Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/10/04 17:15:13
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
DENVER (AP) — A fight in Colorado over how United States' history is taught has pitted the new conservative majority on a suburban Denver school board against students and teachers who accuse the board of censorship.
The students and teachers are protesting possible changes to the new Advanced Placement history course. Hundreds have turned out to demonstrate, holding signs saying "There is nothing more patriotic than protest" and "Teach us the truth."
School board members say they want to make sure the history course, accused of having an anti-American bias by some conservatives, is balanced. They say students are being used as pawns by teachers, who are upset about a new merit pay system.
Here's a look at the issue that has galvanized Colorado's second-largest school district:
WHAT SPARKED THE CHANGES TO THE CLASSES IN THE FIRST PLACE?
For years, high school teachers have complained that Advanced Placement history classes — electives which are meant to help high school students prepare for college— were not challenging enough. They said they were covering so many topics superficially and were more focused on helping students memorize facts and pass the test to earn college credit than actually preparing them to go to college.
A group of college professors and high school teachers were appointed in 2006 by the College Board, which administers AP exams, to redesign the course. The course plan was made public in 2012 and this is the first year it is being used in schools across the country.
HOW WERE HISTORY CLASSES CHANGED?
The focus of the course has shifted from cramming in as many facts as possible to emphasizing examination of historical documents and discussion about the nation's history organized around themes such as "politics and power" and "identity."
For example, the course gives more attention to the period before Christopher Columbus' arrival — a period rushed through before as just a "prelude" to colonization — as well as to slavery and women to incorporate new research, said University of Colorado history professor Fred Anderson, who helped in the first round of the redesign. He said teachers have more time to cover these topics because they no longer have to cover as much minutiae, like making students memorize dates of minor historical events.
WHAT DO CRITICS SAY?
Some conservatives like the National Review's Stanley Kurtz say the course was influenced by a movement in academia to de-emphasize the United States' uniqueness and treat it as one nation among many, with an eye toward promoting a less aggressive foreign policy.
The Colorado school board member who proposed reviewing the course, Julie Williams, says the course has an emphasis on "American-bashing" and says the framework omits important historical figures like Benjamin Franklin and Martin Luther King, Jr. and events like the Boston Tea Party. But others she says are omitted are mentioned as possible choices for student essays on the test, including Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.
The College Board says the framework isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of events and people to be covered because teachers generally know which figures to include and because curriculum standards vary among states. For example, the Black Panthers are suggested for a discussion about "attacks on postwar liberalism," but the instructions state that their specific mention doesn't mean that they are more important than King or Rosa Parks, who isn't mentioned.
WHAT STARTED THE COLORADO PROTESTS?
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
Williams is one of three conservatives elected to the school board last year. They are now the majority, and they've pushed out the district's veteran superintendent and clashed with the teachers union and parent-teacher association.
At the same meeting, they also backed a plan to base teacher raises on an evaluation system which teachers say is flawed. Teachers at two schools staged sick outs with some students joining them in protest the next day. When classes resumed the following week, waves of students walked out of class to protest.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN OTHER STATES?
In Texas, the state board of education has ordered teachers to adhere to curriculum standards and not teach to the AP history standards, even though students will still take the same test as students elsewhere. In South Carolina, conservatives have called on an education oversight committee to ask the College Board to rewrite the framework to remove ideological bias.
WHAT'S NEXT?
The school board will meet Thursday and may vote on the proposal. Students, parents and teachers plan to attend the meeting, as well as protest before it starts.
There's no sign conservatives want to back off creating a review committee, but the latest proposal omits the language about ensuring that the course promotes patriotism and downplays social disorder. Superintendent Dan McMinimee has said he'll ask the board to appoint students to the committee.
And they voted, apparently, now:
GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) — Students, parents and teachers in suburban Denver vow to continue demonstrating against a school board's new conservative majority after it refused to back off plans to review Advanced Placement U.S. history courses for what some see as anti-American content.
