So now can y'all prescribe history?

[KrissiK]

I basically been following the gist of this thread and I have read This Country of Ours. I will agree that it is biased and racist, although I must admit to not having quite the visceral response as others have had. However, I continue to maintain that it is not possible to find a truly unbiased history book because:

1) History is written down by a person who is one one side or other of the event and will write it down from their own perspective. That is bias. And everyone (well, most people) believe that they personally are in the right, whatever they are doing. Sherman's march to the sea. If you read an account from one of his soldiers and then an account from one of the southerners whose home he marched through - which is the truth? Which would you believe? Both? Neither?

 

2) Regarding groups being disparaged... how can a group not be disparaged? Any time there is conflict one group will be portrayed as in the right and one in the wrong, one as being oppressed and one as being oppressors. How can you get away from that?

 

I don't have any answers. My kids are still young, we're doing SOTW1 this year - studying Alexander the Great right now. Was he a brutal tyrant who plowed over everyone who got in his way? Was he a just ruler? I'm getting both in the readings we're doing, and I guess I can say... all is true.

[Spy Car]

I basically been following the gist of this thread and I have read This Country of Ours. I will agree that it is biased and racist, although I must admit to not having quite the visceral response as others have had. However, I continue to maintain that it is not possible to find a truly unbiased history book because:

1) History is written down by a person who is one one side or other of the event and will write it down from their own perspective. That is bias. And everyone (well, most people) believe that they personally are in the right, whatever they are doing. Sherman's march to the sea. If you read an account from one of his soldiers and then an account from one of the southerners whose home he marched through - which is the truth? Which would you believe? Both? Neither?

 

2) Regarding groups being disparaged... how can a group not be disparaged? Any time there is conflict one group will be portrayed as in the right and one in the wrong, one as being oppressed and one as being oppressors. How can you get away from that?

 

I don't have any answers. My kids are still young, we're doing SOTW1 this year - studying Alexander the Great right now. Was he a brutal tyrant who plowed over everyone who got in his way? Was he a just ruler? I'm getting both in the readings we're doing, and I guess I can say... all is true.

 

One can see the alternative by reading The Drama of American History book on the lead up to the Civil War. In this work slavery is dealt with fair-mindedly. The North is (rightly) shown to be less than virtuous in own racial attitudes (generally speaking). It is pointed out that most Southerners were not slave-owners, and that not all Southerners were pro-slavery, as many Northerners were not anti-slavery.

 

The complexities for the religious (Christian) positions on slavery are drawn out in a way that is appropriate for late elementary school/middle school aged kids, with people finding support for both abolitionist and pro-slavery stances.

 

There is nuance and balance, and both sides positions are at least well represented. This is good history IMO. The positions are laid out as fairly as I imagine a historian could, and children are expose to a nuanced (and rather deep for a simplified text) understanding of the issues and controversies without being told one side or the other is comprised of either heros or villains.

 

Bill

 

Bill

[cottagechick]

Wowsers...glad I read thru this thread. I have had TSofM on my shelf and tried to read thru it a couple times thinking, "um, yeah. This ain't gonna work."

 

At least I know I wasn't alone in thinking it wasn't worth even trying to read it aloud to my boys, editing all the time.

 

I have the Drama set in my files for when we hit Am. Hist based on Spy Car's (henseforth referred to as "SC") recommendations.

 

Oh yeah. Disclaimer: I haven't used, looked at, or drooled over TOG in the 14 years I've been schooling kids. Up to this point, I had no strong opinions about it other than it wouldn't work for me because I like the simplified WTM recs for both literature/history and lit analysis. After reading this thread, though, I wouldn't use it because of the choices they offer as spines. I think SC's concerns are valid, and I'm thankful he brought them up. If 2 spines of a program are that 'off', how can I trust their selections at all? I do respect that many, many here love this program, though. I'm happy it works for so many families, but I also hope SC's comments will help illuminate possible issues on racism, bigotry and the like that might have flown under the radar previously. Talk is good.

 

peace.

[everettrj]

One can see the alternative by reading The Drama of American History book on the lead up to the Civil War. In this work slavery is dealt with fair-mindedly. The North is (rightly) shown to be less than virtuous in own racial attitudes (generally speaking). It is pointed out that most Southerners were not slave-owners, and that not all Southerners were pro-slavery, as many Northerners were not anti-slavery.

 

The complexities for the religious (Christian) positions on slavery are drawn out in a way that is appropriate for late elementary school/middle school aged kids, with people finding support for both abolitionist and pro-slavery stances.

 

There is nuance and balance, and both sides positions are at least well represented. This is good history IMO. The positions are laid out as fairly as I imagine a historian could, and children are expose to a nuanced (and rather deep for a simplified text) understanding of the issues and controversies without being told one side or the other is comprised of either heros or villains.

 

Bill

 

Bill

 

So in your opinion Bill, why would someone who opposes slavery/racism/etc want there to be nuance and balance when it comes to a topic such as slavery in history? Sure pro slavery people had/have their opinions and arguements but I wouldn't even entertain the idea of giving them a platform on which to speak it. Honestly I truly and deeply feel that while I want my children to be well aware of history both good and bad, and I agree on showing that there is hero and villain on both sides, I see absolutely no point in even finding support for pro-slavery stances.

I am honestly just curious as to your personal opinion about this.

[TracyP]

Wowsers...glad I read thru this thread. I have had TSofM on my shelf and tried to read thru it a couple times thinking, "um, yeah. This ain't gonna work."

 

At least I know I wasn't alone in thinking it wasn't worth even trying to read it aloud to my boys, editing all the time.

 

I have the Drama set in my files for when we hit Am. Hist based on Spy Car's (henseforth referred to as "SC") recommendations.

 

Oh yeah. Disclaimer: I haven't used, looked at, or drooled over TOG in the 14 years I've been schooling kids. Up to this point, I had no strong opinions about it other than it wouldn't work for me because I like the simplified WTM recs for both literature/history and lit analysis. After reading this thread, though, I wouldn't use it because of the choices they offer as spines. I think SC's concerns are valid, and I'm thankful he brought them up. If 2 spines of a program are that 'off', how can I trust their selections at all? I do respect that many, many here love this program, though. I'm happy it works for so many families, but I also hope SC's comments will help illuminate possible issues on racism, bigotry and the like that might have flown under the radar previously. Talk is good.

