Last month, November 2024, the Texas Board of Education (SBOE) narrowly approved an elective curriculum that would allow for the teaching of Bible stories to elementary school students in kindergarten through fifth grade. The SBOE accepted Bluebonnet’s reading curriculum by an 8-7 vote, despite the board’s four Democrats joining three Republicans in rejecting the curriculum guidelines.
According to a May 2024 Texas Education Agency (TEA) press release, reading classes use a classic education model and include courses that incorporate the Bible, as well as arts, history, culture, science, and technology. I also teach students about School districts that decide to use this material will receive up to $60 per student in incentives to adopt the proposal. The curriculum is part of the state’s Bluebonnet Resources, an optional tool available for free, and the proposal is among dozens the state commission reviewed for consideration for addition to its approved list. It was one of them.
Approval of the Bluebonnet curriculum revives a long-standing debate about the constitutionality of including religious teachings in the public school system. Historically, the primary way to determine the constitutionality of a program has been based on the First Amendment, which provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This has been done by examining whether there is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the Article.
The language of the Establishment Clause reflects the idea that public schools cannot impose religion on students and cannot prevent individuals from expressing their religious beliefs within the public school system. This needs to be clearly differentiated, as what is considered by one person to be a right to freedom of expression may be seen by another to be the imposition of religious beliefs.
In Croft v. Perry, 2009, the U.S. 5th Circuit The District Court of Appeals has upheld a Texas law requiring daily silence in schools. David and Shannon Croft, parents of three minor children, sued the Governor of Texas alleging that Texas Education Law § 25.082 was unconstitutional, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected their claim. , instead the state legislature is for students. It was determined that the secular method was sufficiently clearly demonstrated that students could use the time to “select, reflect, pray, meditate, or do anything else that is unlikely to disturb or distract other students.” “to participate in quiet activities”.
The appellate court’s rationale for upholding a “moment of silence” is that every time a school system recognizes the inclusion of religion, it creates the misconception that an equally important secular use of time is required. It gives an inviting impression. This is simply not the case, and the new curriculum reflects the reality that the Bible can be taught in public schools if it is taught in an academic manner rather than indoctrinating students into a Christian belief system. I am doing it.
This distinction was first recognized by the courts in 1963 in Abington School District v. Schempe, when the Supreme Court ruled that teaching about religion is constitutionally permissible and educationally appropriate. The judges went further and stated that knowledge of the place of religion in civilization constitutes an important element of a well-rounded education.
Moreover, it is no exaggeration to say that no education is complete without the study of comparative religion, or the relationship between the history of religion and the progress of civilization. It is true that the Bible is worthy of study because of its literary and historical qualities. What we have said here is that such Biblical and religious studies, when objectively presented as part of a secular educational program, may not be conducted consistently with the First Amendment. It does not imply that there is.
Texas will be one of the few states to include the Bible as part of the K-12 curriculum. Eight states require Bible courses to be offered as electives in public schools: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Still, Texas is the first state to include Biblical teachings as part of its reading curriculum, and requires that this curriculum be used in a manner consistent with the First Amendment.
For example, the instructions cannot include prayers, chants, or faith-based Bible studies. This means that in 2022, the California Department of Education (DoE) will remove educational materials that include two songs: a chant to Tezcalipoca, an Aztec god who was once worshiped as a human sacrifice, and a chant to a Yoruba god called Ash. That was the lesson I learned when I agreed to . . The Thomas More Society successfully sued the California Department of Justice to remove the curriculum, arguing that it was unconstitutional. The chant was perceived as a violation of students’ rights to attend public schools without one religion being promoted over another.
Currently, one aspect of the Bluebonnet curriculum that helps align with the Establishment Clause is that the proposed courses are not required. If a school district (ISD) does not want the hassle, the ISD chooses one of many other available curricula. Texas also avoids a conflict in the Establishment Clause, which prohibits public schools from promoting one religion over another as an elective course of study.
The constitutionality of the second part of the curriculum depends largely on how these reading courses are taught. Content area teachers should not be hostile to non-religious perspectives. Especially in elementary school learning situations, it can be difficult to judge the fairness of instructors. Teachers will need to teach the material as part of a history and literature course, but this is not impossible and requires training. To be constitutional, Bluebonnet’s curriculum cannot inhibit students’ free speech or impose Christianity on students of other faiths.
Regarding the constitutionality of the $60 student incentive, the Texas Education Agency reported in a May 2024 report that the average state spending per student in Texas for fiscal year 2023 was $13,124. An increase of $60 represents a relatively small 0.5% increase in that amount. Given the challenges of teaching the curriculum in a constitutionally consistent manner, that $60 will likely be used to train teachers willing to pilot the program. K-5 courses should improve elementary school students’ reading comprehension and, to a lesser extent, expose them to the history and culture that played a central role in shaping the Western world. The $60 incentive would likely need to be applied to training these teachers to ensure they are teaching with the constitutionality of the curriculum in mind.
Image: Wonai
