View Single Post
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 14th February 2002, 14:26
yautiawoman2 yautiawoman2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 422
yautiawoman2
Lightbulb

Feliz Dia de la Amistad, o Dia de los Enamorados y para todos los Valentines y Valentinas, Felicidades en el dia de su santo.for comments write to Pipiolaink@aol.com
February 14, 2002

In reply to: La Profesora que pidio informacion sobre nuestra gente, no se donde se encuentra, aqui en el foro pero recuerdo que dijo era Argentina y pedia "information on teaching about Puerto Ricans aqui en @puertorico.com

Dear puertorico.com, member:

You say you are interested in teaching your students about the Puerto Ricans. May I suggest the following: Have your students make an analysis of 25 history textbooks regarding the History of Puerto Rico and the Puerto Rican people. I did the study twenty years ago and I found that the textbooks show a great deal of stereotypes, distortions and omissions regarding the question of who are the Puerto Ricans and what is their history. I suspect the present crop of US history books continue to reflect the same reality, that is to say, that stereotypes, distortions and omission continue to pervade these books.

History from the Yautia Woman:

At the time of this study I was an Associate Professor of Labor Studies at Rutgers University, North Brunswick, New Jersey. I was doing research for adult literacy with migrant Puerto Rican workers in New Jersey.

The question we posed was as follows:
How do high school textbooks on U.S. history present Puerto Rican history?

What are students in U.S. schools learning about the relationship between the two countries?
To find out, we analyzed 25 popular textbooks. Eight were published between 1961 and 1972, seven between 1973 and 1979, and ten between 1980 and 1982. Wherever possible, earlier and later editions of the same text were examined, in order to compare the information provided at different times. In all, 18 different titles and 12 publishers where represented (see list at the end of this post).

The broad range of texts selected would seem to suggest a great deal of information to compare and analyze, but like most of the media in the US, this was not the case. The authors of these textbooks, both old and new, appear to have read exactly the same sources and books. Their accounts, offering minimal and generally misleading information, are virtually identical in every case.

And in every case, their presentation of the facts came from an Anglo perspective that reduces Puerto Rican history to little more than a footnote in the “pageant” of U.S. history. Given the complete absence of the Puerto Rican perspective and the failure to include new scholarship from Puerto Ricans historians, and we have excellent historians, the information presented in even the newest textbooks remains one-dimensional and insufficient. Since every text in the study presented a chronological progression of political and military events, and by the way, the navy seems to have a front and center role to play in the history of Puerto Rico, we have identified six specific time periods to examine:

(1). the indigenous period (before 1492, periodo precolombino).

(2) Spanish colonization of Puerto Rico (Cristobal Colon y Juan Ponce de Leon)

(3) The autonomous period (before 1898)

(4) Political developments from 1898 to 1947

(5) Puerto Rico as a commonwealth and

(6) Migration to the United States (more on this later)

Findings: (en breve):

1. The Indigenous Period (before 1492):
No text mentions Caribbean culture or history prior to the Spanish invasion of the Western Hemisphere.. Some texts include information about native societies before the arrival of Columbus, but these discussions of pre-Colombian civilizations, as they are usually termed, are limited to those of North America and, occasionally, Mexico.
Textbooks failed to indicate that there was a long history in the Caribbean that pre-dated the European conquest of the Western Hemisphere. Extensive contacts, both friendly and hostile, existed among indigenous nations; there were political, economic and cultural exchanges among all groups in the Caribbean, Central, South and North America. Often the social structures of these societies, which were frequently matriarchal systems, were so different from the Indo-European models that they were misunderstood and misrepresented by the European observers and historians. For example, Columbus is quoted in one text as depicting the natives as “little babes,” “so good they will give you anything.” They “know nothing about war. When someone showed them a sword, they took hold of the wrong end and cut themselves.” (from Adventures in American History, Silver Burdett Company, 1976. This book was not included in the 25 examined in the original study but was added to illustrate the lack of knowledge of the writers re. the general culture of the Puerto Rican Indians. The reason why they were “so good and would give the visitors anything” has to do with deep culture, giving hospitality to the stranger).

