Thinking About How I Teach Social Studies

I am in the midst of a book titled, "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" by James W. Loewen. It is more of an indictment on the American History textbooks used in high schools around the country than it is the teachers who use them.

As I read through the book and the interesting, little-known-facts he presents that contradict what has become common knowledge of our country's history, I go back and forth between intrigue and pessimism or skeptical thinking. I am not questioning whether his statements are true as he provides evidence for his points, but his opinion. I believe there is some need to write the textbooks the way they have been despite these errors and misconceptions. It depends on the grade level of the reader and their cognitive development at the time they are presented with the information and objective of the lesson or chapter.

All in all though, it is discouraging how inaccurate and incomplete our education of our own history is to the younger generations. What may be scarier is that it has been incomplete and inaccurate for numerous generations already including my own! Therefore, much of what I read is new to me and hence, the intrigue and excitement to read.

This post is not to review the book or even discuss any of the specific historical events presented in the book thus far. Instead, I am choosing to write about how I, a fourth grade teacher to a predominantly minority class, will continue to teach American history (Ohio history to be more specific according to grade level standards set by the state and district in which I teach) after reading this book and gaining the knowledge that what I teach as fact may be only pieces to the whole story at best.

In fourth grade I can initiate good discussion regarding many of our states historical events but there is a ceiling to what they can developmentally grasp. Also, there may be relevant subjects that are just inappropriate for them to discuss. I want to respect their parents decisions to what they expose their ten year old children to even if they walk in the classroom with T-shirts covered in profane, offensive language and watch music videos or wrestling matches that cheapen women and glorify violence. In the end I need to keep my side of the street clean.

But, the main objective I have gained from this book is the general idea that history is not a concrete, stagnant pile of facts, but a fluid, multifaceted flow of events that should always be questioned. No one factor plays a role in the wars, discoveries, laws, decisions and so on that took place. There are many previosu events that effect these other events we learn. Also, many of the events we read about effect what we do today even centuries later.

I think it is THAT idea of cause and effect that needs to be fostered more than the dates, people and events. Memorizing these facts don't lead to the kind of knowledge that can be used in most of the workforce later in life.

In addition to cause and effect, the encouragement to question what they learn and how to go about questioning it needs to be fostered. Fact memorization won't create a love for learning. But discussion and debate just might.

The curriculum I teach already tries to address cause and effect in several ways. There are chapters that discuss this specific skill. What I'd like to do is find a basic, low maintenance way to incorporate these kinds of discussions in every lesson topic.

Really, I just want to instill the overall open mindedness to possible differences than what we read. I'd like my students to realize more evidence can be found. That history is fluid. What we think is true may not be true or may have more to it. Therefore, it is ok to challenge what is considered "factual." Of course, this would need to be tempered appropriately because questioning just for the sake of questioning may just confuse students more than guide them.

I'd like to share several examples from the book. We all know the basic story of Hellen Keller (Chapter One: Handicapped by History)but rarely touch on the majority of her life as a major player in women's suffrage. I was never taught about her political views and the contradictions of these views to the pick yourself up by the bootstraps message her story is used to portray. While we learn from her story as a deaf and blind, wild and out of control child who learned to read and write and educate herself, that you can do anything if you set your mind to it and work hard...just look at Hellen Keller, she didn't feel as though that was possible for many people in our country due to their economic situation. She was born into a wealthy family and believed without the resources her parents were able to obtain for her, she would have never accomplished what she did. This belief led her to an outspoken socialist stance which has been frowned upon and therefore, left out of our lesson regarding her.

We all know the story of Columbus (Chapter 2: 1493)and how many holes have been shot into his glorified mystique, but did we ever learn that there is evidence that other people were exploring the Americas long before him? Do we truly acknowledge the accomplishments of the Natives who were already there in the first place?

Related to the Columbus story which can be a long post in itself, I also thought it is interesting that slavery is usually taught in the context of the African slave trade and its effects on the American Civil War. I don't remember the fact that Columbus was enslaving the American Indians as well. And the American Indians enslaved other American Indians as did Africans of other Africans and obviously the Europeans enslaving Africans. In fact you can find evidence of slavery in various forms today. This is a subject that goes well beyond the Civil War in America.

Finally, that last sentence reminded me of how we generally teach the Civil War as the North being the "good guys" and the Confederacy being the "bad guys." The Civil War had so many different factors playing their part that it is almost a perfect opportunity to show how history can be viewed differently through different colored lenses. And it can be used to demonstrate the way numerous factor play numerous roles in one event. It is not as black and white as, well, black and white people and slavery. The economy, states rights and more also played roles. Many different people had many different points of views and beliefs and motivations.

So, as I proceed through this book and enjoy reading about my country's history and the things I didn't know or didn't think to question when I was learning it, I plan to keep reminding myself to allow my students to question it. To question me. It would be nice if they learned that they could go "look it up" and actually did.

But that's a whole other blog post.....motivating my students, sigh.