Throughline - The Great Textbook War

Episode Date: March 21, 2024

What is school for? Over a hundred years ago, a man named Harold Rugg published a series of textbooks that encouraged students to confront the thorniest parts of U.S. history: to identify problems, and try and solve them. And it was just as controversial as the fights we're seeing today. In this episode: a media mogul, a textbook author, and a battle over what students should – or shouldn't – learn in school.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Support for this podcast and the following message come from the NPR Wine Club, which has generated over $1.75 million to support NPR programming. Whether buying a few bottles or joining the club, you can learn more at nprwineclub.org slash podcast. Must be 21 or older to purchase. There were more than 3,000 book bans in public schools last year, 1,000 more than the year before. To parents, don't give an inch on this. Speak up. Violence is never the answer. But show up, speak up. A judge has ruled in favor of Temecula parents, students, and teachers suing their school district over two controversial policies. The Library Association announced today it has seen a 92% increase in books targeted for censorship. Supporters of book bans often say

the books are inappropriate for the age group dealing with racial or gender identity, sexuality, and other difficult topics. A lot of times the books that are being complained about by parents, you can't even read in the public hearing. This is about the children and their academic success, and it should be about nothing else. It's up to us to bring those children back to where they belong.

What do you think is the purpose of school for, like, your 8-year-old child? This is Lawrence Wu. He's a producer on this show. We've both been hearing a lot about what you just heard. Headlines, debates, unbelievably tense school board meetings, seemingly everywhere over what's taught in school. So we got to talking about it. Oof. So I think on like one hand,

the purpose is to teach the kids basic mathematics, how to read and write, like the very most basic academic skills you learn. But then I have to say, on the other hand, I also can't help but notice like they got to be kind of inculcated with the values of the country, which is something that's kind of strange that I don't know how I feel about seeing my kid go through it. Yeah. Just as a kid yourself, do you remember being cognizant of that? Yeah. When I was in fourth grade, I read the autobiography of Malcolm X and it radicalized me in some ways in a sense of how I viewed school. And I remember I stopped standing for the pledge for a little while and my dad had to come to school.

But I was aware at that point that we weren't just being taught this basic stuff, that on some level we were being like what I thought back then was brainwashed. Brainwashed. Yeah, I know. Maybe a little bit hyperbolic. I was also a kid. But if you open up any news site today or head to any school board meeting, people are asking similar questions. Like what books should be in school libraries? What topics should be taught in what grades or at all? Lawrence doesn't have kids himself,

but he knows someone who does. I have been thinking about this a lot because I have an aunt. I'm Amy Koteng. I have two kids. They're in sixth grade. They're 11 years old. They're in the public school system. They're twins actually. And she's like a really active. She's like, she knows all about the parent drama, PTA drama, but there's also the culture war drama that's like happening in my hometown. And I found out about this through her because she ended up running for a board of bed seat last fall. Wow, that's a big step. We had eight people running for four seats. It was like unheard of in many municipalities.

They couldn't even get one person to run. So the race was competitive. And just a quick note that Amy talked to us in her capacity as a private citizen, not as a board member. So all her opinions she's sharing are her own. As she's running for this seat, they host a bunch of meet and greets, right? And the whole point of these meet and greets is like, you know, shake hands,

be a politician, smile, let them know you're in the community, kiss babies, yeah. But something weird starts to happen where she starts to have these kind of experiences, one in particular. We set up these meet and greets and we would have folks show up.

I literally had an old lady who probably don't have kids in the system, don't have anything to do with the education system. She came up with a little piece of paper that was typed up for her and asked me about what do I think about books. That's it? That's the question? That's the question. I was like, ma'am, what do I think? I mean, I like my kids to ma'am, what do I think?

I mean, I like my kids to read more. But what do you think about them putting age-inappropriate books in a library? So I'm not aware of any, but if you can give me an example, you know, I'd like to explore further. Oh, man. And she kind of had multiple conversations that are similar to this, where it wasn't kind of this engagement and conversation. It was just a questioning. We had to stop these meetings because they weren't about what we believe in. It was about how can we get a job, you know, saying things so that we can like tell people.

