Holt, Rinehart and Winston: Response to July 17, 2002

Holt, Rinehart and Winston's
Formal Response
To
Written Comments
July 17, 2002

Texas Public Policy Foundation - Sample Errors

John Marshall was the first Supreme Court Chief Justice. Wrong person - John Jay was the first Supreme Court Chief Justice. Grade 8 American History, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 337.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out this error, which we identified in our corrections list submitted to the TEA on June 27. As stated in that report, we will correct the Interpreting the Visual Record caption on page 337 so that it says "John Marshall was the fourth Supreme Court chief justice."

King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella gave Columbus 3 ships. Wrong number – The king and queen gave Columbus no ships. He chartered the Santa Maria himself and the town of Palos gave the Nina and Pinta to Columbus in payment of a debt owed to the monarchs. Grade 7 Texas History, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 90.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out the need for this clarification. The text on page 90S will be changed to address this issue. The new text will read "Ferdinand and Isabella supported Columbus, who acquired three ships."

The Austro-Hungarians imposed Roman Catholicism in Croatia and Slovenia. Inaccurate statement-People in both Croatia and Slovenia had widely practiced Catholicism long before arrival of the Austro-Hungarians, siding with Rome during the Great Schism. Grade 6 World Cultures, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 329.

HRW Response: Although we do not feel that the current wording constitutes an error, we do agree that the passage could be misleading. Therefore, in the first paragraph, line 6, we will change the sentence after "Islam." to read, "Eventually the Ottoman Empire weakened, and in the late 1800s the Austro-Hungarians took control of Croatia and Slovenia." We will delete the last sentence of the paragraph.

William Kennedy is described as a "Texan." Inaccurate description-William Kennedy served as British Consul to Texas and received a land grant to settle in Texas, but he never settled or became a permanent resident of Texas. Grade 7 Texas History, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 284.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out the need for this clarification. We will delete "Texan" from the sentence describing Kennedy.

Gideon Lewis was Richard King's partner in the King Ranch. Inaccurate name – Mifflin Kennedy was Richard King's partner. Grade 7 Texas History, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 449.

HRW Response: On page 449 (T,S), the text states "The King Ranch in South Texas was one of the most important cattle operations in the state. Richard King and Gideon Lewis established the ranch in Nueces County in the early 1850s." This is an accurate statement. The Handbook of Texas states, "The 825,000-acre King Ranch, in Nueces, Kenedy, Kleberg, and Willacy counties, had its beginning in 1852, when Richard King and Gideon K. Lewis set up a cattle camp on Santa Gertrudis Creek in South Texas. Formal purchase began in 1853, when they bought a Spanish land grant, Rincun de Santa Gertrudis, of 15,500 acres on Santa Gertrudis Creek in Nueces County. A short time later they purchased the Garza Santa Gertrudis grant of 53,000 acres. During the mid-1850s, as partners, King and Lewis acquired more landholdings around the area of the creek." The Handbook of Texas further notes that Lewis was a partner until his death in 1855, that James Walworth and Mifflin Kenedy entered into a partnership in 1856, and that Mifflin Kenedy bought interest in the ranch in 1860. The handbook also states that by the late 1960s these partnerships had ended. Students have an opportunity to learn more about the King Ranch with the Internet Activity on page 459 (S,T). We will add information about Mifflin Kenedy in the Chapter Enrichment Links on the Internet, keyword "ST3 CH21".

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments extend rights to the people and to the states. This is an inaccurate statement and the interpretation is exactly the opposite of what the Amendments say. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments recognize pre-existing rights and powers but do not create or expand rights. The federal government has no authority to grant rights or powers to citizens or states. Grade 8 American History, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 276, teachers' edition.

HRW Response: We agree that the answer may be misleading and will change the answer to read as follows: "They recognize the existence of rights and powers that are not listed in the Constitution."

Texas Public Policy Foundation - Sample Statements of Bias

4. "The Careers in Government section discusses the job of state trial court judge. The segment concludes by noting that 'Critics charge that in a Republican controlled Senate (in California), it is harder for women and minorities to be confirmed.' The implication is that Republicans oppose the candidacy of women and minorities when in fact it's more likely that many of these women and minority candidates are of the opposite political party. To this end, it should be clarified that the opposition is one of philosophical difference and not racist or sexist." Holt, Rinehart & Winston, American Government, page 278, Dr. Chris Mammons.

HRW Response: Although we do not agree with the reviewer that this passage contains a factual error, we do agree that the reader could interpret the passage to include an unintended bias with regard to Republican motives. Please note that the source of the "charge" by "critics" was a nonpartisan report issued in 2000 by the Alliance for Justice. As a result of re-examining this passage due to the reviewer's comment, we have chosen to replace the last paragraph of the Careers feature with the following two paragraphs, which will now read as follows:

"The process of selecting judges varies from state to state. In some states judges are elected, while in others the governor or state legislature makes judicial appointments. Once selected to "the bench," judges may serve either for fixed terms or until mandatory retirement. Some state judges who are initially chosen in a partisan election later face uncontested "retention" elections. In these elections, voters decide only whether or not they want to retain the judge on the bench.

Some state judges may go on to receive appointment by the president to the federal judiciary. In recent years the confirmation process in the U.S. Senate has increasingly been one of political battles. In 2000 the nonpartisan Alliance for Justice reported that despite the urgent need for judges, many vacancies were going unfilled because of politics."

7. "The discussion of affirmative action in Texas in the teachers' edition notes that the Texas 10% rule should 'make the relatively segregated high schools the basis for integration in higher education, and reward the students based on merit.' The difficulty here is that there is much evidence to indicate that the 10% rule is having an adverse effect on students (many of them minority) who come from schools where the academic standards are not as rigorous. When these students are accepted into college because they are in the top 10% of their class, they often have difficulty competing at the college level. In short, the top 10% rule is not a true merit system but instead provides set-asides for the top 10% of every school regardless of the level of achievement." Holt, Rinehart & Winston, American Government, page 348 (teachers' edition), Dr. Chris Hammons.

HRW Response: We understand the reviewer's point; however, we believe that the statement in question is factual, even if not as clear and comprehensive as the reviewer may wish. The mention of the 10 percent rule is part of a brief sketch of the issue of diversity in higher education provided as background information to the teacher, and we do not believe that it is misleading as to the system's merit component. Within each high school in the state, students are indeed rewarded based on merit — i.e., they are included in the top 10 percent of their class based on their academic achievement, with no gender, racial, or other set-asides involved. We do believe that the last sentence of this annotation, which was originally written prior to this law being passed, needs to be updated. Therefore, to clarify that the concluding statement on p. 348(T) expresses the intention of the law's supporters at the time that it was passed, not its outcome, we will replace the last sentence with the following sentence: "Supporters of the law intended that this measure combat the potential decline in college enrollment by minority students, while at the same time rewarding high school students based on the merit." We will also add "in 1998" after "passed a law" in line 2 of this paragraph.

9. "The Incas practiced imperialism, but it is not called that; instead, the power is always used for good. European imperialism doesn't receive this same treatment. Examples: "The Inca emperor had absolute power but used it to improve the empire." Also, "In an effort to unify these people, Inca rulers tried to eliminate regional differences. They sometimes moved entire villages to colonize new lands." None of this is referred to as imperialism. When Europeans "move[d] entire villages to colonize new lands" it was always considered a bad thing, even if regional differences were overcome. Even when the British in India "treated Hindus and Muslims equally but did little to ease religious hatred between them (page 675)." It was not enough to treat them equal, the British are criticized for not proactively solving ancient rivalries." Holt, Rinehart & Winston, High School World History, pages 211 and 675, Scott Ham's.

HRW Response: Holt's World History: The Human Journey, like most, if not all, other high school world history textbooks, does not introduce the term imperialism until the post-European exploration era in keeping with general historiographical trends. Therefore, the term imperialism is not used in the text discussions of Mesoamerica and Andean South America before the 1400s. We would also point out that TEK 7B states that students are to study the effects of imperialism on selected societies, which the text does.

Regarding the reviewer's concern with the passage on page 675 of the text, we do not believe that the text gives the impression of favoring one group over another. The example cited by the reviewer is one case in which lack of elaboration on a topic benefits impressions of the British. The sentence occurs in a paragraph discussing the British tactic of "divide and rule" in India. Several historians argue that the British subtly encouraged religious rivalries or intentionally avoided taking action to ease Hindu/Muslim hatred in order to help British colonization efforts. These historians postulate that the British thinking was as follows: as long as the Hindus and Muslims were fighting each other, they would not band together to oppose the British. Because scholars still debate how active, or purposely inactive, the British were in these rivalries, we chose not to elaborate further on this subject.

Texas Public Policy Foundation - Recommendations - Grade 7 Texas History

"572S notes that urbanization occurred more slowly in Texas than in the United States as a whole but does not offer a reason." Holt, Rinehart & Winston, page 572 (students' edition)

HRW Response: Thank you for your feedback on this issue. Unfortunately, to have adequately and clearly explained the history of urbanization in Texas as it compared to urbanization in the rest of the United States would have taken far more space in the textbook than this particular issue warranted in the scope of the Texas history course. Because the point we make may raise questions for students, however, we are adding an Internet Activity that students can access through the Chapter Enrichments link, keyword ST3 CH27.

"Chapter 24 is weak concerning the hurricane of 1900 and the impact it had on Galveston." Holt, Rinehart & Winston

HRW Response: On page 508(S,T) the text discusses the Galveston hurricane in the context of political reforms and the development of the commission plan of local government. On that page, there is a primary source quote on the beginning of the hurricane, a photograph showing the destruction the hurricane caused, and a feature on the building of the seawall to prevent future hurricane damage. Students more fully explore the effects of the hurricane on page 515 (S,T) with the following Internet Activity: "Access the Internet through the HRW Go site to research how the Galveston hurricane of 1900 affected the political, economic, and social development of Texas. Then locate, differentiate, and use primary and secondary sources to create a pamphlet that shows the various ways in which the hurricane changed Galveston's people, infrastructure, and government." We feel that the text and its related activities adequately cover this topic.

"Nowhere in the textbook do they mention Miss Ima Hogg and her contributions to the Arts." Holt, Rinehart & Winston

HRW Response: Thank you for bringing the lack of coverage of Ima Hogg to our attention. Because she was not mentioned in the TEKS and space constraints made it difficult to include everyone we would like to have discussed, Ima Hogg was not featured in the Student's Edition. However, she certainly made many contributions to Texas and is an important figure. We will add a short feature called That's Interesting! to the Teacher's Edition on page 629. The feature will read as follows: "One of the state's great patrons of art, music, and education was Ima Hogg, the daughter of Governor James Hogg. She helped found the Houston Symphony Orchestra and was active in the arts and historic preservation. In 1969 Ima Hogg, along with Oveta Culp Hobby and Lady Bird Johnson, became one of the first three female members of the Academy of Texas." Students will be able to learn more information about Ima Hogg by accessing the Chapter Enrichment Links on the Internet, keyword ST3 CH27.

"I do not think that, in general, this text does as good a job as some of personalizing leaders in its presentation so that students may identify with them." Holt, Rinehart & Winston

HRW Response: We tried to bring the history and people of Texas, including its leaders, to life for the students. We feel that through the use of an engaging narrative, storylike section introductions, and features such as the Biographies, we have brought Texas leaders to life, to the extent possible in a textbook. We welcome from the reviewer more specific examples of how we have failed in these attempts in comparison to other texts. We should also point out that students will learn more about Texas leaders through portfolio projects, activities on the Internet, and other ancillary materials.

Texas Public Policy Foundation - Testimony of Dr. Christopher Hammons

528S, The text does an excellent job in pointing out that the Buffalo Soldiers also served in the Spanish-American War. I am disappointed, though, that this text does not mention that the 10^thcavalry did not receive equal treatment and respect from the settlers they defended.

HRW Response: Thank you for your positive comment about our inclusion in Chapter 25 of the buffalo soldiers in the Spanish-American War. However, you also note that we do not address the discrimination buffalo soldiers faced, particularly in regard to the wars on the Texas frontier, which are covered in Chapter 20. We agree that the issue of discrimination is an important topic; in fact, discrimination against African Americans is discussed extensively in the previous chapter. The Teacher's Edition has an Internet Activity on the buffalo soldiers (p. 429) as well as a reference to a CNN Presents Texas: Yesterday and Today video segment entitled "The Pardon of Henry O. Flipper." These activities give students a chance to explore more information on the buffalo soldiers. Due to the importance of this topic, we have decided to add more material, which students will be able to access through the Chapter Enrichment Links on the Internet, keyword ST3 CH20.

Reviewer Jennifer Powell

Ms. Powell: ...On the surface both books appear to achieve both of these goals. They each have timelines at the beginning of the chapter to show the big picture of the American Revolution. Most of the important people and the most important events are bolded. And they are reading — they're reading checks throughout the chapters in order to stimulate student's thinking. In addition both presents the texts of the Declaration of Independence with dictionary definitions of the difficult words and also a list of the signers. However, close evaluation reveals a few more details. For example, in the Declaration of Independence, there are inadequate references to the signers and their backgrounds. Prentice Hall, in the teacher's edition, mentions some of the signers were not lawyers, and then encourages teachers to ask the students to research the various occupations and the training that the signers had. Holt, however, had no mention of any of their backgrounds. Did you know that out of the 56 signers, 27 had seminary degrees? Holt did an excellent job of providing visual — visuals of history through art and detailed maps. In your packet, you will find an example of that. However, it falters in some of the more important areas. There are few quotes or references from primary sources and said an entire page was dedicated to an historical fiction book rather than primary sources. There are a lot of other primary source examples that could have been included. There is spy letters that are available. There is a lot of journal entries that are available from George Washington and other founding fathers, or the letters between John and Abigail Adams. Prentice Hall, although it does not have the same number of pictures as Holt's, it is superior. It provides summaries and several quotes in the texts. And the inadequacy of Holt can be compared with Prentice Hall with the example of their — their approach to Thomas Paine's common sense and important documents. Holt has a short summary and no quotes whereas Prentice Hall has a background, a summary, and an excerpt and discussion on primary source analysis.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for her positive comments regarding our overall presentation of information in Call to Freedom. We especially appreciate her positive comments regarding our use of visuals to support instruction, our presentation of the Declaration of Independence, and our use of Reading Checks to guide students through the mastery of content in Call to Freedom.

In response to the reviewer's comment that Holt contained no mention of the backgrounds of the signers of the Declaration, we would like to call the reviewer's attention to the following passages in Call to Freedom in which we discuss the signers. On page 191 of the Teacher's Edition, for example, we include a Citizenship informational annotation titled "Signing the Declaration." This annotation discusses the events taking place as late as July 1, 1776, that related to getting enough votes in favor of independence. The annotation specifically discusses Richard Henry Lee, Edward Rutledge, and Caesar Rodney — all signers of the Declaration of Independence. We also include a Citizenship annotation in the Teacher's Edition on page 196 to accompany the Declaration of Independence titled "The Signers." In this annotation we say that "the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence shared many characteristics — almost all were Protestant white males and were fairly wealthy. Forty-eight of the signers were born in America."

