When Learning History Becomes a Choice

Public schools used to be the place where every student learned the same shared history. But in Cherry Hill, some leaders now want to cut Black history from the curriculum instead of teaching it alongside the rest of American stories. A retired educator remembers when schools taught slavery, Jim Crow, and civil rights not as separate events—but as part of the nation’s journey. Back then, extra lessons about any community often came from families or local groups, not classrooms. The fear is clear: teaching history in pieces can split people apart instead of bringing them together. At the same time, Philadelphia’s ward election problems show what happens when power isn’t shared fairly. One official reportedly mixed up votes and even misled the public, then defended the mess by saying, “That’s democracy. ” But democracy isn’t about leaders deciding outcomes behind closed doors. Ward leaders hold volunteer roles while also serving full-time jobs, which already takes huge chunks of their week. If ward leaders act more like bosses than representatives, how can citizens trust the system works for them?

History shows these ward election battles aren’t new. During a 1970 contest in West Philly, another contested race was decided by secret ballot after heavy-handed tactics. Today’s ward meeting ended the same way—but only after loud complaints. Reformers argue ward leaders shouldn’t also hold elected office. One job should be enough to focus on serving people, not running party politics. If the smallest units of local government can’t be fair, what does that say about trust in the whole democracy? The retired history teacher who wrote the first letter knows schools once balanced Black history within American history. But now some families might have to teach it on their own. That’s a step backward—for both understanding and unity.

Actions