American History

[cradleandshoot]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

[MDlaxfan76]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

[cradleandshoot]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

[MDlaxfan76]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

[cradleandshoot]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

[jhu72]

American War Hero, Casimir Pulaski - Father of the American Cavalry was Intersex / Transgender.

Pulaski's Commemorations

[Typical Lax Dad]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

Darien, Chatham, Summit, Victor, Manhasset, Garden City, Walt Whitman, Duxbury and New Canaan public high school kids are doing just fine.

[MDlaxfan76]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

I googled "reading scores nationwide over time"

These were the first two links up...this support your claim?

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ltt/?age=9

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=38

Looks to me like reading and arithmetic scores had long term upward trend, but sharp decline during Covid...that ain't the curriculum.

But I wasn't arguing that kids who don't learn the "3R's" early will not be successful later with more complex subjects (absent a major intervention to address the earlier shortfall). You're right, of course if the kid doesn't learn those early, they will struggle later.

So...why did the kid fail to learn?
Was it trauma at home, lack of support for learning at home?
Learning disability?
Stress in the environment?

or schools without sufficient funding?

All of the above definitely can impact...

[JoeMauer89]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

Darien, Chatham, Summit, Victor, Manhasset, Garden City, Walt Whitman, Duxbury and New Canaan public high school kids are doing just fine.

TLD,

Nice list. Just swap out Walt Whitman HS for Huntington HS though. Huntington HS has surpassed Walt Whitman in the past 10-15 years.

Joe

[Typical Lax Dad]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

Darien, Chatham, Summit, Victor, Manhasset, Garden City, Walt Whitman, Duxbury and New Canaan public high school kids are doing just fine.

TLD,

Nice list. Just swap out Walt Whitman HS for Huntington HS though. Huntington HS has surpassed Walt Whitman in the past 10-15 years.

Joe

My bad……Walt Whitman (Bethesda Md.)

[JoeMauer89]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

Darien, Chatham, Summit, Victor, Manhasset, Garden City, Walt Whitman, Duxbury and New Canaan public high school kids are doing just fine.

TLD,

Nice list. Just swap out Walt Whitman HS for Huntington HS though. Huntington HS has surpassed Walt Whitman in the past 10-15 years.

Joe

My bad……Walt Whitman (Bethesda Md.)

I figured as much, great school district.

Joe

[Typical Lax Dad]

Viva la France. Ben Franklins negotiating skills at getting money from the French to keep the Continental Army in the fight is always overlooked and certainly not taught in our schools today. Well it was when I was in high school.

What in the world makes you think its not taught in schools today? French support was essential, also the contributions of the Spanish and the Dutch. Much of the debt of the 1780's was owed to the Dutch. I learned all that in a classroom. Not sure the last time you were in a classroom or why you feel so certain.

I feel like 98% of people groaning about what's taught/not taught in schools have no clue what's actually being taught in schools today. Even as a parent it's hard to know 100% of what's being talked about every single day.

I know both of my sons didn't learn jack chit about American history from their 4 years at Penfield High School covering 2002 up until 2008. If you want to go in depth about teaching the American Revolution, the War of 1812, The Mexican American War and the Civil War you better damn well be willing to block out a good chunk of learning time. Ask them a hypothetical question. How did the events at the Alamo effect the Mexican American War?
I suppose I could make a radical conclusion that since American students today are failing miserably when it comes to the math, reading and writing that it is unlikely they are doing any better in American history if they are lucky enough to be able to spell American History.

45 minutes to an hour a day of history for ~180 days a year. For 4 years. Plus homework and essays. And your sons didn't learn anything about American history? I think that speaks more about the students and parents than the school. Did you encourage additional learning at home? Or maybe Penfield should focus on American history outside of 2002-2008 to give kids a broader understanding.

I couldn't get enough books about the Civil War in middle school and high school. Looking back at my tests and history papers from back when - it's amazing how much I've forgotten about American history.

I was their learning at home!! I know they could not compose an essay on anything. You and I both know how much fun composing essays is. I do remember at one point in time asking my oldest son about the importance of Appomattox Courthouse. He didn't have a clue. I don't know what the curriculum for American history is today. I do know that neither of my boys had any interest in American history or world history. That could be because it involved alot of reading that wasn't at all that interesting.

I think we might call that a "self-own", a confirmation of the point underlined above.

Like most "learning", including your own about the Civil War, the primary issue is not the curriculum, the books, or even the teacher (albeit that CAN matter to the next point), it's the motivation and interest of the student themself that matters most.

Great teachers, like great parents, CAN inspire more students to be interested and encourage their diligence through the grinding parts, but the student needs to engage in that process...not all do (for all sorts of reasons, whether emotional or learning disabilities, or whatever), just as not all parents and not all teachers inspire and encourage every student successfully. And some actually influence negatively...

