1776 Project vs. 1619 Project: an evaluation

Body

1776 Project: “although the argument for less ideologically driven historical education could not come at a more critical moment, the report is a missed opportunity to make it.” - Commentary

Discussion

“I am working with my colleagues at the National Association of Scholars on what we call the ‘1620 Project’”

Body

“The reader who wishes to wade in deeper to these waters will get an assist from Philip Magness’s bibliography on ‘The 1619 Project Debate,’ at least as it stood on January 3. Still more assistance can be found on John Fea’s website, ‘The Way of Improvement Leads Home,’ which has been tracking ‘The 1619 Project: Debate Continues.’” - ITakeout

Discussion

“The New York Times is introducing revisionist history about race in America into classrooms across the nation without the normal peer review expected of educational materials”

Body

“The [1619] project, a collaboration between the New York Times Magazine and the Pulitzer organization, has mushroomed into a movement to re-educate Americans with novel claims about how deeply racism is embedded at America’s core. As of February 2020, five public school systems had adopted the 1619 Project’s curriculum district-wide.

Discussion