The Jefferson County Board of Education voted Thursday night to lay the groundwork for a review of curriculum, with the AP history course likely the first to get a deeper look. Board member Julie Williams, who proposed the history review, said she wants to make sure the class is balanced.
The elective course has been criticized by the Republican National Committee and the Texas State Board of Education, which has told teachers not to teach according to the course's new framework. Being taught for the first time this year, it gives greater attention to the history of North America and its native people before colonization and their clashes with Europeans, but critics say it downplays the settlers' success in establishing a new nation.
The Colorado board didn't vote on its original proposal to review the history course with an eye toward promoting patriotism and downplaying social disorder — language students have blasted in school-time protests across the district. However, students and other activists say the board's new approach to include students on existing curriculum review committees doesn't satisfy them because they believe board members will ultimately try to change the history course to suit their views.
"This isn't over," said Ashlyn Maher, 18, a Chatfield High School senior who has been helping organize protests over the past two weeks. "We are going to fight until we see some results."
Students and parents — along with Jefferson County teachers who are in their own fight with the board over evaluations and merit pay — demonstrated along a busy boulevard during Friday's afternoon rush hour as passing cars honked their horns.
Toni Johnson Boschee held a sign calling for a recall against the conservative board members as she carried her youngest child on her back, a Starbucks cup in one hand and fliers in the other. She said she's frustrated that the board did not listen to or engage in conversation with those who turned out against the history proposal.
"This is tyranny in slow motion. This is how it happens. We all need to stand up and raise our voices," she said.
The College Board administers the course and other AP classes, which are meant to prepare students for college and give them a chance at earning college credit. It says the framework — an outline of the course built around themes like "politics and power" and "environment and geography" — isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of everything to be studied, and teachers are always free to add material required by their states.
For example, Martin Luther King Jr. isn't mentioned in the framework, but the Black Panthers are. The College Board's instructions about the new framework say teachers know to include King but asked for help with less obvious examples of people and events to discuss around some of the themes.
But besides who is mentioned and who isn't, veteran history teacher Larry Krieger, of Montgomery, New Jersey, faults the framework for having a global, revisionist view. He said it depicts the U.S. as going from conquering Native Americans to becoming an imperial power, while downplaying examples of cooperation and unity.
"Native Americans were defeated, wrongs were done, African-Americans were enslaved. However, at the same time this was going on, democratic institutions were being established, there was religious toleration and a new society was being created," he said.
The College Board says students need to be familiar with concepts taught in college classes but the exam for college credit will often give students a chance to demonstrate multiple points of view.
Joan Bertin, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship, which opposed the Colorado proposal, said it's likely the issue could come up before school boards elsewhere at a time when some are also upset about Common Core, a new set of educational standards for reading and math adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia.
"People who are not in any ideological camp are going to say: 'Wait a minute. We just want our kids to get a good education. We don't want them to be indoctrinated into anything,'" she said.
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
Are they also going to teach the drawbacks of the free-market system, or is that un-American?
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
2014/10/04 17:58:18
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
I appreciate that, on the whole, Americans take patriotism a lot more seriously than the English, but is it really wrong to have a course of education that considers a nation's history from a fair perspective, even if that means admitting that mistakes were made in the past? I'm not suggesting that there should be any revisionism or apologism, as I see no real place for that in history, but regardless of what achievements were made by a nation, it seems wrong to me to not consider the mistakes and errors in the past. There should, to ensure balance in teaching, be equal consideration of, for example, slavery and the development of democracy in the USA.
The courses taught should not be thought about in terms of whether they are pro- or anti- American, but in terms of whether they a) prepare the students with the skills needed to study at a higher level, b) present them with a guideline to study the periods in question, and most importantly, c), allow the students to form their own opinion on the subjects in question. The teaching should be objective, and the opinions on it should be left to the students, no matter what those opinions might be. The purpose of studying history is to determine your own thoughts on a period and what that means to you, not to be taught patriotism/anti-patriotism.
2014/10/04 18:11:05
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
TheMeanDM wrote:Interesting....two articles that tie together.
