This past August, the New York Times released the 1619 Project, a compendium of journalism and poetry examining the 400 years since enslaved Africans arrived on American soil.

The multimedia project has been widely lauded as the first mainstream journalism to reframe American history, centering the arrival of those first few dozens of enslaved Africans. Now, in partnership with the Pulitzer Center, the work at the core of the project is making its way into classrooms across the country including many here in the D.C. region.

But critics argue the project is biased, incomplete, or even incorrect in its thesis. You could say the same thing about the English common law, for example, or the use of the English language, argued a such critic in New York Magazine. You could say that about the Enlightenment. Or the climate. You could say that Americas unique existence as a frontier country bordered by lawlessness is felt even today in every mass shooting. You could cite the death of countless millions of Native Americans by violence and disease as something that defines all of us in America but that would be to engage in a liberal inquiry into our past, teasing out the nuances.

New York Times staff writer Nikole Hannah-Jones, who led the project, says every component was thoroughly fact-checked and verified to ensure the arguments were sound. But the core question of whether a retelling of history can ever be really complete remains especially when studies show so few American students are taught much of anything about slavery.

Well learn more about the 1619 Project and curriculum from a local journalist, then hear from a high school teacher whos used the material and a college professor who has pushed back against it.

Produced by Maura Currie

Read more here:
The 1619 Project Is Reshaping How We Teach Slavery But Is It Enough? - The Kojo Nnamdi Show