And it just, it wasn't built on trust. It wasn't built on an open exchange and listening. And so there's the question. Is school a place for open exchange and listening? Or is it a place to learn the Pledge of Allegiance and study history that makes you feel good about your country? Even though it feels like we're living in a moment where even the mention of slavery is being questioned in history books, it's not an isolated event. So Lawrence went looking for answers to find when this whole debate over schooling began, how it ended up becoming so controversial, and to answer a basic question, what exactly is school for? Turns out he didn't have to go far. The next town over was the site of a massive school battle, the kind of thing that would have happened today.

I'm Ramteen Adablui. Coming up on ThruLine from NPR, producer Lawrence Wu tells us a story about a media mogul, a textbook author, and a battle over what school means in the United States. This is Justin Misch from Indianapolis, Indiana, and you're listening to ThruLine from NPR. This message comes from WISE, the app for doing things in other currencies. Send, spend, or receive money internationally, and always get the real-time, mid-market exchange rate with no hidden fees. Download the WISE app today, or visit wise.com. T's and C's apply. Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels,

with over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else. Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of hotel brands. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com. Part 1. An American School One of the most controversial U.S. textbook wars I came across happened right next door to where I grew up, the site of a major battle that made headline news. But before we get to the fight, let me take you back. It's 1850. A school lesson is taking place in a bustling town. Guten Morgen, liebe Schüler.

Heute werden wir mit der Lektüre beginnen. In German. Bitte sprecht mir nach. They move to the next subject. Hat jemand eine Idee? Still in German. Du? Bitte komm an die Tafel.

The whole school day, lessons are taught in German. But this town isn't in Germany or Austria or even Belgium. This school lesson is taking place in the middle of Ohio in a town heavily populated by German immigrants. The language of instruction in that school would have been German. It wouldn't have been English because, of course, it wouldn't make any sense to teach kids in a language they don't know. This is Charles Dorn. He is the Barry N. Wish Professor of Social Studies at Bowdoin College. He's also the co-author of Patriotic Education in a Global Age. For most of the 19th century, and certainly earlier, America is thought of as a multilingual nation. You know, it was generally accepted. And so you could easily be conceived of as an American and be studying in German in school.

School was different then, too. A lot of students learned in segregated one-room classrooms led by a single teacher. There was no standard curriculum, and the students were all different ages. Most kids were lucky if they even had a public school nearby. But all of that was starting to change. The late 19th, early 20th century, and it's a period of remarkable transformation in the United States. I mean, you know, we all think we live in, like, dramatically changing times. But, wow, that really was a dramatically changing times. But wow, that really was a dramatically changing time.

The flow of immigration reached its peak between 1891 and 1920. It's a country that's going from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy. So the rise of major metropolitan areas, the rise of cities is occurring. During these years, a tremendous movement set in from the countries of southern and eastern Europe. These are immigrants who are speaking different languages and they're practicing different faiths. During this time period, over 20 million immigrants arrived, mostly from Europe. From Austria-Hungary, Poland, Russia, Italy, and the Balkan Peninsula. In many metropolitan areas, big cities in the United States, certainly on the eastern seaboard,

the public school population is comprised of a majority of immigrant students. 60% of the students in most public schools in these major areas are immigrant students. In places like New York, it's 70%. And there is a real concern on the part of the native-born population, if you will, that these immigrants are different enough that it may be hard, if not impossible, to assimilate them into American society. And the schools are going to play a major role in this in a couple of different ways. By the time you get to the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, and most certainly during the period surrounding World War I,

English becomes a marker of American identity, where suddenly it's no longer okay to speak a world language in a public school. Now you need to speak and learn English, because if you're going to be a real American, you need to be proficient in English. That's a brand new idea in the United States. And schools started to change to reflect that idea. You walk into a public school classroom, you see a flag you don't even think twice about. It's like, oh, there's the whiteboard and there's the flag.

But there was a point in time in the United States when there were no flags in classrooms. This happened in the late part of the 19th century. And so just getting flags into classrooms was one example of that. And then, of course, a P sense of unity, of patriotism. And that became even more essential when the country entered World War I. Once World War I does start, well, now the country has an enemy. And the enemy includes Germany. And so back in Ohio, when it was fine for schools to be teaching in German, that's not okay anymore.

