TWIF (Part 4): America IS History (Leaving Behind Our Heritage)
Most of you would be surprised to hear that American History is no longer taught in government schools. No, I don’t mean that our 4th graders no longer attend history class, rather, if “teach” means “to cause someone to learn or understand something,” I would argue that learning and understanding of American history is not taking place in America’s public schools today.
For those persuaded only by numbers allow these numbers to convince you: A survey conducted by the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation in the summer of 2001 found that almost a quarter of the teenagers had no idea that American states fought each other in the Civil War; more than a fifth of the teenagers questioned did not know that the original thirteen colonies declared their independence from England; 17% were unaware that the United States was formed from thirteen original colonies; 15% did not know what significant event in American history happened on July 4, 1776; and, 10% could not identify the first President of the United States.
The CWF’s study doesn’t stand alone on this issue. The same breath-taking lack of grasp of basic historical facts was demonstrated by 17-year-olds when the NAEP was administered in the 1990’s. The study showed that one-third didn’t know whom the U.S. fought in World War II; one-third didn’t know who Abraham Lincoln was; one-third thought Columbus sailed to the Americas after 1750; and nearly two-thirds didn’t know when the Civil War occurred.
Results from the 2001 NAEP examination on American history failed to communicate the full breadth of the problem. Based on a national sample of 23,000 students in 1,100 government and private schools, only 17% of government school 4th graders, 15% of government school 8th graders, and 11% of government school 12th graders had a proficient or advanced understanding of American history, while 35% of government school 4th graders, 38% percent of government school 8th graders, and 58% of government school 12th graders lacked even a basic understanding of American history appropriate to their grade.
Even though these results are bad enough, they mask the utter failure of government schools to educate Black, Hispanic, and American Indian children in basic American history. By 12th grade 80% of Black children, 74% of Hispanic children, and 66% of Indian children lack a basic understanding of American history appropriate to their grade. Our wonderful cultural diversity must be tempered by the cultural unity that comes from understanding where we came from—and by extension—where we are going.
In his a testimony before a committee of the United States Senate, David McCullough, a distinguished historian, testified in 2003, “that the ignorance of American history among students and teachers in American high schools and colleges is now so profound that it represents a threat to the nation’s security.”
Next time someone talks about how our generation is the best educated ever tell them that over 50% of government schooled 12th-graders think that at least one of Italy, Germany, or Japan were our World War II allies.
I realize that most of these posts leave you asking, “So, what should we do about it?” That’s good. You should be asking those questions. And I’ll be providing the answers to the questions I’ve raised starting tomorrow.
Regarding My Statistics: I pulled my statistics from the Bruce N. Shortt’s book, “The Harsh Truth About Public Schools,” in which he does an excellent job of citing sources. Direct sources for the studies and surveys I cited can be provided if requested.
Coming Up Next: “What I’m Not Saying” and “How A Rebelutionary Responds To China’s Challenge.”
Note: Please take advantage of the wonderful discussion taking place in this post’s comment section. So far my readers (which include some other excellent bloggers) have impacted the contents of this post to American democracy, unity, and trust while also stressing the importance of balancing unity and diversity.
In Christ, Brett Harris
Continue to Part Five…
August 11th, 2005 at 3:22 am
This post has been removed by the author.
August 11th, 2005 at 4:32 am
I had inwardly resolved not to comment, but you’re very interesting. Brett, great job, you deserve a comment, even though I?m a bit busy :). Allow me to look a little deeper at your thought.
I believe people focus too much on public schools economic task of making sure everyone has certain skills, rather than on their social task of making sure everyone has certain beliefs. Public schools were first widely adopted when the United States was in the midst of our first great wave of immigration. One of their major purposes was assimilate those immigrants, providing a kind of “social glue” to American society by ensuring that everyone shared certain experiences and certain beliefs, encouraging conformity. However recently, public schools have stopped acting as social glue because they have adopted post-modernism. They choose to emphasize race, gender, and sexual preference rather than American history at least in part because of this ideology; history emphasizes the unity of America, while they would emphasize its diversity.
