back to English 165 Daedalus transcripts
**trinidad estonia peru laos** scroll down the page to find your group
trinidad
[Message #1]
Ruth SanJuan:
hello
[Message #2]
Amy Lawlor:
what are Loewen's main arguments about the way high school history is taught?
[Message #3]
michael mark:
hi
[Message #4]
Ruth SanJuan:
children are becoming more and more resistant towards learning history
[Message #5]
Ruth SanJuan:
is anyone here
[Message #6]
michael mark:
true,but if you make it interesting kids will like it
[Message #7]
michael mark:
yes I am here.
[Message #8]
Ruth SanJuan:
but in making it more interesting, facts can become distorted
[Message #9]
Chochi Santos:
Yo.
[Message #10]
michael mark:
true , but it is not always the case. sanitization of history and glorifying people when they should not.
[Message #11]
Chochi Santos:
I always liked History.
[Message #12]
Ruth SanJuan:
he also says that many textbooks tend to have biased and narrow-focused information. This information can lack important facts that would make it more interesting to learn.
[Message #13]
Chochi Santos:
The truth is, if you want to learn History for yourself, you have to seek knowledge for yourself. Don't rely on school.
[Message #14]
Ruth SanJuan:
I agree
[Message #15]
Ruth SanJuan:
but in learning for yourself, you have to be careful as to which sources are reliable or not
[Message #16]
Ruth SanJuan:
Loewen thought that in surveying twelve books, he would get a broader knowledge of history
[Message #17]
Chochi Santos:
Yup.
[Message #18]
Ruth SanJuan:
But he noticed that many of the books just imitate each other's facts
[Message #19]
Ruth SanJuan:
even though some of those facts can be false or misleading
[Message #20]
michael mark:
it's kind of like when in h.s. we only touched the vietnam war . it was always a small section,,guess they don't like to talk about when the u.s. loses or looks like fools.
[Message #21]
Ruth SanJuan:
exactly
[Message #22]
Chochi Santos:
Yeah, and they don't dig nearly enough into things.
[Message #23]
Ruth SanJuan:
textbooks talk about the glorification of America and its values. They never talk about the defeats or mistakes we've made. We can learn from our mistakes, just as much, if not more than our victories or accomplishments.
[Message #24]
Ruth SanJuan:
if they do talk about it, its a small snippet compared to the tons of pages dedicated to our numerous accomplishments
[Message #25]
Chochi Santos:
Our H. S. History teacher was cool though. He really tried to teach us the truth. He made us read American History X. It's a book that tells the truth behind a lot of the things you learn in History. Like, the first person to invent a telephone was a woman.
[Message #26]
michael mark:
and he's right most history books mimick others, I guess the writers only have or chose easier ways of passing on onfo. no one ever wants to really rock the vote on "historical facts" .like the internment camps of wwII they said it was justified for fear of spies, it in fact was racist. I mean what about the germans and italians?
[Message #27]
Ruth SanJuan:
exactly, the internment camps were based on the same justifications as the internment camps of the Nazi's.
[Message #28]
Ruth SanJuan:
if america makes a mistake, we do our best to justify or minimize the damage.
[Message #29]
michael mark:
I really envy you guys sometimes when I had history back then in h.s. it was boring repetative stuff until we got this young student teacher when she instructed us to question some of our own history.
[Message #30]
Ruth SanJuan:
yeah me too
[Message #31]
Chochi Santos:
Yeah, like WWII. You'll learn a lot about Hitler, but not that much about Stalin, even though he killed a whole lot of people too.
[Message #32]
Ruth SanJuan:
but the administration in my school, felt that he was being to liberal with his tactics and the information he was teaching us. So he left
[Message #33]
michael mark:
ruth it is just like with Bush trying to justify the Iraq situation, so much damage control for him to try to do.
[Message #34]
Ruth SanJuan:
i definely agree. but we have to remember that the only information available to us, is information from the media. These media sources may have agenda's that create a biasness in their work.
[Message #35]
Chochi Santos:
I bet you that when our kids learn about the war in Iraq they won't be taught about the whole scandle behind the "Weapons of Mass Destruction."
[Message #36]
michael mark:
I guess it is like a code of conductfor authors, try to not contridict the general belief.
[Message #37]
michael mark:
It is really going to be interesting to see what new text will say about the crisis in the east,it will really be regulated just to cover Bush's arrogant out look about america.