And so laws are passed to restrict the instruction in languages other than English in public schools. There was more. The Ku Klux Klan got involved in education, and they were a major force. In 1925, the Klan had around 4 million members. Making sure public schools only taught the ideas that they thought were what they called 100% Americanism. Always throughout the existence of the United States and before in the colonial period, schools have always been the spark of social fighting. This is Adam Latz. He's a

professor of education at Binghamton University and author of The Other School Reformers. He has written extensively about culture wars in schools throughout American history. Religious conservatives on one side and inclusivity progressives on the other, those sides, those trenches were dug in the 1920s. So, for example, the leader of the Klan at the time, Hiram Evans, complained that the control of textbooks had been taken away by un-American forces who were trying to force foreign American ideas into America's school children. complained that the control of textbooks had been taken away by un-American forces who were trying to force foreign American ideas into America's school children. You're beginning a year's study of interesting things about your own country and its people. You're going to learn who Americans are, where they have all come from,

how they live in different parts of the United States, what kinds of work they do, and many other things about the people whose life is different from yours from, how they live in different parts of the United States, what kinds of work they do, and many other things about the people whose life is different from yours and from others of your town or city. This is from a pamphlet that was published in 1922, right when the arguments over schooling and patriotism were heating up. It's the introduction for a middle school social studies class all about immigrants and America's multicultural identity. The author is a man named Harold Rugg. He wasn't a person that I would really like to have at my birthday party, but I'd say that he had this idea that if they can change the schools,

if they can make a change in America's public schools, that will automatically be the lever that changes American society. Coming up, Harold Rugg and to Viewer Live on NPR. And for anyone listening who isn't a supporter yet, right now is a great time to get actively involved in creating a more informed public. If you like perks, ThruLine Plus offers sponsor-free listening and behind-the-scenes bonus episodes every month. If you just want to make a tax-deductible donation to your favorite station or stations in the NPR network, that's great too. Listener support is a powerful resource. It takes all of us doing what we can, when we can, to keep this free public service going.

Please give today and donate at npr.org slash throughline or explore NPR Plus at plus.npr.org. Part 2. An American Textbook Do American parents want their children taught such ideas? Do they want them to be inculcated with the idea that the United States is a second-rate country, that its form of government is open to question, that there are other countries more happily circumstanced and governed than ours? Bertie Charles Forbes. Bertie Forbes was a Scottish immigrant

who came to New York City in the early 1900s. He worked as a business journalist until he decided to start a little magazine known today as Forbes. He really is a straight-up 20th century influencer. He has the equivalent of millions of likes and subscribes because he's got his magazine and he's got the ear of other journalists. Which would prove to be very helpful when he hears about a series of textbooks that his local school district has been using. He happens to be serving on the school board in his home school district in Englewood, New Jersey.

In 1940, Forbes joined his school board in the town of Englewood, New Jersey, which is actually just right next door to where my aunt, Amy, is currently serving her term on the school board. And as soon as Forbes joined, he quickly drummed up a warning. He is speaking to, you know, every newspaper, including his own magazine, about the dangers of these textbooks. That these are anti-American. These books are attempting to undermine students' beliefs in the United States, in democracy, and basically he calls for the banning of these books from his school district. If I were a youth, I would be converted by reading

these rug books to the belief that our whole American system, our whole American form of government, is wrong. That the framers of our constitution were mostly a bunch of selfish mercenaries. That private enterprise should be abolished. And that we should set up communistic Russia as our model. He really is putting this issue, these Rugg textbook issues, into the heart of America's anxieties about their public schools. Okay, so what's the deal with Harold Rugg?

Yeah, Harold Rugg? Yeah, Harold Rugg was an unpleasant person. And I say this as an admirer of his work. He was someone who had not just a big idea of his own powers, but an inflated idea of his own powers. Rugg was born in Massachusetts in 1886 and became interested in the education field in the early 1900s. In terms of appearance, he cultivates this Ivy League professorial stereotype. You know, thin, dressed in what you would think a Columbia professor would dress. So, you know, maybe a wide whale coat, maybe some tweed. Like that professor you had in high school.

Jacket and tie with some elbow patches for good measure. The classic New York intellectual look, you know, doubled down on the fact that he would have social events that would draw some, you know, some really big names in the era in terms of progressive politics, progressive thinking. And he would host them in a very sort of, you know, great Gatsby way. And I mean that as an insult, not fashionable, but more like, you know, bitter and self-righteous and feeling superior to the rest of America.