The one thing that is Very clear (IMO) is that this movement to say that public schools "don't teach" is a fallacy, and undermines students' commitments to the effort...it's an excuse for not trying.

BTW, I'm quite sure that any American History class today that covers the Civil War period would include that Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865 after that battle, and it's the sort of detail that would appear on a quiz or test that month. Your son was undoubtedly exposed in class as well as his books. But today the details the strategies employed in the various battles, all the generals etc, would not be emphasized in as much excruciating detail as the "aficionados" do and probably how some teachers taught, and still teach, those classes based on their own interests in military history. Today, more about general themes, less about "heroics". But I read along with my son's classes and if one actually read the books, all the pertinent detail is found.

But gotta read...and pay attention in class.

Your overlooking one very important factor. Any teacher who is going to be instructing his/her students had better be very passionate about our history and spread that passion to his/her students or they will be bored to death. The issue with my son is he squarely fit into the bored to death category. If he learned it yesterday it was gone forever tomorrow. The worst case scenario IMO is a new generation of students who simply don't care about what happened in our nations history. If it has become an enormous struggle to teach kids the basic fundamentals of the 3 Rs what chance does American history have if you can't read past a 3rd grade level?

I dislike generalizing from the individual, but if that's what you mean by those like your son, it sure sounds like he wasn't inspired by any of his teachers....nor his parents. I'd be willing to hazard a guess that he wasn't the only such kid in that school with that situation, and I'd also hazard a guess that there were others who very much were inspired by teachers, parents, and their own hunger factor. They come out of every school eager to learn. (EDIT: as I said earlier, there all sorts of reasons why some students don't learn to enjoy reading and writing, and often that has nothing to do with the teacher, indeed may not be anyone's "fault"...eg undiagnosed dyslexia whether slight or severe)

I didn't miss in the slightest that terrific teachers CAN inspire many, maybe even most, of their students to want to learn more and more about the topic. That certainly includes history teachers. See bolded red above.

Which is why it is SO depressing that knucklehead parents are yelling at school boards and teachers, politicians passing laws about curriculum, telling teachers what can and can't be taught... by enthusiastic, "passionate" history teachers...on the pain of firing or even a felony?

God forbid that they go deep into areas of American History which make some in the classroom "uncomfortable", yet bring history to life, make history relevant in their lives...

ugh

If the curriculum in public schools can't succeed in teaching the 3 Rs where public schools are failing miserably what in the world leads you to believe they can teach American history, biology, or any other subject?? Are you even paying attention to the crisis in public education? You have kids getting ready to enter high school that are reading at a 3rd grade level that you think can read a basic textbook period.

I dunno, cradle, seems to me that we've been hearing this since the '60's at least...and much of that "curriculum" discussion was really just cover for 'my oh my we have black kids now'...

Yes, Covid set back kids a lot, but "public school" has a very wide array of outcomes, and the strongest correlation to low outcomes has been poverty. Where kids live is the easiest predictor of outcomes, if they are in neighborhoods with high poverty, high violence, high addiction, high 'stress', lead pipes, etc, etc, their schools typically reflect the low taxes paid per capita in those areas, and the worst resources into addressing the greater teaching challenge and old infrastructure. And insufficient pay checks to attract teachers to teach there...and little to no enrichment, music, arts, etc that correlate well with brain development...

My point is that it ain't the curriculum, as that gets taught in high performing schools and in low performing.

It's how we fund our schools mostly through local taxes.

All you need do is a 5 second Google search. You don't have to believe me. I'm sorry but your trying to take the discussion on an irrelevant tangent. I ask you the same question... If public school students all across the country have been failing the 3 Rs for a decade or more how are they going to read a history text book at a 3rd grade reading level?? Do the damn Google search then and look at what it finds. It sure as hell is not very optimistic. The curriculum failed these children a long time before they just became ready to enter high school.

Darien, Chatham, Summit, Victor, Manhasset, Garden City, Walt Whitman, Duxbury and New Canaan public high school kids are doing just fine.

TLD,

Nice list. Just swap out Walt Whitman HS for Huntington HS though. Huntington HS has surpassed Walt Whitman in the past 10-15 years.

Joe

My bad……Walt Whitman (Bethesda Md.)

I figured as much, great school district.

Joe

Impossible…, public schools are bad. Teachers don’t teach.

[Brooklyn]

American War Hero, Casimir Pulaski - Father of the American Cavalry was Intersex / Transgender.

Pulaski's Commemorations

This and the disclosure about Steuben {in my day we pronounced it "stoy bin"} make for very interesting reading.


No surprise given that matelotage was a legally recognized form of gay marriage which existed centuries ago:


https://theamm.org/articles/1595-matelo ... artnership


Did you know? ‘Matelotage’ is the french word for ‘seamanship,’ and ‘matelot’ means ‘sailor.’ Most people believe that this is the origin of the infamous pirate greeting – Ahoy, matey! Sorta like Queegqueg & Ishmael in Melville's Moby Dick when they slept together. Then, the former gave the latter half of his money and they woke up in the morning with his arms tied around Ishmael's head.


