So a couple of you have read Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen. The rest of you are in for an interesting read. Check out Loewen's introduction and then draft your response.
While you should continue to evaluate the ideas of your classmates, remember my plea for you to evaluate your own thinking as well. That is, don't accept your first--over even your second or third--thoughts as fact. This practice of dogged self-reflection is what will lead to to real insight on the issues raised. Dig deep. Be willing to get dirty. The real insight's well beneath the surface...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Being that I am getting certified to teach high school Social Studies and that I am currently studying for the PRAXIS II by re-reading high school text books, I am now quite discouraged. It is a real tragedy to learn that not only is history everyone’s most hated subject (not that I didn’t realize that already) but that the very books we are presenting to our children are misconstruing hundreds of years of information, leading them astray, downright lying to them and turning them off to the humanities as a whole. Of course I am not living under a rock and as a high school student, I myself was fairly distracted in US I, but perhaps I chose not to believe that we were really boring our students to death.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be two points that we need to address; first, the way we are presenting history as a subject and second, the absolute disservice that we are doing by writing, publishing and then buying these atrocities called US History textbooks. As James W. Lowen explains, people are interested. It is not that we as humans do not have a fascination with other people, we do, but we need to feed this to students in a different way. People like drama. History is filled! Let us not gloss over, dismiss the elephant in the room or pretend that times were always happy (I wonder what they will say about the financial state of our country during the year 2008, all good news?). As educators we have to create a fire in students’ bellies and keep them guessing. Textbooks shouldn’t omit the controversy; they should report what was so riveting and newsworthy in the first place.
If the text book is really sucking the life out of a good course, can we toss it? How about providing students with thought provoking articles? How about giving them this very article on the first day of school? I know I’ll certainly be printing out excerpts from Tom Brokaw’s The Greatest Generation and hopefully accompanying students to The Constitution Center in Philadelphia. We must find out what works. If the text books are not working, we cannot let a subject die out and allow it to sit on the back burner. Textbooks clearly are written and commissioned incorrectly; there should be more regulation on the “facts” going in. It is one thing to have a bland delivery, but to misinterpret evidence or pass off a seemingly happier outcome as fact is just plain disappointing.
One always remembers the World War II veteran that spoke in their class with tears in his eyes, or the TA in college who gave anecdotes of her time teaching English in Taiwan, or the HBO series John Adams, the common link is that these are all great stories, let’s hope I am half as good and hopefully I will get a much more than bored to death class. My students will not be “stupider” in history when they graduate, I refuse. First step, read the epilogue of this very book!
Jess Gushue le Grange
I am ashamed to admit this but I hated history in high school. It always made me feel bad because most of my history teachers were awesome. I always said they are nice people, but their class is boring. History was the same thing every year. I never learned anything new. It was always the same events: the colonies; the revolutionary war; the civil war; Korean War; Vietnam War; WWI and WWII; and the civil rights movement (if we got to it). I had to memorize a million names, dates, and events and it was never explained to me why it was important – it was just important.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that I did not like history class confused me because I loved to watch the History Channel. I learned a great more from watching the shows, than I did in class. After reading the introduction to Loewen’s book I am able to understand why – the shows made history relevant. I was able to see why all these conflicts started and how a solution was reached. The past events are usually tied in to recent events or they are given a present day equivalent.
I remember that there was always a unit on Latin America. I was lucky if they spent a week on the subject. It made me feel like the history around the world did not matter. It was not important. Whether or not this is intentional I am not sure. When touching on events dealing with other countries like Korea, Vietnam, Germany, and the USSR, to name a few, I always felt that the main focus was how the Americans reacted to everything. Well, what about the people from these other countries? I mean, were they all for the war? How did they become involve in the war? History teachers and books will probably tell you that they explain the involvement of other countries in the war, but they only do a superficial scanning. There is no depth to it.
Jess brings up a good point with the fact that history classes need to be taught a different way. One of my electives in high school was a class called ‘Search for Conscience,’ it was a bit like a history class. It focused on genocides all over the world. Its main focus, however, was the holocaust. I loved it because I learned about the holocaust in a completely different way. It wasn’t just about the US saving everyone and the whole Pearl Harbor ordeal, which is what US history classes mainly focused on. I was able to learn in detail why Germany became involved in both wars, exactly how Hitler rose to power, I learned about the allied powers and the axis powers. I remember that I found it so amusing that the USSR was part of the allies, and that a few years later they would become America’s nemesis. All of these little details made learning about the World Wars and the holocaust much more interesting. It gave me a good point of view behind the events leading up to conflict. It wasn’t just Germany went evil under Hitler and killed all the Jews. There was a human side to it after all.
Is this reading relevant ONLY to those who will teach history?
ReplyDeleteAlright, since someone wasn't too happy with my first line of thought. I am adding to my response. I hope this clarifies my stance on the matter a bit more. I want to teach high school English. I know that this is another subject that students tend to hate. Although most of their hate has to do with grammar rules and punctuation, which I can completely relate to. I hate writing, I could never understand why putting a comma in a certain spot was important. I am still learning English, since it is not my native language. Many people think I'm crazy because I want to teach English, since my own English language skills are lacking in some aspects. My first thoughts on the English language were that there are so many rules that it is ridiculous. My ESL teacher made us do sentence diagrams, which was torture. I must admit that I learned from doing those exercises. It gave me a pretty good understanding on how to set up sentences. The tricky part and the one everyone ignores in school is punctuation. I mean, who really knows how to use a semi-colon and colon? They are just symbols you put in if spell check tells you to. My Literature professor was talking about colons and semi-colons last week and it finally clicked. He explained the rules in a simple and clear manner. It wasn't a cryptic language full of main clauses, predicates, nouns, verbs, and other kinds of jargon. Basically, a semicolon is used when two complete sentences are put next to each other and have a main idea in common. The use of the semi-colon links the thoughts and it gives it a stronger meaning. I thought a semi-colon was something that made your sentence look pretty, not that it connected an idea put in two different thoughts. The more interesting discovery was hot to use a colon. I colon was always a mistery to me. I thought that it was the semi-colon's cousin. If you don't use one you use the other. Well, here is the big earth shattering news my professor told the class, are you ready? "Statement: explanation of the statement." It is the simplest thing I have ever learned. I just stared at the board, and thought why couldn't my middle school or high school English teacher explain this to me. They did explain it to me, but they used fancy words and complicated diagrams. As an inspiring teacher what I learned from this article is that what you tell your students is not that important. The way you present and communicate the information is the important part. Giving a student a 900 page book full of facts will not explain an event to a student. It will bore them to death. Taking the time to break up the ideas and relate it to the students, is what is going to make the ideas have meaning for the students. Complex ideas like the rules of the English language and important historical events need to be simplified for students to be able to make a connection to them. A fact is a fact. It doesn't demonstrate an interest in the subject. As a teacher giving examples and simpler ideas demonstrates that you understand the subject, can analyze it, and most important of all it shows your love for the subject.
ReplyDeleteThe article Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbooks Got Wrong by James W. Loewen had many strong opinions about the current state that high school students are in learning history and why it seems to be perceived as the most boring subject in school to learn. When the article stated that “five sixths of all Americans never take a course in American history beyond high school” I knew that something was wrong. Why is taking a history class frowned upon by most students?
ReplyDeleteSome of the points that Loewen brought up seemed valid. The main argument that I agreed with was that teachers do not do as good of a job teaching history. They tend to give up on their students quickly because the energy is so low. I do not blame them on wanting to give up, but I believe it is their responsibility to make the energy rise. The teachers are getting paid for students to learn, and just having them read a chapter and get a test on it is not teaching. The teachers must get up and do projects with the students until they begin to engage themselves in the subject matter.
The idea presented that the textbooks are difficult to grasp seems valid also. Nevertheless, going back to my first point, the teachers need to use the texts as a guide not for the lesson. When Loewen shared that the books do not make a relevant statement to the students everyday lives and that there are too many questions to memorize at the end of the chapter, he made it seem like it’s the books fault. A textbook is a dry book that nobody wants to read. When was the last time you picked up a math book and read a chapter all the way through? But, if the teacher takes the important bits and pieces of the textbook to life and goes into what they feel is important a difference would be made. In high school, the only textbook I had to ever memorize chapter by chapter was history. That should not be the case. Memorizing only stores the information in your short term memory whereas actually learning it stores it in your long-term memory. No wonder why students don’t want to keep learning about history.
