After my father retired from the military, he went back to school to become a middle school science teacher. He worked in a very wealthy district, and at their school he and his team members worked especially hard at connecting as many aspects of lessons together as they could - the history, science, math, and English were as seamlessly intertwined as they could be, and any project undertaken in one would be doubled up for the others as well.
So, for instance, they wouldn't just write a research paper for his science class, and others for the other classes. They would integrate units so that that research paper for science was also relevant for something they may have learned in math and history as well. The paper would go with the students from class to class as they added to it.
He used to talk to me about how excited the kids would get about discussing findings and discoveries from the other subjects in science, and how cool it was that so many things were connected.
In contrast, in high school, we generally make no effort to have any of the subjects align with one another. We used to be able to count on the history department to at least vaguely follow along the American timeline for English III, so that sometimes the literature we were reading happened to spark a momentary interest of connection, but this year they, for some reason, started at the Industrial Revolution and we've been completely off the timetable ever since.
Because of this great disconnection I see my students being just what the speaker said - disconnected, cynical, uninterested and uninformed. And who wouldn't be? As soon as they get even moderately interested or invested in what they're doing, a bell rings and they have to (in a 7 minute passing period) socialize, switch classrooms, switch gears, and completely switch their thinking to an unrelated discipline with its own facts, figures, and rules. AND be ready to do that as soon as the bell rings.
What's cool about learning is when you can see how things all fit together. How the literature of a time period reflects the historical events, and etc. I think one of the greatest disservices we've done our students at the high school level is to detach the subjects from one another and teach them in isolation.
Every single Friday I meet with the English department. But you know what? I really don't need another bingo game or folded-paper manipulable to help me teach embedded quotes. I've got a great strategy that the kids enjoy and when that stops working I'll look for something else.
What I really need to do each Friday is meet with a History teacher teaching American history, and collaborate with them on my literature lessons so my students are taking information and new knowledge from one place to another and beginning to see why it's important that we ask questions of our past in order to see the patterns in our present - and read the thoughts of those who have already done that. And while we were at it, I just bet you we could slip some math and science in there too.
Did the group have any insights on what IS going on? I think he nailed it when he said he doesn't see the joy in learning (I'm sure this is true beyond just the history field).
Interesting that he mentions Harvard. My dad went to Harvard (on a scholarship, and worked his way through). He majored in history, and was passionate about it for the rest of his life. We had a large bookcase of serious history books, biographies and primary sources, mainly on American history post-Civil War. He subscribed to some book club and got regular new titles in the field -- and read them. And got us kids debating questions like, what might have happened if Coolidge had been President instead of Buchanan? (time travel theory;-)) Was Woodrow Wilson an idealist or a cynical exploiter of the lower classes? Whatever position we kids took, he masterfully took the opposite and challenged us to document our facts, support our hypotheses, etc. It was energizing and fun, but with a serious vein as well -- serious because it mattered.
Of course we were all worried about the Soviet threat in those days, but knowing our own history and its philosophical and legal bases was considered an important part of our education for citizenship.
I just don't see any of that spirit about any more, except, interestingly, in my nephew's family. His five children have never attended school, they have no TV, and the kids read voraciously and are all history and science buffs. They have no idea it is uncool. They're happy, energetic, very positive and polite kids -- rather like children from another era. One of my other family members worries that these kids won't "fit in" as adults. My thought: Good! Let the world adjust to them. Maybe they can start a movement. The joy in learning, uncool, considerate-of-others movement!
Schools do bear some of the responsibility for perpetuating and reinforcing the disengagement, shallowness and superficiality we see around us.
Two other books that are gripping (albeit disconcerting) reading, expanding the ideas re locus of control, disengagement and broader societal values, are these (one old and one new -- maybe you know of them already):
1) Beyond the Classroom by Laurence Steinberg (written in the 90's, but still very current in terms of analysis of issues.) The author points out that by the third generation, Asian-American students perform no better than their non-Asian peers. They have become acculturated to low expectations and little effort. This book was a powerful AHA moment, it shed light on many variables I had not really considered.
2) Ivory Tower Blues by James Cote and Anton Allohar. I heard the first author interviewed at length (I think on NPR) and ordered the book before it was published. It provides a disturbing look inside post-secondary educational institutions in both the USA and Canada. He has had experiences like those Prof. Thomas mentions, but takes a systems analytic approach. Disengagement and a sense of entitlement pervade the student culture pretty well everywhere, and faculty are forced to capitulate. Very sobering stuff.
What to do?
I chuckled when I told a colleague about one of our students (another one I found -- ha ha!) who is going to a Gifted program, and will for the first time in years have some frinds who share his interests. Regardless of the curriculum inanity, those classes provide a chance for kids to meet others like themselves -- something rare in low-achieving schools. My colleague brightened up. "It's wonderful, isn't it?" she said. "It's like they have found their tribe."
We are a diaspora and we need to find ways to band together. As long as there is only one "crank" per school nothing will change.
What this guy is saying is that high schools are creating "conservative" kids (conservative in the negative sense of the term, meaning kids who don't care about the oppressed).
That's actually a pretty interesting idea.
They spend 13 years of their lives being harangued about American Indians and the result appears to be exactly the opposite of the intent.
This actually brings up something I've been wondering about.
I feel as if I'm seeing a "resurgence" of racism in some of the kids around here. C. has now had I think two different kids use the n-word seriously, not as a joke; one of his friends hear someone's mom use it in the car. (This is secondhand, so maybe it didn't happen. But I'm positive the other event did.)
I wonder whether 9 years of Black History Month have led to this?
I also think NCLB is fanning the flames. All over the country - I've heard this from multiple families now - parents & school boards are saying & believing some version of, "Our school would be excellent if it weren't for the black students." So far the only people I know who think that low scores for black students mean the white students are also underachieving are the folks around here and a couple of my close personal friends.
And, frankly, I can see why.
NOBODY wants to think his child is underachieving.
Whatever position we kids took, he masterfully took the opposite and challenged us to document our facts, support our hypotheses, etc. It was energizing and fun, but with a serious vein as well -- serious because it mattered.
I just don't see any of that spirit about any more, except, interestingly, in my nephew's family. His five children have never attended school, they have no TV, and the kids read voraciously and are all history and science buffs. They have no idea it is uncool. They're happy, energetic, very positive and polite kids -- rather like children from another era. One of my other family members worries that these kids won't "fit in" as adults. My thought: Good! Let the world adjust to them. Maybe they can start a movement. The joy in learning, uncool, considerate-of-others movement!
oh my gosh - every one of your comments needs to go up front (redkudu's too --- aaauuuggghhhh!)
My neighbor has always said that homeschooled kids are nicer than public school kids.
They have become acculturated to low expectations and little effort. This book was a powerful AHA moment, it shed light on many variables I had not really considered.
right!
I'd forgotten that.
I need to go find all those old posts (I read the book about...3 years ago...)
What I've been "taught" is that manipulables and foldables cater to the different learning styles and help with student engagement.
Of course they're engaged. They're having to achieve complex origami projects just so they can write some nouns and verbs on little pieces of paper that flip up and down.
My personal theory is that when lessons don't have a solid foundation of step-by-step increments, but rather leap to end product expectations without having shown students how to get there, there is a need for something to stand as the intermediary to show students the pieces - enter folded paper and colored pencils.
So, rather than show students what indpendent clauses look like, and then how to combine them, have them fold a piece of paper, write compound sentences on the parts, and flip them up and down to see the independent clauses independent of one another.
It's very odd, and it's annoying at the high school level - that is, that the expectation is that I should engage my students by wasting twenty minutes of their time folding a little square of paper to write words on it.
Ed had some entitlement problems with his undergraduates at NYU when he decided to teach them how to write, but not many.
He said he was always able to show them exactly what was wrong with their writing. Once they saw, they stopped hammering their T.A.s.
