Are history courses in U.S. schools failing students?

[Boyd]

For many years, I worked with private schools to develop history curriculums. The reason for this is that there was a perceived need for a more thorough look at history; something that these schools saw missing from most history text books. One of the large issues that we worked on stressing was the history of Amartica prior to "discovery" by Europeans. We also dealt with some of the atrocities that our country has been involved in such as the WWII interment camps, My Lai, and treatment of immigrants. The reason for such was to raise awareness that the U.S. is fallible, but that doesn't mean we should just quit.

These were just a few issues that were stressed for these schools, but were basically missing from most text books for public schools. Is this a problem? What can be done to solve the problem? Should we teach students about atrocities the U.S has been a part of?

 

[esmith]

I was in high school in the late 50's and basically hated history. The reason was all the teachers cared about was names, and dates, if you memorized what date something happened or a name you could pass the course. I really didn't get interested in history until I joined the service and got to see places. I finally became more and more interested in the whys. Something that for some reason was not really important in class. Maybe history is more interesting now that I can look at various factors such as geopolitics, related events, and so forth. I haven't seen a high school or college "history" book since say 1960, so I can't answer what is happening now.

 

[metis]

For many years, I worked with private schools to develop history curriculums. The reason for this is that there was a perceived need for a more thorough look at history; something that these schools saw missing from most history text books. One of the large issues that we worked on stressing was the history of Amartica prior to "discovery" by Europeans. We also dealt with some of the atrocities that our country has been involved in such as the WWII interment camps, My Lai, and treatment of immigrants. The reason for such was to raise awareness that the U.S. is fallible, but that doesn't mean we should just quit.

These were just a few issues that were stressed for these schools, but were basically missing from most text books for public schools. Is this a problem? What can be done to solve the problem? Should we teach students about atrocities the U.S has been a part of?

Yes, we must in order to be honest, and the history books I've seen do cover most of the major ones, but generally not in much detail. It's sort of like a hot potato that can be admitted to, but then let's quickly move on.

BTW, on, I believe it was CNN, a couple of weeks ago, they said there there's pressure being put on book companies to not portray slavery as being so bad, and we've already seen pressure being put on there and in some other states to portray creationism as a scientific alternative to evolution.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Whatever is included or left out of a history education is generally a reflection of the biases and agenda of whomever is setting the curriculum. I think it's fine to have a fundamental basis of history. However, history education is only really useful when one gains context and experience. Before that, it's either a dry memorization of people, places, dates, and events, and/or an indoctrination of somebody's elses worldview.

 

[Sunstone]

One of the most important lessons history teaches is that people repeat themselves -- even many people who know history. Perhaps this is because human nature is a constant that never fundamentally changes.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Whatever is included or left out of a history education is generally a reflection of the biases and agenda of whomever is setting the curriculum. I think it's fine to have a fundamental basis of history. However, history education is only really useful when one gains context and experience. Before that, it's either a dry memorization of people, places, dates, and events, and/or an indoctrination of somebody's elses worldview.

This ^

 

[Harari Rajul]

In high school and middle school (in Memphis), we never finished the history book (and my school was supposed to be the best school in the county with straight As on the report card); we always had around half of it left. Nor did I ever get to learn of WWI until 11th grade and that was only because my teacher realized how ignorant we were and decided to go speed up the lessons. We didn't get to WWII though.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

In high school and middle school (in Memphis), we never finished the history book (and my school was supposed to be the best school in the county with straight As on the report card); we always had around half of it left. Nor did I ever get to learn of WWI until 11th grade and that was only because my teacher realized how ignorant we were and decided to go speed up the lessons. We didn't get to WWII though.

I'm hoping that this is because they focused on other areas of the curriculum?

 

[Riverwolf]

They've been failing students for decades, now.

 

[metis]

I hated history in high school but loved in in college, and the reason why the latter was because most of my professors (I had a major in history-- most of it WWII+) dealt a great deal with cause and effect versus just memorizing and regurgitating the textbook. And I can relate to history even better now because at 68, I am history.

 

[Quintessence]

These were just a few issues that were stressed for these schools, but were basically missing from most text books for public schools. Is this a problem? What can be done to solve the problem? Should we teach students about atrocities the U.S has been a part of?

Maybe this is because I was raised in an area with some of the best public education in the country, but when I was taught history, it was not whitewashed. I'm not seeing this supposed problem, and I question whether or not it is as pervasive as is being suggested. I remember learning about the abuses of Native Americans in elementary school. In middle school, we had a major unit on slavery that combined history with reading Tom Sawyer. In high school, we were made well aware of the American atrocities committed during World War II and I did my WWII research paper on the internment of Japanese Americans.

Where's the problem?

 

[Boyd]

Maybe this is because I was raised in an area with some of the best public education in the country, but when I was taught history, it was not whitewashed. I'm not seeing this supposed problem, and I question whether or not it is as pervasive as is being suggested. I remember learning about the abuses of Native Americans in elementary school. In middle school, we had a major unit on slavery that combined history with reading Tom Sawyer. In high school, we were made well aware of the American atrocities committed during World War II and I did my WWII research paper on the internment of Japanese Americans.

Where's the problem?

It could be that your case is not the norm. I know for the state that I live in, and even the city (which actually had a Japanese interment camp, and now a little memorial there), history is greatly whitewashed. The history books used do not mention most of the atrocities that occurred in the state. The sections on Native Americans are very short, do not account the massacres, or even the prehistory.

Most U.S. history books start with white exploration. They ignore the vast amount of time preceding white "discovery," or even the later impact of Native Americans. Most try to present a picture of continual building of greatness.

While I'm sure there are schools that actually have a good hand on the subject, I would venture to say that the majority don't, and this is based on just looking at high school text books.

There is also the problem that the subject often greatly skips over the impact of religion. While there is brief mention of religion, it is largely ignored. Doing such does a great disservice as one can not explain history fully without examining the various contexts, including religion, that influenced actions.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Maybe this is because I was raised in an area with some of the best public education in the country, but when I was taught history, it was not whitewashed. I'm not seeing this supposed problem, and I question whether or not it is as pervasive as is being suggested. I remember learning about the abuses of Native Americans in elementary school. In middle school, we had a major unit on slavery that combined history with reading Tom Sawyer. In high school, we were made well aware of the American atrocities committed during World War II and I did my WWII research paper on the internment of Japanese Americans.

Where's the problem?

I had a similar experience at excellent public schools in a Blue state, up until WWII. Then I went to a Catholic school in a Red state and learned nothing of American atrocities post-WWII.

 

[Quintessence]

I had a similar experience at excellent public schools in a Blue state, up until WWII. Then I went to a Catholic school in a Red state and learned nothing of American atrocities post-WWII.

So the problem is likely non-standard curriculum? That has been griped about for years... and is a very complicated issue.

 

[Matsya]

Yes, I believe they are. Where I grew up they only teach one way and very biased at that. World history is not taught at length until middle-end of high-school. My 4th grade History teacher even tried to demonize Native-Americans. When I took American History in my freshman year of college it was like starting from scratch in that a lot of things we not taught in k-12. Although, I do think a lot of pre-university education is lacking. (e.g., the high-school where I live doesn't teach elementary, or any, physics.

 

[dust1n]

People fail themselves, then parents fail their children, then those children fail themselves, to live on in order to fail their children.