PDF pending restoration
ERIC Number: ED138510
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1977
Reference Count: 0
Classroom Treatment of the Right to Work: High School History and Government Materials.
National Right to Work Committee, Fairfax, VA.
The purpose of the paper is to evaluate classroom materials which are used to teach secondary students in history and government courses about the right to work issue. Classroom and other educational materials designated and evaluated by the National Right to Work Committee as presenting the right to work issue unfairly, inaccurately, or both, are reported. Reviewed are all current history and government textbook adoption lists from the 20 states which have such lists, plus other materials which may be used in other states. Twenty-three texts and five miscellaneous materials are reviewed. The major portion of the document presents evaluations of the text and miscellaneous educational materials. Listed for each entry are title, author, and states which have approved the text, an indication of the status of Right to Work laws in those states, textual reprint of Right to Work coverage, and evaluation of the tone, extent, and slant of the coverage. Basic facts about Right to Work laws are briefly presented, including wording of the law in the Taft-Hartley Act, states which have statutes protecting the right to work, dates these laws were enacted, and a sample Right to Work Law. Comments on objectionable terms often found in the materials are discussed, followed by listings of states with statewide textbook adoptions and an index of titles. (Author/DB)
Descriptors: Civics, Curriculum Evaluation, Employment Problems, Equal Opportunities (Jobs), History Instruction, Instructional Materials, Labor Legislation, Labor Relations, Laws, Legal Education, Secondary Education, Textbook Bias, Textbook Evaluation, Textual Criticism, Unions, United States Government (Course), United States History, Work Attitudes
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: National Right to Work Committee, Fairfax, VA.
Note: Page 34 of the original doucment is copyrighted and therefore not available. It is not included in the pagination