The one topic that Loewen discussed that I disagreed with was the idea of nationalism in textbooks being a bad thing. I think that students want to learn how great their country was. I know if I was learning about only negatives that my country did in the past, I would be turned off and no longer interested in the subject. A balance of the majority good and some bad would probably be ideal since it is also important to learn from mistakes. However as a result, learning to be patriotic and loving the country we live in is a good thing as long as the views do not get distorted.
-Samantha Schanck
This piece made me reflect on a few things form my public school days. I would have to say that for the most part I was one of those students that said history was boring and I never cared too much for the class. Come senior of high school when I wasn’t required to take a history class, guess what, I didn’t take one. That’s not to say I don’t like history, give me a good history movie whether it’s a time piece or a war movie and I will usually enjoy myself. I even gave history another shot in college. I had been removed from history class for three years but I did want to learn about the past. And for the most part I usually find it interesting outside of a classroom. Unfortunately, once back in the classroom I began to find it almost as boring as I used to in public school. The only time I found a history class interesting was in seventh grade. Now looking back and reading this article I know exactly why, we barely used the text book. In seventh grade which was American history, my teacher basically told us stories either about something in his life that correlated with the information in the text, or he took the information in the text and turned it into story form.
ReplyDeleteSo I started wondering why more teachers don’t take this approach. One reason I thought of was that it may be too much work for some teachers, which is just sad. Especially since history is basically one big story. Forget the factoids that no one in the class wants to remember anyway, rather how about learning the big idea from multiple sides and getting the whole picture? For some reason it’s apparently extremely important to know exactly what year some event occurred rather than the basic sequence of events and the main idea and cause of a particular situation. If this approach was used I think more students would be engaged in lessons and actually learn the information provided.
The more I continued to think about Loewen’s piece the more agitated I became knowing that I wasn’t given the full truth in some instances. I thought back to instances where I was told something only to find out later that what I was told was false. For example the fact that Columbus enslaved and killed tons of natives to steal their land and wealth. I’m sorry but I would’ve liked to have known that well before I graduated high school. What’s the point of learning history in school if it’s not even fully correct or information is left out on purpose. So I agree with Jess that there should be more (or less depending on how you look at it) regulation on the information that goes into the text books. Let there be some controversy what will that cause, maybe a good discussion in class, would that really be the worst thing. This way the students may be more interested in the material and we can all learn from the mistakes of the past.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLoewen's intorduction spoke to me on several levels. My first thoughts were from the perspective of a student. Some time ago I attended my stepbrother's graduation from The Citadel in South Carolina. We toured the campus and gloried in it military history, proud tradition of southern hospitality, and beautiful antiquity. Flash forward 3 or 4 years to an American History class here at Stockton where a little known text entitled "Denmark Vesey" is used as a supplement to the Civil War unit. WOW. Denmark Vesey was a freed black man living in Charleston who organized the very nearly successful slave revolt that would have resulted in the complete massacre of Charleston's white elite. The Citadel was built not to aid the south against the north, but to protect Charleston in the event anything like Vesey's plot ever came to fruition. They skipped all that in the offical tour. My point is, after taking that class I felt cheated. I certainly could have handled that information in high school--would have found it more fascinating than trying to remember which side had the Monitor and which the Merrimac ( or did one side have both-I don't remember.) This is what Loewen is talking about when he states that although students get better grades in history, their retention of the information is negligible. This led me to my second perspective, one as a future teacher.
ReplyDeleteSomething is wrong when the learning process focuses on mass memorization instead of internalization of the main ideas. I agree with Jess that history could be taught in a different manner;to that extent so could many other subjects. Like Tania, I intend to teach Literature, which, as far a subjects go, often falls into the same trap as history. As one goes from science to math to literature to history, the neutrality factor decreases as the subjectivity factor increases. Multicultural novels and poetry can just as easily demonstrate language art skills as any text out of standard American writers. A novel that expresses a different perspective can lead to discussion or even debate, thereby injecting some of the "melodrama" that Loewen says is missing from history books. And, they can surely be presented earlier--students shouldn't have to wait until college to have their eyes opened.
Again, like Tania, I love the History Channel, and I think this speaks to this issue of format. My Mediveal Litt professor just stated the other day "after all, history is not a long statement of undisputed facts-it is essentially a narrative" (Miyashiro). Every good narrative teases out the characters traits, good or bad, and dramatic events move it along. Some of the best stories ever written do NOT have happy endings. Some people refuse to read a book without a happy ending. Maybe those are the textbook editors who "make no real use of the past to illuminate the present."Maybe they think American culture must always promote happy endings. If history was presented more like the story it is, more students would be interested.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(continued)
ReplyDeleteMy final thought was as a parent. My daughter is in 5th grade and she has been studying the Holocaust. My Holocaust learning experience was much like Tania's, but I am happy to say my daughter's is taking a different tack. Instead of Anne Frank's diary, the traditional reading, they have a text that excerpts her diary with photos of death camps,the head political players, news commentary of the day, and straight up facts regarding the rise of the Nazi party--you get it. Much more comprehensive than I got, and I was glad to see someone made a decision to trust these kids to process the information at an earlier age.
One final final thought (I promise): Everything seems to have a financial aspect to it in America. I am referencing Loewen's comment about publishers not wanting to miss an opportunity to print and sell a latest-edition copy. Shame on them, and shame on those professors who make us buy the newest editions, those where only ten or twelve words are changed, but now render a used edition invalid. How can they add facts and reissue, and not bother to correct errors in previous texts? Shocking and disgusting to me.
Meredith
October 15, 2009 11:01 AM
History is a story waiting to be heard interpreted and understood by all generations to come. What educators don’t understand is that it takes more than a textbook to intrigue their students. Textbooks are too mundane to get their students to fully comprehend or more importantly, even care about our past. These books are ancient to our parents regardless when they were created. However, even with this and history in general not being my forte I am interested in our past. Mr. Bart Musitano from Atlantic Cape Community College taught American History one, but when he taught he told us a story that through his excitement kept the entire class on the edge of their seats. Before Bart I had Mr. Cervi at Oakcrest High school who also told a story. The point I’m getting at is that it doesn’t matter if history is your favorite subject because a textbook is no way to learn about our past. Students need to be sat down and told a story much like a grandfather tells his grandchildren. The historian needs to spark their attention just like a literature teacher needs to spark their kid’s attention when teaching about Romeo and Juliet. The literature teacher probably uses movies and has the students perform the play as a way to comprehend it. Being involved is always a better way than sitting down and being lectured to. In history I don’t believe it is the dates that are significantly important but the information that goes along with the dates and from experience only the teachers that were enthused and kept me entertained left a mark in my history.
ReplyDelete“High school history so alienates people of color.” I don’t feel as though this is true. I think that the color issue if anything has turned tables, I feel as though when I was in high school and even sometimes now that when something happens that a person of color don’t like they pull out the race card. I don’t feel it is right that our generation today can use the, “It’s because I’m black” card every time things don’t go their way. For example, my father is an AC police officer and pulled over two young African Americans for speeding he was originally going to give them a warning but they in turn used “you only pulled us over because you saw to black boys in the car” I feel as though they alienate themselves, because just like the clip we watched in class last week about the students in Arkansas the students feel the grass is always greener on the other side because they are oblivious to what the other people are going through. The one young lady brought up that they were slaves and that they have a lot more responsibilities then the rich white kids that don’t work, again she was ignorant to the other side of the story.
“All to many teachers grow disheartened and settle for less, they withdraw some of their energy from their courses. Gradually they settle for just staying ahead of their students in the books, teaching what will be on the test, and going through the motions.” It is sad to think that we send our students and waste our tax money on educators like this. Obviously they haven’t found the right way to get through to their students and their students are thriving to be taught and not bored. The teachers portrayed in this article are a poor example of a teacher and are teaching their students through their actions how to just get by.
Professor:
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to share some articles with people in the class but I only know how to contact my partner Meredeth. Is there someplace on your site where you have a list of everyone's e-mails, blogs, etc?
Thanks
Gregg C
Greg,
ReplyDeleteOn Monday I will be collecting everyone's blog url (once everyone has their first post published). You can also see the distribution list that I use to send the class emails.