But this new emphasis harms America because it reduces our ?social capital? in academic jargon. Basically, this new emphasis on diversity has the social cost of making people less able to trust one another. We trust that which we understand; it is difficult to trust those who are substantially different from us, at least until we get to know them. That’s human nature and moderate mush about “tolerance” is incapable of changing it. Encouraging people to see their differences is not a recipe for concord. Two impacts:
Politically, this undermines democracy, at least in theory. Democracy has to be founded on a degree of social altruism. Politics is war by other means, and to prevent escalation, conflict must be moderate. America’s democracy has been stable because there the people of America were AMERICANS, not Southerners, not Hoosiers, not Mexicans, not Asians, not Caucasians, not conservatives, not homosexuals, or homeschoolers - AMERICANS first and foremost. This motivated them to vote (What “logical” reason is there other than a sense of duty?) and to respect the votes of others, because ?the common good? had real meaning. People trusted others to look after everyone’s interests, because everyone’s interests were reasonably similar. By undermining this consensus, postmodernism has encouraged the rise of special interests and the polarization of America. When people do not trust people, THE people are not trusted to rule.
Economically, this increases transaction costs. If I have do not trust you, then I will create barriers to ensure that you cannot hurt me. In the economic realm, this takes the form of contracts thicker than my history book and mechanisms to enforce them. These cost money to create and maintain, draining resources from more productive ends. The rise of litigation and regulation in America is at least in part the result of the decline of social trust.
~Abraham
August 11th, 2005 at 4:32 am
http://www.slate.com/id/2124163
This is a rather interesting article somewhat pertaining to what we’ve been discussing over the last few days. It outlines, first, how the scores recieved on the NAEP aren’t necessarily accurate, and, second, the reason behind that, or American students’ inherent laziness towards work that doesn’t directly benefit them.
That isn’t to say I disagree with the statistics you’ve cited, Brett. It is a shocking fact that many American students know less about America than the rest of the world. This is due, in large part, to what is being taught in our schools today, as Abraham stated. And, as he stated, one of the major problems is the switching of beliefs - from unity to diversity.
But I’d like to throw in a caveat. It is important to study the different people groups, the different cultures and the different beliefs that are both in America now and have been in America in the past. Our diversity is part of what makes us America. We’re “The Great Melting Pot.” If we forget that, and ignore the diversity we do have, we risk losing even more of our identity than we have already. Perhaps the problem with history classes today is they place too much emphasis on ‘what goes into the pot’ and not enough on ‘what comes out of the pot.’ But that doesn’t change the fact that we need to look and both the ‘ingredients’ and the ‘cake.’
Our diversity, when kept in its proper place, makes us stronger as a nation. It allows us to see things from various view points, seek out unique and novel solutions, and gives us our identity in the world - because there is no other nation made up of so many diverse people groups.
August 11th, 2005 at 4:33 am
I would like to take this opportunity to mention that Abraham (Grotius) is a regular contributor on the Legal Redux weblog which exists to discuss changes in society, current legal issues and decisions, to help you form opinions about societal and current issues and become more knowledgeable about these important events. If that description interests you at all I would encourage you to visit http://www.ledux.blogspot.com.
In Christ,
Brett Harris
August 11th, 2005 at 4:33 am
Nqoire, I agree with almost all of the article you cited; though I have a few reservations. I’ll post them later this afternoon. Thank you for your contribution the discussion! You comments are coveted.
August 11th, 2005 at 5:31 am
I had inwardly resolved not to comment, but you’re very interesting. Brett, great job, you deserve a comment, even though I’m a bit busy :). Allow me to look a little deeper at your thought.
I believe people focus too much on public schools economic task of making sure everyone has certain skills, rather than on their social task of making sure everyone has certain beliefs. Public schools were first widely adopted when the United States was in the midst of our first great wave of immigration. One of their major purposes was assimilate those immigrants, providing a kind of “social glue” to American society by ensuring that everyone shared certain experiences and certain beliefs, encouraging conformity. However recently, public schools have stopped acting as social glue because they have adopted post-modernism. They choose to emphasize race, gender, and sexual preference rather than American history at least in part because of this ideology; history emphasizes the unity of America, while they would emphasize its diversity.
