Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I was a Junior in high school our history teacher quit for some reason about two months into the year. Being cheapskates, the school pressed one of the phys ed teachers, Coach Minter, into taking over the job on what was supposed to be a temporary basis until they could find someone permanent. They never did, so Minter was it for the rest of the year.
He was absolutely the most entertaining history teacher I have ever had while simultaneously being quite ignorant of the subject. What he didn't know, he would just make up and the errors flowed like a river. I knew way more history than he, I was the school prodigy in the subject, and was constantly correcting him in class, something he took with good humor because he knew that he was unqualified.
What he lacked in content he made up for in presentation, acting out these elaborate scenarios, using strange voices and dramatic gestures to recreate some scene, his tale of the defeat of the Spanish Armada was a classic. He had the King of Spain sitting on a throne at the wharf, waiting for the return of his fleet and a report on its glorious triumph over the English. But instead of the fleet, a single sailor comes swimming back and.... He also told us that the reason the Brits won was that they had cannon on their ships while the Spanish still relied on boarding tactics only.. and he acted out this whole scene of the Spanish admiral getting his hat blown off in surprise just as he was saying "Prepare to board!"
He had it all wrong, but he also left us on the floor laughing.
He was fired at the end of the year, but not for being a bad history teacher, it was for what he did at the banquet where he was supposed to present the junior varsity letters to the members of the JV football team he had coached the previous fall. They had lost all six of their games and were shutout in every one of them. Minter got up n the stage with the letters in his hand, stood there saying nothing for a few moments, and then yelled "They didn't even score!", followed by his walking out.
I heard later that he had become a sports writer somewhere.
I love history (especially American, African, & European history)
History shows you how our forebears thought/lived, makes you appreciate how far we've come, helps you better understand the world, and can teach you timeless lessons about human nature/the human condition. Roughly 150 years ago, British statesman, William Gladstone, stated to the effect: "No greater calamity can befall a people than to break utterly with its past. For, if we forget our ancestors, we ourselves might become unworthy of being remembered."
Yet, many people don't feel this way; many people dislike history. I suspect that it has a lot to do with how history is taught in the schools. It seems like the schools (understandably) oversanitize the curriculum, don't expose students to different perspectives, and overemphasize memorization.
Like another poster said, it doesn't get interesting until you get to higher level ed and can focus on one era or conflict for a whole semester.
Most historians or history professors/teachers are boring, that's why. If you happen to get one with a personality it makes things much more fun, and is really EDUTAINMENT instead of education.
I had a history professor in college who was so stimulating that I moved in with him 2 years after I graduated & we were married 5 years later-OOOH SCANDALOUS!!!! (We just celebrated our 10th anniversary last year.)
Link TV and you tube. Then of course there's the history channel. Why are books still being used? Take a period in time or a subject and send the kid links. Then a basic test.
I love history (especially American, African, & European history)
History shows you how our forebears thought/lived, makes you appreciate how far we've come, helps you better understand the world, and can teach you timeless lessons about human nature/the human condition. Roughly 150 years ago, British statesman, William Gladstone, stated to the effect: "No greater calamity can befall a people than to break utterly with its past. For, if we forget our ancestors, we ourselves might become unworthy of being remembered."
Yet, many people don't feel this way; many people dislike history. I suspect that it has a lot to do with how history is taught in the schools. It seems like the schools (understandably) oversanitize the curriculum, don't expose students to different perspectives, and overemphasize memorization.
As a kid I liked history but wasn't crazy about it. Pretty boring for the most part. As an adult I kind of wish I could teach history but I'd add genealogy to it. Had I known my family history in this country when I was in high school I would have ended up loving history. I enjoy reading historical novels, as long as the historical parts are accurate. At this point I probably know more about my ancestors than I do about relatives living today.
Yet, many people don't feel this way; many people dislike history. I suspect that it has a lot to do with how history is taught in the schools. It seems like the schools (understandably) oversanitize the curriculum, don't expose students to different perspectives, and overemphasize memorization.
Lots of subjects are taught boringly, dryly, or downright inaccessibly in schools. So much depends on the individual teacher.
American history can be taught in a fascinating manner, as can probably any other kind of history.
Good books are necessary. As well as about five accurate historical portrayals on film.
Simply putting a date down and event or names is obviously NOT the way to teach history. For teaching to be effective, kids have to relate to the subject at hand, and this includes appealing to their emotions (since we are not perfectly intellectual beings) as well as to their logic.
As a kid, I always loved history. It was like story time, and I always thought it was interesting seeing other cultures clash (I wasn't too interested in domestic stuff, since most of it went over my head).
I was always surprised that so many other kids found history, some even found it difficult.
I think the easy answer is...kids find school boring in general. It's just how it is. To be honest, I think some kids may even just think school sucks because they think they're supposed too. I remember I used to tell my dad I hate school, even at times when I really didn't, but what kid would admit to liking school!? Bart Simpson is probably to blame for that one.
I've thought about being a history teacher a few times, but I'm not sure if I like the idea of teaching kids who don't really care about a topic.
The easiest way to make it entertaining is...to be entertaining yourself. Some teachers have it, some don't. Some teachers don't know how to bring life to their topics, or some teachers just are void of charisma in general.
For actual material, I think not stressing so much on obscure dates/titles would probably do wonders. Just knowing the events and why they happened, with a general feeling of the time period may get kids to naturally invest in what is happening. With standardized testing in the US, I doubt we'll ever get to that point, so much stuff history teachers have to cram so kids can pass arbitrary test - part of the reason why college is so much better, professors can teach what they think is important.
I also agree that in America our history curriculum is very small. All countries learn about their nations past, but America we spend 12 years learning about the same 300 year period. I swear, every year we did 1492-early 1800s in America from Grade 1 to like grade 8. How many times are we going to learn the same damn thing?
I think by nature history must be taught in a boring manner, lest you rile up certain races/political views/religious groups, etc.
I understand the whole "cause and effect" rationale for history, however it's the "cause" that may get these groups upset. The "effect" is the history - the concrete facts.
Take the Iraq war, for example. We know the outcome of the war and the historically accurate dates. Now try to be the teacher who has to explain the cause. 9/11? Iraq/Al Queda links? WMD? Bi-partisan support for the war?
I think by nature history must be taught in a boring manner, lest you rile up certain races/political views/religious groups, etc.
I understand the whole "cause and effect" rationale for history, however it's the "cause" that may get these groups upset. The "effect" is the history - the concrete facts.
Take the Iraq war, for example. We know the outcome of the war and the historically accurate dates. Now try to be the teacher who has to explain the cause. 9/11? Iraq/Al Queda links? WMD? Bi-partisan support for the war?
Indeed the cause is the hard and often debatable part.
Ideally, I think people should teach the "cause" from both of the opposing sides. I think history is taught too much in black and white, when things are much more complicated than that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