I have to confess I had no idea that history was so disliked by so many. I was surprised to read that students rate history as their least favorite subject. History has always been one of my favorite subjects, starting way back in elementary school. I have very clear memories about learning about certain people and events in history, and finding it fascinating. I still remember, for example, watching a movie in elementary school about Martin Luther King Jr. and being enthralled by it. I thought it was simply amazing what this man did, and the courage he had. I also recall watching a movie in high school about the holocaust, which included stories and images still with me today. I also fondly remember my high school history teacher, who was passionate and enthusiastic about everything he taught. He would sit on his desk, and we would have class discussions about events in history. He definitely did not just "go through the motions", as talked about in Loewen's book intro. Thinking back on all of this now, I realize I do not really remember any of the history textbooks I had in school. I know we had them, but I don't remember a thing about them. I think I was fortunate enough to have passionate history teachers for the most part, perhaps explaining my love of history. I am also lucky to have a father who has always been very into history and has often shared both horrible and beautiful stories with my siblings and I about events in American history.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more with Loewen that "Understanding our past is central to our ability to understand ourselves and the world around us." If students are calling history irrelevant, something is clearly wrong with the way it is being taught. I think Nick had a great point when he said if teachers focused on things like cause and effect, and less on factoids- memorizing dates and names - students would be more engaged. I also loved the idea Jess had of giving the students not just stuff from textbooks, but thought-provoking articles on events and people. It seems like teachers either have to provide supplemental material like this, or textbooks need to be "fixed". I find it troubling that American history books are almost always written form the white man's point of view and about the white man's experience. When I think back on my history classes, I guess I don't really remember learning much about the experience of women, of black people, or of Native Americans. I did end up learning a lot about the native American history, but not at school; this information came mostly from my dad. Yet 2 of my most vivid memories were of a movie about Martin Luther King Jr, and one about The Holocaust, so I was obviously exposed to some history about minorities. Again, I think I was fortunate, for the most part, as far as the history teachers I had.
It also bothers me that some events in our nation's history are distorted and information is omitted according to Loewen. I don't quite understand why history textbooks are not eliminated or changed drastically if they are having the effects on children that Loewen claims they are. I guess I will have to read the rest of his book to find out more.
Melissa Christensen
I was exposed the some of the inaccuracies in my history book at a young age. My parents always had a high respect for Native Americans and exposed me to their culture at a young age. With this information, it was relatively easy to make the connection that early explorers and the Native Americans were not really the best of friends, as my grade-school Thanksgiving celebrations always led me to believe. It always stuck out to me that such a thing could be just “left out,” or in some cases completely changed. In fact, I resented the text for being so bold as to completely neglect such human pain and suffering. I believe that it is one thing to make a mistake and once you realize it try to do the best you can to make up for it and learn from it, but another to quite boldly, lie about it, to young children! This early realization made me resent history class and distrust all the information that was presented. I always passed my tests and got good grades but I never let the information integrate into my personal knowledge. I was sure to dump the information like old trash on garbage day, right after all tests and finals were completed. Loewen attributes the “forgetting” of tested history knowledge to the volume of information presented in history textbooks and this may be true for some, but for me, personally, it was the bad taste that the information left in my mouth that gave me no motivation to remember it. I felt brain-washed when I regurgitated the history text information for the test and nothing felt worse to me than that!
ReplyDeleteI believe that Samantha makes a very valid point in relation to Loewen’s blame of “bad history” on the lonely shoulders of the textbooks. She is completely correct in my opinion, that a textbook should be a guide or resource for the teacher to use during class. It does not make the class good or bad alone. The volume of information in a history book is not for the complete memorization of the student but rather so that if a teacher wishes to concentrate on any of those topics, the text can provide those resources. It is up to the effective teacher to compile the authentic documents based on the general information introduced in the text. This doesn’t remove blame from the text for misrepresenting events of the past, but the text should not shoulder all the blame for the ineffective teaching of the course content.
Many students are emotionally charged about this article because it allows us to vent about the deceit that we have endured as history students, so many of us are stating specific things that the United States did which was wrong and was not told to us. Samantha stated, “learning to be patriotic and loving the country we live in is a good thing as long as the views do not get distorted.” A completely agree with this statement but not with the idea that nationalism is acceptable in a school environment. I feel that school should be the place where students are presented with truths. If no one knows the exact truth to a situation, then the students should be given the main views and allow them make the choice, as to what the truth is. I do not believe that we should exclude accurate information in education, to make it more easily digested for the student. I understand that we cannot give first-year chemistry students the principles of molecular variation in organic chemistry. I do believe that we need to give the information that the students are capable of understanding, given their background knowledge, but in an unbiased approach.
While reading James Loewen’s article, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong”, I developed a feeling of both despair and enlightenment towards the education system. It’s unfortunate that high school History teachers lack motivation to make the information in their textbooks and classrooms exciting and creative, yet it’s reassuring to know that as a future educator, I, along with other educators have the ability to positively change this. The article clearly explained that History teachers lack motivation to create interesting historical information that is presented in History textbooks. I found the sentence, “Whether one deems our present society wondrous or awful or both, history reveals how we got to this point.” (pg. 2) to be an exceptionally inspiring sentence for both myself and potential students involved in an education system to read and analyze.
ReplyDeleteI truly understand how the subject of History can be perceived as utterly boring and non-compelling due to the content written in the textbooks we are forced to read. However, Loewen makes a valid argument while discussing the movies that were based off of American History, such as “Gone with the Wind” and “Dances with Wolves”. He made the point that these movies proved History could be taught in a romantic, informative, artistic light, while catering to an array of audiences with varying cultural backgrounds and learning styles. Like Gerard Graff explained in his article and Benjamin Zandar conveyed in his speech, any topic or subject could come across as enjoyable and entertaining if presented in the right manner and with different audiences in mind.
I recall taking the course, Introduction to Poetry a few years ago at Stockton and remember the ability my classmates and I had to use our imaginations during each class. The poems in our textbook, (which the professor wrote himself) were presented in their original context; however we were asked to interpret, analyze and synthesize the poetry chapters in the textbook and eventually developed personal opinions regarding the poems. We also created our own poetry daily and presented it to our class. The class was not only informative but also extremely enjoyable and I remember looking forward to reading a textbook that to most, could be considered terribly boring.
Like Melissa’s view, I also can’t comprehend how educators continue to distribute the same textbooks to students without updating them according to important historical events. History changes every minute, everyday. If the textbook remains the same, the teacher must at least make a necessary effort to include current historical data in their curriculum.
Throughout school I have frequently heard that we must learn about history so that history does not repeat itself and so we do not make the same mistakes we did in the past. As a student I accepted this as a valid reason and went to class, read the book, memorized the facts for the test, and then erased them from my memory. I’m afraid to say it but if the future was left up to me it would repeat itself because I learned nothing but facts from my history classes and no concept of how to apply those fast to the present and/or the future. After reading Loewen’s introduction it occurred to me what a shame this really is for our students and how today’s history classes are cheating them out of important intellectual and academic opportunities.
ReplyDeleteIn highlighting the flaws of American textbooks Loewen writes that they “leave out anything that might reflect badly upon our national character”, essentially our mistakes, which are the very things we are supposed to be learning from in order to avoid. History textbooks are then giving students a flawed view of the United States in which we did nothing wrong and hurt no one. I can still remember my alarm when I got to high school and read an historical account of what really happened between Columbus and the Native Americans when Columbus first arrived in the “New World”. Loewen is correct when he describes the textbooks as having a “god-like voice” and that it “never occurs to students to question them”. In any other class, such as chemistry or algebra, students feel free to ask their teacher why things happen they way they do. In history class, however, students simply accept what they read in the textbook as truth and move on with not much thought; “no wonder students don’t learn to think critically”.
A second critical flaw that Loewen highlights is that history textbooks “make no real use of the past to illuminate the present”. Here is where students are being cheated an intellectual experience in the classroom because they are not taught to analyze or synthesize the new information they learned and apply it to what is presently happening in the world. Instead they remain low on Bloom’s taxonomy in the knowledge category and not challenged to go any further.
I agree with Jess, that the history teachers should just toss the book and teach their students the real facts from other historical books and articles. They should use the “speeches, songs, diaries, and letters that make the past come alive”. When students read Shakespeare in English class they are reading the same version that Shakespeare wrote. If students learn from the real materials in their other classes they should learn from them in history class too instead of a diluted, inaccurate textbook.
Loewen’s article reinforces even more that teachers of any subject are the ones responsible for engaging and accurately teaching students the material. Whether or not there is an excellent textbook available, teachers are still responsible for providing students with accurate information and opportunities to think critically about this information, synthesize it, and apply it to their lives.
