One of my favorite authors and historians, David McCullough, wrote an article in the most recent issue of American Heritage (Winter 2008) magazine titled “History and Knowing Who We Are.” His focus is on the idea that teaching history and understanding the past can be a kind of “antidote to the hubris of the present.” True indeed.
He starts his essay bemoaning a conversation he had with university students that reflected their ignorance to simple and essential American history facts. As a high school history and government teacher I encounter similar situations on a daily basis.
McCullough then makes an interesting observation, “[we] cannot, however, blame these students for their lack of understanding and awareness of history.” Essentially, we as educators, parents, and adults are failing to pass on and teach our children American history. He then asks the rhetorical question, Can Americans truly be American unless they know the history of the nation?
I value the knowledge of American history as a teaching tool for both our successes and shortcomings. However, I think here McCullough is off base some. He goes on to argue we need to teach young people how past events did not happen in a vacuum, they were not “preordained,” and how we would be wise to recall that no one “lived in the past.” Good and thought provoking points and ones I’m sure most of my students would not really appreciate or care about.
I teach at a public school in Colorado and feel I am on the frontline of this battle as much as anyone. If I were to teach history solely from the point of view that it is important for my students to understand the past as a kind of record for who they are, or try to impress upon them that our freedoms are indeed because of the work of others, I might get 4 or 5 in 10 who really appreciate it or care. I have not taught long enough to be a cynic, I am merely stating what I know from my limited experience.
I came to love history from what I feel is a fairly “natural” evolution. In high school I could have cared less. I was one of the dreaded 5 or 6 ignorant students. I was 16 and had far better things to worry about. I Don’t even remember who my history or government teachers were. I was a jock, football, and only made it to college because of that.
I developed a love for history later on after taking my first history class in college my junior year. I was a little more mature, had a good instructor, and was ready to appreciate the past.
When I speak with my students today, as I do every quarter, I ask what interests them about history, and if nothing did why? I ask them what I could do as their teacher to make it more “interesting?” Some give me good feedback, others not so much. What I am slowly learning is this: students who are 15 and 16 years old simply are not mature enough mentally or emotionally to really appreciate history: a subject that is disconnected from their every-day lives.
Now, some students, sometimes a lot of them, in one class or another really pick it up and get interested and involved. But that is the exception not the rule. The reason? History does not apply to the here and now like math or science or English. It happened in “the past” and seems so inconsequential to students and young people in general. It has no impact on them today. Also, with recent standards and testing across the nation, schools and thus students are not concerned with “social studies” as it is not tested.
“Today, the new generation of young Americans are like a field of cut flowers, by-and-large historically illiterate. This does not bode well for our future,” writes McCullough.
Here McCullough misses his own point. It is not a new development, these adolescents who are seemingly stricken with anti-historiosis and walk the halls of most high schools and colleges, are no different than yesterday.
Going back to the early 1900s studies (click here) bemoaned the lack of interest and knowledge possessed by our youth. This is no recent development, it is not a “social” issue, but an intellectual one. Nothing is new nor has it changed.
Hi Chris, — This is an excellent post and I agree with just about everything you stated in it. I also do not remember my history teachers from high school and only became interested later during college. You are right that a certain amount of maturity is necessary and given the level of distraction that is present in most teenager’s lives it is unlikely that many will gravitate towards the subject. That said, I am convinced that part of the problem is the way the subject is taught. I will have much more to say about this at the end of the school year, but my transition away from textbooks has made a world of difference. Of course, I have the luxury of being able to make these changes given my work in private schools.
I have to wonder whether commentators like McCullough – who I highly respect – have any real long-term experience working with young adults.
<p>thanks Kevin. i agree, how it is taught is very key. </p>
<p>interestingly, my government classes fair much better. students can see the connection from the revolution, constitutional convention, and on through to today. i can connect the dots and they can see the evolution of our political system and how it works. government, imho, is by far the best class to teach young people something about our history and government. i can spend time with the Civil War, and other key constitutional debates and events. i can teach U.S. history far more effectively via my American Government class.</p>
<p>Chris</p>
Chris,
That was a thoughtful post. I’m not a teacher, but can appreciate what you’re saying. One point in particular — that these complaints about students’ grasp of history is nothing new– really rings true with me. The more one studies history, the more one understands that the same is true about all manner of things. One might be tempted to complain that society or government is more corrupt today than at any time, for example, and it sure seems that way. But the student of history soon discovers that the “good old days” were pretty bleak as well, and that today doesn’t look so bad after all.
