# History



## Smitty37 (Jul 14, 2012)

I have been appalled at how little younger people know about the founding of this nation (the USA) and how much of what they "know" is flat out wrong.  I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago.  What a shame.


----------



## artillerist (Jul 14, 2012)

I graduated from high school 22yrs. ago and in the time since have come to learn that they either taught what they felt like or just enough to get by. Since then I found out that about half the history I was taught was wrong (completely) and the other half was not complete. Even though I had teachers that I took to be good at what they did and cared about their students. Too much effort put on standardized tests and not enough on what matters.


----------



## nativewooder (Jul 14, 2012)

I graduated from HS in 1960 and can guarantee you that the teachers cared about what they taught and who they taught it to.  We had plain old text books that were taken from encyclopedia books or something like that.  ALL our tests were standardized but the weekly and daily quizzes came from what we had been studying.  You knew the teachers had to care if you knew how little they were paid.  Today, I dunno!  I'm sure there are some teachers today who get a thrill out of the students who actually learn from them.  But the federal government interference with the educational system to make sure their vote-buying assured their re-election has dropped the requirements for teaching and attendance and behavior to the point that I don't understand why more parents don't home-school their kids.  Thanks for the opportunity to rant!  I apologize if this offended any ultra-liberal  welfare users!


----------



## Displaced Canadian (Jul 14, 2012)

I think part of the issue is people read less and even less non fiction. I read a biography about Abe Lincon and it took longer to read that book than to listen to everything the teacher had to say about him. Most people who work with me say I'm the smartest person they know. The simple fact is, I've read the most.  I don't blame the teachers, they have a difficult job and the education of a child requires input from the parent and the education system. The education system does need fixing, but most of those changes involve cost. Smaller class sizes, involved parents, and more hands on learning equals better educated students. Until we have the perfect system, encourage your children to read and watch the history channel.


----------



## Drstrangefart (Jul 14, 2012)

I went to school in an area where people express their condolences when I tell them where I went. Half of history class was watching a movie every day. The other half was just filling in blanks on Xerox sheets. THAT was the entire year. I pay enough attention to know enough of what's out there, but a lot of the history IS incomplete and being changed all the time by new evidence or the release of information that had been classified for the last 50 years.


----------



## Dave Turner (Jul 14, 2012)

Back in the 60's, when I was in the public school system, I remember my history teachers always running short of time when it came to US history. We spent too much time on the revolutionary war, skimmed the civil war, and skipped everything after that.

Carefully stepping onto my soapbox:

I think most teachers now are vastly underpaid for the task they should be doing. The people educating your children should be held in as high a regard as your physician. Teachers are just as important- both on a personal level and to society in general. If the positions paid better, they'd be able to attract and retain the caliber of instructors that we need.

Parents also need to be playing a much larger role in their children's education.  The schools can provide a framework and starting point for learning. The parents need to fill in the details and let their kids know how the subjects they're learning fit into the real world. Two hours a day or more should be the norm for parents to interact with their kids. They should be reviewing homework to ensure completeness and provide remedial teaching. They should know when tests are coming up and be informed of how their student performed. They should be sharing their joy of reading with their kids.

Step down from soapbox.

Sometimes if feels good to vent.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 14, 2012)

Displaced Canadian said:


> I think part of the issue is people read less and even less non fiction. I read a biography about Abe Lincon and it took longer to read that book than to listen to everything the teacher had to say about him. Most people who work with me say I'm the smartest person they know. The simple fact is, I've read the most. I don't blame the teachers, they have a difficult job and the education of a child requires input from the parent and the education system. The education system does need fixing, but most of those changes involve cost. Smaller class sizes, involved parents, and more hands on learning equals better educated students. Until we have the perfect system, encourage your children to read and watch the history channel.


 
You are right that reading is very important --- and --- it is being stressed less and less all the time.

I don't think I agree with the smaller class size issue is a resolution of the issue.  I believe it is what is being taught, and, probably more importantly, what is *not* being taught that create the problem.  

The second issue that I believe is a heavy contributor to the "dumbing down" of education, is the lack of dicipline and control in the classroom and the inability of the schools to remove/resolve disruptive kids. 

If I were doing it over today I would home school my children.


----------



## moke (Jul 14, 2012)

Displaced Canadian said:


> I think part of the issue is people read less and even less non fiction. I read a biography about Abe Lincon and it took longer to read that book than to listen to everything the teacher had to say about him. Most people who work with me say I'm the smartest person they know. The simple fact is, I've read the most. I don't blame the teachers, they have a difficult job and the education of a child requires input from the parent and the education system. The education system does need fixing, but most of those changes involve cost. Smaller class sizes, involved parents, and more hands on learning equals better educated students. Until we have the perfect system, encourage your children to read and watch the history channel.


 
Rant open... 
What does Chumlee, the pickers, and choot em lidabet' have to offer about history?
Rant closed...


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 14, 2012)

Dave Turner said:


> Back in the 60's, when I was in the public school system, I remember my history teachers always running short of time when it came to US history. We spent too much time on the revolutionary war, skimmed the civil war, and skipped everything after that.
> 
> Carefully stepping onto my soapbox:
> 
> ...


 My opinion is that dog don't hunt.  Teachers are nearly all represented by Unions now and their wages and benefits are established by collective bargaining - they are not underpaid and their benefits are second to none.

I personally believe that the problems we have with teachers (if there is a problem with teachers - and I'm not saying that there are any.) stems from the inadaquacy of their education not their salary.  Teaching programs at state universities (where most teachers get their education) tend to have very lax entry standards not geared to attracting high acheivers and the programs themselves seem to me to be poorly designed concentrating on "how to teach ???" rather than learning ???.  You can substitute any subject for ???.  Now that is not the teachers' fault, the teachers go to college and take the courses required and offered like anyone else, but they don't come out of college ready to be top notch teachers.

In my opinion, there are a few colleges that produce excellent teachers but many that really don't and there in lies the problem.


----------



## Akula (Jul 14, 2012)

Progressive Teachers and Schools.  Change what they teach and change what people know about history.  This younger group has become the less informed and instant gratification generation.  OWS is a perfect example.  There are still a lot of good kids out there today but we have made little to no progress in improving the inner city education system.  Our ranking in the world is proof something needs to go back to the way things were.  No excuse to not producing higher levels of thinking.  Too many kids see as they are forced to going to school and in most places in the world they still consider it a privilege.  There are even places where they PAY kids just to attend.  The adults do not get a pass on the blame.  Everyone got so busy working and keeping up with others, they allowed TV to take their place as parents.  They didn't take the time to question what was being taught in the schools.  Now we all know what the problems are, it's going to take a lot of hard work to get us back to where we should be in education.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

i just want to put this out there i am 16 and i know alot about my country and i have taken american history and about to take ap american history ( wich i might had is one of the hardest classes you can take) i not sure why you think we don't know about the past. now i will give you this i know there is a portion of people out there both young and old who have no idea how this country started.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

oh and there is no union for teachers in the southern states


----------



## ctubbs (Jul 15, 2012)

Smitty, your theory applies to any subject taught in any college you wish to mention, teaching, nursing, engineering, just add your branch.  Everyone is taught how to do mundane things without having any real idea about how to do the job they will have when school is over.  My late bride as well as my current bride, both BSN, RN and neither one knew anything about floor work in a hospital.  They had to learn that once hired to do it.  I work with Electrical Engineers routinely and none of the new Grads have any idea about reading drawings or how to make things work.  OOPS, I've been back on my soapbox.  Sorry, I'm off now.
Charles