That's the difference between being a professional and being in the position that so many K-12 teachers are in. He knows what good history writing is, he can do it, he can show it, and he can explain it -- and when everyone knows "what the professor wants" the scene is completely different.
A lot of the parent fury teachers are complaining about on the NYTIMES article is caused, I think, by the utter mystery as to what kids are supposed to be able to do in order to earn As in a class.
When people know exactly what the "course requirements are" and the assessment criteria are clear & rational, and the teacher is competent and fair....you're not going to see huge number of parents "going off."
I don't think a teacher has to be a genius to meet these criteria. She just has to be reasonably competent, clear, and fair.
Fold a piece of paper in half, hamburger-style (as opposed to hot-dog style, which is often a lesson in itself). Make two cuts in the top fold near the middle, wide enough for a 3 letter word. Lift that portion up and write down a list of conjunctions.
Close that portion so the conjunctions are hidden. On the two side panels, write down a list of independent clauses.
Now, when you lift up the middle part, the clauses should be united by the hidden conjunction.
The problem is spacing and student handwriting doesn't always make the conjunctions line up with the clauses.
So...bring out the rulers! Now we fold, cut, measure lines on the outside and the inside so everything matches up. AND THEN we start writing in the conjunctions and clauses.
We're talking 30 minutes' work min just to get the paper ready.
I didn't like him one little bit, and the fact that he trashes his daughter in public is only part of it. He was talking off the top of his head, he wasn't prepared, and he didn't make his case. We were just supposed to accept his view.
On one hand, he is saying that his daughter doesn't know enough facts. On the other, he says that she (his students?) doesn't have enough "joy", whatever that means.
One might be able to grab at one of his comments and run with it, but there really isn't enough information.
This is nothing new. There are likely less facts (history) taught than before, but that's different than "joy". I don't remember feeling anything like joy for any of my learning in high school. I was very interested in certain topics, but I wouldn't call it joy.
I didn't care much for history when I was growing up. I think this is normal. Now that I'm older, (and have much more historical knowledge), I can read books about the American Revolution and be amazed. Because of my brother's work, I can see how and where my gradfather's grandfather fought in the Revolution. This is tangible and real to me now. I didn't care about this when I was growing up. Of course.
This doesn't just happen in history. Back when I taught computer science, I had some students who didn't seem to like what they were doing. Forget joy. They were headed for miserable careers.
Desire, hard work, content, skills, and mastery can lead you in the direction of joy, but I don't think it can be taught. Unfortunately, in the real world, joy doesn't pay the bills in many cases. That's why you see so many miserable musicians.
I decided to follow up with some positive anecdotes. My older daughter (now a college freshman) has a great love for History. She is an avid reader, and has a deep love for historical fiction. Perhaps that's why she has developed such a strong interest in history.
She took AP American History as a sophomore, and had a marvelous teacher. Absolutely brilliant.
After her junior year, we took a vacation to Boston, specifically because the kids wanted to visit sights they had learned about. It was an amazing trip; from Salem to Boston to Concord and Lexington, we soaked up America's past.
Several years earlier, when we were in NYC, we walked past Fraunces Tavern. K insisted we check it out; she knew from a book she had read that this was where George Washington had bid farewell to his troops at the end of the War. As it turns out, the upstairs of the tavern lodges a museum; we spent several hours there soaking up Revolutionary War history.
I think as parents, one thing we can do is to actively seek out and visit historical sights. We are always on the lookout for this; no matter where we visit. We're always looking to make or find a historical connection, no matter where we are.
FWIW, my college freshman daughter is contemplating a double major in History and Spanish. She loves History, by the way.
I almost majored in Spanish (and still can't speak the language -- I can read, but not speak. One of these days...)
I wish to heck someone had tied me down and taught me some history whether I liked it or not. Trying to make up for a deficit in historical knowledge in middle age is extremely hard.
Or, rather, trying to make up for deficits in historical knowledge AND math knowledge in middle age is extremely hard.
I've finally bought a used copy of Pauline Meier et al's U.S. history textbook, Inventing America. I've read....2 pages. (Compare that to the 31 pages of the Bible I've made my way through.)
Since I've just become a Ghost Teacher of Earth Science I'm going to have to drop U.S. History and read the Earth Science textbook.
Which is actually a lot of fun.
I had no idea soil was made of rocks and dead animals. I spent my whole childhood dealing with soil (farmer dad) -- had no idea what the stuff was or where it came from.
I didn't mind the guy saying his daughter doesn't know a G-d thing about history. He gave everyone her scores & pedigree first; following up with "She doesn't know a G-d thing" is polite. He's talking to an audience of high school teachers, many of whom are presumably parents, too. It's never fun hearing that some famous person who went to Harvard himself has a kid with 800 scores & 5s on APs and a second or third or fourth generation degree from Harvard.
I was quite interested in 2 things:
* lack of content knowledge * cynicism toward oppressed groups
(The part about joy was beside the point as far as I'm concerned.)
Ed attended the middle school model board meeting last year. It was mobbed by angry parents. The middle school principal was attempting to sell the m-s-m by saying that it would help the kids who are "struggling" (oh yeah, they'll do splendidly just as soon as we "blur the disciplines" and implement block scheduling).
Apparently the guy actually said something like, "They're the ones I care about." (Other administrators have made similar comments, I'm told -- though no one has ever said such a thing to me directly. One parent told me that a high level administrator said to her, "I don't care about the smart kids; they're doing fine." I will add, however, that this is the implicit message I get. It's a variant on 'Your kid is passing the state tests, what more do you want?'")
Ed said the parents were intensely hostile to the idea that the school would focus on kids who aren't doing well. There was a lot of anger in the room.
And I have to say: I've had essentially no one join with me in protesting the zero pass rate on the 8th grade state tests for black and Hispanic kids. I know parents feel intimidated, but I find that pretty shocking.
One parent, present at the Board meeting when those scores were presented, said, "This is shameful."
I wrote about it here and on the Irvington Parents Forum.
And that's it.
Local newspapers didn't pick up on it; parents haven't picked up on it.
I think we may be seeing the consequences of "top-down liberalism."
We may be creating anger against minority groups where there was none before.
Obviously I'm speculating -- I don't know enough about public policy or about history to have much confidence in my perceptions of "large-scale" social phenomena.
On oppression: When you are constantly told that you are a vile oppressor, but you know that you are no such thing, it's reasonable to doubt the good will and honesty of your interlocutor. If what you are doing now is "oppression", then how bad could past oppression really have been?
On history: Any teacher that can't make history interesting should go find a job as a night manager for a motel. History has everything - love stories, action stories, technology, intrigue, perfidy, heroes, villains. It's only when you don't know history, don't care about history, or care more about propaganda than history that you can make it boring.
From what I gather, the worst educational developments like fuzzy math, dumbed-down science, MSM and the like were designed to unoppress the oppressed. It looks wrongheaded.
Times like this I think back fondly on my nerd-nest of an alma mater - the University of Chicago. Crescat scientia isn't just the school's motto - it's the students' motto.
From what I gather, the worst educational developments like fuzzy math, dumbed-down science, MSM and the like were designed to unoppress the oppressed. It looks wrongheaded.
This is certainly my impression -- and if you just go look at the books assigned to ed school classes you'll see a raft of save-the-black-children books.
And remember the "dispositions" idea (which may still be going on; who knows?)
I think this bears close attention. Is it really a good idea to perennially portray blacks, Hispanics, & American Indians as in effect permanent victims?
I've thought that the effect of this on white boys is pernicious.
But I hadn't given much thought to the effect of this on the groups being portrayed as the victims of white men.
The media should have some blame in the cynical generation. The 24 hour news cycle seems to revel in propping up would-be heroes and then shooting them down.
OK, maybe I should blame all those authority figures that turn out to be corrupt, or on steroids. Or both.
Anyway, every time we turn around, some other public official is being investigated for something.
Then we have our Governor serving time. The same Governor that visited our primary school, who's picture (with selected "readers" from the early grades) still adorns the walls of same school.
