Export thread

So... why should we learn history, and how should that knowledge be applied to our lives? Please give practical examples - I know that "he who does not understand history is doomed to repeat it" but that doesn't tell me why history should inform my choices as I shop at the grocery store, or plan my workday.

I'll give it a shot (pardon my poor English hehe)

How does history apply to everyday life?
The general study of history "should" teach us the wisdom of others who have done before us. You learn about prominent figures and their achievements, but a good teacher also teach the student about the person's life. The U.S. fore-fathers were slave owners, but they manage to see beyond their personal needs to create something to make a better world? what does that teach us for everyday life? It teaches us that we sometimes have to make personal sacrifices for the greater good. Do I need to buy that expensive chocolate that cost 42$ a pound (Godiva) or should I buy a lesser brand chocolate that is just as good that you like (kit-kat for me or reese's peanut butter cups) and donate the difference to a charity?

Why did Germany lost World War II? There are many reason like distrust and spreading your resources thin. How does this apply? If we spread our personal resources thin (i.e. saving very little) there is a good chance that when catastrophe strikes, we don't have any reserves to save us. Also, planning and listen to people who are more knowledgeable in areas that you are weak on to make inform decisions (attacking Russia in the winter was a bad idea)

What about Ancient Egypt? How does that apply to normal life? This is pretty easy. Look at the life in those ancient time where advance technology wasn't available. You can apply simple stuff to make great things. You can be more practical and still be happy. You can use your brain to work with the tools you have. Is it better to get a 60" 3D TV vs using a good projector? What about using generic products vs brand name?

These are just some examples from the top of my head.

Are you talking specifically about ancient history, or just any kind of history?

Because even, say, at the grocery store, it's helpful to know past history on cost of items to make informed decisions about what's a good buy, along with company history on the manufacturers, in order to know which companies are worth your time to support, if you emphasize that angle.

At work, any decision can be made simpler and more efficient by prior historical example. Anything to avoid "reinventing the wheel", so to say.

Do your homework and stop whining. We all had to do it, so do you.

Neither do physics or chemistry play a part in your grocery shopping, but you still learn them, buster!

Alright, now that that is out of the way... I would say studying history is important in understanding why the world is like it is today. If you want to watch the news, you need to have some background to the events at hand, otherwise it's just people bitch-slapping people. Learning one's national history is also a matter of building one's self-image, understanding how and why the present society came to be, and how the past is reflected upon it, both as a matter of everyday ideology and societal policy-construction. If and when one studies the history of the world, it helps forming an understanding why in some parts of the world things are done differently from your neck of the woods. In essence, teaching history is a matter of introducing one's own culture to the pupil, and then introducing the cultures of others for greater understanding.

Or at least that's how I see it.

NR: but.... physics and chemistry do play a lot in our daily lives

Grocery shopping - Chemistry - it is nice to know what are all the presevatives and chemicals that goes INTO your food and stuff you use. Sure it is "FDA safe" but what about long term effect? How does certain alcohol product does to your skin? what if certain preservative will do to you in the long run? understanding chemicals gives you a better decision in buying certain products.

Grocery Shopping - physics - can you successfully balance on a shopping cart and fly by the isle without crashing into anything? what angle should you do or balance you need (yea I'm stretching it)

I was being facetious, O serious one

North_Ranger said:

I was being facetious, O serious one

Click to expand...

I know, but I figure FLP might want explanation on how other subject that we are require to learn can be useful in daily lives.

Am I to infer that you think studying history is unimportant?

That's pretty much the jist of it I think

I think it is a valid questions. I do get a lot of students asking "Why do I need to study _______?" <insert core class requirement here>

This stems from the recent education thread which now seems to focus on testing problems.

I have my own little view of what skills education is meant to give us:

Knowledge - what we know
Analysis - Applying knowledge so we can understand something new
Synthesis - Creating something new from our knowledge and analysis

But it seems history's focus is on world changing events, so we get to knowledge, and analysis, but only politicians and world leaders (ghandi, MLK, etc) actually create a new history based on what they've learned, and what they see in the world at their time.

