Re: It didn't really seem something that needed elaborating
Isaac Send a noteboard - 14/03/2010 06:31:45 PM
It's a good thing you inserted "self-described" there.
Yes, I've been monitoring his slow shift to the right with great pleasure, much like Dennis Miller or my mother he is what I call a 'Bush Democrat', he just in denial, soon he will realize he has joined the
As for the NYT picking out Texas, it has that history of being very influential nationally because of its population, and more drama and controversy than in most other states, so that seems rather obvious a choice.
That's one interpretation, the other being that Texas, whose democrats are basically right-wing compared to a New England republican, represent a good place to look when trying to find ways to imply the crazy right is trying to brainwash kids to view the Founders as infallible demigods and the GOP as their clergy. Considering the NYT's track record these days I find the latter more likely than the former as primary motivator.
I realize that the NC case is just an illustration, but it's interesting to debate its merits nonetheless. What I think is an important fact is that the Founding Fathers and early American history *does* appear in actual HS - but in the Civics class. Which one would think is ideal for OSC's views of how to teach about that period, since he sounds like he wants more propaganda than history anyway.
Because frankly, when I see sentences like "So the foundation story of America, the source of all the values and struggles that made America the freest, most prosperous, most generous, most exceptional nation in the history of the world will be a story for little kids?", I'm inclined to say, that sounds about right, the elder kids can get the historical version of America's foundation instead of the fairy tale version.
And it's absolutely true what you say about how one can go in greater depth and detail in higher years - why do you think Flanders has the system it has, with the 20th century coming in the last year so it can be studied in the most depth? I think it's absolutely right to reserve the most detailed treatment for the most recent period, as that is going to be the most relevant and the most important. If you then want to make an exception and give special additional attention to the founding of your country or the Civil War, that is one would think precisely what the Civics class is for. So I don't really see any major flaws in this suggestion they made.
I've no particular objection to this method myself. As mentioned, I have a very limited knowledge of how kids learn history in high school, what little I do know about education at that level usually comes from me demanding info and math and science after a 'What do you mean you don't know what a quadratic equation is?', I rarely asked my students what amount of history. I would say that much of that makes sense, but it is an area I avoid giving much input on since I don't have much context and even as a kid I always read history books like I'd read an editorial, assuming a slant, because I started by reading autobiographies, which now that I think about it was probably a good thing.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein
King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
- Albert Einstein
King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Texas Approves Curriculum Revised by Conservatives
13/03/2010 12:02:15 AM
- 1115 Views
"Impartial Historical Account" is an oxymoron
13/03/2010 12:21:20 AM
- 419 Views
So is "a sinless life," but that doesn't justify murder. *NM*
14/03/2010 12:22:16 AM
- 140 Views
Strange choice of analogies...
14/03/2010 12:17:03 PM
- 328 Views
I could be wrong, but I think his point was simply...
14/03/2010 03:53:23 PM
- 404 Views
I think it was that it just seems too out of place
14/03/2010 04:14:55 PM
- 446 Views
I dunno, you didn't elaborate much on your oxymoron statement.
14/03/2010 04:29:04 PM
- 430 Views
It didn't really seem something that needed elaborating
14/03/2010 05:20:33 PM
- 482 Views
Re: It didn't really seem something that needed elaborating
14/03/2010 05:51:58 PM
- 487 Views
Re: It didn't really seem something that needed elaborating
14/03/2010 06:31:45 PM
- 455 Views
It's about time.
13/03/2010 01:17:25 AM
- 458 Views
Don't forget interned German-Americans in BOTH world wars. *NM*
13/03/2010 02:47:25 AM
- 263 Views
Oh I haven't, but being Italian myself it's an issue close to my heart. *NM*
13/03/2010 04:41:19 AM
- 214 Views
Yes, because this article is all about presenting the truth in an unbiased manner *NM*
13/03/2010 11:02:20 AM
- 139 Views
I'm assuming Art. 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli 1797 is banned from Texan history lessons, then?
13/03/2010 12:26:41 PM
- 368 Views
And, along similar lines, both Article VII of the US Constitution and Missouri v. Holland. *NM*
14/03/2010 12:26:10 AM
- 146 Views
I would assume the Treaty of Tripoli 1797 would outside of the scope of a Texas history lesson
16/03/2010 07:54:53 PM
- 390 Views
Do the states just teach their own history, as opposed to that of what-was-then-the-USA? *NM*
16/03/2010 11:57:06 PM
- 214 Views
They teach both...at least at the college level. U.S. history and Texas History were requirements.. *NM*
17/03/2010 05:38:46 AM
- 216 Views
Texas history or Texas government?
18/03/2010 06:53:15 PM
- 294 Views
Good question....I don't remember if it was history or govt to be honest. *NM*
18/03/2010 07:59:10 PM
- 225 Views
When does revisionist history descend to the level of mere hypocrisy? I weep for my country.
15/03/2010 04:16:25 AM
- 535 Views
calling Zavala a city is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
15/03/2010 05:39:03 PM
- 399 Views
Seguin's a city, or at least town; Zavala is a county.
15/03/2010 09:00:54 PM
- 348 Views
Zavalla is a town as well and city is a bit of stretch for Seguin
15/03/2010 10:23:41 PM
- 302 Views
Fair enough, just trying to make clear I was speaking about municipality and county, respectively.
29/03/2010 03:49:30 PM
- 330 Views
See the problem is the argument is total BS
29/03/2010 05:27:53 PM
- 369 Views
Don't you guys essentially list all of the handful guys who fought at the Alamo already, anyway? *NM*
29/03/2010 08:55:34 PM
- 138 Views
There was 190 or so people there so no they are not all in the textbook
31/03/2010 05:31:41 PM
- 381 Views
Do you have any examples of where they are not teaching the truth?
15/03/2010 05:42:27 PM
- 347 Views
I think it is what they are leaving out that is worrisome.
15/03/2010 06:58:38 PM
- 360 Views
I don't see anything sayting they are leaving that out
15/03/2010 08:26:50 PM
- 352 Views
We were talking about this last night
15/03/2010 11:38:02 PM
- 504 Views
Still not sure I see a problem
16/03/2010 04:58:50 PM
- 288 Views
This thread is indeed making me wonder how textbooks are used in the US...
16/03/2010 05:05:13 PM
- 285 Views