Blog:
What do you think? Take a few minutes to review the texts. Find a quote [relevant, interesting, troublesome, something you agree with, dont agree with] from the readings as a way to begin a discussion on interpretation and perspective. {some things to consider may be What do you think is the role of interpretation in the making of history? Why? Have your ideas on the nature and function of history change? on the job of historian?} Take care to refer to the texts in your discussion.
Response:
Robert Jensen argues that history is based on interpretation. His article on "Florida's fear of history" goes against Florida's ideas on what should be taught in history classes. A bill was recently passed to make history more of a "knowable, teachable, and testable", kind of course. But that does not mean that the critical thinking part needs to be diminished. I agree with Jensen's argument because History is not math. If a school was to only teach a "by the book" and "banking" type of method, there would be no room for questions on why things happened in history. Jensen states, "the law attempts to suppress discussion of the very idea that history is interpretation." Yet, the book that we learned history from for all these years(K-12) shows only one interpretation. As we have all read, history changes. More questions bring out more answers and more of History in general. We can read and learn the facts, but we are also entitled to ask questions to find out more about it. I feel that interpretation brings the facts to a more deepening place than just one version of history.
Sokeo, I agree with Jensen too that history is about interpretation and critical thinking. In addition, he argues, along with Becker and Oakeshott, that facts alone don't tell us much. We can memorize them but alone, without meaning and significance, they don't amount too much.
ReplyDeleteand can you change the text color? My eyes hurt!!