Through schools of the world, we shall disseminate a new conception of government. So Harold Rugg assumed that if he could capture the best of the social sciences and couple it with a, you know, an anti-authoritarian classroom, one that will embrace all of the collective activities of men, if he could get this to every middle school in America, he could, in one generation, really make an actual profoundly democratic change in the way Americans related to one another

by changing textbooks. One that will postulate the need for scientific control and operation of economic activities in the interests of all people. Rugg had a vision, and there were others like him. In 1920, by the time he became a professor at Teachers College at Columbia University, a progressive group of thinkers had emerged on campus. And of course, there was also another big wave rolling through American culture at this time.

The Roaring Twenties After World War I, the country was on a high. The U.S. was on top of the global stage, and there was this overall sense of optimism. You know, the Great Gatsby vibes. Leonardo DiCaprio in his tux, raising his glass out towards you. But Harold Rugg and a group of faculty members at the Teachers College were suspicious of this prosperity. They are questioning this kind of prosperity that is developing the United States. And they'll begin to call into question some of the sort of grampant capitalism that they witnessed in the 1920s in the United States. And it eventually, of course, all comes crashing down in 1929.

The stock market buckled and crashed, and the nation's economy plummeted into the Depression. By 1932, nearly one man out of four was unemployed. And what these more progressive faculty members see in the crash is evidence that the United States needs to reconstruct its political and economic system. Workingmen spent their days on park benches, and the government set up public soup kitchens. Harold Rugg comes out of that tradition. And rather than teaching the more sort of traditional history, which would be a sort of, you know, a patriotic history of American progress, Rugg wants students to study problems.

He wants the curriculum to be oriented around problem solving. But the idea here is that a student should be studying things that are basically wrong with the United States and seeking to solve those problems. So in order to influence the next generation, Rung needed to get writing. And he started out by writing these pamphlets. The pamphlets you will read tell many true stories of real life which will surprise and interest you.

They tell how people from all the other countries in the world have been coming to this country for many, many years, the important things that have happened to them, how they have become a part of our nation. What he wanted to do was catalog this exploding field of social sciences. So, you know, the first three decades of the 20th century, fields that are very established to us, you know, the first three decades of the 20th century, fields that are very established to us, you know, economics, sociology, current anthropology,

you know, basic social sciences, are relatively new. Of course, we are most interested in understanding what is going on today. We want to know what troubles our country is having and what dangers we, as a people, are facing. But in order to understand these things, we need to know how our country grew to its present size. Rugg, with the help of a team of researchers, developed their first pamphlet series in 1920. It was written for 7th, 8th, and 9th graders. So Rugg's original idea was let's compile the best knowledge of this

recent generation of social scientists and we'll get it into the schools. Rugg wanted to see how his materials would do on a bigger scale. So he contacted former students who were now working at schools to ask if they would purchase a copy of his pamphlet. The second edition of the pamphlet series resulted in about a hundred thousand copies that were shipped to schools. The series overall would go on to sell around 750,000 copies of the pamphlets across the country. And eventually a well-established textbook publisher will basically contract with Rugg to develop these pamphlets into a series of textbooks. And make a book that was the absolute most modern collection of knowledge,

and that would be the ultimate textbook. And they really look different from earlier textbooks. So they're all in contrast with what you might think of as a textbook that represents a traditional political history, which maybe, let's say, has a chapter on the colonial period and then a chapter on the founding of the nation, these are very, very different from that. These are looking at social problems, economic problems, political problems. They are posing questions of students. In one text, the focus is on helping them better understand the geography and history of America, as well as the people that

make it up. The first chapter is titled, What is an American? Can you tell an American by his appearance? Do you think the differences are in the shape of the face, the color of the hair and by his appearance. What about the heroes they look up to? And the poetry they love? Just what are the differences between people who are born here, those whose parents are born here, and those who come from other lands? What are their likenesses? American identity and history are just one part of what Rugg's textbooks cover. They're wide-ranging.