 

peace.

 

Does The Story of Mankind have another/subtitle? I cannot find it on the TOG booklist.

[Spy Car]

So in your opinion Bill, why would someone who opposes slavery/racism/etc want there to be nuance and balance when it comes to a topic such as slavery in history? Sure pro slavery people had/have their opinions and arguements but I wouldn't even entertain the idea of giving them a platform on which to speak it. Honestly I truly and deeply feel that while I want my children to be well aware of history both good and bad, and I agree on showing that there is hero and villain on both sides, I see absolutely no point in even finding support for pro-slavery stances.

I am honestly just curious as to your personal opinion about this.

 

It is not that there is a "pro-slavery" stance as much as a recognition that most of the World's Civilizations had some form of slavery, and that there are biblical elements that can be interpreted to sanction slavery (as there are those that do not). The point is to show that Southern slave-holders were not necessarily monsters (although there were no doubt some who fit the description) but that they were human beings who judgement on this issue may have been flawed, as there were many in the North whose ideas about slavery and race were equally flawed.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Bill

 

ETA: And what I mean by nuance and balance is the DoAH also enumerates the Southern position on economic grievances and fears of losing political power (and the equal balance of free and slave states) as the nation expanded and granted statehood to additional territories. So there is an attempt to provide the Southern perspective, but no child (I don't imagine) will read this work and walk away thinking human slavery is a good idea.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Spy Car

[TracyP]

I have TCoO on my shelves so I can preread it because of some reviews I had seen on it. I will hold judgment until I read for myself. I found out about 6 months ago that Peter Pan is considered racist. I watched - I disagree.

 

BTW, I read through every week of Teacher Notes and Dialectic discussion from Year 2 - Units 3 and 4. TOG was completely unbiased and fair.

[everettrj]

It is not that there is a "pro-slavery" stance as much as a recognition that most of the World's Civilizations had some form of slavery, and that there are biblical elements that can be interpreted to sanction slavery (as there are those that do not). The point is to show that Southern slave-holders were not necessarily monsters (although there were no doubt some who fit the description) but that they were human beings who judgement on this issue may have been flawed, as there were many in the North whose ideas about slavery and race were equally flawed.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Bill

 

 

Okay, yes, that does make total sense, thanks :)

[Shelly in the Country]

Does The Story of Mankind have another/subtitle? I cannot find it on the TOG booklist.

 

Yeah, I just looked and I can't find it either...

[Spy Car]

Does The Story of Mankind have another/subtitle? I cannot find it on the TOG booklist.

 

Yeah, I just looked and I can't find it either...

 

Here is a link, click on "General" and you will find it.

 

http://www.tapestryofgrace.com/year3/history.php

 

Bill

[Shelly in the Country]

Here is a link, click on "General" and you will find it.

 

http://www.tapestryofgrace.com/year3/history.php

 

Bill

 

You are misunderstanding how TOG is set up.

 

That is an "extras" page. Not a list of the books used in the Units. If you search through their resource lists (which you have to register with the site to do btw), The Story of Mankind is not used and is not scheduled in the Primary resources.

[Spy Car]

You are misunderstanding how TOG is set up.

 

That is an "extras" page. Not a list of the books used in the Units. If you search through their resource lists (which you have to register with the site to do btw), The Story of Mankind is not used and is not scheduled in the Primary resources.

 

What about This Country of Ours?

 

Bill

[my2boysteacher]

I think you have to be careful about labeling a curriculum (really, the author of that curriculum) 'racist'. In talking with the creator of a well known, widely used curriculum about this very topic- I'm discovering she isn't racist because she chooses racist books, she is simply uninformed. I pointed out how I felt it crucial to show all sides of the story, trying to use primary sources wherever possible. She claimed that since she offers many different books by different authors that her curriculum is 'well balanced'

However, you need to look at the sources the authors are using. You can have 8 different authors all using the same source-- example; John Smith's journals about what happened at Jamestown. Are you going to get a well balanced view from reading 8 different authors who all feel John Smith can be believed? :001_smile: Probably not. You need to look at the POV of those who oppose him, or more importantly the Native Americans who were there.

Just thought I'd throw my .02 in to the ring. :tongue_smilie:

[nmoira]

 

I found out about 6 months ago that Peter Pan is considered racist. I watched - I disagree.

First Nations/Native American people are often depicted in (at best) a simplistic way in British children's literature. However, Peter Pan is of considerable literary merit, and it is worth the time to explain that the "Indians" at Neverland are akin to a child's conception of peoples they had never seen and (obviously) don't know very much about. This is world's apart from a child repeatedly seeing/hearing words like "savages" in a history book.

[Shelly in the Country]

What about This Country of Ours?

 

Bill

 

Yes, I concede your point on this one. But now that you got my curiosity going, I decided to browse through the book lists for Years 3 and 4 (the ones I don't already own). I'm not finding a long list of arcane, dusty history books with antiquated racist overtones. I'm finding a pretty modern and standard list of book titles that could be easily found in a good public library (which is more likely than not a major consideration even though I personally buy all our books). TCoO is problematic and heavily scheduled, so like I said, I concede that one. I will be looking through the chapters that are actually assigned to see how much of TCoO they use. But for the rest I'm seeing mostly newer, mainstream books....which could of course still contain racism. I've not read or looked at any of them. It's just that in general one finds these problems with outdated books. There are dozens and dozens of books for each year of TOG. To cherry pick one book from these titles and declare the entire curriculum racist is a bit extreme. And again....TOG is NOT a book list. They don't even schedule every chapter from every history text and there is discussion of everything read. I truly hate posting in threads like this, but honestly, I've just finished going through a year of this curriculum with two of my kids and I don't recognize anything racist in it AT ALL. One off-book in their suggested titles could be complained about to see if it could be replaced, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

The linking of the text of The Story of Mankind is not relevant though. Did you happen to look through the super long list of links they include for each Unit? I think it's nice they linked that many Internet resources for folks and I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to vet each and every one in its entirety.