I can't blame my 16 year old for being so cynical, but it's really hard to find anyone portrayed in the media as decent and honest.
We've raised a whole generation on "gotcha" news and now they trust no one.
I'm troubled by the lack of idealistic youth. I always found that naively refreshing. But the public schools can't take all the blame for that; it seems to be a part of the culture now.
It doesn't help matters that schools don't really teach history anymore. If grownups don't think it's important enough to teach kids history, why should children think it's important enough to bother learning it?
From what I've seen, in too many schools, history only exists as part of social studies and even social studies is disappearing from the list of subjects taught in elementary school.
"Ed said the parents were intensely hostile to the idea that the school would focus on kids who aren't doing well. There was a lot of anger in the room."
This is a classic school trick. They tell you that the problem is limited resources (money) rather than a problem with the school. You should ask them for exactly how much money they would need so that they could focus on ALL kids. Ask them why (what is it?) $17,000 per child is not enough.
"And I have to say: I've had essentially no one join with me in protesting the zero pass rate on the 8th grade state tests for black and Hispanic kids. I know parents feel intimidated, but I find that pretty shocking."
The pass rate is not necessarily unrelated to the concerns of the parents. I would never think to suggest to the school that I'll keep quiet until they fix that other, more important, problem. Pitting one group of parents against another is a dirty trick.
"I think we may be seeing the consequences of 'top-down liberalism.'"
The only thing I see is the attitude that all parents should be involved with helping their kids at home; with providing an ideal learning environment. They (we have a couple of these parents on our school committee) can't seem to understand that this is not possible for many parents.
I don't see any sign of reactionary liberalism around here, just those who think that all parents should be just like them.
"cynicism toward oppressed groups"
I don't see that at all in education. Parents barely feel that they have any influence to affect their own child's education, let alone anyone else's child.
What cynicism there is (outside of education) seems to be kept well under wraps, but it does pop out occasionally via bickering within the black community. Boy, I'm glad I don't have any responsibility to be part of a white community. I'm not white, I'm Steve.
I think his question was almost answered by himself.
You need to RELATE to those people and those times to find history interesting. The modern mindset of post-modernism where nothing has any fixed point for meaning or truth and its spawn of various isms--multiculturalism, nihilistic cynicism, etc, coupled with most of us living in a society lacking in hardship means you can't imagine WHY or HOW people behaved in the past. You can't read even something as old as Dickens and relate to the conditions, the pain, the tradeoffs. And since the teachers keep teaching the modern viewpoint of the history of victimization, there's no way to enter the old mindset.
Specifically, there's nothing there to enlighten, inspire, or otherwise awaken to the power and coolness of history. Kids --children and young adults--get excited by Events, by Things, not by historiographic abstractions of how various isms played out. They get excited by the Battle of Thermopylae, if you let them learn about it in detail. They get excited by the burning of DC if you let them learn about it in detail. But the detail has to be enough for you to understand the motivations, desires, goals, and constraints of the actors in that world.
If all they see is the history of victimization on one hand, and a laundry list of dates, names and places without any flavor for WHY those people, those Individual Persons, were acting that way, there's no reason to be inspired.
Lastly, I think the kids know something is wrong with what they are being taught, but they don't know exactly that they are being lied to. So the dissonance is enough to be turned off.
I know precious little history because I wasn't taught any since 3rd grade. But I distinctly remember that I was taught how noble and boring the French Revolution was--so it was quite a surprise to learn as an adult with a graduate degree how bad the Reign of Terror really was. I distinctly remember being taught some puff about how Gandhi freed India from the Brits, so it was quite a shock to learn the amount of bloodshed and current problems in Pakistan and Waziristan that we have to this date arose from his and a few other folks' machinations. I distinctly remember being taught how bad the Empires were for the African colonies, but only in my 20s did I learn about the looting of the treasuries by the Africans after kicking out the various Brits, French, Germans, etc. and what infrastructure they allowed to become undone.
So when you're lied to, and everything you've been taught is boring yet somehow doesn't make sense (because you've been lied to), then the context fails. Without context, history is uninteresting.
Could schools be discouraging students from relating and connecting to history? Specifically through the constant use of "personal essays"? How can you understand the motivations of old dead guys if you are being forced to write about yourself all the time? (And your parents are required to sign those personal essays and comment on how interesting their children's lives are?)
On a positive note, our school still seems to be teaching old-fashioned World History in 9th grade. It's an overview, to be sure, but at least specific and concrete factual information was taught.
What I also liked was that our 9th grader was learning about the French Revolution from a historical standpoint, and her English Lit class was studying A Tale of Two Cities. M thought the novel rather dry until the end, but she could clearly see the link and connections between the two.
I have three children (10, 8, 5) who enjoy learning history and actually find it entertaining. Reading from history books often replaces bedtime stories at our house.
My daughter, in particular, loves it so much she talks to her friends about it. Her friend's parents have started saying that their kids want to be homeschooled too thanks to my daughter's enthusiam (mostly about history). The value of history is not only understanding the past, but making connections to the present and decisions about how to go about our future.
My point? I think children not only would benefit profoundly from learning history, but that they would actually enjoy it. Like Doug said, history is better than fiction. It really has it all.
If only we'd begin to share our story, the story of mankind, with the passion it deserves.
I trace it also to a willingness to treat history as a collection of unrelated events, into which one can drop at one's leisure. My daughter's grade (she's in Middle School now) missed American History after 1800. They covered China instead. So, the War of 1812, the Civil War, Westward Expansion, which they used to cover, are all mysteries to her. They've read novels about slavery, of course, but they didn't cover the historical background, so the novels are not tethered in time.
I think there's a connection to math, too. Some subjects are sequential in development, and intermediate students require a knowledge of basic facts in order to create higher level theories. Without that knowledge, and without sequential treatment of the subject matter, everything becomes disconnected and uninteresting.
Add to that the current rage for finding victims and oppressors throughout history, and for extending that identification to the current day by use of identity politics, and yes, I can understand students rejecting the subject of history.
Today's Frank & Ernest cartoon seems timely (with the New Hampshire primary and this thread's discussion about history). The setting is election day and a candidate is giving a speech. Frank and Ernest are off to one side and Frank says: "Democracy was invented here in Athens?" Ernest replies: "And Euclid invented triangulation!"
I have a secret urge to go into my son's school at night and paint timelines along the corridors.
A thematic or drive by approach to history might work if they were serious, but they aren't. This isn't about a better way to learn history. It's about low expectations. Just like math.
I was thinking of different scaled timelines for each corridor. One on a cosmic scale, starting from the big bang and moving in billion year increments; another starting at about 500 million BC and moving in millions of years, and so forth.
I'm a big proponent of framework facts that make it easier to remember new facts. You don't have to remember many facts and dates to make this work.
Actually, I don't know why schools don't do this. They can combine history, art, science, music, math and more on the timeline and it would look a lot better than crayon work hung on the walls when parents come for their conferences.
Any suggestions for history ed remediation? I'm hoping some of you homeschoolers might be able to suggest some sources for filling in the gaps.
When I look through the library (last night) or browse through Amazon, I'm finding very little elementary aged history books. I'd like a little fiction to go along with some straight history.
Yes! The The Story of Mankind by Hendrik Willem Van Loon is a wonderful place to start. Every home should have the Kingfisher History Encyclopedia and the Usborne Internet Linked Encyclopedia of World History is a good one too. I also recommend The History of US and The Classical Education Timeline from Pandia Press. For younger children The Story of the World relates the story of world history in a way that really captivates children. If you're looking for a guide to put it all together I really like History Odyssey (5-8th grade)as it has a great suggested reading list with good historical fiction that fits in with the period being studied. Another great clearinghouse of resources and information is The Well Trained Mind by Susan Wise Bauer.
I'm sure I left out something really good, but this is the stuff we go to just about everyday.