Like the need to conserve natural resources. Rugg is making an argument that unfettered capitalism is responsible for the destruction of natural resources. And so there needs to be some regulation of that. And many of the problems that he does focus on, things like poverty in cities, poor living and health conditions, Rugg will focus on those and trying to get students to think what we would say today critically about some of the different, you know, challenges. Now, I will say this, you know, if you and I opened one of these textbooks and looked at it today, we would think, well, what's so radical about this? This doesn't seem so controversial. So you just have to keep in mind that in their historical context, they were actually quite different. Between 1929 and 1939, Ruggs sold over a million copies.

At their peak, Ruggs textbooks were being used in more than 4,000 school districts nationwide. And so by the time you get through the 1930s to about 1940, Ruggs' books are some of the most popular textbooks in social studies classes in America. And with popularity comes backlash. He becomes a lightning rod in the late 30s, early 1940s. Which brings us back to Bertie Forbes, sitting in his Board of Ed seat in 1940. He liked to tell a story that he was talking to a group of middle schoolers in his town of Englewood, New Jersey. And they told him that their teacher had told them, using the rug textbook,

the teacher had said, is there any country as great as the United States? And one of the kids said, no. And the teacher, according to the kids, according to Forbes, read from her teacher's guide and said, the answer is yes. America is just one country

and there are other countries that are just as good. Forbes saw that as an unpatriotic, even a criminal act. I mean to battle against such poisoning of the youth of America. I plan to insist that this anti-American educator's textbooks be cast out. And Rugg will actually go on a kind of speaking tour in which he will go out and defend the use of his textbooks in a number of these different communities. And Englewood is one of these. I comment first upon the attack upon my Americanism.

Mr. Forbes accused me of being un-American, pro-Russian, a communist, and therefore of writing books that give young people an inaccurate and prejudiced picture of American life. And what he encounters in many cases, quite interestingly, is a fairly moderate crowd when he gets there. These are folks who are not out with pitchforks looking to, you know, burn him in effigy. For the most part, there is this curiosity, actually, around what it is kids are learning in schools and how it is that there's so much controversy around them. There is at stake, however, back of these personal attacks, a very important question. What shall we teach our children about American life and the modern world? And he will present his case arguing that, you know, America is a great nation, and he often does make that claim,

but that like every other nation, it has its problems, and students are better educated when they have an opportunity to examine those problems and develop solutions. We shall not close their eyes to the problems which confront our people on every hand. They are made aware of these problems anyway, through the home, press, radio, movies, and every other agency of community life. These are the things that I try to do through my books. I am compelled to conclude that Mr. Forbes does not wish to have American youth confront the problems of American life.

He would bar controversial issues from the schools. He forgets that the very essence of the American spirit is intelligent and courageous understanding of our real conditions. Rugg would actually win this battle. His books would remain on the shelves in Englewood despite Forbes' efforts. But the fight wasn't over. Conservative reactionaries think this is going in the exact wrong direction. We need to be teaching kids about how great the nation is, not about all its problems.

And one of the remarkable things about the controversy is how fast that all came crashing down. Coming up, the war on Ruggs' textbooks grows bigger. Hi, this is Kelly calling from rainy Portland, Oregon. You're listening to ThruLine from NPR. Part 3. Un-American. Americanism is love of America. Americanism is a vital active living force. Americanism is a way of life, the best way of life ever known. These are definitions of Americanism from the 1950s, produced by a veterans organization called the American Legion. From coast to coast and border to border, American Legionnaires take over the heart of Manhattan for their 29th annual convention. What you're hearing is coverage of their annual parade in New York.

American Legion, at the time, it's kind of new. It was started after World War I as a veterans organization. And it was started as a sort of social group for veterans of World War I. Two million spectators jam the sidewalks, windows, roofs, and every point of vantage. And between this massive throng of humanity, over 50,000 Legionnaires pass with majestic dignity, representing the Legion's entire membership of three and a quarter million men. So by the late 1930s, they have an Americanism commission in the national leadership to say,

hey, our organization, it's not just about veterans' benefits. It's about making sure the schools are only teaching a certain type of patriotic citizenship education. And they're not letting any ideas like Harold Ruggs in. teaching a certain type of patriotic citizenship education. And they're not letting any ideas like Harold Ruggs in. Where there are good schools, we find good citizens. In fact, education is the first requisite of good citizenship. The relationship of the American Legion is that of a friendly and firm supporter of free education as a means of keeping and improving a free civilization. Harold Rugg was also really invested in having educated citizens. But he thought the way to do

it was to talk about America's problems and have kids learn the skills to solve them. The American Legion of that era was not having it. The American Legion takes the side of Bertie Forbes and others who feel that Rugg's textbooks are in fact indoctrinating children into anti-American ways of life and belief. But in order to go after Rugg, the American Legion needed to tell people who he was in the first place and what kind of ideas he'd been sending into their children's classrooms. And so they have a publication, the American Legion magazine.

