PDA

View Full Version : Md. gets a C for teaching of U.S. history ( US average is a D!!! )




tangent4ronpaul
02-20-2011, 07:24 PM
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bs-md-history-teaching-20110216,0,879659.story

By the time students get to Matthew Finck's 11th-grade U.S. history class, the Civil War and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln are vague memories, historical facts they haven't heard about since eighth grade.

Beyond a very simplistic view of the causes, "they have no knowledge of the Civil War," Finck said.

The Catonsville High School teacher does a basic review before he begins teaching his course, which covers the period from 1877 to today. But many of those students will never take another course in U.S. history because most colleges don't require them. So their first and last brush with the American Revolution could be in fifth grade.

In advance of Presidents Day weekend, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute published a report that gives Maryland a grade of C for its American history standards and says a generation of students is growing up essentially illiterate about the history of the country.

Maryland's grade was slightly ahead of the national average of D, but the report still found the standards, which form the basis for the curriculum across all school districts, "disjointed and fragmentary" and particularly lacking in the fifth and eighth grades.

In Maryland, American history is broken up into different periods. Students are given a dose of it in fifth and eighth grades and then one year in high school, usually in 10th or 11th grade.

Fifth-graders learn about the Colonial period through the American Revolution; eighth-graders cover the post-Revolutionary period through 1877 or Reconstruction; high school students take a course that covers 1877 through the post-Cold War era. Only high school students who take Advanced Placement U.S. history cover all time periods.

The Fordham report concludes that kind of emphasis on the later period of American history in high school means that many students don't receive a thorough grounding in the early periods of the country's history.

"I do agree splitting history up is detrimental to the kids and they don't have the continuity" they should, Finck said.

Four years ago, a Maryland task force made up of history teachers and professors spent two years reviewing social studies teaching and came up with conclusions similar to the Fordham report's, said Geraldine Hastings, chair of the social studies department at Catonsville, who served on the committee. But those recommendations apparently were never implemented.

Mary Cary, the state's assistant superintendent for instruction, said the state is participating in discussions on the national level about what should be taught in social studies. "We are in the mode of rewriting and revision of our curriculum from kindergarten to 12th grade. Social studies is No. 3," she said. "Next year we will begin to look at that program very critically."

She said she has begun internal discussions in the state Department of Education about the recommendations from the social studies task force.

Social studies teachers have expressed concern in recent weeks that their subject is getting short shrift because students do not have to be tested on it until they take American government in high school. Even that exam may be done away with after this year to save money, a proposal that received mixed reactions. Some teachers see it as cause for celebration because it frees them to be more creative, but others think it diminishes the importance of history.

Teachers also say that when students need extra help on reading and math in elementary and middle school, social studies is one of the subjects that is expendable.

"I think in middle school because of the high-stakes testing, people are definitely looking at language arts and math" more, said Laura Pinto, social studies department chair at Bates Middle School in Anne Arundel County. She said that teachers try to address some of the gaps in their students' knowledge and that Anne Arundel does allot a few days for teachers to review previous history classes.

Fordham did give a few grades of A: South Carolina and the District of Columbia were singled out for having exemplary standards.
[...]

====

Is it any wonder we find ourselves in our current situation?

the study:
http://www.edexcellence.net/publications-issues/publications/the-state-of-state-us.html

-t

Rothbardian Girl
02-20-2011, 08:41 PM
This is not surprising. There are plenty of kids in my class who simply have no clue about anything having to do with history. I suppose it takes a certain kind of person to be a history buff, but I would expect people to have at least a workable understanding of major events in U.S. history, the Constitution, and maybe the presidents, just as a jumping-off point.

In eighth grade we basically covered Columbus to the French and Indian War, then in ninth grade the American Revolution to the progressive era, and then in tenth grade Wilson to about present-day. The problem is that it's a lot of material and those who aren't already predisposed to learning history will simply not remember much of the material that is covered in class.

This article is sort of interesting to me on a personal level, as I personally dislike US history. Half of my dislike is because of political reasons and the other half is that the facts simply never stay with me, probably because of the glossing-over of important topics.

james1906
02-20-2011, 08:44 PM
The obvious answer is that teachers need to be paid more.

kah13176
02-20-2011, 09:42 PM
I hate learning history in school.

-Wilson = Hero for regulating banks
-FDR = Hero for spending programs that "alleviated" (postponed) the Depression
-Ted Roosevelt = Hero for foreign intervention in the Carribean
-Jackson = Villian for resisting a Central Bank
-Basically NO mention of the Vietnam, Korea, or Persian Gulf wars

Everything pretty much distorted to all hell.

Legend1104
02-20-2011, 09:48 PM
seeing as how I am a history teacher, I will drop my two cents in. First off in a way it is true that the curriculum is divided and that can be a problem, but it is also a lot of material to cover in that time. you can have an entire class on just the revolution and the civil war. I could see a school possibly focusing entire courses on single subjects, or possible covering american history over and over maybe every other year. The major problem though is the entire structure of school is all wrong. It is not based on a student gaining skills or knowledge or even the ability to critically think. Rather, it is aimed at passing students to the next grade.