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

ctubbs said:


> Smitty, your theory applies to any subject taught in any college you wish to mention, teaching, nursing, engineering, just add your branch. *Everyone is taught how to do mundane things without having any real idea about how to do the job they will have when school is over.* My late bride as well as my current bride, both BSN, RN and neither one knew anything about floor work in a hospital. They had to learn that once hired to do it. I work with Electrical Engineers routinely and none of the new Grads have any idea about reading drawings or how to make things work. OOPS, I've been back on my soapbox. Sorry, I'm off now.
> Charles


I graduated from high school and got my degree in 1982 - I took my first college courses in 1966/67 and got B's then work intervened and I left college for a bit- I went back in 1976/1977 and got A's at what was supposedly a 'tougher' college.  My work didn't get better - getting A's got easier.  My Navy ET School was tougher than college.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

Luke Putman said:


> i just want to put this out there i am 16 and i know alot about my country and i have taken american history and about to take ap american history ( wich i might had is one of the hardest classes you can take) i not sure why you think we don't know about the past. now i will give you this i know there is a portion of people out there both young and old who have no idea how this country started.


 
Luke, we think you don't know much about History not because you aren't intelligent enough, but because you only know what you are taught.  Our thinking is that you have not been taught enough and that too much of what you have been taught is not accurate.  A suggestion I would make is if you are really interested in learning history, go to Hillsdale College after you finish high school.


----------



## TellicoTurning (Jul 15, 2012)

I have a daughter that is a teacher and a very dedicated one... my suggestion on the education of our young, take the government out of the schools and let the teachers be in charge.  When teachers have to teach to a test so the schools can get funding from the government, they don't/can't spend a lot of time on the subjects at hand.... I graduated in 1960 and they were just beginning to develop the "achievement" test, but we took them without preparation for them... they were supposed to have been for the support of the teachers to see how well the students were comprehending what was being taught.  They have devolved into something to determine how much money the schools should get per student or something like that. 

Let the teachers do their jobs, there are many many good people out there trying to do the right thing, but often have their hands tied by school systems regulations.


----------



## StephenM (Jul 15, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> Luke Putman said:
> 
> 
> > i just want to put this out there i am 16 and i know alot about my country and i have taken american history and about to take ap american history ( wich i might had is one of the hardest classes you can take) i not sure why you think we don't know about the past. now i will give you this i know there is a portion of people out there both young and old who have no idea how this country started.
> ...



That's an awful bold (and rude) statement made to someone you don't know.  

If you look back (i.e. learn your history), you will find that these same conversations have been going on since there was an older generation and a younger generation.  

The more things change, the more they stay the same.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

TellicoTurning said:


> I have a daughter that is a teacher and a very dedicated one... my suggestion on the education of our young, take the government out of the schools and let the teachers be in charge. When teachers have to teach to a test so the schools can get funding from the government, they don't/can't spend a lot of time on the subjects at hand.... I graduated in 1960 and they were just beginning to develop the "achievement" test, but we took them without preparation for them... they were supposed to have been for the support of the teachers to see how well the students were comprehending what was being taught. They have devolved into something to determine how much money the schools should get per student or something like that.
> 
> Let the teachers do their jobs, there are many many good people out there trying to do the right thing, but often have their hands tied by school systems regulations.


 We are in agreement in some of what you are saying, schools spend far too much effort and too many resources worrying about things which are unrelated to education.  They are unable to maintain dicipline, sports are over-emphasized and they have too much nonsense forced into the cirriculum so everybody can graduate.  

On the other hand the standardized tests affecting funding are relatively recent and are a reaction to the poor performance of our students - my opinion is they are not the cause of the poor performance.  I believe that if the subject is taught correctly the tests will take care of themselves.


----------



## Glen Schumann (Jul 15, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> TellicoTurning said:
> 
> 
> > On the other hand the standardized tests affecting funding are relatively recent and are a reaction to the poor performance of our students - my opinion is they are not the cause of the poor performance. I believe that if the subject is taught correctly the tests will take care of themselves.
> ...


----------



## Robert111 (Jul 15, 2012)

I taught English for 37 years and then worked for an educational consulting firm for seven more. I edited college and secondary school texts (over 60) and instructional materials. My $.02:

Problem 1: There are more students today who are problem learners than ever before, coming from broken and single-parent homes, from neglectful parents, from non-English-speaking homes, from crime and drug-ridden neighborhoods, from impoverished homes, etc. Many overcome their handicaps, but many more are a challenge to even the most committed and hard-working teachers. Some can be induced to take an interest, but it takes tremendous energy, time and talent.

Problem 2: If there are poor teachers (and there certainly are), there are poor school administrators. Leading a faculty calls for a supremely courageous, talented and intelligent man or woman. I have a school administrator's certification in New York. I've also edited books in management. The approach to leading workers in education is miles, MILES! behind that found in the private sector.


----------



## mredburn (Jul 15, 2012)

Here in SW Florida Reading is emphasized and required. The school system in my county requires the elementary students to read and pass a test on the books they read. They receive points for their testing performance and its based on the level of the books they read. Harder books have greater points. They have quarterly minimum score level goals they must meet as part of their grade. This year they have implemented required reading for the summer for the next grade level. both  in elementary and middle school levels. I don't think there is any occupation that you cant say there are people who do an outstanding job and there are those taking up space. I feel that the parents that use the schools as a daycare facility and don't take an active part in the child's education other than when a "problem" arises carry most of the blame. Then next largest pet peeve is the parents that blame everyone else but the child and themselves for their  child's problems at school.  And at 56 I'm raising 2 of my grandchildren that are in 7th and 5th grade respectively. I would not agree on the pay scale issue entirely, our teachers are paid on an annual basis and recieve their entire summer pay in one lump sum at the end of school year. Most of the teachers take summer jobs on top of that pay. My daughters best friend from her school years is a teacher now and its not as low as I thought it was.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

Robert111 said:


> I taught English for 37 years and then worked for an educational consulting firm for seven more. I edited college and secondary school texts (over 60) and instructional materials. My $.02:
> 
> Problem 1: There are more students today who are problem learners than ever before, coming from broken and single-parent homes, from neglectful parents, from non-English-speaking homes, from crime and drug-ridden neighborhoods, from impoverished homes, etc. Many overcome their handicaps, but many more are a challenge to even the most committed and hard-working teachers. Some can be induced to take an interest, but it takes tremendous energy, time and talent.
> 
> Problem 2: If there are poor teachers (and there certainly are), *there are poor school administrators.* Leading a faculty calls for a supremely courageous, talented and intelligent man or woman. I have a school administrator's certification in New York. I've also edited books in management. The approach to leading workers in education is miles, MILES! behind that found in the private sector.


 I opened this thread to mention what our children are not being taught.  Not the problems faced by schools.  The simple fact in my opinion is that the schools are not teaching the right things.  That would still be the case even if there were no problems.  No one has blamed the teachers, they teach what they have been taught and if they have not been taught the right things that isn't their fault but they can't teach what they don't know.

