.On p. 7, lines 2527 (pdf version), the bill states, ...the Christian synthesis of Greek, Hebrew, and Roman thought that emphasized the equal dignity of all individual humans in the eyes of God This violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it requires that students accept the existence of a particular god.The only principle identified throughout the text is the concept of liberty. Concepts such as equality or justice are glaringly absent. In addition, the concept of liberty is never clearly explained. There are different types of liberty listed. Various portions of the legislation refer to economic, political, social, cultural, and religious liberty, but what is meant by the term liberty is never clarified.These requirements would leave no space for the study of geography, world history, psychology, sociology, or any other social studies elective.At grades 7 and 8, students would be required to complete 1 semester of study in civics, U.S. history, Western Civilization, economics, and Iowa history, for a total of 5 semesters of social studies in 2 years.At grades 912, students would be required to complete 4.5 years of social studies unit of government, 1 unit of civics, 2 units of U.S. history, and 1 unit of Western Civilization. Note that the current understanding of the term unit is one year of study.Civics education is about doing as well as understanding, but this legislation explicitly prohibits anything it identifies as action civics. This would be like taking a Foods class and learning what a knife, a pan, and a recipe are, but never being allowed to cook. The source of this curriculum is from Civicsalliance.org, and that website very clearly states its opposition to having students engage in any kind of democratic practices or processespractices or processes like voting or debating or campaigning. So, while this legislation expects students to know their rights and responsibilities, they are expressly prohibited from acting on those rights and responsibilities as part of their education.The Iowa Council for the Social Studies recognizes the need to improve social studies education in Iowa. With the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 and the Iowa Legislatures decision to require testing in literacy, math, and science and mandate a 90minute block of literacy every day in the Elementary grades, social studies was pushed to the margins of the elementary day. ICSS has heard from teachers across the state that social studies is the last 15 minutes of the day, done if there is time, not important because its not tested, or not done at this grade level. We are in our second generation of elementary students who do not consistently receive social studies education in our elementary schools. And now, every new elementary teacher themselves is the product of this marginalization. HF 2544 does not recognize, much less, address this issue.HF 2544 also represents another attack on the professionalism of Iowa teachers. The portions of this legislation that should legitimately be included in a U.S. History course or civics or government are already being included where appropriate. Iowa social studies teachers are licensed professionals, licensed by the state of Iowa because they have met the educational requirements established by the state of Iowa. This legislation did not result from a conversation with Iowa social studies teachers but was outsourced from an organization outside of Iowa with its own agenda. Clearly, the belief that Iowans know whats right and will do whats right does not extend to our own social studies teachers.ICSS Executive Board
03-11-2024
Cynthia Hofmeister []
To the Committee on Education, For the past eleven years, I have taught social studies to middle school students. Since that time, I have implemented the new social studies standards that were created in 2017. In addition, I have participated in various learning opportunities from AEAs, the Iowa Social Studies Council, and the State Historical Society on best practices and how to incorporate the standards into the classroom. Further, I have worked with other social studies teachers in breaking down the standards to integrate them into the classroom. I have read House File 2544 and have concerns about how this piece of legislation will impact students education in social studies. Regarding the proposed elementary program most of it is already covered under the 2017 Social Studies Curriculum Standards. One concern is the suggestion about primary sources in fifth and sixth grades. The current fifth grade focus is Rights and Responsibilities and the current sixth grade focus is World Regions and Cultures. These grades do interact with primary sources that are abridged or modified, that is at their reading levels. Most of the documents listed in their original form would not be appropriate for this age group to comprehend. Most adults struggle with understanding the Constitution of the United States for example. As this list appears again, for the seventh, eighth, and high school grade recommendations it would be ageappropriate to remove the list from the elementary level. This list can be highly difficult for most eighth graders as I use many of these primary sources while teaching that course. There are no primary sources listed for United States