Does this disturb anyone other than me?

[CUSO]

I am 36, I took my 16 year old cousin to lunch today. We were talking about her history class and she talked about her books, and the topics they studied. She told me they spent 1 entire week devoted to studying Eli Whitney and the advent of the cotton gin, she rattled off tons of facts about Eli, I looked at her book and there was 11 pages dedicated to Eli Whitney. Same scenario about Fredrik Douglas, 1 weeks studying and 9 pages dedicated, tons of facts. Ceasar Chavez, the same thing also. Now they were great folks who did good things. I asked her "well what about George Washington?" her response was "He was our first president and had wooden teeth." There was 3 paragraphs dedicated to old GW. Single sentances dedicated to most of the other founding fathers. What is going on?

 

[Lula]

Well, one would hope that she covered George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin, etc., in Early American History, which she should have taken long before age 16 (I think we covered that material from 4th - 6th grade). But even so, she should know more about George Washington!

 

[CUSO]

Well, one would hope that she covered George Washington, Paul Revere, Ben Franklin, etc., in Early American History, which she should have taken long before age 16 (I think we covered that material from 4th - 6th grade). But even so, she should know more about George Washington!

She did inform me that Eli Whitney has been the most studied figure she has studied in History class since the 4th grade.

 

[iLander]

You do realize that George wasn't the Actual first president right? He was first president under the constitution, but not of the United States. The United States of America was actually formed on March 1, 1781 with the adoption of The Articles of Confederation. The first president was John Hanson.

Just sayin'

And yes, she should have covered Washington and all that in elementary school.

 

[PinkTower]

I am a teacher, and mother of a 16yo, and I agree with everyone else. A 16yo is long past Geo.Wash.
I helped my 16yo study last week, because it was memorization. The assignment was a terribly long, all in Latin, paragraph from Cicero.

Her history this year is AP, American. Last year it was AP World. They get much more esoteric by this age. So, don't worry, your lunch date probably knows a lot more about history than you or I have ever forgotten.

 

[swimmer]

Yikes, old George did not have wooden teeth either. Give her a copy of Lies My Teacher Told Me http://www.amazon.com/Lies-My-Teacher-Told-Everything/dp/0684818868

Personally as a world history teacher I find most of these guys to be pretty tangential in the grand scheme of things.

 

[zoebartlett]

Your cousin would have learned all about George Washington years ago, beginning in early elementary school. I wouldn't worry.

 

[KittyGolightly]

You do realize that George wasn't the Actual first president right? He was first president under the constitution, but not of the United States. The United States of America was actually formed on March 1, 1781 with the adoption of The Articles of Confederation. The first president was John Hanson.

Just sayin'

And yes, she should have covered Washington and all that in elementary school.

I don't think this is accurate. Hanson was the President of Congress, which was really not the same office as the President of the United States at all.

 

[Circe]

Speaking as a college prof ... I think it's a lot more about HOW they learn than it is WHAT they learn.

Repeating the same tired old facts about George Washington (half of them tall tales - see, wooden teeth, cherry tree)? Useless, and not conducive to learning. Complicating history by learning about less significant figures who nevertheless had a huge impact ... and who might help them gain perspective on current social issues, a la Frederick Douglas? Useful. By 16, people need to start thinking in an interdisciplinary and multi-faceted fashion, or they're going to fall behind.

Could you maybe say a little bit more about why it distressed you? Me, I would have been bugged by the fact that it was all American history, with nothing resembling a nod to the previous 4000 years of civilization ....

 

[dragonfly411]

If I remember correctly, my junior year was a year that was pretty dedicated to African American History, vs. other years were devoted to other parts of history. There was more African American based literature that year, more history on them etc. My sophomore year had a lot of pilgrim time period reading and history. Senior year was a lot of the World War history and the great depression. Is that perhaps how her schooling has worked?

I do think she should know more about George Washington, but I also notice in the current schooling systems students have to focus very much on the info for the here and now so they can pass the ridiculous tests. It's the same way in some of my college courses.

 

[Haven]

Speaking as a college prof ... I think it's a lot more about HOW they learn than it is WHAT they learn.

Can I get an amen?

AMEN!

 

[CUSO]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I fought for this? I put my life out there for this?

Now when my 16 yr old cousin said she was tought in her education history almost nothing about founding fathers (and she is honors and strait A student) and she knows everything about most minority historical figures, I believe her. it is just 1 reason I now regret fighting.

Sorry about venting....

 

[Lula]

Oh, you must be referring to this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

 

[zoebartlett]

Oh, you must be referring to this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

Wow. Just...wow.

 

[CUSO]

Oh, you must be referring to this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

Wow. Just...wow.

All I ask is that you understand you are reading a left leaning newspaper article from NY about TX. Might not be telling the full story.

