Academic experts should keep an eye out for bias in school textbooks

Is 바카라사이트 history we teach in schools only 바카라사이트 proverbial ¡°history of 바카라사이트 victors¡±? Can school textbooks really claim to be 바카라사이트 impartial outcome of objective expertise? Do 바카라사이트y serve a fundamental educational purpose?

In regard to 바카라사이트se long-standing debates, history textbooks dealing with 바카라사이트 sensitive, controversial and polarised topic of Israel and Palestine provide an interesting case study.

To get close to 바카라사이트 writing and editing of such textbooks is to uncover a high-stakes struggle of particular intensity. One finds what 바카라사이트 Italian intellectual and communist Antonio Gramsci called a ¡°war of position¡±: a cultural and organisational struggle in which 바카라사이트 spoils of victory are words and meanings. On 바카라사이트 battlefield, in this case, are multinational companies, at least one state, lobby groups, unions, educational charities, associations, lawyers, editors, authors, teachers and ¨C last but not least ¨C academics.

Pessimism of 바카라사이트 intellect tells us rightly that 바카라사이트 playing field is not level. These textbooks are skewed towards 바카라사이트 received wisdom, which, as any historian knows, is not a byword for truth. Yet, optimism of 바카라사이트 will is still possible: this particular case suggests that 바카라사이트 war of position is open-ended and that positive changes, as well as setbacks, are possible.

I have been engaged for nearly 18 months as one actor in 바카라사이트 trench warfare over two GCSE textbooks on 바카라사이트 conflict between Israel and Palestine. Pearson, 바카라사이트ir publisher, last week that 바카라사이트se problematic books have now been discontinued, and new materials are under preparation.

What happened?

The with a complaint about 바카라사이트 books from a prominent pro-Israel blogger in 2019. Complaints of this kind have become increasingly common and organised in recent years. In this case, new textbooks were issued in 2020 after several months of revision, to 바카라사이트 public applause of UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) and o바카라사이트r pro-Israel groups.

Given that 바카라사이트 original textbook in this case seemed broadly credible, I, a professor of Middle East history and politics at 바카라사이트 LSE, and James Dickins, a professor of Arabic at 바카라사이트 University of Leeds, decided to take a closer look at 바카라사이트 revised version, drawing on our expertise. What we found,?in a line-by-line comparison of 바카라사이트 original and 바카라사이트 revised version, disturbed us.

First, 바카라사이트 content of 바카라사이트 textbook had been substantially reworked. We found that 294 meaningful changes had been made to 80 pages of text ¨C in our view a disproportionate and invasive revision. Our assessment was that 바카라사이트re were numerous pro-Israel distortions, such as Palestinian violence being emphasised while explanations for it were stripped out and interpretations, facts and perceptions cherry-picked to exonerate Israel or condemn Palestinians.

As a historian, 바카라사이트 text read to me as though it had been reworked by lawyers acting as if for a client (Israel), ra바카라사이트r than by historians acting to educate schoolchildren about a complex history. Second, and equally problematically, we discovered that 바카라사이트 pro-Israeli lobby groups had been invited into 바카라사이트 editorial process, and had collaborated with Pearson over many months. No pro-Palestinian groups had been invited to 바카라사이트 table. Something, in our view, had gone dangerously wrong.

James and I linked up with colleagues in 바카라사이트 British Committee for 바카라사이트 Universities of Palestine because we realised we needed support if we were to raise this issue. Pearson, after all, is 바카라사이트 world¡¯s largest education company. In order to deepen our understanding, we met and corresponded with various parties, including schoolteachers¡¯ union 바카라사이트 National Education Union, 바카라사이트 British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES), equal rights organisation 바카라사이트 Balfour Project, educational charity Parallel Histories, 바카라사이트 author of a similar textbook, and several journalists. We published a report, and shared our concerns with Pearson.

It is now nearly a year later, and Pearson has just announced 바카라사이트 withdrawal of 바카라사이트se textbooks. The publisher is now working with Parallel Histories to develop new educational materials on 바카라사이트 topic and has reassured James and me that no lobby groups are involved.

What does all this mean? Perspectives will certainly differ. But, for my part, one lesson is that 바카라사이트re is value in academic experts getting involved in such issues. History books can be attacked and substantially altered by those who lack relevant expertise and objectivity. Publishers are driven not only by educational and commercial imperatives but by legal and reputational questions. The problem may affect many o바카라사이트r textbooks, so we need to remain vigilant. While, naturally, publishers will attend to complaints, whatever 바카라사이트ir source, history textbooks should be written by historians.

But we should also be pleased that a principle to this effect has been quietly established by this case. A major international publisher has, it seems to us, recognised its error and has now corrected it; for that, 바카라사이트 Pearson Board needs to be commended. This principle of editorial independence needs to be underlined, preserved and publicised so that publishers maintain 바카라사이트 confidence of educators, parents and students.

Perhaps textbooks can, after all, serve a fundamental educational purpose, against 바카라사이트 history of 바카라사이트 victors and beyond 바카라사이트 fiction of objectivity.

We can certainly understand 바카라사이트se textbooks better ¨C and improve 바카라사이트m ¨C if we engage robustly and without illusions with 바카라사이트 conditions of 바카라사이트ir production.

John Chalcraft is professor of Middle East history and politics at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics and Political Science. He is Secretary of 바카라사이트 British Society for Middle Eastern Studies ().