[squirtymomma]

I threw out those aweful workbooks that SL uses in their 3 and 4 history because of similar content to the ones Bill is protesting.

 

Can I ask which SL books you are referring to? The Landmark books or The Story of the USA? Or, are you talking about books they have since pulled? I think they previously used The Light and the Glory, which I wouldn't touch with a 10 ft pole, but have since regretted it and changed their spines (to Landmark and the other).

[Terabith]

I think it would be fun to just do Horrible Histories for history for a couple of years....

[Jen+4dc]

Something just occurred to me...

 

I have heard before that TOG purposefully does not schedule every chapter of some resources. I read on these boards once that, using History of US by Joy Hakim as an example, some chapters were skipped because they were deemed too problematic by TOG. Now, in the discussion at hand, has anyone actually looked to see whether the offending chapters in TCoO are even scheduled for reading in TOG? I quickly flipped through my copy of TCoO this morning (We haven't started Year 2 yet, but I have purchased all my books already for the coming year.). I could not find anything in my cursory flipping, but I have no idea what offensive chapters I'm looking for. So...

 

...

emphasis mine

 

 

The problem, Shelly, is it isn't as if there are "offending" chapters and non-offending chapters. H E Marshall's attitudes flavor every bit of this book. I don't see how a person could possibly edit around the problems. I really don't.

 

Bill

 

The larger point being that members of faith communities don't like to feel slandered, disparaged, or disrespected? If that is the point, I fully concur.

 

Let me offer up the short section on "Mormonism" from This Country of Ours:

 

http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=marshall&book=country&story=mormons

 

I hope people will read this chapter and ask themselves if such characterizations are acceptable. To me they are not.

 

The section on "Mohammedism" in Van Loon (while more polite) is an equally objectionable portrayal of Islam. Neither a Jew, a Muslim or a Christian (Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or other) should have to read this kind of filth.

 

So I understand your point, and agree.

 

Bill

 

 

Wow! After reading Bill's link I can say I'm truly disgusted!!:banghead: I would never, ever use a program that characterizes an entire group of people based on such misinformation, bigotry, and outright lies. Frankly, in my house it's not how many chapters were or were not scheduled. The problem is having the book on my shelves or in my home at all!

 

Sure, I could read this one as a read-aloud with my olders and discuss. The problem is then that any of my voracious readers (olders or youngers) might then pick it up off my shelves and read it on their own. My purchasing this book and allowing it in my home and reading parts of it to the kids implies that I agree with/endorse it. My olders may understand that I don't but what about my youngers? What about other people's kids who come to visit? There has to be better stuff out there to teach history!! There has to be programs that don't schedule such filth!

 

Having a book like that in my home implies to anyone who enters my home that I agree with that book's messages. That will never happen. Ugh, the thought makes me sick to my stomach.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Having a book like that in my home implies to anyone who enters my home that I agree with that book's messages. That will never happen. Ugh, the thought makes me sick to my stomach.

 

 

But this concept totally negates the point of education which is to read and understand even those philosophies with which you disagree but which have also shaped the world.

 

For example-this may mean you would never have in your home: the Holy Bible, the Koran, Shakespeare, Marx, Engles, Mein Kampf, the Federalist Papers, The Prince, Lady Chatterly, Thomas Aquinas, and even the Constitution of the USA.

 

There are plenty of books that are objectionable in this world but owning or reading them doesn't imply agreement. It means you are educated enough to know what they contain.

 

Historically speaking, this is a dangerous type of thinking that in the wrong hands can quickly lead to the burning and banning of books.

Edited June 10, 2010 by JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

Ok, I just looked at TOG's sample New World unit, & SOTW is an alternate for TCoO. They've also got Cowan's Invitation to the Classics, which has been sitting on my Amazon wish list ever since I read about it.

 

I wonder if TCoO is on the list for TOG & Ambleside simply because it's free online? I skimmed a couple of ch's, but was very disrupted & didn't see anything particularly great OR objectionable, but I probably overlooked it.

 

My point, though, is I've spent the afternoon reading about Biblioplan, Mystery of History, even Calvert & BJU after I got really fed up w/ history curric websites, &...I'm not seeing good *curriculum* for history to follow SOTW.

 

I don't know about TOG's booklist, but of what I've seen, the plan & philosophy of it is my favorite. Still, looking through the samples of the New World & Egypt left me very...*sigh*...bored. It sort of looks like a fancy booklist with review questions spread through a maze-like notebook. Once you've looked at it hard enough to figure out how to use it, you're too worn out to realize...this is just review questions for books we read. :001_huh:

 

Surely I'm missing/misunderstanding something. Ultimately, that's "all" SOTW is. But you get *content* instead of just notes & you get it for so much less $. And fwiw, I want to love TOG. I want Bill to be wrong about TCoO, too. Or at least TOG's motives for using it. Gosh, the bit that I read didn't even seem to have *that* good of a narrative style to it--it was that old-fashioned condescending-to-a-kid narrator. *groan* I can't stand subjectivity. I'm on the verge of replacing history w/ math. :lol:

 

:lurk5: This is exactly where I am about TOG. Sadly, I own TCOO and the Story of Mankind and I'm totally with Bill on those...

 

I was very happy with SL + WTM for my oldest son through 8th grade. I must find something good, and interesting, and NOT Sonlight, for high school! I was hoping it would be TOG. Biblioplan and MOH leave me cold. I don't want textbooks, either. Omnibus was expensive and confusing. Am I being picky?

 

TOG is so beautiful and well-planned, but I feel pretty sure that I would be spending a fortune (that we don't have) only to keep running up against things I'd have to change. Which would totally defeat the purpose of using TOG in the first place...

 

I want WTM for high school in a box. Please.

[cottagechick]

But this concept totally negates the point of education which is to read and understand even those philosophies with which you disagree but which have also shaped the world.

 

For example-this may mean you would never have in your home: the Holy Bible, the Koran, Shakespeare, Marx, Engles, Mein Kampf, the Federalist Papers, the Constitution of the USA, The Prince, Lady Chatterly, Thomas Aquinas, and even the Constitution of the USA.