[Message #38]
Ruth SanJuan:
Loewen says that "Emotion is the glue that causes history to stick" I completely agree with him. But if we continue to glamorize our history, students will see it as unrealistic and not be involved and interested. We should document our mistakes and defeats and the effects so that students will have emotional reactions, therefore making it more interesting.
[Message #39]
Chochi Santos:
The books will make it seem like it was all about terrorism.
[Message #40]
Ruth SanJuan:
i know that if i found out the truth about Columbus and FDR i would have been more interested in learning the topic at hand.
[Message #41]
Amy Lawlor:
What are the results of history being taught in this way?
[Message #42]
michael mark:
we need to know about past mistakes so we doo not repeat them.
[Message #43]
Ruth SanJuan:
students are becoming more resistant to learning history
[Message #44]
Chochi Santos:
Yeah, we won't learn from History this way.
[Message #45]
michael mark:
false impression of certain key figures would be the thought.
[Message #46]
Chochi Santos:
American History is all about making America look golden.
[Message #47]
Ruth SanJuan:
if history continues to be taught from books containing false facts and information, students will continue to buy into the incorrect information.
[Message #48]
michael mark:
we get this straight cut view of people, very sanitized.
[Message #49]
Chochi Santos:
Yeah, and then they have those so called "Historical Movies."
[Message #50]
Chochi Santos:
Did any of you see the Patriot?
[Message #51]
Ruth SanJuan:
i think that lately, students are becoming more and more aware of the "fantastical" information in the books handed out to us.
[Message #52]
michael mark:
unfortunately there is alot of dirt on plenty of people
[Message #53]
Chochi Santos:
Now that was one usless peace of crap.
[Message #54]
michael mark:
which movie was that?
[Message #55]
Chochi Santos:
The one with Mel Gibson.
[Message #56]
Ruth SanJuan:
exactly. Hollywood is further distorting our knowledge about our histories.
[Message #57]
michael mark:
I actually thought Pearl harbor was a real bad movie some stuff was not accurate.
[Message #58]
Chochi Santos:
Yup, super-deal storyline + bad acting + great special effects = A BOX OFFICE HIT!
[Message #59]
Chochi Santos:
Gimme a break!
[Message #60]
Ruth SanJuan:
Children are being affected also. I remember seeing a cartoon in which it highlighted Columbus and his quest to disprove the "world is flat" concept. I also remember believing it at that point in time. These children and students alike aren't given many options or resources to learn their history, therefore they resort to pop culture.
[Message #61]
Chochi Santos:
I thought that was one of the lamest movies about WWII.
[Message #62]
Chochi Santos:
American's are so fond of making themselves look like victims and heros.
[Message #63]
Chochi Santos:
Did anyone ever ask about what the Americans did to the Japanese way before the war?
[Message #64]
Chochi Santos:
Of course not. They don't even want to hear it.
[Message #65]
Ruth SanJuan:
that's what loewen says. "Feel-good history for affluent white males inevitably amounts to feel-bad history for everyone else."
[Message #66]
michael mark:
chochi, it seems like the internment camps were the black mark on america inly within the last thirty years.but during the war it was okay,really bad thought process.
[Message #67]
Chochi Santos:
Did you know that Japan never intended to open its borders? They never even wanted to deal with the rest of the world. They were some of the most content people in the world, but the U.S. and the English forced them to open their borders under threat of war.
[Message #68]
Amy Lawlor:
How should history be taught? Since it is not possible to teach every event from every perspective, what is important in teaching history?
[Message #69]
Chochi Santos:
It is important to teach the mistakes first.
[Message #70]
Ruth SanJuan:
i agree. emotional learning is best
[Message #71]
Chochi Santos:
That's the whole point in teaching History. It's not for praising, but for learning.
[Message #72]
Ruth SanJuan:
if we can comprehend and accept our mistakes, we can learn so much
[Message #73]
michael mark:
not to make the same mistake twice ,and try not to teach as juat fact that you must remember but , something to think about and wonder if it can happen in present day.
[Message #74]
Chochi Santos:
Take John Wayne for example. He has to be one of the worst examples for Americans, but he comes off as a hero.
[Message #75]
Chochi Santos:
All of his movies made every other culture in the world look barbaric.
[Message #76]
michael mark:
ture was'nt he a womanizer?