So while history is nice, and I enjoy it myself, is it part of a well rounded education simply because we say so, is it merely so that we pass our culture (this is why things are the way they are, and if you can't fit in, here's what you're in for), or does learning the date of a particular statesman's birth actually help us progress - all of humanity?

In other words, what is the teaching of history meant to accomplish in our youth, and are we actually teaching that, or are we teaching only that which can be easily and quickly tested?

FLP: well.... putting it like THAT.... changes the scenery don't cha think?

You either had bad history teachers or didn't learn much. I don't just teach dates and politicians' names, I teach kids about entire time periods and how those events and/or people relate to the present. I teach students to recognize patterns in human behavior, understand the cause and effect relationships that still affect our world today, and how to better understand/predict what will happen next. History is the study of where humanity has been in order to better understand where humanity is going.

I don't understand how someone can suggest that's not important for students to learn.

Not at all. My first post was "why should we learn history, and how should that knowledge be applied to our lives?" and I've simply refined it to "what is the teaching of history meant to accomplish in our youth."

I think it's mostly to give a base of what was done before. What worked, what didn't work. There are plenty of ideas, practices, and techniques that work in theory, but didn't work in practice. Having a basis to observe, examine and learn from is key to not repeating past mistakes, and to take what was or is currently done that works and try to make it work better or more efficiently. Learn from the pitfalls and the successes.

With regards to U.S. History, I am more apt to vote with a complete understanding of how our country was formed (as well as a better understanding for how the process works). I am also better able to appreciate diversity and freedom, since we have dramatic examples of those things being removed or attained.

With regards to other historical developments: I understand science better through the historical progression of my science (as well as parallel or tangential sciences).

Memorizing names and dates is NOT history. If that is what is considered history, then it can be discarded. History involves the story of events unfolding, told through the pens and voices of the actors involved. When and who are recorded in those things but they are not the primary lesson to take away from it.

MindDetective said:

With regards to U.S. History, I am more apt to vote with a complete understanding of how our country was formed (as well as a better understanding for how the process works). I am also better able to appreciate diversity and freedom, since we have dramatic examples of those things being removed or attained.

With regards to other historical developments: I understand science better through the historical progression of my science (as well as parallel or tangential sciences).

Memorizing names and dates is NOT history. If that is what is considered history, then it can be discarded. History involves the story of events unfolding, told through the pens and voices of the actors involved. When and who are recorded in those things but they are not the primary lesson to take away from it.

Click to expand...

I remember when I was in Middle/High school, history was all about remembering dates and who does what. In College, we talk more about what is going on in history rather than what date I need to remember.

MindDetective said:

Memorizing names and dates is NOT history. If that is what is considered history, then it can be discarded. History involves the story of events unfolding, told through the pens and voices of the actors involved. When and who are recorded in those things but they are not the primary lesson to take away from it.

Click to expand...

And this was the whole problem that prompted this thread. In the other discussion I commented that multiple choice tests are a poor way of gauging a student's progress in history classes. This is why. Invariably the tests demand students recite names and dates and routinely ignore questions which would demonstrate the deeper understanding that is the main focus of the course. Teachers (good ones, anyway) spend all year teaching kids the importance of history, only to have students tested on minutiae. Those scores are then supposed to reflect back on us, which is stupid. So, you either keep teaching what the kids truly need, or you "teach to the test" (meaning you ignore the actual important lessons in favor of drilling students on unimportant factoids).

Tress;460323][QUOTE=MindDetective said:

Memorizing names and dates is NOT history. If that is what is considered history, then it can be discarded. History involves the story of events unfolding, told through the pens and voices of the actors involved. When and who are recorded in those things but they are not the primary lesson to take away from it.

Click to expand...

