The problem is, how many people are going to make the same mistakes as Hitler? You have to be in government for that, and right at the top.
Yes, knowledge is power, but what knowledge? What knowledge helps people the most in the modern world? How to fight against Romans or mathematics or Science whatever?
Yes, it's teaching kids how to think, but what I'm saying is it's better to teach kids how to think using History, rather than using History to teach kids how to think.
It isn't the specific things people may have done but the thinking behind what they did. I've lived in Germany. No country in the world teaches the Holocaust as thoroughly as they do in Germany. It's not about Hitlers per se but about prejudice and bigotry, about ethnic cleansing. We have that problem around the world on a continuous basis. It isn't about the Romans but the concepts that led to their behavior, another thing we have to contend with on a daily basis around the world.
"it's better to teach kids how to think using History, rather than using History to teach kids how to think." I don't get what you're saying.
Science and math are not less or more important than history, language, art--all the humanities. Science isn't any good to us unless we understand how to use it for the better not for the worse. The humanities are just as important as the hard sciences.
Yes, of course. But how much thinking goes into it in the classroom? Or is it just, this happen, that happened blah blah? History can be taught in different ways.
Yes, the Germans want to make sure Nazism doesn't come back. However there are still neo-Nazis in Germany. Now, the more well educated people are, the less likely they're going to think in certain ways. Teach people certain skills and society will follow.
Okay, I could teach History, and in the process of teaching history some kids might come across the idea of this or that.
Or I could teach this or that and use History as the tool with which to do it.
It's the mentality of the teacher. What are you teaching? A History teacher teachers History. But a logic teacher teaches logic. They can both use WW2 or whatever to teach what they're teaching, but when the emphasis is on the skills kids need, rather than simply teaching the subject, you're going to find pupils with a much better skills set than otherwise.
Different subjects can be important, but why? Why is literature, for example important? Really it's not actually that important, so how does it survive in the modern era? Probably because A) people are stuck in their ways and B) because actually there are some great skills that can be taught through teaching literature.
If society looks at the skills that are needed in the modern era, and then set out to teach those skills using a variety of topics, it would probably seem far more relevant to a lot of students than just studying History or Literature.
Your purpose as a teacher in a public school isn't to teach morality, it is to teach students how to think for themselves. You teach history and in teaching history, the student comes to his and her conclusions about what it means to us as a civilization. You ask questions but do not prescribe the answer. Your purpose as an educator is not simply to teach facts but to teach students to think about those facts.
Literature, all art, is very important. Art, indeed the humanities, is a reflection of history, culture, and humanity itself. Again,you don't teach literature and art simply to pass on facts but to teach kids to think about our world--past, present and future.
Morality and thinking for yourself aren't the same?
The problem here is that anyone can think for themselves, you just don't educate them, then they're thinking for themselves. What you want is them thinking for themselves in a controlled manner. Being able to think about what is right and wrong is being able to control your thought process with more agility and strength.
Basically the way I see how you see teaching History is "you teach 'em History and hope to hell that they learn something from it".
You don't need to give the answers when teaching thinking. The whole point is that they learn to come up with answers themselves. Teaching kids that there are multiple answers is part of the issue. But you have to actually teach that, not just hope they pick it up.
I think most of the time I studied History it was a waste of time, and I was one of the kids who liked History more than most. Only one lesson I remember and that is when we studied how to deal with sources. If there was a message in most of those History lessons, I didn't get it.
Yes, you can teach literature and art and hope that they get it. Some kids won't, some kids won't enjoy it, and shouldn't be learning the necessary skills through something they don't really enjoy. However if they're studying it not in Art class of Literature class but know they're doing it in order to learn skills, they might be more receptive.
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I taught for 30 years, half in the US and half internationally. I don't just teach facts and hope they pick up how to think. I guide them in the process of how to think through such things as discussion, debate, problem solving and group activities. Not teaching them what to think but how to think. "The whole point is that they learn to come up with answers themselves." Yes, but
their answers, not prescribed answers. You don't teach them what to think. Teaching how to think and teaching subject matter are not two separate things.
My impression of what you say is that your education was some time ago and you aren't familiar with more modern methods and quality teaching. When I was in high school, I didn't get Shakespeare at all; that's because of the lousy teaching. Nowadays, if you have a good teacher, kids do get Shakespeare, and enjoy it, because the teacher will approach teaching it from different angles where the students are actively involved in experiencing it verbally, imaginatively, visually, and physically; you don't just sit and read it and explain what the words mean. Literature is not something that is meaningless to most of the population,not if it is well taught. Not everyone will like every piece of literature, of course, but understanding it as an art form that expresses the human condition in an artistic way is accessible to everyone, if you have a good teacher.
I think you didn't often have good teachers and were probably taught with old fashioned, uninspired methods.
In school, I was always interested in history too. But it was taught very badly and made uninteresting by being just a matter of remembering dates,names and places. Nowadays things are different. Here's a lesson about how to understand history.
The students read a passage from a novel that recounts an event which takes place between the British imperialist govenment in an African village and the people of the village. During this event, which is a fictionalized account of the type of thing that actually did occur, many of the villagers are killed by the British. A hypothetical international court is set up for the event to be reviewed. Students are put into groups: judges, defense (defending the British), prosecution (supporting the African villagers), people who testify to what they saw and did (based on the account in the novel excerpt) , historians, and reporters from various types of news outlets (conservative, liberal, tabloid, mainstream, etc.). The groups get together to plan their part in the exercise.
Then the trial is acted out with each group taking its part, playing out their role in this scenario. At the end the judges give their verdict and the reporters and historians write their accounts of the event and trial. Finally each group presents their work to the group as a whole and the entire class discusses the exercise.
This lesson is to teach how history is written. Today we don't just accept an historical account without questioning where it came from and how it was presented, what perspectives and biases might be involved. Different peoples will interpret history differently.
This is a memorable lesson for students because it teaches them to think about how we acquire knowledge and understanding of our world. I taught this lesson in an epistemology course.
Today's methods are different than they were 40 years ago.