2. Spanish Colonization:
The arrival of the Spanish invaders brings the first mention of the Caribbean area in textbooks, conveying to students the ethnocentric notion that his part of the Western hemisphere became important only after white men “discovered” it. In every text examined, the scenario is similar: a small band of explorers steps off their ships and easily subdues the weak and passive “Indian” population. Finding the islands rich in gold and natural resources, the Spanish force the “Indians” to do the heavy work, such as exploring and mining the rivers of Puerto Rico for gold, while they accumulate vast amount of wealth for themselves and planned and explored the Western hemisphere for the Spanish Empire. When the “Indians” begin to die off because of the diseases transmitted from the Europeans, and start dying off because of overwork and exploitation, the Spanish must import African slaves to augment the labor force. Only the compassion of some of the Catholic missionaries-notably Bartolome de Las Casas and others who chronicled the horrible violation of human rights and ultimately the genocide of the indigenous population,

Nota: In 1974 Adalberto Lopez and James Petras edited a book : “Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans” Studies in History and Society, in the introduction they say:

"For the original indigenous population Spanish economic expansion and exploitation meant death, migration, disruption of their society and economy, disease, exploitation and domination by external forces-leading to the total destruction of its culture. Subsequently the island’s development within the empire was tied to the production of foodstuffs and raw materials and to the defense needs of the Spanish colonial metropolis. This prevented the settlers from developing an economy capable of taking advantage of the world markets of the industrial nations and from developing a more balanced economy. Defined by the Spanish officials as a strategic outpost of the larger empire, Puerto Rico and its society became administratively and militarily top-heavy at the cost of internal economic development. The stunting of economic growth and the subsidization of these critical non-economic activities increased Puerto Rico’s dependence on Spain. …The bureaucratic officials, lacking an autonomous economic base, were quick to mobilize the settlers against the intrusions of rival imperialist powers-whose hegemony might have led to greater economic activity but certainly would have displace the Spanish appointees from their government posts. Contrary to the assertion of some “development” theorists, western contact with the third world was not in the interest of both the dominated and dominant peoples but rather was a very one-sided relationship in which the dominated contributed to the welfare of the dominant imperial nation." (Not much has changed since then, has it?).

