5th grade U.S. History textbook comparison chart on multiculturalism

Positive multiculturalism VS. Negative political correctness

in 5th grade U.S. History books approved for 2003 local Texas adoption

— Public school textbooks should not stereotype particular groups as oppressors or victims. —

	Harcourt Horizons: U.S. History Harcourt ©2003	The United States Scott ©2003	Our Nation Macmillan ©2003
Also see: Chart on American Revolution : Chart on coverage of U.S. Constitution : 5th grade US History ratings : Request more info on these books
Historical context of colonization and enslavement by Europeans ♣	positive multiculturalism Acknowledgment that Africans and American Indians practiced slavery long before the coming of Europeans SE 77, col. 1, par. 3 SE 118, col. 1, par. 1, lines 6-9	positive multiculturalism Reference to American Indian practice of slavery SE 68, col. 2, par. 5 Explanation that Aztecs practiced human sacrifice, which Cortes opposed SE 68, col. 2, par. 6 – SE 69, col. 1, line 4 SE 144, col. 2, par. 1, lines 1-3	positive multiculturalism Note that Aztecs practiced slavery SE 49, col. 2, par. 2 [ SE = Student Edition ]
Conquistadors and Indians ♣	positive multiculturalism No racist double standard on this topic	positive multiculturalism No racist double standard on this topic	negative political correctness Spanish stereotyped as greedy, but silence on Aztec habits of human sacrifice and cannibalism; claim that an opportunistic Cortes humiliated a hospitable Montezuma; reference to Pizarro's duplicity toward Atahualpa; no mention of Montezuma's multiple duplicities toward Cortes, such as ordering a massacre of the Spanish at Cholula while feigning cordiality, or of Atahualpa secretly ordering the death of his captured brother, while he himself was Pizarro's prisoner SE 130, par. 2 SE 131, col. 1, par. 1 SE 132, "HISTORY MYSTERY," par. 1 SE 134, col. 2, par. 1 - par. 2, line 2
17th century New England Indian wars ♣	partly positive multiculturalism No mention that Indians fought on both sides in the Pequot War and King Philip's War, but does state that King Philip's War began when Indians destroyed an English town SE 198 – SE 199, col. 1, par. 1	negative political correctness No specific reference to Pequot War; no explanation that in King Philip's War some Indians sided with the English SE 247, col. 1, par. 2, lines 5 – par. 3	negative political correctness Pequot War and King Philip's War viewed as race wars of red men vs. white men, though in fact some Indians fought alongside the English in both conflicts SE 184 – SE 185, col. 1, line 3
Radical Reconstruction ♣	negative political correctness All three books refer to Southern white opposition to black civil rights. None mention abridgment of constitutional rights by the Reconstruction Acts, including taxation without representation, a standing army in peacetime without consent, juryless trials, unfree elections, and no separation of powers.
Radical Reconstruction ♣	SE 483, col. 1, par. 4 – SE 485, col. 1, line 3 TE 483, right margin, "Civics and Government," lines 1-4	SE 518 – SE 519, col. 1, par. 2, line 9 SE 519, col. 2, par. 1, lines 1-6	SE 459 – 460