BTW, there is great historical fiction out there for the elementary level. A. just finished studying ancient Egypt so she rounded it out with The Golden Goblet, The Cat of Bubastes and from The Royal Diaries series, Cleopatra VII, Daughter of the Nile. The Well Trained Mind and History Odyssey both include suggestions for historical fiction. The Activity Books for The History of the World series includes "Corresponding Literature Suggestions" that include wonderful fiction books for young readers.
Thanks for the suggestions. I'm starting a list. We'll keep this going.
But now that we're afterschooling math and writing, I'm not sure how much more time I can expect out them for history.
Still, we'll squeeze it in where we can.
FWIW, my 6th grader just finished The Golden Goblet as they are doing ancient civilizations in humanities.
Before that, she read The Great Gilly Hopkins, set in modern times about a foster girl (more victims). My daughter turned in a shockingly bad piece of writing for that book. It is probably the worst thing she ever created.
Her grade? check + the highest grade possible. I have no idea how they evaluate these things.
Had it been my assignment, I'd have asked her to redo.
So after modern foster kids, to ancient civilizations, where will we go next? Darts would probably be the best predictor.
Do you think curriculum directors throw darts in their offices to choose topics?
I know how challenging it is to afterschool (I'm doing that for the other two). I have to say, that my kids like browsing through the history encyclopedias at their leisure. Sometimes, if you keep the good stuff just lying around and easily available, kids tend to gravitate to it naturally. History really is fascinating and I really think that kids are, by nature, curious about it.
For historical fiction for kids, you might want to start with the Newbery Medal books. Though I wouldn't suggest most of the more recent ones (which often seem to be chosen for their propaganda value), before about 1970 or so there are some brilliant pieces.
For actual history, I'd recommend anthologies as a good place to start. The shorter pieces tend to concentrate on the most interesting parts of history. For boys, especially, war stories are likely to be interesting and there are many books of anthologies and vignettes that are quite good.
I am posting this annoymously because I am pressed for time to create an account. As a 6th grade teacher who loves to incorporate historical fiction and biography into the study of history/geography(not Social Studies!) I really recommend looking at the web site for Beautiful Feet books. History through literature and a great list of book ideas. The focus is a bit heavy on Christian values but look beyond that for ideas about literature/hsitory connections. Once you get started there are more books than you could possibly cover for every time period!
History Odyssey is published by Pandia Press (the same people with the awsome timeline). http://www.pandiapress.com/history_odyssey.htm
They are actually study guides divided into sequential periods. They could fit very well with summer break if the school year is too hectic.
The Newberry Medal books are excellent resources. In fact, The History of Mankind* is actually the winner of the first John Newberry Medal.
There are various versions of Van Loon's classic history available and you can even access it online for free on google's book search. They have a downloadable PDF. We have the version that has been updated by John Merriman and are very happy with this edition.
I'm a bit surprised about the comments about "The Great Gilly Hopkins" -- I recall that book rather fondly. I did read it on my own (along with about half a zillion other books), so I may not have focused on "victim" as much as your daughter's class did, or it may have been drowned out due to sheer volume. :-)
It was a Newbery Honor winner in 1979, which is the year "The Westing Game" won, which is also a very fun book. Also 1976, "The Grey King." I have gathered up that whole series for my kids (which since the elder is 4.5, will not need it for a while yet), as well as the Lloyd Alexander series.
Thanks for reposting the timeline link -- I keep meaning to get one, and maybe I will just order now.
I like the E.D. Hirsch Core Knowledge books -- my public library has most of them and I've bought a couple as well -- guess I need to buy the 6th grade one, too.
I recently looked at Hirsch's The New First Dictionary of Cultural Literacy. It lists everything (in short paragraph form) that you should have heard of by the time you finish the 6th grade.
It could be useful in identifying gaps, but not so good at filling the gaps.
As for the Great Gilly Hopkins, I'm going by my daughter's reaction. She didn't like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good book. I think she really missed the point as she mentions that she really doesn't get why the girl doesn't live with her parents.
For chronological history, we're using the Story of the World series by Susan Wise Bauer. It also comes in unabridged audio format. The activity guide for each book also comes with comprehension questions, sample narrations, maps, and suggested reading.
SWB is also working on a chronological history for adults. The first volume, The History of the Ancient World, is out in stores. Volume 2 covers the Middle Ages and is in the works now.
Lots of good resources on this thread. Thanks, everyone!
The Parthenon Graphics Timelines are also very good. They offer many different choices, and since my daughter has been studying American history, we’ve made good use of those timelines. They’re a very manageable 44” long, so it’s easy to find places to put these up for us.
This is a classic school trick. They tell you that the problem is limited resources (money) rather than a problem with the school. You should ask them for exactly how much money they would need so that they could focus on ALL kids.
In this case it had nothing to do with money. The administration was arguing that we should adopt the middle school model because that will be REALLY, REALLY GOOD for students who are STRUGGLING.
NY state has fantastic history standards -- the same ones Lynne Cheney killed back when she was head of NEH.
C. knows FAR more history than I do, and he's learned most of it at school. (Obviously, having a dad who is a historian means that he learns history at home, too. But even if he were learning no history here at home at all he would still know more than I do.)
So far his teachers have done a good-to-excellent job teaching the subject, too.
Great suggestions. It's making me realize that I need to get back with it.
The Story of the World series was the most useful to me. Now that we are finally on the last one, my son can read the chapters himself, but he still likes it if I read it.
The Well-Trained Mind is such a good resource, too. I still go back to it because it's divided up into three levels to help homeschoolers when their child moves into the grade school, middle school or high school era.
One of the most helpful things the book does is to have a list around 20 people from each era that your child should at least be exposed to by the end of the year. It gives you an anchor to lean on.
The book is also packed with recommendations and links for each era and, I believe, has been updated a good deal.
I'm going to go order those timelines now. They look great.
I so wish I could have been at that discussion!
ReplyDeleteAfter my father retired from the military, he went back to school to become a middle school science teacher. He worked in a very wealthy district, and at their school he and his team members worked especially hard at connecting as many aspects of lessons together as they could - the history, science, math, and English were as seamlessly intertwined as they could be, and any project undertaken in one would be doubled up for the others as well.
So, for instance, they wouldn't just write a research paper for his science class, and others for the other classes. They would integrate units so that that research paper for science was also relevant for something they may have learned in math and history as well. The paper would go with the students from class to class as they added to it.
He used to talk to me about how excited the kids would get about discussing findings and discoveries from the other subjects in science, and how cool it was that so many things were connected.
In contrast, in high school, we generally make no effort to have any of the subjects align with one another. We used to be able to count on the history department to at least vaguely follow along the American timeline for English III, so that sometimes the literature we were reading happened to spark a momentary interest of connection, but this year they, for some reason, started at the Industrial Revolution and we've been completely off the timetable ever since.
Because of this great disconnection I see my students being just what the speaker said - disconnected, cynical, uninterested and uninformed. And who wouldn't be? As soon as they get even moderately interested or invested in what they're doing, a bell rings and they have to (in a 7 minute passing period) socialize, switch classrooms, switch gears, and completely switch their thinking to an unrelated discipline with its own facts, figures, and rules. AND be ready to do that as soon as the bell rings.
What's cool about learning is when you can see how things all fit together. How the literature of a time period reflects the historical events, and etc. I think one of the greatest disservices we've done our students at the high school level is to detach the subjects from one another and teach them in isolation.
Every single Friday I meet with the English department. But you know what? I really don't need another bingo game or folded-paper manipulable to help me teach embedded quotes. I've got a great strategy that the kids enjoy and when that stops working I'll look for something else.
What I really need to do each Friday is meet with a History teacher teaching American history, and collaborate with them on my literature lessons so my students are taking information and new knowledge from one place to another and beginning to see why it's important that we ask questions of our past in order to see the patterns in our present - and read the thoughts of those who have already done that. And while we were at it, I just bet you we could slip some math and science in there too.