 

There are plenty of books that are objectionable in this world but owning or reading them doesn't imply agreement. It means you are educated enough to know what they contain.

 

Historically speaking, this is a dangerous type of thinking that in the wrong hands can quickly lead to the burning and banning of books.

 

Owning those books is different than reading them. My olders read (and my youngers will read) some 'offensive' books in their education. But at the grammar and early logic stages, books that a family deems unacceptable and chooses not to have sitting on their shelves doesn't seem to me the anything other than a parent's choice about what their kiddos will exposed to. I won't have racist history books just sitting on my shelf, won't use them in our study until I'm sure my kids are into the late logic or rhetoric stage, and will get them from the library. I won't buy them.

 

We all make choices about what things our kids will be exposed to, when that exposure is appropriate (or not at all), and what we would like to surround ourselves with in our homes. Not to get too woo-woo here, but after my hubby inherited a ton of old tomes from his grandpa, we sold several that made me uncomfortable...some I'd read, some I had no desire to read, some I skimmed and just got icky feelings about. I don't believe they should be banned or burned however. Just don't want them in my environment. That doesn't mean I don't currently own several books by authors I dislike and books with opinions I disagree with. Just means some books won't be getting a coveted place on my bookshelves. I only have so much space, and I'd rather fill that space with books that bring out the best in my family. And yes, reading books of opposing viewpoints can make us better people....more aware of our shortcomings, etc. But using a book that continually has nuances about abhorrent ideas to educate my kids over a period of months via their history study isn't the best way to teach kids about those ideas...at any age, IMO.

 

I will agree that 'in the wrong hands' just about any decision or choice we make as individuals about what we do or don't find acceptable can lead down a slippery slope. I just don't think that's a good reason for a parent to decide to keep certain books out of their homes. :) That seems like a stretch to me I suppose.

 

This has been such a good discussion....really helps me solidify some of my thoughts about certain books I've chosen in the past, and what books I'll choose for my kids and myself in the future.

Edited June 10, 2010 by cottagechick

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Owning those book is different than reading them. My olders read (and my youngers will read) some 'offensive' books in their education. But at the grammar and early logic stages, books that a family deems unacceptable and chooses not to have sitting on their shelves doesn't seem to me the anything other than a parent's choice about what their kiddos will exposed to. I won't have racist history books just sitting on my shelf, won't use them in our study until I'm sure my kids are into the late logic or rhetoric stage, and will get them from the library. I won't buy them.

 

We all make choices about what things our kids will be exposed to, when that exposure is appropriate (or not at all), and what we would like to surround ourselves with in our homes. Not to get too woo-woo here, but after my hubby inherited a ton of old tomes from his grandpa, we sold several that made me uncomfortable...some I'd read, some I had no desire to read, some I skimmed and just got icky feelings about. I don't believe they should be banned or burned however. Just don't want them in my environment. That doesn't mean I don't currently own several books by authors I dislike and books with opinions I disagree with. Just means some books won't be getting a coveted place on my bookshelves. I only have so much space, and I'd rather fill that space with books that bring out the best in my family. And yes, reading books of opposing viewpoints can make us better people....more aware of our shortcomings, etc. But using a book that continually has nuances to abhorrent ideas to educate my kids over a period of months via their history study isn't the best way to teach kids about those ideas...at any age, IMO.

 

I will agree that 'in the wrong hands' just about any decision or choice we make as individuals about what we do or don't find acceptable can lead down a slippery slope. I just don't think that's a good reason for a parent to decide to keep certain books out of their homes. :) That seems like a stretch to me I suppose.

 

This has been such a good discussion....really helps me solidify some of my thoughts about certain books I've chosen in the past, and what books I'll choose for my kids and myself in the future.

 

Of course-there are lots of books that I don't own, won't let my children read, won't let them read 'til they are older and this is for a myriad of reasons. There are video games, movies and TV programs we exclude from our home on the same basis. That is certainly our right as parents.

 

However, to state that ownership of a particular book (movie, game, etc.) must be reflective of that individual's personal belief system is ridiculous and this is where the danger in such a sentiment as I quoted originates. I own and have read much that I disagree with but I do believe that I have the right to own such works without the assumption automatically being made that I support the views of the authors.

 

The day we are only permitted to own in our homes only those books (and other media) that reflect our personal worldview and will be judged by others accordingly is the day before the banning and burning begin.

Edited June 10, 2010 by JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst

[Spy Car]

I read Mein Kampf when I was in 7th grade (on my own) because i was deeply troubled by the holocaust and Nazism, and wanted an understanding of what motivated Adolf Hitler and his hatred.

 

But would I use Mein Kampf as a middle school textbook? No way.

 

It is not about burning or banning books. Its about making appropriate choices of textbooks for our children's education.

 

Bill

[cottagechick]

 

However, to state that ownership of a particular book (movie, game, etc.) must be reflective of that individual's personal belief system is ridiculous and this is where the danger in such a sentiment as I quoted originates.

 

Ah, I get what you're saying. You're concerned that others can come into our homes and look at our bookshelves and make snap assumptions that we must agree and condone everything within the pages of those books simply because they are sitting on our shelf...am I understanding?

 

 

I own and have read much that I disagree with but I do believe that I have the right to own such works without the assumption automatically being made that I support the views of the authors.

I see what you mean. Unfortunately, and to your point, there are those who do make those assumptions. I've been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty criticism due to some of the reading material I've delved into over the years. I've learned to keep that info private in certain company, and on the bookshelves in my bedroom.;) I hope that the majority here can separate offensive books from those who choose to use them in a curricula. It would make me sad to think there are those who may judge someone using TOG as 'racist' or that they don't give a flip that others are offended. I try to give folks the benefit of the doubt....we're all trying to do the best for our kids. Threads like these shed light on difficult stuff that need to be wrestled with.

 

The day we are only permitted to own in our homes those books (and other media) that reflect our personal worldview and will be judged by others accordingly is the day before the banning and burning begin.

 

Yep. I hope that day never comes.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I read Mein Kampf when I was in 7th grade (on my own) because i was deeply troubled by the holocaust and Nazism, and wanted an understanding of what motivated Adolf Hitler and his hatred.