Spoiler:
DENVER (AP) — A fight in Colorado over how United States' history is taught has pitted the new conservative majority on a suburban Denver school board against students and teachers who accuse the board of censorship.
The students and teachers are protesting possible changes to the new Advanced Placement history course. Hundreds have turned out to demonstrate, holding signs saying "There is nothing more patriotic than protest" and "Teach us the truth."
School board members say they want to make sure the history course, accused of having an anti-American bias by some conservatives, is balanced. They say students are being used as pawns by teachers, who are upset about a new merit pay system.
Here's a look at the issue that has galvanized Colorado's second-largest school district:
WHAT SPARKED THE CHANGES TO THE CLASSES IN THE FIRST PLACE?
For years, high school teachers have complained that Advanced Placement history classes — electives which are meant to help high school students prepare for college— were not challenging enough. They said they were covering so many topics superficially and were more focused on helping students memorize facts and pass the test to earn college credit than actually preparing them to go to college.
A group of college professors and high school teachers were appointed in 2006 by the College Board, which administers AP exams, to redesign the course. The course plan was made public in 2012 and this is the first year it is being used in schools across the country.
HOW WERE HISTORY CLASSES CHANGED?
The focus of the course has shifted from cramming in as many facts as possible to emphasizing examination of historical documents and discussion about the nation's history organized around themes such as "politics and power" and "identity."
For example, the course gives more attention to the period before Christopher Columbus' arrival — a period rushed through before as just a "prelude" to colonization — as well as to slavery and women to incorporate new research, said University of Colorado history professor Fred Anderson, who helped in the first round of the redesign. He said teachers have more time to cover these topics because they no longer have to cover as much minutiae, like making students memorize dates of minor historical events.
WHAT DO CRITICS SAY?
Some conservatives like the National Review's Stanley Kurtz say the course was influenced by a movement in academia to de-emphasize the United States' uniqueness and treat it as one nation among many, with an eye toward promoting a less aggressive foreign policy.
The Colorado school board member who proposed reviewing the course, Julie Williams, says the course has an emphasis on "American-bashing" and says the framework omits important historical figures like Benjamin Franklin and Martin Luther King, Jr. and events like the Boston Tea Party. But others she says are omitted are mentioned as possible choices for student essays on the test, including Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.
The College Board says the framework isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of events and people to be covered because teachers generally know which figures to include and because curriculum standards vary among states. For example, the Black Panthers are suggested for a discussion about "attacks on postwar liberalism," but the instructions state that their specific mention doesn't mean that they are more important than King or Rosa Parks, who isn't mentioned.
WHAT STARTED THE COLORADO PROTESTS?
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
Williams is one of three conservatives elected to the school board last year. They are now the majority, and they've pushed out the district's veteran superintendent and clashed with the teachers union and parent-teacher association.
At the same meeting, they also backed a plan to base teacher raises on an evaluation system which teachers say is flawed. Teachers at two schools staged sick outs with some students joining them in protest the next day. When classes resumed the following week, waves of students walked out of class to protest.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN OTHER STATES?
In Texas, the state board of education has ordered teachers to adhere to curriculum standards and not teach to the AP history standards, even though students will still take the same test as students elsewhere. In South Carolina, conservatives have called on an education oversight committee to ask the College Board to rewrite the framework to remove ideological bias.
WHAT'S NEXT?
The school board will meet Thursday and may vote on the proposal. Students, parents and teachers plan to attend the meeting, as well as protest before it starts.
There's no sign conservatives want to back off creating a review committee, but the latest proposal omits the language about ensuring that the course promotes patriotism and downplays social disorder. Superintendent Dan McMinimee has said he'll ask the board to appoint students to the committee.
And they voted, apparently, now:
GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) — Students, parents and teachers in suburban Denver vow to continue demonstrating against a school board's new conservative majority after it refused to back off plans to review Advanced Placement U.S. history courses for what some see as anti-American content.
The Jefferson County Board of Education voted Thursday night to lay the groundwork for a review of curriculum, with the AP history course likely the first to get a deeper look. Board member Julie Williams, who proposed the history review, said she wants to make sure the class is balanced.