While this description suggests the cruelty and greed of the Spanish invaders, it portrays the indigenous populations as helpless and impotent. The attention given de Las Casas underscores this impression-the only significant effort to humanize the conquest comes from a sensitive member of the invading group, missionaries of the Catholic Church.
Although the theme is essentially the same, there are variations among the 25 texts. America’s Heritage (1982), of the most traditional works, devoted four paragraphs to a discussion of how the Indians and the Spanish “got along” and includes some of the hardships faced by the Spanish. In the 1980 edition of The Free and the Brave speculates:
The Indians must have had mixed feelings about the Spanish invaders. Sometimes they must have wished that the Europeans would go away. (pp.38-39).
The African slave trade generally receives greater condemnation than the subjugation of the indigenous population. The Free and the Brave, cited above, waffles about the “good” and bad proints of slavery, but another text, The Rise of the American nation (1972 and 1977 editions) states:
Whenever Spaniards and Portuguese found it profitable to exploit black slave labor, …they did so. Thus Latin American slavery, like slavery at all times and places, was a cruel denial of human worth and dignity and often led to desperate resistance on the part of the slaves.
Documentation of native reactions to the Europeans, as well as their efforts to resist forced labor, is available. This information would do much to dispel the false picture of native passivity of the Puerto Rican native people. Students should also learn that the Spanish did not just walk in and take over. They achieved control by old Indo-European strategies of divide and conquer.
They achieved control by taking advantage of antagonisms within the indigenous groups. By uniting and leading weaker factions against the more dominant groups, the invaders were able to construct a strong power base in the Western hemisphere, this strategy was particularly lethal to the Aztecs in Mexico City.
Note from Yautia:
According to Benjamin Keen’s comments in Readings in Latin American Civilization (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1955), “The Indians were to be forced to labor, but as free men.” Isabella’s order of December 20, 1503, which follows, set the foundation for the “encomienda” system.(As quoted in “The Puerto Ricans, A documentary History, Edited by Karl Wagenheim,\ and Olga Jimenez de Wagenheim, pp18-19):
Queen Isabella’s Order
….We are informed that because of the excessive liberty enjoyed by said Indians they avoid contact…with the Spaniards to such an extent that they will not even work for wages…and cannot be had by the Christians of said island…may not lack people to work their holdings for their maintenance, and may be able to take out what gold there is on the island…and because we desire that the said Indians be converted to our Holy Catholic Faith and taught its doctrines; and because this can better be done by having the Indians living in community with the Christians of the island, and by having them go among them and associate with them, by which means they will help each other to cultivate and settle and increase the fruits of the island and take the gold which may be there and bring profit to my kingdom and subjects:
…I command you our said Governor that beginning from the day you receive my letter you will compel and force the said Indians to associate with the Christians of the island and to work on their buildings, and to gather and mine the gold and other metals, and to till the fields and produce food for the Christian inhabitants and dwellers of the said island; and you are to have each one paid on the day he works the wage and maintenance which you think he should have…and you are to order each cacique to take charge of a certain umber of Indians so that you may make them work wherever necessary, and so that on feast days and such days as you think proper they may be gathered together to hear and be taught in matters of the faith…This the Indians shall perform s free people, which they are, and not as slaves. And see to it that the said Indians are well treated, those who become Christians better than the others, and do not consent or allow that any person do them any harm or oppress them.
I, The Queen."

No text specifically discusses Puerto Rico and its native Taino population during this period. All the Caribbean cultures are lumped together under the composite term “Indian.” Some texts give one or two paragraphs to the racial diversity that resulted from the mixing of Indian, African and Spanish cultures, noting that those of European, or white, origin maintained a sense of superiority. (Blanquitos, Gachupines, Criollos, Ladinos, Hispanics, etc.).

3. The Autonomous Period (before 1898):

Puerto Rico receives its first significant mention in discussions of the Spanish-American War-the war ended with the Treaty of Paris when Spain “ceded” Puerto Rico to the United States. Only one text mentions that Puerto Rico had achieved a high degree of autonomy from Spain prior to the U.S. Takeover of Puerto Rico. It had its won currency, could make foreign treaties, sent a representative to the Spanish government and controlled local affairs. The only text to note this, in the 1981 edition, was A People and a Nation-it explains that:

"In 1897 Spain announced a charter of autonomy for Puerto Rico. The new government had barely completed elections and begun to function when a United States force landed on the island. The Spanish were unable to defend the island, and the American(sic) command, declaring its intention not to oppress further an oppressed people, took the island easily. Puerto Rico lost its short-lived autonomy. By October an American(sic) military government was ruling the island." (P.541).

This information places the subsequent “awarding” of self-government to Puerto Rico in an interesting context. It makes it possible to compare with the final offer of commonwealth which the island has been stuck with to this day. Significantly, it is omitted in the other 24 history textbooks analyzed.

4. Political Developments from 1898 to 1947:

Only about 50% of the textbooks studied (13 out of 25) provided any specific information about the post-1898 political developments in Puerto Rico. All 13 included the fact that the United States made the people of Puerto Rico U.S. citizens in 1917 but most texts say that U.S. citizenship was “given” or “granted.” Nowhere is it mentioned that many Puerto Ricans in fact did not want U.S. citizenship, or that the Puerto Rican-elected legislature voted unanimously against it, stating, “we firmly and loyally oppose our being declared against our express will or without our express consent, citizens of any other than our own beloved country.” (From a speech by Luis Munoz Rivera, in 1913).

