•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article examines how weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and the 2003 invasion of Iraq are represented in Georgia's social studies curriculum. Standard SSUSH23.a of the Georgia Standards of Excellence requires instruction on the War on Terror but does not specify how WMDs or the Iraq War's contested justification should be addressed, leaving curriculum deelopers significant discretion. This study analyzes two widely circulated U.S. history textbooks, The American Visoin and United States History: Reconstruction to the Present, finding that both emphasize WMDs as a central justification for invasion while giving limited attention to post-invasion findings that no stockpiles were discovered. The analyis then compares these textbook narratives with alternative curriculum material from the Zinn Education Project, Bill of Rights Institute, the Georgia Department of Education's teacher notes, and teacher-created resources on Teachers Pay Teachers. Drawing on this comparison, the study proposes a typology of three curricular approaches to teaching contested WMD claims: security, critical, and deliberative narratiaves. The findings suggest that Georgia's broad standards language, combined with a decentralized textbook adoption process, creates significant variation in how students encounter one of the most consequential and disputed justifications for military action in recent U.S. history.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Download

Share

COinS