The elective course has been criticized by the Republican National Committee and the Texas State Board of Education, which has told teachers not to teach according to the course's new framework. Being taught for the first time this year, it gives greater attention to the history of North America and its native people before colonization and their clashes with Europeans, but critics say it downplays the settlers' success in establishing a new nation.
The Colorado board didn't vote on its original proposal to review the history course with an eye toward promoting patriotism and downplaying social disorder — language students have blasted in school-time protests across the district. However, students and other activists say the board's new approach to include students on existing curriculum review committees doesn't satisfy them because they believe board members will ultimately try to change the history course to suit their views.
"This isn't over," said Ashlyn Maher, 18, a Chatfield High School senior who has been helping organize protests over the past two weeks. "We are going to fight until we see some results."
Students and parents — along with Jefferson County teachers who are in their own fight with the board over evaluations and merit pay — demonstrated along a busy boulevard during Friday's afternoon rush hour as passing cars honked their horns.
Toni Johnson Boschee held a sign calling for a recall against the conservative board members as she carried her youngest child on her back, a Starbucks cup in one hand and fliers in the other. She said she's frustrated that the board did not listen to or engage in conversation with those who turned out against the history proposal.
"This is tyranny in slow motion. This is how it happens. We all need to stand up and raise our voices," she said.
The College Board administers the course and other AP classes, which are meant to prepare students for college and give them a chance at earning college credit. It says the framework — an outline of the course built around themes like "politics and power" and "environment and geography" — isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of everything to be studied, and teachers are always free to add material required by their states.
For example, Martin Luther King Jr. isn't mentioned in the framework, but the Black Panthers are. The College Board's instructions about the new framework say teachers know to include King but asked for help with less obvious examples of people and events to discuss around some of the themes.
But besides who is mentioned and who isn't, veteran history teacher Larry Krieger, of Montgomery, New Jersey, faults the framework for having a global, revisionist view. He said it depicts the U.S. as going from conquering Native Americans to becoming an imperial power, while downplaying examples of cooperation and unity.
"Native Americans were defeated, wrongs were done, African-Americans were enslaved. However, at the same time this was going on, democratic institutions were being established, there was religious toleration and a new society was being created," he said.
The College Board says students need to be familiar with concepts taught in college classes but the exam for college credit will often give students a chance to demonstrate multiple points of view.
Joan Bertin, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship, which opposed the Colorado proposal, said it's likely the issue could come up before school boards elsewhere at a time when some are also upset about Common Core, a new set of educational standards for reading and math adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia.
"People who are not in any ideological camp are going to say: 'Wait a minute. We just want our kids to get a good education. We don't want them to be indoctrinated into anything,'" she said.
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
Are they also going to teach the drawbacks of the free-market system, or is that un-American?
To be fair, it is quite rare for the education to tell about the negative sides of the current system.
2014/10/04 18:40:40
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
I took an AP US History class back in high school which suffered from the same misdirected focus as the conservatives are complaining about in the article. We spent nearly a quarter of an entire semester - this is several weeks, mind you - discussing pre-Colombian North America. Now I'm not going to say that the history of pre-Colombian societies is worthless and irrelevant, but it really has very little to do at all with the history of the United States. In my junior year of high school I took an AP World History class and we covered pre-Colombian societies there too, and I feel this is a far more appropriate venue for that curriculum.
I also recall absolutely superfluous anecdotes about racial minorities and women in every single chapter, often on every other page in our textbook, and while I appreciate the notion that these people were also involved to some extent in shaping our history, again there was far too much time invested into these relatively insignificant topics while major ones like the 7 Years War and the American Revolution itself went virtually without mention.
Just as an example to show you some of the ludicrous activities we did in this class: to simulate the harsh conditions of the slave ships, we were instructed to lie on the ground, and curl up into balls for the majority of the class period. It's positively looney.