*I have never met a school administrator in my life who did not begin as a classroom teacher and didn't get their advanced education according to the certification requirements of their state school system. They are the result of the same educational system that is producing the teachers.  I don't think school boards are out there looking only for bad teachers to become administrators.*


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

mredburn said:


> Here in SW Florida Reading is emphasized and required. The school system in my county requires the elementary students to read and pass a test on the books they read. They receive points for their testing performance and its based on the level of the books they read. Harder books have greater points. They have quarterly minimum score level goals they must meet as part of their grade. This year they have implemented required reading for the summer for the next grade level. both in elementary and middle school levels. I don't think there is any occupation that you cant say there are people who do an outstanding job and there are those taking up space. I feel that the parents that use the schools as a daycare facility and don't take an active part in the child's education other than when a "problem" arises carry most of the blame. Then next largest pet peeve is the parents that blame everyone else but the child and themselves for their child's problems at school. And at 56 I'm raising 2 of my grandchildren that are in 7th and 5th grade respectively. I would not agree on the pay scale issue entirely, our teachers are paid on an annual basis and recieve their entire summer pay in one lump sum at the end of school year. Most of the teachers take summer jobs on top of that pay. My daughters best friend from her school years is a teacher now and its not as low as I thought it was.


If they are emphasizing reading that's a good start.


----------



## Frank Nemke sr (Jul 15, 2012)

My son got caught ditching school. One week suspention.  Asked the prin. "why are you rewarding him for ditching.  He just gave me a dumb look


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

StephenM said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Luke Putman said:
> ...


i have to agree that this is getting really insulting that becouse of my age i can't know about history becouse schools don't have time to teach it. ( wich hasn't changed) i find it rude that yall say such things without know the real facts.


----------



## IPD_Mr (Jul 15, 2012)

moke said:


> Rant open...
> What does Chumlee, the pickers, and choot em lidabet' have to offer about history?
> Rant closed...


 
You are right that not everything on the History channel is about history, but they do offer some really great history shows from time to time.  For example on the 4th they had an almost all day long series on the Revolution.  THAT was very educational.  While not the most educational you will find that Pickers and Pawn Stars do offer a bit of education.  The other day they talked about the first President of the United States.  It was not Washington.  Washington was the first president under the constitution that we follow today.  Pickers has a bit of history when it comes to the industrial period of the US and does touch on WWII and the Civil War from time to time.  But all in all it is the daytime shows not the prime time shows on the History channel that educate.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

StephenM said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Luke Putman said:
> ...


 
The statement is neither personal nor rude.  Any young person knows only what they have been taught.  And, saying that they have not been taught enough about a particular subject is no reflection what-so-ever on them.  

Saying that I am appalled by how little about history young people know is if anything a reflection on older people who taught them or decided what to teach them.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

Luke Putman said:


> StephenM said:
> 
> 
> > Smitty37 said:
> ...


 It is no insult.  Regardless of how bright you are and how well you have learned - what you know is constrained by what you have been exposed to.  That is no reflection at at all on you - you might know twice as much as your peers.  

I have been 16 (a long time ago) and I have raised 6 children all of whom were also 16 at one time and have had neices, nephews, grand neices and nephews around who were all 16 at one time.  And including myself, I have never known a 16 year old who didn't think they knew more than they actually did - it goes with the territory and there's not a thing wrong with it.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

i not saying i know every thing about history but i know my fare share. i do find your statments rude. i said i know my history and alot of people tell me to make it brief no you don't know ( even though you don't have a clue what i have in my head and i have been tought)
and yes i do know my fare share of history. just becouse some kids my age don't doesn't mean all do. your side of it saying i don't know is rude and little consided


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

and your hole argument is based on the fact that i am puplic schooled. wich is a bold asumstion and a little consided.


----------



## frank123 (Jul 15, 2012)

Control what someone knows of the past and you control how they handle the future.


----------



## EBorraga (Jul 15, 2012)

Boy when I was your age, I had to walk 4 miles up hill both ways just to get to school. Gas was .22 cents a gallon. Kids respected their elders and always replied with sir or maam. Heck we never even had conditioned air. We never had tv and worked from daylight to dark. 

I've heard every complaint known to man about the YOUNG GENERATION. I consider myself a very well educated 35 year old. I read alot and watch programs on tv about history. I graduated from high school in 94 and I can tell you that history class was short and sweet. Hit a few basics on different aspects of a certain period of time and move on to the next subject of history. I've learned more about history from reading books than i ever learned in school. 95% of all books i read are non-fiction, mostly biography's, biker gang's, true crime's, and books on war. The only fiction books i've read that i liked were Dan Brown Books. Angels and Demons, DaVinci Code, Lost Symbol, Deception Point and a couple others.

But what irritates me is all the older generation constantly complaining about the young people. Maybe when i'm 60 or 70 i'll be doing the same, but you have to realize, the world has drastically changed since you were young.   

Now to step off my soapbox and prepare for incoming retalitation.


----------



## maxwell_smart007 (Jul 15, 2012)

Just a point of fact to consider when watching the history network for its historical value - most of the history programs that make it to television are geared toward the wider audience...meaning that facts can be 'interpreted' in a different way which is more approachable to TV viewers than perhaps what one might find in an academic journal.  

Most of what we 'know' in later life comes from our own studies - grade school is just there to light the fire and passion for learning on our own...As a History teacher, I'm not going to weigh in on the argument in this thread, but I do think that I'd like to leave you with my favourite history quote by E.H. Carr.  (It's not word-for-word, as it's from my head...I came across it in university in a Masters Historiography course; I think it's a very wonderful 'telling' of how facts and 'history' should be approached by the student of history.  

"Facts are not at all fish on a fishmongers' slab, but rather fish in a vast and somewhat inaccessable ocean - what the historian chooses to catch depends partly on chance, but mostly on what part of the ocean the historian choses to fish and what tackle he chooses to use - these being of course determined by what kind of fish he wants to catch.  By and large, the historian will catch the facts that he wants to catch. " (This is just a rough qutoe from memory - it's from E.H. Carr's "What is History" if you're interested in looking up the original.  As a tome on historiography, however, it's worth looking up - a very interesting read!) 

History as a discipline is just interpretation about events of the pas as recorded and documented by people biased by the times in which they lived.  Please keep this in mind when reading/watching history.  (and Abraham Lincoln likely didn't fight vampires! :biggrin


----------



## ctubbs (Jul 15, 2012)

maxwell_smart007 said:


> History as a discipline is just interpretation about events of the pas as recorded and documented by people biased by the times in which they lived.  Please keep this in mind when reading/watching history.  (and Abraham Lincoln likely didn't fight vampires! :biggrin



WHAT!! are you really sure?

My History teachers also informed me to take all printed history with much salt due to the fact it was all written by the winners.  There are at least two sides to any history and most likely three, your side, my side and the correct side.  Not meaning to take sides, oh well of course I am, Smitty is somewhat correct, we only know what we actually experienced or have been taught.  We depend on the honesty of those before us to tell the truth.  Sorry, but that does not always happen.