 

But would I use Mein Kampf as a middle school textbook? No way.

 

It is not about burning or banning books. Its about making appropriate choices of textbooks for our children's education.

 

Bill

 

Of course it is. Whatever your perspective you need to make the choice that is appropriate for you and your family. But the person I quoted stated that the books on our shelves show who we are and reflect our beliefs. This is a dangerous mindset and is what I am arguing against. Choosing not to read or own a book that you disagree with is different from stating that what sits on your shelf defines the type of person you are.

 

I'm all for not reading or owning books you object to and find offensive. I am against you deciding that I am XXXXX because I have the volume titled XXXXX sitting on my bookshelf.

 

I'm not sure I want a middle school student of mine reading Mein Kampf or Marx but I sure don't think you're a Nazi if your old copy is sitting tucked away on a shelf at home and I know I'm not a communist (or even a Marxist-Leninist) just because I have a copy of the Marx and Engels Reader on mine.

[Jen+4dc]

But this concept totally negates the point of education which is to read and understand even those philosophies with which you disagree but which have also shaped the world.

 

For example-this may mean you would never have in your home: the Holy Bible, the Koran, Shakespeare, Marx, Engles, Mein Kampf, the Federalist Papers, The Prince, Lady Chatterly, Thomas Aquinas, and even the Constitution of the USA.

 

There are plenty of books that are objectionable in this world but owning or reading them doesn't imply agreement. It means you are educated enough to know what they contain.

 

Historically speaking, this is a dangerous type of thinking that in the wrong hands can quickly lead to the burning and banning of books.

 

I totally disagree.

 

First, as a parent of young children I have a responsibility to surround them with good, uplifting things. I also have a responsibility to limit harmful, untruthful, bigoted things. You may disagree, that's your right. I never said you couldn't or shouldn't have them in your home. I said I won't have them in mine.

 

Second, purchasing books like TCoO encourages continued printing of such rubbish and I won't spend my hard-earned money on worthless trash. This does NOT mean I won't buy/use books I disagree with (have done and will do again, I'm sure) it simply means there must be some redeeming value to using the books.

 

Did you read the link Bill posted? If so, how can you not be completely offended? This was not well-written, it was not informative and it was not accurate. Why in heaven's name would I pay for that and then bring it into my home?

 

Several of the books you listed are already in my home and others will probably be here someday. Some I may purchase and others I'll get from the library. But, I won't use a book, whether I agree or disagree with it, unless there is some redeeming value to it other than to be able to call myself "educated." IMHO that't not a good enough reason to own something.

 

Owning those books is different than reading them. My olders read (and my youngers will read) some 'offensive' books in their education. But at the grammar and early logic stages, books that a family deems unacceptable and chooses not to have sitting on their shelves doesn't seem to me the anything other than a parent's choice about what their kiddos will exposed to. I won't have racist history books just sitting on my shelf, won't use them in our study until I'm sure my kids are into the late logic or rhetoric stage, and will get them from the library. I won't buy them.

 

We all make choices about what things our kids will be exposed to, when that exposure is appropriate (or not at all), and what we would like to surround ourselves with in our homes. Not to get too woo-woo here, but after my hubby inherited a ton of old tomes from his grandpa, we sold several that made me uncomfortable...some I'd read, some I had no desire to read, some I skimmed and just got icky feelings about. I don't believe they should be banned or burned however. Just don't want them in my environment. That doesn't mean I don't currently own several books by authors I dislike and books with opinions I disagree with. Just means some books won't be getting a coveted place on my bookshelves. I only have so much space, and I'd rather fill that space with books that bring out the best in my family. And yes, reading books of opposing viewpoints can make us better people....more aware of our shortcomings, etc. But using a book that continually has nuances about abhorrent ideas to educate my kids over a period of months via their history study isn't the best way to teach kids about those ideas...at any age, IMO.

 

I will agree that 'in the wrong hands' just about any decision or choice we make as individuals about what we do or don't find acceptable can lead down a slippery slope. I just don't think that's a good reason for a parent to decide to keep certain books out of their homes. :) That seems like a stretch to me I suppose.

 

This has been such a good discussion....really helps me solidify some of my thoughts about certain books I've chosen in the past, and what books I'll choose for my kids and myself in the future.

emphasis mine

:iagree::iagree: You said it far better than I could!

 

However, to state that ownership of a particular book (movie, game, etc.) must be reflective of that individual's personal belief system is ridiculous and this is where the danger in such a sentiment as I quoted originates. I own and have read much that I disagree with but I do believe that I have the right to own such works without the assumption automatically being made that I support the views of the authors.

 

The day we are only permitted to own in our homes only those books (and other media) that reflect our personal worldview and will be judged by others accordingly is the day before the banning and burning begin.

emphasis mine

 

I would ask "How old are your kids?" This makes a big difference. I still have youngers who know that there are certain things we don't do, read or participate in because it's not worth our time. There are video games we don't play, movies we don't watch, etc, etc.

 

I did NOT suggest that people should only be allowed to own books we agree with. I simply said I will not keep racist, bigoted, hate-filled books on my bookshelves. When you have children (and their friends) running through your house reading random books off the bookshelves all the time, like I do, you must realize that these little guys will pick them up and read them and you won't always be there to discuss.

 

I read Mein Kampf when I was in 7th grade (on my own) because i was deeply troubled by the holocaust and Nazism, and wanted an understanding of what motivated Adolf Hitler and his hatred.

 

But would I use Mein Kampf as a middle school textbook? No way.

 

It is not about burning or banning books. Its about making appropriate choices of textbooks for our children's education.

 

Bill

emphasis mine

:iagree:

The bolded part is exactly what I mean.

[Jen+4dc]

Of course it is. Whatever your perspective you need to make the choice that is appropriate for you and your family. But the person I quoted stated that the books on our shelves show who we are and reflect our beliefs. This is a dangerous mindset and is what I am arguing against. Choosing not to read or own a book that you disagree with is different from stating that what sits on your shelf defines the type of person you are.

 

 

If this is what you heard, I'm sorry. This is not what I meant to say.

