The 8th grade history textbook in the school I spent the day in is called United States History, Beginnings to 1877. It is published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt in cooperation with the History Channel and the copyright is 2012. This History Channel Logo appears regularly pointing students to “Multimedia Connections” and to other video access. The History Channel logos are distracting and make the book appear unserious to me. I spent a couple of hours with the book looking for bias and conclusions not based on evidence.

The concern on one side of the textbook debate is that slavery and black Americans are underrepresented. The other side complains the founders and key elements of US History are evaluated based on current morals or presentism. In my view, neither side could have major issue with this textbook. Reading the sections on the Founding and the Civil War highlighted how political some historians have become.

Any issues I saw were related to the lack of depth or asking the next question. For example, the textbook says:

Lincoln disagreed with Crittenden’s plan. He believed there could be no compromise about the extension of slavery. Lincoln wrote, “The tug has to come and better now than later.”

There is no comment on why it is was better to address it “now” or the potential repercussions. There is also no mention of the Corwin Amendment. Lincoln is presented how you would expect but there is a piece on the suspension of habeas corpus and the book discusses Clement Vallandingham and the Copperheads.

Slavery is discussed throughout beginning with section 5 of the 2nd chapter titled “Beginnings of Slavery in the Americas” and ending with the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. Here is part of the beginning of the section on the Civil War:   

During the Civil War, Americans fought each other on battlefields and in government. Ideas about slavery and sovereignty led many soldiers to fight.

The statement does not make the war about slavery, nor does it dismiss outright the legitimacy of “state’s rights”. In the case of the textbook, the textbook debate is much ado about nothing.