Hello all,
I hope you summer has been relaxing and a fun adventure! Welcome to another installment of Book Clubs for IEFA. I really want you to know how much I appreciate your participation and enthusiasm. We will be breaking this book into 4 weeks. It each will have questions. Please responded to questions and others comments and thoughts. The final project will be a Bloom's Ball. I will post what they are and how to make one next week!
Week 1 Reading:
Chapters 1-3
Week 1 Questions:
1) How does "hero-making" take conflict and multi-demensional, flawed characters out of history? In what ways does this rob students of perspective and practical connection to thier present-day lives?
2) On page 37, the author writes, " Who are the textbooks written for (and by)? Plainly, the descedants of Europeans." Do you agree with statement? Explain. Do you believe thatit is simply a question of victorss writing history? Are there other reasons why textbooks might not have a purely inclusive viewpoint?
3) The author writes on page 72 that, “Within our lifetimes, the school-age
population of the United States is destined to become majority minority,
with Hispanic, African, Asian, and Native Americans totaling more than
51 percent.” What implications will this demographic change have within
the context of the classroom? Will this change your current views about
what you teach and how you teach it? Should this change how you teach?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have always had the image of Helen Keller learning to spell and talk even though she was blind and deaf. I didn't know about the radical socialist side of her. I don't necessarily agree with her ideas but I definitely admire her commitment to a cause. She was well-known so she takes this to promote her cause. What an opportunity for students to discuss how use a "celebrity" status can bring issues to the forefront. We are not short of modern day examples. Again I was surprised at the many "racial" acts Woodrow Wilson implemented. He is most famous for starting the League of Nations but discussion of his whole term in office needs to be brought up to students. It will make them look harder and think more about present day politics and leaders.
ReplyDeleteI agree that textbooks are limited in their persepctives of events. However, if textbook authors tried to include every perspective on every issue, the book would certainly be daunting and unweildy. I personally think textbooks should merely present facts and then it is the teacher's job to bring up controversies and let students research on their own. Teachers should present questions about different viewpoints. For example, talk about what happened to Indian tribes after Columbus landed.
I should certainly hope that teachers adjust their teaching based on their classroom's demographics. When talking about slavery, World War II, etc., bring in the various cultures and races that are involved. Again a good teacher will present facts and lead the students in productive discussions and assignments bringing in different races. Native American students are becoming more aware of their heritage. Let them talk about it. Same is true with the others. History is full of mistruths, bad examples, and unscrupulous heroes. What an opportunity to let students discover on their own history's truth.
I never knew the rest of the story of the Miracle Worker, but am secretly glad she used her notoriety to illuminate class issues. She remains a hero to me, though I can see how it gets sticky for the Woodrow Wilson's of the world.
ReplyDeleteTextbooks are written by the victors in any situation, are they not? Loewen's Paradigm Shift is a very powerful explanation for the rationalization of wrongdoing, particularly in Columbus's case of enslaving his former friends in the Americas. My Mayflower relative apparently thought grave and cache robbing wouldn't violate his self-concept as he rationalized a higher power was helping him (or at least the master to whom he was indentured) to survive. When he and the master later signed the Mayflower Compact, the history writer made the leap that it was a unique flash of American-style self governance, which we now find is not the only instance.
Teachers are beginning to teach history in a different way because communication is different. Revolutions are being tweeted in real time despite the interpretations of mega-multi-media corporate conglomerates. Teachers use primary source material more often than not. Loewen is evaluating texts like the kind I used in high school which really emphasized the "ingenuity and wisdom" of our forefathers in an American pageant, rather than the truth that human clashes and encounters are messy and organic and have many players.
1) How does "hero-making" take conflict and multi-dimensional, flawed characters out of history? In what ways does this rob students of perspective and practical connection to their present-day lives?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the “hero making” in American history leaves out so much that people would find human and real. Students have a hard time relating to these so called “heroes”, when the perspective and human story is left out. Text books have been relied upon far too often, leaving out the primary documents of truth. The “hero making” takes out perspective and perspective is truth. It makes history boring for students when they are not able to relate to the history in any kind of way. It is important for educators to include human perspective from all sides involved. Students need to see that conflict happens for many reasons.