Even at the principled, normative level, I take major issue with primarily focusing on the "politics of power and identity," instead of citizenship and our shared national history. It's absurdly divisive and exclusive, and really quite repulsive in and of itself. We ask that students not remember that they are chiefly Americans who can look to struggles in the past and realize we came away together, and instead ask them to trace the activities of their particular minority group and remind them that it's important to honor the sacrifices of their ancestors and identify as members of that group. In general the majority was demonized throughout both the text and the class, and if you happen to be a white male then you're basically told how terrible you should feel for the actions of people who died decades or centuries ago, whose only relation to you specifically is race and sex.
Go and check out the CYOA thread for some escapist fun
I think we had another thread on this thing a few weeks ago, and the conclusion was basically "complain about a framework while not understanding how a framework works."
Jebus....if these kids went to school in my time frame where you fail a grade you get held back a grade....
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/10/04 22:35:25
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
Are they also going to teach the drawbacks of the free-market system, or is that un-American?
To be fair, it is quite rare for the education to tell about the negative sides of the current system.
The books generally don't, our economics book didn't, our teacher just taught it to us anyway.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/04 22:43:34
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2014/10/04 22:38:32
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Wait.....I know there are some teachers on here
Are not the text books the guide lines and the teachers are there to fill in the pertinent subject matter relating to the points in the text books.....
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/10/04 22:49:22
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
TL,DR: conservatives are outraged that history classes teach actual history instead of "AMERICA IS AWESOME" propaganda. These are often the same people who riot every time a textbook mentions evolution and fight to get (fundamentalist) Christian myths into science textbooks as a replacement. And their outrage in this case is about as reasonable.
Jihadin wrote: Are not the text books the guide lines and the teachers are there to fill in the pertinent subject matter relating to the points in the text books.....
The article mentions that this is the case. The guidelines provide some structure to the class and help teachers fill in the gaps in areas they might not be familiar with, but the individual teachers are able to add their own material. So not mentioning X specifically does not mean that X can not be taught, it may just be an assumption that any remotely qualified teacher is already aware of X and it doesn't need to be explicitly added to the outline.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/04 22:51:22
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/04 23:09:14
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Peregrine wrote: TL,DR: conservatives are outraged that history classes teach actual history instead of "AMERICA IS AWESOME" propaganda.
That's simply unfair. Look at my previous post - what this sort of philosophy means in practice is spending inordinate amounts of time on fairly insignificant topics for almost purely political reasons.
Go and check out the CYOA thread for some escapist fun
Peregrine wrote: TL,DR: conservatives are outraged that history classes teach actual history instead of "AMERICA IS AWESOME" propaganda.
That's simply unfair.
It is totally unfair. There's enough "America is Awesome" is history as is, we hardly need more
Look at my previous post - what this sort of philosophy means in practice is spending inordinate amounts of time on fairly insignificant topics for almost purely political reasons.
Someone in an AP history course should already be well grounded in the 7 Years War and the American Revolution. Otherwise they have no business in an AP course, the purpose of which is supposed to be to prepare you for college work.
College history courses cover things like Pre-Columbian America and how it effected the Colonial New World, which does effect the United States (it's actually a really big deal, historically speaking). They cover things like the history of slavery in very fine detail (which is a huge issue in US history general education almost always overlooks outside of it's role in certain compromises and the Civil War). Environmental History has also become quite hip in college and you're likely to see courses offered covering it.
"politics of power and identity,"
Except that that's history. Straight out of Van Ranke (literal father of modern historical study).
citizenship and our shared national history.
This is not history. This is propaganda and the only reason to teach it is for purely political reasons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/04 23:21:10
Peregrine wrote: TL,DR: conservatives are outraged that history classes teach actual history instead of "AMERICA IS AWESOME" propaganda.
That's simply unfair. Look at my previous post - what this sort of philosophy means in practice is spending inordinate amounts of time on fairly insignificant topics for almost purely political reasons.
The fact that you don't understand that you cannot teach "a history of country X" without understanding the people that were here before country X and how societies interacted with them makes it pretty clear that you are not exactly knowledgable on how history works or how teaching works. So I'm just going to take your posts with a grain of salt here.