We are surprised by the reviewer's contention that Call to Freedom is deficient with regard to the inclusion of primary sources. We have included primary source excerpts at points of use throughout Call to Freedom. For example, Chapter 7, "The American Revolution," includes ten primary source quotes within the chapter narrative. (Please see pages 185, 186, 192, 193, 199, 200, 203, 208, 210, and 213.) Four of the primary source quotes are accompanied by an Analyzing Primary Sources critical thinking question. Also included in this chapter is the Declaration of Independence. We would like to call the reviewer's attention to the table of contents, pages xiii through xv, where we list over 150 primary source quotes and 17 historical documents that are included in the textbook.

Regarding the reviewer's comments about our coverage of Thomas Paine, we must mention that we devote a section (see page 190) in the American Revolution chapter to Thomas Paine's Common Sense titled "Paine's Common Sense." We include excerpts from the pamphlet in the discussion and place emphasis on the significance of this discussion by calling out both Common Sense and Thomas Paine as key terms that students should learn in this chapter. The section is followed by a Reading Check critical thinking question that focuses on the significance of Thomas Paine's Common Sense.

Ms. Powell: The TX Education Code wants public education to "prepare thoughtful, active citizens" and give them an appreciation for the basic democratic values and national heritage. Holt's textbook falls short of achieving these goals. Prentice Hall's textbook, on the other hand, strives to integrate primary sources and depth into its coverage of the American Revolution.

HRW Response: We addressed the reviewer's comments concerning primary sources in our preceding response. Here we will respond to her comments regarding citizenship.

We share the reviewer's concern with preparing students to become thoughtful, active citizens. We also feel that it is essential to provide students with information that will give them an appreciation for basic democratic values and our national heritage. We would like to draw the reviewer's attention to TEKS 8.16 through TEKS 8.23 listed below. We are listing in brackets after each TEKS reference some of the pages from Call to Freedom that address each of these TEKS objectives.

8.16 Government: The student understands the American beliefs and principles reflected in the U.S. Constitution and other important historic documents. [pp. 222-24, 241, 248]

8.17 Government: The student understands the process of changing the U.S. Constitution and the impact of amendments on American society, [pp. 247, 335, 566]

8.18 Government: The student understands the dynamic nature of the powers of the national government and state governments in a federal system. [242, 354, 391]

8.19 Government: The student understands the impact of landmark Supreme Court cases. [408, 566, 567]

8.20 Citizenship: The student understands the rights and responsibilities of citizens of the United States. [275, 295, 296]

8.21 Citizenship: The student understands the importance of voluntary individual participation in the democratic process. [114, 170, 704]

8.22 Citizenship: The student understands the importance of the expression of different points of view in a democratic society. [325, 636, 711]

8.23 Citizenship: The student understands the importance of effective leadership in a democratic society. [316, 477, 654]

We have addressed each of these identified TEKS objectives numerous times throughout Call to Freedom. We feel that the content of Call to Freedom will provide more than adequate support in preparing students to become thoughtful, active citizens. Throughout the Call to Freedom program we have attempted to provide content for students that encourages them to develop an appreciation for the basic democratic values on which our nation was built.

Reviewer Eleanor Hutcheson

Ms. Hutcheson: "Glencoe and Holt did correctly state the accurate details of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the $15 million United States paid to Mexico for the land session. They both also mention the additional 3.5 million paid to settle claims which Prentice and MacDougal did not."

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for noting our accuracy regarding the details of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

Ms. Hutcheson: "Again, Glencoe and Holt explain the laws made by the State democratic party of Texas forbidding the blacks to vote in their primary."

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for noting our accuracy.

Ms. Hutcheson: "Holt has a sentence on 557 that Annie Mae was African-American and how was her life affected during the great depression. And she said, I didn't have to worry about no jobs because I had a job. And then she says other things. The question then of the book is: Why was it tough for her to find work and increase the hardship she faced because of discrimination against the African-American. And I say why be critical of a hard working, self-employed individual, more power to her. We need more people like that."

HRW Response: Regarding our quote by Annie Mae Hunt and the questions that follow, we did not intend, nor do we believe students will interpret question number 4 to be critical of Annie Mae Hunt. We believe it is appropriate to ask students the critical thinking question on page 557, "How might the fact that Annie Mae Hunt was African American have affected her life during the Great Depression?" The text notes 12 pages earlier on page 545 that the depression was particularly hard for African Americans and Mexican Americans who were often the first to lose their jobs. The Annotated Teacher's Edition provides one possible answer, focusing on both the difficulty of finding work and discrimination, but students' responses to this open-ended question will vary.

Ms. Hutcheson:

"Holt, Page 565 has a picture of a military post. What's this photo show about life on the military base? And the answer is facilities were plain and functional. And military base life included standing around and waiting. Now, this is negative to military efforts that should add, we're grateful that the military was able to organize and be effective in a very short time. I am assuming this was a World War II picture."

HRW Response: Our text images and their corresponding questions, such as the photo and related question on page 565, are designed to be open-ended critical thinking questions that help students practice the skill of analyzing primary sources, including visuals. The question on page 565, "What does this photo show about life on a military base?" has a variety of possible responses. The answer in the Annotated Teacher's Edition — "Facilities were plain and functional and military-based life included standing around and waiting" — is one possible student response. We fail to see how the photo or its related question and possible answer imply a negative attitude toward U.S. military efforts.

Reviewer Lindsay Whitehurst

"1. Portrayal of Abraham Lincoln ...

Holt devotes 1/4 page to Lincoln's bio and wants the students of Texas to remember that Lincoln was a funny guy. He liked to laugh, had a great sense of humor, and possessed a dry wit, as evidenced by this quote:

7 feel like the boy who stumped his toe," he said on losing the 1858 U.S. Senate race to Stephen Douglas. "/ am too big to cry and too badly hurt to laugh." (P. 97)

I ask you, which portrayal of Lincoln does Texas want to impress upon the minds of its students? Humor or humility? Laughter or leadership?"

HRW Response: The biographical sketch of President Lincoln on p. 97 begins, "Superior leadership skills made Abraham Lincoln one of our nation's greatest presidents. The personal hardship of losing two children and the stresses of the Civil War took a toll, however. Lincoln endured periodic bouts of severe depression. He often used laughter to combat his depression." Please note that this passage about Lincoln begins by describing his leadership skills. Also note that one of the purposes of the text's biographical sketches, such as this one about Lincoln, is to humanize historical figures and to make them more interesting to a broad range of students. The text also includes numerous examples of Lincoln's leadership ability: Lincoln's response to secession (pp. 91, 96); his response to Fort Sumter (p. 97); and his abilities as commander in chief (pp. 102, 110, 112, 113, 114, 117). An excerpt from Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (p. 144) and his Gettysburg Address (p. 119) are also included. We feel that our text offers a wealth of detailed coverage of a multifaceted person, especially when one considers that this information is included for review purposes, not for in-depth study, in a textbook focused on modern U.S. History, from 1877 to the present. As one would expect, more thorough coverage of Lincoln can be found in our 8th grade U.S. history book Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877.

"2. Battle of Gettysburg ...

Holt provides a fairly sparse account of the battle: less than a page of text with the basics of what happened. It concludes with a less-than-adequate assessment.:

The Union army had proved that the Confederacy could be beaten, (p. 119)"

HRW Response: Please see our preceding response regarding the scope and intent of American Nation in the Modem Era as compared to the scope and intent of our 8^th grade U.S. History text, Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877. The Battle of Gettysburg is briefly mentioned in American Nation, which focuses on modern U.S. history; it is covered in more detail in Call to Freedom. Although intended for review purposes only, our coverage of the Battle of Gettysburg in American Nation (pp. 118-19) is substantial. On p. 119, 2nd complete paragraph, line 7, the text states, "The battle, however, marked a critical turning point." The text also includes several opportunities in the student edition and teacher's edition for students to examine the significance of the battle: Read to Discover, p. 118; Reading Check, p. 119; Finding the Main Idea, question 4a, p. 123; and Objective 1 lesson, p. 119. The text includes a Historical Document feature on the Gettysburg Address as well as maps of the final campaigns of the war. Given space considerations and the intent of the section in which this discussion occurs (for review purposes only), we believe this coverage to be informative and adequate for student comprehension.

"3. Who cares, and so what? ...

Holt actually raises the issue "Why it matters today," but gives rather inadequate answers ..."

HRW Response: It is not clear in the transcript to which book this comment applies. Should the reviewer's comment be directed toward Holt's American Nation in the Modern Era, we offer the following response. The Why It Matters Today feature in our text is a point-of-use activity that appears in each section of the book. There are a total of 101 such features in the book. The activities suggested in these features provide students opportunities to connect what they are studying with current events. These opportunities help students determine the importance of studying history. Each feature is directly connected to the specific content of each section, which is why a Why It Matters Today feature for "The North and South Face Off section of the Civil War chapter asks students to research the challenges U.S. soldiers face today.

Reviewer Dr. Jose Limon

"Another book, Holt's The American Nation in the Modern Era, provides hundreds of biographical references for key American individuals but includes only two Hispanic names."

HRW Response: Please note that our text contains 73 biographical sketches of key Americans, of which several are presidents. These sketches also include Hispanics, Juan Seguin (p. 87), José Marti (p. 333), Josefina Fierro de Bright (p. 452), and Cesar Chavez (p. 682). In addition, the text discusses the roles and contributions of Mexican Americans throughout U.S. history. On pp. 450-52, the text discusses Mexican Americans in the Great Depression — forming mutualistas, working in the Southwest, and organizing for their rights. Mexican Americans who fought in World War II, 17 of whom earned the Congressional Medal of Honor, are mentioned on p. 539. Section 2 (pp. 682-88) of Chapter 23. "Struggles for Change," is devoted to the Mexican American civil rights movement. It includes a discussion of the Texas movement and the formation of the Mexican American Youth Organization and La Raza Unida Party. As these and many other examples indicate, our goal at Holt, Rinehart and Winston is to publish a balanced historical account of our nation's past and the contributions of all Americans. Although we feel that we have achieved this goal, we are always open to suggestions for improving our textbook programs, and, therefore, welcome any specific suggestions the reviewer may have for creating more appropriate coverage of Hispanics.

Reviewer Stan Smith

Mr. Smith: The frequent use of describing our government as being a "democracy", when it should certainly be obvious to any adult student of our history that we were formed (and supposedly remain so today) as a "republic"; I found to be inexcusable in a book designed to teach our children. The great differences between these two types of government should be obvious to any qualified to provide learning material on the subject.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for taking the time to review and comment on Holt Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877, Texas Edition. However, we must disagree with the reviewer's statement that "It [the text] didn't refer to republic." We would like to point out the examples that follow in which the text clearly describes the republican nature of the U.S. government and the ideas of republicanism that fostered the growth of self-government in the United States.

In Chapter 8, Section I (page 224), under the heading "The State Constitutions," the text includes the following statements: "All of these political ideas were quickly put into practice after the United States declared independence. During the American Revolution nearly every colony wrote a new state constitution. These constitutions showed a belief in republicanism — that is, support for a system of government called a republic. In such a system, citizens elect representatives who are responsible to the people." The discussion in this section contains an explanation of how the first state constitutions promoted the growth of these republican ideas.

In Chapter 9 the text includes the Constitution of the United States. (See pages 262-83.) In our discussion of Article IV, Section 4, on pages 272-3, we include an informational annotation (Exploring the Document) that states, "In a republic, voters elect representatives to act in their best interest." The text also includes a critical thinking question that reads, "How does Article IV protect the practice of republicanism in the United States?"

As a final example in Chapter 10, Section I, on pages 301-2, the text includes the heading "Life in the New Republic" under which we discuss what life was like for most Americans during the early republic. We also include in this section a photo with the following caption: "Like these women, many Americans worked on farms in the early republic."

Mr. Smith: The "states rights" issue was treated as though the states had surrendered their sovereignty when the nation was formed. It is obvious that this was not the case. We are the "United States" of America, and these states gave the central government, with only the power it rightfully needs, it's right to existence. It needs to also be said that our constitution did not "evolve", as this textbook says, but was written in a period of 120 days, with the words having the same meaning today.

HRW Response: We are unclear about which specific passage the reviewer is referring to. We believe the text on page 240 (quoted below) presents a balanced and appropriate discussion for this grade level of the issues of popular sovereignty, federalism, and the founding of the United States under the Constitution.

"Most of the convention delegates wanted a strong national government to replace the Articles of Confederation. At the same time they wanted to protect popular sovereignty — the idea that political authority belongs to the people. They also wanted to balance the power of the national government with the powers of the states. Therefore, the delegates looked to federalism, or the sharing of power between a central government and the states that make up a country."

On p. 256, the text reiterates this point about federalism: "The Constitution created a federal system in which power is divided between the states and the federal government." Moreover, in discussing the Tenth Amendment (p. 289) we emphasize that states reserve powers to themselves. Because sovereignty is essentially about powers exercised by states (in the wider sense of that term), we feel that all these statements taken together clearly support the concept of continued (limited) state sovereignty in the context of the Union. By quoting Article VI (p. 240), we also allow the Constitution to speak for itself as to how states are subject to it. Finally, we are not aware of any particular passage in the text that denies states' sovereignty or speaks of states giving up their sovereignty.

Mr. Smith: The issue of slavery was treated as though this nation was the originator of that practice, and in such an emotion stimulating manner it would be difficult to see how our nation would not be further divided. The fact that slavery had been a major institution as far back as history is recorded, and the many factors surrounding it were never approached, nor the far more pertinent fact that it was this nation which actually abolished the practice, except in the area where it began; Asia and Africa. It is still practiced today in almost every nation of those regions except in Israel. Another important item, regarding this issue, that is not mentioned, is the problems associated with the sudden release of a large mass of totally uneducated people into our society; such as the south was faced with.

HRW Response: We find it difficult to respond to the reviewer's comments regarding slavery. We would welcome specific page or chapter references from the reviewer so that we might more effectively evaluate and respond to his concerns. We feel that our coverage of slavery is accurate and appropriate for the 8^th grade U.S. history course taught in Texas.

Mr. Smith: There were statements made in chapters one and two which raise questions of credibility for this book, at least in my mind. The Magna Carta, although it was a giant step forward on the road to freedom, did not recognize people as being "created equal". It addressed rights as belonging only to the wealthy. The fact of equal rights, under GOD, for all men was first addressed in the declaration of July 4th, 1776. In the section on "adapting to new climate" there was a lot of guesswork portrayed as fact regarding times and episodes of geological events, much like those of which have been scientifically called to question in recent years. The statement made on page 35 of chapter two "many people believed people are superior to other living creatures", I found to be incredulous. What kind of mindset is being instilled into our young people?

HRW Response: Please note that the following response is necessarily speculative since the reviewer did not indicate specific page numbers or passages in his comments regarding our coverage of Magna Carta.

The text of Call to Freedom discusses Magna Carta in several places. Page 22 reads, "In 1215 they [the nobles] forced [King] John to agree to Magna Carta, or the Great Charter. The charter addressed the land rights of nobles.... In addition, Magna Carta was one of the first documents to protect some of the rights of free people." On page 223, the following reference is made: "England had limited the power of its kings and queens in two documents — Magna Carta and the English Bill of Rights. Magna Carta, signed by King John in 1215, required the king to follow the rule of law like other English people." Page 228, which features an excerpt from the charter, includes this introductory sentence: "[Magna Carta] stated that the king was subject to the rule of law, just as other citizens of England were." We believe that these are accurate statements about the importance and meaning of Magna Carta for 8^th grade American history students, and we fail to see how the text can be construed to mean, as the reviewer asserts, that Magna Carta "recognize[d] people as being 'created equal'". We do not believe that we have in any way disparaged the unique significance of the Declaration of Independence (the entire text of which is included on pages 194-197).

