KQED61%

SF Public Schools Are Set for New History Textbooks for the First Time in 20 Years 15%

By Katie DeBenedetti69%

4/19/2026, 6:00:43 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 10.8% saturation with 97 hits. Analysis detected 695 faulty-reasoning hits from 898 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 31.4% and a BS Rank of 15% (18,602 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.00% of the article peer group.

San Francisco public schools will introduce new history and social studies materials in elementary and high school classrooms for the first time in more than 20 years next fall, under a curriculum overhaul set to be approved this month. 
The city’s school board is also set to permanently shelve its pioneering ethnic studies curriculum in favor of an off-the-shelf alternative after the homegrown course was put on pause following controversy last summer. 
Superintendent Maria Su said the new history and social studies materials will replace sorely outdated textbooks  in which George W. 
Bush is president of the United States and self-driving cars and smartphones are still far-off ideas. 
“That day not only happened already, but it happened like five years ago,” Su said. 
“We’re way behind on this.” 
Generally, school districts update their curriculum every six to 10 years. 
Su said the overhaul will include lesson planning materials to teach modern world history and social science, meaning teachers will no longer have to augment the curriculum to cover events in the 21st century. 
“We can’t be a world-class school district if we’re using a curriculum that is 20 years old,” she said. 
“Our students deserve to have updated materials that really embrace the new way of thinking in our city, in our state, in our country.” 
Superintendent Maria Su speaks to students at Sanchez Elementary School on the first day of classes for the new school year in San Francisco on Aug. 
18, 2025. 
(Beth LaBerge/KQED) 
The new elementary and high school curriculum from InquirEd and McGraw Hill will go before a San Francisco Unified School District board of education vote later this month, on the district’s recommendation. 
SFUSD plans to continue using its middle school course materials, though they will be refurbished to reflect the current day. 
The vote comes four years after SFUSD began a process in which central office educators reviewed available curriculum programs and an 80-person team of school site educators and community members evaluated the top selections. 
For the last two school years, 40 elementary school classrooms and 35 high school classrooms have piloted the top options, which the district has recommended for adoption. 
The overhaul is expected to cost the district about $7.3 million for the next five years of physical and digital course materials. 
At the middle school level, SFUSD said none of the programs that were evaluated surpassed the performance of the current program, TCI’s History Alive. 
The district said it will continue to use History Alive, while continuing to review newly released instructional materials. 
The social science curriculum changes follow similar program overhauls for English language arts and mathematics. 
In 2024, SFUSD adopted a new language arts core curriculum for pre-kindergarten through eighth grade, and in the fall, it rolled out a new math curriculum for kindergarten through eighth grade. 
“I am proud to follow through on our promise to provide a world-class education for every student  this is about making sure that we are setting our students up for success today and into the future,” Su said in a statement announcing the curriculum. 
The board will also vote on standardized ninth-grade ethnic studies course materials, after the district’s homegrown curriculum, developed by educators over the last 15 years, caused controversy last summer. 
SFUSD has been lauded as a leader in ethnic studies throughout the state, first introducing the course as an elective in 2010 and making it a yearlong requirement for ninth graders in 2024. 
Studies showed improved graduation outcomes for students who took the course, and the district’s success was cited by state lawmakers when they enacted a mandate for California public schools to require a semester of ethnic studies in 2021. 
That policy was set to take effect last year, but it hasn’t been implemented due to budget constraints. 
San Francisco’s course came under scrutiny last year following multiple reports from the national group Parents Defending Education, which has opposed lessons about racism, social justice, sexual orientation and gender identity. 
The group obtained a trove of SFUSD ethnic studies teachers’ lesson plans, curriculum and miscellaneous documents through public records requests, and accused the course of being “activist-driven” and biased. 
The San Francisco Unified School District Administrative Offices in San Francisco on April 18, 2025. 
(Beth LaBerge/KQED) 
Media coverage cited one in-class activity that asked students to role-play as Israeli soldiers putting Palestinians into refugee camps, and a slide deck that compared civil rights and other social movements to the Red Guards, an often-violent youth movement supporting Mao Zedong during China’s cultural revolution in the 1960s. 
Ethnic studies teachers at the time told KQED they had never seen the documents or taught those lessons, but the curriculum was put aside by Su and replaced with an off-the-shelf option used in other districts across California. 
In the fall, SFUSD piloted Voices: An Ethnic Studies Survey, by Gibbs Smith Education, which it’s now recommending as the permanent curriculum. 
The district said the Voices curriculum was the only one reviewed by an evaluation committee, which included 16 ethnic studies teachers and 15 other district educators, plus a handful of community members. 
Su said it’s been well-received thus far, which is why she’s choosing to recommend it for permanent use. 
The school board is set to vote on the curriculum changes April 28. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 2.5%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.5%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 3.6%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.9%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias1.7%This article: 6.9%Katie DeBenedetti: 8.9%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect6.9%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.0%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.1%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.7%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.7%Katie DeBenedetti: 4.0%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias9.7%This article: 0.6%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.6%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.6%This article: 9.6%Katie DeBenedetti: 8.9%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias9.6%This article: 5.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 2.6%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Katie DeBenedetti: 2.1%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias4.2%This article: 3.5%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.5%This article: 3.7%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.8%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect3.7%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.5%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.3%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.8%Katie DeBenedetti: 3.5%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority7.8%This article: 2.1%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.3%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma2.1%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.1%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 3.7%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 9.1%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.0%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 2.2%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 2.5%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.5%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.0%CalMatters: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.8%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.7%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice10.8%This article: 2.7%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination2.7%This article: 7.1%Katie DeBenedetti: 1.6%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Katie DeBenedetti: 0.2%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

898 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers30%attributed speech627writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageMaria Su • 21 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 34 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 19 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageSFUSD • 24 words • 0.0% coverageSFUSD • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageSFUSD • 32 words • 0.0% coverageMaria Su • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Maria Su

83%flagged-word coverage
197 attributed words73% of attributed speech40% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.5 ptsWriter: 15.5%Maria Su: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+12.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Maria Su: 12.2%12.2%Politically Left Leaning B-10.2 ptsWriter: 10.2%Maria Su: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.