How good is your history class

[SomeRandom]

Something of a cliche that I’ve always kind of grew up with is, honestly, how badly the US education is in terms of teaching history. (I assume below a College level.)

So I’m curious as to what your experiences were in school, at the younger levels specifically. Up until college level.
With history specifically. Though you may chime in with faults of other subjects if you so desire.

Because I’ve had many interactions with my US brethren which indicates that history was largely “whitewashed” and many that indicated the opposite
I assume that’s to do with how different states handle such things, yeah?
And honestly it’s something I’ve always been a little curious about.

Have at it.

 

[Viker]

I got as far as learning George Washington never told no lies and never chopped down that cherry tree. Then he lead rebels against the Galactic Empire and winned.


But really. I faired well in history. Made it through high school and took some college level history. I don't remember history classes being different moving from Indiana to Kentucky. College was more comprehensive. Learned things then I didn't remember or learn before.

 

[SomeRandom]

I got as far as learning George Washington never told no lies and never chopped down that cherry tree. Then he lead rebels against the Galactic Empire and winned.

Sounds fun lol

Why do you think the subject is lacking?
Merely curious

 

[Viker]

Sounds fun lol

Why do you think the subject is lacking?
Merely curious

It's probably due to lack of interest from students. Plus, they probably received history lessons at home. Especially in the South.

 

[JustGeorge]

It was intensely boring, and almost none of it stuck. Probably because it was intensely boring.

I wonder if part of the reason it was so boring is so much is required to be taught, they just have to squeeze as much in as possible.

When I looked at some of my oldest son's history courses, they... well, there was a certain bias. You could say it was white washed(not denying some is/was), but I don't think that's entirely the right phrase... it was taught through a specific lens, what you were supposed to think/feel was laid out... there wasn't a lot of room for critical thinking or personal reflection.

 

[The Hammer]

there wasn't a lot of room for critical thinking or personal reflection

And therein lies my problem. It should invoke some critical thinking and reflection, at least at an age appropriate level.

 

[SomeRandom]

It's probably due to lack of interest from students. Plus, they probably received history lessons at home. Especially in the South.

What makes you say that?
Because I’ve heard similar sentiments from others over the years (specifically the comment about learning it in “the south.”)

 

[Estro Felino]

High school history curricula in my countries are very thorough and difficult.
If you want to have a 5-6 (C grade) basically...you need to study history in detail.
Our high school lasts 5 years.
In the first year students are taught history from prehistory to Julius Caesar.
Second year: the Roman Empire and the Middle Ages
Third Year: From the Middle Ages to Renaissance
Fourth Year: From Absolutism to the Second Industrial Revolution
Fifth Year: The 20th century.

 

[Father Heathen]

I grew up in a small rural red state town. My graduating highschool class was less than 80 students. In hindsight it was a **** school, with disinterested, unengaged teachers just phoning it in and simply ushering kids through the grades. The local system didn't give a **** about bullying, kids with psychological issues, and various other red flags. This was during the 90's. I've learned far more from the Internet than I ever did at that school.

 

[Watchmen]

My high school in the 90s did a fantastic job with history. It was always thought provoking and challenged us to be critical thinkers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I grew up in a small rural red state town. My graduating highschool class was less than 80 students. In hindsight it was a **** school, with disinterested, unengaged teachers just phoning it in and simply ushering kids through the grades. The local system didn't give a **** about bullying, kids with psychological issues, and various other red flags. This was during the 90's. I've learned far more from the Internet than I ever did at that school.

I went to a small rural school too. Though not in a red state. It was just about the opposite, except for one of our history teachers. He was hired to be football coach, teaching was secondary. And he was rather old and so what his style of football so we never did too well. He was also a terrible teacher and even worse when it came to grading papers. Students are not that stupid and over the years everyone came to know that he graded essay tests on one factor. Length. A longer paper meant a better grade. So people would write anything. After one test he had a stroke and died. Perhaps he was reading the papers for once. One student, one bright enough to get an A if he tried. was really worried and he confessed to me that his test consisted of the lyrics from American pie. Luckily our replacement was a young and smart teacher. He read the test and knew what was going on. The only thing he did was to announce to the calls that he could see that there were problems, no blame was given to anyone, and that our grades would start over from that point on. I actually learned some serious history for the rest of that class. And not a peep was heard from anyone that took advantage of the Ernie Madsen grading system.

 

[Secret Chief]

UK:

- National curriculum in England: history programmes of study

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

UK:

- National curriculum in England: history programmes of study

That is a variant of critical thinking. Is that actual taught or is it just fancy words?

 

[Augustus]

So I’m curious as to what your experiences were in school, at the younger levels specifically. Up until college level.
With history specifically.