Regarding the reviewer's reference to "adapting to a new climate," we would point out that the subsection in Call to Freedom titled "Adapting to a New Climate" on page 6 follows a section titled "The First Migration to the Americas" (pp. 4-5). This prior section contains the following statements: "Many scientists believe that people first arrived in North America during the last Ice Age.... No one knows exactly when people crossed into North America.... historians rely on archaeology — the study of the unwritten past. ... Artifacts suggest that Paleo-lndians, or the first Americans, crossed into Alaska sometime between 38,000 and 10,000 B.C." (emphasis added).

The phrasing of this introductory subsection clearly establishes the discussion of this prehistoric period as a discussion based on the understandings of many scientists, historians, and archaeologists, not on "guesswork portrayed as fact." The "facts" of prehistory are of course not on par with those of history, and we make an obvious effort to establish that understanding in the context of the entire section.

Regarding the reviewer's concern with the passage on page 35, we would ask that the reviewer reread the passage, being mindful of the context of the passage. The sentence quoted by the reviewer in his comments is merely a transition to the brief discussion of humanist beliefs that follows. Since the reviewer misquoted the sentence, we will restate it here: "During the Renaissance many people believed that human beings were superior to all living creatures." This sentence presents to students the general idea of humanism, which was an important aspect of Renaissance thought. More specifically, the sentence focuses on the humanist idea concerning the glorification of human beings, as is shown in the following excerpt from Giovanni Pico della Mirandola's Oration on the Dignity of Man: "There is nothing to be seen more wonderful than man." The text is not, as the reviewer suggests, attempting to "instill" a particular "mindset... into our young people"; rather, it is providing students with background information about circumstances leading up to the discovery of the Americas.

Mr. Smith: This book did make reference to the fact that it was denominational differences within the Christian religion which formed the separate thinking of the colonist, and that it was their concern for state insistence on a particular Christian denomination that energized their actions on this issue. However this reference was buried in the mass of detail supporting acceptance of any religion, and fostering the idea that the Judeo-Christian Bible, along with a national relationship, and acceptance of the [true God] in public matters was not acceptable. It does not require a student of United States history to detect the error in this thinking. The etchings on our public buildings, built from the earliest times of our history, along with our institutionalized practices, also dating from our earliest times, illustrates the error in this. As a matter of fact almost those same words were spoken in the majority opinion of a supreme court decision about 50 years before the "Everson" decision, used only eight words of one of the same documents which, when used in it's entirety, in that earlier case had confirmed our nation as "a Christian nation"; perverted the meaning of "separation of church and state".

HRW Response: We are uncertain as to which passage in the textbook the reviewer is referring. This uncertainty prevents our addressing the reviewer's comments more specifically. That said, we would like to point out that on page 285, in our discussion of the First Amendment, the text states,"... the government cannot support or interfere with the practice of a religion. This [First] amendment keeps the government from favoring any religion over others. When the Constitution was written, many countries had an official state religion. However, some Americans wanted to keep the government from establishing an official religion." We believe this is an appropriate brief description of the meaning of the First Amendment regarding religion. Other mentions of religious freedom include pages 224 and 229, which discuss Thomas Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom; the latter page introduces a primary source excerpt from the statute with text recalling Jefferson's hope of "separating church and state" to protect Virginians' religious freedom. On page 275, in an annotation to the full text of the U.S. Constitution, the text invites students to explore the importance of the freedom of religion further. The textbook does not discuss the Everson decision.

Mr. Smith: The most dangerous writing within this book was in it's stressing our constitution as a "living document". This book went to great lengths in presenting this idea. Actually if any one simply used their GOD-given intelligence a little they would detect the fallacy here. The idea that a legal document, (which the constitution is) especially a legal document that is "law" (again which our constitution is) can have it's words change meaning to "fit circumstances is completely an asinine thought. If it were true the law (in this case constitution) itself would have no meaning. I can not help but wonder — is that the purpose? The arguments presented in this book, to the minds of children, display either a large degree of social ignorance, or a deliberate attempt to make pliable minds more adjustable to tyranny. Our constitution was written by highly capable individuals, gifted with writing skills, and exceptionally knowledgeable of the human and world situation. They understood (what apparently many today don't) that conduct which provide for good human relationships do not change with numbers, technical innovations or any external circumstances.

HRW Response: We believe that our discussion of the "living Constitution" idea presents the widely held view regarding the U.S. Constitution's flexibility over time and that this idea accords with mainstream constitutional scholarship. To quote just two of many sources that support this view: "The idea of a 'living Constitution'... has guided judicial interpretation throughout most of American history and has made it possible to adapt the Constitution to changing circumstances without extensive use of the amendment process." (American Political Dictionary; emphasis added) "["Living Constitution" means] The governing document of the United States whose meaning changes and evolves over time in response to new circumstances. This evolution takes place mainly in the minds of the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, not to mention other officials, whose actions and decisions constantly forge the written Constitution into directions never imagined by the framers. Yet this is in accord with their intent." (Dictionary of American Government and Politics) We believe that our brief presentation of the common, prevailing view is appropriate for a middle school American history course. We discuss the issue of strict versus loose construction on p. 308.

Reviewer Walt Glasscock

1. The writers of these texts have totally missed the genius that made America great.... The deeply religious convictions that directed our founders was the inspiration that drove them to forge this kind of Constitutional Republic. This must not be missed if one is to truly understand America.

HRW Response: The reviewer's comment suggests that the reviewer may be unaware of the scope and intent of Holt's People, Places, and Change. Holt's People, Places, and Change was written to meet the objectives of the 6^th grade TEKS, which outline a world cultures/world geography course. The description for this course in Proclamation 2000 of the State Board of Education begins with the sentence: "In grade 6, students study people and places of the contemporary world." Only 2 of the 23 TEKS for this course are designated as History TEKS (the others are labeled Geography, Cultures, etc.). The history sections that are included in Holt's People, Places, and Change have been provided to address the History TEKS for this course and to serve as guidelines for a more complete understanding of the geography and cultures of the world. They are not meant to provide an exhaustive history of the founding of each country. .

2. These two texts omit reference to our founders: no mention of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson in the roles they played in establishing this nation. How can you foster patriotism if you have no heroes?

HRW Response: Please see our response to the preceding comment.

4. These two texts constitute agenda-based geography. Geography is to supply information to students. Period. These texts involve indoctrination and manipulation of the students to form opinions and to adopt the philosophies and agendas of the authors as directed through the questions and suggested projects on the work pages.

HRW Response: We disagree with the reviewer regarding the presentation of the material. We believe that we have provided a balanced, thorough, and informative text that gives students a broad understanding of the geography, history, cultural traits, economy, and modern-day problems of the regions of the world. We are unclear as to the meaning of the reviewer's comment regarding "work pages"; all questions and suggested projects in section reviews, chapter reviews, lessons, and side-column activities relate to facts in the text and are presented in an unbiased manner.

Reviewer Roxann Chavez Reza

Ms. Reza: ...Overall, Call to Freedom presented its information well but lacked in depth of content. By expanding on particular civilizations and historical events the target audience would have a better understanding of how these events relate to American society today. For example, on Pages 7, 66 and 67, the empires of the Aztec, Inca, and Maya are briefly mentioned, but simply being mentioned does not do justice to these amazing civilizations. A discussion of the scientific, political, architectural, and societal achievements of these peoples is absolutely necessary. To state that these cultures were rich and powerful is not enough, would a textbook exclude any information pertaining to the Roman Empire and simply say it was great civilization? For readers to fully comprehend the magnitude of any civilization more information citing examples is obviously crucial.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for her positive comments regarding our overall presentation of information in Call to Freedom. We regret that the reviewer is not satisfied with the extent of the coverage given to the Aztec, Inca, and Maya civilizations. We would like to point out, however, that at Holt, Rinehart and Winston, we strive to present the most complete coverage possible for the intended audience in all of our textbooks. Toward that end, we value the time and effort that has been placed into developing the various state standards, such as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for social studies. In Holt Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877, Texas Edition we used the TEKS as guidelines in determining what information must be included, and it is worth noting that Call to Freedom has achieved 100 percent compliance with the TEKS standards and has been placed on the conforming list for 8^thgrade U.S. History.

Although the TEKS for the 8^th grade U.S. History course do not specifically mention the Aztec, Inca, or Maya civilizations, Call to Freedom does contain significant information about these civilizations. For example, in our discussion of the Aztec civilization in Chapter 1, page 7, we cover the history and cultural developments of the Aztec. We include a primary source poem from King Nezahualcóyot about how the Aztec knew that their success might not last. We also include an image showing an example of a tax record used by the Aztec to keep track of their wealth. In Section 1, pages 67-8, of Chapter 3, we have an entire section titled "Cortes and the Aztec" in which we focus our discussion on how Cortes conquered the Aztec and the effect of this defeat on the Aztec Empire. As support for instruction in this section, we also include the following: a primary source quote about the Aztec capital city of Tenochtitlán, a side-margin feature about how the Aztec treated Cortes as though he was Quetzalcoatl (a legendary figure), an image of Moctezuma II, and a large image depicting the battle for Tenochtitlán. There is also a map on page 68 titled "Spanish Exploration and Conquests, 1513-1542" that shows the location of the Aztec Empire.

We begin our discussion of the Inca in Chapter 1. In this discussion we describe how and where the civilization began. We also devote some of our coverage here to the characteristics and developments of the Inca. There is also a photo included in this chapter showing Machu Picchu. In Chapter 3, Section 1 (page 68), we continue our discussion of the Inca under the section titled "Pizarro's Conquest of the Inca." Our coverage here focuses on the culture of the Inca civilization as well as Pizarro's defeat of the Inca. The extent of the Inca Empire is also shown on the map in this section.

We present information about the Maya civilization in Chapter 1. In Section 1 of this chapter we discuss the history and cultural aspects of the Maya civilization.

In our coverage of these civilizations we do discuss scientific, political, architectural, and societal achievements.

While we agree that including more information on these and other important civilizations would be ideal, we are unfortunately forced to make decisions about coverage due to space constraints in our textbooks. To cover the history of our country from the beginnings to 1877, we were forced to limit the coverage of all historical events and people. We feel that we have provided appropriate coverage of all groups and cultures given the scope of the course, the TEKS requirements, and textbook space limitations.

Ms. Reza: Furthermore, in the discussion of World War II, I was pleased that both African-American and Japanese-American efforts were recognized. I was astounded, though, that the efforts on behalf of the Mexican-Americans were not. This textbook failed to include that of the minority groups that participated in the war, Hispanics, were the most highly decorated. 17 Hispanics received United States Congressional Medal of Honor and of those 17, five were from Texas. Among the five, Jose M. Lopez not only received the U.S. Congressional Medal of Honor but the highest military award for Mexico as well, the Aguila Esteca. Recognition for Hispanic efforts in World War II is most definitely needed in Call to Freedom.

A final example of information needing elaboration is the statement in reference to Cesar Chavez. I was very glad that Mr. Chavez was mentioned as a civil rights leader, but I was disappointed that only one short sentence was provided describing his efforts. For readers to understand his passion for wider migrant rights, a graphic description of migrant working conditions and substandard housing must be included. The Delano Grape Strike of 1966 in California was excluded altogether.

HRW Response: Perhaps the reviewer is unaware of the scope of the 8^th grade U.S. history course and its TEKS, which focus on U.S. history up to but not after 1877. As with all other textbooks submitted for this course, Holt's Call to Freedom contains a condensed Epilogue covering all of U.S. history since Reconstruction. This brief 32-page chapter in Call to Freedom is provided merely as a convenient resource for teachers who want to touch on some aspect of the country's later history while they are focusing on the years up to 1877. Therefore, this Epilogue was not intended to provide a true history of the topics mentioned by the reviewer. For more detailed coverage of World War II and the other topics mentioned by the reviewer, we suggest that she look to the textbooks submitted for high school U.S. history courses.

As a final note, we would like to say that at Holt we are committed to presenting history in a balanced manner and to identifying the contributions of all Americans to our national heritage.

Ms. Reza: The following are only several examples of areas in the textbook that need improvement or clarification:

* pages 67, 68 usage of the term "American Indians" to refer to Aztec and Maya civilizations, this term places these civilizations in the same category as Apache, Comanche, Sioux or Cherokee in later chapters

HRW Response: Although the term American Indian has been more frequently and commonly used in reference to North American Indians, the Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th Ed.'s primary meaning for American Indian is "a member of any of the aboriginal peoples of the western hemisphere except usu. the Eskimos"; according to that definition these groups do all belong together. For the most part, the text refers to peoples by their more specific names; however at this grade level, we feel it is appropriate in certain contexts, including those cited by the reviewer, to use the term American Indian in its broader meaning.

* page 67 includes Tenochtitlán as an Aztec center, needs to include that this is present day Mexico City for geographical clarity

HRW Response: We include Tenochtitlán on a map titled "Spanish Exploration and Conquests, 1513-1542" on page 68. We indicate on this map that Tenochtitlán is present-day Mexico City.

* page 67 includes that Tenochtitlán was at the center of a great lake, needs to include the name of the lake, Lake Texcoco, also for geographical purposes

HRW Response: We appreciate the reviewer's concern but believe that the requested level of geographic detail, especially about an area that is not a part of the United States, is unnecessary in a U.S. history textbook.

* pages 7, 66, 67 much elaboration is needed on the few sentences describing who the Aztec and Maya were and their achievements

HRW Response: Please see HRW's first response to this reviewer's comments.

* page 67 there is no mention of "La Noche Triste", when in June of 1520 the Spaniards, in an escape attempt, drowned as a result of trying to cross a river but were weighed down in stolen Aztec treasures as they fled

HRW Response: While we do not use the term La Noche Triste in the text, we do discuss the fighting and losses to which this name refers on page 167. Unfortunately, space considerations prevent us from including additional details, such as the fact that the Spanish soldiers were hindered by the weight of the Aztec treasures that they were carrying.

* pages 67, 68 there is no mention of Cuauhtemoc, the nephew of Montezuma, who surrendered to the Spanish in 1521

HRW Response: We believe that the fall of the Aztec Empire is appropriately covered on pages 67 and 68, which include primary source quotations, a painting, and a map, in addition to the text discussion. We believe that mention of the person referred to by the reviewer is an unnecessary detail considering the scope and intent of the text.

* pages 496, 498 does not fully explain why Mexico refused to accept that Texas had become an independent state

HRW Response: We believe that our coverage of Texas becoming a republic is more than adequate. We believe that a more detailed explanation of the deliberations of the Mexican government as suggested by the reviewer is unnecessary in a U.S. history textbook for this grade level. Moreover, we would like to point out that the diplomatic aspect of the issue of Texas's independence from Mexico is further treated on page 501, which notes that after the Texas Revolution "Mexico still considered Texas to be its property." This issue is also discussed on page T9 (Student Edition), which states, "After Texas was annexed, Mexico cut off diplomatic relations with the United States. The Mexican government rejected the U.S. claim that the Rio Grande marked the southern border of Texas." Finally, we would remind reviewer that students would have had an opportunity to study this issue more fully in their 7^th grade Texas history course.