Of the 13 texts that discuss this period only ten mention the Foraker Act of 1900 which set up a U.S.-controlled civilian government. Only tow texts acknowledge that the island was under military control between 1898 and 1900 and that much of our country to this day is still under U.S. Military control. Take for example the U.S. occupation of the Municipality of Vieques since World War II. Eight textbooks, or less than one-third cite the Insular Cases of 1901, which determined that Constitutional guarantees do not automatically apply to people living in U.S. territories, thus Puerto Ricans became second class citizens.

The remaining 50 per cent of the textbooks either skip over this period completely or include a vague and misleading paragraph, as in The New Exploring American History (1981):

"In 1898 the United States gained Puerto Rico from Spain. It is a beautiful island southeast of Florida the Puerto Ricans accepted the government of the United States immediately. Over the years, the United States has given the Puerto Rican people more and more power to govern themselves." (p.408).

There is some critical commentary on U.S. imperialism following the Spanish American War. Several textbooks reproduce arguments advanced at the time by prominent U.S. politicians. Only one textbook includes “The Lain American Reaction” to US imperialism (History of a Free People, 1970, p.97). This text devotes almost a full page to this perspective, which includes the protest poetry of Ruben Dario of Nicaragua and an explanation of the meaning of “Hispanidad” as an expression of ethnic pride. It is revealing that the 1981 edition of this text drops this entire section.

On the issue of U.S. imperialism and racism:
The text, American History by Garraty (1982), makes a curious comment about U.S. imperialism.

“Many people in the United States…insisted that owning colonies was un-American. Taking Puerto Rico was bad enough, but it was one small island. It might be needed for national defense in case of another war. However, ruling the Philippine Islands without the consent of the Filipinos would make the United States an imperialist nation.”

The discussions of imperialism after 1898 ignore the fact that the United States had long been engaged in racist policies which exploited different Third World groups. In fact, the word “racism” is only found in one discussion of this time period. American History by Abramowitz (1979) links racism with nationalism and imperialism (p.609) and makes the very significant connection between the treatment of colonized people and the treatment of Blacks, Native Americans and Mexicans in the USA.

No textbook, including Abramowitz, allows students to see the interconnectedness of specific racist and sexist policies throughout this period, such as the lynching of Blacks.

At Tuskegee University in Tuskegee, Alabama the Tuskegee records show that in 1892, 162 Black Americans were put to death outside the bounds of the law, chiefly in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Kentucky. (See “At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America by Philip Dray, published in January 2002 by Random House. This is still going on in the USA to this day, see “The Trent Wayne Blakes Case”, See the NAACP, Oklahoma, April 16th 2000, where an altercation resulted in the death by hanging of a 34 year old African American male named Trent Wayne Blakes. The NAACP considers this a hate crime, Mr. Blakes was beaten to the brink of death, his throat lacerated and then dragged to the location of a tree and hung. Mr. Blakes was reported dead at the scene at 2:46 AM. The case still leaves dramatic questions regarding the complicity in this crime of local law enforcement, many of whom have resigned and moved on to other locations and jobs both in state and out of state).

Then there were the exclusion laws against Asians and the genocide of Native Americans, (don’t forget Wounded Knee and Leonard Peltier), as well as the ongoing struggles of women (Title IX) and the dismantling of the labor movements in the USA.

Back in 1972 in the text The Shaping of America, there are critical observations in its “Conclusion” to the chapter on imperialism:
"…policies were far from consistent. The underlying reasons were nearly always economic, and in some cases, strategic or political. They were formulated, however, in moral terms. It was right for the United States to intervene, it was said, because it would ultimately benefit the weaker power…. ….Nevertheless, intervention left a legacy of bitterness among the people; and schools, roads, and telegraph lines were no substitute for freedom."

As with “The Latin American Reaction” quoted earlier, this type of critique does not appear again in the texts published after 1980.

5. Puerto Rico as a Commonwealth: El Estado Libre Asociado
Typical of the information offered on later developments in Puerto Rico is this excerpt from America: Its People and Values (1979):

"In 1947, Congress gave the Puerto Ricans the right to elect their own governor. In 1952, the island adopted a constitution and became the free Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. As a commonwealth, or free republic, Puerto Rico today governs itself, but receives military and tariff protection from the United States…After Puerto Rico became a free commonwealth, conditions improved greatly." (pp. 683-684).