history past 1863. Will there be a list of modern United States history? The 2017 Social Studies Curriculum Standards does provide lists of primary sources, many that are recommended are included, for eighth grade and high school. Was the 2017 Social Studies Curriculum Standards consulted when making this proposal? Were current Social Studies teachers asked for their expertise? Another concern is the wording of the study of devotion to the United States exceptional and praiseworthy history. Students should be proud to be citizens of the United States but there is a fine line between being overly nationalistic and ignoring the recognition of other countries achievements. In addition, not everything America has done in the past is praiseworthy such as the treatment of people of color and the Atomic Bomb. Again, most of the topics listed in this section do apply to the current eighthgrade course of United States History and Civic Ideals. There are additional concerns and questions about this proposal. Some social studies topics are missing such as geography of other places outside of Iowa and the United States, Eastern Civilizations history and culture, financial literacy, current events, sociology, and psychology. All of these are currently addressed in the 2017 Social Studies Curriculum Standards. Further, how is this plan going to be enacted? The last time a committee of government leaders and teachers created the standards, asked for feedback, and then implemented them. Then districts had three years to adapt. If passed would there be a similar procedure? At present, the proposed legislation should not be moved forward. Instead, provide districts with time and resources to integrate the system that is already in place. The current curriculum is wellrounded and covers the areas listed for United States history, primary sources, and the Holocaust. Hold districts not using the 2017 Social Studies Curriculum Standards accountable and allow the teachers who are doing the work a say in their career of choice. I highly encourage all of you to visit your local social studies classrooms and speak to their teachers, I think you would be impressed with what you would encounter. A concerned teacher, Cynthia R. Hofmeister West Des Moines, IA 50265
Attachment
03-11-2024
Kathleen Goodyear []
Dear Subcommittee: I write to oppose HF 2544. I live in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and am a member of the American Historical Society. As Jim Grossman, the AHAs Executive Director, has already pointed out, the social studies curriculum requirements contained in this bill are clearly not gradeappropriate and read as though some rightwing operatives cobbled them together. It is vital that experienced Iowa K12 educators continue to craft a holistic social studies curriculum for our children that facilitates childrens ageappropriate engagement with the complex history of our pluralistic society. Please allow our educators to do the jobs for which they are trained. Please do not allow rightwing political operatives to usurp our educational system here in Iowa. Thank you, Kathleen M. Goodyear, PhD
03-11-2024
Kathleen Goodyear []
Corrected comments: Dear Subcommittee: I write to oppose HF 2544. I live in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and am a member of the American Historical Association. As Jim Grossman, the AHA's Executive Director, has already pointed out, the social studies curriculum requirements contained in the bill are clearly not gradeappropriate and read as though some rightwing operatives cobbled them together. It is vital that experienced Iowa K12 educators continue to craft a holistic social studies curriculum for our children that facilitates children's ageappropriate engagement with the complex history of our pluralistic society. Please allow our educators to do the jobs for which they are trained. Please do not allow rightwing political operatives to usurp our educational system here in Iowa. Thank you, Kathleen M. Goodyear, PhD
03-11-2024
Elizabeth Lawrence [Augustana College]
As a historian and history educator (Augustana College), as a member of the American Historical Association, and as an Iowa resident and parent of schoolaged children in Iowa, I urge lawmakers to reject HF 2544 for the reasons stated by James Grossman, both in this comments section and in a letter sent by the American Historical Association. Of particular concern to me is the absence of world history from the extensive requirements mandated by the proposed curriculum. The curriculum would be a disservice to Iowa students who will chart their futures in an age of global conflicts and connections.
03-11-2024
Rebecca Conard []
I write in opposition to HF2544, a bill that would usurp the responsibility of professional educators for setting social studies educational standards, and the equal responsibility for school administrators and teachers to implement these standards, and replace a wellestablished process for curriculum design with an agenda that is so obviously politically motivated. Enough with cultural politics! I stand with the Iowa State Education Association, the Iowa Association of School Boards, the School Administrators of Iowa, the Urban Education Network of Iowa, and the Rural School Advocates of Iowa in opposing this proposed legislation.