All I can remember doing was:

Ancient Egypt
Romans
Vikings
Gunpowder Plot
Bonnie Prince Charlie
Industrial revolution
WW1
WW2

Because I’ve had many interactions with my US brethren which indicates that history was largely “whitewashed” and many that indicated the opposite

It's not just "our" history that gets whitewashed though, it's all history at a young level. Romans were efficient and advanced, not sometimes near-genocidal supremacists. Viking warriors were cool, not slavers and rapists.

I think it's really hard to create a history curriculum given limited time to contextualise everything.

In America, can you teach US slavery in a meaningful manner without teaching the global history of slavery?

In Britain can you teach the Empire in a meaningful manner without teaching the global history of Empire?

If Empire is bad and slavery is bad, how do you teach the role of imperialism in the abolition of slavery?

Without context it's easy to end up "whitewashing" or "self-loathing". Pointing out all the failings of your own country by modern standards without showing how these related to the standards of the time is as bad as pretending it was all sweetness and light.

Someone will always complain.

 

[ChristineM]

All my classes were pretty poo (except art). Not entirely the fault of the teachers though they should have noticed something rather than classing me as thick and unteachable.

I'm dyslexic which was not diagosed until i was 14, simple green tinted eye glasses brought letters into focus and my education began in earnest

 

[SomeRandom]

All I can remember doing was:

Ancient Egypt
Romans
Vikings
Gunpowder Plot
Bonnie Prince Charlie
Industrial revolution
WW1
WW2



It's not just "our" history that gets whitewashed though, it's all history at a young level. Romans were efficient and advanced, not sometimes near-genocidal supremacists. Viking warriors were cool, not slavers and rapists.

I think it's really hard to create a history curriculum given limited time to contextualise everything.

In America, can you teach US slavery in a meaningful manner without teaching the global history of slavery?

In Britain can you teach the Empire in a meaningful manner without teaching the global history of Empire?

If Empire is bad and slavery is bad, how do you teach the role of imperialism in the abolition of slavery?

Without context it's easy to end up "whitewashing" or "self-loathing". Pointing out all the failings of your own country by modern standards without showing how these related to the standards of the time is as bad as pretending it was all sweetness and light.

Someone will always complain.

I think it largely depends on the teacher.
I remember learning about the “bad parts” of my country’s history as young as maybe grade 4 maybe 5 (9 or 10 years old.)

Obviously not very in depth at that age and I agree with you otherwise.

But I think you have no choice but to be truthful in today’s era. Kids have a much higher access to the internet than even my generation did and I literally grew up on the web. That comes with a lot of baggage by default. Information, both good and flawed and indeed a generation used to a much higher “flow” of ideas. And at a much younger age.
If the school doesn’t teach them, someone else inevitably will.

 

[SomeRandom]

All my classes were pretty poo (except art). Not entirely the fault of the teachers though they should have noticed something rather than classing me as thick and unteachable.

I'm dyslexic which was not diagosed until i was 14, simple green tinted eye glasses brought letters into focus and my education began in earnest

SimilIar thing happened with me. Wasn’t until late high school a teacher noticed that I couldn’t see the board. (Needed corrective lenses)
Though I swear even with glasses I could never see those damned OHT things

 

[Viker]

What makes you say that?
Because I’ve heard similar sentiments from others over the years (specifically the comment about learning it in “the south.”)

In the south, there are still two historical narratives. The official one in the schools and the one many kids get at home, the one where southern slave owners and their protective states were the victims of the Civil War. It's called the Lost Cause.

 

[Viker]

I would add that there's not much in the way of critical thinking offered in early education. And civics courses seem to no longer be mandatory courses but electives ( not 100% certain ).

 

[MikeF]

Something of a cliche that I’ve always kind of grew up with is, honestly, how badly the US education is in terms of teaching history. (I assume below a College level.)

So I’m curious as to what your experiences were in school, at the younger levels specifically. Up until college level.
With history specifically. Though you may chime in with faults of other subjects if you so desire.

Because I’ve had many interactions with my US brethren which indicates that history was largely “whitewashed” and many that indicated the opposite
I assume that’s to do with how different states handle such things, yeah?
And honestly it’s something I’ve always been a little curious about.

Have at it.

I think High School history can be quite excellent in the US. It can vary, though, and is not universally true. Below High School, I see teaching history as providing a simplistic survey of history overall, but also, it is part of the indoctrination we provide our children into our particular society, instilling social values and social identity.

One fascinating thing about US schools, is that elementary schools focus a lot on State history. So the history you are getting will vary from state to state. And as someone else has mentioned, how the Civil War is characterized can be different between Northern states and Southern states. The the north, emphasis is given to slavery, while in the south, emphasis is given to the issue of States rights. Or at least this was the case in the 70's and 80's. Things may be different now.