Excuse me, hello! To be more specific, under the diz que “free republic” of Puerto Rico, the U.S. now has control of Puerto Rico’s foreign trade, monetary system, postal system, foreign relations, communications, military service, social security, health, education and “defense.”
Only one text, A People and Nation (1981), commended earlier for its information about the autonomous period, discusses the demands of Puerto Ricans for greater self-government between 1917 and 1947 (p.553). Another text, History of a Free People (in its 1970 edition only) also mentions this pre-Commonwealth period, but in a different manner. It gives Rexford Tugwell, the Anglo-American appointed governor by the U. S. in 1941, credit for having “laid the groundwork for much of the later progress” (p. 477). Not a word on the Puerto Rican independence movement or any of the patriots of those times.
Descriptions of this “later progress,” known as “Operation Bootstrap,” are significantly different in texts published in different time periods. In The Rise of the American Nation, 1972 and 1977 editions, includes a special feature on Puerto Rico as “The showcase of Latin America.” Puerto Ricans, the feature states, “enjoy a per capita income higher than that of any other Latin-American country” except for Venezuela, and “Puerto Rico’s victory over poverty, although far from complete, represents one of the most dramatic chapters in recent history” (p. 719, 1977). In the 1982 edition of this text, this feature has disappeared. Similarly, the 1961 edition of History of a Free People exults over the gains under Operation Bootstrap, including an increase in per capita income to $468.(Si, 468 dollars, eso fue lo que trajo el barco!).

In the 1970 edition, the tone is more guarded: “Operation Bootstrap did not solve all problems. Dramatic as the increase in wealth was, the per capita income of Puerto Ricans was less than half that in the United States” (p.477).

The 1981 edition omits this entire discussion on per capita income.
The Status Question is completely Ignored.

And yet, for us, the Puerto Ricans, the status question is so central to the Puerto Rico-U.S. dialogue, the constant question of colony-commonwealth-statehood-independence between the people of Puerto Rico and the U.S. government is generally dismissed in textbooks with a simple “some wanted this, some wanted that, but most voted for a commonwealth.” In actuality, the status question has been a constant and major point of debate in Puerto Rico, particularly since there is such a thing as the 1898 Treaty of Paris.

In my time, (cuando presidia el comite del PIP en Nueva York) the dispute first reached the international level when the Decolonization Committee of the United Nations passed a resolution in 1972 identifying Puerto Rico as a colony of the U.S. and calling for self-determination for Puerto Ricans.

This resolution has been reaffirmed every year since that time by the committee, but has been blocked from discussion in the General Assembly by the efforts of U.S. diplomats for decades. The case of Puerto Rico has again become a central theme at the international level because of the Case of the Bombing of Vieques by the Navy since the 19th of April of 1999 and as a result the struggle of the Puerto Ricans to liberate Vieques, the US was removed from the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations.

6. Migration to the United States

As far as the U.S. history textbooks are concerned, Puerto Ricans began to migrate to the U.S. in large numbers after World War II in order to escape poverty in Puerto Rico. No text notes the movement to transport masses of Puerto Rican Jibaros (mostly from the central part of the mountains of Puerto Rico) to Hawaii between 1900 and 1921 to work as scabs on sugar cane plantations, following a strike by the Japanese workers. (See the Hawaii-Puerto Rico Diaspora Project, 1776 Church St. N.W., Washington, DC 20036).
More significantly, no text points out that a major cause of the poverty in Puerto Rico is the fact that the U.S. businesses, seeking a cheap labor source, replaced the traditional agricultural economy with industrialization and displaced rural workers in “maquiladoras” in larger urban centers. Many workers have been submitted to U.S. experiments such as the use of nerve gas in the “Free Industrial Zone of Mayaguez” Puerto Rico, thus depriving them of their basic human rights.. (See Research by the University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras, Department of Social and Community Psychology, Dr. Edwin Fernandez and Dra. Marya Munoz, et.al. 1985-1986).
Insufficient jobs and overcrowded conditions in urban areas, violation of human and civil rights against the people of Puerto Rico, caused many to migrate to the U.S. (It is ironic that when the U.S. oppresses the Latin Americans in their land, they migrate to the USA). They will tell you it was in search of better opportunities, a better education for their children, sadly, the research shows that their condition became worse not better for many of them in New York City, for example. For once in the states, they faced similar problems of overcrowding and lack of job opportunities in addition to all the problems of living in a fascist, racist society, something they did not believe to be possible, the great American dream was a hoax for Puerto Ricans. The 1969 edition of Exploring Our Nation’s History told students that this situation was temporary:

