“A student in the class
asked whether this curriculum was followed in other parts of the
world, and she was told that in other countries, elementary children
learn about their own history, of course, not ours. That 'of course'
turned out to be misguided. Although assertions like this are
common, it is not true that children invariably study the history of
their own countries, at least not in the ways that we take for
granted in the United States.”
(Barton,
K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching
history for the common good.
p.4)
This passage lies within
the larger context of the authors discussing how curriculum has in
recent years (recent to the time of their writing) expanded to
include focusing on other cultures and histories around the world.
The assumption was made that students in other countries study their
own history just as much as students in the United States, but that
simply isn't true (for a variety of reasons). While it specifically
refers to elementary school students, it could logically be extended
to higher grades as well. The authors imply both that it is
important for students to learn about the history and cultures of
other countries and groups as well as learning about the United
States as their own country, and that this has been a increasing
trend in social studies education. Knowing what students learn in
various countries (and why) sheds some light on what the purpose of
education in the social studies is. An understanding of what is
taught is essential to Barton and Levstik's further exploration in
search of an understanding as to how and why it is taught. This
passage also reveals an important note of inquiry. Moving from
assumptions, however commonly made, to a true understanding of the
situation is also a theme which Barton and Levstik advocate for in
social studies education as a whole.
If I had read this passage
several weeks ago, I would not have given it any special notice
beyond a sentiment perhaps that it was an interesting bit of
information but otherwise unremarkable. It would not have held much
significance for me if I had not recently heard that DC Public
Schools are going to drop the graduation requirement of having to
take a US History course. I don't know any further details than
that, though as I consider the source to be reliable it is safe to
conclude that someone of importance has decided that it is no longer
worthwhile for students to have a thorough understanding of United
States history by the time they reach adulthood. Of course a student
will have had it to some extent in earlier years but not with the
depth and recentness of a high school course. While I agree with
Barton and Levstik that learning about other parts of the world is
important, what I find so jarring about this situation is how it
violates one main reason that I believe is central to teaching social
studies (and particularly US history), namely cultural literacy and
competency.
It is certainly possible
that many students will choose to take a US history course even if
they are not required to, but a number will certainly miss out on
content that they may not have had a very good understanding of to
begin with. Students will not be equipped to live in a city and
country that uses imagery, symbolism, and concepts from its past on a
daily basis. This can range from understanding serious matters such
as freedom and what it means to US citizens as well as more frivolous
matters such as why it is both amusing and apt that Taft was chosen
to be the next racing president of the Washington Nationals. They
cannot understand how certain specific individuals and types of
people were subject to erasure if they do not understand the
histories from which they were erased. They cannot understand why
some gestures and phrases garner different reactions from different
people without understanding the history behind them. Taking US
history is not important from a position of self-centered obsession
but rather because it, especially with the reflection and analysis
typically required at the secondary level, equips students to
understand the environment in which they live.