Oh well. When I have my own school... :)
Did the group have any insights on what IS going on? I think he nailed it when he said he doesn't see the joy in learning (I'm sure this is true beyond just the history field).
ReplyDeleteInteresting that he mentions Harvard. My dad went to Harvard (on a scholarship, and worked his way through). He majored in history, and was passionate about it for the rest of his life. We had a large bookcase of serious history books, biographies and primary sources, mainly on American history post-Civil War. He subscribed to some book club and got regular new titles in the field -- and read them. And got us kids debating questions like, what might have happened if Coolidge had been President instead of Buchanan? (time travel theory;-)) Was Woodrow Wilson an idealist or a cynical exploiter of the lower classes? Whatever position we kids took, he masterfully took the opposite and challenged us to document our facts, support our hypotheses, etc. It was energizing and fun, but with a serious vein as well -- serious because it mattered.
Of course we were all worried about the Soviet threat in those days, but knowing our own history and its philosophical and legal bases was considered an important part of our education for citizenship.
I just don't see any of that spirit about any more, except, interestingly, in my nephew's family. His five children have never attended school, they have no TV, and the kids read voraciously and are all history and science buffs. They have no idea it is uncool. They're happy, energetic, very positive and polite kids -- rather like children from another era. One of my other family members worries that these kids won't "fit in" as adults. My thought: Good! Let the world adjust to them. Maybe they can start a movement. The joy in learning, uncool, considerate-of-others movement!
Schools do bear some of the responsibility for perpetuating and reinforcing the disengagement, shallowness and superficiality we see around us.
Two other books that are gripping (albeit disconcerting) reading, expanding the ideas re locus of control, disengagement and broader societal values, are these (one old and one new -- maybe you know of them already):
1) Beyond the Classroom by Laurence Steinberg (written in the 90's, but still very current in terms of analysis of issues.) The author points out that by the third generation, Asian-American students perform no better than their non-Asian peers. They have become acculturated to low expectations and little effort. This book was a powerful AHA moment, it shed light on many variables I had not really considered.
2) Ivory Tower Blues by James Cote and Anton Allohar. I heard the first author interviewed at length (I think on NPR) and ordered the book before it was published. It provides a disturbing look inside post-secondary educational institutions in both the USA and Canada. He has had experiences like those Prof. Thomas mentions, but takes a systems analytic approach. Disengagement and a sense of entitlement pervade the student culture pretty well everywhere, and faculty are forced to capitulate. Very sobering stuff.
What to do?
I chuckled when I told a colleague about one of our students (another one I found -- ha ha!) who is going to a Gifted program, and will for the first time in years have some frinds who share his interests. Regardless of the curriculum inanity, those classes provide a chance for kids to meet others like themselves -- something rare in low-achieving schools. My colleague brightened up. "It's wonderful, isn't it?" she said. "It's like they have found their tribe."
We are a diaspora and we need to find ways to band together. As long as there is only one "crank" per school nothing will change.
I really don't need another bingo game or folded-paper manipulable to help me teach embedded quotes.
ReplyDeleteWhat the hell is with all the paper folding???
The new Glencoe books have a GAZILLION "foldables."
The directions don't make a lick of sense. As far as I can tell they advise you to cut a piece of paper in half, then fold "on the cut."
Well... you can't fold on the cut when you cut the whole thing in 2...
And why is a high school algebra book devoting pages and pages and pages to "Foldables"?
And, part 2, why does there have to be a DIFFERENT foldable for each unit?
What this guy is saying is that high schools are creating "conservative" kids (conservative in the negative sense of the term, meaning kids who don't care about the oppressed).
ReplyDeleteThat's actually a pretty interesting idea.
They spend 13 years of their lives being harangued about American Indians and the result appears to be exactly the opposite of the intent.
This actually brings up something I've been wondering about.
I feel as if I'm seeing a "resurgence" of racism in some of the kids around here. C. has now had I think two different kids use the n-word seriously, not as a joke; one of his friends hear someone's mom use it in the car. (This is secondhand, so maybe it didn't happen. But I'm positive the other event did.)
I wonder whether 9 years of Black History Month have led to this?
I also think NCLB is fanning the flames. All over the country - I've heard this from multiple families now - parents & school boards are saying & believing some version of, "Our school would be excellent if it weren't for the black students." So far the only people I know who think that low scores for black students mean the white students are also underachieving are the folks around here and a couple of my close personal friends.
ReplyDeleteAnd, frankly, I can see why.
NOBODY wants to think his child is underachieving.
Including me.
Whatever position we kids took, he masterfully took the opposite and challenged us to document our facts, support our hypotheses, etc. It was energizing and fun, but with a serious vein as well -- serious because it mattered.
ReplyDeletewow!
That's amazing.
I just don't see any of that spirit about any more, except, interestingly, in my nephew's family. His five children have never attended school, they have no TV, and the kids read voraciously and are all history and science buffs. They have no idea it is uncool. They're happy, energetic, very positive and polite kids -- rather like children from another era. One of my other family members worries that these kids won't "fit in" as adults. My thought: Good! Let the world adjust to them. Maybe they can start a movement. The joy in learning, uncool, considerate-of-others movement!
ReplyDeleteoh my gosh - every one of your comments needs to go up front (redkudu's too --- aaauuuggghhhh!)
My neighbor has always said that homeschooled kids are nicer than public school kids.
I believe it.
They have become acculturated to low expectations and little effort. This book was a powerful AHA moment, it shed light on many variables I had not really considered.
ReplyDeleteright!
I'd forgotten that.
I need to go find all those old posts (I read the book about...3 years ago...)
What I've been "taught" is that manipulables and foldables cater to the different learning styles and help with student engagement.
ReplyDeleteOf course they're engaged. They're having to achieve complex origami projects just so they can write some nouns and verbs on little pieces of paper that flip up and down.
My personal theory is that when lessons don't have a solid foundation of step-by-step increments, but rather leap to end product expectations without having shown students how to get there, there is a need for something to stand as the intermediary to show students the pieces - enter folded paper and colored pencils.
So, rather than show students what indpendent clauses look like, and then how to combine them, have them fold a piece of paper, write compound sentences on the parts, and flip them up and down to see the independent clauses independent of one another.
It's very odd, and it's annoying at the high school level - that is, that the expectation is that I should engage my students by wasting twenty minutes of their time folding a little square of paper to write words on it.
Ed had some entitlement problems with his undergraduates at NYU when he decided to teach them how to write, but not many.
ReplyDeleteHe said he was always able to show them exactly what was wrong with their writing. Once they saw, they stopped hammering their T.A.s.
That's the difference between being a professional and being in the position that so many K-12 teachers are in. He knows what good history writing is, he can do it, he can show it, and he can explain it -- and when everyone knows "what the professor wants" the scene is completely different.
A lot of the parent fury teachers are complaining about on the NYTIMES article is caused, I think, by the utter mystery as to what kids are supposed to be able to do in order to earn As in a class.
When people know exactly what the "course requirements are" and the assessment criteria are clear & rational, and the teacher is competent and fair....you're not going to see huge number of parents "going off."
I don't think a teacher has to be a genius to meet these criteria. She just has to be reasonably competent, clear, and fair.
(I can define that last term, btw.)
Ed says he wishes he could have been there for that discussions. He has no idea how the h.s. teachers responded.
ReplyDeleteI love it that his daughter majored in history at Harvard and "doesn't know a G-damn thing."
ReplyDelete(She majored in history there, right?)
I should send him a copy of THE KNOWLEDGE DEFICIT.
What I've been "taught" is that manipulables and foldables cater to the different learning styles and help with student engagement.
ReplyDeleteYou could see that one coming a mile away.
So does it work by physically separating out independent clauses?
Something like that?
I looked at the Glencoe ones briefly and couldn't see any logical reason for them at all. The whole undertaking just seemed bizaree.
Plus, of course, there was the little problem of folding along a nonexistent "cut."
That's the idea.