-Stephanie Pyle
So last week I was the first one to post, and now I'm wishing I hadn't done that. I have finished reading the Loewen article but decided to read all the comments first before posting, and I found so many other points to add I never thought of!
ReplyDeleteFirst, in responding to professor Hall's question, this reading is important for all teachers, not just history teachers. I would hope not to be the type of teacher who blames his failure to inspire and motivate his students on the material he uses to teach. This is one of the points I took away from this article. I think whatever materials you use in your class, whether it is textbooks in high school, or manipulatives in first grade, should only be used as support, not as your main method of imparting knowledge. That is why you are in the room as a teacher, to impart knowledge.
I found a lot of general statements in this article, some I agreed with and some I didn’t agree with. It’s hard for me to argue with the statements about history being borr-r-ring, because I thought it was in high school. However, now that I’m 50 years old and have a 28 year old step-son who is a college history professor, and a 17 year son who is considering becoming a history teacher, I’m thinking the reason I found it boring had more to do with the kind of student I was, and not the teacher or the text book.
I found the statements from Jess, as a future high school history teacher, very promising. She seems to want to have the initiative to go beyond a boring text book, and bring out all the complexities of history. The thought that kept jumping into my head, while reading Loewens article, was he felt textbooks, while shortchanging minorities roles in history, also failed to make history come alive. I don’t think it’s possible for textbooks to make history come alive, I think TEACHERS make history, and any other subject, come alive.
One portion of the article I found very disappointing was Loewens supporting statements to show that American show a great interest in history. While I agree that they do, using fictional movies that take great license with history, like Gone with the Wind, Dances with Wolves, and, worst of all, Oliver Stone’s JFK, as examples, was just ridiculous. These are movies designed to entertain, not serve as official versions of history. It lessened Loewens credibility for me.
As for the absence of women, minorities etc, and the mentions of nationalism, perhaps schools should be more discriminating in the materials they choose for their curriculum. Perhaps schools should hire teachers who are interested in teaching history that resonates with all children, regardless of their color. Perhaps schools should hire teachers who are interested in balancing the greatness of America, with discussion about how American sometimes has failed to live up to its potential.
Let’s not blame it all on the materials.
I felt so liberated to read this article and feel like there was finally a reason that I absolutely and positively despised, avoided, and slept through my history classes from grade school up to and including high school. I think Loewen hits the nail on the head when he says, “…students find history ‘irrelevant’ to their present lives”. It’s funny how ironic it is that the one subject that is supposed to tell the tale of the shaping and molding of our lives ends up being so disconnected; so impersonal. But after reading this article; it all makes perfect sense to me now. We are in the most exciting time of the world; America is becoming a multicultural quilt of overlapping cultures and ethnicities that all have a different story; thus a different history. But we are stuck with the same, traditional, omnipotent stories. How can we teach one and not another? How can we make your history relevant to my history?
ReplyDeleteThis article was dead on once again and made me laugh out loud when it said “five sixths of all Americans never take a course in American History beyond high school”. I was forced to fulfill a history credit in college so…I decided to take a class on African American history in the United States from slavery to present day. I felt this unfamiliar surge of passion in my soul for “history”. We talked about the relevance of the experiences from days of slavery to the injustices that still exist for Black Americans today. My professor put the blame for the inhumane treatment on the white settlers and the next generations after that. It felt so breathtakingly refreshing to hear it point blank. White Americans treated the African Americans with such disgusting hatred and inhumanity! We said it! We studied it! Finally! Loewen knows that all kids want is to hear a little bit of the truth! We can learn from the truth. It can be applied to today. Kids want relevance. Give them truth! The truth can be relevant. Most times our history wasn’t this “American Way” or “Land of Promise” as the titles Loewen showed claimed to be; and I think the ones who see it for a bunch of bull are the untainted children in classrooms who say ‘I’m not buying this’.
History should be a multifaceted and multicultural experience for school children. Perhaps it won’t be loaded with fact upon fact because let’s face it; there wouldn’t be enough time to truly serve every occurrence justice. Yet, if a student comes in and says my family is from Taiwan and I’d like to learn a bit about my ancestors too; we could tie something from the Taiwanese experiences to US history to make that student see the correlation and importance of his history and ‘our’ history. Because in this day and age; his history is our history. His family’s coming to the United States is shaping the future of what it means to be American. Besides, what is ‘American’ anymore?
History is so exciting when we see that it is the many beautiful tales which weave in and out of each other and tell the human experience from the start of humanity all the way up to today. American history should show a bunch of braveries and mistakes; faults and accomplishments. American history is only part of and a result of World History and should honor that diversity.
After reading the first five words of this article, “High school students hate history”, I thought FINALLY an article I can get into! I have been an honor student since I was six and history was the only subject that I got C’s in during high school. Not only was it extremely boring but I hated memorizing stupid facts that were useless in my everyday life. If you give me a math problem I can figure out the answer. Give me a Shakepearian sonnet and I can find dissect it to make sense to the average 15 year old, but history, I never could grasp all the facts. I wasn’t good at it which made me hate it which made me not want to study which made me even worse at the subject. Now I realize what I was missing. I wish I paid more attention in these classes because, as everyone says, history is starting to repeat itself and at times I feel “uneducated” because I don’t know anything about the past. It relates back to what Loewen said in page 4 of the article that students and teachers “fall back on one main idea”…memorize and forget. It is embarrassing that I still can’t name 7 American presidents or anything I was taught in my four years in history class at Steinert High School. Who really wants to cause more work for themselves in a subject they won’t understand anyway? Not me. I was mainly to blame in this for not making the effort to study but I do agree with Gregg, teachers need to relate the facts to their students. Minority of not, not many people find history exciting or relevant and as educators we need to change that. No Hall, this doesn’t just go for history teachers. We all need to find a way to relate our subjects to ALL of our students. That is a major responsibility that we have to make sure our students do not fall behind and retain the information they learn in our classrooms. Sometime I feel that too many teachers teach “by the book” or “to the test” and that’s not right. We should teach our students based on not only the curriculum but also their specific interests and needs. No teacher is going to want to teach a group of Native American students about the first Thanksgiving or an African American majority class about the slave trade but these events happened. A good teacher should know how to turn these touchy subjects that need to be taught in a way that is informative but can show how each group that is in the class can relate to the topic. It won’t be easy but just passing students because they memorized material to get an A on a test without remembering the information past June is not doing what we are going to school to do. The education field is already too filled with teachers who take this profession as just a job. It needs more who actually care about what they teach and pass that enthusiasm onto their students.
ReplyDelete-Brittany Falsetti
Unlike math or science, history touches people on a more personal level. It goes beyond plugging numbers in or mixing chemicals together, but rather a make up of who they are. Many students, especially at the high school level, do not have to capability to think beyond the subject then just the facts and term presented. “Understanding our past is central to our ability to understand ourselves and the world around us” (2). It is important for us as Americans to understand how our nation became what it is today. We need to understand history to understand the importance and values of not only our culture, but rather the many different cultures around us. This is a big problem for Americans because we are ethnocentric. Much of history is biases towards women and people who have different ethnicity. The main focus has been on the rich “white males who saved the day”. Students, especially those of other cultures and races, do not dislike history, they dislike the history books and the teachings.
ReplyDeleteAs having a strong passion for history, I think it is sad that most students do not. Yet, I can relate because during my high school years, I wasn’t a big fan of history. The majority of how students relate to any subject is based on how the teacher presents the material. I took one college level course in history and I was hooked. My passion came about because the professors who taught my history classes had a strong passion and an understanding of the knowledge. Unlike many educators, they taught us the ugly side and weren’t afraid to admit was America was wrong. They also encouraged us to think what if the outcome was this instead of that, how would America be changed. When they taught us, they tried to be unbiased by showing both side of the situations. The classroom that I am observing now is high school US history. The teacher is fantastic and makes learning history fun. Her students are engaged and seem to enjoy the lessons. For example, she taught them about the establishment of the13 colonies then she allowed them to create their own colony. They were able to use the information that they learned, along with their own creativity, to make learning about history fun.
Most importantly, I think it is time to reevaluate our educational system in regards to the text, teachers, and achievements. History is “his story”. History varies from person to person, place to place. Unlike other subjects, there are tons of different history textbooks. This makes learning extremely difficult for the students and hard for teachers to teach. With NCLB, how will scores reach 100% if some textbooks “actually make students stupid” (9)? This goes against everything that education is suppose to do. The reason why textbooks fail is because writers try to cram 1,000 of years into 182 days of school. This combination it is overwhelming for the students, which leads to lack of knowledge and interest in the subject.