03-11-2024
Kathy Hilliard []
I write in opposition to HF2544. Ive taught American history at Iowa State since 2008 and have come to love working with students as they pursue questions about our countrys past and Iowas place in it. Most of my students are products of Iowa public schools and come to class with open minds, ready to interact with each other in a robust discussion of our shared past. I fear HF2544 will undermine both the good work of social studies teachers in the state and Iowas open, nonpartisan, and democratic process for social studies curriculum development. As you know, Iowas wellestablished processes for curriculum development and revision are a model of responsible civic engagement. Why subvert them? This legislationcobbled from partisan legislative efforts in other statesdraws its inspiration from very wellfunded private groups who care little about Iowa students educational success. In both content and form, the curriculum they promote prioritizes rote memorization over thinking and argues for a particular narrative of American history that is simplistic, narrow, and unrepresentative of the communities our students live in now and will engage in the future. There is much that is praiseworthy in this countrys history, but a curriculum that asks students to celebrate ideals, people, and noteworthy events while minimizing discussion of challenges to achieve and maintain them cannot possibly prepare our students for lives beyond the classroom.These partisan efforts to infiltrate Iowas education system are deeply disturbing. Far from promoting a love of state and country, this legislation undermines it by allowing private groups to subvert democratic processes and to impose a series of standards that do not meet the needs of Iowa students.
03-11-2024
Lawrence Paska [National Council for the Social Studies]
Dear Senators Green, Quirmbach, and Rozenboom:We are writing on behalf of social studies educators in Iowa who have alerted the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) that you are considering the revision of K12 social studies standards and curriculum, as outlined in HF 2544 which was passed by the House of Representatives on Wednesday, February 28, 2024. We urge you not to pass this bill as the basis for K12 social studies standards and curriculum in Iowa.NCSS knows that Iowa has a strong K12 education system with highquality learning standards and multiple pathways to prepare all students for college, career, and civic life. Additionally, NCSS counts among its own leaders and active members many qualified and dedicated Iowa educators. NCSS is proud of its state affiliate, the Iowa Council for the Social Studies, for its leadership, service, and support to Iowa teachers. According to their statement, The Iowa Council for the Social Studies recognizes the need to improve social studies education in Iowa. With the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 and the Iowa Legislatures decision to require testing in literacy, math, and science and mandate a 90minute block of literacy every day in the Elementary grades, social studies was pushed to the margins of the elementary day. ICSS has heard from teachers across the state that social studies is the last 15 minutes of the day, done if there is time, not important because its not tested, or not done at this grade level. We are in our second generation of elementary students who do not consistently receive social studies education in our elementary schools. And now, every new elementary teacher themselves is the product of this marginalization. HF 2544 does not recognize, much less, address this issue.We agree with the Iowa Council for the Social Studies in its statement that HF 2544 also represents another attack on the professionalism of Iowa teachers. The portions of this legislation that should legitimately be included in a U.S. History course or civics or government are already being included where appropriate. Iowa social studies teachers are licensed professionals, licensed by the state of Iowa because they have met the educational requirements established by the state of Iowa. This legislation did not result from a conversation with Iowa social studies teachers but was outsourced from an organization outside of Iowa. Therefore, we believe that the Iowa Senates consideration of this bill would have a lasting negative impact on Iowas education system. As we wrote in 2022, NCSS has determined that the suggested social studies standards developed by the Civics Alliance do not align with best practices related to the development of social studies standards. If implemented in schools, these suggested standards would have damaging and lasting effects on the civic knowledge of students and their capacity to engage in civic reasoning and deliberation. NCSS does not endorse nor support the use of these standards. The full response is available at https://www.socialstudies.org/currenteventsresponse/ncssstatementamericanbirthrightcivicsalliancesmodelk12social.We are concerned that the proposed legislation does not meet these nationally accepted norms related to the development of state standards and curriculum. Our ultimate interest is that any standards used for social studies curriculum and lesson development produce students who have strong content knowledge, strong inquiry and analysis skills, and who are ready to be active participants in civic life. NCSS recently issued a statement on the development of social studies standards to guide those priorities. This statement is available at https://www.socialstudies.org/currenteventsresponse/ncssstatementdevelopmentsocialstudiesstandards. We are happy to further discuss this letter with you and can be reached at whedgepethncss.org and lpaskancss.org. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Wesley Hedgepeth, 202324 NCSS President Lawrence M. Paska, Ph.D., CAE, Executive Director
Attachment
03-11-2024
Rachel Henning []
I oppose HF 2544 and urge a vote of "No." It is the job of educators and historical experts to create a social studies curriculum that best serves the needs of our students, not politicians without experience in education or social studies. Both a state historical organization and a national organization for social studies teachers have submitted comments opposing this bill, and I am adding my voice to their expert ones. Please listen to educators and vote no on HF 2544.