* page 500 discussion of Texas Rangers does include information regarding blatantly racist actions that only increased tensions between Americans and the newly created Mexican-American minority (the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo created Mexican-Americans when it divided the U.S. and Mexico and granted American citizenship to all living it what was formerly Mexico)

HRW Response: We are uncertain as to the intent of reviewer's comment. The Texas Rangers are not discussed on this page.

Holt, Rinehart and Winston
Formal Response
To
Oral Testimony
July 17, 2002

Reviewer: Ms. Lindsay Whitehurst

Ms. Whitehurst: "I chose two Eleventh Grade history textbooks; one was Holt's American Nation in the Modern Era. . . .

First, I would like to comment on each books' portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. Each book contains a short bio of the president; one book devotes half a page, the other a quarter of a page. And the first book that devoted a quarter of the page basically wants the students of Texas to remember that Lincoln was a funny guy. He liked to laugh, had a great sense of humor, possessed a dry wit, as evidenced by this quote:

'I feel like the boy who stumped his toe,' he said on losing the 1858 U.S. Senate race to Stephen Douglas. 'I am too big to cry and too badly hurt to laugh.'...

I ask you which portrayal of Lincoln does Texas want to impress upon the minds of its students, humor or humility? laughter or leadership?"

HRW Response: The biographical sketch of President Lincoln on p. 97 begins, "Superior leadership skills made Abraham Lincoln one of our nation's greatest presidents. The personal hardship of losing two children and the stresses of the Civil War took a toll, however. Lincoln endured periodic bouts of severe depression. He often used laughter to combat his depression." Please note that this passage about Lincoln begins by describing his leadership skills. Also note that one of the purposes of the text's biographical sketches, such as this one about Lincoln, is to humanize historical figures and to make them more interesting to a broad range of students. The text also includes numerous examples of Lincoln's leadership ability: Lincoln's response to secession (pp. 91, 96); his response to Fort Sumter (p. 97); and his abilities as commander in chief (pp. 102, 110, 112, 113, 114, 117). An excerpt from Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (p. 114) and his Gettysburg Address (p. 119) are also included. We feel that our text offers a wealth of detailed coverage of a multifaceted person, especially when one considers that this information is included for review purposes, not for in-depth study, in a textbook focused on modern U.S. History, from 1877 to the present. As one would expect, more thorough coverage of Lincoln can be found in our 8th grade U.S. history book Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877.

Ms. Whitehurst: "The second area I focused on was each books' treatment of the Battle of Gettysburg. .. .

The first book provides a fairly sparse account of the battle, basically lip service, less than a page of text with the basics of what happened. It concludes with a less-than-adequate assessment:

'The Union army had proved that the Confederacy could be beaten.'"

HRW Response: Please see our preceding response regarding the scope and intent of American Nation in the Modern Era as compared to the scope and intent of our 8^th grade U.S. History text, Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877. The Battle of Gettysburg is briefly mentioned in American Nation, which focuses on modern U.S. history; it is covered in more detail in Call to Freedom. Although intended for review purposes only, our coverage of the Battle of Gettysburg

(pp. 118-19) is substantial. On p. 119, 2nd complete paragraph, line 7, the text states, "The battle, however, marked a critical turning point." The text also includes several opportunities in the student edition and teacher's edition for students to examine the significance of the battle: Read to Discover, p. 118; Reading Check, p. 119; Finding the Main Idea, question 4a, p. 123; and Objective 1 lesson, p. 119. The text includes an Historical Document feature on the Gettysburg Address as well as maps of the final campaigns of the war. Given space considerations and the intent of the section in which this discussion occurs (for review purposes only), we believe this coverage to be informative and adequate for student comprehension.

Ms. Whitehurst: "Most likely high school students will be asking their teachers this question: Why should I care? Why should it matter today?

As I provided examples, one of these books provides very inadequate answers to any of these questions that are raised. . . ."

HRW Response: It is not clear in the transcript to which book this comment applies. Should the reviewer's comment be directed toward Holt's American Nation in the Modem Era, we offer the following response. The Why It Matters Today feature in our text is a point-of-use activity that appears in each section of the book. There are a total of 101 such features in the book. The activities suggested in these features provide students opportunities to connect what they are studying with current events. These opportunities help students determine the importance of studying history. Each feature is directly connected to the specific content of each section, which is why a Why It Matters Today feature for "The North and South Face Off section of the Civil War chapter asks students to research the challenges U.S. soldiers face today.

Reviewer: Ms. Jennifer E. Powell

Ms. Powell: ...And I would like to highlight two of his goals in my comparison of these two books. One of which was to enlighten the understanding of the American Revolution and fit them for usefulness in their future. The key question here is: How do we want Eighth Graders to know and to remember the American Revolution? On the surface both books achieve these goals. They each have timelines at the beginning of the chapter to show the big picture of the American Revolution. Most of the important people and the most important events are bolded. And they are reading — they're reading checks throughout the chapters in order to stimulate student's thinking. In addition both presents the texts of the Declaration of Independence with dictionary definitions of the difficult words and also a list of the signers. However, close evaluation reveals a few more details. For example, in the Declaration of Independence, there are inadequate references to the signers and their backgrounds. Prentice Hall, in the teacher's edition, mentions some of the signers were not lawyers, and then encourages teachers to ask the students to research the various occupations and the training that the signers had. Holt, however, had no mention of any of their backgrounds. Did you know that out of the 56 signers, 27 had seminary degrees? Holt did an excellent job of providing visual — visuals of history through art and detailed maps. In your packet, you will find an example of that. However, it falters in some of the more important areas. There are few quotes or references from primary sources and said an entire page was dedicated to an historical fiction book rather than primary sources. There are a lot of other primary source examples that could have been included. There is spy letters that are available. There is a lot of journal entries that are available from George Washington and other founding fathers, or the letters between John and Abigail Adams. Prentice Hall, although it does not have the same number of pictures as Holt's, it is superior. It provides summaries and several quotes in the texts. And the inadequacy of Holt can be compared with Prentice Hall with the example of their — their approach to Thomas Paine's common sense and important documents. Holt has a short summary and no quotes whereas Prentice Hall has a background, a summary, and an excerpt and discussion on primary source analysis.

In response to reviewer's comment that an entire page was dedicated to a book of historical fiction rather than to primary sources in Call to Freedom, we would like to point out to the reviewer that we periodically conduct focus group sessions with teachers. We conduct these sessions to ensure that the information that we are providing in our programs meets the needs of students and teachers. One point that is consistently made by teachers in these focus groups, and that is evident in other data that we collect and study, is that a cross-curricular connection between history and other disciplines is very important to Social Studies teachers. In the one-page Connecting to Literature feature (page 189) in the American Revolution chapter titled "My Brother Sam Is Dead" we attempt to provide another aspect of the American Revolution — i.e., how it affected the lives of everyday people. In doing so we have given teachers the type of cross-curricular activity that they tell us they want; we have also included a story that will hopefully capture students' interest and motivate them to read further and develop a greater understanding of how the Revolution affected the lives of the colonists. We are surprised by the reviewer's contention that Call to Freedom is deficient with regard to the inclusion of primary sources. We have included primary source excerpts as points of use throughout Call to Freedom. For example, Chapter 7, "The American Revolution," includes ten primary source quotes within the chapter narrative. (Please see pages 185, 186, 192, 193, 199, 200, 203, 208, 210, and 213.) Four of the primary source quotes are accompanied by an Analyzing Primary Sources critical thinking question. Also included in this chapter is the Declaration of Independence. We would like to call the reviewer's attention to the table of contents, pages xiii through xv, where we list over 150 primary source quotes that are included in the textbook.

Regarding the reviewer's comments about our coverage of Thomas Paine, we must mention that we devote a section (see page 190) in the American Revolution chapter to Thomas Paine's Common Sense titled "Paine's Common Sense." We include excerpts from the pamphlet in the discussion and place emphasis on the significance of this discussion by calling out both Common Sense and Thomas Paine as key terms that students should learn in this chapter. The section is followed by a Reading Check critical thinking question that focuses on the significance of Thomas Paine's Common Sense.

Ms. Thornton: I have a question. Did you look at the teacher's edition concerning the background of our founding fathers? Was there anything in there that would help the teacher to facilitate some of that information that you said was lacking?

Ms. Powell: Both of the textbooks of the teacher's edition, they — they recommended Internet research. But that was — that was as far as it went.

Ms. Thornton: So there wasn't any information detailed about the founding fathers in the teacher's edition for the teacher.

Ms. Powell: Not specifically. In Holt it did not in. And then in Prentice Hall, it said that most of them were not attorneys. And it mentions that a couple were businessmen, one was a farmer. And then it — they recommend that students go and do a project and find out what their backgrounds were.

HRW Response: As noted in the response above, Call to Freedom does contain information in the Teacher's Edition on the signers of the Declaration. The text goes into a great deal of detail on the founding fathers, including Benjamin Franklin (see page 143, although he is discussed in other parts of the textbook as well), Thomas Jefferson (see pages 191-193), James Madison (see pages 236-37), William Paterson (see page 238), and Alexander Hamilton (see pages 304-5).

Reviewer: Ms. Eleanor Hutcheson

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for noting our accuracy regarding the details of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in Holt Texas!

Ms. Hutcheson: "Again, Glencoe and Holt explain the laws made by the State democratic party of Texas forbidding the blacks to vote in their primary."

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for noting our accuracy.

Ms. Hutcheson: "Holt, Page 565 has a picture of a military post. What's this photo show about life on the military base? And the answer is facilities were plain and functional. And military base life included standing around and waiting. Now, this is negative to military efforts that should add, we're grateful that the military was able to organize and be effective in a very short time. I am assuming this was a World War II picture."

HRW Response: Our text images and their corresponding questions, such as the photo and related question on page 565, are designed to be open-ended, critical thinking questions that help students practice the skill of analyzing primary sources, including visuals. The question on page 565, "What does this photo show about life on a military base?" has a variety of possible student responses. The answer in the Annotated Teacher's Edition, "Facilities were plain and functional and military-based life included standing around and waiting" is one of students' possible responses. We fail to see how the photo or its related question and possible answer imply a negative attitude toward U.S. military efforts.

Reviewer: Ms. Roxanne Reza

Ms. Reza: My research examined the representation of minorities in this particular textbook, namely Mexican Americans. And my next few statements will highlight my findings. Overall, Call to Freedom presented its information well but lacked the depth of content. By expanding on particular civilizations and historical events, the target audience would have a better understanding of how these events relate to American society today. For example, on Pages 7, 66 and 67, the empires of the Aztec, Inca and Maya are briefly mentioned. But simply being mentioned does not do justice to these a missing civilizations. A discussion of the scientific, political, architectural and societal achievements of these peoples is absolutely necessary. To state that these cultures were rich and powerful is not enough. Would a textbook exclude any information pertaining to the Roman Empire and simply say it was — that was a great civilization? For readers to fully comprehend the magnitude of any civilization, more information citing examples is obviously crucial.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for her positive comments regarding our overall presentation of information in Call to Freedom. We regret that the reviewer is not satisfied with the extent of the coverage given to the Aztec, Inca, and Maya civilizations. We would like to point out, however, that at Holt, Rinehart and Winston, we strive to present the most complete coverage possible for the intended audience in all of our textbooks. Toward that end, we value the time and effort that has been placed into developing the various state standards, such as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for social studies. In Holt Call to Freedom: Beginnings to 1877, Texas Edition we used the TEKS as guidelines in determining what information must be included, and it is worth noting that Call to Freedom has achieved 100% compliance with the TEKS standards and has been placed on the conforming list for 8^th grade U.S. History.

Although the TEKS for the 8^th grade U.S. History course do not specifically mention the Aztec, Inca, or Maya civilizations, Call to Freedom does contain significant information about these civilizations. For example, in our discussion of the Aztec civilization in Chapter 1, page 7, we cover the history and cultural developments of the Aztec. We include a primary source poem from King Nezahualcóyotl about how the Aztec knew that their success might not last. We also include an image showing an example of a tax record used by the Aztec to keep track of their wealth. In Section 1, pages 66-8, of Chapter 3, we have an entire section titled "Cortes and the Aztec" in which we focus our discussion on how Cortes conquered the Aztec and the effect of this defeat on the Aztec Empire. As support for instruction in this section, we also include the following: a primary source quote about the Aztec capital city of Tenochtitlán, a side-margin feature about how the Aztec treated Cortes as though he was Quetzalcoatl (a legendary figure), an image of Moctezuma II, and a large image depicting the battle for Tenochtitlán. There is also a map on page 68 titled "Spanish Exploration and Conquests, 1513-1542" that shows the location of the Aztec Empire.

We begin our discussion of the Inca in Chapter 1. In this discussion we describe how and where the civilization began. We also devote some of our coverage here to the characteristics and developments of the Inca. There is also a photo included in this chapter showing Machu Picchu. In Chapter 3, Section 1 (page 68), we continue.our discussion of the Inca under the section titled "Pizarro's Conquest of the Inca." Our coverage here focuses on the culture of the Inca civilization as well as Pizarro's defeat of the Inca. The extent of the Inca Empire is also shown on the map in this section.

We present information about the Maya civilization in Chapter 1. In Section 1 of this chapter we discuss the history and cultural aspects of the Maya civilization.

In our coverage of these civilizations we do discuss scientific, political, architectural, and societal achievements.

Ms. Reza: Furthermore, in the discussion of World War II, I was pleased that both African-American and Japanese-American efforts were recognized. I was astounded, however, that the efforts on behalf of the Mexican-Americans were not. This textbook failed to include that of the minority groups that participated in the war, Hispanics, were the most highly decorated. Seventeen Hispanics received United States Congressional Medal of Honor and, of those 17, five were from Texas. Among the five, Jose M. Lopez not only received the U.S. Congressional Medal of Honor but the highest military award for Mexico as well, the Aguillar Esteca. Recognition for Hispanic efforts in World War II is most definitely needed in Call to Freedom. A final example of information needing elaboration is a statement in reference to Cesar Chavez. I was very glad that Mr. Chavez was mentioned as a civil rights leader. But I was disappointed that only one short sentence was provided describing his efforts. For readers to understand his passion for wider migrant rights, a graphic description of migrant working conditions and substandard housing, must be included. The Delano grape strike of 1966 in California was excluded altogether.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for her positive comments. Perhaps the reviewer is unaware of the scope of the 8^th grade U.S. history course and its TEKS, which focus on U.S. history up to but not after 1877. As with all other textbooks submitted for this course, Holt's Call to Freedom contains a condensed Epilogue covering all of U.S. history since Reconstruction. This brief 32-page chapter in Call to Freedom is provided merely as a convenient resource for teachers who want to touch on some aspect of the country's later history while they are focusing on the years up to 1877. Therefore, this Epilogue was not intended to provide a true history of the topics mentioned by the reviewer. For more detailed coverage of World War II and the other topics mentioned by the reviewer, we suggest that she look to the textbooks submitted for high school U.S. history courses.

