Above photo: Seats waiting for indoctrination. Linnaea Mallette.
Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble. – John Lewis Tweet (June 2018)
More than four years ago I wrote a piece entitled “Patriotic History is Fake History,” in which I reported that then-President Donald Trump had insisted that we must teach our children “that they are the citizens of the most exceptional nation in the history of the world.” At the same time, he signed an executive order to establish a “national commission to promote patriotic education” calling it the “1776 Commission.” It would be based on the 1776 Report that was released by the commission to promote “patriotic education.”
Despite the fact that the “1776 Report” had been criticized by historians for being filled with “errors and partisan politics” it was re-established by Trump in January 2025 as part of an executive order titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.”
Anyone teaching American history should become familiar with what is in this new executive order because it is directly aimed at what they teach. It begins by stating that American parents “trust that American schools will provide their children with a ‘rigorous education’ and that they ‘instill a patriotic admiration for our incredible Nation.’” Both of these claims deserve a serious response.
What is a Rigorous Education?
Unfortunately, what I’ve found in three separate evaluations of American schooling does not come close to what deserves to be described as rigorous.
If a rigorous education is one that reflects a high level of engagement where students are analyzing information in creative ways, then what we have is not very rigorous. If a rigorous education is one that adheres to strict standards of achievement, what we have is not rigorous. Here is the evidence:
Gallup has tracked American satisfaction with the education system annually since 1999. The latest findings from August 2024 show that only 9% of Americans say they are completely satisfied with the quality of education attained by U.S. students in kindergarten through grade 12; 34% are somewhat satisfied; 34% somewhat dissatisfied, and 21% are completely dissatisfied.
Also, according to Gallup, those results are “consistent across most major demographic subgroups, including Republicans and Republican-leaning independents and Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.”
The results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress for 2024 (often called America’s Report Card) are also disappointing. The two most significant findings are summarized as follows:
1) U.S. students have not recovered from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. National scores continue to be below pre-pandemic levels (2019) in all grades and subjects tested.
2) Higher-performing students drove most of the progress made in 2024. The large gap between higher-performing and lower-performing students is growing.
A third respected evaluation of American schools is the Program for International Student Assessment or PISA. This report reinforces some of the findings above. The most recent results show disturbing inequalities in American education. “Black and Hispanic students, on average, scored far below Asian and white students. Those from low-income backgrounds scored lower than their more affluent peers.”
Eric A. Hanushek, an economist from the conservative Hoover Institution of Stanford University, estimated that “the U.S. economy would grow 4.5% in 20 years if our students’ math and science skills were as strong as those of the rest of the world.”
What does it mean to “instill patriotic admiration for our nation?”
This second point made by the President, that American parents trust that schools will “instill a patriotic admiration for our incredible Nation,” is not quantifiable and is not even included in the California Content Standards for history.
As the National Education Association (NEA) states, it is not the school’s responsibility to teach students what to think. Rather, it is the school’s responsibility to teach students how to think critically and to develop their own viewpoints.
Who is Responsible for What?
Before looking more closely at the content of Trump’s executive order, I need to make very clear who is responsible for what is taught in our schools.
When the founders met in Philadelphia in 1787 to draft a new Constitution, they decided on a separation of state and national powers known as Federalism. According to this division of power, it is the states that generally oversee the content of K-12 education.
In California, for example, what is taught about American history is outlined in the State Content Standards and in the California State Framework. I have written extensively about this process..
The 2025 Executive Order: Ideology and Indoctrination
“Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schools” begins by stating that “in recent years parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies.” In fact, even the title of this order suggests that in K-12 education there has been a wide-spread attempt to indoctrinate students, but provides no evidence of any indoctrination whatsoever.
Clear descriptions of these “anti-American ideologies” are not given other than stating that “innocent children are compelled to adopt identities as either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics.”
In 35 years of teaching American history, I can say, without exception, that I have never witnessed any such indoctrination and I have never suggested to any student that he or she should adopt the identity of either victim or oppressor.