[Message #77]
Ruth SanJuan:
in teaching history, expecially to young children, we have to remember that we are dictating to the reader about their history. What they take from school, they will take with them forever.
[Message #78]
michael mark:
true ruth
[Message #79]
Chochi Santos:
The irony of it all is that though he was in so many war-movies, he never actually served in the armed forces.
[Message #80]
Chochi Santos:
That's why kids should learn History from a less biased POV.
[Message #81]
michael mark:
kids are a blank canvas and what ever they learn earlier on in life usually sticks for a long time. I guess you should balance out things you know like pros and cons.
[Message #82]
Ruth SanJuan:
i think history books should just be a collection of primary sources
[Message #83]
Ruth SanJuan:
exactly
[Message #84]
Chochi Santos:
I agree.
[Message #85]
Chochi Santos:
Have any of you taken Mr. Wong here for US History?
[Message #86]
michael mark:
several classes actually goood teacher. why do you ask
[Message #87]
Chochi Santos:
One of the first things he told us was, "Forget everything you learned in H.S. You're in my class now and now you'll learn History."
[Message #88]
Ruth SanJuan:
Children may be turned off by the 'fantastical' history they are taught. So when they get older, they automatically have a pessimistic view towards history.
[Message #89]
Ruth SanJuan:
i had Henry
[Message #90]
Chochi Santos:
He's dope, huh.
[Message #91]
michael mark:
he tels it like it is ,a definate change from high school history.made me more interested in the sub ject.
[Message #92]
Chochi Santos:
Learning shouldn't be a chore.
[Message #93]
Chochi Santos:
You should be studying because you're interested in what you want to learn.
[Message #94]
Ruth SanJuan:
history teachers who teach the good and bad, the victories and defeats, make a greater impact on students' lives.
[Message #95]
michael mark:
he uses the text for refence and then he tells us about what actually was going on.he made it kind of fun for me, learned alot of things that I did not know about
[Message #96]
Chochi Santos:
I think that it's very lame that the school system forces us to learn things that we don't want to learn.
[Message #97]
Chochi Santos:
Mr. Wong inspired me to change my major from Business to History.
[Message #98]
michael mark:
chochi are you going to teach?
[Message #99]
Chochi Santos:
Do you know about the History of the school system?
[Message #100]
michael mark:
not really
[Message #101]
Ruth SanJuan:
Good teachers are hard to find. But when you find one, you'll know. They're able to draw out essentials of a students' intellect. By doing so, students become engaged and opinionated about what they are learning.
[Message #102]
Chochi Santos:
It was invented to get us used to monotony.
[Message #103]
michael mark:
very true ruth.
[Message #104]
Ruth SanJuan:
i think that the younger teachers, like ones closer to our generation, have become more attuned to these needs.
[Message #105]
Chochi Santos:
They gave kids standardized work. Then they made them take standardized tests so that they'll get used to the monotony of factory life. The school system was never built with the intention of teaching knowledge.
[Message #106]
michael mark:
I think there are alot of teachers on campus that really want us to see the other side.
[Message #107]
Ruth SanJuan:
Teachers are teaching from a broader perspective than before.
[Message #108]
Chochi Santos:
Unfortunately, we still use that system.
[Message #109]
Chochi Santos:
Why make us take Biology when most of us don't even need to know it for our major?
[Message #110]
Ruth SanJuan:
to know about what makes life life! :)
[Message #111]
Chochi Santos:
We take it because it's part of all of our standard course.
[Message #112]
Chochi Santos:
Alright then folks.
[Message #113]
Ruth SanJuan:
Hey! I like Biology!! Giorgi is a great teacher
[Message #114]
michael mark:
have fun this weekend guys.
[Message #115]
Chochi Santos:
See ya later, Space Cowboy.
[Message #116]
Amy Lawlor:
end 2/27
peru
[Message #1]
Amy Lawlor:
what are Loewen's main arguments about the way high school history is taught?
[Message #2]
kristina oda:
the way high school history is taught is the way that the teacher s like to teach straight out the book.
[Message #3]
kristina oda:
is there anyone else in this group?
[Message #4]
Nancy Duran:
They present the people as being flawless in history books. Students can't relate because no human is perfect every human make mistakes. They also leave out details and some of the things they write are not true.
The teacher also give lots of facts and expects us to memorize them. They don't make it interesting.
