If these are the same woman she didn't age well (considering second to be later) or had a good plastic surgeon (if first is later)… I even looked for Sarah Hale. She was close but still not sure, didn't find “the picture”.

….Okay, so there are alot of ways this discussion could go….

Not much different in other states I'll bet… the following take is based on over 15 years teaching in CA.

1.  Shouldn't history books be written by, uh, historians?

Yes but that gets in the way of prushing whatever the current feel good or we've got to be ashamed issue. Most historians seek the facts and try to avoid bias. Someone with a liberal studies or general studies major… not so much.

2.  While the state department of education is responsible for approving textbooks, shouldn't the editors also be held responsible for vetting the legitimacy of hte books they produce?

In a 'round about way; they appoint a committee (they are political appointees themselves) to examine and approve several texts in each subject area for each grade level… many times they will take input from academic sources (professional organizations and college educators, etc.) but by that time the publishers have the books and are just waiting for orders. several years back I (thru a professional geography assoc.) sent my input which was summarily ignored since I was a high school teacher in a one-horse Nor-Call town.Then the school districts can pick from those choices. IME, at the HS level the teachers was fairly free to pich which book he / she thought best to accomplish the goals (try for agrrement w/in dept). Elem and middle usually a committee @ grade level (district wide) makes the call… often in bigger districts this happens at HS too. [this can muck things up if people w/o majors in anything are involved]In CA the big deal is conforming to the standards… (hint effed up books generally, see resp to point 1)… if not on the list from the state, forget it. Books not aligned with the standards can be used as supplimentary material under certain circumstances but likely, at the expense of the teacher… tight economic times the schools won't pony up for anything that isn't on the”good list”.

3.  No, she didn't use Wikipedia as a source (at least she didn't list it as one) but she did cite a web post by the “Sons of Confederate Veterans” – shouldn't there be a minimum level of scholarship required for the production of school texts?

Yes there should although things like Wikipedial can be used by a person to find “direction”… granting that anything found needs checked. Any web source cited should be for “extension” not primary or secondary source material IMHO. [That said check this one out http://www.37thtexas.org/html/BlkHist.html%5D

4.  The Internet is a great resource for scholarly research – but there has to be some rigor applied, just as there is for printed materials.  Does this damage the use of Internet sources for legitimate scholarly research?

Often; just as using Worldbook was frowned on years ago but Britannica was okay. Depends on who makes the call, which sources you use, and how carefully you cross-check. Even good sources will bite us occassionally.

5.  Inaccuracies and biases concerning the American Civil War in school books is nothing new – and neither are distortions in other literature concerning the war – so is this really anything new?

In a word: no… other things to look for; are all the author from the same basic background (schools), if so, think academic incest, there will be but one mindset among them all. Look for the smoking gun; majors in liberal studies, any minority studies dept., or schools that you've never heard of, or can't find out anything about. Not to say that solid work cannot be done under those circumsances… even the blind sow finds an acorn once and awhile… but it don't happen often.

What do you think? 

There you have it…fwiw. Hate to sound negative but this was my world for 17 years.

I don't think that is Frances Willard.  I couldn't find that pic in any of the Google images I looked at, and those I saw didn't resemble this pic at all.  I could be wrong…..  So I'm stumped.

So am I but several of the pics I found appeared to be similar… shape of jaw bone, ear, mouth, and nose. Might be that I just spent too many years ID'ing yearbook photos though.  ::)

I'm with you.

Stereotypes exist because, at the most basic leve, there is a degree of truth in them.former teacher of mine was elevated to an elected office and had made that statement (caught major grief) and explained… “for instance the stereotype of the Irish as pub owners; that was the easiest way for a man to gewt beyond the dangerous jobs they were religated to in 18th century American. Low overhead… invest in three barrels of beer, a plank, some cheap glasses and you're in business. Expansion comes when the lady of the house makes a nice Irish stew (lunch is served)… good cash flow and expansion is on the way. No more fighting fires, or crooks, or digging ditches. This my friends was the American Dream.Boy did he catch sh*t for that one… but is was true.

Whatever!  You guys are no fun.

Too much time in front of the computer…  ::)

There were so many events that happened prior to the American Revolution. The colonists thought of themselves as true English men. They identified themselves as English, originally coming from England yet living in North America. They were subject to the laws bestowed upon them by England yet were not given the same civil rights and liberties as the English subjects living in England.  I wrote about their experiences and what ultimately led to the revolution.  You can read it athttp://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5820164/prelude_to_the_american_revolution.html?cat=37

Nicely done! Welcome aboard, nice to have another voice.