What do Americans learn in school about history?

Mar 22, 2009 21:16

I was chatting away in another community entirely, using various historical parallels to describe things, and was informed by a couple of American posters that I was overestimating the historical knowledge of the average American by a considerable degree. Their description of "what Americans learn" seems to imply that by the end of senior school, ( Read more... )

culture shock, education, history

Leave a comment

Comments 117

cass_rising March 22 2009, 21:26:45 UTC
American post-secondary educator here.

It is true that most of the history Americans learn is their own and that even that is spotty. American high schools mandate some world history, when I was a student it was two years, but some of my students have told me they received only one.

I should point out that I teach at a highly-selective state school (that's public school to you) and I have had students not know who Archduke Ferdinand was, I've had students tell me that Shakespeare imported the first novel to America, I've heard that Russia was an ally of Nazi Germany...

Not all Americans are ignorant of history, but those that are well versed in it seem to get their education after they leave school, not while they're there.

Reply

lothy March 22 2009, 22:15:45 UTC
I have had students not know who Archduke Ferdinand was, I've had students tell me that Shakespeare imported the first novel to America, I've heard that Russia was an ally of Nazi Germany...

Are you serious? I knew US school history lessons focused mostly on recent American history (I can tell that just from watching American movies & TV) but I didn't realise it was as bad as getting only 1-2 years on world history. I did masses of both British and international history at school (even before I chose to do it for GCSE and A Level).

I'm still laughing a little at the "Shakespeare imported the first novel" idea. ;)

Reply

cass_rising March 22 2009, 22:21:16 UTC
I swear, hand on heart, that I did not make any of those examples up, and neither are they quote-mined exceptions. The level of historical (and current events for that matter) ignorance among my students is shocking. And don't even get me started on their critical thinking skills...

As far as the years of education, I can't speak to what's going on at the primary level, but I can tell you that many of my students barely remember the things they should have learned in high school, so I don't hold out much hope for them remembering things from further back.

Reply

winterbadger March 24 2009, 21:28:52 UTC
Erm, Soviet Russia *was* an ally of Nazi Germany, from 1939 until 1941.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

nikolche March 22 2009, 23:16:31 UTC
Seconding this. The district I spent most of my education in did very in depth history courses from kindergarten straight through high school, but because they focused equally on the eastern and western worlds most students had a very broad overview of things. For instance, we were expected to be able to name major wars of both Europe and Asia, but most of us probably couldn't go into an in depth discussion of the individual battles.

However, the district I went to for the second half of high school barely did history at all. We were required to take US history, world history (which was really western European history from the French Revolution through the end of WWII), and US government, but since it wasn't considered a "real" subject like math, science, and English no one actually learned anything.

Reply


heartsara March 22 2009, 21:39:18 UTC
I'm in an American secondary school attending a large state school in Indiana. I've taken history classes every year since 2nd grade, starting with rudimentary world history, moving on to AP history classes in high school (European History, World - primarily concentrated around E. Asian history, ME, and African history, US, and Human Geography). I think that I have a thorough knowlegdge of history, but I am terrible at geography because I never learned it in school!

Reply

heartsara March 22 2009, 21:43:54 UTC
that being said, I'm not very knowledgable about British history. I know the PMs, World Wars, Revolution, etc. but I was never really taught anything before the Thirty Year's War.

Reply

janewilliams20 March 22 2009, 21:59:25 UTC
Whereas my tuition in history didn't quite get as far as the Thirty Years' War :) If I'd carried on, instead of going science specialist.... but as it was, we stopped with the Tudors.

Reply

lothy March 22 2009, 22:32:56 UTC
Out of interest, would you say, then, that your history education is mostly confined to fairly recent history but spread over different countries, or is it solely Britain where you haven't studied anything older?

In the UK, emphasis in compulsory history lessons (ie those before the age of 14) is often on much older periods. We generally do the world wars and the Holocaust, and possibly the Victorians or something like that, but mostly compulsory history focuses on the medieval period, the Tudors & Stuarts, the English civil war, the Romans, and perhaps in primary school the ancient Egyptians or Greeks.

Non-compulsory history lessons, btw, vary far more since schools have more choice in what they teach. I, for instance, did a lot of French and Russian history which isn't necessarily true of most Brits.

Reply


englishmann March 22 2009, 21:40:35 UTC
In secondary school, I had an Ancient cultures/anthropology/comparative ancient theology/geography class in 6th, an an ancient Asian cultures social studies class in 7th (I remember learning about China, Japan and Islam...), 8th was American History, 9th was "World Cultures" (kind of a misnomer; I remember doing general social studies work and a model UN thing, and learning about Islam again). 10th was AP European History, which again was a big misnomer; it was everything from the Renaissance in Italy to WWII, very cursory shit, almost nothing British. In fact, I only remember learning about Cromwell and being taught this stupid model for remembering the succession of kings/events around him. 11th was AP American History. 12th was AP US Government and Politics ( ... )

Reply

lothy March 22 2009, 22:43:16 UTC

I've noticed that quite a few people commenting here have mentioned classes to do with law, government, politics, etc, and I'm curious as to why they're counted as relevant. Do they contain a lot of history?

Reply

cass_rising March 22 2009, 22:48:52 UTC
In my school, government and economics counted as our senior history requirement even though it contained very little history.

Reply

lothy March 22 2009, 22:51:47 UTC

That's... bizarre.

Reply


sparkofcreation March 22 2009, 21:45:47 UTC
I went to a US public school and my husband to a Scottish one, and I learned considerably more history than he did, as he was never required to study it--he told me he was only required to study five subjects throughout secondary school and they were English, math, and he had to pick three more--he did music, physics, and chemistry. He basically never studied history again after the age of 9 when the Scots were living in huts (he says Scottish schools are obsessed with huts made of peat and that all he learned after that was The Fall of the Empire and then Churchill and that was it), whereas from 6th through 12th grade I had three years of American history, two years of world history, and one year of criminal and Constitutional law, all of which were mandatory. (Also, as social sciences electives I took one semester of civil law, one semester of sociology, and one year of psychology. And my guidance counselor was not pleased that I opted to take art rather than economics.) In university I was required to take one western civilizations ( ... )

Reply

licon March 23 2009, 13:51:27 UTC
How old (roughly) is your husband? Because my husband also went to a Scottish school, and his required classes were very different.

(In my English school, history was required up to the age of about 14 at which point it became optional - most people had to choose between history or geography.)

Reply

sparkofcreation March 23 2009, 14:12:44 UTC
He left school in 1996. ISTR that in the earlier years of secondary school he also studied Latin and German, but his A levels were in English, maths, chemistry, physics, and music, and his Highers in English, chemistry, and music.

Reply

licon March 23 2009, 14:19:29 UTC
That's weird. Most Scottish schools don't do A-levels.

Normally Scottish schools offer Standard Grades (roughly equivalent to GCSEs), where students take 7-9 separate subjects; English, maths and science are usually required, then students choose the others. Later they can take 4-5 Highers (which I think are like AS-levels). There's something else too, but I can't remember what it is.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up