Teaching the Japanese American internment: A case study of social studies curriculum contention

Conflicts over the teaching of school subjects such as evolution and U.S. history illustrate the different values, perspectives, and ideologies that shore up curriculum. The resolution of curriculum conflict is particularly important for public schools in a liberal democracy because educators are charged with negotiating multiple perspectives in curriculum decisions. The present study examined a case illustrating this negotiation. Such negotiations embody the tension between competing perspectives concerning how curriculum best serves the public interest. The conflict occurred over Leaving Our Homes (LOH), a sixth grade U.S. history curriculum that claimed that the WWII mass incarceration of Japanese Americans was a grave mistake. This was the dominant interpretation in the community where the curriculum was taught, but this interpretation was challenged by a small group of parents. Although parents were not able to convince the school to change the 'wrongfulness claim', the curriculum was changed in some substantial ways. Given that the community overwhelmingly supported this claim, how was it that this small group of individuals was able to change the LOH curriculum? Three data sets and two methods of analysis were used. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) uncovered connections between the texts of the three data sets in order to identify emerging themes within historical, contemporary, local, and national discourses. The examination of these discourses and their influence upon the LOH conflict produced a snapshot of curriculum conflict as it was embedded in the LOH discursive field. The discursive field illustrated the structural influence of discourses and texts upon the LOH conflict. Next, frame analysis (FA) identified the similarities and differences of texts and discourses and their relationships with competing LOH stakeholders. Frame analysis portrayed the agency of LOH challengers and LOH supporters as they appropriated texts and discourses to construct an interpretation of reality that furthered their goals. CDA and FA were interpreted in light of the proceduralist model of democracy. This interpretation found the LOH contention to be a contest between different claims concerning history curriculum that is in the public interest.