And yes, Andrew, Abe fought vampires and the CDC has officially announced that the 'walking dead' do not actually exist.  What have we come to when the CDC has to actually make such an announcement!:rotfl:

Charles


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

Luke Putman said:


> i not saying i know every thing about history but i know my fare share. i do find your statments rude. i said i know my history and alot of people tell me to make it brief no you don't know ( even though you don't have a clue what i have in my head and i have been tought)
> and yes i do know my fare share of history. just becouse some kids my age don't doesn't mean all do. your side of it saying i don't know is rude and little consided


 I did not say that you don't know your fair share - I said you don't know as much as you think you know. 

I also said that the reason you don't is because you know only what you have been taught and as a coming junior (or possibly senior) in high school that is not a lot. There is nothing negative about you in that.

You did not say "I know my history" you said "I know a lot of history". 


You are right I don't know what you have in your head but I do have a pretty good idea of what you have been taught in history and it hasn't been a whole lot. 

To give you an idea of what I mean. On my college transcript I have 21 credit hours of History - probably as much as your teacher has unless he/she is a history major. In addition, since I have a concentration in Political Science I have a number of poly sci credits that are history related. I've also read at least 100 memoirs and or historical books outside of class. I don't consider that I "know a lot" of history. I learn something new about it almost every day.

Let's just say you and I don't mean the same thing when we say "a lot" and leave it at that.


----------



## Glenn McCullough (Jul 15, 2012)

If you care to, see this site from one of my customers. He is a Michigan Judge who wrote a book about taking back America and getting back to it's founding principals. He is a genuine caring American on a crusade with his daughter. They are making some noise!!
America's Survival Guide


----------



## EBorraga (Jul 15, 2012)

Glenn McCullough said:


> If you care to, see this site from one of my customers. He is a Michigan Judge who wrote a book about taking back America and getting back to it's founding principals. He is a genuine caring American on a crusade with his daughter. They are making some noise!!
> America's Survival Guide


 
Looks pretty interesting Glenn. I'm ordering a few books from Amazon tomorrow and will add this one to my order.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 15, 2012)

Glenn McCullough said:


> If you care to, see this site from one of my customers. He is a Michigan Judge who wrote a book about taking back America and getting back to it's founding principals. He is a genuine caring American on a crusade with his daughter. They are making some noise!!
> America's Survival Guide


I think I'll put that on my reading list.  We need to start thinking like that.  Societies based on democratic ideas tend to experience this kind of trouble when majorities discover they can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority and/or politicians learn they can buy votes by offering some people benefits at the expense of other people.  We as a nation might be too far gone to turn it around, but maybe not.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

here is what you said 
me _i have to disagree with part of what you said. i am 16 and i know alot about this countrys history.
_

Originally Posted by *Luke Putman* 
_i have to disagree with part of what you said. i am 16 and i know alot about this countrys history._

smitty 
Hello, I sincerely doubt that you know very much at all about the History of the United States 
( Wich is very condescending)
In this statment (which i might add is very bold and rude to say to someone which you don't know) you question what i know about united states history. How are you supposed to know and assess what history is in my head? for all you know i am super smart and spend my days learning all i can about American history. you are in no place to judge my knowlege on american history untill we sit and spend atleast a couple of hours talking about it.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 15, 2012)

oh and this is what i get form you thought on how i know things. i only know what is tought to me and if what was tought to me was wrong then i know wrong things. 
this is wrong in more than one way. i know more than what i been tought. i personally search for things thus i was never tought it i learned it on my own. If someone thinks that you get out of school and are done learning they are foolish. live is one big class room. no matter what stage of life you are in you should allways be learning.


----------



## IPD_Mr (Jul 15, 2012)

Luke you need to have someone teach you how to use a spell and grammar checker.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

Luke Putman said:


> here is what you said
> me _i have to disagree with part of what you said. i am 16 and i know alot about this countrys history._
> 
> 
> ...


 
Luke, I'm only 99.9999% sure that you are not super smart as I would judge super smart.  There's nothing wrong with that, I'm not super smart either - Stephen Hawking is super smart - most of the rest of us are not. 

Going only by what you have told me yourself I am convinced that you do not know a great deal about US History.  Again, there is nothing wrong with that, most people don't.  

I have treated you with nothing but respect, I have not talked down to you, I have not questioned your intelligence.   I even said at the onset that if you don't know as much as you think you do, that it was no reflection on you because you only know what you've been taught.  That doesn't imply that you've never read something extra about history.


You have offered no evidence that you know any more of US History than any other high school student your age exposed to public school education.  In fact, nothing you have said even supports your contention that you know a lot of history.  You have given me no reason to believe that my initial assessment was wrong.

On the other hand, you have given me reason to believe that your general knowledge exceeds that of any normal 16 year old.  Even allowing for typing and haste, your writing and spelling is not even at your grade level.  That's not too terrible either, English was my worst subject in high school and spelling my worst in elementary school.  I would advise you  (and elders should offer advice to young people,), that if you want to be convincing in asserting that you know "a lot" about any subject, you will need to work on your spelling and grammar.


----------



## bensoelberg (Jul 16, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> I don't think I agree with the smaller class size issue is a resolution of the issue.  I believe it is what is being taught, and, probably more importantly, what is *not* being taught that create the problem.
> 
> The second issue that I believe is a heavy contributor to the "dumbing down" of education, is the lack of dicipline and control in the classroom and the inability of the schools to remove/resolve disruptive kids.



I completely agree with your second paragraph and disagree with your first.  I know that I had a lot less discipline problems with my class of 25 students than I did with my class of 42. I definitely was able to teach more material when I had fewer students in class.  



Smitty37 said:


> I personally believe that the problems we have with teachers (if there is a problem with teachers - and I'm not saying that there are any.) stems from the inadaquacy of their education not their salary.  Teaching programs at state universities (where most teachers get their education) tend to have very lax entry standards not geared to attracting high acheivers and the programs themselves seem to me to be poorly designed concentrating on "how to teach ???" rather than learning ???.  You can substitute any subject for ???.  Now that is not the teachers' fault, the teachers go to college and take the courses required and offered like anyone else, but they don't come out of college ready to be top notch teachers.
> .



I went to a state university.  I feel like I got a good education.  Once I entered the teaching field however, I have never once blamed my education for the catastrophe that is public education.  I'm not sure whether you are aware of it or not, but most teachers that I know do not feel that they are doing the best job that they could be either.  But it is not out of laziness. My first year out I would have loved to teach more in-depth about certain topics.  I would have loved to give more background, more primary source data, etc, but I had my hands tied by what the state told me I was allowed to teach in my classroom. I had to follow the state standards and could not teach outside of those standards, because they were the only things that would show up on the state end-of-level tests. My second year, I did not toe the line the way they wanted me to because I felt that the things that I was being forced to teach were not that relevant or challenging enough. When questioned about it after my admin team observations, I explained my feelings, and they told me to get with the program.  Just to be clear, I was still teaching to the state standards, (which are poorly written and vague, by the way) just not what the other grade level teachers at my school had outlined, which the admin team also didn't approve of.  Near the end of my second year, I was called into the Assistant Principal's office and informed that because I was on probation, my contract would not be renewed. I had to resign from my position and am now working outside of education because the school district where I live will not hire someone who resigned. I guess I should have cared more about not thinking about what I was teaching and just taught what I was told so that I could still have that _amazing _salary and benefit package...