Schools need to be set up so that you must gain a certain skill or amount of knowledge before you move to the next level, not just moved along because they don't want to look bad. Schools and teachers are punished if students fail and that is just wrong. People don't look at colleges and say, "That college failed too many students. It must be a bad college." Rather, they say, "Look at the quality of students that come out of that school." I cannot tell you how much pressure is on a teacher to pass a student. I have been told that if a student fails because he does not turn in homework, it is my fault. There is also so much paperwork and hoops that have to be jumped through that it is very hard to actually fail students.

Last, I do not think schools should have manditory attendance, or at least it should only be manditory for say 3 or 4 grades. Just enough to gain reading, writing, and basic math skills. Then if you want to continue in school it should be a choice. Also, parents should be either given vouchers or not taxed for school funding. They should have to use the voucher to pay for the schooling and the student should have to compete to get into schools. That way, education will begin to have more value again. That is the major problem. Education has no value anymore because we have removed it. In other countries like India where school attendance is a privilege, education is valued and students that are allowed to attend and learn see it as a rare chance for a better life; almost like getting into an ivy league school is today.

heavenlyboy34
02-20-2011, 09:57 PM
Educational horror stories like the OP always make me wonder why so many people have faith in the gov'ment "education" system to teach children. My own experience with public school history classes are just as bad as the OP describes. I didn't have to take any rigorous history classes till high school. Even then, it was only 1 semester of American history and 1 semester of World history. Nowhere near enough time to learn history, and it was an easy A for me. College American History was better, but still not that great. I've learned more by myself than I did in school.

tangent4ronpaul
02-20-2011, 10:08 PM
seeing as how I am a history teacher, I will drop my two cents in. First off in a way it is true that the curriculum is divided and that can be a problem, but it is also a lot of material to cover in that time. you can have an entire class on just the revolution and the civil war. I could see a school possibly focusing entire courses on single subjects, or possible covering american history over and over maybe every other year. The major problem though is the entire structure of school is all wrong. It is not based on a student gaining skills or knowledge or even the ability to critically think. Rather, it is aimed at passing students to the next grade.

Schools need to be set up so that you must gain a certain skill or amount of knowledge before you move to the next level, not just moved along because they don't want to look bad. Schools and teachers are punished if students fail and that is just wrong. People don't look at colleges and say, "That college failed too many students. It must be a bad college." Rather, they say, "Look at the quality of students that come out of that school." I cannot tell you how much pressure is on a teacher to pass a student. I have been told that if a student fails because he does not turn in homework, it is my fault. There is also so much paperwork and hoops that have to be jumped through that it is very hard to actually fail students.

Last, I do not think schools should have manditory attendance, or at least it should only be manditory for say 3 or 4 grades. Just enough to gain reading, writing, and basic math skills. Then if you want to continue in school it should be a choice. Also, parents should be either given vouchers or not taxed for school funding. They should have to use the voucher to pay for the schooling and the student should have to compete to get into schools. That way, education will begin to have more value again. That is the major problem. Education has no value anymore because we have removed it. In other countries like India where school attendance is a privilege, education is valued and students that are allowed to attend and learn see it as a rare chance for a better life; almost like getting into an ivy league school is today.

+rep

tangent4ronpaul
02-20-2011, 10:10 PM
Educational horror stories like the OP always make me wonder why so many people have faith in the gov'ment "education" system to teach children. My own experience with public school history classes are just as bad as the OP describes. I didn't have to take any rigorous history classes till high school. Even then, it was only 1 semester of American history and 1 semester of World history. Nowhere near enough time to learn history, and it was an easy A for me. College American History was better, but still not that great. I've learned more by myself than I did in school.

+rep!

Austrian Econ Disciple
02-20-2011, 10:35 PM
My history teacher in High School was the basketball coach who cared more about that than anything. He also always came in and basically gave us the answers to all the tests and always at least graded people with a C at a minimum. The guy was a bum. It was basically myself and like two other students who actually cared and the rest of the students also pestered us to give them the answers and it was so blatant and open. Government schools are almost identical to assembly lines. They pass you off from one line to another instilling Government values - obedience, lethargy, one jackboot fits all, no choice, and all the rest of the ills fostered in society like a lack of critical thinking, logic, and actually teaching how to LEARN. Pedagogy in Government schools doesn't even exist. It's a complete joke, costs out of the yazoo, and people get thrown in jail, fined, and harassed by the Government if you don't send your kids to school and when you choose to send them to a school outside of your Socialist designated zone by bureaucrats thousands of miles away. It's complete insanity.

I was always so much more gifted than most of the other students scoring in 99.5 percentile yet the school system sucked all the lifeblood of yearning to learn out of me because I was always treated like the lowest common denominator. I was de-motivated. It took me graduating and getting away from that system for me to become interested in learning once more. I hated school (Remember, schools are not synonymous with learning!) with a passion. Hell, I purposely skipped almost 50 days my senior year and still got a 3.6 for gods sake (oh yeah, they threatened to take my license away also -- fuck Florida). I didn't even try because the system makes you feel like a piece of shit.

t0rnado
02-20-2011, 10:40 PM
How can anyone expect teachers, who force kids to raise their hands to speak and beg to go to the bathrooms, to teach about revolutionary history of this country?