If “all too many teachers grow disheartened and settle for less” (2) well then it is time for these teachers to find a new profession. If you do not have the drive then neither will your students. If the students fail then so does the teacher. Educators need to understand that their students “find history “irrelevant” to their present lives” (3). Not matter what subject; teachers need to make the subject relate to their students. This is were teachers could use Graff’s theory about having lessons relating to your students. This will encourage your students to have stronger interest in that subject. Many teachers teach the directive approach, which may be great for math, however when dealing with history or language arts teachers need to be constructivist.
Mistakes are lessons learned. We learn from our past how to improve our future.
-Jenn
I was one who did not enjoy history much in high school. I believe my junior year I actually slept through most my history class. I still managed to get a B for the class. But as the article says that or history text lied to us I already knew. My first history course at OCC I had a professor who told the class that most of what we have learned about history in or lifetime of schooling was incorrect. Now I don't remember what it was that showed us and how the books were wrong but, he was right just as this article is. He was able to show us.
ReplyDeleteIt’s been 4 maybe 5 years since I had a history course because of my dislike towards it just as the article said, most people do not take history if they don’t have to. I do find though that there are something’s about history that I do like. I like to know how things came about and how else would that be known if there wasn't history. The thing I don't like is that most of the things we had to learn were not interesting to me. That may be the reason why I slept during most of my history class.
Going back to my OCC professor, the class was Western Civ. and he made the class interesting. he made it obvious that he loved history and knew everything that he was teaching to us. He was very energetic and showed lots of emotion while teaching. I do not remember the book so much as I remember how he taught. That could be a reason as to why history is so boring, many of the teachers are just monotone and not very energetic in their teaching of the subject.
I would do my best to be just like my western civilizations Professor at OCC. I want to be passionate and energetic about whatever I am teaching. Just as professor Hall said “how could a child learn from the teacher if that teacher is not passionate about what they are teaching.” The students can tell when the teacher likes what they are doing or not. If they sense that the teacher does not like what they are doing then they begin to dislike the subject also. I feel that a good teacher is passionate about their subject matter and energetic in teaching it to their students.
Christina Racanelli
ReplyDelete“Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong”
By: James W. Loewen
I do agree that high school students do hate history. I remember being in high school; history and math were the worst classes. Math was hard and the whole class revolved around numbers. History was repetitive each year and you really only remembered names and dates for the test. But unfortunately for everyone, History along with Math classes are some of the most important subjects in high school. I feel it is extremely important to know the history of your country. Things that happened in our past shape our future. When a child goes to school he/ she is supposed to learn, boring or not. It does not matter if the books are repetitive or they contain boring, same old information.
Even if history is boring to many students, it all depends on how the teacher teaches their class. History is boring. It is full of dates and a bunch of names of people who won battles or died in battles. If a teacher makes the class fun and gets everyone involved the class will go by fast and the information will become more interesting. You can play games for memorization of dates and names. You can also have the class read out loud and ask them questions throughout the reading. These little things can make the class fun for students and it can help them memorize important facts not only for the test but in the future. This can be good because every year you basically learn the same information in history; it never changes, so therefore the students will know the information.
In high school, I had the best history teacher. It was my junior year of high school and I was in an AP class. I thought it was going to be so hard. I thought it was going to be boring and I was not going to learn anything that was going to stick in my head. Low and behold, I had the best teacher. His name was Mr. Curry. Mr. Curry got the whole class involved and he made the class fun. He also would split the class in half on Fridays. He would make Fridays our extra credit days. He would ask us questions from the homework or from the text that we just went over. Whatever half of the class answered the most questions would get five points extra credit; in an AP class anything you could get to help you out with your grade made a difference. But if there was a tie breaker each side of the class would have to sing our school’s Fight Song. This song was the song the band played at our football games; Mr. Curry was the coach, so he was big on the Fight Song. We seriously had to scream the words to this song, we could bang the walls or the floor with our feet just to be the loudest half of the class. It was usually hilarious. Everyone could hear us and students and teachers would peek their heads into our class until they got used to the noise. This little bit of fun in the classroom made the class so much more fun. History is boring, but it is how a teacher teaches the class that can make it fun and interesting. My teacher made a class that many would consider challenging and boring into a class that was excited to learn and had fun doing it.
I agree with some of the things that Loewen said. But on the other hand I feel that some subjects need to be taught. You need to learn how to do math for your future, you need to learn English, because it is our language, it is important to learn science and it is important to learn history. Like I said our history is what has shaped out lives. Slavery and World Wars and 9/11 are things that are so important to our country and they are things children need to learn boring or not.
Now this is upsetting…History is definitely my favorite subject. Mostly because of history based vacations forced upon us by my father, the history scholar, teacher, professor etc. I’ve been to every Presidents house and vacation house on the East Coast as well and all major battlefields fought on US soil. Name a historical event or location in a 500 mile radius and I can guarantee I’ve been there.
ReplyDeleteAs torturous as is it was when I was a kid it grew a true affinity in me for all things historic….
I really love all subjects – but what is great about history is that all subjects are in it! If you have a love of science the history is already there, research the strides we’ve made in Science or Geology and find that it is all history! If you love Art, like I do, the entire subject is based in history and the evolution of the subject! All that we learn is based on the past – everyone that doesn’t already love history better start!
I believe the reason so many children say they do not like history is that they are so stuck in the ‘now’. Everything they do and say is in the right now and it is hard for them to find interest in something they feel does not affect them. That’s why the best way to involve students in the past and take an interest in history is to work backwards. Take current events and relate them to the past. You really can find any event going on in the present and find some way to relate it to an event in history. The Iraq and Afghanistan war for instance, I won’t get in to how we really got ourselves here but that is something they might find interesting – while learning that their own country did them a disservice (some teachers may feel they need to leave certain things out) – these events and the like would be included in a history book titled, “An American Tradition.” Anyway…….
Cont.
ReplyDeleteI feel that most students that are apathetic towards history have learned something but have become disheartened. Loewen refers to minority students becoming disinterested in history – because they are not a part of it and most history books still focus on the ‘white mans’ perspective. Can you imagine how passive you would be if you never learned anything about your own people in history class, besides slavery in the South and how the Spanish conquered South America. Most history, by the time anyone gets to writing it down, has been misinterpreted or just plain wrong. This either makes people disinterested or pushes them away entirely. Students today are a lot savvier than many teachers think – many do research on their own or have interests that are based in history. Teachers just need to do a little research of their own to find what will bring these students in.
People and students are very aware of the rights and wrongs done by this country and when our own government states it in “unpatriotic’ to question what they do – it is easy to become apathetic. It can be overwhelming to someone that is not inherently interested in history – people want realism and honesty in their history. Teachers need to learn how to pull that information out of the history books. Perhaps if a teacher was stuck with one of these books that Loewen was referring to – they could use it as an example and pull out all of the inaccuracies. Showing the students the imperfections in history and how many of the people that make up our history were imperfect. For instance, everything we know about our first President George Washington, is based on a book by Washington Irving that was written 50 years after his death. The story about him chopping down a cherry tree is completely made up. Much of our knowledge of history is based on misinformation written years after the events.
Perhaps the best way to learn history and get students excited about it – is to get rid if text books all together, or perhaps put them to the side. Using current event periodicals to spark conversation can help a teacher to find relatable events based in history. As a teacher I would want to create analysis and debate in my classroom, leading to a deeper wonderment that will follow the students through life.
The introduction to James W. Loewen’s book, “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong,” was an intriguing preface to his book. He references and quickly addresses what he will cover in chapters to come, which left me questioning what he was really getting at.
ReplyDeleteJust by reading the introduction, and being one of the five-sixths of Americans that has, “never take a course in American history beyond high school,” (5) I do not know the “omissions and distortions” (4) he is talking about. It makes me want to read the rest of the book so I can see what he is referencing, and see if my schooling in American history was all lies. My American history courses in high school consisted of two years of A.P. U.S. History that was taught purely for test preparation, I wonder if the AP test is just full of the lies our textbooks contain as well.