----------



## Haynie (Jul 16, 2012)

TellicoTurning said:


> Let the teachers do their jobs, there are many many good people out there trying to do the right thing, but often have their hands tied by school systems regulations.



I agree.  
I had this long post about this and that and realized that it would go no where.  Here are the facts:  

I am a teacher with a well earned advanced degree

I make an okay salary for a 24/7 dead end job with no hope of advancement. If I want to advance I have to go back to college and get an entirely different set of credentials.  Do I think I should be paid more-That depends.  I do think I should have the opportunity to advance based on my ability and how hard I work like every other job.  I feel that I should NOT have to pay for classes to be re-certified every 6 years that will cost more than any raise will be.  

if you think students are "not learning what they are supposed to be learning":

1-go volunteer at a school-after you get a your finger prints cleared by the FBI and State Law Enforcement offices, and are okayed by the school board of course-and talk to the students. help out. lift a finger.

2-Start a second career by becoming a teacher.  Jump in the trenches and get your hands dirty.  You will have to go back to school but states make it easier to get a certificate as a second career applicant.  Just remember that you will not be able to support your family so you should do this after you retire, or have made your fortune in another career. You should be aware that these folks do not have a very high success rate.  Many leave out of frustration.

Get a taste of what we do from our side of the fence.  Walk a mile in our shoes before you decide we are not doing enough.  There are plenty of us who work our asses off because we are dedicated to one purpose, educating children.


----------



## TellicoTurning (Jul 16, 2012)

Haynie said:


> TellicoTurning said:
> 
> 
> > Let the teachers do their jobs, there are many many good people out there trying to do the right thing, but often have their hands tied by school systems regulations.
> ...



I once thought I wanted to be a teacher and did some training as a petty officer in the navy... I learned early on that I didn't have the patience to be a teacher... unlike my math teacher in high school... I've seen him spend one hour on one problem with one student because the kid was having trouble with a concept.   This teacher fought the system of grading that was just being developed called "grading on the curve" in which a certain percentage should have be given an "A", another percentage a "B", etc... Mr. Meridith contended that if he was doing his job right, every student would make an "A"...  He taught in the same school his entire career, doubling as advanced math teacher and junior high P.E. coach...(we didn't have middle school in my town... the Junior high was grade 7 & 8 and in the high school building)... he often would assign a set of problems and tell the class to work together and just keep the noise down, then he would attend to those students that needed extra help.  When he broached a new subject then he taught the whole class, but the day to day exercises, he let us work together to learn... even most pop quizzes were open book... his contention was that in real life, we would have reference material available and not need to remember every detail in our heads... it was more important to know the procedures and how to find them.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

Haynie said:


> TellicoTurning said:
> 
> 
> > Let the teachers do their jobs, there are many many good people out there trying to do the right thing, but often have their hands tied by school systems regulations.
> ...


 
The last 4 paragraphs are a little defensive about things no one has suggested; no one implied that teaching is easy, or that teachers are lazy.

I have suggested and stand by it, that teachers colleges do a poor job providing teachers with the education they should have and that their methods and courses are lacking what will attract academically upper echelon students.  That is not the fault of teachers who got their preparation there - they studied what the colleges told them they had to study.  

When I say that kids are not being taught the right things in enough depth it's not a reflection on teachers.  I fully understand that cirriculum is usually developed outside the classroom and that teachers are expected to teach what they are told to teach.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

*Free Course*

If any of you are interested in getting some real good insight into both the Declaration of Independence and the constitution at your leisure check this site. constitution.hillsdale.edu .  The course is free and is called Constitution 101.  Their are 10 lectures some QA sessions and if you want you can get all of the reading list materials.


----------



## Haynie (Jul 16, 2012)

Smitty,

Numbers 1 and 2 were not meant to be defensive.  I was pointing out that if you want to make a difference instead of complain, lift a finger and do something.  I pointed out what you would have to do and a simple warning about second career frustration.

And as for the last paragraph yes Smitty you are implying that we are not doing enough.

You started the thread with "  I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago.  What a shame"

Then you said "The second issue that I believe is a heavy contributor to the "dumbing  down" of education, is the lack of discipline and control in the  classroom and the inability of the schools to remove/resolve disruptive  kids"

Then-"Our thinking is that you have not been taught enough and that too much of what you have been taught is not accurate.

And-"I believe that if the subject is taught correctly the tests will take care of themselves"

If you know how to teach the subject correctly then please go do it.

Let me give you an idea about why merit pay cannot work in the educational system:
I teach 6th 7th and 8th grade Reading Intervention.  My students read from between the 1st and 5th grade levels.  They have all failed the state test miserably.  They have all but given up and the sad fact is most of them will drop out.  I don't want them to and I do my best to build their self esteem and belief in themselves as I teach.

The teacher down the hall teaches 7th grade Honors English.  All of her students exceeded on the state test.  All of them will move into 8th grade honors English.  Statistics say they will all most likely go into some form of post high school education.

Merit pay for teachers, as the ignorant general public wants it, is based on students passing or exceeding the state test.  I would be ecstatic if my students moved to the approaching level.  I would have a heart attack if they passed.  I would never get a merit pay bonus.  It is developmentally impossible.


----------



## John Pratt (Jul 16, 2012)

When I was in college the question was, "What do you call a history major with a teaching degree?" 
 
Answer: "Coach"
 
Part of the problem is that we want our children to learn history but we really (as a society or possibly something a little more sinister) don't place a huge amount of emphasis on it. It becomes just another requirement to get your diploma.
 
I agree that teachers in some case are not adequately prepared in their secondary education, even though they meet the requirements imposed by the various states to teach. However, even those teachers who go above and beyond to become experts in their field are hampered by the restrictions that individual school districts impose as to what they can teach. 
 
As to standardized testing; I think it became a necessity when we found out that there are some teachers who don't care. Hopefully, there are more who do care vs. those who do not (only you can speak to your own districts), but it was incumbent upon the bureaucracy to put something in place to ensure at least a minimum amount of information was getting through. Some of the time constraints for certain subjects happen because the schools have delved into areas that they have no business teaching which limits time spent on what they should be teaching.
 
I’ve seen quality teachers who really wanted students to learn and I’ve seen teachers who were more concerned with the teacher’s lounge coffee pot. I had one teacher who called me to ask if they could set some time aside to discuss where my child could excel if they wanted to take the course to the next level, and I have had teachers who wouldn’t return my calls concerning my child’s progress (I was actually told, it was not my concern, they would make sure my child was adequately prepared.) I have been to school board meetings where I became enraged when told that teachers know what’s best for my child. I have had to ask why a math teacher was telling the students the merits of one political candidate over another. There are a number of good teachers out there, but there are still some who have an agenda and feel it necessary to teach my children what to learn vs. how to learn.


----------



## John Pratt (Jul 16, 2012)

Merit pay may be a bridge to far, but until the teacher's unions allow for the termination of poor teachers, most of the concerned citizens who take an interest in their childs education are going to balk at paying more to an education system that seems to be increasiningly broken. I applaud those teachers who make an effort to help those students who have fallen behind, lack determination, have parents who do not paly an active role in their childs education, or were "promoted" to the next grade when they should not have been. At the same time, I have seen teachers complain in my area who make $36K a year. I counter that you made $36K for nine months. There are opportunities to find work in those other three months to earn more, or you can take a heck of a lot more vacation than I get in a year. I know there are continuing education requirements and certifications that take up some of this time, but that is not every year and certainly not the entire summer break.