 

What we own and keep on our shelves sends a message to our children that we need to be aware of. To an adult it may not imply we believe everything the author says, but to a child it's a whole different world. What I allow to happen in my home and what I allow to take up space in my home, whether I want it to or not, implies to my children that I agree with it. Add to that the fact that they can pull it down and read it when I'm not around...that's a recipe for problems I don't need.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I totally disagree.

 

First, as a parent of young children I have a responsibility to surround them with good, uplifting things. I also have a responsibility to limit harmful, untruthful, bigoted things. You may disagree, that's your right. I never said you couldn't or shouldn't have them in your home. I said I won't have them in mine.

 

Second, purchasing books like TCoO encourages continued printing of such rubbish and I won't spend my hard-earned money on worthless trash. This does NOT mean I won't buy/use books I disagree with (have done and will do again, I'm sure) it simply means there must be some redeeming value to using the books.

 

Did you read the link Bill posted? If so, how can you not be completely offended? This was not well-written, it was not informative and it was not accurate. Why in heaven's name would I pay for that and then bring it into my home?

 

Several of the books you listed are already in my home and others will probably be here someday. Some I may purchase and others I'll get from the library. But, I won't use a book, whether I agree or disagree with it, unless there is some redeeming value to it other than to be able to call myself "educated." IMHO that't not a good enough reason to own something.

 

emphasis mine

:iagree::iagree: You said it far better than I could!

 

emphasis mine

 

I would ask "How old are your kids?" This makes a big difference. I still have youngers who know that there are certain things we don't do, read or participate in because it's not worth our time. There are video games we don't play, movies we don't watch, etc, etc.

 

I did NOT suggest that people should only be allowed to own books we agree with. I simply said I will not keep racist, bigoted, hate-filled books on my bookshelves. When you have children (and their friends) running through your house reading random books off the bookshelves all the time, like I do, you must realize that these little guys will pick them up and read them and you won't always be there to discuss.

 

emphasis mine

:iagree:

The bolded part is exactly what I mean.

 

Nowhere have I disputed what you are saying-I haven't even disagreed with the assessments of the books you are discussing. (I am familiar with the books in question.) I have gone so far as to advocate that parents censor what material they give their children so that it is of a quality and content that is in line with their personal beliefs. I am all for not supporting causes and companies that you find objectionable.

 

The problem is that you said/wrote the sentence below.

 

Having a book like that in my home implies to anyone who enters my home that I agree with that book's messages. That will never happen. Ugh, the thought makes me sick to my stomach.

 

This is what I object to-they day we decide that the content of an individual's library, what books they checkout from the public or school library, which DVDs they own or rent can only reflect the kind of person they are, we are in trouble. To assume that a person who owns TCoO is a bigot or racist or narrow minded is ridiculous. I am arguing against the sort of prejudice that would take a statement just like yours above and turn it into an indictment of anyone based on the books they read. If you think that having a copy of TCoO in your home implies that you agree with it's message what does it mean if I own a copy TCoO?

[Mommyfaithe]

 

My purchasing this book and allowing it in my home and reading parts of it to the kids implies that I agree with/endorse it. My olders may understand that I don't but what about my youngers? What about other people's kids who come to visit? There has to be better stuff out there to teach history!! There has to be programs that don't schedule such filth!

 

Having a book like that in my home implies to anyone who enters my home that I agree with that book's messages. That will never happen. Ugh, the thought makes me sick to my stomach.

 

Yipes!!!! I hope not. I have tons of books I don't "agree" with, yet we still read them ...at least my olders do...Mein Kampf comes to mind. I in NO WAY endorse that drivel, yet as a primary sourxe and the means to understand how a madman can convince an entire culture to follow him is an important lesson.

 

i am a born again Christian who would have a Bhagavad Gita or a Koran or a Book of Mormon...I do not endorse them, but it is important to know what they say...

 

And I am not even going to talk about the biographies of Brian Wilson or Alice Cooper...

 

I also own This Country of Ours and would never use it as a history book, but I have used it as a history lesson...showing my kids how we need to be careful what we read and discern truth from opinion.

 

I understand your feeilings of disgust...and certain books are nice and safe in my bedroom where they are not free to grab and read.

 

I did toss the Pearl's books, because I NEVER wanted anyone to read those...not even as an object lesson :D

 

~~Faithe

[Mommyfaithe]

I read Mein Kampf when I was in 7th grade (on my own) because i was deeply troubled by the holocaust and Nazism, and wanted an understanding of what motivated Adolf Hitler and his hatred.

 

But would I use Mein Kampf as a middle school textbook? No way.

 

It is not about burning or banning books. Its about making appropriate choices of textbooks for our children's education.

 

Bill

 

:iagree:

OY, this is getting to be a habit....sigh....

[pqr]

What we own and keep on our shelves sends a message to our children that we need to be aware of. To an adult it may not imply we believe everything the author says, but to a child it's a whole different world. What I allow to happen in my home and what I allow to take up space in my home, whether I want it to or not, implies to my children that I agree with it. Add to that the fact that they can pull it down and read it when I'm not around...that's a recipe for problems I don't need.

 

Absolute bunk.

 

I grew up in a home with an extensive library. We had the works of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. We also had the Koran and the Srimad Bhagvatam. I read parts of all of them as early as 11 and we discussed them at home. I never for a moment thought that my family had any Communist or Socialist silliness about them. In a similar manner I never felt my family to be anything but Christian.

 

We had prints of Greek Gods on the walls but again I never thought we were pagans.

 

What you are saying is, in effect, that we should not maintain extensive libraries and should not raise our children in literate households where a wide range of ideas are discussed.

 

If you speak with your child about what is on the shelves then there is no concern that they will somehow believe that you have odd beliefs.

Edited June 10, 2010 by pqr

[everettrj]

May I just throw out there the general summarization of what it seems everyone is actually agreeing on? The point is that a huge part of our deciding to be home educators to our children is because we want to be able to not only decide how and what they learn but also know everything that they are learning so as to be able to give them the attention and explanation that would otherwise not be done in a classroom of 20+ students? Yes? Okay well then should it not also be common sense that to base judgement on an entire curriculum, authors of or even so far as users of, because of one book recommendation, is a bit hasty to say the least?