2. On page 37, the author writes, “Who are the textbooks written for (and by)? Plainly, the descendants of Europeans." Do you agree with statement? Explain. Do you believe that it is simply a question of victors writing history? Are there other reasons why textbooks might not have a purely inclusive viewpoint?
I completely agree with the author on this point. I feel that the text books are written from the victor’s point of view. To have a book written with multiple perspectives might make people really have to look at our “violent” history. History is not rosy and fun. I believe this style of writing is boring and has no body to it or pure truth. It would be difficult to include all perspectives, but it could be nice to have links to primary documents in the book to help teachers give a more in-depth look at history. The sad part is that many teachers do not know the perspective others in history because they have not had those in their own studies. Things are starting to change with the connections that are available today.
3. The author writes on page 72 that, “Within our lifetimes, the school-age
population of the United States is destined to become majority minority,
with Hispanic, African, Asian, and Native Americans totaling more than
51 percent.” What implications will this demographic change have within
the context of the classroom? Will this change your current views about
what you teach and how you teach it? Should this change how you teach?
As an educator, one should always look at the demographics of each class. One should develop the habit of creating history lessons that are meaningful, multi-perspective and rich! This habit would make history come alive for all in the classroom and would not be one sided. History would be humanized and have more truth! The way history has been taught over the last 200 years was one-side and I bet it made the minority of those times feel invisible, in-adequate, and frustrated!.
*Jennifer I really appreciate your sharing your own family history! It really added depth to your point in paragraph three!
*Vicki you made really great points in paragraph three as well!
1. I am not always sure that textbooks try to create “heroes” in our society. Our knowledge of history has grown so much with the use of technology that we have been able to correct or interpret certain events and people differently over the last few decades. However, people like Columbus turn into a made-up hero when we do not correct our history, and in the end we have misperceptions and inaccuracies that make students question our educational system. What we have to remember is that we are a society that is dominated by morals and correct behavior, and therefore like any culture or religion we want to find the best story that is going to make our kids into respectable adults. Therefore, I think history textbooks have a goal of trying to focus on character growth, and not the facts. I personally think textbooks are trying to incorporate the new information out there, but it takes time to break down a traditional story that has been covered for decades especially if that special story was inspirational, but now negative. People hate change, and sadly it is going to take time for real change to take effect.
ReplyDelete2. I believe textbooks take a very safe approach to controversial issues such as the slavery, civil rights, wars, Native Americans, etc. The authors leave out specific events that describe the complete struggle of these groups, and therefore, giving just enough information to inform the students there was something wrong, but it got fixed by government actions/policies is not morally right or accurate. In some cases, the “fixed” part was making it worse rather than better. I think one of the main reasons for this approach is the attitude our government has had throughout the course of the 20th century. During the 1960s, President Nixon was worried that if the younger generation questioned the actions of the government that a revolution could threaten the country. I am not sure if textbook authors and politicians of 2011 are worried about a revolution, but rather the perception of who really is the United States today. It seems to me the goal that textbook authors and politicians want us to achieve in our teaching is how the history of democracy is a perfect system and has given our country a strong powerful example of how life should be conducted.
On the other hand, I believe it is not really a matter of making the government look good, but rather to make administrators of school districts happy. Many textbooks are written for administrators who do not want to rock the boat with controversial topics as mentioned throughout the book. I do not think textbook authors are trying to sell a agenda necessarily always, but feel in order to sell their book they have to please schools districts by writing to their views of what should be told to students. However, in the end you receive a finished product that gives no perspective, but rather a melodramatic storyline of facts that do not scratch the surface.
3. Even though our country could have over 51% minorities at some point, I wonder if we will ever see 49% or less whites in our classrooms at one time (in places other than urban areas, parts of the east coast, and the southern United States). I am not sure if it would necessarily change my teaching because I think you should try to incorporate different cultures and customs into your class no matter what, but rather I would try to change the perspectives and attitudes of the students. Many schools in Montana that do not have a diverse culture of students have a very ignorant viewpoint on the sensitivity of the history of minorities. One of the things I will be stressing more in my classroom after reading this book will be doing constant exercises of having the students critique and analyze if the topics in our textbook were accurately and completely covered. One of the constant struggles that I am sure we all have as teachers is trying to break down the stereotypes that students have learned outside of school and giving them perspective rather than ignorance.