2014/10/04 23:21:17
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Kali wrote: That's simply unfair. Look at my previous post - what this sort of philosophy means in practice is spending inordinate amounts of time on fairly insignificant topics for almost purely political reasons.
Alternatively, you could argue that students already learn about "conventional" history (IOW, history involving important white men) and therefore it's worth spending extra effort on covering those "political" topics that would otherwise be ignored. Or you could ask the people pushing for these changes why they're doing it:
Some conservatives like the National Review's Stanley Kurtz say the course was influenced by a movement in academia to de-emphasize the United States' uniqueness and treat it as one nation among many, with an eye toward promoting a less aggressive foreign policy.
...
On Sept. 18, the Jefferson County Board of Education met and proposed setting up a committee to ensure that the courses "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law."
So yeah, there's a pretty explicit statement that the issue isn't students getting the most important facts they'll need later in life, it's that the history standards aren't sufficiently "patriotic" and don't align well enough with conservative ideology.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2014/10/04 23:23:23
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
I've seen the history books they're using for 10th grade. Some of that homework is for the students to look up on their own on the internet.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/10/04 23:25:02
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Regardless of whatever changes are made someone will disagree with it at any given time
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/10/04 23:42:17
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
I don't know about you guys, but I took the class that they are wanting to teach: it was called US Government.
And if you want to teach a class about our politics, what makes our political system different, national symbols, laws, etc it would seem that a class on our Government would be the perfect venue.
But hijacking a history class for that is stupid.
2014/10/04 23:46:27
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Jihadin wrote: Wait.....I know there are some teachers on here
Are not the text books the guide lines and the teachers are there to fill in the pertinent subject matter relating to the points in the text books.....
Teachers are very rarely given any scope on a unit scale anymore. The push for standardization and equity for all students has led to curriculum maps, which lay out what will be taught in each month, with timelines we must hit. If a teacher manages to get ahead of schedule, they are welcome to supplement the textbooks- but removing any lesson without county approval is frowned upon- as in find another county to work in frowned upon. Then too, with the sheer volume of students and testing requirements teachers face these days, it takes a tremendous investment of time to vary from a set curriculum.
I've had the pleasure of teaching from the textbook, and using a more or less scripted curriculum- Springboard. Both have their pros and cons. My personal prejudices played a huge role in shaking my curriculum- but the unit I did with Frankenstein that tied in to my pregnant students themed around the responsibility of a creator to his creation was incredible. Springboard is growing better with each addition, and the verall style works well for teaching basic English skills and reading comprehension. a teacher tweaking the lessons results in powerful units as well.
So I suppose the answer to your question, Jihadin, is that a teacher will fill in any blanks they really are passionate about to the extent they can without getting in trouble with the county.
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
2014/10/04 23:47:39
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Jihadin wrote: Wait.....I know there are some teachers on here
Are not the text books the guide lines and the teachers are there to fill in the pertinent subject matter relating to the points in the text books.....
Teachers are very rarely given any scope on a unit scale anymore. The push for standardization and equity for all students has led to curriculum maps, which lay out what will be taught in each month, with timelines we must hit. If a teacher manages to get ahead of schedule, they are welcome to supplement the textbooks- but removing any lesson without county approval is frowned upon- as in find another county to work in frowned upon. Then too, with the sheer volume of students and testing requirements teachers face these days, it takes a tremendous investment of time to vary from a set curriculum.
I've had the pleasure of teaching from the textbook, and using a more or less scripted curriculum- Springboard. Both have their pros and cons. My personal prejudices played a huge role in shaking my curriculum- but the unit I did with Frankenstein that tied in to my pregnant students themed around the responsibility of a creator to his creation was incredible. Springboard is growing better with each addition, and the verall style works well for teaching basic English skills and reading comprehension. a teacher tweaking the lessons results in powerful units as well.
So I suppose the answer to your question, Jihadin, is that a teacher will fill in any blanks they really are passionate about to the extent they can without getting in trouble with the county.
We're doomed in twenty years....