Loewen’s review of multiple textbooks of high schools American history is an interesting endeavor. It reminds me of a Fox News Special that was on in the beginning of this schools year, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,506724,00.html and http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,545900,00.html. The special highlighted the monopoly over the textbook industry, how political correctness of the wording has altered the meaning of multiple concepts, and how depending on the biggest buyer, some major subject points are just left out. One of the most striking points of the special for me, which fits directly in with Loewen’s introduction, is how the Texas State Board of Education did not want to include Evolution in their science textbooks, and since Texas is one of the largest buyer of textbooks the theory of Evolution was altered or omitted in most textbooks that ended up selling nationwide.
I want to teach high school science, so this definitely impacts my future. I know that the theory of evolution is a controversial topic, but I did learn it in high school. This article and Loewen’s report of how the same thing happens in history texts, makes me think depending on your school and teacher, vital information in all subjects could be missing. If students are supposed to be learning from the past and learning major life concepts, why are the school districts allowing for this to happen?
Even if the texts omits material or contain lies it should be up to the teacher to teach the correct concepts, like Gregg said, you can’t just blame the materials. This goes for any subject, not just history. Would I not teach the theory of Evolution just because it is not in my text? I would teach evolution, but have the students understand that there are other theories and it is a controversial topic. It is doing a disservice to the students by omitting information. With that I fully agree with Loewen, we are making the students stupider by keeping things from them.
As I read this, I began to think of my past history teachers. And some of my history teachers were actually pretty exciting. One of my middle school history teachers was actually pretty fun and he would show us videos and relate history to our personal experiences. And my freshman history teacher would teach us history, but not in the technical terms. He'd bring world war II into high school perspective. LIke saying the jocks are at the lunch table, and suddenly the chess team would come over and start throwing food at them, simulating the bombing of pearl harbor.
ReplyDeleteMy sophomore history teacher was actually pretty exciting too. She actually used the book that the article came from . I forget what it was exactly (probably wasn't paying attention that day) but I remember us discussing about the book. She would get excited, use powerpoints, and get us involved.
I do agree with becky, how some kids hate it, but had to walk away with something from the class. I feel it is partially the teachers fault. Because I had this teacher in my other college. And he had powerpoint slides of straight words, black and white, nothing fancy and it would be paragraphs, and it was absolutely torture. I would rather have someone pull my eyelashes out one by one then be in that class again. But to show a teacher everyone enjoyed was my chemistry teacher in high school. He was showing us water displacement, and he actually filled up a trash can and show us how it works. I think it definitely changes how a student can learn.
I know I'm going to sound like a typical student but I feel field trips and other hands on activities definitely help in the learning. When I was in middle school i never really was interested in the civil war, but when we went to Gettysburg, everything seemed to opened my eyes. I felt that was an eye opener and hearing all the stories of the past.
To sum it up, it's all depending on what teacher you have. If you get a teacher like I had in my other school, you'll hate history and it's awful. But if you have a teacher like I had in high school, you'll definitely enjoy the subject that they are teaching.
Dave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9L52maq_vA
If anyone is interested, thats the video of my chem teacher doing the water displacement.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI wasn’t a fan of history in school either. It felt like receiving 40 minutes of facts five days a week. It was boring, because it wasn’t challenging. I would usually use the time to take a quick nap. The only pieces of my history classes over the years that were enjoyable were the sections on slavery and the holocaust. Not because of the subject matter, but because they were the most memorable.
ReplyDeleteOur American History books are one big information overload. In grade school, the teachers sugar coat the truth because of our fragile age and by the time we move into high school, we are completely lost, “I don’t remember that happening.” It’s like watching Bambi in a grade school classroom and the teacher fast forwards through the scene where Bambi’s mother gets shot, and then watching the movie again at home with no one there to fast forward. When I learned about the holocaust in grade school, I didn’t understand the big question. Why? Why were they killing the Jews? I didn’t understand it and I didn’t know how or the extent of the genocide. I was in fifth grade and to make it more clear for me, my parents had me watch Schindler’s List. The reality of the holocaust hit me hard, because I was so young and couldn’t understand why.
In high school, history is required for all four years of study. The funny part about it is they use the same textbook for all four years, but they just divvy it up into American History I, American History II, American History III, and American History IV. They just pick up where the previous year left off. Has anyone ever heard of teaching with some other source besides a textbook? Jess Gushue le Grange makes a valid argument in terms of using other sources, “How about providing students with thought provoking articles? How about giving them this very article on the first day of school?” She touches on something big here, “…thought provoking,” history isn’t thought provoking the ways its currently being taught in grade school and high school.
Finally, we reach college where we get to choose what branch of history we want to take. My favorite was World History; I loved learning about other cultures and countries. My teacher never used a book; she gave us the important information without sugar coating it or editing it. My teacher also refused to use the first three intellectual domains on bloom’s taxonomy. She would have us analyze, synthesize, and evaluate. Our tests didn’t focus on memory retrieval, but essays on “how do you explain…” and “what do you think led to…” Grade school and high school history are all about knowledge and comprehension, which is why students don’t enjoy history. The student never gets a chance to challenge it, because most scholars believe that what’s printed is the truth and one can’t challenge the truth. College focuses on teaching students to analyze and support. I didn’t know how to write a proper paper on what I thought until college. I never knew my opinion even mattered until I went to college. As I said before, the newest generation of teachers is going to get it right.
I found the introduction to Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen extremely interesting. I do believe that this author has very valid points and is bringing up a huge issue in the education field today. Kids don’t like history, it is always their least favorite subject and when I was in school it was my least favorite subject as well. I would always get A’s in history but I would hate having to sit through eighty minutes (we had block scheduling) of history a day. It would always put me to sleep and make the day drag along. However, history is very important and our nation’s future is at stake if the future generations aren’t learning what they need to learn.
ReplyDeleteThe author states that “most students get higher grades in history than math, science, or English” and when they can avoid history they do. I know this true through my own experience, even though my weak point is math, I took pre-calculus over another history course my senior year. It is sad, but most of the people I knew senior year did the same thing. History just isn’t exciting for students and is the longest part of the day for most students.
The author also states that history teachers just tend to stay ahead of students in the books and just teach them what will be on the test. This describes every history teacher I have ever had, even in college. If teachers took the time to reinvent the curriculum and didn’t teach straight from the book all the facts that students are suppose to memorize, they might be more engaged in the subject. I know a few kids who love history; they always watch the History Channel and National Geographic, but when they are in a history class, their always the kids who go to sleep. If the kids who love history are tuning out their class, then we know there is a problem and something needs to change.
I also agree with the author that “textbooks exclude conflict or real suspense” and that they leave out” anything that might reflect badly upon our nation.” However, I don’t think that we are the only nation who does this; I think all nations do this to some extent. I often say that I would like to see a history textbook from Germany because I would love to see what they say happened in World War Two. I think this is just a natural reaction, a nation does not want its youth to see its flaws or mistakes, however, it is information they need to know. Is it not the point of history to learn the past, so history does not repeat itself? Well if we don’t know all of the past, the stuff the history books left out, how can we be so sure it will not be repeated?
Also it is true that “history textbooks” are clones of each other.” Every text book I have ever had has the same information in them and nothing more. They contain the same “Key Terms,” “Review Identifications” and “Thinking Critically” questions. They have the same set up, the same information, and covers that aren’t so different. It always 800 pages of the same material and it seems like it is the same lessons year after year. It is not wonder why history is at the bottom of the priority list for students. It is boring and repetitive for students and we need to find a way to break the barrier and get through to our students. History teachers have the burden of these tasks, but if they aren’t up to the challenge, then maybe the need to consider a career change.
Part 1
ReplyDeleteI went to elementary school in the 60’s. The civil rights movement, women’s rights movement, the hippy movement and the Vietnam War protests were in full swing. This history wasn’t written yet, however everybody was questioning everything.
Can you believe that I wasn’t allowed to wear pants to public school until 6th grade and the only pants allowed were pantsuits! Some of you know the “The Mary Tyler Moore” show from Nick at Night. It was popular during the time of the pantsuit. Mary, an unmarried woman, living in her own apartment in the big city , was trying to become a journalist (OMG). Mary made heads turn in the 60’s and early 70’s. Sure, women were able to enter the workforce, but only if they were doing women’s work and had dinner ready for the husband and kids each night. Some of you might remember “All in the Family” and the controversial kiss between Carroll O’Connor and Sammy Davis Jr. This was a historical moment!
Most of the country only had 6 television stations to choose from and they didn’t have a 24 hour programming cycle. In fact, most channels “signed off” with a picture of the American flag waving with our national anthem playing in the background. While watching the evening news with Walter Cronkite with my parents and brother, I remember asking my mom “why are there gorillas in Vietnam?” The newscast was actually discussing guerrilla warfare without the spin that is so prevalent today.