"Like earlier immigrants, the Spanish-Americans were quickly working their way up into the middle class. It seemed likely that discrimination against them would end in the near future and that prejudice too would end in time. (p. 634). To this day, Dia de San Valentin 2002, Puerto Ricans in the US fight with the American Indians in the Department of the Interior as to who is at the bottom of the US Totem Pole! Indians or Boricuas!

We are still waiting for democracy to take hold in the USA.
One third of the texts present no information on contemporary conditions in Puerto Rico or on Puerto Ricans living in the U.S.A. today, in the 21st Century. The remaining texts in the late 1970s and early 1980s refer, in limited and varying ways, to the role of Puerto Ricans in the movements for minority recognition during the 1960’s and to the pattern of circular migration. Puerto Ricans are mentioned in Land of Challenge (1975) in an offensive discussion of “ethnic” pride: “By the time the 1970’s rolled around it was ‘in’ to be ‘ethnic.’” And, from the same text, “ethnic comedians helped Americans retain their ability to laugh at themselves, even as they re-examined serious questions” (p.118).

Our question was, how could they re-examine what they had never examined in the first place?

A more serious discussion appears in The National Experience (1981), the most sophisticated of the texts, but its implications are interesting since it broke out into a full blown war that is still in full swing, the English Only Movement in the USA.. Speaking of bilingualism as the “distinctive interest of the Hispanic community,” it states: “the promotion of bilingual education threatened to make the Hispanics the first among all immigrant groups in the United States to resist linguistic assimilation (p.891), it states: “the promotion of bilingual education threatened to make the Hispanics the first among all immigrant groups in the Untied States to resist linguistic assimilation (p.891). This text also credits “West Side Story” for making U.S. whites sympathetic to the problems of the Puerto Ricans!
Exploitation of the Puerto Ricans is never recognized
According to a new text at the time (1982), America’s Heritage, immigration to the U.S. from Puerto Rico has decreased “because economic conditions on the island have improved, [and] Puerto Ricans have not wanted to leave their beautiful homeland” (p.575). In fact, we noted, and this was 20 years ago, there is “40 per cent unemployment on the island; 60 per cent of the people live below the federal poverty level, and 70 per cent depend on food stamps. The exploitation of Puerto Rico’s human and natural resources by multinational companies is not found in today’s history textbooks.”

Let Freedom Ring (1980) offers minimal information about Puerto Ricans, but it does discuss the economic discrimination faced by minorities in general: “Forced into unemployment or restricted to low-paying jobs, members of minority groups are usually poor. Often it is to the advantage of the majority to keep them this way so their labor can be obtained at a low cost when need” (p.546).