03-12-2024
Quinn Arnold []
I strongly oppose HF2544. As the parent of two secondary aged children, I expect the social studies curriculum to be created, reviewed, and approved by professional educators and historians, as the current process allows. Why this change, other than to do the bidding of conservative outside lobbying groups? Can the advocates for this bill point to any benefits for Iowa students? It's just so frustrating to hear about massive changes to our state's educational system with no information provided to Iowa parents as to why these bills are advanced, and then to find out that they are crafted by outofstate interest groups who are not held responsible by our elected officials for the issues and upheaval they create. Please let this illadvised and poorly crafted bill die!
03-12-2024
Brie Swenson Arnold []
Dear subcommittee members, As one of your constituents, a professional historian and history educator (at Coe College in Cedar Rapids), and a mother of two children in Iowa's K12 public schools, I'm writing to express my strong opposition to HF 2544 and to urge you to vote against it. I have spent the last 25 years working as a historian and teaching the history of the US, in college classrooms, K12 history programs, and community history programs across Iowa. I deeply believe in the value of teaching history, including instilling admiration for the history of Iowa, the US, and the world in students. But this proposed legislation will not accomplish that. I urge lawmakers to reject HF2544 for all of the reasons stated in the comments and letter submitted by James Grossman, the president of the American Historical Association (AHA), which is the worlds largest organization of folks like me who have dedicated their careers to highquality history information and education. I also support and stand with the many Iowabased groups of educators and historians (like the Iowa State Education Association, the Iowa Association of School Boards, the School Administrators of Iowa, etc.) who also oppose this legislation. I believe in teachers and historians who have deep knowledge of, insight into, experience with, and dedication to history and to teaching. I hope you will also believe in and show your support for teachers, history, patriotism, and Iowa by firmly voting no against this measure.
03-12-2024
Kristin Anderson-Bricker [Loras College]
Please consider that HF2544 subverts the careful and democratic process of shaping social studies curriculum in Iowa that currently exists. Utilizing best practices, the K12 Iowa Core for Social Studies provides current and future teachers guidelines for citizenship education. According to the National Council of Social Studies, "Social studies is the study of individuals, communities, systems, and their interactions across time and place that prepares students for local, national, and global civic life." (https://www.socialstudies.org/mediainformation/definitionsocialstudiesnov2023) The Iowa Core currently embraces the centrality of critical thinking to citizenship in the opening paragraph of the Iowa Core standards, "Preparing students for the 21st century cannot be accomplished without a strong emphasis on the social studies. The founders of our country emphasized that the vitality and security of a democracy depends upon the education and willingness of its citizens to participate actively in society. This level of participation requires civic competence. In other words, it is imperative that our future generations gain an understanding of the core concepts of social studies. Life in the United States within our democratic system is constantly changing which creates varying social circumstances. As a result, citizens need to adapt to such changes in order to sustain vital democratic traditions. Meeting this need is the mission of the social studies." (https://educate.iowa.gov/media/5527/download?inline=) HF2544 does not follow best practices in social studies education because it randomly selects individual primary sources without reference to the historical context currently at the center of Iowa standards. Social studies encourages active citizenship by developing critical thinking skills which enable students to learn to understand ideas as part of a larger context. The current bill negates the purpose of social studies education: "As a result of examining the past, participating in the present, and learning how to shape the future, social studies prepares learners for a lifelong practice of civil discourse and civic engagement in their communities." (https://www.socialstudies.org/mediainformation/definitionsocialstudiesnov2023) On a more practical level, legislation like HF 2544 politicizes social studies and makes it more difficult to recruit and retain quality teachers in Iowa. Students interested in becoming teachers pursue social studies to assist future generations to become active and engaged citizens utilizing critical thinking skills to participate in their communities and the democratic process. They do not choose to be teachers in order to promote particular ideologies. By politicizing social studies education in Iowa, many students are choosing not to complete their education degrees or to obtain a license in nearby states. This legislation may have the unintended consequence of creating a teacher shortage. Thank you for considering these ideas in your deliberations.