As a final note, we would like to say that at Holt we are committed to presenting history in a balanced manner and to identifying the contributions of all Americans to our national heritage.

Reviewer: Mr. Stan Smith

Mr. Smith: This book talked entirely about democracy. It didn't refer to republic. The only time it referred to republic was when it was about ancient Rome. And the irony of that is that Rome during the period of history when most of us are familiar with it had actually degenerated into a democracy. And I found it strange when so many credentialed writers and credentialed people don't seem to know what type of government we have. And I felt bad about this.

Mr. Smith: They talked about a state's rights. At the time of the revolution, at the time we declared our independence, at the time we were forming our nation, as the states giving up their sovereignty. States didn't give up our sovereignty. We are an United States. We work in a cooperative manner. States are sovereign. We are sovereign as individuals and we are sovereign as a nation. But we have to work for the rest of the world. That context needs to be taught. No one gives up sovereignty in order to become a part of or work with another unit or group.

Mr. Smith: Slavery. Slavery was treated like, if the United States didn't originate that practice, we mostly perpetuated. And we know that wasn't true. We know that slavery goes back a long way. But I will tell you, the bad thing about it, in teachings of this manner is no way to unite a divergent nation. When I am talking about divergent, I am talking about divergent of a lot of colors, classes, and et cetera. When you take one of them and tell them how badly they have been treated and elevate us to that point. The irony here is that, it was the United States that virtually eliminated slavery, and this was never brought out in that book. I don't think it is taught enough anywhere.

HRW Response: We find it difficult to respond to the reviewer's comments regarding slavery. We would welcome specific page or chapter references the reviewer so that we might more effectively evaluate and respond to his concerns. We feel that our coverage of slavery is accurate and appropriate for the 8^th grade U.S. history course taught in Texas.

Mr. Smith: The most dangerous thing, writing that I saw in the book and anywhere was this idea of our Constitution being — what is the term I want to use?

Mr. McLeroy: A living document.

Mr. Smith: A living document. That in the face of it is totally asinine. A legal document, a law, is a living document and becomes whatever the people that are administering it says it is. That — that is totally ridiculous. It means that that document is worthless. It means that the Constitution is worthless. And it is only good, it only means whoever is obtaining at that moment says it was. This is getting back to pagan government before our Constitution was written.

HRW Response: We believe that our discussion of the "living Constitution" idea presents the widely held view regarding the U.S. Constitution's flexibility over time and that this idea accords with mainstream constitutional scholarship. To quote just two of many sources that support this view, "The idea of a 'living Constitution'... has guided judicial interpretation throughout most of American history and has made it possible to adapt the Constitution to changing circumstances without extensive use of the amendment process." (American Political Dictionary; emphasis added) "['Living Constitution' means] The governing document of the United States whose meaning changes and evolves over time in response to new circumstances. This evolution takes place mainly in the minds of the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, not to mention other officials, whose actions and decisions constantly forge the written Constitution into directions never imagined by the framers. Yet this is in accord with their intent." (Dictionary of American Government and Politics) We believe that our brief presentation of the common, prevailing view is appropriate for a middle school American history course. We discuss the issue of strict versus loose construction on p. 308.

Ms. Thornton: In reviewing this book, Holt's Call to Freedom, you said there was never the mention of the word of this country being a republic. That word was never in the book.

Mr. Smith: I never saw it in the first eight chapters. The eight chapters is what I went through.

Ms. Thornton: And you said that in the book it says that the individual states gave up their sovereignty.

Mr. Smith: This was what the belief was. It never taught that. But it taught that the belief was that they gave up their sovereignty.

HRW Response: We discuss republic in Chapters 8, 9, and 10. Also see our earlier responses regarding republics and state sovereignty.

Reviewer: Mr. Walt Glasscock

Mr. Glasscock: (pp. 242-43) The deeply religious convictions that directed our founders was the inspiration that drove them to forge this kind of a constitutional republic. This must not be missed if one is to truly understand America.

Mr. Glasscock: (p. 243) ...These two texts omit reference to our founding fathers. No mention of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, in the roles they played in establishing this nation. How can you foster patriotism if you have no heroes?

HRW Response: Please see our response to the preceding comment.

Mr. Glasscock: (p. 244) The two text constitutes agenda-based geography. Geography is to supply information to students, period. These texts involve indoctrination, manipulation of the students to form opinions, and to adopt the philosophies and agendas of the authors as directed through the questions and suggested projects on the work pages.

Holt, Rinehart and Winston's
Formal Response to the Texas Public Policy Foundation Report
Social Studies Textbook Review 2002

List of Factual Errors by Book

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Holt, People Places and Change: An Introduction to World Studies, Texas Edition	6^th Grade Social Studies

1. p. 329. Error. The Austro-Hungarians did not impose Roman Catholicism in Croatia and Slovenia as the authors declare. Catholicism is deeply rooted in these two countries, both of which, though proselytized by Byzantium, inclined to unity with Rome when the Great Schism occurred. For a brief history on this question see Newman C. Eberhardt, A Summary of Catholic History: Ancient and Medieval History, Vol. I (St. Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1961, pp. 501-02.

HRW Response: Although we do not feel that the current wording constitutes an error, we do agree that the passage could be misleading. Therefore, in the first paragraph, line 6, we will change the sentence after "Islam" to read as follows: "Eventually the Ottoman Empire weakened, and in the late 1800s the Austro-Hungarians took control of Croatia and Slovenia." We will delete the last sentence of the paragraph.

2. p. 427. US and UK led the alliance action against Iraq as the authors point out. However, it is important to say that they did so with the full approval of the UN. This wasn't an 'imperialist' action as might be implied or as one might conclude from the way the text is worded.

HRW Response: We agree with reviewer that adding information about the UN's consent to this military operation improves the passage. We will, therefore, in line 6, insert "With United Nations authorization," in front of "An" (lowercase "an"). For the record, please note that, in our opinion, the text as it is currently written is not erroneous.

3. P. 495. The treatment of the slave trade fails to mention that British policy and enforcement brought it to a close. The authors do not mention the fact that a slave trade existed in East Africa with the Arab and Islamic world, even before the West African slave trade began. Slavery was largely eliminated in Europe during the Middle Ages.

HRW Response: We would ask that the reviewer re-examine this passage in context, in which case the reviewer will notice that this section is meant to be a very brief overview of the slave trade in West Africa, not a history of the slave trade as a whole. The authors do in fact discuss the earlier slave trade in East Africa, on pp. 512-13.

4. p. 519. Famine in Ethiopia is caused not just by drought. Major factors are civil war and bad government, especially during the Communist regime of the 1970s-1990s.

HRW Response: While we do not believe that this passage contains a factual error, we do agree with the reviewer that clarification of the reason for the starvation of millions of people in Ethiopia would be helpful. We will change the last two sentences of the first paragraph to read: "Drought, combined with war and ineffective government policies, caused the starvation of several million people in the 1980s."

5. p. 273. The Communist Worker's Republic in Spain aggressively persecuted Catholics and murdered priests. So the rather anodyne phrase adopted by the authors, suggesting that the communists just wanted to "reduce Church influence," does not convey adequately the communist animus toward Catholicism in Spain.

HRW Response: While the reviewer may feel that the statement is not strong enough, we believe it accurately portrays the events and is appropriate wording for our sixth-grade audience within the scope of this course.

6. P. 421. The common prejudice concerning the "Dark Ages" is uncritically repeated here in the sidebar on Math. In fact the dark ages weren't so dark. Learning continued in Europe through the monasteries. The Muslims borrowed from ancient Greek knowledge, including math. It was Euclid who developed the science of geometry. Muslims used it, but cannot take credit for discovering it as might be implied from the sidebar.

HRW Response: The focus of the "Connecting to Math" feature on p. 421 is clearly "The Muslim Contributions to Mathematics," not the Dark Ages, and we believe that our brief mention of the cultural decline of Europe is appropriate for setting the time period and the sense of contrast with the emergence of Islamic civilization. In the second paragraph, however, we will make the following change to remove the implication that geometry was a discovery of Muslims: replace "algebra, geometry, and trigonometry." with "algebra and revived the study of geometry."

7. Pp. 115. Kwanzaa, the authors imply, originated in Africa. But Kwanzaa is not celebrated in Africa. It is an African-American invention of recent decades. Other real holidays with significant histories and backgrounds are not explained in this text, as the TEKS requires. They are merely listed.

HRW Response: We do not think that saying Kwanzaa is based on a traditional African festival implies that the holiday originated in Africa. However, to ensure that there is no confusion regarding Kwanzaa's origins, we will insert the words "in part" between "based" and "on" in line 6 of paragraph 4. The scope of the TEKS and space constraints prevent us from providing the background information and explanations desired by the reviewer. The TEKS require only that some religious holidays be explained — as we have done, for example, with Mexico's celebration of the Day of the Dead. Our reviewers, who teach children in the sixth grade, indicated in their reviews that this level of detail is grade appropriate and that this TEKS has been adequately covered.

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Holt Texas	7^th Grade Texas History

1. 90S says Ferdinand and Isabella gave Columbus three ships. Actually, Columbus chartered the Santa Maria himself, and the town of Palos, a shipbuilding center, provided the Nina and Pinta in lieu of a debt owed the monarchs.

2. 211S states that Santa Anna was popularly elected in 1833 after overthrowing Bustamante in 1832. 212T says he was popularly elected in 1831. The 1833 date is correct.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out this error in the Teacher's Edition. The date on page 212T will be changed to 1833 to match the correct date in the Student's Edition.

3. The biography of Zavala mentions that he received a land grant to settle 500 families. It does not say he never developed his settlement. It leaves the impression that he might have settled part of East Texas among his other accomplishments, 242S.

HRW Response: Thank you for noting this issue in the Zavala biography (242S), which in isolation could create a clarity issue. However, Zavala and his land grant are previously discussed on page 175S. The text on page 175S reads, "In 1829 he received a contract to settle 500 families on a huge tract of land in East Texas. Zavala never established the colony, however, and later sold it to the Galveston Bay and Texas Land Company." Having made this point earlier in the text, we felt that it was not necessary to include it in the biography feature on page 242S; instead, in this feature we chose to focus on the many accomplishments of Zavala that had not been previously mentioned.

4. It is incorrect to call William Kennedy a Texan (284S). He did like Texas and served Texas' interests in England (replacing Arthur Ikin as consul) before annexation. He also served a couple of years as British consul to Texas. He received a grant to settle 600 families in Texas, but he never did and he never resided here permanently.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out the need for this clarification. We will delete "Texan" from the sentence describing Kennedy.

5. On page 271 (T,S) the text lists Edward Burleson as the vice president during Sam Houston's 2nd presidential term. Anson Jones was Sam Houston's vice president before becoming the last president of the Republic of Texas. This is a major error.

HRW Response: This is not an error. In the Handbook of Texas the biography of Edward Burleson states that "In 1841 he was elected vice president of the republic." The biography of Anson Jones in the Handbook of Texas states that "He declined candidacy for the vice presidency in the election of 1841, in which Houston again became president. Houston appointed Jones his secretary of state."

6. On page 449 (T,S) they mistakenly identify Richard King's partner in the King Ranch as Gideon Lewis when it should be Mifflin Kennedy.

HRW Response: On page 449 (T,S), the text states "The King Ranch in South Texas was one of the most important cattle operations in the state. Richard King and Gideon Lewis established the ranch in Nueces County in the early 1850s." This is an accurate statement. The Handbook of Texas states, "The 825,000-acre King Ranch, in Nueces, Kenedy, Kleberg, and Willacy counties, had its beginning in 1852, when Richard King and Gideon K. Lewis set up a cattle camp on Santa Gertrudis Creek in South Texas. Formal purchase began in 1853, when they bought a Spanish land grant, Rincun de Santa Gertrudis, of 15,500 acres on Santa Gertrudis Creek in Nueces County. A short time later they purchased the Garza Santa Gertrudis grant of 53,000 acres. During the mid-1850s, as partners, King and Lewis acquired more landholdings around the area of the creek." The Handbook of Texas further notes that Lewis was a partner until his death in 1855, that James Walworth and Mifflin Kenedy entered into a partnership in 1856, and that Mifflin Kenedy bought interest in the ranch in 1860. The handbook also states that by the late 1860s these partnerships had ended. Students have an opportunity to learn more about the King Ranch with the Internet Activity on page 459 (S,T). We will add information about Mifflin Kenedy in the Chapter Enrichment Links on the Internet, keyword "ST3 CH21".

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Holt Call to Freedom	8^th Grade American History

1. Chapter 11, p. 337. "The Visual Record." Sidebar says John Marshall was first Supreme Court Chief Justice. It was actually John Jay, as stated on p. 303.

2. Chapter 17, p. 521. "War Breaks Out." — "...the Texas and US claim that the Rio Grande marked the southern border of Texas..." This claim comes from the Treaty of Velasco, signed by Santa Anna after the battle of San Jacinto in 1836, giving Texas her independence (p. 496)

HRW Response: We are uncertain as to the reviewer's concern, but speculate that it focuses on the use of the word claim. Because the validity of the Treaty of Velasco was disputed, we believe that it is acceptable and appropriate to use the word claim in this passage in reference to the Texas and U.S. position on the location of the southern border of Texas.

3. Chapter 11. As mentioned in Section 5A, there is no mention of the election of 1804 or the Essex Junto. It's plan to get Aaron Burr into the NY governor's office and then have New England secede from the union shows that the concept of states' rights and secession was not particular to the South.

HRW Response: While we do not believe that our text errs on this point, we agree with aspects of the reviewer's suggestion. Therefore, we will add coverage of the election of 1804 on p. 341. The following changes will be made to accommodate this addition. The first paragraph will be changed from the end of the sentence in line five to the end of the first paragraph to read as follows: "To lead it, Jefferson chose former army captain Meriwether Lewis, who had served as his presidential assistant. Lewis chose Lieutenant William Clark to be the co-leader of the expedition. Jefferson told Lewis and Clark to explore the Missouri River." The following paragraph will be added to the bottom of the page to follow the paragraph that is currently the last paragraph on the page: "The Louisiana Purchase helped Jefferson's popularity. With George Clinton as his running mate, Jefferson defeated Federalist candidate Charles Cotesworth Pinckney in the 1804 presidential election. Pinckney's loss marked the decline of the Federalists." While we find that the information related to the Essex Junto is interesting, we do not feel that this is information that 8^th-grade students must know. Therefore, because of space constraints we are not able to add information on the Essex Junto.

4. On p. 12(S), the text discusses "potlatches." The text's benign wording about social standing and respect misleadingly neglects the central importance that potlatches and similar customs give to envy in the society in which they exist. Widespread envy has serious corrosive effects on families, friendships, and trust as well as holding back economic development. For a discussion of potlatches and envy, see Helmut Schoeck, Envy (1969).

HRW Response: The current text discussion of potlatches describes them as a tool for gaining respect. This description does not suggest that they played societal roles that were entirely positive or negative. We agree that an extended discussion of potlatches, including their cultivation of envy within societies and the corrosive effects of envy, would yield a more interesting and nuanced discussion of potlatches. We do not feel, however, that the current text is misleading. Unfortunately, space limitations do not allow for more extended coverage.

