Lies My Teacher Told Me by James W. Loewen is a classic in the history field. Originally published in 1995, one would think it would be well out of date by this time, thirty years later. The reality is – it couldn’t be more relevant.
Loewen examines twelve high school history textbooks widely used in the United States in the early 1990s. He looks at what they get right, what they get wrong, and inquires into the nature and method of teaching history in the American educational system. His findings range from grim to hilarious. But almost universally, he finds that the school systems are failing to educate our children on the most rudimentary facts of our nation’s past.
The problem is manifold. By and large it can be broken down in to three broad areas: 1) Avoid controversy; 2) Instill patriotism; 3) Briefly memorize facts to regurgitate on a test. No wonder students roll their eyes and slumber through many history classes. It is simply not interesting. The texts present history as bland, inevitable, and most definitely, absolutely irrelevant to anything that is happening today.
Some publishers and school boards seem to think that our students must be shielded from any uncomfortable truths about our nation’s past. All stories must have a happy ending. Bor-ring. Controversy is all around us, every day – now moreso than when Loewen wrote his book. Our teenagers are not immune or ignorant of this. So why must varying or disputing viewpoints and interpretations be excised from our textbooks?
Instill patriotism
Some publishers examined in Loewen’s work seem to believe that they should present a single overarching narrative about America the Great, free from complexity, controversy or any kind of shortcoming. But our students are wise and perceptive. They themselves can interrogate this notion – wondering why their family struggles to pay bills, or why their grandfather was refused service at a lunch counter because of the color of his skin.
But what if instead, history was presented as an uncertain story, full of contingency and suspense – the way people of the past actually experienced it? And, in fact, the way we experience all of the uncertainty and “unprecedented” situations we face today? We should challenge students to view more recent events through a historical lens, to help them see how history itself is “created” and narrated. Consider how points-of-view and motives factor in to the ways events of the past were recorded (or omitted) – and how those stories are told and remembered today. Comparing two different first-hand accounts of an event is a great way to understand the way historical events were reported and yes, “created” at the time. Understand and evaluate how interpretation affects history – what is remembered, recounted, and forgotten today. What stories or peoples are left out of the narrative – and why? What is patriotism anyway – blind obedience or thoughtful engagement?
Avoid controversy
By avoiding controversy, events of the past are vastly oversimplified. The causes, consequences, origins and outcomes of events are glossed over, or omitted entirely. Connections between past and present, or events separated in time yet still linked in causal factors, are seldom mentioned. For example, the effort to secure Black civil rights during Reconstruction and the white backlash that followed, are divorced from the racial discrimination and Jim Crow laws that made the modern Civil Rights movement possible and necessary a century later. In Loewen’s words, “Nothing ever causes anything. Things just happen.”
By oversimplifying, historic events become “inevitable.” Why, of course the North won the Civil War. Of course “the West was won.” But of course – these present only one side of the story – a story that had many participants, many narrators, and many possible outcomes at the time. Oversimplification also makes it much easier to “dumb down” history. This happened, then that happened, there was this small little hiccup, and then we all lived happily ever after. Not many people truly believe that to be the case.
Regurgitation of facts
Which brings us to the ultimate pain point of the way history was taught in Loewen’s time – and often still in our own. Read the textbook. Memorize the facts so you can pass a multiple choice quiz. Read, repeat.
This is no way to teach any subject in a meaningful way, and certainly not history. History is full of contingencies and surprises, plot twists and twists of character and fate. How will it turn out? What happens next? How do these events support, weaken, challenge or expand our understanding of our nation and its values? What did America’s ideals mean to enslaved people, for example? Ask Elizabeth “Mumbet” Freeman of Massachusetts – who successfully sued for her freedom in Massachusetts in 1780.
The “regurgitation of facts” model of history education does nothing to encourage critical thought, evaluation of sources, or to bring in some hint of uncertainty about how things will turn out. It does nothing to connect or follow through themes across time and place.
Thank goodness there are programs now like National History Day that encourage instructors and students to select and study history in a way that is stimulating and engaging. Primary resources and interpretation are key to this methodology, and students learn any number of skills that are seldom used in rote-memorization history classrooms. Critical thought and evaluation of sources, research skills, creativity, teamwork, inquiry, writing, organization, project planning, and other skills are all part of the History Day package. In fact, the skills learned through History Day projects are transferable to other areas of students’ education as well.
Loewen’s book has much that it can still teach us, today. History can be interesting. It can produce engaged and thoughtful citizens. But to do so, our textbooks and educational system need to allow students to engage, question, and investigate the past – not just memorize one version of it that a publisher or school system has declared authoritative.