----------



## John Pratt (Jul 16, 2012)

For a wide eyed look at some of the stuff they are not teaching our children in schools, take a look at some of the books by Kevin R. Gutzman, J.D., Ph.D. (The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution) or Thomas E. Woods, Ph.D (The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History).


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

Haynie said:


> Smitty,
> 
> Numbers 1 and 2 were not meant to be defensive. I was pointing out that if you want to make a difference instead of complain, lift a finger and do something. I pointed out what you would have to do and a simple warning about second career frustration. Do you think public schools are doing the job as well as they should. If you do you don't have a lot of company.
> 
> ...


 
On merit pay - you said you would like to be able to advance and get paid based on your hard work,etc - that sounds like merit pay to me. I said I wish you could too but had no clue how that could be implemented. 

Now you are (it seems) telling me you don't either. You've told me one approach that you think won't work. 

I won't argue the point, but I do think that any merit system needs to be based on results. How to measure the results and how to set the goals is the conumdrum. I believe it can be done, I worked my whole career at a major corporation where my performance was measured - and my job was not putting "tops on bottoms" where all they had to do was count. The job was complex and sometimes the measurements were complex but we were measured. 

By the way, both of my daughters who are high school principals do have their school's performance on standard tests as a part of their evaluation - they don't particularily like it either because they have even less control over those results that you do. 

I would question that the general public 'wants' any particular pay system for teachers - the general public just wants better results than we have been getting. 

I'd guess that, if you've been on the job long, you know which of your peers are excellent teachers and which aren't. I know my kids didn't have to be in a class very long before I knew whether their teacher was excellent, decent or in the wrong profession.


----------



## Haynie (Jul 16, 2012)

Merit pay as it is applied to administrators is just as unfair.  I don't like it because it will cause good principals to leave tough struggling schools.  As I said there are new ideas, they look good on paper, but I have no idea how it will look in practice.  Superintendent pay gets tagged as well. and here it tagged at 20%.  OUCH.  

For me to advance out of the teacher pay scale I would need to become an administrator which means an entirely different certification and program.  Once again it is I pay for classes to get certified and cross my fingers that over time those classes will pay for themselves.  In fact I was 1.5 years away from my PhD in administration when I had to take over the business.  But that is another story.

I am somewhat color blind and just now realized you have been responding in the quote.  Red is a bad color to use unless it is placed in bold lettering.

Ultimately, and your daughters can tell you this as well, the teacher is responsible for teaching the subjects they are hired to teach.  The state government is responsible for the curriculum but the teacher is responsible for teaching it.  If I were a social studies teacher and the curriculum said explore the causes of the civil war, it is up to me to do just that.  The curriculum does not tell me how to do it, and this is where a good teacher shines.  So, if students do not know the causes of the civil war it is not the fault of the curriculum it is the fault of the teacher.

I teach some of the worst of the worst at this middle school.  Granted it is not bad by my definition but bad for here. I have also taught in places where gang fights were the norm as were school wide lock downs, weapons and drugs.  I have NEVER, knock on wood, had an issue controlling students in my classes.  80% of successful teaching is classroom management.  A teacher with a commanding presence, clear expectations and who genuinely cares about the kids will seldom have issues.  Things pop up but a good teacher knows how to handle it.  And I have never thought a student needed to be removed from the system.  Call me a sap but all children have a right to an education, especially those whose world causes them to act out.

Yes I think the system is broken. The reason it is broken is because the states and local school boards control it.  Education should be in the sole control of the federal government.  Local control allows emotions and agendas to control the direction education is going.  It allows non-educators to dictate what is taught and what is not.

The curriculum sets what must be taught.  It defines the outcomes that are expected.  A teacher should be teaching to well defined and specific outcomes (standards).  The test assesses whether the child learned the expected outcome. It does not matter if it is a state test or a teacher created test, the teacher needs to teach to what they will be assessing.  That is called common sense.  If you are going to assess the students on what the causes of the civil war were you would not teach them the battle strategies of different civil war battles. I teach to the expectations defined in the curriculum.  Do I think some of them are sill yes, so I teach beyond them.  Lets face it the standard is the basic knowledge.  Why should we stop at the base.

  If I made and  had complete control of my curriculum I would still be doing the same  thing.  Teach to the assessment.  This whole teaching to the test argument is bogus.  Those who use this argument are longing for the days when we got to teach what we wanted how we wanted and we were left alone.  It was nice, but without direction and cohesiveness.

No I was not defensive I was serious.  If you have a specific knowledge set, that you think is not being taught properly, or just have something to add, go teach it.  Go to a school and say I want to volunteer in an American History class when they are learning XXXXXX.  I bet, if you are nice and meet the teacher your presence would be a welcome change by the students and the teacher.  Just make it lively and hands on.  Remember, that we are teaching a generation that cannot and will not suffer through lectures.  Older folks have experiences us young teachers can never have.

I'm done.


----------



## The Penguin (Jul 16, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> Dave Turner said:
> 
> 
> > Back in the 60's, when I was in the public school system, I remember my history teachers always running short of time when it came to US history. We spent too much time on the revolutionary war, skimmed the civil war, and skipped everything after that.
> ...


my wife is a teacher, 2 of my aunts are retired teachers. 

I can tell you for certain that teachers are underpaid and the benefits suck.

I certainly wouldn't do what my wife does for the amount of money they pay her.


----------



## randyrls (Jul 16, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> My Navy ET School was tougher than college.



Smitty;  When did you go to ET School?  Great Lakes?  I was a ham in the ham station up on the top floor.  I raced slot cars down in the basement(? that was a while ago).  I was there in 1970.

I went thru ET-N  and specialized in Crypto after school.  I was in the accelerated course.  Learned a lot that wasn't in the curriculum.  Learned more in the courses I took later.  Took one course in England (NATO) for 7 weeks.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

The Penguin said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > Dave Turner said:
> ...


Perhaps where you live....not here and not anywhere I've lived in the past 30 years. 

I also had a sister, 3 nieces and 2 daughters who were/are teachers - and I still believe they are not underpaid - they have fully paid health care including dental and eye care, nearly fully paid retirement which they can collect in as little as 25 years, they have 2 and a half months of vacation plus a number of holidays plus a number of sick days. They never get called in to work on a weekend.  They never get called on to travel on an hours notice.  They are seldom if ever required to work 2nd or 3rd shift.
That doesn't sound like benefits that suck to me.

If teachers were underpaid we would have a shortage of teachers which we do not have in most areas.  Where shortages do develop the pay goes up just as it does for any other profession.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

randyrls said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > My Navy ET School was tougher than college.
> ...


 I did go to Great Lakes - 1956 26 weeks of which 10 were Radar specilization.  I also had some other classes while in the service but not very many I spent my time on a distroyer that went out of commission about the time you were in school.