[Message #5]
kristina oda:
that is very true because i used to hate histroy class foreal
[Message #6]
Nancy Duran:
I also disliked history and found it to be very boring.
[Message #7]
kristina oda:
it used to be so boring the only history class that i liked in high school was my government class. my teacher was good and he was funny. he always tried to make jokes out of stuff and he kept everyone paying attention. i wanted to be actually learn in that class
[Message #8]
Nancy Duran:
That is how more teacher should be instead there are those that speak in monitone which can get really boring.
[Message #9]
Nancy Duran:
Teachers also don't relate history to the present.
[Message #10]
kristina oda:
o i know i used to hate that..you know the teacher i forgot her first name but her last name is bell?? a history teacher?
[Message #11]
kristina oda:
she's a good teacher.
[Message #12]
Aaron Jones:
I loved history. Particularly because the teacher and the class could read the highlighted section like dialogue, and it would involve something like the civil war or something.
[Message #13]
Aaron Jones:
sorry for the odd interruption
[Message #14]
kristina oda:
but yeh getting back to the point, before i used to be like why do we need to learn history? that happened in the past and pretty soon we are going to be in the past so why do we have to keep learning about what happens through out history. after taking a intresting history class i guess you kind of see why history is important when your not falling asleep in class that is
[Message #15]
Nancy Duran:
What are some of other Loewen arguments about how high school history is taught?
[Message #16]
kristina oda:
he talks about how the teacher and the text books lie about certain things to make the characters sound alot better than they really are
[Message #17]
kristina oda:
what do you guys think?
[Message #18]
Nancy Duran:
yes, and he talks about how they introduce "conflict" then present it as being easily solved.
[Message #19]
Aaron Jones:
i'd like to argue Nancy's point, about history teacher's don't relate to the present...have you ever had buckingham for california history? he relates everything
he also says that the textbooks try to promote morale and patriotism than teaching history
[Message #20]
kristina oda:
yes that is true. like it doesnt explain the hardships that they had to go through or nothing it just explains it as easlily done.
[Message #21]
Aaron Jones:
not really
[Message #22]
Aaron Jones:
you must have never read about civil war history
[Message #23]
Aaron Jones:
there were a whole bunch of hardships , worthless money, little food, freezing winters, so on so forth
[Message #24]
Amy Lawlor:
What are the results of history being taught in this way?
[Message #25]
Nancy Duran:
That students don't remember or learn anything because they it boring.
[Message #26]
kristina oda:
the result is that the students arent really learning the truth about what happened. what they are getting taught is falsified information. the students think one way but then you read this book and find out that it went another way.
[Message #27]
Nancy Duran:
Yes that is very true.
[Message #28]
Aaron Jones:
the result is not falsified info, but less than accurate info
[Message #29]
kristina oda:
okay less accurate but then they arent really telling the whole truth so it is falsified.
[Message #30]
Aaron Jones:
so people go on believing something is true when in actuality, it is not, it is only partly, if not totally wrong
[Message #31]
Nancy Duran:
Well according to Loewen there are some false information for example when they talk about Christopher Columbus.
[Message #32]
kristina oda:
true..
[Message #33]
kristina oda:
i was just about to say that
[Message #34]
Aaron Jones:
keep in mind that when these books are published to students, they can't go back in time and record perfectly, surely you guys and see that somewhere over hundred years the story (facts) will be changed or misconstrued, take beauty and the beast, how many times was that changed?
[Message #35]
Nancy Duran:
Loewen say that they tell the stories in a way where it almost is a myth becasue she have change it to make it interesting.
[Message #36]
kristina oda:
but then that was a fairty tale this is something that really happened.
[Message #37]
Nancy Duran:
But then it is kinda hard to know what is true and what isn't. What are we suppose to believe then.
[Message #38]
Aaron Jones:
true, who wants to read run-on, ramblings of facts, they're probably written like a news story because to keep people interested, while keeping most of the facts, but when a fact can't be found if its true or not then you can't be sure it is true, and they won't run it
[Message #39]
kristina oda:
yup i know so what is real history and what's not?? that is the question.
[Message #40]
Amy Lawlor:
How should history be taught? Since it is not possible to teach every event from every perspective, what is important in teaching history?
