comment: >
  
  One possible reason for the timing is that DeSantis became aware that the course was under review and about to announce changes, and took the opportunity to position himself to take credit. That doesn't mean the changes aren't a revolting reaction to the far right's attack on CRT, mind. But, in my opinion they probably aren't a direct reaction to what DeSantis said about the course while their review of the course was already almost over.
  edit: To clarify, I do think the changes are a cowardly reaction to anti-CRT politics from the far right in Florida and elsewhere in the country. But, I think it's quite likely that this cowardly decision to cleanse the course had already been made before DeSantis most recently made comments about AP African American Studies not being welcome in Florida. It would be typical Republican Politics to demand something he knew was already happening, and then take credit for causing it.
context: The College Board has been a shit organization for years. This is just another signal that they should lose whatever credibility they still have. >
  
  College Boards is a business and one that has been losing customers over its poor results.  It's been proven several times that it has serious biases.
  Responding, as it appears to be doing, to Trumpism and its white supremacist majority in states like FL and TX fits the pattern of changing academic content no on merits but on sales.
  The second, however, is more fundamental — some education experts say the ACT and SAT are a poor predictor of whether a student will succeed in college.
  "Our research has shown that a student's performance in high school is the most significant predictor of academic success at UNE," Scott Steinberg, who runs the University of New England's admissions office, said in a statement in May when the school announced that it was going test-blind. "Standardized tests provide very little — if any — incremental value beyond the high school record and grade point average." >
  
  I’m no where near being an admissions expert, but I would’ve imagined that SAT/ACT help to differentiate GPAs based on different schools. Some schools have massively inflated grades compared to others >
  
  
  We began the changes that are being discussed in September of the 
  previous year, led by the committee that is developing the course. 
  There's a committee of faculty. And those changes were largely complete 
  by December, and we have those time-stamped materials. Far before the 
  governor spoke up, we'd announced that we were going to release the 
  revised framework on the first day of Black History Month, as we did
  
  DeSantis and Trump have been running on this for years and DeSantis in particular ran on it in FL last year.  So saying they started to discuss changing the course as Black studies aka "wokeness" was being attacked is more an admission than a defense.
  The white supremacists like Trump, DeSantis, Haley et al have run against Black studies, specifically "Critical Race Theory" which is just a place holder for study of racism and its effects.   Since few know what "Critical Race Theory" actually is, teaching it in the AP courses would be essential in these times.   The College Board members very specifically do not mention it and only say how wonderful and fascinating their course is without addressing what they must know is the core issue.  Does it teach about Critical Race Theory and the economic effects of US history of slavery and white supremacy? >
  
  Why does a private company have so much control over what's taught at high schools and colleges? A """non-profit""" that's making money hand over fist.
  This feels like a great opportunity to overhaul the whole system... >
  
  Summary: Let me dance all around the question and try to redefine the meaning of words. We didn't "ban" or "remove" books by black authors. We made some changes and streamlined the course. >
  
  We just removed "secondary sources"...nudge, nudge, wink, wink.   OK...what sources did you remove? >
  
  Minority ones. >
  
  this_is_bullshit.gif >
  
  I especially love how they’re saying “well, our course syllabus was really more of a proposal in need of feedback”
  So it was never a real course? Just an idea for a course? And when young adults take that course, secure in the knowledge that the AP board is providing time-tested, relevant educational material that transfers into college credits, you were just gonna say, “nope lol, we changed it to suit the whims of fascists, you have to take the ‘updated’ version where we banned viewpoints that didn’t test well with Trump supporters and included talking points from such political luminaries as ‘Michael the Black Man’.” Don’t forget to download our app!
  It’s okay, though, I know you’re just following orders. 🙄 >
  
  It’s not a course yet. This is a planned future course. So no, it never was a “real course” that young adults took. >
  
  So from the sound of it, they launched a pilot revision of the course last year, and then shuffled out anything that’s a little too objectionable, like intersectionalism and black queerness (secondary sources), over to the AP Classroom app, so course-takers in the future won’t be required to interact with media from historical scholars and researchers on any topic, only primary sources from witnesses and people involved, and then threw ‘both sides’ a bone on appeasement with the sudden inclusion of Black Conservatism.
  I can’t imagine very many high schoolers would willingly give “extra content” a look, especially if they’re cramming for multiple AP courses, so this “mainstream” version of the course will be the only one that really matters - all the other viewpoints are being relegated to supplemental material. 
  If the AP editors have time stamps of their proposed changes to sand down the course, and swear up and down that they didn’t change anything based on the way the political winds are blowing currently, it doesn’t mean that the editors themselves didn’t internalize that viewpoint of “oh god, the right-wing mom groups are gonna riot when they read this syllabus” and decide to make the change out of a fear of conflict, which is why I think they’re kinda cowardly, because of how the media presented it. 
  DeSantis complained, J.B. Pritzker insisted the course be left alone and that Florida doesn’t get to decide that for the whole country, and then the AP board immediately made changes to everything DeSantis objected to, and then published a follow up here insisting that neither governor had sway - which they may not have, but the ideologies behind those two men may have swung that decision regardless. >
  
  If they have time stamps of the specific changes, and claim there was no connection to DeSantis, they should release documentation. It's plausible, but the timing seems very convenient.