And it’s not just 15- and 16-year-olds who may be ill-prepared to appreciate the deeper context and ramifications of history, or the transcendent qualities of great literature, or other art. They say that youth is wasted on the young, and in the same vein, to a large degree, so is college. Think of all the things you were asked to read in a freshman literature survey course. Nice to be exposed to it at 18, but it makes a lot more sense at age 40.
Then again, without the early exposure, there are one or more less dots to connect when the time is right.
David
I’m glad I’ve found this blog. Great stuff. Loved this article on David McCullough. As a former full-time and now part-time history teacher, I agree with what you say about the maturity level of teens and how that affects interest in history. However, I do think schools should work hard in engaging their interest as best they can, because McCullough (also one of my favorite historians) is right that historical illiteracy doens’t bode well for America.
By the way, the issue of AH you cite (Jan 2008) is the first one published since that magazine suspended publication 6-8 months ago. It is no longer owned by the Forbes group. I briefly chatted with the editor at the recent AHA “meeting” in D.C., and he says that the magazine will now be focused “on history and not nostalgia.” I was too tired at that point in the day to ask him what he meant by that, but it seems like it means something to him!
Chris,
I can undoubtedly relate to your progression of understanding and appreciating history at a time when it was more ‘convenient’ for me. I too was aloof to the whole learning thing in high school. It was in 3rd grade when I found out that I was in the gifted program and could slide by doing much less than most. I didn’t pay attention to history in high school and regret that now.
However, it was in college when I rediscovered my love for the past and the stories that went along with it. It wasn’t untiil my junior year in college when I found myself becoming a sponge and truly wanting to learn as much as possible during my time there.
I had a history teacher at King’s College, Dr. Paul Zbiek, who inspired me to take his classes numerous times because of how he taught history by telling stories and personifying the text into something real. He would plan the classes well by leaving us with cliffhangers. It was great to watch his passion for the Civil War.
I eventually took enough of his classes and surprisingly got a history minor. (it really wasn’t my intent, but i took enough of his electives to qualify)
I remember emailing him several years after graduating and thanking him for giving me a new ‘hobby’. That of the appreciation of history. However, I should probably re-thank him for I’ve turned my hobby into a career.
After 5 years in the business world, I took the leap, and became a history teacher myself. And now I can’t get enough of it. I can appreciate your apathy early on, and i can relate to the passion you have now.
My Dr. Zbiek plug – http://departments.kings.edu/history/zbiek.html
You may be interested in this article, http://www2.oakland.edu/oujournal/files/wi2006_unpopularity.pdf, which is by an academic who criticizes DM’s approach to writing history.
John tried to access link but it was not there….
C
I read that same article recently myself. I think that you and he are both right. I agree with you that most students don’t have the intellectual interest in really knowing their history, but I have to say that I agree with McCullough’s assesment that today’s youth are ” a field of cut flowers.” WHile I’m sure that it is true that every generation has had challenges engaging its youth in educational pursuits, perhaps even more so in social studies than others, in my humble estimation things are certainly more difficult today. In the past whle history teachers may have been stuck behind the proverbial 8-ball in sparking their students’ interest, they now have the added disadvantage of having their cue taken away. You mentioned the standards and testing in schools now that removes a lot of the necessity for diligent study, and certainly that is a factor. I think also a general societal decline in the importance of civic virtues is also to blame. I can recall my grandfather being shocked at what I didn’t learn.
All that said, I appreciate your efforts as a teacher. Its clear you have the passion for history and enjoy conveying it to your students. In the few posts I’ve read so far (I just found your blog) that much is clear. From one history lover to another, keep up the good work.
Ando thanks for the comments and feedback. I will check out your blog…
C
Pingback: This Is a Test (yes another one) «
Chris: I know this is an old post, but if you hadn’t already found it…I located the article mentioned by John Maass. It is available as one of the pages archived by the Internet Archive project. http://web.archive.org/web/20060909091343/http://www2.oakland.edu/oujournal/files/wi2006_unpopularity.pdf
Carrie thank you that link works nicely!
Chris
I want to participate. interest in using American History to teach the techniques of and promote critical thinking