[Message #41]
Aaron Jones:
partial facts and an interesting story
[Message #42]
kristina oda:
history should be taught in a manner where it is intresting to learn..when students think of history they think of a subject that is boring and that noone wants to go to that class. but if a teacher makes it so that it is intresting then a student will be intrested in learning something new.
[Message #43]
Nancy Duran:
I agree and also gets student invovled instead of just listening to the teacher just lecture.
[Message #44]
Aaron Jones:
history should be taught w/ the most up-todate factual info and should be taught to students over visual display and interaction: something to keep the students active and interested and involve the teacher
[Message #45]
Nancy Duran:
They should also included everything in high school history textbooks instead of just including the good things.
[Message #46]
Aaron Jones:
they should treat particular instances like drama class so every one can play a part, i agree w/ that
[Message #47]
kristina oda:
its important to keep at least the facts straight..or what the teacher knows knowledge of anyways
[Message #48]
Nancy Duran:
yes
[Message #49]
Aaron Jones:
i just thought of something, since the government controls public education, what if they selected these books to raise morale for the country, gain military people, that sort of thing, would changing history to promote the whole truth change the patriotism we have for our country, that word everyone here would be chastised for if they were not loyal to their country?
[Message #50]
kristina oda:
my throat hurts im glad we dont have to say all this stuff..
[Message #51]
Aaron Jones:
me too! : )
[Message #52]
kristina oda:
lol
[Message #53]
Aaron Jones:
i think students deserve the whole truth, but then again, how can anyone at a young age develop strong feelings for their country if their country had so many mistakes and are still making them today and that is what i feel the US is trying to do at a state level
[Message #54]
kristina oda:
well yeh what else can we say about the history?/
[Message #55]
Aaron Jones:
what do you think is the problem, the system or the teachers?
[Message #56]
Nancy Duran:
I think the system.
[Message #57]
Aaron Jones:
i think it is teacher's ineptitude going through routine
[Message #58]
Aaron Jones:
instead of teaching new opinions or facts
[Message #59]
Aaron Jones:
later
[Message #60]
Amy Lawlor:
end 2/27
Estonia
[Message #1]
Amy Lawlor:
what are Loewen's main arguments about the way high school history is taught?
[Message #2]
Mercedes Campos:
hi
[Message #3]
Mercedes Campos:
one of his main arguments are that the Children are only learning the good parts of the"American Heroes." that society does not want to dirty the images of the Heroes.
[Message #4]
Eva Milenewicz:
Loewen's argument is that history text books use heroification to make not so great guys in history look like heros, that's what you just said, im kinda slow
[Message #5]
Eva Milenewicz:
like Woodrow Wilson
[Message #6]
cecilia ellington:
i agree
[Message #7]
cecilia ellington:
i think that most of history is like that
[Message #8]
cecilia ellington:
for exaple like christopher columbus....all they really tell in the history books is how he discovered America but they hardly ever explain the fact that he killed all those Native AMericans and even for doin all of that there is a national holiday for him
[Message #9]
Eva Milenewicz:
He also points out how text books leave out alot of information such as saying Chistopher Columbus was the first one to discover America, but really their were others before him
[Message #10]
Mercedes Campos:
also the US wants to be the best in every there is, therefore us has the need to potray Americans as intellegent, courageous, generous, and so on. but all others heroes from different country are being dehumanize to blame them for problems like wars.
[Message #11]
Amy Lawlor:
When history is taught like this in high schools, the text books try to control what is being taught in the classrooms. But like that we are unable to use our investigative thinking.
[Message #12]
Eva Milenewicz:
That's pretty much what his whole book is about, criticizing text books for what they did wrong, fun book yuh
[Message #13]
cecilia ellington:
i think b/c most people wil not go out there way to get the deep sown secrets of histort , most people dont really care
[Message #14]
cecilia ellington:
down*
[Message #15]
cecilia ellington:
most people just want to pass and get it over with
[Message #16]
Eva Milenewicz:
true
[Message #17]
Mercedes Campos:
because society wants to controll what we learned, history is mostly taught in our earlly ages, before we learn how to analyze readings.
[Message #18]
cecilia ellington:
b/c to tell u the truth most of the history that i learned i basically the same through middle school and high school
[Message #19]
cecilia ellington:
so for me that mad it borring
[Message #20]
Eva Milenewicz:
He is saying everything we learned in high school was a lie, i thought i had pretty good history teachers i learned some of this stuff in my history class
[Message #21]
Amy Lawlor:
We are not allowed to question the personality, different aspects, and personal lives of historical figures.
