History teachers at Asker Upper Secondary School protested after finding that a textbook covering Norwegian history after 1850 made complex and controversial comparisons between occupied and post-war Norway.
The text argued that "both put great weight on ideology and modern propaganda" and that their methods led to both forms of government being controversial.
"The book erases the separation between democracy and dictatorship. This can be dangerous in a time where one knows that history repeats itself," said teacher Johanne Volden.
The school ordered the textbooks 'nearly unseen' after being satisfied with the volumes on earlier time periods but soon found what they felt were fundamental errors.
History teachers called the book a scandal, partly due to its coverage of the war and post-war Norway in a single chapter called "Solidarity, growth and indoctrination".
"We expect a minimum of correct interpretation of historical events in a textbook. The author cannot take liberties at the cost of fundamental societal perceptions. The students are left with the impression that (post-war prime minister) Gerhardsen was just as bad as Quisling and Terboven," said history teacher Sissel Frogg.
The teachers say the text has created chaos, leaving many students with the impression that Nazi occupation was a high point in Norwegian history. Grades have dropped and confidence in textbooks plummeted.
The teachers at the school claimed that the author, May-Brith Ohman Nielsen, at best has little understanding of student background knowledge, and presents complex historical analysis before supplying basic information.
"Such academic exercises should be left to forums other than textbooks," said teacher Inge Johnsen.
Head of the publishers, Nina Refseth, quickly agreed to remove the "unfortunate" passage claiming democracy was controversial, but argued that the criticisms calling the book a scandal were exaggerated.
Refseth argued that the text was mean to stimulate critical thought and to spark discussions about the similarities and differences in historical periods.
Students argued that their workload was such that they didn't have time to dissect textbooks, and they expected their books to be accurate.