5. On p. 16 (S) the text implies that Iroquois women had proportionally more power than they had in fact. It is true that Iroquois women had a minor political role, but Iroquois politics was overwhelmingly male-dominated, to such a degree that the text's bland wording masks the reality of the situation. Women possessed a rarely-wielded veto power and a nominating power that customarily was in tune with male guidance. Actual tribal leadership was always entirely male. The pioneering anthropologist Henry Lewis Morgan writes: "The [Iroquois] Indian regarded women as the inferior, the dependent, and the servant of man, and from nurturance and habit, she actually considered herself to be so." [Morgan, League of The Ho-De-No-Sau-Nee or Iroquois (1901), p. 315].

HRW Response: We agree that it would be helpful to clarify the fact that men held leadership positions in Iroquois groups. We will add the phrase "for tribal leadership" after "were responsible for" in the second-to-last sentence in the first complete paragraph.

6. On p. 75(T), the text asserts that all California missions are standing today. This is misleading. In fact, the truth is that many reconstructions of missions exist today.

On 110(S), "Carolina" is not a Latin form of Charles, though it is related to Carlus, which is the Latin form of Charles.

HRW Response: We agree that this is an error. The phrase "all of which are still standing today" will be deleted.

We agree that the sentence about the name Carolina should be clarified. It will be changed to read, "The colonial proprietors named the new southern colony Carolina, which is derived from a Latin form of the name Charles."

7. There is a conflict between pages 7(S) and 68(S). Did the Inca Empire extend from present day Ecuador or from present-day Colombia to present-day Chile?

HRW Response: The description of the Inca Empire on page 68 will be changed to match the description on page 7. The description on page 68 will now read, "The Inca ruled a huge region that stretched from Ecuador to central Chile."

8. On pp. 155(T) and 179(S), the text quotes Patrick Henry as saying "If this be treason, make the most of it." There is a dispute among historians about what precisely was said by Henry on this occasion, since the sources do not agree. It would have been better for the text to have said "Henry reportedly replied" or "according to some reports, Henry replied." [See William P. Cumming and Hugh Rankin, The Fate of a Nation: The American Revolution Through Contemporary Eyes; John Pendleton Kennedy, ed., Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761-1765. ]

HRW Response: We agree that it would be helpful to clarify this statement. On page 155(T) in the third to last line under the heading Historical Art, "replied" will be changed to. "is said to have replied," On page 170(S), line 3, "replied Henry" will be changed to "Henry is said to have replied,". There is no mention of Patrick Henry on page 179.

9. On p. 166(S), the biography of George III says that his son ruled "as king" during George Ill's madness. During this time, George Ill's son ruled "as regent," not "as king."

HRW Response: We agree that it might be misleading to say that George Ill's son ruled "as king." We will change the sentence to read, "...his son had to rule until George's death..."

10. On p. 175(S), the legend under a picture describes Mercy Otis Warren as the daughter of James Otis. In fact, she was his sister. This material also relates to TEKS #24.

HRW Response: We agree that this is an error. The caption under the picture of Mercy Otis Warren will be changed to state that she was the sister of James Otis.

11. On p. 275(S), the text reads: "One of the conditions set by several states for ratifying the Constitution was the inclusion of a bill of rights." This is misleading. It sounds as if several states had said that their ratification would only go into effect when a bill of rights was added. In fact, these states ratified unconditionally, but recommended that a bill of rights be added. For an example of better treatment of this topic, see the McDougal Littell textbook.

HRW Response: Please see page 246 for a more detailed coverage of the Bill of Rights and its relationship to the ratification of the Constitution. The explanation on page 246 appears in the main body of the student text, which means students will have read it and should have a clear understanding of the debate over a bill of rights and its impact on the ratification of the Constitution before they read the supplemental side annotation that the reviewer refers to on page 275. Therefore, we do not feel that the side annotation is misleading or in need of change.

12. On p. 327(S) in the Skills Workshop #1, the correct answer should be c, not a.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out the ambiguity in this question and answer. We agree that the cartoon on page 327(S) should have additional information provided for students since the words on the banners are not legible. We will adjust the introduction to the cartoon to read as follows: "Study the cartoon of the XYZ affair below that shows France as a monster attempting to bribe honest American diplomats. Then answer the questions that follow." We will change statement "b" to read as follows: "The Americans and the French will quickly reach an agreement." We will change statement "c" to read as follows: "French officials are corrupt and dangerous and are threatening American officials." We feel that by adding this information to the introduction to the cartoon and by making the indicated adjustments to statements b and c, "c" will be recognized as the only correct answer for question #1. We will delete question #4 in the second column of the Skills Workshop section to compensate for the text that we will add. Question #5 will be renumbered as question #4. We will change the answer to question #1 in the Teacher's Edition to "c" and adjust other answers (to #4 and #5) accordingly.

13. On p. 515(T), the model answer to the "Critical Thinking Question" is wrong, since Britain did not obtain territory in China (other than Hong Kong).

HRW Response: We want to point out that we provide opportunities for students to use varied critical thinking skills throughout the textbook. On page 515, we are attempting to get students to draw inferences and conclusions from the information provided in the "Opium Wars" annotation and any prior knowledge that they have about this topic. Neither the annotation nor the model answer say that Britain obtained additional territory in China. The question merely asks students to imagine why Britain might have wanted to control additional territory. The answer given is, therefore, one of many possible answers and is not wrong.

14. On p. 554(T), it says "House" where the "Senate" is meant, as where the South had more power.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out this error. We will change House to Senate in the "Support of Slavery" section that appears at the top of page 554(T).

15. On p. 260(S), the text says: "in an emergency, the president can send in U.S. troops...." A better wording would be: "in an emergency, the president can defend the country...." All constitutional scholars who specialize on war powers agree that the president has the authority to repel attacks (this was discussed at the Philadelphia Convention). But scholars disagree over whether a president who sees what he considers to be an emergency in a foreign country has the authority to send in U.S. troops without authorization by Congress.

HRW Response: We agree that the meaning of this passage would be clearer if the text read, "in an emergency, the president can defend the country..." We will make this change.

16. On p. 276(T), the model answer for "Exploring the Document," says: "[The Ninth and Tenth Amendments] extended rights to the people and to the states." This is wrong. These amendments don't extend rights, they recognize pre-existing rights and powers. That is their whole point. This misleading model answer says that it is the federal government which grants all rights and delegates all powers, which is precisely the opposite of what the Ninth and Tenth Amendments say.

17. On p. 286(S), the text says:

"The Second Amendment deals with state militias. Colonial militias were vital to America's defense. The first battle of the Revolutionary War started when British troops tried to seize the Massachusetts militia's weapons. The framers believed that the states needed to keep their weapons for emergencies. Today the National Guard has replaced state militias. National Guard members also serve in wars and help to restore order during crises, such as natural disasters.

"Some people believe that gun control laws violate the Second Amendment. This part of the Constitution states that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed [violated]." In 1939 the Supreme Court passed rules for nonmilitary firearms. Years later, a U.S. court of appeals ruled that gun control laws do not violate the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court let that ruling stand in 1983."

These passages on the Second Amendment are almost entirely factually wrong.

HRW Response: While we agree that the text can be improved and offer to make several changes (noted below), we disagree that our treatment of the Second Amendment's history and interpretation is, as the reviewer charges, "almost entirely factually wrong." We ask that the reviewer keep in mind that the passage in question is an attempt to discuss briefly, given the scope of the course in which the text will be used and the grade level of our audience, the prevailing understanding of and basic background to the amendment; the passage is not meant to be an in-depth exploration of all possible interpretations.

Please see the following specific responses to individual points and the Summary Response at the conclusion of the reviewer's comments concerning page 286.

- As historical background to the Second Amendment, certainly as important as the British raids on the militia's arms stores was General Gage's confiscation of the arms of Boston's citizens. [See Continental Congress, "Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms" (July 6, 1775), Journal of Congress, edited 1800, I, pp 134-139. <http://www.civicwebs.com/cwvlib/constitutions/usa/e_declaration_of_causes.htm>]

HRW Response: We believe that the level of additional detail suggested by the reviewer is unnecessary since the example given in the text sufficiently recalls the colonial dispute. In addition, space constraints prevent us from adding information about General Gage confiscating arms in Boston.

During the time period when the states were considering ratifying the Constitution and adopting the Bill of Rights, every reference to the right to keep and bear arms was to an individual right. No one wrote or is recorded as having made in a speech a single "collective rights" statement.

HRW Response: See Summary Response below.

The Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and deals with a right: the individual right of self-defense possessed by the people. This is the view of the Amendment taken by the U.S. Department of Justice. (The alternative view of the Amendment, apparently adopted in the Holt textbook, is that the Amendment recognizes a power possessed by the states to bear arms against the U.S. military. This would certainly be a vindication of Southern secession and the Confederacy.) [See Glenn Harlan Reynolds & Don B. Kates, The Second Amendment and States' Rights: A Thought Experiment, 36 William & Mary L. Rev. 1737 (1995)].

HRW Response: See Summary Response below.

The militia is understood in American law to refer to the whole body of the people capable of bearing arms. (See the Virginia Declaration of Rights (June 12, 1776) <http://www.civicwebs.com/cwvlib/constitutions/usa/e_virginia_decl_rights.htm> .) All states define the unorganized militia as all able-bodied male citizens within specified age groups.

HRW Response: See Summary Response below. It should be noted that the Virginia Declaration of Rights is not "American law" per se, having been adopted prior to the creation of the United States of America.

The National Guard is not a replacement of the state militia and a continuation of that institution. The National Guard (when federalized) is part of the U.S. armed forces and loses its state militia character. [See Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334, 351 (1989).]

HRW Response: Numerous sources support the text as it currently reads. The American Political Dictionary (p. 565) defines the National Guard as being "the volunteer armed forces of the states, formerly called the militia. ... Since 1916, the [state volunteer] militias have been organized as the National Guard"; Concise Dictionary of American History defines National Guard as "the modern counterpart of the militia"; Dictionary of American Government and Politics defines National Guard as "the military forces of the states. ... The National Guard was organized in 1916. Until that time, each state had a volunteer militia"; Oxford Companion to American History defines militia as "now officially termed the National Guard in the United States, [being] the body of armed forces within the states." Semantic arguments relating to the term militia we believe are beyond the scope of the text at this grade level. However, in the interest of clarification, we will make the following changes:

In line 7: insert "largely" before "replaced" and insert "organized" before "state militias."

To lessen the text's emphasis on the National Guard in this discussion of militias and the Second Amendment, we will move the sentence "National Guard members ... natural disasters." in lines

7-8 to the Interpreting the Visual Record caption (top of page), thus replacing in the Visual Record caption "These members of the National Guard are" with "Members of the National Guard may serve in wars and help restore order during crises, such as natural disasters. Here the National Guard is ..."

The text refers to United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). The Miller ruling held that the Second Amendment protects firearms that would have militia uses. Specifically, the Miller ruling held only that when there was no evidence presented in a trial court that a sawed-off shotgun "at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense." Id. at 178. The court's test was not whether the individual who had the firearm was a member of a governmental military unit, but whether the firearm "at this time" is "ordinary military equipment" or its use "could" possibly aid in the common defense. Referring to the militia clause of the Constitution, the court opinion said that "to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made." Id. at 178. In America's history, "the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense," and "these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time." Id. at 179. Thus, the Miller opinion concludes that the Second Amendment's two clauses reinforce each other. Protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms helps make it likely that a well-regulated militia can be found amongst the populace. The Holt textbook completely misconstrues the meaning of the Miller case for the Second Amendment.

HRW Response: See Summary Response below.

There is a split among the federal courts of appeals as to whether the Second Amendment refers to individual rights or state powers. See, for example, the opinion rendered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Emerson: <http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/99/99-10331-cr0.htm> Yet by writing about only one appeals court decision, the Holt textbook misleading fails ("Years later, a U.S. court of appeals ruled that gun control laws do not violate the Second Amendment.") to covey to the student the existence of this split.

HRW Response: See Summary Response below.

The Holt textbook indicates that the 1983 U.S Supreme Court's refusal to review a lower court ruling (and thus letting that ruling stand) indicates that the U.S. Supreme Court in doing so has made a constitutional holding on the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment. Not so. The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court declines to review a case (that is, technically speaking, denies a petition for a writ of certiorari) carries with it no implication whatsoever regarding the court's views on the merits of the case. As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter once wrote about a case in which review was denied: "The one thing that can be said with certainty about the Court's denial of [the] petition in this case is that it does not remotely imply approval or disapproval of what was said by the Court of Appeals."

HRW Response: See Summary Response below. Further, we believe that the reviewer's objection here stretches the meaning of the text, which states merely that "The Supreme Court let that ruling stand." We feel our text is appropriate for this grade level and is a fair paraphrasing for "declined to review a lower court's finding" (i.e., the phrase from our source, Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court, p. 764) — that is, for denying a writ of certiorari. We do not feel that the text comments on the Court's making "a constitutional holding on the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment" or "the merits of the case."

No federal court at any level has ever upheld a general prohibition on the ownership of firearms by law-abiding citizens. Most constitutional scholars who specialize in the Second Amendment would say that there can be regulations of firearms that are constitutional, just as the courts have found certain regulations of speech and press constitutional.

HRW Response: See Summary Response below.

The individual right to bear arms exists so that the people can defend themselves personally from criminals and tyrants and be available when called upon by the civil authorities to enforce the laws or defend the community from invasion. In summary, the only matters that are factually correct in the text's two paragraphs on the Second Amendment are the statements that the British sought out the arms of the colonial militia and the description of the current functions of the National Guard. All the rest is seriously wrong or misleading. To be accurate, this section must be rewritten virtually in its entirety. [In general, see Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (2000).]

HRW Response: As stated previously, we disagree that our treatment of the Second Amendment's history and interpretation is "almost entirely factually wrong" and "seriously wrong and misleading." In addition to the preceding specific responses, we offer the following general comments and suggested changes in support of our opinion.

Summary Response (to page 286 comments): It must be acknowledged that the Second Amendment is not a topic that lends itself to clear-cut agreement among constitutional scholars, and that textual and historical perspectives are not the only relevant ways to interpret the Constitution. Moreover, it has been argued by both sides in the debate that the matter has been ruled on definitively by the U.S. Supreme Court. Where there is debate among the experts and a possible lack of clear guidance from the Court, three basic editorial approaches can be taken: omission of any discussion, the presentation of multiple views, or the presentation of the prevailing view. If we have erred, it is merely that in taking the third approach, which seems appropriate for a text at this grade level, we have not explicitly laid out the contours of the controversy.

In regard to the reviewer's point about the Department of Justice, it must be noted that the date of official submission of textbooks to the TEA was originally February 4, 2002, and subsequently April 26, 2002, and that the DOJ's official position at this time was not that the Second Amendment deals with an individual right to bear arms; in fact, the view of the DOJ was what it had been for at least the past 40 years — i.e., that the amendment confers a collective right in the context of a state-sponsored militia. For us to have advanced an argument for the individual-right interpretation of the Second Amendment at the time of the textbook's development and on the April submission date would have been in fact contrary to the DOJ's official view (which was not reversed until May 6). We are making a change to update the text (see the line 3 change described at the end of this response).

