Tucker says we need CAMERAS in our govt-schools. Liberals explode

T. A. Gardner said:
Is teaching The 1619 Project more honest? Is using Howard Zinn's A People's History... more honest? What do you consider a "more honest teaching of US History?"
Click to expand...

Using Zinn or 1619 as 1 resource is a good thing. As many perspectives as possible.

My personal idea of honest is not skipping events. I was never taught about the Tulsa massacre. I think teaching Nat Turner's rebellion from Nat's perspective is also important.

Not skipping the forced assimilation of Native Americans (Carslie School).

Also teaching about how our country has continued to evolve and move towards a "more perfect" union is important.

Teach the flaws AND how they led to improvement as a country. Focus on the ideals and how that allows for our greatness.

So much history is not included. Not from the perspective of the oppressed. That is why Zinn is so powerful. Not as a primary source but a perspective. Same with 1619. The podcast provides different ideas that students can explore.

A good history teacher will provide thought-provoking questions that students can explore. A good history teacher will facilitate learning from a variety of perspectives.

Teach students to critically look at multiple sources. Read Jefferson and Lincoln. Analyze their words and then look at Zinn. Compare and contrast.

An honest look at our history will be uncomfortable at times. However, a constant reminder of our ideals will provide balance.

The current problem is the uncomfortable is being used in politics to create a negative narrative about teachers. The uncomfortable lesson without context can easily be used as propaganda, and it is.

My experiences tell me that most k-12 teachers do not know what CRT is, or at least why it is such "news". Most are taking pd classes and enjoying a much deserved summer break before returning in a few weeks.

Yes, like every profession there are a few extremes. But that should not define the teaching profession or any profession.
 
Flash said:
What is being dishonestly taught now?
Click to expand...
More by omission or not exploring all perspectives of an event.

Think of John Adam's v. Sam Adam's and the Boston Massacre. One was out for blood, the other for justice.

Especially true when only looking at textbooks. Very limited information and perspectives in a typical US History textbook.
 
Whythink said:
More by omission or not exploring all perspectives of an event.

Think of John Adam's v. Sam Adam's and the Boston Massacre. One was out for blood, the other for justice.

Especially true when only looking at textbooks. Very limited information and perspectives in a typical US History textbook.
Click to expand...

You could list a thousand examples such as that. Most U. S. History teachers don't have time to cover everything included in the text now, especially if they engage in activities other than just "covering the material."

While interesting, the Adams v. Adams thing is a somewhat minor topic to include in a survey class. That is usually reserved for upper level classes on the American Revolution.

I bet if every student was taught about Adams v. Adams in high school very few would remember it today. Very few students even have to read their textbook to pass. I taught college students who said they had never read an entire book (of any type).

My comments do not apply to just students "today." It has been that way for many decades.
 
Diesel said:
Where do I find which schools "require" CRT coursework?
Click to expand...

CRT is more subtle than that. In K-12 schools that offer specific courses in CRT pretty much don't exist. Instead CRT is applied in developing curricula for many classes. This takes the form of what books are to be used and read, the areas of instruction included, course expectations, that sort of thing. The link I gave before gives details on which colleges and universities across the US require specific coursework in CRT for graduation along with those that intertwine it into other coursework. And, yes, many colleges and universities now require specific coursework in CRT to graduate from certain degree programs, education being a common one.
 
Flash said:
You could list a thousand examples such as that. Most U. S. History teachers don't have time to cover everything included in the text now, especially if they engage in activities other than just "covering the material."
Click to expand...

That is part of my point. Making sure their is time, by making it a priority, is the key. That is what I believe is the goal. Not just teaching the main events from the same perspective should be the objective. That is the challenge. Covering the same time period but providing stories of people and events from a variety perspectives. Like I said, that is what makes Zinn so interesting. I would never use his book as a text but it works well as a resource. It provides a perspective that I never would have been taught.

From my experience, students love the John and Sam Adams stories. Especially if the movie John Adams is used as one of the sources.
 
Whythink said:
That is part of my point. Making sure their is time, by making it a priority, is the key. That is what I believe is the goal. Not just teaching the main events from the same perspective should be the objective. That is the challenge. Covering the same time period but providing stories of people and events from a variety perspectives. Like I said, that is what makes Zinn so interesting. I would never use his book as a text but it works well as a resource. It provides a perspective that I never would have been taught.

From my experience, students love the John and Sam Adams stories. Especially if the movie John Adams is used as one of the sources.
Click to expand...


Zinn is a Marxist. We know what his perspective is on all historical events. Students do not learn much history by learning ideological biases that he never bothers to substantiate before he applies those to history.

I think it is useful to look at perspectives through historiography looking at different interpretations rather than political ideological perspectives. The high school level may be a little young to teach these things as we are not ready to evaluate different perspectives until we have an understanding and knowledge of the events we are studying.
 
Diesel said:
It honestly revolts me. There is no more important job than that of a teacher. I have seen the cult on this website denigrate teachers as propagandists, elitists, and idiots. They are professionals. They have degrees, which is something that the vast majority of the cult lacks. They should be respected while they do the job that their parents are incapable of doing.
Click to expand...

Most teachers should be fired. Once the kid can read he can teach himself anything. Teaching should have ended when gutenberg invented the printing press 500 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top