My younger son's class "covered" this briefly a few days ago. Of course, he only got the standard elementary school propaganda.
Here's an excerpt from Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know. (I am not here saying the Constitution is all-things-considered worse than the Articles of Confederation, but I do think it's puzzling we use this story to justify the Constitution.)
The Articles of Confederation were the original government documents of the United States. The actual—indeed, intended—effect of replacing the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution was not to protect liberty or promote social justice, but to strengthen the central government. The Constitution gave the central government the power to tax, to raise and maintain an army, and to regulate commerce.
Shay’s Rebellion in 1786 prompted many leaders to replace the Articles of Confederation and to favor a stronger central government. Daniel Shay was an honored and decorated soldier during the American Revolutionary War. Like many revolutionary soldiers, Shay was never paid for his service. He returned from service with large farm debts—debts he could not pay because he was not paid for his military service. European creditors wanted payment in gold and silver, but these were in short supply. Shay and other badly treated veterans worried their property would be confiscated and they would be placed in debtors’ prisons. They petitioned the Massachusetts government to fix the problem. Boston ignored their petitions. Finally, in desperation, Shay and other farmers rebelled. They formed a militia to prevent local courts from confiscating their property. Under the Articles of Confederation, it was difficult for the US central government to help Massachusetts crush the rebellion.
American public school history books tell the story of Shay’s Rebellion in order to show that the US Constitution was necessary. Some libertarians take an alternative reading: The government treated Shay and his fellow farmers in an extremely unjust way. If Shay’s Rebellion is supposed to justify the US Constitution, what is the justification, that the Constitution makes it easier for the government to oppress the poor after the government breaks its word to them?