velvetpage | Another link

catarzyna
2006-06-18 07:02 pm UTC (link)
Comment Posted Successfully
All my US to 1865 students learn that Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and possibly George Washington were Deists. When I discuss the Age of Enlightenment in Western Civ II those students learn the same.

I don't think it is mentioned generally K-12 in Social Studies classes because they are not suppose to discuss religion. I would say that linking Christianity and the 'Founding Fathers' is just a natural assumption.

I do think if you read anything about Jefferson it mentions that he is a Deist. Any child who does a research paper and goes to Wikipedia can learn this now in our age of the internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson#Religious_views

That's assuming they have any reason to question the prevailing assumption of Christianity. As I pointed out on Wyldraven's

dark_christian post, the Christian Right doesn't bother to argue this point. Mostly, they state it as a fact as a precursor to some other argument, so those who wish to refute it are forced to refute two things at once - a very sneaky but effective debating tactic. Most people won't even realize this assumption should be questioned. I didn't, until I stated it as part of another argument and had it shot down.

I am not so surprised that it is not known so openly because most education in the US is public state run schools. In the US there is a 'separation between church and state'. If it is not to be discussed in school then you cannot inform or refute a child's assumption that Jefferson was anything but Christian.

In K-12 in the US it is vastly different than post-secondary schools. We are taught a rather patriotic but not necessarily religious version of our history. Through rose colored glasses, if you will.

How much did you study Thomas Jefferson in Canada?

Not much. There's an optional American History course offered in high school, but I had no room for it in my courseload at the time, so I've done almost no formal studying about the American colonial and revolutionary periods. My Canadian history course in university included a segment on the American Revolution, as part of a study of U.E. Loyalists (I'm descended from a loyalist family through my only Canadian-born grandparent!) and I read up on it when I was expected to teach that unit to grade sevens - more for my enlightenment than theirs, since they didn't care one whit about history.

The texts I taught from in grades seven and eight all included segments of religious history, where that was important to the unit of study. I often had to explain how colonists' actions were shaped by their religious beliefs, and I have been known to field questions about Christian doctrine in the classroom. If it was something potentially contoversial, I'd remind my class that this was what the subjects of our discussion believed, and I wasn't telling them they had to believe it or trying to convert them; I was simply providing historical context. In my classrooms full of kids from every corner of the globe, I never had a parent complain.

I think it's sad that teachers are not permitted to provide that historical context for their students, under the excuse of "separation of church and state." You can't do a good job of Western history without reference to religion. It's short-changing the students.

"I think it's sad that teachers are not permitted to provide that historical context for their students, under the excuse of "separation of church and state." You can't do a good job of Western history without reference to religion. It's short-changing the students."

This is what is focused on in college or at a university not K-12 here. So if you do not go to college you do not generally learn critical thinking. It is a rare person who continues their own independent education but it does happen. K-12 is meant to give us a patriotic and passive proletariat more than a country of thinkers.

It seems that most teachers do not bridge the gap and put it in historical context out of fear. Parents and students in the US have more power than the teachers.

My only comment to that is . . . Thank God for a strong teachers' union. So long as I'm careful to make it clear that I'm not trying to convince, only explain, I will be supported generally by my administration and my union.

It has occurred to me that I cannot name one Canadian PM. We were simply not taught this in US schools. I think they gloss over US Presidents too. I was never required to memorize who they were and in chronological order.

We're nor required to learn much about our own politics or yours, actually, but most Canadians develop a working knowledge of American historical figures through American tv. I don't remember not knowing who Washington or Lincoln were, for example, and I learned that Lincoln was the16th president from an episode of Growing Pains. Then there are the miniseries - I learned a lot from "North and South", of which I can quote large swathes, having watched it so many times. ("I will not sit down at table with a man who chooses to keep his fellow human beings in bondage!") Between those sources and some avid reading, I have enough knowledge to know where the holes are and fill in many of them. I think I could name every president since WWII, and I know I could name every Prime Minister since WWI, and probably right back to Confederation - there haven't actually been that many of them.

Lincoln is very important in US history, during his presidency we fought over states rights and ended slavery.

The Emancipation Proclamation was pivotal:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/transcript.html

Also, the Gettysburg Address:

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/25.htm

I think I need to make a history icon of some sort:-)

I can name Pierre Trudeau, but only because, as a child, I thought he did Doonesbury.

Another link

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

I can't help it I'm a teacher too ;-)

no subject