----------



## randyrls (Jul 16, 2012)

When I was taking American History; it was in mid-Oct as I remember, the Teacher, Mr Good (really!)  stopped the class and said, "Mr Smith, are we boring you?".  My response was, "yes", to which he said, "Perhaps you'd like to take the mid-term exam?"  I said OK.  Got an 86 the next day during study hall.  He asked the obvious question then, "How?"  I confessed I had read the entire book in the first 3 weeks of school.  The reason I remember him as a teacher is that he brought me history books to read from his library that exposed me to a lot of history that isn't taught in schools or is glossed over.  I was never interested in the "Who was the fourth president?" type of questions.  I was more interested in questions like "How did the Civil War change America".


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 16, 2012)

Haynie said:


> Merit pay as it is applied to administrators is just as unfair. I don't like it because it will cause good principals to leave tough struggling schools. As I said there are new ideas, they look good on paper, but I have no idea how it will look in practice. Superintendent pay gets tagged as well. and here it tagged at 20%. OUCH.
> 
> For me to advance out of the teacher pay scale I would need to become an administrator which means an entirely different certification and program. Once again it is I pay for classes to get certified and cross my fingers that over time those classes will pay for themselves. In fact I was 1.5 years away from my PhD in administration when I had to take over the business. But that is another story.
> 
> ...


I apologize I will not use the red from now on.

Phylosophically I have two issues where I disagree with that.  Georges Clemenceau is quoted as saying "War is too important a matter to be left to the military."  I feel that way about a number of things war is one and education is another.  Clemenceau did not mean soldiers would not be important and involve just that they should not have the final say.  I'm not saying educators don't have an very important role, just that they shouldn't have the final say.  In the end, those of us who are not educators must also live with the results and we are paying the freight.

The other is I would never believe that putting the Federal Government in charge of education would do anything but make matters worse.  There is not enough room on the page for me to list all the reasons I believe that way.  Colleges have done very well in this country with a mixture of private and public education and not a lot of involvement by the Federal Government and I believe lower schools can also.  They have in the past - there was a time when US primary and secondary education was among the best without the Fed and I think it can be again.


----------



## John Pratt (Jul 16, 2012)

Haynie said:


> Call me a sap but all children have a right to an education, especially those whose world causes them to act out.
> 
> Education should be in the sole control of the federal government. Local control allows emotions and agendas to control the direction education is going. It allows non-educators to dictate what is taught and what is not.


 
I am not really sure where to begin with my disagreement with these two statements and I am glad the Smitty weighed in first. 

As to the first: Are we talking about primary or secondary education? At what point does someone lose their "right" to an education when they are unable to comport themselves in a manner which does not detract from the educational opportunities of others? The fact is that all people are not created with the same mental capacities and unfortunately, (and I do not intend this to be mean spirited) some people will never (or do not wish to) progress beyond the most basic levels of education. I had a college prof. who used to say that, "You must always remember that half the population has an I.Q. of less than 100." What he meant was that not every one is suited for seconday education or even the higher levels of primary education. Or if you prefer Caddyshack, "The world needs ditch diggers too."

And to the second: Is this your belief because the Federal Govt. has done such a wonderful job with everything else they run? Just because the sheepskin on my wall does not profess a teaching degree does not mean I do not know what my children need to learn. Many of us "non-educators" are quite able to understand what should or should not be taught. We entrust the teachers and schools our children not to "raise" them and teach them what to think, but we entrust them to you to teach them how to think. I would hope that teaching HOW to think is one of the core abilities of a good teacher. It is the public who determines what we want the public employees to teach our children. We send our children to the teachers and schools because most of us "non-educators" are toiling away at our chosen professions in an effort to raise our families, and in part pay the salaries of those educators. If I were independently wealthy and had the ability to stay at home, I would reduce the burden on the overcrowded classrooms and home school my children.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 17, 2012)

Dave Turner said:


> Back in the 60's, when I was in the public school system, I remember my history teachers always running short of time when it came to US history. We spent too much time on the revolutionary war, skimmed the civil war, and skipped everything after that.


I agree with Dave.  The problem is not that the schools have stopped teaching history or that teachers don't care.  The problem is that there is an incredible volume of material to be taught and a finite number of hours to teach it in.  You are able to visualize the problem more in a subject like history because every day the subject material increases while the time available to teach it all stands still.


----------



## sbell111 (Jul 17, 2012)

I mistakenly responded to the thread prior to reading the entire thing.  Had I noticed that it's existence was merely to hide political debate I would not have bothered to respond at all.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 17, 2012)

*One issue*



EBorraga said:


> Boy when I was your age, I had to walk 4 miles up hill both ways just to get to school. Gas was .22 cents a gallon. Kids respected their elders and always replied with sir or maam. Heck we never even had conditioned air. We never had tv and worked from daylight to dark.
> 
> I've heard every complaint known to man about the YOUNG GENERATION. I consider myself a very well educated 35 year old. I read alot and watch programs on tv about history. I graduated from high school in 94 and I can tell you that history class was short and sweet. Hit a few basics on different aspects of a certain period of time and move on to the next subject of history. I've learned more about history from reading books than i ever learned in school. 95% of all books i read are non-fiction, mostly biography's, biker gang's, true crime's, and books on war. The only fiction books i've read that i liked were Dan Brown Books. Angels and Demons, DaVinci Code, Lost Symbol, Deception Point and a couple others.
> 
> ...


In all due respect - we know what the world was like when we were young and how it has changed.  Some for the better some for the worse.  When I was your age - a few years before you were born our country was being torn apart by a number of issues...we survived but the whole landscape had changed.   

But - problems with education date back farther than that.  I first became aware of it the year I graduated from high school when "Why Johnny Can't Read" hit the street but the problem with reading went farther back than that. It was first identified in 1946.  65 years later we are still producing high school graduates that can't read and perhaps in greater numbers than before.  In the 70s when all of my children were going through elementary and high school - there was a big issue with reading.  Now their children are going through elementary school and there is still an issue with reading.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 17, 2012)

sbell111 said:


> Dave Turner said:
> 
> 
> > Back in the 60's, when I was in the public school system, I remember my history teachers always running short of time when it came to US history. We spent too much time on the revolutionary war, skimmed the civil war, and skipped everything after that.
> ...


 That has always been true. I think the problem is that the time devoted to teaching history has been reduced. 

When I was in high school history as a separate was required every year or at least 4 full year credits were required. In some larger schools it was possible to take two courses in the same year. Two years were American History one year European History and one year was World History. In addition, we had history as a separate subject in 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grades during elementary school.  American History was divided into Colonial through 1900 and 1900 to present.  I would grant that 1900 to present has doubled in size so probably a year more of history could be added.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 18, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> I have been appalled at how little younger people know about the founding of this nation (the USA) and how much of what they "know" is flat out wrong.  I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago.  What a shame.



Please provide some concrete and relevant examples/illustrations to this rather broad statement. I feel it is too general of a statement to make without some examples to back it up. It may be true in your experience where you are located but the USA is a large and diverse country.

I am more than pleased with the History education and all other subjects for that matter that my teenager is currently receiving. (Granted he is enrolled in AP classes and that does make a large difference.) The education he and his peers is currently receiving is vastly superior to what I received in the same school district 30 years ago.

He definitely is learning way more than I ever did or was required to.

Maybe I'm just lucky??

I am disheartened by the elimination of Vocational and Industrial Arts programs and believe there is much too much emphasis placed on college entry. I don't believe that every child is destined to or should go to College/University immediately following their secondary education. Many if not most just aren't ready for it. I know I wasn't ready. Eventually, I went back, but when I was ready and capable.