And this was the whole problem that prompted this thread. In the other discussion I commented that multiple choice tests are a poor way of gauging a student's progress in history classes. This is why. Invariably the tests demand students recite names and dates and routinely ignore questions which would demonstrate the deeper understanding that is the main focus of the course. Teachers (good ones, anyway) spend all year teaching kids the importance of history, only to have students tested on minutiae. Those scores are then supposed to reflect back on us, which is stupid. So, you either keep teaching what the kids truly need, or you "teach to the test" (meaning you ignore the actual important lessons in favor of drilling students on unimportant factoids).[/QUOTE]

Thanks Tress: this is what I was trying to say (but having a hard time making myself clear)
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, Math have no issue with multiple choice BUT I remember when I was studying for the SAT, the teacher taught us to use the answer and go in reverse (i.e. test taking method) You can do that with Math.
reading skills mostly got to do with reading a passage and pick out/interpret stuff or matching on a test
Writing is just pure essays

Now the Social Studies and Science..... most of these are usually either matching, multiple choice or fill in the blank. I have seen some of these test and mostly got to do with memorizing dates, names, and places

Tress, there's clearly something different in U.S. tests, then. In my school days, our history exams and tests were always essays, rarely minutiae. Maybe something likely naming events and particular people and asking for a brief summary for who they were, but never multiple choice questions.

In fact, in matriculation exams you are expected to write 3-4 essays on various subjects (the so-called reaaliaineet, subjects that deal with society and the material world: R.E., History, Psych, Biology, etc.). The questions on history are VERY broad, and really require a good amount of reading and thinking.

North_Ranger said:

Tress, there's clearly something different in U.S. tests, then. In my school days, our history exams and tests were always essays, rarely minutiae. Maybe something likely naming events and particular people and asking for a brief summary for who they were, but never multiple choice questions.

In fact, in matriculation exams you are expected to write 3-4 essays on various subjects (the so-called reaaliaineet, subjects that deal with society and the material world: R.E., History, Psych, Biology, etc.). The questions on history are VERY broad, and really require a good amount of reading and thinking.

Click to expand...

What's that you say? The US doing a poor job of handling education compared to other parts of the world? Pish-posh, I would never believe such a thing.

Last year's test here in California (since they may differ state to state) had a majority of questions like "What year did [random historical event] happen?" or "Who was the president during [timeframe]?" It has a HEAVY, HEAVY focus on names, years, and vocabulary words. I don't remember a single thing about "What was a major development of [this]?" or "What caused [that] to happen?" And it was 100% multiple choice, no short answer or essay questions.

That's not history. That's trivia. And I resent being pressured to teach trivia by the current system.*


*Just to be clear, historical facts do have their place. People should know the most important dates and names, but it shouldn't be the only thing they learn.

Its a part of studies or through this you can learn many things and the history behind their origin. So you have to do it.

Why wouldnt you want to do it. Studying history is amazing in learning about the real life power grabs, how crazy people actually are and the stunts they tried/did pull off. Makes you learn about how things came to be and probably where they are headed. For the youth it lets them get more jokes and sayings. Shows them where things such as economy and parts of culture are likely headed since they seem to follow patterns. Lets them know where some prejudices started hopefully allowing them to deal with it better when they encounter them. Shows things that are possible for them to do, might even help them be grateful for what they have and all that went into them being able to have it.

I will agree that just learning dates and names it not a sufficient way to learn history but learning the events and how they came about and finding some lessons they can carry with them from those events is most important.

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

This stems from the recent education thread which now seems to focus on testing problems.

I have my own little view of what skills education is meant to give us:

Knowledge - what we know
Analysis - Applying knowledge so we can understand something new
Synthesis - Creating something new from our knowledge and analysis

But it seems history's focus is on world changing events, so we get to knowledge, and analysis, but only politicians and world leaders (ghandi, MLK, etc) actually create a new history based on what they've learned, and what they see in the world at their time.

So while history is nice, and I enjoy it myself, is it part of a well rounded education simply because we say so, is it merely so that we pass our culture (this is why things are the way they are, and if you can't fit in, here's what you're in for), or does learning the date of a particular statesman's birth actually help us progress - all of humanity?

In other words, what is the teaching of history meant to accomplish in our youth, and are we actually teaching that, or are we teaching only that which can be easily and quickly tested?

Click to expand...