[Message #22]
Amy Lawlor:
What are the results of history being taught in this way?
[Message #23]
Mercedes Campos:
most history books are teach the same thing and like you say is taught for many years of our early years of school. i think that they are trying to make sure that we don't doubt what is being said in those text books.
[Message #24]
cecilia ellington:
i think the results are that the younger kids are learning the hard facts just the stuff that is sugar coated
[Message #25]
cecilia ellington:
they are not learning the hard facts
[Message #26]
Mercedes Campos:
American kids might feel that others are inferior, since the american heroes are being protray as if they never did anything wrong and others did.
[Message #27]
Amy Lawlor:
The results of beign taught this way is that young children are basically made to think that most historical figures were pefect and had no faults.
[Message #28]
cecilia ellington:
yea pretty much.....but that should not be what history is about
[Message #29]
Eva Milenewicz:
exactly
[Message #30]
cecilia ellington:
America can make itself look good but when it talks about other countries its all bad....but that is probably how it is in every country
[Message #31]
Eva Milenewicz:
is that what the whole book talks about?
[Message #32]
Eva Milenewicz:
how america is better then everywhere else
[Message #33]
Mercedes Campos:
true
[Message #34]
cecilia ellington:
i mean thats how i see it anyway.....i cant speak on other countries though
[Message #35]
Amy Lawlor:
Text book authors think that it is ok to write lies in their books because they know that they will not be criticized by a proffesion because proffesionals don' t read text books according to Loewen.
[Message #36]
Amy Lawlor:
How should history be taught? Since it is not possible to teach every event from every perspective, what is important in teaching history?
[Message #37]
Mercedes Campos:
to teach both sides of the coin
[Message #38]
cecilia ellington:
i think if they are goin to tach hisotry they should not leave out anything
[Message #39]
Mercedes Campos:
to let kids know that every human as its bad decision making
[Message #40]
Eva Milenewicz:
I think the most important way to teach history is to just tell it how it is
[Message #41]
Mercedes Campos:
as=has
[Message #42]
cecilia ellington:
all history was not filled with all positive stuff
[Message #43]
Eva Milenewicz:
or negative stuff
[Message #44]
Mercedes Campos:
it is true but instead of listing all the good thing that the heroes did, list some negatives as well
[Message #45]
cecilia ellington:
like if they are goin to teach about christopher columbus then they should teach how he killed people to claim something that never belonged to him
[Message #46]
Eva Milenewicz:
I think their is alot of things we can learn from history by both the positive and negative things
[Message #47]
cecilia ellington:
most history books leave out the facts that would make people angry or something
[Message #48]
Mercedes Campos:
i agree.
[Message #49]
Amy Lawlor:
Importance is truth and with truth that enables us to use our investigative thinking. To be able to question another persons historical beliefs without critizism. It is important that lies are not told to us about the past because there is always someone out there who knows the thruth.
[Message #50]
cecilia ellington:
but i really dont think that it will happen anytime soon.....if they wanted people to know the truth they would make books like this one of the schools text books
[Message #51]
cecilia ellington:
most people wont go out there way to find the truth
[Message #52]
Mercedes Campos:
i don't think society wants kids to learn the bad things about the american heroes.
[Message #53]
cecilia ellington:
yea pretty much
[Message #54]
Mercedes Campos:
i mean role models might be destroyed
[Message #55]
Amy Lawlor:
If enough people know the truth and are not afraid to share it, change may hopefully come sooner then we think. I love history.
[Message #56]
Eva Milenewicz:
high school is just something we have to do if we really want the truth you can easily do some research and find it, but you have to want it, you dont have to believe everything teachers tell you, its better to be sceptical
[Message #57]
cecilia ellington:
yea thats true but not to many people love history....some people just want that passing grade so they could move on
[Message #58]
cecilia ellington:
like when i did research papers for history i also found something that was different from my history book
[Message #59]
cecilia ellington:
and sometimes teachers would think i was makin it up or soemthing
[Message #60]
Amy Lawlor:
Most high school students don' t care about the truth. They only care for a passing grade. But that doesn' t mean that were should hide the truth from them.