ReplyDeleteFold a piece of paper in half, hamburger-style (as opposed to hot-dog style, which is often a lesson in itself). Make two cuts in the top fold near the middle, wide enough for a 3 letter word. Lift that portion up and write down a list of conjunctions.
Close that portion so the conjunctions are hidden. On the two side panels, write down a list of independent clauses.
Now, when you lift up the middle part, the clauses should be united by the hidden conjunction.
The problem is spacing and student handwriting doesn't always make the conjunctions line up with the clauses.
So...bring out the rulers! Now we fold, cut, measure lines on the outside and the inside so everything matches up. AND THEN we start writing in the conjunctions and clauses.
We're talking 30 minutes' work min just to get the paper ready.
Here's an anecdote that gives some dates as to when students started to change.
ReplyDeleteI don't remember any "sense of entitlement" among the high school students I taught from fall 1963 to the spring of 1966 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
However, it was clearly present among the college freshman I taught at a UC campus in the spring of 1977.
It may be a lot worse now but it's not new.
I didn't like him one little bit, and the fact that he trashes his daughter in public is only part of it. He was talking off the top of his head, he wasn't prepared, and he didn't make his case. We were just supposed to accept his view.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, he is saying that his daughter doesn't know enough facts. On the other, he says that she (his students?) doesn't have enough "joy", whatever that means.
One might be able to grab at one of his comments and run with it, but there really isn't enough information.
This is nothing new. There are likely less facts (history) taught than before, but that's different than "joy". I don't remember feeling anything like joy for any of my learning in high school. I was very interested in certain topics, but I wouldn't call it joy.
I didn't care much for history when I was growing up. I think this is normal. Now that I'm older, (and have much more historical knowledge), I can read books about the American Revolution and be amazed. Because of my brother's work, I can see how and where my gradfather's grandfather fought in the Revolution. This is tangible and real to me now. I didn't care about this when I was growing up. Of course.
This doesn't just happen in history. Back when I taught computer science, I had some students who didn't seem to like what they were doing. Forget joy. They were headed for miserable careers.
Desire, hard work, content, skills, and mastery can lead you in the direction of joy, but I don't think it can be taught. Unfortunately, in the real world, joy doesn't pay the bills in many cases. That's why you see so many miserable musicians.
FWIW, my college freshman daughter is contemplating a double major in History and Spanish. She loves History, by the way.
ReplyDeleteI decided to follow up with some positive anecdotes. My older daughter (now a college freshman) has a great love for History. She is an avid reader, and has a deep love for historical fiction. Perhaps that's why she has developed such a strong interest in history.
ReplyDeleteShe took AP American History as a sophomore, and had a marvelous teacher. Absolutely brilliant.
After her junior year, we took a vacation to Boston, specifically because the kids wanted to visit sights they had learned about. It was an amazing trip; from Salem to Boston to Concord and Lexington, we soaked up America's past.
Several years earlier, when we were in NYC, we walked past Fraunces Tavern. K insisted we check it out; she knew from a book she had read that this was where George Washington had bid farewell to his troops at the end of the War. As it turns out, the upstairs of the tavern lodges a museum; we spent several hours there soaking up Revolutionary War history.
I think as parents, one thing we can do is to actively seek out and visit historical sights. We are always on the lookout for this; no matter where we visit. We're always looking to make or find a historical connection, no matter where we are.
FWIW, my college freshman daughter is contemplating a double major in History and Spanish. She loves History, by the way.
ReplyDeleteI almost majored in Spanish (and still can't speak the language -- I can read, but not speak. One of these days...)
I wish to heck someone had tied me down and taught me some history whether I liked it or not. Trying to make up for a deficit in historical knowledge in middle age is extremely hard.
Or, rather, trying to make up for deficits in historical knowledge AND math knowledge in middle age is extremely hard.
I've finally bought a used copy of Pauline Meier et al's U.S. history textbook, Inventing America. I've read....2 pages. (Compare that to the 31 pages of the Bible I've made my way through.)
Since I've just become a Ghost Teacher of Earth Science I'm going to have to drop U.S. History and read the Earth Science textbook.
Which is actually a lot of fun.
I had no idea soil was made of rocks and dead animals. I spent my whole childhood dealing with soil (farmer dad) -- had no idea what the stuff was or where it came from.
I didn't mind the guy saying his daughter doesn't know a G-d thing about history. He gave everyone her scores & pedigree first; following up with "She doesn't know a G-d thing" is polite. He's talking to an audience of high school teachers, many of whom are presumably parents, too. It's never fun hearing that some famous person who went to Harvard himself has a kid with 800 scores & 5s on APs and a second or third or fourth generation degree from Harvard.
ReplyDeleteI was quite interested in 2 things:
* lack of content knowledge
* cynicism toward oppressed groups
(The part about joy was beside the point as far as I'm concerned.)
Ed attended the middle school model board meeting last year. It was mobbed by angry parents. The middle school principal was attempting to sell the m-s-m by saying that it would help the kids who are "struggling" (oh yeah, they'll do splendidly just as soon as we "blur the disciplines" and implement block scheduling).
Apparently the guy actually said something like, "They're the ones I care about." (Other administrators have made similar comments, I'm told -- though no one has ever said such a thing to me directly. One parent told me that a high level administrator said to her, "I don't care about the smart kids; they're doing fine." I will add, however, that this is the implicit message I get. It's a variant on 'Your kid is passing the state tests, what more do you want?'")
Ed said the parents were intensely hostile to the idea that the school would focus on kids who aren't doing well. There was a lot of anger in the room.
And I have to say: I've had essentially no one join with me in protesting the zero pass rate on the 8th grade state tests for black and Hispanic kids. I know parents feel intimidated, but I find that pretty shocking.
One parent, present at the Board meeting when those scores were presented, said, "This is shameful."
I wrote about it here and on the Irvington Parents Forum.
And that's it.
Local newspapers didn't pick up on it; parents haven't picked up on it.
I think we may be seeing the consequences of "top-down liberalism."
We may be creating anger against minority groups where there was none before.
Obviously I'm speculating -- I don't know enough about public policy or about history to have much confidence in my perceptions of "large-scale" social phenomena.
ReplyDeleteBut I do wonder.
On oppression: When you are constantly told that you are a vile oppressor, but you know that you are no such thing, it's reasonable to doubt the good will and honesty of your interlocutor. If what you are doing now is "oppression", then how bad could past oppression really have been?
ReplyDeleteOn history: Any teacher that can't make history interesting should go find a job as a night manager for a motel. History has everything - love stories, action stories, technology, intrigue, perfidy, heroes, villains. It's only when you don't know history, don't care about history, or care more about propaganda than history that you can make it boring.
From what I gather, the worst educational developments like fuzzy math, dumbed-down science, MSM and the like were designed to unoppress the oppressed. It looks wrongheaded.
ReplyDeleteTimes like this I think back fondly on my nerd-nest of an alma mater - the University of Chicago. Crescat scientia isn't just the school's motto - it's the students' motto.
ReplyDeleteI don't remember any "sense of entitlement" among the high school students I taught from fall 1963 to the spring of 1966 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it was clearly present among the college freshman I taught at a UC campus in the spring of 1977.
interesting
From what I gather, the worst educational developments like fuzzy math, dumbed-down science, MSM and the like were designed to unoppress the oppressed. It looks wrongheaded.
ReplyDeleteThis is certainly my impression -- and if you just go look at the books assigned to ed school classes you'll see a raft of save-the-black-children books.
And remember the "dispositions" idea (which may still be going on; who knows?)
I think this bears close attention. Is it really a good idea to perennially portray blacks, Hispanics, & American Indians as in effect permanent victims?
I've thought that the effect of this on white boys is pernicious.
But I hadn't given much thought to the effect of this on the groups being portrayed as the victims of white men.
The media should have some blame in the cynical generation. The 24 hour news cycle seems to revel in propping up would-be heroes and then shooting them down.
