The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn<\/a>![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=thesheivari-20&l=as2&o=1&a=1400030641\")
<\/i>, by Diane Ravitch.<\/b><\/p>\nAs I tried to understand the reasoning of the reviewers, I remembered that in 1998 the president of Riverside Publishing had met with our committee to explain how reading passages for the voluntary national test would be selected. We expressed our hope that the test would be of high quality, that it would be more than just a basic skills test. We wanted the publisher to include passages based on good literature. We thought that children should read something worthwhile when they took the test, not just banal selections. We asked whether his company would choose some readings drawn from myths and fables and other classic literature. He said they would try, but we had to bear in mind that “everything written before 1970 was either gender biased or racially biased.” He said this very casually, as though he was uttering a truth too weall known to need explanation or defense. This belief provided the backdrop for the document that he gave us that day, titled “Bias and Sensitivity Concerns in Testing.”<\/p>\n
When I first read this document, I was astonished by the list of topics that the test publishers considered out-of-bounds, and I filed it away. Two years later, in 2000, when I saw the results of the bias and sensitivity review, I retrieved this document and found that it held the key to the reviewers’ assumptions. “Bias and Sensitivity Concerns in Testing” explained how the concept of bias had been redefined. It contained rules for self-censorship that most Americans, I believe, would find deeply disturbing.<\/p>\n
The Riverside guidelines are a mixture of sensible general reminders about the unacceptability of bias, as well as detailed lists of words and topics that must be avoided on tests. “Bias”, it declares, is anything in a test item that might cause any student to be distracted or upset. Bias is the presence of something in a test item that would result in different performance “for two individuals of the same ability but from different subgroups.” So, for example, a test question that is upsetting to a member of group A (for instance, a girl) would prevent her from doing as well as someone who was from a different group (for instance, a boy). Bias, says the publisher, can cause inaccurate scores and measurement errors. It seems to be a settled principle that tests should not contain anything that is so upsetting to certain students that they cannot demonstrate what they know and can do. Presumably a very graphic description of violence, for example, would be so disturbing to some students that they would not be able to answer test questions. Presumably students would be upset by a test question that contained language that demeaned their race, gender, or religion. Riverside says that its tests “are designed to avoid language, symbols, gestures, words, phrases, or examples that are generally regarded as sexist, racist, otherwise offensive, inappropriate, or negative towards any group.” In addition, tests should not contain any subject matter that anyone might consider “controversial or emotionally charged.” Such things would distract test takers and prevent them from showing their true ability. It would be unfair, certainly, and the goal of a bias and sensitivity review is supposed to be fairness.<\/p>\n
But then look at where the logic of fairness leads…<\/p>\n
In addition to the list of banned controversial topics, there is an exhaustive description of “negative” and “sensitive” material that cannot appear on a test. Negative material includes (but is not limited to) parents quarreling, children mistreating each other, children acting disobediently toward their parents, and children showing disrespect for authority. Sensitive material includes paganism, satanism, parapsychology, magic, ghosts, extraterrestrials, Halloween, witches, or anything that might conjure up such subjects, even in the context of fantasy. Anything related to Halloween, such as pumpkins and masks, must be avoided. Gambling must be avoided, as must references to nudity, pregnancy, or giving birth, whether to animals or people. “Controversial” styles of music like rap and rock and roll are out.<\/p>\n
But that is not all. Religious and political issues must be avoided. Reading passages must not contain even an “incidental reference” to anyone’s religion. There must not be any mention of birthdays or religious holidays (including Thanksgiving), because some children do not have birthday parties and do not share the same religion. In any material about Native Americans, care must be exercised to steer clear of religious traditions.<\/p>\n
There must be no reference in any test passage to evolution or the origins of the universe. Writers must avoid any mention of fossils or dinosaurs. Their very existence suggests the banned topic of evolution. However, it is acceptable to refer to “animals of long ago” if there is no mention of how old they are and no suggestion that the existence of these animals implies evolution…<\/p>\n
The bias guidelines require that test questions “model healthful personal habits.” Any references to smoking, drinking, or junk food must be eliminated. Writers must be cautious when depicting someone drinking coffee or tea and must take care not to mention even aspirin. Children must never be shown doing dangerous things, “no matter how good the moral of the story is.”<\/p>\n
The test passages must avoid beliefs, attitudes, or values that are not embraced by just about everybody. Fables are a particular concern, because they often conclude on a cynical note or have “a pragmatic moral” that someone may find offensive. Particularly taboo, the guidelines warn, is anything that suggests secular humanism, situation ethics, or New Age religion.<\/p>\n
The people who select reading passages for tests are directed to seek out “uplifting topics”. Anything depressing, disgusting, or scary should be eliminated.<\/p>\n
Many topics are prohibited because testing experts agree that any less than ideal context will be so upsetting to some children that they will not be able to do their best on a test. But would children really be distracted if they read a story in which someone was fired or unemployed? Would they be disoriented if they read a story in which someone was seriously ill or parents were divorced? No educational research literature supports these prohibitions. There are no studies that show that children were unable to finish a test or do their best because they were asked to read a story in which the characters were rich or poor. Farewell then to Great Expectations<\/i>, Little Lord Fauntleroy<\/i>, and “The Little Match Girl”, with their unacceptable images of wealth and poverty.<\/p>\n
The prohibitions are there not because of research findings, but because the topics upset some adults<\/i>, who assume that they will upset children in the same way. Some adults sincerely believe that children will project themselves into everything they read and that they will be deeply disturbed to read that someone else is taller than they, or that other children had a birthday party or live in a big house when perhaps they are not similarly privileged. It is hard to imagine that a fourth-grade student would be paralyzed by dread by reading a story that included descriptions of mice. Clearly forbidden by such a prohibition is any excerpt from books like EB White’s Stuart Little<\/i> or Robert Lawson’s Ben and Me<\/i>, not to mention stories of Mickey Mouse and Mighty Mouse, and other fictional mice beloved by generations of children.<\/p>\n
Most of the prohibitions are a direct response to long-standing complaints from the religious right. Many of the banned topics are intended to avert the controversy that might erupt if the test referred to evolution or witchcraft or religion. Spokesmen for the religious right consider any description of behavior they do not like as an endowment of that behavior. They reject depictions of magic, witchcraft, and the supernatural; they don’t want education materials to show people engaging in bad behavior, like children disobeying their parents. They have gone to court in several jurisdictions to protest against “secular humanism”, “situation ethics”, and “New Age” religion, because such ideas conflict with the moral code that is fixed in the Bible.<\/p>\n
Test publishers have found that the best way to avoid controversy is to eliminate anything that might cause controversy. As the bias guidelines of Riverside Publishing show, quite a large number of topics are avoided (ie: censored) because fear of complaints by the religious right. But the bias guidelines try to mollify not only conservatives, but also feminists, and advocates for multiculturalism, the handicapped, and the aged. The publishers want everything to be happy, or at least not to be unhappy. Whereas the right gets topic control, the left gets control of language and images. To see how this works, we must consider what the test publisher describes as three types of fairness: representational fairness, language usage, and stereotyping.<\/p>\n
![\"0375414827.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg\"](\"https:\/\/www.sheilaomalley.com\/0375414827.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg\")
The next book on my culture bookshelf is:<\/p>\n