[Message #61]
cecilia ellington:
i agree
[Message #62]
Mercedes Campos:
is good to research the truth
[Message #63]
Amy Lawlor:
I love history
[Message #64]
cecilia ellington:
well guys have a nice weekend
[Message #65]
Eva Milenewicz:
you too
[Message #66]
Amy Lawlor:
end 2/27
Laos
[Message #1]
James Reclus:
finally, I can type again
[Message #2]
Amy Lawlor:
what are Loewen's main arguments about the way high school history is taught?
[Message #3]
Azran Ashroff:
i cant quite remember but was loewen talking about how high school history is thaught in not such a interesting way, which makes students fall behind when in history class?
[Message #4]
Alex Daugherty:
he said that it is geared towards being sensitive to white students, so it alienates students who are not white. history books do this to please white americans who are in the commitiees to have the books accepted in each state.
[Message #5]
James Reclus:
I believe we discussed this in a class lecture last week and this is what was said.
1. Presents people in history as being more than human.
- They are infaliable, meaning they can do no wrong
- History is editted in such a way that major parts of people's lives are missing and we only see/read the good parts.
- They seem to be Gods, things that are not a part of society, but rather things to be worshipped
2. Takes away conflict.
- Everything is presented in a nice, neat manner
- Conflict is introduced and then immediately resolved
3. Sanitizes history.
- All of the horror and gorey(sp) aspects are taken out of history.
- Nothing is as it seems because everything has been sensored so as to show only the good parts of history
If that is not what we are suppose to discuss then Loewen's main arguments about the way high school history is taught dealt with the students and how they respond to the topic of history. All of history has a slant, usually towards the dominant white males in society at the time. History is taught by those in power at the time and because they do not want to get any bad press they center their history around only the good things they have done/accomplished.
[Message #6]
Azran Ashroff:
yeah thats how i felt. u r right mr.reclues
[Message #7]
Azran Ashroff:
cause i havent read chapter eight. what was they talking about?
[Message #8]
James Reclus:
With that in mind, students of ethnic backgrounds do not want to get involved in history because their race/culture is always portrayed as the wrong doers or the ones that started a conflict. I believe one of the examples that Loewen gave of this was a Native American student in one of his classes was obviously ignoring the whole subject of history and when Loewen confronted the student the student stated that his father told him what really happened and that not to trust any white man teaching history because it was all based on lies.
[Message #9]
Azran Ashroff:
damn thats a tripp.
[Message #10]
Azran Ashroff:
do you think being a certan color enables you to teach history wrong?
[Message #11]
Azran Ashroff:
i doubt but i am sure there are situations RIGHT?
[Message #12]
Alex Daugherty:
what do you mean teach history "wrong"?
[Message #13]
Azran Ashroff:
biased wise
[Message #14]
Azran Ashroff:
like favortism actually
[Message #15]
Azran Ashroff:
if you are of certain group would you want to make your group look better to stand out more?
[Message #16]
James Reclus:
Sorry, I was a little off with what I said before, after glancing at the chapter, chapter 11, it seems that the main focus of Loewen's discussion is "...that textbooks supply irrelevant and even erroneous details, while omitting pivotal questions and facts in their treatments of issues..."
[Message #17]
Azran Ashroff:
its okay james your forgivven
[Message #18]
James Reclus:
You spelled "forgiven" incorreclty
[Message #19]
James Reclus:
lol
[Message #20]
Azran Ashroff:
i know. i appologize
[Message #21]
Azran Ashroff:
did i spell applogize wrong too?
[Message #22]
Alex Daugherty:
apologize... i think.
[Message #23]
Azran Ashroff:
so have you guys thaught bou tthe essay yet.? i am leaning towards thomas jefferson or black panther party
[Message #24]
Alex Daugherty:
i have not decided.
[Message #25]
James Reclus:
Anyway, back on topic.
Further into the chapter Loewen discusses the content of textbooks and the value of private education vs. public education.
I am going to go with the bombing of Hiroshima
[Message #26]
Azran Ashroff:
i am lost 2day.
[Message #27]
Azran Ashroff:
private education is wayyyy diffferent from public education i think.
[Message #28]
James Reclus:
Chapter 11, that is what the question Lawlor created for this interchange to discuss is based on.
[Message #29]
Amy Lawlor:
What are the results of history being taught in this way?