It is our understanding that every federal appeals court except the Fifth Circuit (in U.S. v. Emerson, a very recent case) has interpreted the Second Amendment along collective-right, rather than individual-right, lines. To discuss the "split" to which the reviewer refers (based merely on Emerson, which had still not run its course at the time of the submission date) would be well beyond the level of constitutional analysis that the text is attempting here. We believe that to mention this "split" in the midst of such a brief discussion might itself be misleading as to the importance of the lone exception among 13 circuits. According to the Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court (p. 132), "it is not always obvious when circuit courts are in conflict. Moreover, the [Supreme] Court often prefers to wait for additional courts of appeals to weigh in on a matter before it decides to resolve it. Nevertheless, the justices do see resolving conflicts among the circuit courts as one of their primary responsibilities." In deference to the Supreme Court's role in such matters, we too choose to wait for history to unfold, rather than attempt to insert constitutional analysis. We view the role of this textbook more as reporting the (settled) state of issues than as trying to guess the lay of an ever-evolving legal landscape. While it may well be that this landscape will look entirely different in the future — and notwithstanding the extensive scholarly debate on this subject — we believe our text does reflect the basic constitutional reality at the time of the textbook's submission.

In conclusion, we acknowledge, thanks in part to the reviewer's comments, that the details concerning the Supreme Court may be unclear given the scope of this text, and that we can improve our presentation of the debate that exists. Therefore, the following changes will be made to the passage:

Line 3: Add "and the right to bear arms" after "state militias."

Lines 9-14: Replace paragraph with "Supporters of gun control laws have generally argued that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the collective right of states to maintain well-regulated militia units. Opponents hold that the amendment was meant to protect an individual's right of self-defense. The meaning of the amendment continues to be debated."

Reading Check (bottom of page): Delete "today" and "Second,"; delete comma after "Third" (to agree with answer on T p. 286).

18. On p. 289(S), the text suggestions that education is a basic right, indeed a Ninth Amendment right. The federal courts have in fact held that there is no federal constitutional right to an education at public expense. Public education is a exercise of a power of the states. Education is, however, usually a right (often vaguely worded) under state constitutions. [See Robert F. Worth and Anemona Hartocollis, "Johnny Can Read, But Does He Know How to Vote?"New York Times, June 30, 2002.]

HRW Response: On page 289, we state that the Constitution "does not address education," thus suggesting that an education at public expense is not a right that is guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. We continue to explain that state governments offer free public education. As educational publishers we strive to emphasize the importance that many leaders place on education while remaining factually accurate. We believe that we have met both of these goals in our discussion of the Ninth Amendment.

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Holt American Government	High School American Government

1. p. 6 - The last sentence of the section on "Providing Services" notes that "Because most government services do address issues of widespread concern, the benefits are shared by everyone." This may be true in some areas such as defense but many of our social programs are largely redistributive. That is, they provide benefits to the needy by redistributing tax dollars from those who pay taxes. In addition, there is ample evidence to indicate that the wealthy and middle class pay a disproportionate share in taxes to fund these programs. Such discussion of the nature of redistributive politics should be included here less students get the impression that social programs come at now expense or that the expense is equally distributed among all users.

HRW Response: The services described in the section include building roads and schools, food and drug inspection, and postal services. People of all classes benefit from these services. The section also points out that some people argue that certain services would be better provided by private businesses. We agree that the last sentence of this subsection (col. 2, lines 4-6) needs to be made more clear, and will change it to read: "Government services that address issues of widespread concern benefit a wide range of citizens, directly and indirectly."

Also please note that the discussion on S p. 191 of the individual income tax addresses the different percentages of income that a high-income person and a low-income person would pay. Redistribution of wealth through taxation is addressed on S p. 195. Arguments for and against it are described there. Space considerations prevent further elaboration of the subject in this section; we feel our coverage is adequate.

2. p. 6T - The "Themes in Government" box offers the argument that the American colonists were not particularly concerned about taxation as they were about lack of representation. This is partially true as the lack of representation was a critical issue in strained relations between England and the colonies. However, to dismiss the fact that taxation was unimportant is not entirely accurate, as taxation and representation were seen as two sides of the same coin.

HRW Response: We are uncertain as to the intent of the reviewer's comment (in the 3rd sentence, is "important" meant, not "unimportant"?). Although we do not agree that the text includes an identifiable factual error — or that it dismisses the importance of taxation (rather, in this extra information provided to the teacher, we have quoted the perspective of a commencement speaker at a high school graduation merely as a discussion point) — we recognize that the mention of the taxation/representation issue is not well tied to the passage's focus on citizenship and political participation in general. We will delete the first paragraph (From "Urging a class of graduating seniors ..." to "... not be heard in public discussions."); the passage will begin thus:

"POLITICAL FOUNDATIONS Political scientists note that when people discuss ..."

3. p. 40 - While it is true that supporters of the Constitution were called Federalists and opponents were called Anti-Federalists, the explanation behind these names should be clarified. The Federalist preferred a stronger national government, not a stronger federal form of government as the book notes. Remember, a federal form of government is a government based on the states, which is what the Anti-Federalists were for. The decision by proponents of the constitution to call themselves the "Federalists" was a clever ploy to make them seem in favor of state-based government when what they really advocated was a more powerful centralized government.

HRW Response: While there is definitely merit to the reviewer's comments, we do not believe that the kind of elaboration suggested by the reviewer would be particularly appropriate or helpful to students; rather, because of the intricacies of the suggested definitions, we fear that their inclusion may only serve to create confusion. After all, the form of government that the Constitution provided is a federal form of government, and to link that term to the Anti-Federalists, who did not prevail in defeating ratification of said Constitution, would not seem, in our opinion, to advance clarity of understanding.

4. p. 56 - The argument that the Constitution is a "living document" that has lasted a long time because it is easily adapted to modern times is debatable. This suggests that the document itself it meant to be reinterpreted in different ways across the ages. One could just as easily suggest that the reason it has lasted so long is because it contains timeless principles that are not open to revision. Perhaps students could draft up 10 rules for good classroom behavior and then debate the extent to which these rules should remain fixed over time or be flexible. If fixed, will they become too rigid or outdated as time passes? If flexible, are they in danger of becoming meaningless, as students will simply amend them to get away with whatever they want? More discussion is needed.

HRW Response: We are aware that the "living document" interpretation is "debatable" and agree that the Constitution contains "timeless principles" — but even these are re-examined on occasion in light of circumstances quite different from those existing at the time of the Constitution's framing, as unanticipated cases and controversies arise. In support of our text, we refer to the following sources: "the idea of a 'living Constitution'... has guided judicial interpretation throughout most of American history and has made it possible to adapt the Constitution to changing circumstances without extensive use of the amendment process" (American Political Dictionary, p. 272; emphasis added); "it is anachronistic and presumptuous to assume that we can determine what the framers and ratifiers of a particular [constitutional] provision, drafted a century or two before the present, would have preferred to happen in a world they could no more anticipate than we can successfully imagine theirs" (Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court, p. 184). We believe that to mention the prevailing view — the text says only that the Constitution "has been called a 'living document'" and define what that means — is appropriate for a high school American government course. Students need to know the nature of the actual American constitutional tradition in which they will participate as citizens (a tradition where "original intent" is not the only view). The subject of constitutional interpretation is also treated elsewhere in the text (see S pp. 249-50 and 272).

5. p. 251 -The "Linking Government and Philosophy" segment notes that the framers of the Constitution were particularly influenced by Locke and Montesquieu. This is true, but in this same paragraph the text discusses Thomas Jefferson as one of the framers. Jefferson was absent during the Convention of 1787, serving as representative from the United States to France.

HRW Response: We appreciate the reviewer's comment and are aware of Jefferson's absence from the convention — a point detailed on S p. 35 ("Some other well-known leaders were absent [from the Constitutional Convention]. Thomas Jefferson was in Europe as a U.S. representative to

France."). We do not agree that the passage "discusses Jefferson as a framer of the Constitution". The main point of this paragraph, as expressed in the first sentence, the topic sentence, is that the writings of Locke and Montesquieu influenced the development of the Constitution. The remaining sentences in the paragraph, including the one in which Jefferson is mentioned, do not discuss the actual framing, but rather the importance of Locke and Montesquieu. We do believe, however, that students could possible be misled about Jefferson's role in framing the Constitution, so we will change the first sentence in the paragraph to read as follows: "The writings of Locke and Montesquieu particularly influenced the founders of the United States."

6. p. 29T - The description of Thomas Paine as a "leader" of the American Revolution in the "Themes in Government" box in the teacher's edition is misleading. Paine was neither an American nor a revolutionary leader. He really didn't become famous until after his essay Common Sense was published. His work on this project was at the bequest of Ben Franklin who was trying to find work for his underemployed friend.

HRW Response: We disagree that it is misleading to discuss Thomas Paine as a leader of the American Revolution and that it is wrong to call him an American. Though born in England (as many colonial Americans were), Paine came to America in 1774 and is called an "American political philosopher" by Webster's Biographical Dictionary and a "Revolutionary propagandist" by Encyclopedia of American History (emphasis added). The latter source also notes that he served in the Revolutionary army and in the Continental Congress. Although he lived abroad for many years, Paine spent his closing years in New Jersey and New York. As the writer of Common Sense, perhaps the most influential writing of the American Revolution next to the Declaration, Paine did play a role in leading Americans (an estimated 120,000 of whom read his tract within the first three months) toward independence, and in that sense he can fairly be called a leader. The Thomas Paine National Historical Association considers Paine "an important founder of the United States [of America]," and he is included in American National Biographies.

7. p. 178T - The discussion of Civil Service reform notes that when Arthur became president in 1881 he was a strong supporter of Civil Service reform. In fact, it was Garfield (the previous president) who was the advocate of reform. Arthur was more in line with the Stalwart Republican faction that tended to favor the old spoils system. It was only after Garfield's assassination by a disgruntled civil service applicant that Arthur championed his predecessor's cause

HRW Response: The text does not say that Arthur supported civil service reform before he became president. It says, "Ironically, Arthur became president in 1881 and was a strong supporter of civil service reform, lending his support to the Pendleton Act." This only describes his actions as president — after Garfield's assassination. We feel that the preceding sentences and the use of the word "Ironically" accurately portray Arthur's actions with regard to spoils and reform before he became president as well.

8. p. 211 - I am not sure why the book needs to point out that in 1993 President Clinton's economic package was adopted "despite some Republican opposition." Was there no Democratic opposition at all? Is Republican opposition unique in this case? Was Republican opposition justified on philosophical differences? More importantly, the contention that the reduction in deficit spending can be attributed to the President's economic package is highly debatable and should not be presented as fact

HRW Response: Because Republicans did oppose the measure, the phrase in question — "despite some Republican opposition" — merely points to the political battle that surrounded the proposals; it does not purport to describe it fully. Within the context of the brief discussion, we feel that this statement required no further explanation. In addition, we do not attribute the reduction in deficit spending solely to the president's economic package. The text calls the 1993 Clinton plan "an important step in the turnaround." Moreover, in discussion of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (p. 212), which the text notes was "intended to finally eliminate budget deficits," the text quotes Clinton to the effect that the act was passed by "large, bipartisan majorities in both Houses" and thus does not attribute the outcome solely to Clinton. Finally, the text also mentions the effects that "a slowing economy and increased government spending" could have on future budget deficits, clearly suggesting that far more than one president's economic package will affect this matter.

9. p. 511 - The section on socialism notes that one of the criticisms of capitalism is that "some people are quite wealthy, while others are very poor." Socialism, the text continues, "attempts to reduce these inequalities by redistributing wealth throughout society." The concern here is that it implies a better standard of living in general in socialist societies than in capitalist systems. That is, the argument could be made that the relative standard of living in capitalist systems is better because it produces a large middle-class that is affluent compared to the average system in a socialist system. This possibility should be discussed.

HRW Response: The text merely states what socialism attempts to do. It does not imply that it succeeds at this attempt, nor does it imply, in our opinion, that socialism produces a higher standard of living. Explicit comparisons of standards of living are not introduced in this discussion, so we believe that the text adequately presents the theoretical role of government in different economic systems without adding opinions on the outcomes of varying levels of government involvement in the different economic systems.

10. p. 513 - The statement that "When government operates ... businesses [in socialist systems], all citizens own and collectively benefit from any of their profits" should be qualified. First, the "sharing" of profits is not really a cash benefit but instead translates into social programs. Second, some discussion of the extent to which socialist run enterprise succeed should be included.

HRW Response: In our opinion the text does not imply that the benefits citizens in socialist countries receive from government-operated businesses are cash benefits. There is discussion on S pp. 513-14 of the problem of high taxes associated with socialist systems. Also, students will have learned about the problems with government enterprises (inefficiency, poor performance) in Chapter 8. They can be expected to apply this knowledge to what they learn about socialist-run enterprises.

11. p. 58 - The statement that the Constitution does not provide for a "formal body of leaders" to assist the president is only partially true. While the book specifically mentions the President's cabinet, and it is true that Washington formulated the idea for a presidential cabinet, the prerogative for the president to consult the heads of the "departments" is provided for in Article 2, Section 2.

HRW Response: We agree with the reviewer that the Constitution does give the president the right to consult with the heads of the "departments." We also believe, however, that the text adequately describes this matter and does not contain any factual errors. Article II, Section 2 of the Consitution does not precisely create any "formal body of leaders" but speaks only of principal officers of executive departments. The key word is "body"; the relation implied in the Constitution is one to one, not the group that actually resulted. According to the The American Political Dictionary (p. 185), "The Cabinet remains an informal group, with its membership determined by tradition and presidential discretion" (emphasis added) — i.e., not by the Constitution per se.

12. p. 58 - The text states that the president's power to make executive agreements has "grown in ways not specifically mentioned in the Constitution." This seems to imply that the executive agreement is mentioned in some manner but has evolved over time when in fact the executive agreement is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. The wording is misleading.

HRW Response: We appreciate the reviewer's comment and agree that the text should be revised to make clear that the use of executive agreements has increased but that this is not an expressed power in the Constitution. We will revise the last sentence of the paragraph to read as follows: "This power, though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, has been used increasingly in recent years."

13. p. 146 - The succession of the president is not clearly spelled out in the Constitution, contrary to the text. When Harrison died in office there was some discussion as to whether Tyler would become the president or merely become "acting" president until a new one was chosen. Tyler did set the precedent for succession but it remained more tradition than law until the 25^th amendment clarified the issue.

HRW Response: We agree that the description of succession needs to be improved; we have previously identified this problem (see TEA editorial changes and corrections), and will make the following changes: replace "Constitution" with "Twenty-fifth Amendment"; replace "This provision has been invoked" with "In U.S. history the vice president has become president"; and delete " — eight times when the president died in office and once following a resignation."

14. p. 278 - The "Careers in Government" section discusses the job of state trial court judge. The segment concludes by noting that "Critics charge that in a Republican controlled Senate (in California), its harder for women and minorities to be confirmed." The implication here is that Republicans oppose the candidacy of women and minorities when in fact its more likely that many of these women and minority candidates are of the opposite political party. To this end, it should be clarified that the opposition is one of philosophical difference and not racists or sexist.

15. p. 461 - The section of state constitutions begins "The US Constitution divides powers between the federal government and state governments." This statement might easily be misconstrued to mean that the state governments are a product of the national constitution. It should be made clear that the state governments existed before the national constitution, and that the national constitution is largely a product of state delegation of power and authority. A better way to phrase this sentence might be to write "The US Constitution defines the relationship between the federal government and the states."