 

[ForteKitty]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

 

[Lula]

Okay, some other viewpoints...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100315/ts_ynews/ynews_ts1253
http://tfninsider.org/2009/05/22/overrepresentation-of-minorities/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704133804575197723035341114.html
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/20/tx-textbook-before-we-tackle-history-math/
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010...ok-social-studies-standards-american-history/

 

[Circe]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I fought for this? I put my life out there for this?

Now when my 16 yr old cousin said she was tought in her education history almost nothing about founding fathers (and she is honors and strait A student) and she knows everything about most minority historical figures, I believe her. it is just 1 reason I now regret fighting.

Sorry about venting....

It's fairly late my time, so do forgive me if I ramble ... but discussions like this are one of the reasons why I love this board.

I never did fight for my country - chalk it up to being the only chick and child of two loving only-child parents. But, I assure you, I damned well wanted to, and - if I can say this without personal insult, for I most surely respect your choices and sacrifices - I've been disappointed at times in seeing the decisions that my government made on my behalf. And, that said, your uncle is either baiting you or simplifying things, or both.

You sound like a brave, independent, courageous man. So why identify with the obvious choices, as opposed to the people who had to fight hard to realign the notions and assumptions and safe bets of their people? Neither Frederick nor Eli nor Harriet nor Martin nor Malcolm was exactly a ... mild ... member of society. I am not disrespecting George Washington, whom I adore as a historical figure, nor Thomas Jefferson, whom I think was frankly fantastic, nor Benjamin Franklin, whose letters I very much enjoy teaching (in no small part because the man had a hell of a wit). I'm just saying, in the context of their society, kids learn about the BIG figures early on. Learning more facts about those same figures has the potential to burn them out. Foreign or local, they need CONTEXT. And then, when they get to college, or go on to pursue their own studies on their own time, they can read about Crassus ... or Adams ... or Equiano. Whatever they choose. They just need to learn HOW to read in the bigger picture, first ....

 

[ksinger]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I fought for this? I put my life out there for this?

Now when my 16 yr old cousin said she was tought in her education history almost nothing about founding fathers (and she is honors and strait A student) and she knows everything about most minority historical figures, I believe her. it is just 1 reason I now regret fighting.

Sorry about venting....

First you need to tell us what course she's taking. World? State? American history before 1850? After? In our state 10th grade is world history, and 11th is American history from 1850, and the first (colonial era) American history is, I think, 8th grade? Anyway, Eli Whitney and Frederick Douglass both have far more bearing on the set-up for the Civil War, AND later as a set-up for the civil rights issues, than discussing GW ad nauseum. So no, it's likely that they would NOT be discussing "the founding fathers" at length.

And as others have pointed out with their links here, the politicization of history is HUGE right now, and a goodly part of what is being attempted right now is the de-emphasis on certain of those founding fathers you think are important, and NOT in favor of Frederick Douglass I can assure you. Think Joseph McCarthy as one that they would extol. He's not a founding father either.

I would also ask you to not pass judgement on the teaching of history, or teachers/teaching in general, by a random snapshot discussion with a 16 year-old over lunch, no matter how smart she is. It's a long and disconnected leap from that to regretting that you served your country.

 

[CUSO]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

What a streach! Now the discourse has turned sour.

 

[Lula]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

What a streach! Now the discourse has turned sour.

CUSO, you're posting on a jewelry board largely populated by independent, well-educated women -- what did you expect? Women have been left out of the history books, too, as I well remember from the arguments we had in my high school history classes in the 1970s.

 

[iheartscience]

Actually I find the racist undertones to your posts more disturbing than what your niece told you. And how is questioning history as it is taught turning discourse sour?

 

[iLander]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I have a 3 star Marine general and a 2 star Navy admiral in my family. Also, several sergeants, a couple of corporals, one goofy PFC, and a WAVE (remember them?).

I would like to say that not one of them share your views.

At all . . .

 

[iLander]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

What a streach! Now the discourse has turned sour.

CUSO, you're posting on a jewelry board largely populated by independent, well-educated women -- what did you expect? Women have been left out of the history books, too, as I well remember from the arguments we had in my high school history classes in the 1970s.

YES to this!

Also, I think that the saying "History belongs to the victor", was said by Winston Churchill, which is what Forte Kitty is saying in the lines from Wicked.

 

[ForteKitty]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

What a streach! Now the discourse has turned sour.

How is this a stretch? unless I was there personally, or if there are multiple videos... i dont believe it actually happened the way it's represented. Can you honestly say that something written 2000 years ago is actually true? There are always embellishments in stories. History is pretty much a lot of stories.

Oh, unless you were talking about the minorities part? I dont think that's much of a stretch either...

eta: this inscrutible twinkie can smell thinly veiled racism anywhere...

