Students don't grasp U.S. History

reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe

---

Yes, they are, and in fact, if you look back at my post earlier at 4:11, you'll see it again.

A very odd suggestion, given the nature of the thread.

Menzies book (replace "America" with "the world" in the title if you`re not in the states), is a very interesting read. I enjoyed it, frankly. But at best it`s a work of speculative fiction. It was a very valuable book for me personally, because some of the claims he makes are so far-fetched, they caused me to dig deeper into the story - to find that his theories are generally without merit - in that they are unsupported by the very sources he documents, in that some of his sources are forgeries taken as factual, in that his claims of fact are based clearly in the work as his own speculation of events, only to be presented as fact later on in the same work. Oh, and he never bothered to actually consult any Chinese primary sources when writing a book about ... China.

In other words - it`s a highly speculative work at best, but despite that it was presented in the media as being a groundbreaking piece of historical research that "...makes history sound like pure fun..." (to quote the NY Times on the front cover of the book).

Fictionalized history, speculative history presented as factual, romanticized historical accounts presented on the big screen with a multi-million dollar effects budget... all of these things, if accepted at face value, contribute to the inability of students to grasp U.S. history.

I think one of the problems with history, as a field of study, is that it has two different facets: rote memorization and investigation/speculation. Sadly, rarely anymore does one find a balance between the two in modern education.

For those that complain that “History is boring” or “I just can’t remember names and dates”, I can see their viewpoint to some extent. Many teachers avoid getting “dirty” by simply having their students memorize data with no sense of context: The battle of Hastings was? Abe Lincoln was the ___ President? Much of this data is important but some of it can be generally useless: What date was FDR born? How old was General Lee at the Battle of Gettysburg? Simple reiteration of dates and names, in and of itself, has no real relevance to learning “History”.

The other side is investigation/speculation. This is where history gets the chance to come alive: Why did Truman drop the bomb? Why did the Roman Empire fall? Was the Industrial Revolution inevitable? Much of this aspect of history has no real right-or-wrong answer but it provides the framework for learning about the past in a visceral way. To understand why and how things got to be the way they are and enable us to relate to our current situation from a grounded historical perspective.

However, both sides are mutually dependant. One can’t have a really valid opinion about the American Civil War if they don’t know what century it occurred in or the various events that led up to it in a chronological order.
History is not just data and not just ideas. The good teachers always find a balance and therefore make history come alive and give students an education that matters. And History does matter. It ‘s a shame that it is being given such short shrift, as evidenced by the OP.

reply to post by vox2442

---

As I said, his conclusions are subject to debate. It still does come down to what you wish to believe about the "facts". Here in the states, he was more widely accepted, than he was on the other side of the pond. In China, admittedly biased, there is more acceptance by some. Again, one of the things I mentioned in my last post was how people tend to color their version of the truth with their personal biases. It works both ways with 1421. Of course, the Chinese government would be much more favorable to 1421's conclusions than say the Italian-American Foundation of America.
I have seen most of the refutations regarding the work. Most of the detractors quote the same PBS show, or the same detractors, citing their claims as facts. Again, having been in the environment for almost a decade, I can say from experience that academics have a way of accepting the facts that support their position, while claiming that those "facts" that do not confirm their position to be fraudulent. Selectivism is rampant in many fields, from science to history to meteorology. Just look at the Global Warming Debate, or the debate over String Theory.
Again, 1421 was debated in the Christopher Columbus thread a few weeks ago, and I would rather keep on topic here.

not suprising at all. I doubt most people discuss history with the people they work or hang out with anyway. so you'd have no way of knowing that people are ignorant to U.S. history. and if you do talk about it, it's because you have made friends who have similar interests. When I worked in retail a running joke for me and 2 of my buddies was to have ex-presidents paged over the intercom. just to see if we could slip it past the person doing the page, and to gage the customers reactions, if any. we got Zachary Taylor by them every time, once a young lady who was in school to become a teacher even fell for it. she later told me she thought something was weird about Zachary Taylor, but claimed he was a kid on Home Improvement. *sigh* people can be funny

reply to post by passenger

---

Excellent post. What many people fail to realize is that some of the greatest discoveries in history have come about as a result of speculation and subsequent investigation. History is no different than science. It is constantly EVOLVING, at least our view of it.

Those that believe that they have all of the answers need only go back 20 or 30 years and look at some of the history books of that time, and compare them to today. Many of the conclusions have changed, based upon new investigation.
We have to be open to new theories and ideas, because they then bring about further investigation.

Of course, there are always the history of World War II, as written in history books in the old Soviet Union, versus those written by allied countries..........

Or say, the history of the reasons for Pearl Harbor, written in, say Japan, versus a book written in the US....

reply to post by Totalstranger

---

That reminds me of the story I heard at my college about the old professor that used to send around a sign-up sheet for students the first day of class. One of the students, as a joke, signed the name DESCARTES. The following several classes, the professor started each class by asking students to respond "present" when their name was called. Each time he got to Descartes, there was no response. Finally, one day when reading the name Descartes, and getting no answer, he stopped and asked if anyone knew this Des Cartes. One of the students replied "He's a philosopher". The professor, quite annoyed by now, replied "I don't care WHAT his major is. Tell him if he doesn't get to the next class, I'm FAILING HIM!

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

---

Prof, I thank you for all that you have done. For doing it the right way.