Honestly I have never and will never think of learning dates as being important to learning history. What people have done the fact that we have heroes to inspire us is to me what history is all about. Also it is a cliche but people who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it. For example I don't believe that anybody who is still pro-prohibition or anti-legalization actually knows anything about prohibition, how it turned our government into mass murderers or how it allowed the rise of organized crime. Or the most recent attacks on the FDA from those who didn't bother to learn what the FDA was created to fight.

That is how History helps you when you go to the grocery store. You don't need to worry that some dairy worker lost a finger in the milk your going to buy, or that the pastries you are picking up for the Holiday party are 50% sawdust because people remember what the FDA is for and that king corn and the food companies can not and will not regulate themselves.

Tress;460323][QUOTE=MindDetective said:

Memorizing names and dates is NOT history. If that is what is considered history, then it can be discarded. History involves the story of events unfolding, told through the pens and voices of the actors involved. When and who are recorded in those things but they are not the primary lesson to take away from it.

Click to expand...

And this was the whole problem that prompted this thread. In the other discussion I commented that multiple choice tests are a poor way of gauging a student's progress in history classes. This is why. Invariably the tests demand students recite names and dates and routinely ignore questions which would demonstrate the deeper understanding that is the main focus of the course. Teachers (good ones, anyway) spend all year teaching kids the importance of history, only to have students tested on minutiae. Those scores are then supposed to reflect back on us, which is stupid. So, you either keep teaching what the kids truly need, or you "teach to the test" (meaning you ignore the actual important lessons in favor of drilling students on unimportant factoids).[/QUOTE]

Actually the History SATII were very good about testing actual knowledge of history. I mean the only date I know from all of WWII is 1945 and I was a freaking history minor in college and don't ever ask me any date in the American Civil war. I still got a 680 on the History SATII due to the fact that I knew quite a bit about the hows and the whats.

Of course I went to a private school so I didn't have to deal with any of the public school standerdized tests but it is completely possible to make a multiple choice test that tests actual knowledge of history.

I love history, but the teaching of history (in the US, at least) is designed to suck all the joy and wonder from learning it.

I loved watching James Burke’s Connections, which took seemingly unrelated people/events and showed how they were connected. I think this is how history should be taught, how events build on other events and how even seemingly unimportant things (at the time) can actually have a major impact on the world. Sure, we would still need to learn names and dates, but they would be used to put events into context, not be the main point of history class. Focusing on the cause and effect in history would give you the practical information (and critical thinking skills) you can use in your everyday life.

While history may not necessarily help you at the grocery store, it does help when you are voting, and it will help you make informed decisions when supporting/opposing causes and issues, or simply watching the news. Or when you’re buying a house and you visit the local museum and find out about that devastating 100-year flood cycle on your prospective property.

Never forget!

Website recommendation. My favorite history website/radio show, hosted by a professor of Thermal Dynamics. It is a series of small essays into the history of technology, and the creative process.

The Engines of Our Ingenuity: Main Page

First Lady Puffinstuff said:

I have my own little view of what skills education is meant to give us:

Knowledge - what we know
Analysis - Applying knowledge so we can understand something new
Synthesis - Creating something new from our knowledge and analysis

Click to expand...

This is super-simplified Bloom's Taxonomy. In some schools down here, you not only have to submit a lesson plan with applicable state Grade-Level Expectations, but you have to highlight which levels of the taxonomy you aim to hit with your lesson. The goal is to help students see the relevance of what they're learning.

What's the point of learning history?

Click to expand...

To not repeat the same mistakes, for example, imagine if Hitler learned from Napolean and actually didnt make the mistake of invading Russia.

JCM said:

What's the point of learning history?

Click to expand...

To not repeat the same mistakes, for example, imagine if Hitler learned from Napolean and actually didnt make the mistake of invading Russia.

Click to expand...

That is actually too terrible to imagine.

sixpackshaker;460844][QUOTE=JCM said:

What's the point of learning history?

Click to expand...

To not repeat the same mistakes, for example, imagine if Hitler learned from Napolean and actually didnt make the mistake of invading Russia.

Click to expand...

That is actually too terrible to imagine.[/QUOTE]
That is one of the time I'm glad some people didn't learn their history