ReplyDeleteOK, maybe I should blame all those authority figures that turn out to be corrupt, or on steroids. Or both.
Anyway, every time we turn around, some other public official is being investigated for something.
Then we have our Governor serving time. The same Governor that visited our primary school, who's picture (with selected "readers" from the early grades) still adorns the walls of same school.
I can't blame my 16 year old for being so cynical, but it's really hard to find anyone portrayed in the media as decent and honest.
We've raised a whole generation on "gotcha" news and now they trust no one.
I'm troubled by the lack of idealistic youth. I always found that naively refreshing. But the public schools can't take all the blame for that; it seems to be a part of the culture now.
It doesn't help matters that schools don't really teach history anymore. If grownups don't think it's important enough to teach kids history, why should children think it's important enough to bother learning it?
ReplyDeleteFrom what I've seen, in too many schools, history only exists as part of social studies and even social studies is disappearing from the list of subjects taught in elementary school.
You cannot learn what you're never exposed to.
My daughter loves history, but has never studied it in school.
ReplyDeleteIn 6th grade, it is part of the "humanities" curriculum -- which lumps together anything that isn't science and math.
Theoretically, this should be great - study history, read, write, spell, learn some grammar, and integrate across the disciplines.
But the reality is a disjointed, random hodge podge.
"Ed said the parents were intensely hostile to the idea that the school would focus on kids who aren't doing well. There was a lot of anger in the room."
ReplyDeleteThis is a classic school trick. They tell you that the problem is limited resources (money) rather than a problem with the school. You should ask them for exactly how much money they would need so that they could focus on ALL kids. Ask them why (what is it?) $17,000 per child is not enough.
"And I have to say: I've had essentially no one join with me in protesting the zero pass rate on the 8th grade state tests for black and Hispanic kids. I know parents feel intimidated, but I find that pretty shocking."
The pass rate is not necessarily unrelated to the concerns of the parents. I would never think to suggest to the school that I'll keep quiet until they fix that other, more important, problem. Pitting one group of parents against another is a dirty trick.
"I think we may be seeing the consequences of 'top-down liberalism.'"
The only thing I see is the attitude that all parents should be involved with helping their kids at home; with providing an ideal learning environment. They (we have a couple of these parents on our school committee) can't seem to understand that this is not possible for many parents.
I don't see any sign of reactionary liberalism around here, just those who think that all parents should be just like them.
"cynicism toward oppressed groups"
I don't see that at all in education. Parents barely feel that they have any influence to affect their own child's education, let alone anyone else's child.
What cynicism there is (outside of education) seems to be kept well under wraps, but it does pop out occasionally via bickering within the black community. Boy, I'm glad I don't have any responsibility to be part of a white community. I'm not white, I'm Steve.
I think his question was almost answered by himself.
ReplyDeleteYou need to RELATE to those people and those times to find history interesting. The modern mindset of post-modernism where nothing has any fixed point for meaning or truth and its spawn of various isms--multiculturalism, nihilistic cynicism, etc, coupled with most of us living in a society lacking in hardship means you can't imagine WHY or HOW people behaved in the past. You can't read even something as old as Dickens and relate to the conditions, the pain, the tradeoffs. And since the teachers keep teaching the modern viewpoint of the history of victimization, there's no way to enter the old mindset.
Specifically, there's nothing there to enlighten, inspire, or otherwise awaken to the power and coolness of history. Kids --children and young adults--get excited by Events, by Things, not by historiographic abstractions of how various isms played out. They get excited by the Battle of Thermopylae, if you let them learn about it in detail. They get excited by the burning of DC if you let them learn about it in detail. But the detail has to be enough for you to understand the motivations, desires, goals, and constraints of the actors in that world.
If all they see is the history of victimization on one hand, and a laundry list of dates, names and places without any flavor for WHY those people, those Individual Persons, were acting that way, there's no reason to be inspired.
Lastly, I think the kids know something is wrong with what they are being taught, but they don't know exactly that they are being lied to. So the dissonance is enough to be turned off.
I know precious little history because I wasn't taught any since 3rd grade. But I distinctly remember that I was taught how noble and boring the French Revolution was--so it was quite a surprise to learn as an adult with a graduate degree how bad the Reign of Terror really was. I distinctly remember being taught some puff about how Gandhi freed India from the Brits, so it was quite a shock to learn the amount of bloodshed and current problems in Pakistan and Waziristan that we have to this date arose from his and a few other folks' machinations. I distinctly remember being taught how bad the Empires were for the African colonies, but only in my 20s did I learn about the looting of the treasuries by the Africans after kicking out the various Brits, French, Germans, etc. and what infrastructure they allowed to become undone.
So when you're lied to, and everything you've been taught is boring yet somehow doesn't make sense (because you've been lied to), then the context fails. Without context, history is uninteresting.
Could schools be discouraging students from relating and connecting to history? Specifically through the constant use of "personal essays"? How can you understand the motivations of old dead guys if you are being forced to write about yourself all the time? (And your parents are required to sign those personal essays and comment on how interesting their children's lives are?)
ReplyDeleteOn a positive note, our school still seems to be teaching old-fashioned World History in 9th grade. It's an overview, to be sure, but at least specific and concrete factual information was taught.
ReplyDeleteWhat I also liked was that our 9th grader was learning about the French Revolution from a historical standpoint, and her English Lit class was studying A Tale of Two Cities. M thought the novel rather dry until the end, but she could clearly see the link and connections between the two.
I have three children (10, 8, 5) who enjoy learning history and actually find it entertaining. Reading from history books often replaces bedtime stories at our house.
ReplyDeleteMy daughter, in particular, loves it so much she talks to her friends about it. Her friend's parents have started saying that their kids want to be homeschooled too thanks to my daughter's enthusiam (mostly about history). The value of history is not only understanding the past, but making connections to the present and decisions about how to go about our future.
My point? I think children not only would benefit profoundly from learning history, but that they would actually enjoy it. Like Doug said, history is better than fiction. It really has it all.
If only we'd begin to share our story, the story of mankind, with the passion it deserves.
I trace it also to a willingness to treat history as a collection of unrelated events, into which one can drop at one's leisure. My daughter's grade (she's in Middle School now) missed American History after 1800. They covered China instead. So, the War of 1812, the Civil War, Westward Expansion, which they used to cover, are all mysteries to her. They've read novels about slavery, of course, but they didn't cover the historical background, so the novels are not tethered in time.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a connection to math, too. Some subjects are sequential in development, and intermediate students require a knowledge of basic facts in order to create higher level theories. Without that knowledge, and without sequential treatment of the subject matter, everything becomes disconnected and uninteresting.
Add to that the current rage for finding victims and oppressors throughout history, and for extending that identification to the current day by use of identity politics, and yes, I can understand students rejecting the subject of history.
Today's Frank & Ernest cartoon seems timely (with the New Hampshire primary and this thread's discussion about history). The setting is election day and a candidate is giving a speech. Frank and Ernest are off to one side and Frank says: "Democracy was invented here in Athens?" Ernest replies: "And Euclid invented triangulation!"
ReplyDeleteUh, make that an exclamation point, as in "Democracy was invented here in Athens!"
ReplyDeleteI have a secret urge to go into my son's school at night and paint timelines along the corridors.
ReplyDeleteA thematic or drive by approach to history might work if they were serious, but they aren't. This isn't about a better way to learn history. It's about low expectations. Just like math.
Timeline Graffiti!! Yes! I'm in.
ReplyDeleteCan we start with the Ming Dynasty?
I'm in too.
ReplyDeleteHow about Mesopotamia?
I was thinking of different scaled timelines for each corridor. One on a cosmic scale, starting from the big bang and moving in billion year increments; another starting at about 500 million BC and moving in millions of years, and so forth.
ReplyDeleteI'm a big proponent of framework facts that make it easier to remember new facts. You don't have to remember many facts and dates to make this work.
Actually, I don't know why schools don't do this. They can combine history, art, science, music, math and more on the timeline and it would look a lot better than crayon work hung on the walls when parents come for their conferences.