Not only does it evolve but the evolution demands monitoring. History does repeat itself just as evolution also replicates itself. Maybe not in an exact and identical way but in such a manner as that certain results can be anticipated from prior manifestations. Just as say, eyes have evolved and been replicated in similar manner - so have dictatorships. Just as legs have common similarities – so do economic collapses. Nothing evolves in a vacuum and history doesn't exist there either. That’s why history stands as an important field of study and why it’s such a tragedy that it’s being neglected so much.


[edit on 19-2-2008 by passenger]

Well my definition of truth is something that isnt a lie, fact, i understand what you posted, im just going by my opinions, obviously but as someone else posted here, they downplay historical facts, ill cut this short i have a extremely bad headache ill continue tommorow.

reply to post by passenger

---

I couldn't agree with you more. You make excellent points. It's interesting that what you said about history repeating itself reminded me of the Mayan view of history and the 9 cycles of human creation. If you're interested, here is something I had come across regarding that issue:
www.mayanmajix.com...

You might find it interesting.
Nice posts.

reply to post by patriot jim

---

Patriot Jim,
Thank YOU.
Thank YOU again. (note to moderator- 2 lines)

Another aspect of this issue that I find so disturbing is that not only are so many ignorant of history – but they revel in that attribute.
I have heard so many comments along the lines of: “Well I don’t care about that, them people are all dead anyway”, or “Well, that was sooooo long ago…who cares anymore?”

Also, many seem to hit upon historical events and use them as a foundation of their belief system with no sense of the context of the event itself. When arguing with people decrying the Hiroshima bombings (on the anniversary) , I queried them if they had ever heard of the Nanking Massacre or the Bataan Death March. Many replies were of this sort: “I didn’t know we bombed them too!” or “What does that have to do with anything?” I find that this sort of isolation and extraction of events, from history proper, allows people to establish credulous opinions on events that they have no real perspective on. That itself can be a very dangerous thing.

you guys are so right. especally you passenger with the "I dont care, their dead, doesnt affect me" thing. I think as a social experiment you guys should go into work and ask people to name the first 3 pres. in order. simple right? and with pres. day being only 2 days removed you can say its just out of curiosity. I bet some people will get obtuse, and then you may even get a few answers like -washington, ben franklin and Lincoln..?

and dont get me wrong, when me and my buddies did this we never berated people. we didnt even tell them they were wrong. it was just AMAZING how little people knew. I mean, I had that stuff shoved down my throat in grade school. so did all other americans. yet we(as a collective) fail at out own history. *sigh*

Passsenger and Totalstranger,
Have you ever heard newscasters mispronounce famous historical figures' names, or get well-accepted historical facts wrong? It happens all the time. Occasionally, my wife and I will be watching the news, and that will happen, and I'm ready to jump out of my easy chair. My wife will softly say "Honey, now calm down, they can't hear you". The wisdom of women!

The unfortunate part of that, though, is that many people get their "news" and information from TV, and of course, most of it is pure glitz, with no substance. How many times have you heard people say something like "Well, I heard it on the CBS/ABC/NBC news, so it must be true" ?

Of course, most of the news involves Britney or Paris Hilton or Brad Pitt or some other Hollywood figure. I'm sure those news viewers could tell you who is divorcing whom, or who is now dating whom.

My wife and I are fortunate. When we were growing up, TV was in its infancy, and in fact went off the air at times, around 9pm, and there were only a few channels. But that is another topic.......

ah yes I too remember when tv went off air, but it was more in the days like the first poltergeist movie! but as to people on tv making mistakes, I too have thrown an unnecessary fit seeing that. my wife yells at me but she thinks that I'm really smart and I just think that I listened to what I was taught in school. I mean c'mon Ben franklin and A. Hamilton are presidents because they are on money? It's just sad. I bet everyone knows what year mom and dad were born but cant necessarily put a pres. on that year. its frustrating and I'm not even a "history buff"

To ProfEmiritus and Totalstranger,

Yeah. “President” Ben Franklin. I have heard news/TV personalities refer to him as such. Makes my teeth hurt every time. I can only suppose because they see him in their wallet next to the other “dead Presidents”, that they assume he must be one of them.

As regards the first three Presidents - I’m constantly shocked by how many people can’t name the LAST three. Oh, they always get Clinton, sometimes George the First, after that it gets foggy quick. I don’t like to ask these types of questions too much any more, as it makes it hard to sleep at night.

oh yeah, and one more thing. true story. I had it out with my own father(R.I.P.) once over who was the president when I was born. he swore,literally, up and down that it was Nixon. It was Ford, I was right, and he was standoffish the rest of the night!

reply to post by Totalstranger

---

I think that's one of the reasons that people like Ron Paul weren't accepted by the MSM or most people. When he talked about the Fed, and Jefferson versus Hamilton's view of the banking system, most people didn't have a clue. Heck, in the last televised Republican debate, when each candidate got to ask one question of the candidate of their choice, Ron Paul asked John McCain about the monetary system. McCain replied that he didn't know much about economics. I'm not trying to pick on McCain, but all of the major candidates, except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, focus on surface topics that they think Americans are interested in, (and they're unfortunately probably right), so we never get any proposals of substance addressing the REAL pressing issues of today.

don't forget "president Hamilton"! thats if the people calling him that even KNOW who is on their 10 spot. every year it seems this comes up and it makes me frustrated. I've been to the Hayes household/grave in Ohio, I signed the Reagan memorial book inside the Ford library..maybe I'm just a history nerd?!