Summary (En resumen):

In summary, our examination of 25 U.S. history textbooks revealed the following:

1. Although Puerto Rico has been governed by the U.S. for (now over 100) years, textbook authors clearly see the history of this connection as peripheral.
2. The information that appeared in early texts continues to appear in subsequent “revised editions. There is no reflection of the new scholarship or the perspective of Puerto Rican scholars in Puerto Rico or the USA in the last twenty years.
3. Only the Anglo-American perspective on U.S.-Puerto Rican relations is presented. (The one exception was a section entitled “The Latin American Reaction” which appeared in the 1970 edition of A Free People, but it was removed in the 1981 version of the text.
4. There appears to be a decrease in the amount of substantive information presented on Puerto Rico in the texts published after 1980. Sections that appeared in early editions have been dropped from several texts (see above).
5. Although specific legislation is sometimes mentioned, these are never placed in a larger political or socio-economic context. For example, over half the tests cite the Jones Act of 1917 which made Puerto Ricans U.S. citizens. However, not one mentions that the timing of the act made it conveniently possible for the U.S. to Draft Puerto Ricans for service in World War I (nor, for that matter, do any texts mention the extent of the opposition by Puerto Ricans to the Jones Act).
6. The discussions of important topics-if they occur at all-are so fragmented that students can not see how these topics are linked. For example, although imperialism, reconstruction, immigration, the labor movement and women’s suffrage all occurred during the same time period (roughly 1870-1920), the textbooks makes it difficult for students to see how systematic race, sex, and class bias in a capitalist society such as the USA, link these situations.
7. Controversial issues are generally avoided or downplayed. Textbooks sidestep serious analysis of such issues as the status question of Puerto Rico, circular migration and human rights violations, including the issue of Puerto Rican political prisoners of conscious in prison in the US Federal jails because of their political convictions and their fight for civil rights in the island of Vieques, as an example. The textbooks stay away from such loaded issues as the widespread sterilization of millions of Puerto Rican women.

Recommendations for improvements of the presentation of Puerto Rico in textbooks center on the need for inclusion of the Puerto Rican perspective. The above study was done by a team of researches in 1983, including su servidora La Yautia de la Amazona and las companeras Sonia Nieto, y Sharon Wigutoff; to whom we are very grateful. We would like to see a similar study of current US history textbooks for the year 2002 and put on Puerto Rico. com.
Textbooks Analyzed

Listed below are the textbooks analyzed. A total of 25 books-18 titles in various editions-were examined.

America: Its People and Values by Leonard C. Wood et.al., Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1979
American History by Jack Abramowitz, Follettt, 1971, 1979 (5th ed.).
American History by John A. Garrarty, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982.
The American Nation by John A. Garrty, Harper & Row 1979.
The Americans by Winthrop Jordan et al., Science Research Association, 1982.
Americas Heritage by Margaret Stimmann Branson, Gin (Xerox Corp), 1982.
Episodes in American History By Robert E. Burns et al., Ginn, 1973.
Exploring Our Nation’s History by Melvin Schwartz and John R. O’Connor, Globe, 1969; reissued as The New Exploring American History, 1981
The Free and the Brave by Henry F. Graff, Rand McNally, 1972,1980.
Freedom’s Trail by Richard A. Bartlett et al., Houghton-Mifflin, 1979.
History of a Free People by Henry Bragdon and Samuel McCutchen, MacMillan, 1961,1970.1981.
The Impact of Our Past by Bernard Weisberger, McGraw-Hill, 1972
Land of Challenge by Margaret Stimmann Branson, Ginn (Xerox Corp), 1975.
Let Freedom Ring by Joseph H. Dempsey, Silver Burdett, 1980.
The National Experience by John Blum et al., Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981.
A People and a Nation by Charence Ver Steeg and Richard Hofstadter, Harper & Row, 1981.
Rise of the American Nation by Lewis Paul Todd and Merle Curti, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971,1977,1982.
The Shaping of America by Richard Curry et al., Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972.
I will have to continue and edit this on another occasion, because it has become very late and I am off again to another conference in another state. This one on the issue on how it is that the education system disables our children when they are exposed to English, and before they finish the third grade.
Sincerely,
Parta todos mis estudiantes: Feliz Dia de San Velentin. Para mi madrina Valentina, Feliz dia de su Santo Madrina, se le quiere muchisimo. Bendicion. I.V.S.R.
La Yautia del Amazona



Sincerely
Yautia del Amazona
Research Department
Coalition for Human and Civil Rights Advocates
yda/ivsr

Reply With Quote