"The attributes of a good teacher of history, by contrast, have remained constant across generations: curiosity, humility, and concern for students." Ummmm, aren't you forgetting knowing the history themselves? I'd rank that number one, since you can't teach something you don't really understand. I would rank the ability to present the curriculum in an engaging way to be number two, and that would include knowing different ways to teach the material to different kinds of learners. Number three would be effective classroom management, which means that the students are learning without distractions from other students, since they are all forced to be there and some may not wish to get with the program. People at the university level haven't got a clue about this since everyone is paying to be there. Fourth would be the ability to assign independently written and read work that is meaningful and imparts the lessons contained in the curriculum. The good history teacher also assesses the students' work and assigns grades in a way that supports the students , and doesn't turn them away from the subject. A teacher can be curious, humble, and concerned, but that isn't the job. That could describe a Head Start teacher's aide or a cafeteria worker.

And yes, basic literary skills are vastly more important than the study of history, since a student without those skills is absolutely wasting their time sitting in a history class. History is written, and the student must master literacy before they can get any benefit out of the study of it.

As far as this non-scientific Critical Race Theory nonsense goes, if the state wants public school teachers to teach it, that's what the state school board will put in the state curriculum. Teachers can then either teach it or do something else for a living. But like you said, fads come and go, and the lag time on changing curriculum and writing new text books is years.