The State Of Discipline Essay

In The Death of History is Bunk, Patrick Watson argues that the decrease of historical content in the curriculum does not indicate that history, as a subject, is declining. While many complain about the decreasing prominence of history classes in Canadian schools, the content of those classes is excessively dull as it consists of memorizing lists of facts. Despite this, there are still protests that knowledge of “defining events” is required to contribute to “the National Conversation”. However, history is not so simple as a list of events—it is the sum of the small happenings in society around the events. A whole variety of factors influence history, which is created by the common people. Unlike Americans, who turn to their constitution for

High school history textbooks are seen, by students, as presenting the last word on American History. Rarely, if ever, do they question what their text tells them about our collective past. According to James W. Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me, they should be. Loewen has spent considerable time and effort reviewing history texts that were written for high school students. In Lies, he has reviewed twenty texts and has compared them to the actual history. Sadly, not one text measures up to the author's expectation of teaching students to think. What is worse, though, is that students come away from their classes without "having developed the ability to think coherently about social

I do not know if there is any other field of knowledge which suffers so badly as history from the sheer blind repetitions that occur year after year, and from book to book.

Confederate Monuments have been a hot topic of debate through the years of whether they should stay or go. Throughout history the idea of removing the Confederate Monuments has been perceived as the best possible solution citing that they had a sense of evilness and could flare up racial emotions. While a strong point could be made for the removal of Confederate Monuments, the Confederate monuments should stay in public places because they honor timeless virtues, they could be used as figures to reflect upon our nation’s past and they could be used to educate future generations.

Thesis: As the debate continues on whether or not we should keep confederate monuments and symbols displayed publicly, it is important that we recognize both the benefits and downfalls of removing these symbols.

There are also monuments that are more salient and mention the concentration camps that the individuals survived (Appendix B, Figure 2). The community purposefully includes monument inscriptions to show an individual’s connection to the Holocaust. This action creates tribute to those who were victims of the Holocaust. This practice also creates a collaborative means for the community to mourn over these survivors.

She carries the audience through her argument in a logical sequence. First, she makes her claim that student do not know history and explains her reasons (250). She then elaborates on what history students are taught and what exactly is wrong with the methods by which they learn (251). After this, she explains the job of a historian to the reader – how historians confront primary sources to “make some sense of what once happened” (252). To end the article, Simon describes how students can better learn history through exploring primary sources (253). This structuring and organization helps the reader to understand and to believe Simon’s

The removal of Confederate monuments has been a controversial topic over the past few years. Many want to tear them down, others want to keep them up and some want them to be moved to museums. Although controversial, many still do not know why exactly people want these statues to tear down or be kept up. After reading and analyzing both Michele Bogart’s and The Guardian’s view on Confederate statues, I would say that Michele Bogart’s “In Defense of ‘Racist’ Monuments” article was the most persuasive. Right off the bat, Michele Bogart starts off with how the rise of white nationalism is causing officials around the country to remove memorials of Confederate soldiers, military leaders, and symbols of “the Lost Cause”. Bogart clearly states that not all civic statues represent white supremacy or racism, but that they are “the culmination of complex social and artistic engagement at the community level” (Bogart). She further explains how eliminating these statues is not going to help solve the problem of racism in the United States. Her purpose in this essay is to persuade the reader that civic monuments should be kept up as pieces of art, not as “symbols of hate”.

The study of history and the teaching of history has come under intense public debate in the United States in the last few decades. The “culture-wars” began with the call to add more works by non-Caucasians and women and has bled into the study of history. Not only in the study of history or literature, this debate has spread into American culture like wildfire.

A recent hot-button subject in the media has been what to do with Confederate monuments in the South. After the removal of a statue honoring Robert E. Lee, a general in the Confederate Army considered by many to be a hero for the part he played in the American Civil War, a clear divide has formed over whether it was the right thing to do. Some agree with this choice, calling the statues remnants from a time of racial oppression in the United States. Others are outraged, considering it desecration of their proud history. Still others don't understand either side of the issue, and see it as a pointless feud. It is imperative to understand that to many people, these are more than just statues. Whether their impression is positive or negative, this issue goes beyond physical monuments.

Before August 12, 2017 many Americans neither cared about nor thought about Confederate flags or monuments in their daily lives. On that day in Charlottesville, Va. was “… one of the bloodiest fights to date over the removal of Confederate monuments across the South.” (Stolberg) This tragic event brought light to a movement that was able to fly under the national radar until that fateful day in August, the removal of the Confederate flag and monuments. This paper will demonstrate the need to move the Confederate flag and Confederate monuments to museums where they can be displayed in the context of history instead of in the public square where they glorify traitors and insurrectionists as heroes. This will be done by providing a brief

History engages me like no other subject. History is unrivaled in complexity and depth compared to other areas of study, but many do not realize this because we choose to gloss over the vast majority, reducing entire sagas into little more than a footnote on a single page. The American revolution, while celebrated in the US, is little more than a paragraph in European history, overlooked because of the more relevant Napoleonic era. My passion for learning encourages me to read into these footnotes and discover the lessons and ideas that are ignored by the common curriculum.

1a. According to Loewen’s introduction, high school students hate history because nobody expects much from it. Many people are bored of history because we already know the ending of all the textbook’s “stories.” The textbooks have a monotone voice, and are technically clones of each other. Apparently history professions do not even review the textbooks in order to check if they have any historical mistakes in them. Also the authors of the textbooks wrote in them like there are still no debates about any of the topics, so students are not meant to question history. The textbooks are written through “white eyes” so they are biased and full of nationalism. Textbooks do not include

History is a major part of our society, what we’ve done in the past and how it affects us now, so when we are told that history may change over time, it might seem false. However, it is important to know that history changes to fit our needs so we can learn from our past and apply it to our society today. Although history is seen as unchanging, over time different historians use their own perspectives and facts to alter the people’s view of the past to fit the need of their time period. Those who believe that history doesn’t change will argue that if it is based on facts, and facts never change, then history should also never change. They are correct in saying that facts are always true, however, they are missing a fundamental part of how they are used by historians.

What is History? This is the question posed by historian E.H. Carr in his study of historiography. Carr debates the ongoing argument which historians have challenged for years, on the possibility that history could be neutral. In his book he discusses the link between historical facts and the historians themselves. Carr argues that history cannot be objective or unbiased, as for it to become history, knowledge of the past has been processed by the historian through interpretation and evaluation. He argues that it is the necessary interpretations which mean personal biases whether intentional or not, define what we see as history. A main point of the chapter is that historians select the facts they think are significant which ultimately