[Message #30]
Azran Ashroff:
that we think the way we think today, white still dominatnt the rest have thier voices be heard but no changes happen
[Message #31]
James Reclus:
Sorry, but I said this before, having history taught in such a manner severly hinders students of different ethnic or cultural backgrounds because they are being taught things that contradict what they know to be true.
[Message #32]
Alex Daugherty:
it is kind of interesting that it would seem that the alienation happens to females, too. american history was written for white males.
[Message #33]
James Reclus:
They are being taught that things they have come to believe in or things they know cannot be true are true. (i.e., the Native American student in one of Loewen's classes openly ignoring the teacher when the subject of history is brought up)
[Message #34]
James Reclus:
True, history has taken women and turned them into something they are not. History, as it is taught in history classrooms today, portrays women in such a manner that they accomplish everything without actually doing anything. Remember Helen Keller, she had a version of her life told in history textbooks, but in actuality those textbooks omitted more than 64 years of her life. She was portrayed as an advocate for the disables, a modern day Jesus Christ in a way. But because of this description of Helen Keller she is really shown as someone who just learned how to read, write, and speak even though she was blind, deaf, and mute
[Message #35]
Amy Lawlor:
How should history be taught? Since it is not possible to teach every event from every perspective, what is important in teaching history?
[Message #36]
James Reclus:
Nothing really important, but she seems to have done nothing of historical signifiance yet she still gets a few pages dedicated to her.
[Message #37]
James Reclus:
What is important in teaching history is to not just go by what the textbook says. Teachers should encourage students to go outside the limitations of their textbooks and find out what really happened in history. They could take certain things from history textbooks and then have projects or class discussions about what actually happened as opposed to the neat and clean version portrayed in the textbook.
[Message #38]
Azran Ashroff:
history i feel should be thaught MAIN POINTS only. good or bad, teachers should decide who, what, when,where ,and why it happened. so students get thier understanding. cause usualyy i think that when a teacher referes to WHY things happen, its more of a gossip way to teach it, and in trests everyone.
[Message #39]
Alex Daugherty:
i think that it is important, also, to use factual information, and to try to remain nuetral towards events, not pro- american, or anti- american.
[Message #40]
Alex Daugherty:
by only teaching the main points, students would not have an understanding of the causality in history.
[Message #41]
Azran Ashroff:
well teachers are what we depend on to learn so even if we go outside and take it, we have to get a good source of what things are about before we go get those sources, cause a person who dont know shit about history, would believe everything the teacher says, and its up to the teacher to give him/her right information. and then students should go refer outside after learning, and if it seemed biased that the teacher was telling you, then theres always a thing of talkin to a teacher on why things were said the way they said it.
[Message #42]
James Reclus:
That is going to be one of the harder things to do, remain neutral as a teacher because teachers were also taught the same stuff they are now teaching, but the only thing that has changed is that the teachers have formed their own opinions about certain subjects which will greatly influence what they feel shoudl and should not be taught in a classroom.
[Message #43]
Alex Daugherty:
i agree, for the teacher it would be pretty much impossable to remain nuetral, but it is something they should strive for.
[Message #44]
James Reclus:
Overall, the subject of history in todays learning environments has a long way to go before it can truly be called history. Things are not going to be changed over night because all of the limitations that we mentioned earlier are going to weight heavily on what will be taught in history classrooms. I hate to say it, but there is really nothing that can be done to effectively change the way that history is taught today because those in power will not allow it to change or those gaining power do not want to lose so they will go with the statis qou.
[Message #45]
Alex Daugherty:
that is a kind of history book-esque thouhgt. people cannot change the way things are, things just change, and it all depends on the government or conglomorates.
[Message #46]
Azran Ashroff:
alright people. good job. i am out.
[Message #47]
James Reclus:
Striving for and doing are completely different things. If someone is striving to be a better person than others usually congradulate him/her, but if someone is striving to remain more neutral people see no really importance in doing so. What I am trying to say is that it is good that teachers strive to remain neutral, but it is never going to happen because those same teachers have already formed their own opinions about a subject. If they feel that something is threatening their pre-established ideas of what is correct or incorrect in history they can simply change the subject or refuse to talk about the differences in opinion. This is why today many students hate the subject of history. They have to sit and listen to someone spit out the same boring, useless information day in and day out without being able to challenge anything that is said. They are not allowed to voice their own opinions and effectively change what is taught in their history classes.
[Message #48]
Amy Lawlor:
end 2/27