Spin off from APUSH thread - Koch brothers influencing history curriculum

[Frank Bones]

Originally Posted by psr13

The fact that you're defending that waste of paper tells me all I need to know.

Even professional historians, nearly all of whom identify with the left, are critical of People's History. It's bad history. Unfortunately, many history teachers use it as a reference, even if it isn't the primary textbook. If teachers want students to get a cynical, left-wing view of history, they would be better off using Charles Beard. All Zinn did was repackage Beard's 100-year-old methodology.

[nana053]

Originally Posted by Frank Bones

Even professional historians, nearly all of whom identify with the left, are critical of People's History. It's bad history. Unfortunately, many history teachers use it as a reference, even if it isn't the primary textbook. If teachers want students to get a cynical, left-wing view of history, they would be better off using Charles Beard. All Zinn did was repackage Beard's 100-year-old methodology.

Many historians (and not just those on the right) accuse Zinn of oversimplifying in A People’s History of the United States. But many of these historians agree with Zinn’s premise that American history as traditionally taught represents far too narrow a set of perspectives. I think the idea is to balance things.

Zinn never hides his biases, so students should get a clear idea of where he is coming from unlike the traditional views where the bias is strong, but not talked about.

Would you prefer
Drive Thru History America with Dave Stotts: Foundations of Character by David Barton and Nita Thomason?

There are plenty of books that ought to be looked at critically by high school and college students. I think none of the actual history textbooks give the reality because there is always bias.

[psr13]

I would prefer a more balanced approach. A good writer and historian, and one that should be read, would be able to present the subject in a much more balanced approach than basically saying all whites, all men, all rich people, and all Christians are evil. Did Zinn come out and say it like that? No, but that's basically what comes across. Zinn's idea is not at all to balance things. His idea is to present history in a very biased manner, and that's exactly what he did.

Look, I read books I don't agree with all the time. I love reading the other side of things, but Zinn's was just atrocious. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things, and he was definitely on the wrong side of the aisle.

Also, biases are talked about in many history classes. They may not be mentioned in textbooks, but they are definitely mentioned.

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

George Soros is one. And Gates has way more influence than I think you realize, as does the Broad Foundation for administrators.

The model both want to use is a teaching force of relative short timers who are facilitators more than teachers.

No need to learn History (of any type) you can look it up on your IPad. Same with learning Math or Science formulae. What's being lost is basic knowledge.

Look, I don't disagree that Gates and Broad have outsized influence on education. I follow education news closely and I'm aware of what they're trying to do. Where we fundamentally disagree is that these folks are implementing policies that are liberal in nature. The Kochs are focusing on curriculum, attempting to institute openly conservative learning standards for students. Gates and Broad are mostly focusing on educational delivery, and if anything, the reforms that they're proposing in terms of privatizing schools are actually more conservative.

Also, I'm not at all aware of any meddling that Soros is doing in the field of education.