http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41555-2004Mar8.html

When the U.S. Department of Education reported that in 2001 nearly
six out of 10 high school seniors lacked even a basic knowledge of
the nation's history, Bruce Cole was indignant and concerned.

"A nation that does not know why it exists, or what it stands for,
cannot be expected to long endure," said Cole, the chairman of the
National Endowment for the Humanities.

It is a sentiment repeated often, part of a torrent of distress over
the state of American history education. The 2001 report said most
12th-graders did not know that the Gulf of Tonkin resolution led to
the war in Vietnam. Most eighth-graders did not know why the First
Continental Congress met.

Yet, according to recent papers by two researchers, it turns out
Americans have been deeply ignorant of their history for a very long
time, while still creating the strongest, if not the brightest,
country in the world.

A test administered in 1915 and 1916 to hundreds of high school and
college students who were about to face World War I found that they
did not know what happened in 1776 and confused Thomas Jefferson with
Jefferson Davis. A 1943 test showed that only a quarter of college
students could name two contributions made by either Jefferson or
Abraham Lincoln, leading historian Allan Nevins to fret that such a
historically illiterate bunch might be a liability on the
battlefields of Europe in World War II.

And still, Americans won both wars, and many of the 1943 students who
said the United States purchased Alaska from the Dutch and Hawaii
from Norway were later lionized in books, movies and television
as "the Greatest Generation."

"If anything," writes Sam Wineburg, a Stanford University education
professor in a new Journal of American History article, "test results
across the last century point to a peculiar American neurosis: each
generation's obsession with testing its young only to discover -- and
rediscover -- their 'shameful' ignorance. The consistency of results
across time casts doubt on a presumed golden age of fact retention.

"Appeals to it," the article continues, "are more the stuff of
national lore and wistful nostalgia for a time that never was than a
claim that can be anchored in the documentary record."

Richard J. Paxton, an assistant professor in the Educational
Foundations Department of the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh and a
former Wineburg student, makes a similar point in the December issue
of the Phi Delta Kappan. Frequent articles about historically
challenged U.S. students, plus public displays of ignorance on "The
Tonight Show With Jay Leno," "propagate the impression that today's
students are educational midgets standing on the shoulders of
giants," Paxton wrote. ". . . More important, they spread the false
notion that the biggest problem facing history students today
involves the retention of decontextualized historical facts."

The earliest evidence of historical cluelessness that either scholar
could find was a study by J. Carleton Bell and David F. McCollum in
the May 1917 issue of the Journal of Educational Psychology. Bell and
McCollum tested 1,500 students in Texas and reported these
percentages of correct answers on history questions: elementary
school, 16 percent; high school, 33 percent; teachers college, 42
percent; and university, 49 percent.

It was particularly troubling that many of these sons and daughters
of Texas could not state the significance of the year 1846, the
beginning of the Mexican-American War, and had Sam Houston marching
triumphantly into Mexico City rather than beating Gen. Antonio Lopez
de Santa Anna at San Jacinto 10 years before.

The next key survey cited in both the Wineburg and Paxton studies
appeared in the New York Times on April 4, 1943, under the
headline "Ignorance of U.S. History Shown by College Freshmen." Only
6 percent of the 7,000 freshmen could name the 13 original colonies.
Only 13 percent identified James Madison as president during the War
of 1812, and only 15 percent knew that William McKinley was president
during the Spanish-American War.

Some commentators at the time blamed the results on then-
controversial public school efforts to wrap history, geography,
economics and civics into something called social studies.

A bicentennial survey in 1976, supervised by Harvard University
historian Bernard Bailyn and published in the New York Times, tested
nearly 2,000 freshmen at 194 colleges. On average, the respondents
got only 21 of 42 multiple-choice questions right, although Bailyn's
standards appeared to be very high. Wineburg said the professor
called it "absolutely shocking" that "more students believed that the
Puritans guaranteed religious freedom (36 percent) than understood
religious tolerance as the result of rival denominations seeking to
cancel out each others' advantage (34 percent)."

Many surveys and tests in the generation since have produced similar
results, with high school students getting about half of the
questions right. Neither Wineburg nor Paxton says so, but Virginia
recently reduced the passing score on its American history test to
about 50 percent, and some other states have similar benchmarks.

The National Assessment of Educational Progress history tests in
1987, 1994 and 2001 came out about the same. Slightly less than half
of high school students scored at what the test makers considered a
basic knowledge of U.S. history in 2001. Younger students showed
modest gains, with 67 percent of fourth-graders and 64 percent of
eighth-graders scoring at at least the basic level.

When asked about the Wineburg and Paxton reports, Cole, the National
Endowment for the Humanities chairman, said: "I am surprised that any
professor would suggest that it doesn't matter whether students know
American history."

Wineburg and Paxton said their goal is not to place less priority on
historical knowledge, but rather to advocate changes in the way it is
taught. Wineburg said the history standards that teachers must cover
are often so detailed that the main points of the American story are
lost, and few schools teach the subject well in any case. Teachers
skip quickly from topic to topic, he wrote, while "the mind demands
pattern and form, and both are built up slowly and require repeated
passes, with each pass going deeper and probing further."

Paxton said he is also bothered by scholarly ignorance of the century-
old American performance on such tests. "Historians who shout like
censorious Chicken Littles that our nation is in jeopardy but do not
bother to inspect the historical record are terribly poor role
models," he wrote.


xponent
The Apple Never Fell Far From The Tree Maru
rob


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to