My brother was sent home from school because his hair was too long.Hair was the popular and controversial musical of the day. Would anyone in our class send a kid home for having long hair?
Equal pay for women didn’t exist. Neighborhood “redlining” was actively practiced. Our neighborhood was built in three sections between 1965 and 1968. The builder wouldn’t sell to Black families. A bi-racial couple was able to “sneak in” because the white spouse negotiated the deal. Imagine the builder’s surprise when he found out!
Women could not have legal abortions and the Pill was new. Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King were both assassinated and Apollo 11 landed on the moon when I was in grade school.
My 7th and 8th grade history teacher brought contemporary history to life. In 1972, he taught a summer class about Presidential Elections. The 1972 Democratic Convention took place during this class. It was exciting! Our learning was interactive and the concepts stuck. He made everything interesting.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePart 2
ReplyDeleteHigh School history class is a blur. I don’t remember if any of my history teachers even brought up Watergate and Nixon’s Impeachment. History wasn’t interesting again until I attended Kean College. I took at least two history classes from the same professor. I remember he loved the Yankees and looked like a homeless man. His teaching style was compelling. He would bring in recordings of historical events, baseball games, and political speeches and act them out. He lived his subject and we loved living it with him.
I have to believe that many teachers of History are not teaching it as a first choice. Some teachers would have to rely on the text and may even be naïve enough to think that because it is in a textbook, it is true. I am not eager to assign blame to the teacher who uses the textbook. Not every teacher is a history scholar. Not every teacher is able to translate their enthusiasm and knowledge as effortlessly as Professor Hall can. He knows what he wants to teach and he makes it interesting and relevant.
I dropped an Ecology class this semester because the Professor was unable to fully bring the lessons to life or make them relevant to the class. Her interest and her knowledge of the topic were apparent, however, she was unable to deliver “the goods” to her students. The textbook was scholarly and dry. The professor couldn’t make the lesson her own and the book was so awful that I knew it was a losing combination. The irony here is that Ecology is interesting and the Professor is an Ecology scholar.
Tania showed us that the right teacher can make punctuation rules relevant. Clearly this could be a TED moment! I was introduced to a book by the Grammar Girl yesterday. I wonder what she has to say about semi-colons.
But I digress….. We have the opportunity to teach our students to fact check, or to not let a poorly written text to keep them from learning History or any other interesting, or not so interesting subject. We can make it come alive like my American History Professor at Ocean County College could. He has a huge collection of historical clippings, movies, documents, cartoons and the like to make the material come alive. He told the class that The History Channel is not always factually correct and should be regarded with some skepticism.
Those of you that saw the Berlin wall come down or participated in the election of our first Black President or remember the birth of MTV and the racial controversy that ensued can bring your own history to the classroom and relate it back to events that began before our time.
I will be able to teach all four core subjects in elementary school when I complete this program. I want to teach all subjects in one classroom to the same grade every day because I want the opportunity to weave it all together. There is so much History to teach in Science, Mathematics and English. Like most people, I believe in my terminal uniqueness. The amount of education, work and life experience I bring to the classroom is greater than the majority of the students in our program. I have lived through and experienced some of the most significant contemporary historical events or movements in our country. In my world and in my classroom, none of these subjects are truly separate. While these subjects can be taught in isolation, it makes no sense to me to do it that way. Don’t let a lousy text stop you from giving the students what they need and crave.
Lynn Rosch-Brancato
It is hard to respond to something that I agree with as much as I agree with James w. Loewen. Do I highlight the points that stand out the most? Do I just say how my high school history experience shaped my strong agreement? Do I just say: “I need to read the rest of the book?” Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong is definitely on my book list, along with Outliers.
ReplyDeleteI was actually fortunate in high school to have really good history teachers, especially my American history teachers. I’ll spare the name of my Western Civilization teacher because he was your standard monotone history teacher who was in the position just so he could coach a high school athletic team. Western Civ was pretty boring but I always liked history and geography. As I said before my American history teachers were great. We were always doing current events and trying to tie them into the actual class work that needed to be covered. We did a lot of projects that involved seeking first hand experiences like books, and diaries. So in general I feel like my history teachers tried a substantial amount to keep our interest.
Now I don’t want to say that there isn’t any room for improvement. History is a heavy subject and a lot gets left out. When I did get to college and had my first history class I was blown away with what had been left out of my classes for so many years. I am not sure what the best solution is. I think it would greatly depend on the students in the class. Sometimes watching a movie about a period can help a person better imagine what life must have been like for the people. I mean I just found out this year that in ancient Roman times they used to paint their houses bright colors, but because of movies I think everything was marble white. In Loewen’s article, he highlights that minority students feel left out of history, I could not agree more, even as a woman I feel left out of mainstream history. There is a lot more to history than war. High School history needs to be about everyone.
I was that kid who knew all the state capitals at age 6. I feel a lot of my interest in history comes from my parents who were constantly taking the family on educational vacations. We went to Williamsburg, Boston, Plymouth Rock, Washington D.C., name a historical site on the east coast and I’ve probably been there. So history in my life started early and I never grew tired of the people dressed in era costumes and acting as if the television is non-existent. I love history. I want others to enjoy it as much as I do, when I teach history to future students I want them to find something about history that is relevant to them in their world.
-Emily Asay
Mindy Bancheri
ReplyDeleteI too hated history, in fact I had to take history in summer school my freshman year in high school. I knew why then and I know why now when I read my daughters elementary history text. When I got to college I found history more interesting cause it gave me choices of what history I wanted to learn about. I craved my roots of historical backgroud not just Chrisopher Colubus blah blah blah, by the way is also BS! Students need to be engaged in what they are learning not be read to. All I remember about the hostory class I failed was this; read chapter so and so and then answer the questions at the end of the chapter. What did I learn? Then the next day the class read outloud what we were suppose to read to previous night. BORING! I never learned arguementive history and our class never had a debate. Perhaps things are different in some of todays history classes. My oldest who is a junior in high school is loving her history class. She said they debate issues about current and past politics and have cooperative learning projects and mock trials of previous history lessons. I agree that text book anything is not going to engage anyone, or just being cut and dry about an issue without a debate. The teacher needs to see the mulitculture of the classroom and add a little spice to the lesson from these different cultures and blend it all together. Perhaps when teaching about the civil war discuss at the same time what was going on in the Middle East. History is important to know so it does not repeat itself but the teacher should make it interesting as well as informative.
I completely agree with this article. I remember often finding history one of the most sterile and boring subjects in school. I remember feeling like the information was just written in the most uninspiring and boring way humanly possible. I suppose because of this, in grade school I thought history was simply something I wasn't interested in. However, my father has a great love of history and buys many books about history, including many older books that have been banned.
ReplyDeleteThe article is absolutely correct about history classes and textbooks taking all of the drama and controversy out of the subject. US history and all history is full of so many dramatic, controversial and interesting things. Some of the stuff that has happened is so incredible it's difficult to think it even took place, but that is glossed over in most history classes. I definitely think nationalism has to do with it. Teachers are afraid to touch certain topics in certain ways, and many textbooks just seem like phony drivel that are trying overly hard to paint the US as "right" and "good" to the point that it all seems extremely fake. I have read books in my spare time about history and found them extremely interesting. It is important that we all have at least a baseline knowledge of how things got to the point they are today.
I also definitely can understand why minorities and people of other races are even more uninterested by history. They aren't spoken for or about. No one is going into detail or looking at all of the rich cultural events of these people. If you feel that you aren't being included, it must be very difficult to remain interested. Unfortunately, the combination of not being able to relate and a textbook full of sterile, boring information creates a very difficult environment in terms of really feeling passionate about the subject.
The whole process of memorizing knowledge and spewing it out for a test is nothing exclusive to the subject of history, but it doesn't help. I could go on a rant about my dislike for that whole "formula" of how a class works, but I won't because that can get quite long-winded. But with something as deep and rich as history that is about real life, making the way the class is taught so standard is a crime. There is so much interesting knowledge to be gained from history, but I feel we shy away from truly getting into it at any somewhat early age because rules and regulations make it difficult to talk about the interesting, controversial or dramatic factors of history ... which are the very factors that make history so interesting.