Basically reports, features and interviews about national issues and topics. And they write a bunch of articles attacking Rugg and his textbooks. It's time we learned that our children are being taught in the name of civics, social science, and history doctrines so subversive as to undermine their faith in the American way of life. A legionnaire named O.K. Armstrong, and he told the story of talking to his son who came home from school with these kind of textbooks. And Armstrong wrote and he told the story of talking to his son, who came home from school, with these kind of textbooks. And Armstrong wrote a piece in the Allegiant magazine about how dangerous these textbooks were, and just generally how dangerous people like Harold

Rugg were. Catch them young! That's the motto of the radical and communistic textbook writers, who all too evidently have been in control of the field. And they said, these writers, these quote unquote experts, they are friendly with communists. They are trying to sneakily infiltrate these ideas into your children's brains. And the American Legion line was, I'm not exaggerating when I say, they said, you could probably read this textbook if you're just a parent in the United States, and it might even seem fine to you because you don't have your ear attuned, and this is a quote, for the weasel words, end quote, that Harold Rugg uses. At a time when the very existence of our republic is threatened by totalitarian ideology and aggression,

the public schools must be regarded as one of the major arms of our internal defense. So the idea was that there was a code, the American Legion's idea, a code embedded in these textbooks intentionally to turn children against their country. Harold Ruggs swung back in defense in an article by the New York Herald Tribune. Far from being subversive, we are teaching youngsters the magnificent developments in American life. But we are not whitewashing or ignoring the problems. I try to sell democracy. I believe in it. And I make no bones about it.

But no matter how sincere Rugg's words, it hardly made a dent as the list of attacks on him grew longer. To spread the word about this dangerous, communist-influenced type textbook, there are also spies into classrooms in places like Columbia University to note down what these purportedly left-wing professors are saying to run those professors out of the business. So it's a widespread public relations campaign. A lot of it sounds very similar to the kind of headlines we're seeing these days. The idea was they were trying to convince America, and I think they sincerely believed it, that there was this life or death danger from these textbooks, and they had to be combated, you know, just like you would combat, you know, they sincerely believed it, that there was this life or death danger from these textbooks. And

they had to be combated, you know, just like you would combat, you know, poison in your drinking water. You had to combat this kind of intellectual poison in your school books. And that feels more essential as World War II begins. The Nazi masters of Germany have made it clear that they intend The war breaks out in Europe in September of 39. We have German troops storming into Poland. Before long, the German army is going to be occupying France. There is an obvious threat to democracy in Europe as a result of these fascist movements. We must be the great arsenal of democracy. For us, this is an emergency as serious as war itself. It's only a matter of time before war comes to the United States.

And there is the development at this moment in time of a general sense of America may have to go to war. What is it that we're going to be fighting for? To the 16 million young men who register today, I say that democracy is your cause, the cause of youth. There will be a draft, beginning with young men ages 21

and eventually then down to 18. Well, what are we fighting for? We're fighting for the American way of life. That's what we're fighting for. Okay, well then any project that calls that way of life into question can be seen as undermining America's legitimacy on the world stage and in the Second World War. And that's where Rugg will get into trouble.

You see it again and again. Will America be ready for the next battle if all of its youth are told that America is not worth fighting for? When an enemy comes calling, these textbooks will just make America roll over and accept socialist overlords. Fears of fascism, communism, socialism, anything that wasn't Americanism made labels like subversive and un-American that much more damaging to Ruggs' reputation. And in that way, those voices are extremely successful because they do, in fact, wind up basically with districts pulling the books from the shelves and canceling their orders.