Yes, it was a gay way of tying the old fisherman's knot.

[Kismet]

Don't want to get in a back and forth, but look at various state and county history curriculums to see what is being taught, or better yet the AP US History Curriculum. Anecdotal evidence is a classic logical fallacy.

By the way, I've taken five history classes in my free time since 2017. Aren't you the guy that recently said you didn't like school?

I said I was fed up with school after 12 years of it and realized I had no idea what I wanted to do in life. That is why I became a short order cook at Perkins in 1976 instead of going to St Bonaventure. Do I regret that decision today?? Yes I do, but I made my decision and I don't regret it. I chose to join the army and become a paratrooper. What I learned and experienced in those 3 years I could have never learned in any college.

I have always been a WW2 aficionado. I have one book that IMO was the best book written about WW2 in the European theater of operations. Since you also love history what do you think that book is?

My choice of the overall topic of WW2

The Second World War by John Keegan

published in 2005

The Pacific War: 1941-1945 by John Costello is also very well done published in 2009

[old salt]

Keegan's book is the definitive history. If you want to analyze further, consider Victor Davis Hanson's The Second World Wars . There are many youtube clips about it & Hillsdale College offers a free online lecture series based on it. Below is a representative clip. Keegan encouraged & admired VDH's work & even collaborated with him.

https://www.hoover.org/research/part-i- ... vis-hanson

[Kismet]

Keegan's book is the definitive history. If you want to analyze further, Keegan endorsed & recommended Victor Davis Hanson's The Second World Wars . There are many youtube clips about it & Hillsdale College offers a free online lecture series based on it. Here a representative clip.

https://www.hoover.org/research/part-i- ... vis-hanson

VDH is no John Keegan - as both author and historian - Despite his recommendation.

[old salt]

VDH is no John Keegan - as both author and historian - Despite his recommendation.

Keegan admired Hanson's work & was a formative influence on VDH, writing forewords, favorable reviews &/or cover blurbs. They even co-authored a book. VDH credit's Keegan's encouragement for helping shape his career path. Keegan was not a history snob who allowed his political bias to tinge his appreciation of insightful history.

https://the-american-catholic.com/2012/ ... hn-keegan/

[Typical Lax Dad]

Keegan's book is the definitive history. If you want to analyze further, consider Victor Davis Hanson's The Second World Wars . There are many youtube clips about it & Hillsdale College offers a free online lecture series based on it. Below is a representative clip. Keegan encouraged & admired VDH's work & even collaborated with him.

https://www.hoover.org/research/part-i- ... vis-hanson

VDH is still alive? I hadn’t seen him in years.

[cradleandshoot]

Don't want to get in a back and forth, but look at various state and county history curriculums to see what is being taught, or better yet the AP US History Curriculum. Anecdotal evidence is a classic logical fallacy.

By the way, I've taken five history classes in my free time since 2017. Aren't you the guy that recently said you didn't like school?

I said I was fed up with school after 12 years of it and realized I had no idea what I wanted to do in life. That is why I became a short order cook at Perkins in 1976 instead of going to St Bonaventure. Do I regret that decision today?? Yes I do, but I made my decision and I don't regret it. I chose to join the army and become a paratrooper. What I learned and experienced in those 3 years I could have never learned in any college.

I have always been a WW2 aficionado. I have one book that IMO was the best book written about WW2 in the European theater of operations. Since you also love history what do you think that book is?

My choice of the overall topic of WW2

The Second World War by John Keegan

published in 2005

The Pacific War: 1941-1945 by John Costello is also very well done published in 2009

I've never read either book. I focused more narrowly on European theater of operations. The Longest Day by Cornelius Ryan is in a league of its own. Mr Ryan had the rare opportunity to interview the D Day participants on both sides while their memories were still fresh. Mr Ryans other 2 books were just a painstakingly researched and just as well written. I really have not read much about the the war in the Pacific in many years. The last book was Flags of our Fathers. It was a very good book and a terrible movie.

[DMac]

When there was first talk about colorizing WW II footage I was initially opposed to the idea. Didn't feel as if the footage should be altered in any way, it's reality needed to be exactly as recorded. Color was a long way from perfect, color tv was anything but natural looking and I sure didn't want the footage to look like that. Ultimately the color in the footage is dead nuts on the money and I don't know how it could be better. You can watch the war for pretty much as long as want on tv and I've watched quite a bit of it. The epitome of madness, man and his killing machines. Conditions survived, battles survived, what were the odds of those who returned home would? Adolf was an unbelievably dark and evil human being. The genes lined up a little out of whack when that one was put together. Geezuz H!!!