After reading Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, I felt like I was reliving high school all over agan. I can't tell you how many times I have memorized chapter after chapter for my tests. Don't aske me after the test because I couldn't tell you. I know it's terrible for me to say this, but it's the truth. It is unbelievable that "five sixths of all Americans never take a coarse in American History beyond high school". How is that even possible? Loewen brings up a an interesting point that Americans are interested in history, just not in the history textbooks. I don't know if the history books will ever change, but does that mean our students can't learn about their country? Absolutely not. Like Samantha mentions, we have to use the textbooks as a guide not to use them as the lessons. When it comes down to it, they are books, and they must fit every bit of history in 800 pages. I remember my teacher asking me to read two three chapters at a time and then coming to class just to fill a worksheet out. what good did that do me? I found the answers to my questions and then moved on to the next worksheet. Does it really have to be this way? Again absolutely not. I know it sounds cheesy but but we somehow how to make history come alive for our students. I don't know what the exact answer is, but we can't only rely on the textbook itself. As Loewen mentions, we have to bring some relavance to history class. Loewen writes that "textbooks never use the present to illuminate the past". As Loewen mentions, why don't we ask students to "learn about gender roles in the present, to promt thinking about what women did and did not achieve in the suffrage movement"? I can only speak for the teachers I had, but it seems if they had given up. If my teacher wasn't interested in the subject how on earth was I supposed to love the subject. I will never be like those teachers no matter what subject I teach.
ReplyDeleteLies My Teacher Told me
ReplyDeleteI suppose I should add myself to the list of students that dislikes history very much; I am not sure if I should blame some former teachers for that or my parents. Even though I had a couple of great history teachers, it was not my favorite subject neither in the United States nor Peru. Here, I learned about the 13 colonies, George Washington, the Mayflower, the Vietnam War, about the impact that 1929 had in the U.S. economy, The Cold War and so forth. In Peru, while I was in elementary school, I learned about how, when and why my native country lost so much land against other neighbor countries (Ecuador and Chile), the Arica’s war, the Tarapaca War, Peruvian heroes, etc. No matter what kind of history I was taught, it did not interest me. I was always attracted to science in general and I always had a talent for it. I always excelled in Spanish literature, but not too much in English Literature; for this reason I want to teach science or Spanish in either middle school or high school. By the way, I read Tania’s post and I admired her courage for wanting to teach English in High school, even though it’s not your native language. I applaud you and I am sure that you will be a great English teacher because you will be able to bring another culture to your teaching and that is a mega plus.
Students that attend college and take history get surprised of how much they were taught while they were in public school. In most cases, when a student attends college, they only take the history that it is required and even though there are many history classes that belong to the “G” (general) subjects, most students decide to stay away from the history classes. For my Languages and Culture Studies major, I was required to take classes related to Spanish culture and civilization. Even though part of these classes were about the past and history of Latin-American countries; it was very interesting to learn. But this changed as soon as my professor started to mention dates and names of many wars, of people involved in the events. Immediately after, I lost interest in the topic. I am not sure what it was, but it became “boring,” like Loewen said. I never minded to know the overview of a war, but when the professor started to mention small details; it was then hard to pay attention and keep focus in class. For some history majors, this might be so rude; I apologize for not being able to appreciate your passion.
I agree with Loewen when he states that history is a not hard subject to learn, a lot of it takes memorization. Before I started to write this essay, I started to discuss about this topic with my two teenage kids; I read the beginning of the text, “High school students hate history,“ immediately after I was interrupted; they both nodded at the same time, “Yeah mom, history sucks,” my son said, “It is so boring!” my daughter instantly said. I could not help to laugh, “Oh my gosh! That’s what the article says next. Loewen said that is borr-r-ring,” My husband got somewhat upset because he is the only at home that is a history lover, “How can you say that! History is what we are now,” he answered in disgust. It was three of us against him alone.
I remember when my children where in middle school and I would go to their school for teacher/parent conferences. Outside the math classroom, literally all the parents waiting outside were discussing their concern for the children in math. In my mind I was thinking, “Really? For Jose and Kathie, math is piece of cake.” Right after that, I recalled one of the mothers asking, “After this, I have to talk to the social studies teacher,” another mother responded, “I don’t think I am going to that one, social studies is soooo easy” They seemed to care less about history but were very concern for math. Both of my children always struggled with history because it was “so boring,” they said. “The worst thing is to have it first thing in the morning,” my son said, “It was torture,” my daughter responded.
Before actually reading through this article, I knew I was already going to have a negative attitude towards it just because the word “history” was in the title. I despised history, along with many others I see after reading some peoples responses. Ever since elementary school it was that one subject that I just hated to learn and was horrible at. The books were such a turn off, huge, bulky, and dull as he brings up in his writing. History books are all past incidents and its hard for any real relation to take place to understand it better. As someone else stated in there response my dad was also a huge fan of history so whenever I asked about something or needed help he was right there and tried to convince me it was cool, but that never worked ha. Now don’t get me wrong, I do believe history is something that everyone should have a little knowledge of because it explains how our country came to where it is now and I think that’s important to understand. I just wish it wasn’t so dry and boring!
ReplyDeleteI think this topic of discussion can also lead back to the never ending point of how if the teacher can make it interesting then it will benefit the students in there learning of that topic. I can remember one very good teacher and one very bad teacher in my history class career. My freshman year of high school I got slammed with one of the most difficult and dullest teachers I could have got for a history class and I managed to slip by with a C. He put notes up and we had to copy and that was about it, the worst way to learn history. The good teacher I had was interesting and got us involved and had lots of projects to help us out and you know what, I got an A. Learning history is not hard it’s all about memorization but if it was interesting when you learned it, it will be that much easier to remember.
I found it very interesting when he brings up the topic about how history teachers in college are more pleased when students taking there class have less background in history. Yet this would never be appropriate for a math class in college since you need large amount of background information to perform higher level math classes. I guess history professors figure they didn’t learn anything in previous classes so it easier to start on a new slate. I really enjoyed the quote on the front page that James Baldwin said because we can ramble on about how boring and horrible it is, but its still so much better than anything we can say because face it we wouldn’t be anything without history.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
ReplyDeleteChristina Racanelli
“Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong”
By: James W. Loewen
I do agree that high school students do hate history. I remember being in high school; history and math were the worst classes. Math was hard and the whole class revolved around numbers. History was repetitive each year and you really only remembered names and dates for the test. But unfortunately for everyone, History along with Math classes are some of the most important subjects in high school. I feel it is extremely important to know the history of your country. Things that happened in our past shape our future. When a child goes to school he/ she is supposed to learn, boring or not. It does not matter if the books are repetitive or they contain boring, same old information.
Even if history is boring to many students, it all depends on how the teacher teaches their class. History is boring. It is full of dates and a bunch of names of people who won battles or died in battles. If a teacher makes the class fun and gets everyone involved the class will go by fast and the information will become more interesting. You can play games for memorization of dates and names. You can also have the class read out loud and ask them questions throughout the reading. These little things can make the class fun for students and it can help them memorize important facts not only for the test but in the future. This can be good because every year you basically learn the same information in history; it never changes, so therefore the students will know the information.
In high school, I had the best history teacher. It was my junior year of high school and I was in an AP class. I thought it was going to be so hard. I thought it was going to be boring and I was not going to learn anything that was going to stick in my head. Low and behold, I had the best teacher. His name was Mr. Curry. Mr. Curry got the whole class involved and he made the class fun. He also would split the class in half on Fridays. He would make Fridays our extra credit days. He would ask us questions from the homework or from the text that we just went over. Whatever half of the class answered the most questions would get five points extra credit; in an AP class anything you could get to help you out with your grade made a difference. But if there was a tie breaker each side of the class would have to sing our school’s Fight Song. This song was the song the band played at our football games; Mr. Curry was the coach, so he was big on the Fight Song. We seriously had to scream the words to this song, we could bang the walls or the floor with our feet just to be the loudest half of the class. It was usually hilarious. Everyone could hear us and students and teachers would peek their heads into our class until they got used to the noise. This little bit of fun in the classroom made the class so much more fun. History is boring, but it is how a teacher teaches the class that can make it fun and interesting. My teacher made a class that many would consider challenging and boring into a class that was excited to learn and had fun doing it.
I agree with some of the things that Loewen said. But on the other hand I feel that some subjects need to be taught. You need to learn how to do math for your future, you need to learn English, because it is our language, it is important to learn science and it is important to learn history. Like I said our history is what has shaped out lives. Slavery and World Wars and 9/11 are things that are so important to our country and they are things children need to learn boring or not.
Posted by Christina Racanelli at 9:10 AM