CALIFORNIA, USA, December 26, 2005: HPI Note: There have been several articles and documents to appear on the Internet dealing with the California textbook controversy. See HPI, here, for an early December update. The following document is posted by friendsofsouthasia.org, a group supporting Prof. Witzel in the debate, and says it is the final decision of the California Curriculum Commission on the proposed edits to the Hindu sections of the 6th grade social studies books. It looks authentic and is in keeping with information already available. HPI consulted Hindus in California involved in the issue. They have not received a copy of this document, which is only supposed to be released following the next Curriculum Commission meeting in January when the December minutes are approved. The bottom line here is that out of 153 edits proposed by the Hindus, only 16 were altered as a result of the action of Prof. Witzel’s group. This they considered a great setback and appear to be petitioning the California Board of Education to overturn Curriculum Commission decision — a highly unlikely possibility, we are told.
This is the introduction to the document, and what follows goes item by item through the 153 edits with the recommendations of the Hindus, the evaluation by Dr. Shiva Bajpai, the recommendations by Prof. Witzel’s group and the final decision. It is interesting reading.
Document begins:
Final Actions of the Curriculum Commission, December 2, 2005, regarding the edits proposed by the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation.
The following document has 4 columns:
* Column 1 contains the edits proposed by the Hindu Education Foundation or the Vedic Foundation
* Column 2 contains the edits recommended by the Ad Hoc committee on the basis of Prof. Shiva Bajpai’s recommendations
* Column 3 contains the recommendations of the panel of historians (Witzel, Wolpert and Heitzman). They are referred to as the CRPs (Content Review Panelists). These recommendations were endorsed by the Department of Education’s Curriculum Framework and Instructional Resources Division (CFIR). The head of CFIR is Tom Adams.
* Column 4 contains the final action of the Curriculum Commission on December 2, 2005.
Gray shading on the document indicates which recommendation the Curriculum Commission chose to follow. A gray entry is the edit chosen by the Commission.
The document is divided into 2 parts. Part 1 lists all of the changes proposed by the Hindu Education Foundation, in alphabetical order by publisher. Part 2 lists all the changes proposed by the Vedic Foundation in alphabetical order by publisher.
There are a total of 153 edits requested.
Of that total:
* 97 edits where the Commission endorsed the recommendation of the Ad Hoc committee (Shiva Bajpai advising).
* 34 edits where the Ad Hoc (Shiva Bajpai) and Final CFIR/CRP Recommendation (Witzel, Wolpert, Heitzman) were in agreement and endorsed by the Committee.
* 16 edits where the Commission endorsed the Final CFIR/CRP Recommendation (Witzel, Wolpert, Heitzman advising).
* 6 edits where the Commission made its own edit and used its own language (including 2 where the commission rewrote the publisher’s text).
Rest of document is available at “source” above.