So, what is the point of this new executive order? I believe that President Trump’s vague reference to “anti-American ideologies” is meant to intimidate teachers into avoiding any discussion of anything that might be interpreted as negative, including unavoidable topics like race-based slavery even though that was eliminated in this country with a civil war.
Nevertheless, according to the NEA, in the last few years, 20 states have passed laws or issued statewide rules that aim to restrict the ways educators can teach uncomfortable subjects like the history of racism or sexism in the U.S.
Having written a great deal on the content of American history textbooks, I am convinced that schools cannot afford to dilute the already sanitized history found in those books.
If we want to teach students to think critically, teachers must take the advice of civil rights activist John Lewis and not “get lost in a sea of despair.” Teachers must avoid being afraid to teach a history that includes an examination of legalized discrimination, racism, slavery, and sexism, especially because in doing so, they would deny students an appreciation for the heroic struggles, often successful, against discrimination and oppression that are also parts of American history.
Ironically, avoiding such victories over institutional discrimination would seem to work against what Mr. Trump demands be taught as “inspiring, and ennobling” characteristics of America’s history.
We are all equal
In the section of Trump’s executive order meant to define terms it is suggested that it is wrong to treat “members of one race, color, sex, or national origin [as] morally or inherently superior to members of another race, color, sex, or national origin.”
I agree completely with this principle and, as a teacher, I attempted to teach in accordance with such agreement, but that did not prevent me, nor should it prevent any teacher, from suggesting that some individuals and some groups may still suffer the consequences of previous discrimination.
Perhaps using the past to explain the present is what some consider an ideology, but it is also the definition of education. Education, in fact, demands that we consider the likely consequences of past circumstances to help explain current conditions.
That is exactly the message that Jared Diamond delivered in his fascinating book Guns, Germs and Steel, in which he explains why some civilizations have historically done very well due to geographical advantages, particularly the availability of domesticable plants and animals.
In a similar sense one might observe that some American Indigenous peoples, whose ancestors survived repeated attacks and suffered the loss of both land and culture, now suffer extreme poverty and high rates of malnutrition.
The U.S. may not be “fundamentally” discriminatory, but in order to educate, teachers must discuss the history of discrimination.
It would be contradictory to suggest that one of the two examples mentioned above is part of an anti-American ideology while the other is simply education. Is it not enough to agree that members of one race or gender are never inherently superior to members of another race or gender?
The 2025 Executive Order: Patriotic Education
In President Trump’s executive order, “patriotic education” is defined as the presentation of American history grounded in the following: “an accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling characterization of America’s founding and foundational principles.”
The order also suggests that a “patriotic education” must show how the U.S., as a nation, “has grown closer to its noble principles.”
Both of these statements are open to interpretation regarding how one might demonstrate this patriotism and both invite a wide range of accurate and inspiring examples from our shared history. What follows are examples of what I believe work well.
“Patriotic education” should feature the life and struggles of Frederick Douglass, who unforgettably admitted to a criminal past in stealing himself from his proper owner.
“Patriotic education” should also include an accurate and inspiring discussion of the triumphs of Susan B. Anthony including the statement she made at the end of her trial for voting illegally in 1872:
It was we, the people, not we, the white male citizens, nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed this Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people — women as well as men. And it is downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republican government — the ballot.
Is it not inspirational that even after the 19th Amendment was ratified and the right of women to vote had been recognized, Alice Paul wrote the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) and spent the rest of her life fighting for its ratification? It was, as John Lewis said, the struggle of her lifetime.
Of course, “patriotic education” should emphasize the actions of President Harry Truman in support of equality. In 1948 he signed the Women’s Armed Service Integration Act allowing women to receive regular permanent status in the armed forces, and in July of the same year, his Executive Order 9981, mandated military desegregation.
Is it not inspirational that a former first lady, Eleanor Roosevelt, led the effort at the United Nations for ratification of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948?
How can students not be inspired by Fred Korematsu, a civil rights leader who fought against the wrongful internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II?