HRW Response: We believe that the earlier discussions of state and national governments on S pp. 30-31 and 34-36 make it clear that the states existed prior to the federal government and that they are not the product of the national constitution. The Constitution does discuss the division of powers between the two levels of government. Teachers of American government will certainly stress this point. The issue of state powers is also covered on S pp. 53, 68, and 108. We disagree that this statement is likely to be misconstrued in context. The statement is immediately followed by examples of the ways that powers are divided. The "relationship" is not precisely the subject of this passage, so to mention it, as the reviewer suggests, rather than the division of powers, we believe would not be an improvement.

16. p. 472 - The section on Appeals Courts is not entirely correct. The section notes that in Texas the Supreme Court does not hear criminal cases but that they are handled in the Court of Criminal Appeals. While this is true, the implication is that the Court of Criminal Appeals is an appellate court in the traditional sense that it is subordinate to the Supreme Court. In fact, Texas has a bifurcated court system meaning that the Texas Supreme Court and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals are dual "high" courts with different jurisdictions. Oklahoma has a similar arrangement.

HRW Response: We fail to see the implication cited by the reviewer. We believe that the text statements are accurate and straightforward. Given the broad scope of the course and the context of this passage, we do not feel it would be appropriate to go into more detail about the Texas court system at this point in the chapter, which encompasses state government in general, not just Texas state government.

17. p. R29T - The teacher's edition contains some background on the Clinton impeachment in 1999. Given the division of the Senate's vote, students are asked to analyze why it was so divided. The suggested answer provided in the teacher's edition is that "neither charge [of impeachment] garnered even a simple majority against Clinton, suggesting a weak initial case." This is one possible answer. Another might be that the vote occurred heavily down party lines, suggesting that Democrats and Republicans disagreed on the seriousness of the charges.

HRW Response: The reviewer makes a valid point. Please note, however, that the information on T R29 is factually correct. Also please note that the passage to which the reviewer objects is provided as an extra background activity that a teacher may or may not choose to incorporate in discussing the impeachment clause in the Constitution. While we agree that the answer can be improved, we believe that the reviewer's suggested answer presumes knowledge that would probably go beyond what could reasonably be expected of the students. We would also note that neither the 55-45 vote nor the 50-50 vote was a strict party-line vote on the acquittal. The following change will be made, however, to address the reviewer's concern. The answer will be revised to read as follows (beginning): "Answers will vary. Some students might argue that the defeat was not "humiliating." Others might suggest..."

18. T/S p. 164 The chart "Electoral Vote per State 1992-2000" is incorrect. The electoral votes for each state on the chart are the new totals as determined after the 2000 census. Either the writers put the wrong title on the chart or they used the wrong electoral vote numbers.

HRW Response: Thank you for pointing out this error, which we previously identified (see TEA editorial changes and corrections). The title of this chart will be corrected to read: "Electoral Vote per State, 2002-2010".

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Economics, Texas Edition	High School Economics

1. The explanation of opportunity costs accompanying the production possibility curve, Figure 1.3, see T13, is extremely confused. Opportunity costs involve marginal analysis which is simply not explained here. Although the curve illustrates increasing opportunity costs, the concept is never discussed. Furthermore, the discussion appears to explain opportunity costs wrongly with the PP curve as an all-or-nothing decision. Consider the misleading statement, T13: "The opportunity cost of producing a certain number of one class of cars would be the number of cars of the other class that could not be produced." That is not marginal analysis. How could students master the concept from that statement? What does it actually mean? Granted a well-qualified teacher could say "what the author meant to say here"; however, why place the burden on the teacher? What about the student reading this and trying to make sense out of such a flawed statement?

HRW Response: The definition and explanation of opportunity cost starts on page 11. The example on page 13 in Fig. 1-3 deals with a simple two-good economy, luxury cars versus economy cars. The discussion is not an all or nothing one, but is about the costs of going from only luxury cars to economy cars or vice versa, with points like B, C, and D given. The very next sentence after the one quoted above talks about a point between D and C, where to go from 6 million economy cars to 5.5 million cars means an increase from 1.5 million to 2.5 million luxury cars. The quoted sentence is not misleading but actually describes the graph. It is not flawed but could be improved to read "the opportunity cost of producing more of one class of cars would be the reduction in the number of cars of the other class that could be produced." We will make this change to the program, and we thank the reviewer for bringing it to our attention.

2. T54: "Diminishing marginal utility helps explain why the demand for a product is not limitless." No, that's not correct. Purchasing power of a consumer's income explains why demand is not limitless. We don't even require marginal utility to "explain" demand; intuitively, the substitution and real income effects are satisfactory to justify the law of demand for a first pass for students.

HRW Response: Income and substitution effects have previously been discussed on pages 52-53. The discussion of diminishing marginal utility is used to help students understand why the demand curve for a good or service is downward sloping. Therefore, as the quoted sentence says, it helps to explain why the "demand is not limitless." The statement does not seek to explain the concept totally, and the income constraint is not ignored in the total discussion.

3. T100... high prices signal firms to produce more and low prices less of the goods consumers desire...is this right in terms of economic incentives reflected in the efficient signaling of the price system? It's higher prices, lower prices that are the price signals. Not necessarily the magnitude of prices, but the direction of change in prices, that signals firms to reallocate resources in the economy.

HRW Response: While we do believe that the statements in this paragraph are accurate, the reviewer is correct that this could be stated more clearly. As the reviewer requests, we will change the word high to higher and the word low to lower.

4. A monopolist does not have a supply curve, neither does a monopolistic competitive firm or an oligopolist. But Figure 6.2 analyzes monopolistic competition with supply and demand curves! !! This coverage of market structures is entirely descriptive, with virtually no economic analysis. Where is the decision making with MR=MC profit-maximizing output rule? Concerning this content area, economic analysis is necessary to present the principles, not this way where the student can memorize the descriptive economics on their notecards without learning any economics. Granted, the types of business ownership TEKS learning objective is necessarily descriptive and the text delivers here. But the lack of economic analysis in the coverage of market structures is a real weakness.

HRW Response: We appreciate the reviewer's comments on this topic. Based on these comments, we will make the following changes to the program for clarity:

We will change two paragraphs, beginning with the last paragraph on page 121 and continuing onto page 122 to read as follows:

"You can see this type of shift in demand and profit-maximizing price in Figure 6.2. The demand curve (D₁) represents the initial demand for Jean Luc brand jeans. The initial profit-maximizing price and quantity ($30; 40,000) are represented by point A. After the company launches a successful national advertising campaign, demand for Jean Luc jeans soars. The demand curve (D₂) shifts to the right as consumers are willing and able to buy more jeans at each and every price.

If the new profit-maximizing price and quantity of Jean Luc jeans shifts upward to $50 and 80,000, then we move from point A on the old demand curve (D₁) to point B on the new demand curve (D₂). Thus, although the product did not change and basically is the same as other jeans on the market, the market price is now higher for that brand of jeans as a result of the advertising."

On Figure 6.2, we will remove the supply curve and change the title of the graph to read: "Shift in Demand and Profit-Maximizing Price." We will change the caption to read as follows: "A demand curve shift results in a new profit-maximizing price. What does demand curve (D₂) indicate about demand?" We will change the answer to read as follows: "Demand at each and every price has increased, resulting in a new profit-maximizing price."

We believe these changes will help facilitate student comprehension.

5. S428..."The factors of production - natural, human, capital, and entrepreneurial resources -are not distributed equally throughout the world." That statement is insufficient to meet the two part TEKS learning objective relating to the geographic significance of economic factors of production and yet that is fundamentally the text's coverage of this learning objective.

HRW Response: TEKS 12 states, "Geography. The student understands the geographic significance of the economic factors of production. The student is expected to:

A. describe the effects of the unequal distribution of economic factors of production, and

B. analyze the locations of resources used in the production of an economic good and evaluate the significance of the location."

This TEKS objective is actually covered in several places, including:

page 19: The Economics in the News feature and its follow-up questions deal entirely with the geographic significance of the distribution of economic factors of production and their effects on U.S. businesses.

page 263: Section Review question 4 asks students to evaluate the significance of the unequal distribution of economic resources, in this case, gold.

page 407: the photo caption question asks students to consider the significance of an economy that relies on one crop.

In the Teacher's Edition, page 425C, the Understanding Main Concepts activity asks students to "explain how the distribution of the economic factors of production throughout the world encourages nations to specialize and trade."

As is clear from these examples, at various places throughout the program students are given the opportunity to understand and demonstrate their knowledge of this important TEKS.

6. T351..."State and local governments also rely on property taxes"...implying the federal government generates tax revenues from property taxes? No! The tax discussions generally meet the first learning objective, although treatment of state and local revenue sources is relatively weak. Why even mention Jean-Baptiste Say..."supply creates its own demand"...in exposition of supply-side economics and fiscal policy strategies? That's a stretch for a history of thought course and inappropriate (confused and confusing) for a high school text, T355.

HRW Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for pointing out the awkward wording of the text's statement concerning taxes collected by state and local governments. We have already submitted an editorial change to the TEA to adjust the language. The passage on page 351 will read, "State and local governments collect property taxes." Jean Baptiste Say is mentioned in the discussion of supply-side economics to provide students with a general historical reference. Students are not asked to learn any greater detail. The author was simply trying to point out to students that the theory of supply-side economics is not a new one.

7. In discussion of decline in labor unions in recent decades, we encounter the negative public opinion explanation, T182, where author states, regarding the actions of union leaders, "others are thought to have used violence and other offensive tactics to maintain their power." Are thought?? Labor corruption and violence simply speculation without any evidence? Please, some honesty here. Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters never used "violence and other offensive tatctics"?

HRW Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for pointing out the vagueness in the statement concerning union leaders on page 182. We will change this statement to read: "Others have at times used violence and offensive tactics to maintain their power."

8. On fiscal policy p. 356 it states the limitations of supply side economics but not the limitations of demand side. There is also not a mention of the Lafer Curve.

HRW Response: We thank the reviewer for pointing out this issue. We will change the heading on page 359 from "Limitations of Fiscal Policy" to "Limitations of Fiscal Policy and Demand-Side Economics." The text actually goes into great detail on these limitations. Above all, our goal is to present a balanced view of these two important economic theories to students. Unfortunately, space constraints and limitations as to the amount of material that can be provided to students in a one-semester course prevented us from including the Lafer Curve.

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	The American Nation	High School American History

No errors reported. However, one reviewer only evaluated this textbook.

PUBLISHER	TEXTBOOK TITLE	SUBJECT
Holt Rinehart & Winston	Holt World History: The Human Journey	High School World History

1. Discussion of the Declaration of the Rights of Man (S513) fails to mention that one of the rights with which this phase of the revolution was concerned was the right to property — this allows the authors to miss the fundamentally bourgeois nature of this phase of the revolution and deprives the students of the chance to compare it to the American Revolution, whose wealthy conservative leaders shared the same concern about the sanctity of property (particularly theirs) and about protecting their property from taxation by their government.

HRW Response: The reviewer is correct that the list does not include mention of property rights. We will revise the last sentence in the second paragraph to read as follows: "This document dealt with basic political and human rights, including the right to private property."

2. The section on post-war China is entitled "Communist China and its Influence" (S852). "Communist China" is a Cold War appellation. It is generally not used in the Chinese language. Chinese refer to "mainland China" (Zhongguo dalu) or to "The People's Republic of China" (Zhonghua renmin gongheguo). I suggest that in future editions, the textbook use the latter.

HRW Response: We chose the title "Communist China" for brevity and because it is the term used most often by U.S. leaders during the period covered by the section. We feel that this title is appropriate and that it does not constitute an error.

3. p. 395 - Claims that Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe "was also the first proof that the world was round." The earth was known to be round as early as Aristotle, who observed the Earth's curved shape on the moon during a lunar eclipse. "Eratosthenes calculated the distance around the earth with amazing accuracy" (p. 145).

HRW Response: We appreciate the reviewer pointing out a passage that could confuse students. We agree with the reviewer that scientists had proved that the world was round. Our intent here was to make the point that the population of Europe as a whole now became aware of and convinced that the world was indeed round. To clarify we will change the wording after "courage;" to read as follows: "it also proved to the people of Europe that the world was round."

4. p. 400 - Credits horses, guns, and smallpox as reasons for Spanish overtaking Aztecs, all of which are true; however, left out are the surrounding tribes that were all too eager to overthrow the oppressive Aztecs. The role of human sacrifice among the Mayans (p. 209) and the Aztecs (p. 210), barely receives mention. Cutting out the hearts of your neighbors plays a large role in why they want to overthrow you.

HRW Response: The reviewer is correct that the Aztec practices influenced their downfall. We specifically note that on p. 210: "In the late A.D. 1400s unrest grew among surrounding peoples who had been forced to pay oppressive tribute to the Aztec, greatly weakening the empire." Although we do not mention this topic again on p. 400 within the context of the Spanish conquest, students will be examining that subject as part of the Internet Connect activity in the Teacher's Edition on p. 401.

Human sacrifice is a sensitive topic with regard to its discussion in a high school textbook. Although we do discuss human sacrifice among both groups on pp. 209 and 210, we chose not to delve into the details out of concern for offending some teachers and students. Our research has shown that many teachers do not want graphic details about such topics in the textbooks. In addition, there is still some debate among scholars as to how and why these sacrifices were carried out, which makes it especially difficult to say anything definitive and brief in a text at this level.

5. p. 548 - "American engineer Robert Fulton was the first to build a profitable steamboat. In 1808 his boat, the Clermont, began regular trips on the Hudson River between New York City and Albany." And, "Soon Samuel Cunard of Great Britain was providing regular steamboat service across the Atlantic." To call either of these men "profitable" is stretching the definition. Fulton secured a 30-year government enforced monopoly on the Hudson. It took Cornelius Vanderbilt illegally operating on the Hudson and suing to break it. With his partner, Vanderbilt won in Gibbons v. Ogden. The Supreme Court ruled that Fulton's monopoly was unconstitutional. His "protection" by the government allowed him to not innovate and still profit. Once this lack of innovation and ingenuity faced the free market, he quickly went out of business. The same held true for Cunard, who was subsidized by the British government. Vanderbilt should receive mention for his work in steamboats and/or railroads.

HRW Response: Although our statement about Fulton's steamboat being profitable is correct, we understand the reviewer's desire for more clarification on how he made his profits and why his business ultimately failed (we make no mention of whether Cunard's business was profitable). A detailed discussion of the business practices of the time did not seem appropriate in a section focusing on innovations in transportation, nor did space allow for it. However, studying the business practices within the transportation industry of the time, including discussion of Cornelius Vanderbilt, would make a worthy extension activity for students. Therefore, we will add the following activity to the Teacher's Edition on p. 548: "SPOTLIGHT ON TECHNOLOGY Many innovators in transportation, such as Robert Fulton, benefited from monopolies supported by government policies at the time. Transportation entrepreneur Cornelius Vanderbilt was instrumental in breaking Fulton's monopoly of the steamboat business. Have students work in groups to conduct research on Robert Fulton's business, then have them write a summary that explains how his business initially succeeded and why it eventually failed, noting the role of Vanderbilt in these events."