And in some cases, communities considered the extreme. In Binghamton, New York, two members of the school board proposed publicly burning the extreme. In Binghamton, New York, two members of the school board proposed publicly burning the textbooks. This is 1940. 1940, just to put it in context, there's a very famous group burning textbooks in 1940. It's the Nazis. So Americans are keenly aware and I bring it up only because the feelings are so intense that even book burners are aware that, okay, we know that no one wants to be a book burner. But in this case, the danger is so immediate, we have to do every single thing to get rid of this dangerous content for our children. General Eisenhower informs me that the forces of Germany have surrendered to the United Nations. By the time the war is over, the textbook series is essentially,

if it hasn't been removed from schools, districts simply haven't ordered new books. And if you think about this from the perspective of a school district superintendent, it's simply easier not to order new Rugg textbooks and get involved in the controversy. And what happens to Rugg? He's able to keep teaching at Columbia's Teachers College until 1951 when he retires. He ends up writing one more textbook to little fanfare before he passes. But it wasn't like he was the only person writing social science textbooks during the 30s and 40s. And if Ruggs textbooks are being pulled, something else has to replace them. And here's the irony. The authors of those new

textbooks are also progressive thinkers. But they saw what happened to Rug, and they toned their writing down. And so the attack on the Rug text does have a kind of chilling effect on what other textbook authors are willing to include, That's for sure. But at the end of the day, really the only textbooks that are removed from school districts on a large scale are the rug texts, and they're replaced by, in some ways, almost equally progressive textbooks. And I do want to point something out, and that is that if we go back to the Harold Rugg controversy, the American Legion didn't identify just the Harold Rugg text for removal from schools. It had a list of over 30 books that it wanted removed from schools and school libraries.

The person who proposed this was actually O.K. Armstrong, the author of that first article about Rugg. He had a list of 38 books he wanted off. But there was a backlash. The only book that it was successful in removing was the Harold Rugg text. And so relatively speaking, that conservative movement was a failure in that it was not able to build the kind of momentum that was necessary to remove many, many different books and texts and to ban them from school. That was close to a century ago. But in the 2022-2023 school year, there were 3,362 book bans

in K-12 schools across the country, a 33% increase over the year before. States like Florida, Texas, and Missouri led the charge with the most books banned, with many of the targeted books centered around stories of people of color and LGBTQ plus individuals. In total, 33 states banned books. All of this brings us to this question, one that was at the center of the Harold Rugg controversy and today's schooling controversy. What are public schools for? When we talk about our current school culture wars being a hundred year

war, this is the question that has always been the same question. The public school, I think for a lot of Americans of all different political backgrounds and attitudes, the public school is supposed to tell children who they are. But the contention comes with like, well, who are we? Who is America? Is America a multiracial, inclusive, welcoming society that is stronger through its diversity? That's one very strong and traditional idea. That was Harold Ruggs' guiding idea. It's my guiding idea. Or this other tradition has been strong since the 1920s, that the public schools need to teach kids that we, the people, are a uniquely heroic, liberty-loving type of person. You know, it's a bit cliche, but I still think the most important role for schools

today is to educate students to be competent citizens, to think in terms of their civic-minded responsibilities, and to contribute to the maintenance of a democratic society. There are lots of other roles that they play, and they should play, but I still think that's the primary role. And that's it for this week's show. I'm Randa Abdel-Fattah. I'm Ramteen Adablui. And you've been listening to ThruLine from NPR. This episode was produced by me.

And me and... Lawrence Wu. Julie Kane. Anya Steinberg. Casey Miner. Christina Kim. Devin Kadayama. Peter Balanon Rosen. Irene Noguchi. Thanks to Chris Carnati, Hannah Yvonne Snyder,

Blaise Adler-Ivanbrook, Svenja Pedersen, Bowie Alexander, and Sean Hartman for their voiceover work. Fact-checking for this episode was done by Kevin Vocal. The episode was mixed by Robert Rodriguez. Our music was composed by Ramtin and his band, Drop Electric, Thank you. This year, we here on ThruLine are doing a series that takes a close look at the past, present, and future of amendments to the U.S. Constitution. We'll be going back in time to tell stories of why they were created, how they've been enforced, and why fights over their meaning continue to shape life in America. So please, if there's a particular amendment you'd like to know more about, write us. We're here at ThruLine.mpr.org. Thanks for listening. This message comes from Grammarly. Back and forth communication at work is costly. That's why over 70,000 teams and 30 million people use Grammarly's

AI to make their points clear the first time. Better writing, better results. Learn more at grammarly.com slash enterprise.