Any suggestions for history ed remediation? I'm hoping some of you homeschoolers might be able to suggest some sources for filling in the gaps.
ReplyDeleteWhen I look through the library (last night) or browse through Amazon, I'm finding very little elementary aged history books. I'd like a little fiction to go along with some straight history.
Any ideas?
Yes! The The Story of Mankind by Hendrik Willem Van Loon is a wonderful place to start. Every home should have the Kingfisher History Encyclopedia and the Usborne Internet Linked Encyclopedia of World History is a good one too. I also recommend The History of US and The Classical Education Timeline from Pandia Press. For younger children The Story of the World relates the story of world history in a way that really captivates children. If you're looking for a guide to put it all together I really like History Odyssey (5-8th grade)as it has a great suggested reading list with good historical fiction that fits in with the period being studied. Another great clearinghouse of resources and information is The Well Trained Mind by Susan Wise Bauer.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure I left out something really good, but this is the stuff we go to just about everyday.
BTW, there is great historical fiction out there for the elementary level. A. just finished studying ancient Egypt so she rounded it out with The Golden Goblet, The Cat of Bubastes and from The Royal Diaries series, Cleopatra VII, Daughter of the Nile. The Well Trained Mind and History Odyssey both include suggestions for historical fiction. The Activity Books for The History of the World series includes "Corresponding Literature Suggestions" that include wonderful fiction books for young readers.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the suggestions. I'm starting a list. We'll keep this going.
ReplyDeleteBut now that we're afterschooling math and writing, I'm not sure how much more time I can expect out them for history.
Still, we'll squeeze it in where we can.
FWIW, my 6th grader just finished The Golden Goblet as they are doing ancient civilizations in humanities.
Before that, she read The Great Gilly Hopkins, set in modern times about a foster girl (more victims). My daughter turned in a shockingly bad piece of writing for that book. It is probably the worst thing she ever created.
Her grade? check + the highest grade possible. I have no idea how they evaluate these things.
Had it been my assignment, I'd have asked her to redo.
So after modern foster kids, to ancient civilizations, where will we go next? Darts would probably be the best predictor.
Do you think curriculum directors throw darts in their offices to choose topics?
I know how challenging it is to afterschool (I'm doing that for the other two). I have to say, that my kids like browsing through the history encyclopedias at their leisure. Sometimes, if you keep the good stuff just lying around and easily available, kids tend to gravitate to it naturally. History really is fascinating and I really think that kids are, by nature, curious about it.
ReplyDeleteDo you know who wrote History Odyssey? I can't seem to find it in my brief search on Amazon.
ReplyDeleteFor historical fiction for kids, you might want to start with the Newbery Medal books. Though I wouldn't suggest most of the more recent ones (which often seem to be chosen for their propaganda value), before about 1970 or so there are some brilliant pieces.
ReplyDeleteFor actual history, I'd recommend anthologies as a good place to start. The shorter pieces tend to concentrate on the most interesting parts of history. For boys, especially, war stories are likely to be interesting and there are many books of anthologies and vignettes that are quite good.
I am posting this annoymously because I am pressed for time to create an account. As a 6th grade teacher who loves to incorporate historical fiction and biography into the study of history/geography(not Social Studies!) I really recommend looking at the web site for Beautiful Feet books. History through literature and a great list of book ideas. The focus is a bit heavy on Christian values but look beyond that for ideas about literature/hsitory connections. Once you get started there are more books than you could possibly cover for every time period!
ReplyDeleteMy dad had all the Childhood of Famous Americans Series published through the 1930s, which I loved, and my boys liked the more recent ones.
ReplyDeleteHistory Odyssey is published by Pandia Press (the same people with the awsome timeline). http://www.pandiapress.com/history_odyssey.htm
ReplyDeleteThey are actually study guides divided into sequential periods. They could fit very well with summer break if the school year is too hectic.
The Newberry Medal books are excellent resources. In fact, The History of Mankind* is actually the winner of the first John Newberry Medal.
There are various versions of Van Loon's classic history available and you can even access it online for free on google's book search. They have a downloadable PDF. We have the version that has been updated by John Merriman and are very happy with this edition.
Awesome timeline: http://www.pandiapress.com/timeline.html
ReplyDeleteI suspect the history & geography series edited by E.D. Hirsch of Core Knowledge is very good.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.coreknowledge.org/CK/bkstr/pearson.htm
Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to get my hands on the books.
History & Geography
I'm a bit surprised about the comments about "The Great Gilly Hopkins" -- I recall that book rather fondly. I did read it on my own (along with about half a zillion other books), so I may not have focused on "victim" as much as your daughter's class did, or it may have been drowned out due to sheer volume. :-)
ReplyDeleteIt was a Newbery Honor winner in 1979, which is the year "The Westing Game" won, which is also a very fun book. Also 1976, "The Grey King." I have gathered up that whole series for my kids (which since the elder is 4.5, will not need it for a while yet), as well as the Lloyd Alexander series.
Thanks for reposting the timeline link -- I keep meaning to get one, and maybe I will just order now.
-m
I like the E.D. Hirsch Core Knowledge books -- my public library has most of them and I've bought a couple as well -- guess I need to buy the 6th grade one, too.
ReplyDeleteI recently looked at Hirsch's The New First Dictionary of Cultural Literacy. It lists everything (in short paragraph form) that you should have heard of by the time you finish the 6th grade.
It could be useful in identifying gaps, but not so good at filling the gaps.
As for the Great Gilly Hopkins, I'm going by my daughter's reaction. She didn't like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good book. I think she really missed the point as she mentions that she really doesn't get why the girl doesn't live with her parents.
The Sonlight catalog provides a wealth of ideas for books to use for history studies. The books also have a suggested reading level.
ReplyDeleteFor chronological history, we're using the Story of the World series by Susan Wise Bauer. It also comes in unabridged audio format. The activity guide for each book also comes with comprehension questions, sample narrations, maps, and suggested reading.
ReplyDeleteSWB is also working on a chronological history for adults. The first volume, The History of the Ancient World, is out in stores. Volume 2 covers the Middle Ages and is in the works now.
Lots of good resources on this thread. Thanks, everyone!
ReplyDeleteThe Parthenon Graphics Timelines are also very good. They offer many different choices, and since my daughter has been studying American history, we’ve made good use of those timelines. They’re a very manageable 44” long, so it’s easy to find places to put these up for us.
This is a classic school trick. They tell you that the problem is limited resources (money) rather than a problem with the school. You should ask them for exactly how much money they would need so that they could focus on ALL kids.
ReplyDeleteIn this case it had nothing to do with money. The administration was arguing that we should adopt the middle school model because that will be REALLY, REALLY GOOD for students who are STRUGGLING.
TIMELINE GRAFFITI!!!!
ReplyDeleteNY state has fantastic history standards -- the same ones Lynne Cheney killed back when she was head of NEH.
ReplyDeleteC. knows FAR more history than I do, and he's learned most of it at school. (Obviously, having a dad who is a historian means that he learns history at home, too. But even if he were learning no history here at home at all he would still know more than I do.)
So far his teachers have done a good-to-excellent job teaching the subject, too.
Will read the rest later - must go drag my child through another session of parent involvement.
ReplyDeleteGreat suggestions. It's making me realize that I need to get back with it.
ReplyDeleteThe Story of the World series was the most useful to me. Now that we are finally on the last one, my son can read the chapters himself, but he still likes it if I read it.
The Well-Trained Mind is such a good resource, too. I still go back to it because it's divided up into three levels to help homeschoolers when their child moves into the grade school, middle school or high school era.
One of the most helpful things the book does is to have a list around 20 people from each era that your child should at least be exposed to by the end of the year. It gives you an anchor to lean on.
The book is also packed with recommendations and links for each era and, I believe, has been updated a good deal.
I'm going to go order those timelines now. They look great.
SusanS