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/10/05 00:08:23
Subject: Re:History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Jihadin wrote: Wait.....I know there are some teachers on here
Are not the text books the guide lines and the teachers are there to fill in the pertinent subject matter relating to the points in the text books.....
Teachers are very rarely given any scope on a unit scale anymore. The push for standardization and equity for all students has led to curriculum maps, which lay out what will be taught in each month, with timelines we must hit. If a teacher manages to get ahead of schedule, they are welcome to supplement the textbooks- but removing any lesson without county approval is frowned upon- as in find another county to work in frowned upon. Then too, with the sheer volume of students and testing requirements teachers face these days, it takes a tremendous investment of time to vary from a set curriculum.
I've had the pleasure of teaching from the textbook, and using a more or less scripted curriculum- Springboard. Both have their pros and cons. My personal prejudices played a huge role in shaking my curriculum- but the unit I did with Frankenstein that tied in to my pregnant students themed around the responsibility of a creator to his creation was incredible. Springboard is growing better with each addition, and the verall style works well for teaching basic English skills and reading comprehension. a teacher tweaking the lessons results in powerful units as well.
So I suppose the answer to your question, Jihadin, is that a teacher will fill in any blanks they really are passionate about to the extent they can without getting in trouble with the county.
I have to say that sounds pretty ridiculous that the courses are planned down to the lesson by the county! I've had more than my share of problems with teachers going to slow and not getting stuff done, and just as many with teachers going too fast and glossing over stuff, but is prefer that to knowing that it's all planned out with so little scope for taking extra time over stuff that's complicated and not wasting it on stuff that is simple enough.
For perspective, the way it works in UK at what I assume is an equivalent level, is that the course will specify a period of years, a subject area (could be a nation or a topic) and a series of 'themes' within that (akin to the "politics of power and identity" mentioned above. So I hardly see the issue people have with that.
On another note, as others have said, there really is no place for political motives in education at this level. The purpose of teaching history/politics is not to say 'communism/liberalism/conservatism/whatever is right/wrong/whatever', it is to inform people about such things and let them decide for themselves their opinions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/05 00:09:06
2014/10/05 00:23:17
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Ah, sorry- I'm middle school now, 8th grade. The same curriculum is used for HS though. Yeah, we're given what to read and what to do with it. They even included Harrison Bergeron and Fahrenheit 451 this year. That's only slightly less ironic than teaching 1984.
The pendulum will swing though, and the standards will change as they always do.And our students will worry about the new generation, who will somehow turn out just fine.
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
2014/10/05 10:20:20
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Some conservatives like the National Review's Stanley Kurtz say the course was influenced by a movement in academia to de-emphasize the United States' uniqueness and treat it as one nation among many, with an eye toward promoting a less aggressive foreign policy.
I've seen this pop up a few times before; why is this so bad? Last time I looked, the US IS one country among many. To me, it seems it'd be arrogant in the extreme to pretend otherwise.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
2014/10/05 11:02:04
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Peregrine wrote: TL,DR: conservatives are outraged that history classes teach actual history instead of "AMERICA IS AWESOME" propaganda.
That's simply unfair. Look at my previous post - what this sort of philosophy means in practice is spending inordinate amounts of time on fairly insignificant topics for almost purely political reasons.
What is the purely political reason for studying pre-Columbian history?
On another note, as others have said, there really is no place for political motives in education at this level. The purpose of teaching history/politics is not to say 'communism/liberalism/conservatism/whatever is right/wrong/whatever', it is to inform people about such things and let them decide for themselves their opinions.
An incredible amount of political manipulation goes into the basic history syllabus. Is World War 1 a pointless war that should never have been fought, with lions led by sheep and copious amounts of Blackadder? Or is it a complex series of events that led to an inevitable conflict? Or was it a standard geopolitical struggle of the time, differing only in the scale? Or was it a war that HAD to be fought, to preserve British security?
Was Churchill a legendary leader of men? Was he an interfering fool? Was he a mix of the two? Was appeasement up until WW2 a wise decision or not? Was the American Army initially an effective fighting force, or a force of inept amateurs? Did the Marxist movement in Russia have an initial legitimate grievance or not? Was the collapse of communism predetermined, or could it potentially succeed in the future?