But this new emphasis harms America because it reduces our “social capital” in academic jargon. Basically, this new emphasis on diversity has the social cost of making people less able to trust one another. We trust that which we understand; it is difficult to trust those who are substantially different from us, at least until we get to know them. That’s human nature and moderate mush about “tolerance” is incapable of changing it. Encouraging people to see their differences is not a recipe for concord. Two impacts:
Politically, this undermines democracy, at least in theory. Democracy has to be founded on a degree of social altruism. Politics is war by other means, and to prevent escalation, conflict must be moderate. America’s democracy has been stable because there the people of America were AMERICANS, not Southerners, not Hoosiers, not Mexicans, not Asians, not Caucasians, not conservatives, not homosexuals, or homeschoolers - AMERICANS first and foremost. This motivated them to vote (What “logical” reason is there other than a sense of duty?) and to respect the votes of others, because “the common good” had real meaning. People trusted others to look after everyone’s interests, because everyone’s interests were reasonably similar. By undermining this consensus, postmodernism has encouraged the rise of special interests and the polarization of America. When people do not trust people, THE people are not trusted to rule.
Economically, this increases transaction costs. If I have do not trust you, then I will create barriers to ensure that you cannot hurt me. In the economic realm, this takes the form of contracts thicker than my history book and mechanisms to enforce them. These cost money to create and maintain, draining resources from more productive ends. The rise of litigation and regulation in America is at least in part the result of the decline of social trust.
~Abraham
August 11th, 2005 at 11:50 am
http://www.slate.com/id/2124163
This is a rather interesting article somewhat pertaining to what we’ve been discussing over the last few days. It outlines, first, how the scores recieved on the NAEP aren’t necessarily accurate, and, second, the reason behind that, or American students’ inherent laziness towards work that doesn’t directly benefit them.
That isn’t to say I disagree with the statistics you’ve cited, Brett. It is a shocking fact that many American students know less about America than the rest of the world. This is due, in large part, to what is being taught in our schools today, as Abraham stated. And, as he stated, one of the major problems is the switching of beliefs - from unity to diversity.
But I’d like to throw in a caveat. It is important to study the different people groups, the different cultures and the different beliefs that are both in America now and have been in America in the past. Our diversity is part of what makes us America. We’re “The Great Melting Pot.” If we forget that, and ignore the diversity we do have, we risk losing even more of our identity than we have already. Perhaps the problem with history classes today is they place too much emphasis on ‘what goes into the pot’ and not enough on ‘what comes out of the pot.’ But that doesn’t change the fact that we need to look and both the ‘ingredients’ and the ‘cake.’
Our diversity, when kept in its proper place, makes us stronger as a nation. It allows us to see things from various view points, seek out unique and novel solutions, and gives us our identity in the world - because there is no other nation made up of so many diverse people groups.
August 11th, 2005 at 12:11 pm
I would like to take this opportunity to mention that Abraham (Grotius) is a regular contributor on the Legal Redux weblog which exists to discuss changes in society, current legal issues and decisions, to help you form opinions about societal and current issues and become more knowledgeable about these important events. If that description interests you at all I would encourage you to visit http://www.ledux.blogspot.com.
In Christ,
Brett Harris
August 11th, 2005 at 12:30 pm
Nqoire, I agree with almost all of the article you cited; though I have a few reservations. I’ll post them later this afternoon. Thank you for your contribution the discussion! You comments are coveted.
In Christ,
Brett Harris
August 11th, 2005 at 3:11 pm
This post has been removed by the author.
August 11th, 2005 at 3:20 pm
A few information clarifications:
When the “Slate” article says that Texas high school performance on assessment tests jumped nearly 20 points in 2004; there is much they fail to tell you. The indication, of course, is that the NAEP I cited had no impact on their graduation (and so they underperformed) while the TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) did (and was thus a more accurate assessment of American students abilities).