I truly think it is safe to say that no one who has participated in this thread is looking to train their children up in the ways of forementioned 'evils' so why not just shake on that and let it rest. The horse is dead. Good points have been made, wonderful recommendations have been given, opinions have been expressed.

Peace? (or should I duck because a copy of TCoO is about to be thrown at me?) ;)

Edited June 10, 2010 by everettrj
because it's late and i left out an entire part of a sentence but was saved by an awesome late night editing momma! ha!

[M&M]

May I just throw out there the general summarization of what it seems everyone is actually agreeing on? The point is that a huge part of our deciding to be home educators to our children is because we want to be able to not only decide how and what they learn but also know everything that they are learning so as to be able to give them the attention and explanation that would otherwise not be done in a classroom of 20+ students? Yes? Okay well then should it not also be common sense that to base judgement on an entire curriculum, authors of or even so far as users of, because of one book recommendation?

I truly think it is safe to say that no one who has participated in this thread is looking to train their children up in the ways of forementioned 'evils' so why not just shake on that and let it rest. The horse is dead. Good points have been made, wonderful recommendations have been given, opinions have been expressed.

Peace? (or should I duck because a copy of TCoO is about to be thrown at me?) ;)

The voice of reason! I agree, and very little of this has helped the OP.

[Aubrey]

May I just throw out there the general summarization of what it seems everyone is actually agreeing on? The point is that a huge part of our deciding to be home educators to our children is because we want to be able to not only decide how and what they learn but also know everything that they are learning so as to be able to give them the attention and explanation that would otherwise not be done in a classroom of 20+ students? Yes? Okay well then should it not also be common sense that to base judgement on an entire curriculum, authors of or even so far as users of, because of one book recommendation?

I truly think it is safe to say that no one who has participated in this thread is looking to train their children up in the ways of forementioned 'evils' so why not just shake on that and let it rest. The horse is dead. Good points have been made, wonderful recommendations have been given, opinions have been expressed.

Peace? (or should I duck because a copy of TCoO is about to be thrown at me?) ;)

 

Does that mean we can talk about history curric now? ;)

[Sophia]

The voice of reason! I agree, and very little of this has helped the OP.

 

I was just thinking over 100 posts and Aubrey still doesn't have her prescription for history :tongue_smilie:

[M&M]

:lol::lol:

[ElizabethB]

Does that mean we can talk about history curric now? ;)

 

No, I think you might have to start a new thread if you want to talk about that! :001_smile:

[Spy Car]

Does that mean we can talk about history curric now? ;)

 

In case anyone missed it, I suggest The Drama of American History series as a great US history series, and will repeat that I've heard wonderful things about the two-volume K12 Human Odyssey series from posters whose opinions I value, but I have not had the opportunity to use these yet.

 

To that I would add living books, novels, original documents (as appropriate) and other supplemental texts. It ought not be that difficult.

 

Bill

[Rosie_0801]

In case anyone missed it, I suggest The Drama of American History series as a great US history series, and will repeat that I've heard wonderful things about the two-volume K12 Human Odyssey series from posters whose opinions I value, but I have not had the opportunity to use these yet.

 

To that I would add living books, novels, original documents (as appropriate) and other supplemental texts. It ought not be that difficult.

 

Bill

 

 

But didn't Aubrey want all that wrapped up nicely in cellophane with a pretty curling ribbon? Having it merely written out like this will not do!

 

:tongue_smilie:

Rosie

[Mommyfaithe]

In case anyone missed it, I suggest The Drama of American History series as a great US history series, and will repeat that I've heard wonderful things about the two-volume K12 Human Odyssey series from posters whose opinions I value, but I have not had the opportunity to use these yet.

 

To that I would add living books, novels, original documents (as appropriate) and other supplemental texts. It ought not be that difficult.

 

Bill

Genevieve Foersters books (Augustus Caesar's Worlds, John Smith's World etc.) offers a really nice narrative on World Hx for Logic Stage Hx. Used with Kingfisher as an encyclopedia or another textbook (K-12????) and you have a nice combo as suggested WTM.

 

Faithe

[Jen+4dc]

SOTW is going to wrap up for us in the next yr. What should we do next? We've loved SOTW & didn't do as well w/ the original WTM suggestions, although I love those *in theory.* We're not super-projecty, & I'd like to make sure we do timelines this time through.

 

 

:bigear:

 

We tried History Odyssey Level 2 this year. I felt like it was just the WTM recs written down in lesson plan form. If you like the WTM recs it might work for you. I added in tons of supplemental literature because it didn't have enough. It's a thought: www.pandiapress.com There are schedules floating around on the boards that line up k12's Human Odyssey with it instead of Van Loon's the Story of Mankind. I have one for the middle ages. You can do an archive search and find more than you can possibly read on History Odyssey. Good and bad.

 

Yipes!!!! I hope not. I have tons of books I don't "agree" with, yet we still read them ...at least my olders do...Mein Kampf comes to mind. I in NO WAY endorse that drivel, yet as a primary sourxe and the means to understand how a madman can convince an entire culture to follow him is an important lesson.

 

i am a born again Christian who would have a Bhagavad Gita or a Koran or a Book of Mormon...I do not endorse them, but it is important to know what they say...

 

I actually have all these in my home, I don't agree with them all but they have merit and beauty in them, even if only as a primary source. TCoO does not.

 

I understand your feeilings of disgust...and certain books are nice and safe in my bedroom where they are not free to grab and read.

Oh, to have a bedroom big enough for lots of bookshelves....and youngers old enough to discuss all my books with;)

~~Faithe

 

May I just throw out there the general summarization of what it seems everyone is actually agreeing on? The point is that a huge part of our deciding to be home educators to our children is because we want to be able to not only decide how and what they learn but also know everything that they are learning so as to be able to give them the attention and explanation that would otherwise not be done in a classroom of 20+ students? Yes? Okay well then should it not also be common sense that to base judgement on an entire curriculum, authors of or even so far as users of, because of one book recommendation, is a bit hasty to say the least?

I truly think it is safe to say that no one who has participated in this thread is looking to train their children up in the ways of forementioned 'evils' so why not just shake on that and let it rest. The horse is dead. Good points have been made, wonderful recommendations have been given, opinions have been expressed.