----------



## The Penguin (Jul 18, 2012)

Smitty37 said:


> I have been appalled at how little younger people know about the founding of this nation (the USA) and how much of what they "know" is flat out wrong.  I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago.  What a shame.


my wife and I are currently watching the 8-part HBO series on John Adams. 

excellent review of events following Adams' involvement in the revolution from the Boston Massacre through the Continental Congress and beyond. We finished part 5 a few days ago. It ended with his election as president.

I highly recommend it...we're getting the disks from Netflix.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 18, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > I have been appalled at how little younger people know about the founding of this nation (the USA) and how much of what they "know" is flat out wrong. I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago. What a shame.
> ...


 *I agree with you - so did I.*

One quick example - I have talked to some young high school graduates (that were smart kids) who did not have a clue as to why the Declaration of Independence was written and some of them couldn't even get when it was written in the right century.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 18, 2012)

Well that truly is a sad state of affairs then.

Thanks for the example.

Makes me glad I put my son through Scouts and made sure he understands why things are the way they are.

Interesting while I was stationed in England I learned that in U.K. History they refer to the "American Revolution" as the "North American Colonial Rebellion" (at least that is what I was told) and it is a very small part almost a footnote really in their history. It came about as we invited our English neighbors to celebrate the 4th of July with us and they had no idea of the significance of the day.  They did enjoy themselves though. The previous November they invited us to celebrate "Guy Fox" with them.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 18, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> Well that truly is a sad state of affairs then.
> 
> Thanks for the example.
> 
> ...


 At the time it probably was considered an unpleasant footnote in their history.  It probably had very little impact on their VAST empire.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 18, 2012)

It did get the rebellion ball rolling in that we were the first colonies to successfully break away from the mother ship. Although according to many brits it took us almost 40 years. Tax rebellion (Boston Tea Party time frame once open rebellious acts started) to the end of the war of 1812.


----------



## BlackPearl (Jul 18, 2012)

I was in school, all in all for 16 years, I have been out of the education system of any kind for almost three times that and I have never stopped learning.  

I have run into a number of people who have told me that they do not feel the need to learn anything more than what they learned in School. I work with a guy who can not believe I read books for fun. 

My wife spins yarn, uses natural dyes and weaves, I warp her looms in double shot, it helps me to learn programing, warping diagrams were the first computer graphics programs. 

I got a lathe to learn how to do it, Geometry is fun. 

I mix my own glass and make beads and marbles to learn how love the chemistry and the flames!

The Education system teaches you how to learn, it does not teach you all you need to learn.


----------



## BlackPearl (Jul 18, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> "Guy Fox" with them.



Actually isn't it Guy *Fawkes*? But what do I know I have been out of school since 1967 and I am a Texan.


----------



## BlackPearl (Jul 18, 2012)

The Penguin said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > I have been appalled at how little younger people know about the founding of this nation (the USA) and how much of what they "know" is flat out wrong.  I'm convinced our schools must have stopped teaching USA History 25 years ago.  What a shame.
> ...



+1 but I read the book from the Library.  

Ironic isn't it.


----------



## The Penguin (Jul 18, 2012)

My wife is not a US citizen, but she is an avid reader. 

she asked me to add the series to the Netflix queue - I had no idea they were based on a single book...but I'll recommend it to her.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 18, 2012)

BlackPearl said:


> TerryDowning said:
> 
> 
> > "Guy Fox" with them.
> ...



Actually, I knew it wasn't "Fox", but could not remember the spelling for the life of me so I went phonetic figuring some our friends across the pond would straighten me out.

Thanks for the correction


----------



## BlackPearl (Jul 18, 2012)

The Penguin said:


> My wife is not a US citizen, but she is an avid reader.
> 
> she asked me to add the series to the Netflix queue - I had no idea they were based on a single book...but I'll recommend it to her.




http://www.amazon.com/John-Adams-David-McCullough/dp/0684813637http://


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 18, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> It did get the rebellion ball rolling in that we were the first colonies to successfully break away from the mother ship. Although according to many brits it took us almost 40 years. Tax rebellion (Boston Tea Party time frame once open rebellious acts started) to the end of the war of 1812.


 
The idea of separation started raising its head in the early 1770s - the Treaty of Paris in 1783 got British recognition that the United States was a free country.  There are those who would argue that Great Britain did not really recognize the USA as a completely free country (because they claimed the right to stop and board our ships on the high seas) until the Treaty of Ghent in 1814.  So from their perspective you are talking about 40 years.


----------



## AnachitlPut (Jul 19, 2012)

sorry been busy. how am i supposed to prove anything over the internet. i can say any thing and all you will say is that i looked at google.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 19, 2012)

Relax Luke.

I'm fairly confident that Smitty's comments were not directed at you specifically. Never take things posted to a forum personally. It's just a forum.

As previously mentioned by another poster, I do recommend using correct grammar and spelling, even in a forum.

The hardest lesson I ever learned on written communication happened when a Squadron Commander returned a letter I prepared covered in red ink from his proof reading with a note that said "I never sign shoddy work!"

From that day on, I always do my best to make sure that written communication is well crafted.


----------



## Dave Turner (Jul 19, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> From that day on, I always do my best to make sure that written communication is well crafted.



I'll second that. My written word is the only thing that represents me to the people online. My charming smile just won't cut it in cyberspace.  My best learning experience with regards to writing took place in an intermediate writing class at the University of Michigan. It was a small class with an outstanding professor teaching it. We wrote a 3 page paper each week on any topic we felt would be of interest to the other students. We read our papers in class and they would be ripped apart, I mean critiqued, by the other students and the professor. I really learned how to write that term and it's probably one of the most useful skills I acquired in college. I just wish we had computers back then instead of having to type up my paper each week on a typewriter.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 19, 2012)

Dave Turner said:


> TerryDowning said:
> 
> 
> > From that day on, I always do my best to make sure that written communication is well crafted.
> ...


I managed to learn typing in high school so typing wasn't too bad but I did have to keep a dictionary at close hand.


----------



## TerryDowning (Jul 20, 2012)

It wasn't so much the spelling I got slaughtered on, I've always been pretty good at that.  It was punctuation and Grammar.

Just the thought of that letter coming back proof read (through my boss of course) turns my face red to this day. That was more than 20 years ago. Not only did I learn that I need to step up my game when it comes to written communication, I learned that NO official communication leaves the office without at least 2 proof reads (By co workers) and of course the boss signing off on it.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jul 20, 2012)

TerryDowning said:


> It wasn't so much the spelling I got slaughtered on, I've always been pretty good at that. It was punctuation and Grammar.
> 
> Just the thought of that letter coming back proof read (through my boss of course) turns my face red to this day. That was more than 20 years ago. Not only did I learn that I need to step up my game when it comes to written communication, I learned that NO official communication leaves the office without at least 2 proof reads (By co workers) and of course the boss signing off on it.


 Think of this.  The new norm is getting to be, poor spelling, terrible grammar, idiotic sentence structure, many acronyms, and no punctuation including periods or question marks.  A gift of these wonderful computing machines we have developed.  I think their education, or lack thereof, also contributes some.


----------