How can students not be motivated by the Supreme Court’s majority decision in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) which held that neither students nor teachers “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
We can all be proud of Title IX (in the Education Amendments of 1972), which prohibited sex discrimination in any educational program or activity that receives federal financial aid by requiring schools to provide equal opportunities for girls and boys to participate in sports.
No matter where we get our education, it is clear that American history is filled with inspirational people, many of whom insisted on making “good trouble, necessary trouble… .”
A Personal Note
Earlier, I noted that in 35 years of teaching American history, I never witnessed any indoctrination in any type of anti-American ideology. But it is more than that. For more than 20 of my 35 years in the classroom, I served as a department chair. As such, I interviewed, along with other teachers and administrators, well more than two hundred teacher candidates.
During those interviews we discussed why each candidate wanted to teach. American history was always discussed, but there was never any mention of any anti-American ideology.
Over the years I worked with history faculty at two universities to provide a variety of workshops on teaching American history and I presented materials at various locations throughout Southern California. We often worked with the California State Standards and the California Framework. We discussed what books, and what other materials, had helped various teachers teach more effectively, but in none of these workshops was there any mention of indoctrination or anti-American ideology.
Over the years I have observed classes taught by dozens and dozens of history teachers. Sometimes I offered suggestions and sometimes I have simply been inspired by the talents and successes of those I have worked with. I have seen students struggle to understand difficult concepts, but I have never witnessed any attempt to tell students what to think or what to believe.
Teaching is hard work. Sometimes, it can be all-consuming. The number of students taught by any teacher in a semester varies, but I taught from 160 students to 185 students each semester.
And I always assigned essays. Scoring them could take days. Whenever I attempted to count how many hours I spent each week preparing for class, teaching, and scoring student work it was never less than 65. It was often more.
I wonder how many of those who wrote President Trump’s Executive Order, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” have ever spent time teaching. How many of them have spent hours preparing to teach 160 students a week, then teaching the classes, and evaluating their students’ work? I wonder where they get the impression that in K-12 education there has been a widespread attempt to “indoctrinate students.” And indoctrinate them in what?
The very idea that groups of professional educators have the time and the motivation to coordinate an anti-American agenda is absurd.
The National Education Association responds to the Executive Order
I mentioned earlier that according to the NEA, in the last few years, 20 states have passed laws or issued statewide rules that aim to restrict the ways educators can teach uncomfortable subjects such as the history of racism or sexism in the United States.
If anyone wonders, California, where I live, is not one of those states, but if you work in a state with such rules, the NEA provides state-specific Know Your Rights guides. These guides are meant to help teachers understand what the laws in each state prohibit as well as what they do not.
The local and state affiliates of the NEA make it possible for every educator, in every city, in every state to join with others to create great public schools. See here.
The National Council for the Social Studies responds to the Executive Order
The National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) believes that the Jan. 29 “Executive Order Ending Radical Indoctrination in K–12 Schooling” does not address the core challenges of teaching and learning social studies in today’s K-12 classrooms. The NCSS remains dedicated to supporting social studies educators and has issued position statements on a variety of related issues.
In its Feb. 4 response to President Trump’s Executive Order, the NCSS stated:
NCSS has consistently supported the idea that states and local education entities are best positioned to develop social studies standards. As one of the first education organizations to establish a code of professional ethics, we have long defended the academic freedom of both students and teachers. The teaching of U.S. history should invite discussion, encourage inquiry, and reflect the diverse people, places, and events that shape our shared human experience. A strong social studies education helps students develop the ability to analyze information, engage in meaningful discourse, and contribute thoughtfully to their communities. …
By prioritizing social studies education and accurately portraying the roles of our educators, we can help future generations develop the skills needed for lifelong civic engagement, informed decision-making and meaningful participation in our democracy. In the end we are all in this together, as John Lewis reminds us in his 2017 memoir:
You are a light. You are the light. Never let anyone — any person or any force — dampen, dim or diminish your light. Study the path of others to make your way easier and more abundant.
– John Lewis, Across That Bridge: A Vision for Change