 

[CUSO]

Actually I find the racist undertones to your posts more disturbing than what your niece told you. And how is questioning history as it is taught turning discourse sour?

Anytime the "R" word gets involved, discourse always turns sour, and I then end my point. Sorry I brought this up. Women are largely downplayed in history. But downplaying our founding fathers disturbs me. There are no more important people responsible for the formation of this country, and to downplay that is what disturbs me. I am done. Sorry, but when topics sometimes arise where you discussed them with buddies who are now dead, just sparks emotion.

 

[ForteKitty]

Could it be that your cousin simply wasn't paying attention when "American History" was being taught in elementary school? Because honestly, my 13 yr old cousin studied that a few years ago... and she doesn't remember jack from that year either. Not because they didn't teach it. She just doesn't remember. And she's an "A" student.

 

[ksinger]

Speaking as a college prof ... I think it's a lot more about HOW they learn than it is WHAT they learn.

Repeating the same tired old facts about George Washington (half of them tall tales - see, wooden teeth, cherry tree)? Useless, and not conducive to learning. Complicating history by learning about less significant figures who nevertheless had a huge impact ... and who might help them gain perspective on current social issues, a la Frederick Douglas? Useful. By 16, people need to start thinking in an interdisciplinary and multi-faceted fashion, or they're going to fall behind.

Could you maybe say a little bit more about why it distressed you? Me, I would have been bugged by the fact that it was all American history, with nothing resembling a nod to the previous 4000 years of civilization ....

Circe, I'm a bit confused by your world history comment - surely you know that there are all-American history courses taught in highschools? Given that they have approximately, (taking out days for standardized testing, chapter tests, quarterly tests, and any extra benchmarks that they have to do, then several assemblies of various stripes, and review days) 90 instructional days to actually TEACH the (ample) material - you honestly think they have time or the mandate to be teaching any of 4000 years of world history? Please remember that a highschool teacher's job is judged on how many of his students PASS THE EOI TEST. Unlike university profs, they don't get to wax on ad nauseum about their pet era just because they want to, or they do so at their peril. That state-mandated test is a bitch.

Anecdote. Husband at an in-service. A head of a local university history department was talking and waxing whiney about how minorities were not adequately addressed in highschool history classes. The hubs chimed in and pointed out that it depends on how much women (the minority in question) were addressed in the state PASS standards. The HEAD of the department said, "What's that?"
He had NO idea that highschool teachers actually were held to some sort of state-mandated standard. CLUELESS.

 

[iheartscience]

Actually I find the racist undertones to your posts more disturbing than what your niece told you. And how is questioning history as it is taught turning discourse sour?

Anytime the "R" word gets involved, discourse always turns sour, and I then end my point. Sorry I brought this up. Women are largely downplayed in history. But downplaying our founding fathers disturbs me. There are no more important people responsible for the formation of this country, and to downplay that is what disturbs me. I am done. Sorry, but when topics sometimes arise where you discussed them with buddies who are now dead, just sparks emotion.

Yes, yes, the "R" word is what ruined this "discourse"-let's go with that.

You are insinuating (not very subtly) that the poor, oppressed white man is being left out of history entirely and being replaced by African-American men. And that this is somehow an OUTRAGE. FIrst of all, white men get plenty of credit. I would be willing to wager that the vast majority of Americans know more about the founding fathers than they do about Frederick Douglass. Second of all, it's about time students are taught about notable African-American men, and mention of a few women couldn't hurt, either. White people (men especially) still have most, if not all of the power in this country and around the world. You can't claim oppression just yet, even if there is a biracial president.

 

[soocool]

My DD has been in the gifted program in school since 2nd grade. This means that she was in a social studies program specifically designed for those kids who were tested as gifted and admitted into the program. DD thrived in this program because they did not memorize facts from a textbook. The textbook was merely a supplement to what was taught in the classroom.

In her freshman year in high school they studied the Civil War in depth (American History I - pre WW1) and she completed a 15 page paper on Antietam analyzing the strategies utilized by both warring sides and how and why this led to President Lincoln's announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation (so if you thought Lincoln was all for freeing the slaves, you would have been wrong.It was a strategic move on his part to win the war). In Sophomore Year (American History II- WW1 to present) DD completed a project focusing on the US government's use of propaganda to entice women into the work force during WW11 (think of Rosie the Riveter) and later utilized propaganda once again to get women to leave the work force once the war was over. She even interviewed a woman who was know as a "Top Secret Rosie: who became one of the programmers of ENIAC, the first electronic computer. Junior Year was Modern World History (she became an expert on Australia) and this year Is Honors Philosophy.

So DD can blurt out a lot of facts also, but she knows just as I am sure your cousin knows, much more than what she discussed with you during lunch.