There are several necessary corrections: 1) According to the Houston Chronicle TAKS passing scores were lowered in 2002. A student can pass the high school exit exam, for example, by answering correctly only 25 of 56 math questions, 23 of 50 social studies questions, 41 of 73 reading and English questions, and 27 of 55 science questions (this according to Connie Mabin, “Questions, Answers About TAKS,” Associated Press, December 2, 2002). Then in 2003, Mike Moses, the superintendent of Dallas Independent School District and former Texas Education Commissioner, proposed that the passing scores be “re-examined” (read “lowered”) after the spring results were in. In fact, a report on TAKS by his school district argued that TAKS was too “difficult.” (From the Houston Chronicle, January, 2003)
Bruce N. Shortt comments on this situation by saying: “Perhaps Texas needs a 12-step program for “test result manipulation recidivists.” In any event, be on the watch for future newspaper headlines and television stories breathlessly reporting how Texas children are passing the TAKS at the “highest scores ever!”
2) We can expect Julie Jary (who oversees test assessments in Texas) to say that no “substantive alterations” to the test before 2004; but we’ve clearly seen that there were. And even if there weren’t the passing scores were to low already to be considered encouraging.
3) Also, notice that the article says that math and English portions improved 20 points. This wasn’t an overall improvement; just two subject areas.
3) Next, the article says that from 1994-2004 SAT math scores have increased 14 points and verbal scores inched up 9 points; and this is despite a 6% increase in the amount of minorities taking the SAT. Even though it doesn’t sound too good to be true, it isn’t.
What the article doesn’t tell you is that in 1995 the ETS (Educational Testing Service)”re-normed” the scoring of the S.A.T. This mean that a performance that would have earned a verbal score of 428 before the “re-norming” was reported as a 505 after the “re-norming.” According to the New York Times reporter Diane Ravitch (in an 1996 article) the change in testing standards caused roughly a 100-point upward shift in combined S.A.T. verbal and mathematics scores (the two areas “Slate” reported have improved).
Granted, the newspapers “dutifully” reported in 2003 and 2004 that the “36-year high scores” did take into account the 1995 re-norming. But what they didn’t tell us is that the 2003 and 2004 S.A.T. test was a very different test than the test the ETS administered in the 70’s, 80’s and early 90’s. For instance, since 1994 students have been able to use calculators on the mathematics test, and, in same year, an antonym test, which many considered one of the harder sections of the verbal test, was dropped in favor of a easier “vocabulary in context” test. Plus, in order to ensure that no one is left behind students with learning disabilities get extra time on the test.
That last change could be considered the most significant. Prior to September of 2002 (I’m pretty sure it was 2002) only 2% of students qualified as “learning disabled.” Those that were allowed extra time had an asterik on their tests to inform colleges that they receive special accommodation.
However, under pressure from activists for the disabled, ETS moved eliminated the asterik starting September of 2002. This means that those who can obtain a suitable “learning disability” diagnosis can take almost 200% longer on the test and college admission officers will be none the wiser.
The “diagnosis shopping” that ensued became so flagrant that the New York Times ran a front page story on it in September of 2002. (Jane Gross, “Paying For A Disability Diagnosis to Gain Time on College Boards,” The New York Times, September 25, 2002)
I don’t have time to address the ACT scores the Slate article mentions, but I think I’ve made my point. Realize that I’m not disagreeing with you Nqoire so much as Alexandra Starr from Slate. Also, remember that this is the information no one is supposed to have (if the ETS had their way).
My conclusions are as follows: perhaps American students are lazy, but they clearly aren’t in an environment that encourages them to pursue excellence. The public school system is failing to inspire them or educate them, and is now doing its best to veil its own shortcomings.
Again, my information has come from great books such as Bruce N. Shortt’s “The Harsh Truth About Public Schools.” I would encourage all of you to check out his book and to feel free to ask me for specific sources for anything I say. I have them ready.
In Christ,
Brett Harris
January 6th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
I knew that the education system in the states isn’t the best, but i never thought that it was this bad.