mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (11/22/83)
I hope this newsgroup gets to Europe, because this note is intended
to be an international survey. I am particularly interested in whether
there is a difference between European and N. American experiences.
Over the last few days I have been having a dialogue with Scott Pector
on the teaching of history. We don't really disagree too much, but
the question has arisen of the comparative quality and nationalistic
bias of history teaching in high-schools (age 12-18) in different
countries (or states/provinces). The result is this survey, which
may provide a first approximation.
1) How much time (hour/week, years, or whatever) did you spend
on formal history classes (not social studies, citizenship, etc.)
2) What proportion of the time was spent on history of events that
did not involve your own (a) country, (b) continent.
3) Considering events that did involve your country and another
in a disagreement, in what proportion was your country in the right?
--(3a) please provide an example of an event in which you were
taught that your country was in the wrong.
--(3b) an example where your country was in the right, and the
opposition was a country represented on Usenet.
4) How was the time spent on formal history distributed over the
centuries (BC, 0-1000AD, 1000-1500, 1500-1700, 18th, 19th and 20th
century).
5) In light of what you have since learned, do you think that what
you were taught was (i) unbiased, (ii) mildly biased, (iii) strongly
biased, (iv) chauvinistic? (Overall, not for isolated events).
6) Do you tend to interpret today's politics in light of what history
you learned in school, or do you depend more on what you have learned
subsequently?
========================
Please note what country, state or province provided your high-school
education (and whether publicly or privately financed if you don't
feel that violates your privacy).
I know I would have trouble answering most of these questions accurately,
since my memory of high-school is both distant and spread across countries.
But please try, especially if your memory is quite recent.
The more respondents, the more likely it is that some events in
3(a) or 3(b) will be mentioned from different viewpoints, and the
better we will be able to attribute differences to region rather
than to the luck of the draw.
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmtlaura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (11/22/83)
I would like to add one question to Martin Taylor's survey. How much of your history was "western history"? ALL of mine was, which is shocking. China, India and Japan might as well not have existed for al theat they were mentioned in school. laura creighton utcsstat!laura
jsq@ut-sally.UUCP (John Quarterman) (12/06/83)
At least most history courses *mentioned* India, China, and Japan,
but most people have never even heard of Ghana, Songhai, Benin, Zimbabwe,
Axum, the Khmer Empire, or other nations older, more powerful, or
more extensive than European nations of the same periods.
A pop test:
1) What is the oldest continuously occupied city in North America?
2) Who was Mansa Musa?
3) Where is Samarkand and why was it important?
--
John Quarterman, CS Dept., University of Texas, Austin, Texas
{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!jsq, jsq@ut-sally.{ARPA,UUCP}