However you are taught history at the earlier stages of your life affects your reasoning and political beliefs for the rest of it, in most cases. It doesn't predetermine you completely, but it does set the mold for your train of thought. Most people never even realise that their minds sit in a conceptual cage constructed for them by their society, and how/what they are taught in history plays a large part of that construction.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/05 11:31:30
2014/10/05 12:09:27
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Valid points, but hence why I said 'at this level'. By the time you reach this level (I'm assuming they're taking about A-level/pre-Uni equivalent) you should be able to and allowed to consider and research a subject area and form your own opinions on it.
Taking, for example, your references to WW1; to my mind the syllabus should not be teaching the Blackadder view or that it was typical/right, it should encourage students to decide for themselves.
You are right though that at a younger age, there does need to be some politicising/moralising of history simply to teach that there are things that are right and wrong, but one the students have reached the age where they're going to study at university/college, they should be mature enough that they don't need their education politicised.
2014/10/05 12:26:54
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Paradigm wrote: Valid points, but hence why I said 'at this level'. By the time you reach this level (I'm assuming they're taking about A-level/pre-Uni equivalent) you should be able to and allowed to consider and research a subject area and form your own opinions on it.
Taking, for example, your references to WW1; to my mind the syllabus should not be teaching the Blackadder view or that it was typical/right, it should encourage students to decide for themselves.
But in order to do so, it would need to tell the students 'why' each and every one of those four possibilities I just outlined could be 'right'. And there are more viewpoints/potential analysis than just the four I've put up above. I could easily fill a class for a year on various historiographical squabbles, debates, and perspectives of WW1, without actually covering WW1 itself.
At some point, for time efficiency if nothing else, you have to say be able to say to the students 'this is what happened'. But in doing so, you implicitly prioritise whichever aspects of the conflict you regard as the important ones, and in doing so, promulgate whichever line of historical thought you subscribe to.
The sad fact of the matter is that unless you are prepared to devote the better part of your life to investigating these things, you will never know what actually happened. And even if you do, you only catch the faintest shadow of it. However you choose to teach World War 1, it's going to be tainted by politicisation.
Sadly, WW1 is not alone there. If I want to teach students about communism, I simply don't have the time to dive headfirst into Marx and Lenin, and the whole plethora of Marxist/Soviet philosophers/scholars. And even if I did, the average 17 year old (and often, the average adult) is quite simply not smart enough to even comprehend what they're talking about, and it would take many years to even try.
So instead, you feed them a boiled down view of what somebody believes are the more salient features. But whatever that person believes to be the more salient features is entirely determined by their own political orthodoxy or motivations. If they're an unashamed Marxist, what they teach will be entirely different to what a Trotskyite, or a Keynesian economist might teach. Whether they gauge a policy to be a success, what their perception of 'success' is, and so on.
So the question is, which version do you teach? Because you have a year, maybe two. Who picks which version gets set down as the orthodoxy for the majority of people to learn as 'truth' or 'what happened'? The answer is, the examinations board. And whatever their personal beliefs are will dictate which one they pick. But their personal beliefs will have been heavily influenced by what they were taught. Which would have been dictated by either another exam board, their own teachers choice, or their parents.
What actually happened is ultimately of less importance in your history class than what morals/world view you wish to inculcate in your youth. Most people will not see it that way, but they will still naturally conflate the two together without realising it.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2014/10/05 12:40:27
2014/10/05 12:44:54
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Fair enough, I do see and appreciate what you're getting at. It's more the complaints about the course treating America as 'one nation among many' when they is, in fact, what it is that bugs me. The complainers are basically assuming that the teaching of History should be primarily used to instil national pride and patriotism, which it patantly isn't.
2014/10/05 13:03:15
Subject: History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon...
Then too, with the sheer volume of students and testing requirements teachers face these days, it takes a tremendous investment of time to vary from a set curriculum.