Peace? (or should I duck because a copy of TCoO is about to be thrown at me?) ;)

 

Point taken. I apologize to the OP (and others!) if my remark "hijacked" the thread, that was not my intention. :D

 

I'll quietly suggest History Odyssey as an option to the OP and bow out now.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Jen+4dc

[Capt_Uhura]

If the OP wants to try K12 Human Odyssey, I don't think anyone has mentioned that you can purchase a teacher's book and student book for each of the volumes. The discussion questions are pretty good. If I recall, it goes through writing an essay on a history topic etc. My current plan is to use History Odyssey as my spine for that WTM-history all laid out for me (maps, timeline,outlining,etc) w/ Kingfisher as the spine for timeline facts but use K12 Human Odyssey (HO) for outlining text, summarizing, discussion questions from student book e tc.

[lovemykids]

If the OP wants to try K12 Human Odyssey, I don't think anyone has mentioned that you can purchase a teacher's book and student book for each of the volumes. The discussion questions are pretty good. If I recall, it goes through writing an essay on a history topic etc. My current plan is to use History Odyssey as my spine for that WTM-history all laid out for me (maps, timeline,outlining,etc) w/ Kingfisher as the spine for timeline facts but use K12 Human Odyssey (HO) for outlining text, summarizing, discussion questions from student book e tc.

 

But do you have to purchase from K-12? Do you have a link?

[Capt_Uhura]

You can only get the student book and teacher book through used sources. If you sign up for K12 logic stage history course, you can sign up for a month and then cancel and keep the materials, I've been told. I got mine used through AMazon Marketplace.

 

Here's the teacher guide for K12 world history A (vol1 of the series) http://www.amazon.com/Intermediate-History-Teacher-Answer-Semesters/dp/B000TQENFS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276175931&sr=8-1

 

Here's the student pages http://www.amazon.com/K12-Intermediate-World-History-Semesters/dp/B001BKJ6XU/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276175973&sr=8-3

 

If you search AMazon for K12 Intermediate WOrld History it pulls up both level A and level B - I forget where the breaks are but you can find that out at the K12 website.

 

hth,

Capt_Uhura

[Aubrey]

In case anyone missed it, I suggest The Drama of American History series as a great US history series, and will repeat that I've heard wonderful things about the two-volume K12 Human Odyssey series from posters whose opinions I value, but I have not had the opportunity to use these yet.

 

To that I would add living books, novels, original documents (as appropriate) and other supplemental texts. It ought not be that difficult.

 

Bill

 

I'm sure this would work great for anyone who has successfully followed the WTM rec's. Before having kids, this made total sense & sounded brilliant.

 

I don't know why it hasn't worked for us to do it this way--it's probably just a personality thing, but one by one I've exchanged WTM rec's for *curric* & done so much better. Instead of narrating the Usborne book--I forget which it was--we got SOTW w/ the AG & haven't looked back. Instead of random science books & encyclopedias, we went w/ NOEO, & now we *love* sc. (By we I mean *I*, & ds is so glad because it means we do sc every week now, lol.)

 

So I've looked at the Drama of America books, they look wonderful, & they're on my Amazon wish list. I can't tell much about Human Odyssey, but vol 1 is a great price, so I might just go ahead & buy it. Either way, I still need a curric. I just do.

[Capt_Uhura]

I posted above links to curriculum to go along w/ K12 Human odyssey. It would be pretty much open and go and is written to DC.

 

History Odyssey is also open and go and gives that guidance for a WTM-like history study I think.

[Aubrey]

I posted above links to curriculum to go along w/ K12 Human odyssey. It would be pretty much open and go and is written to DC.

 

History Odyssey is also open and go and gives that guidance for a WTM-like history study I think.

 

Thank you--I'm just reading thr the responses now over a lively game of Strawberry Shortcake. :lol:

 

I've actually read a lot of your posts about Human Odyssey over the last couple of days & read the excerpts someone typed up for you a few mos ago. I want to get excited w/ everyone, but...I wasn't impressed. It looked awfully revisionist, referring to the ancient Mesopotamians as good little capitalists. But I was afraid to say anything...since history turned out to be such a volatile topic. I decided maybe I just need to see it...

And honestly, as long as we're typing small, if TOG is out of the range of reasonable curric because of its inclusion of TCoO & Sarah Noble, then that takes down LLATL, SL, & many others as well. I'm not convinced that these still can't be good curric w/ an exception of a book or two, which is unfortunate. Because otherwise, we need a funeral thread. If this is the case, then almost every non-textbook box curric has been taken down in the last couple of days, incl CM & AO. We need to STOP & grieve & decide as a community if we can even go on after such loss. This would almost put as back to the beginning when there was no curric.

I don't know about you, but either way, I'm picking up my pen.

[Capt_Uhura]

No curriculum will work for everyone. We are all too different. Something that is objectionable to Mary, will be an irritant to Joe, and totally glossed over by Samantha. I think any book will have some bit that makes me frown but I suppose the question is if it's pervasive throughout the entire book and what my purpose is for using the book.

 

I found a website which listed objectionable books based on the way Native American's are portrayed. Nearly all of the books can be found on PS reading lists for elementary and middle school.

[Aubrey]

No curriculum will work for everyone. We are all too different. Something that is objectionable to Mary, will be an irritant to Joe, and totally glossed over by Samantha. I think any book will have some bit that makes me frown but I suppose the question is if it's pervasive throughout the entire book and what my purpose is for using the book.

 

I found a website which listed objectionable books based on the way Native American's are portrayed. Nearly all of the books can be found on PS reading lists for elementary and middle school.

 

I guess I'm not sure what you mean...this comment seems to be going a different direction, or I'm misunderstanding (or distracted, lol).

 

I know that there's not a curric that will work for everyone, & I know that we're offended by different things at different levels, but I think it's good to discuss it as we have because I won't acccept a relative conclusion, i.e., this is offensive to you but not to me.

 

But since I wasn't talking about being offended by HO, I am a little confused--are we talking about the same thing? :001_smile:

[TracyP]

I hate to hijack further (sorry, Aubrey). But what is wrong with Sarah Noble?