The curriculum was designed with a cross-disciplinary approach that uses reading and language arts lessons to advance or cement concepts in other disciplines, such as history and social studies. Critics, which included religious studies scholars, say the curriculum’s lessons allude to Christianity more than any other religion, which they say could lead to the bullying and isolation of non-Christian students, undermine church-state separation and grant the state far-reaching control over how children learn about religion. They also questioned the accuracy of some lessons.

The curriculum’s defenders say that references to Christianity will provide students with a better understanding of the country’s history.

Texas school districts have the freedom to choose their own lesson plans, so the choice to adopt the materials will remain with them. But the state will offer an incentive of $60 per student to districts that adopt the lessons, which could appeal to some as schools struggle financially after several years without a significant raise in state funding.

Three Republicans — Evelyn Brooks, Patricia Hardy and Pam Little — joined the board’s four Democrats in opposition to the materials.

Leslie Recine — a Republican whom Gov. Greg Abbott appointed to temporarily fill the State Board of Education’s District 13 seat vacated by former member Aicha Davis, a Democrat who ran successfully for a Texas House seat earlier this year — voted for the curriculum.

Abbott handpicked Recine, who was the deciding vote on the materials, to fill the seat through the end of the year days before the general election, bypassing Democrat Tiffany Clark. A majority of District 13 residents voted this election for Clark to represent them on the board next year. She ran unopposed.

Board members who expressed support for the curriculum said during the week they believed the materials would help students improve their reading and understanding of the world. Members also said politics in no way influenced their vote and that they supported the materials because they believed it would best serve Texas children.

“In my view, these stories are on the education side and are establishing cultural literacy,” Houston Republican Will Hickman said. “And there’s religious concepts like the Good Samaritan and the Golden Rule and Moses that all students should be exposed to.”

The proposed curriculum prompts teachers to relay the story of The Good Samaritan — a parable about loving everyone, including your enemies — to kindergarteners as an example of what it means to follow the Golden Rule. The story comes from the Bible, the lesson explains, and “was told by a man named Jesus” as part of his Sermon on the Mount, which included the phrase, “Do unto others as you would have done unto you.” Many other religions have their own version of the Golden Rule.

Brooks, one of the Republicans who opposed the materials, noted this week that the Texas Education Agency is not a textbook publishing company and said treating it like such has created an uneven playing field for companies in the textbook industry. Brooks also said she has yet to see evidence showing the curriculum would improve student learning and that she was opposed to the state using Texas schoolchildren as “experiments.”

Hardy, a Fort Worth Republican who also opposed the materials, said she did so without regard for the religious references. She expressed concern about the curriculum’s age appropriateness and her belief that it does not align with state standards on reading and other subjects.

Little, a Fairview Republican, expressed concern on Friday that the state would have no way to see its “return on investment” with the materials, considering schools have wide latitude to adopt lessons as they see fit — meaning districts could pair Bluebonnet Learning with other learning materials, making the effectiveness of Bluebonnet as a standalone curriculum unclear.

Little said on social media earlier in the week that she supports “the teaching of biblical values in education” but criticized the curriculum for some of its teaching methods, which she said leave “little time for students to practice reading and develop critical skills like fluency and comprehension.”

Meanwhile, some of the Democrats who voted against the curriculum said they worried the materials would inappropriately force Christianity on public school children. Others cited concerns about Texas violating the Establishment Clause, which prohibits states from endorsing a particular religion.

“If this is the standard for students in Texas, then it needs to be exactly that,” said Staci Childs, a Houston Democrat. “It needs to be high quality, and it needs to be the standard, free of any establishment clause issues, free of any lies, and it needs to be accurate.”

The state had until late Wednesday to submit revisions in response to concerns raised by board members and the general public before the official vote took place Friday.

Democratic members said Friday, however, that their concerns still remained. Childs, who is also an attorney, said she believes if someone were to sue the state for a violation of the Establishment Clause, they would likely succeed.

San Antonio Democrat Marisa B. Pérez-Diaz said she found value in the materials but that the Christian bias kept her from supporting it. Rebecca Bell-Metereau, a San Marcos Democrat, said that although the curriculum attempts to reference faith traditions other than Christianity, she doesn’t feel the state did so in a meaningful way.

“It seems to me like it is trying to place a Band-Aid on a gaping wound,” Bell-Metereau said.

The State Board of Education’s approval of the materials drew immediate criticism from both national and local organizations.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State said in a statement that “Texas’ new Bible-infused elementary curriculum is part of the nationwide effort by Christian Nationalists to impose their religious beliefs on public school students.” The Texas American Federation of Teachers blasted the state for infusing school lessons with “Bible-based references more appropriate for Sunday Schools than public schools.”

“We can anticipate what will come next, whether that’s the erasure of contributions of marginalized populations in social studies or the minimization of climate change in science,” the union said.

Meanwhile, conservative organizations like the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which helped develop the materials, applauded education officials for taking “the next big step toward dramatically improving the quality of education in Texas.”

“Teachers will be able to spend more of their time doing the critical job of teaching and evaluating students, rather than spending their nights and weekends searching for lesson plans,” said Greg Sindelar, the organization’s CEO. “And parents will get to follow along as their children learn thanks to the online resources that come with the lessons.”

More than 100 Texans signed up Monday to speak for and against the state-authored curriculum.

Courtnie Bagley, education director for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, told board members that the Texas Education Agency has made every effort to respond to concerns from the public. She said rejecting the lessons would give other materials not owned by the state an unfair advantage.

“It would create a double standard, as Bluebonnet Learning has been held to a different and more stringent review process than other materials under consideration,” Bagley said.

Opponents argued that revisions did not go far enough, and some questioned whether the state’s intentions with crafting a curriculum that leans heavily on Christianity are political.

“I am a Christian, and I do believe that religion is a part of our culture, but our nation does not have a religion. We’re unique in that,” said Mary Lowe, co-founder of Families Engaged for an Effective Education. “So I do not think that our school districts should imply or try to overtly impress to young impressionable children that the state does have a state religion.”

Education officials say references to Christianity will provide students with a better understanding of the country’s history, while other supporters have stated their belief that the use of religious references does not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause. Legal experts note that recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority have eroded decades of precedent and made it unclear what state actions constitute a violation of the Establishment Clause.

State leaders also say the materials cover a broad range of faiths and only make references to religion when appropriate. Education Commissioner Mike Morath has said the materials are based on extensive cognitive science research and will help improve student outcomes. Of 10 people appointed to an advisory panel by the Texas Education Agency to ensure the materials are accurate, age-appropriate and free from bias, at least half of the members have a history of faith-based advocacy.

The Texas Tribune recently reported how parents, historians and educators have criticized the ways the materials address America’s history of racism, slavery and civil rights. In public input submitted in response to the curriculum and in interviews with the Tribune, they have said the materials strip key historical figures of their complexities and flaws while omitting certain context they say would offer children a more accurate understanding of the country’s past and present. Bell-Metereau and other Texans referenced the Tribune’s reporting during public testimony on Monday.

In response to those concerns, the Texas Education Agency has said the lessons will provide students with “a strong foundation” to understand more complex concepts as they reach later grades. State officials have also said those materials are written in an age-appropriate manner.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune. Read the original here. The Texas Tribune is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Disclosure: Texas Public Policy Foundation has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.