2016–17 California textbook controversy over South Asian topics


In 2016 and 2017, there was a significant debate on how topics related to South Asia were represented in California middle school textbooks—a follow-up to a related set of debates that took place from 2005 to 2009. The California Department of Education runs a public process to update the history and social sciences curriculum frameworks, which help guide the textbooks that publishers develop for us in schools. Starting in 2016, groups submitted textbook revisions dealing with a variety of issues related to histories of South Asia, India, Hinduism, Sikhism, Dalits, Muslims, Ravidassias, the Indus Valley Civilization, and the rights of women, as taught in California 6th and 7th grade history and social science textbooks. The Department of Education made final decisions on the topics in 2017, retaining content on the caste system, and referring to all of historical South Asia as India, among many other decisions.

Groups involved

Advocacy groups

According to The Caravan, there were two main set of advocacy groups:
Academics also played an important role. There were two primary sets of academics providing comment on the issues:

The debate

Advocates disagreed on whether and how the history of the caste system should be included in history books, and how Dalit communities should be named.
The proposal to rename "Untouchables" as "socially ostracized and economically disadvantaged communities" was rejected by the Instructional Quality Commission, and the use of the word Dalit was incorporated into the curriculum framework. Commission members also rejected a suggestion that would describe jati groups as "self-governing."
However, according to The Caravan, "the final textbook matches HAF’s suggested edits more closely than it does the framework text. For example, while the framework had described the Dalit community by name, the approved National Geographic textbook fails to do so. It notes, 'At the bottom were slaves, laborers, and artisans…Many centuries later, another group developed that was considered even lower.'"

Guru Nanak and caste

The debate

After debate, the Sikh Coalition praised the final textbook curriculum for retaining the language. However, National Geographic, one of the publishers who developed a textbook based on the curriculum, dropped references to Nanak’s opposition to the caste system. Sikh groups pointed to a Hindu American Foundation employee credited in the textbook as a “reviewer of religious content." According to The Caravan, the Hindu American Foundation "affirmed that the foundation had worked directly with all the publishers except for Studies Weekly and McGraw Hill."

Dalip Singh Saund and Sikhism

The debate

The Instructional Quality Commission agreed to retain language naming Saund's Sikh identity.

India and South Asia

The debate

The California Department of Education's Instructional Quality Commission eventually decided to use the word "India" in every instance within the curriculum framework.

Indus Valley Civilization

The debate

The Instructional Quality Commission rejected the edits, retaining the phrase "Indus Valley Civilization."
Subsequently, the textbook review panel flagged publisher Pearson's references to the "Sarasvati River," responding with comments like "This is a subject of controversy, not settled fact…Remove mention of ‘Sarasvati’ and refer to it as ‘Indus Valley Civilization'". In response, a Pearson employee defended the usage, stating that the changes were requested by the Hindu American Foundation, the Hindu Education Foundation, and Hindupedia. The Instructional Quality Commission upheld the original request, and Pearson revised its textbook.

Representation of Hindus

A coalition led by the Hindu American Foundation and other community groups that included nearly 40 academics, about 74 interfaith organizations and elected officials like Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and California State Senator Steve Glazer urged the California Board of Education to review the draft to ensure fair representation of Hinduism, Jainism and Indian culture. Dozens of Indian-American students spoke out against the South Asia Faculty Group's suggested edits, accusing them of Hinduphobia and robbing them of selfhood.