Having a hard time justifying a year long American History study

[AimeeM]

I'm having a hard time justifying a full year of formal American History instruction. How difficult would it be to just read living books for some AH exposure, while doing a world history comprehensive study (using a text)?

[Veritaserum]

I'm having a hard time justifying a full year of formal American History instruction. How difficult would it be to just read living books for some AH exposure, while doing a world history comprehensive study (using a text)?

 

That's our plan for this year. We are doing Early Modern and will add a lot of extra materials for American when get to those years in world history.

[OrganicAnn]

I'm sure you could do that.

 

I'm curious why you can justify a year of American History? Do you think there is not enough content for a year? That other subjects are more important? That you've had enough Am Hist in with other subjects like world history? Sorry I'm just more curious than helpful. But it will bump up the thread.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I'm curious why you can justify a year of American History?

 

I am too.

 

I know a lot of people on the boards feel like doing American history separately somehow imparts more importance to the subject and feels narcissistic (for lack of a better word). However, I feel that (1) people should know the history of their own country best and (2) supplementing with a great deal of American history in a rotation that is supposed to be focused on world history is much more out of balance than spending a year or two focusing solely on American and spending 3-4 years focusing on world history. When you separate American history, you can study the details of it, having fun with it. Then when you study world history, your supplements can be about the rest of the world. I would argue that you will learn significantly more about the rest of the world doing it this way.

[elegantlion]

I am too.

 

I know a lot of people on the boards feel like doing American history separately somehow imparts more importance to the subject and feels narcissistic (for lack of a better word). However, I feel that (1) people should know the history of their own country best and (2) supplementing with a great deal of American history in a rotation that is supposed to be focused on world history is much more out of balance than spending a year or two focusing solely on American and spending 3-4 years focusing on world history. When you separate American history, you can study the details of it, having fun with it. Then when you study world history, your supplements can be about the rest of the world. I would argue that you will learn significantly more about the rest of the world doing it this way.

 

:iagree: We weren't doing classical ed at the time, but in 4th grade we did a year of American history. It was fun. I used a high school text as a spine and built a schedule of living books around it. We could have spent a lot more time, and it was a good year.

 

We added geography studies by ordering tourism information from many states (most include a state map). We spent a good deal of time on the Revolution. The only bad thing was that I discovered ds didn't care at all for notebooking and I'd printed a nearly 200 page notebook for him.

 

I don't regret spending an entire year on it. You could look at book lists from Sonlight or Veritas, they have some good ideas on covering the topic without using a text.

[Lily_Grace]

We use a ring method for history that works out well. This year our focus is on American history (since he'd never get it otherwise). 8 units, and we'll stop during each one and explore how decisions made in the U.S. were both influenced and did influence other events around the world. Our eventual "map" of history will have what looks like a pond when several stones are dropped in - each ring around a main event shows what happened next.

[Mom in High Heels]

Well, I'm one who doesn't think a year of American history is necessary. It does seem narcissistic to spend an entire year on one country, which other than some ancient history which most people don't cover anyway, that has basically 400-500 years of history when there are thousands and thousands of years of history to cover for the entire world.

That's not to say children who are from the US shouldn't learn US history a little more in depth, but I think it can be done while studying world history. When we got to the explorers, we spent a little more time learning about the "discovery" of America and when we got to the the American Revolution we spent more time on it and added extra books. This was easy to do for all the big American events and of course even the not quite so big events.

[LaxMom]

I ponder the same thing. American History is part of world history. I don't really want to take a year out to do that. I wouldn't mind supplementing and extending our history year to include more detail... Not sure how to go about that, though.

 

So, while not being helpful at all, I can relate.

 

Eta: oh good. Mom in High Heels nailed my leanings while I was posting. Excellent. I was starting to think no one did that. Whew.

Edited June 25, 2012 by MyCrazyHouse

[Lily_Grace]

Well, I'm one who doesn't think a year of American history is necessary. It does seem narcissistic to spend an entire year on one country, which other than some ancient history which most people don't cover anyway, that has basically 400-500 years of history when there are thousands and thousands of years of history to cover for the entire world.

That's not to say children who are from the US shouldn't learn US history a little more in depth, but I think it can be done while studying world history. When we got to the explorers, we spent a little more time learning about the "discovery" of America and when we got to the the American Revolution we spent more time on it and added extra books. This was easy to do for all the big American events and of course even the not quite so big events.

 

I don't think it's narcissistic at all. As a citizen or resident of a country, learning the history can help one see how politics, civics, and daily life have developed and gain a better understanding of their immediate surroundings.

 

We've spent two years covering Italian history (particularly of our region) in addition to world history. Why? Because the culture needs to make sense to my children. It is foolhardy to ignore the details of our everyday world in favor of looking at the world like a Monet painting. Details count, too.

We'll cover a year of American history next, like I said, and relate it to the world, but as we get further into history and a study of high-school level government, that background will be absolutely necessary to draw from. Since we don't have monuments or museums to visit we'll dedicate the year and relate it to the rest of the world, not add it as a sideshow that is given little attention and would rely too much on the "drivel" passed off as history.

[Iskra]

:bigear:

 

I want to do a year long American History study along side our main focus which is Ancient Times using SOTW. If you do come up with a living book list on American History to be used in this fashion (in addition to a main curriculum of world history), would you please share it with us?

[Jenny in Florida]

I'm having a hard time justifying a full year of formal American History instruction. How difficult would it be to just read living books for some AH exposure, while doing a world history comprehensive study (using a text)?

 

Well, that's more or less what is recommended in the WTM, as I recall. The idea is that you cover American history kind of incidentally as you go through the four-year world history rotation.

 

It's one of the points on which I, personally, disagree with the WTM, actually. I never got a good, solid grounding in the history of my own country, and I've always felt that lack.

 

Our "solution" has been to adjust the way we cover world history to condense it into three years so that we can do a year of American history with each rotation.

 

I guess I don't understand why it's difficult to justify. It's where we live. It's our own history. For me, it makes sense to study the story in one nice, long sweep, rather than in bits and pieces as part of a bigger story. I wouldn't want it to displace thorough coverage of the world, but I think it's important and worthwhile to know who we are.

[ByGrace3]

We are actually planning 2 years of American history for when my dc are in 1/3 and 2/4. However, while we study American history, we will listen to the SOTW audios for years 3 and 4 lined up with where we are so that my dc can get the feel of how these events fall into the wider history of the "world."

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I don't think it's narcissistic at all. As a citizen or resident of a country, learning the history can help one see how politics, civics, and daily life have developed and gain a better understanding of their immediate surroundings.

 

We've spent two years covering Italian history (particularly of our region) in addition to world history. Why? Because the culture needs to make sense to my children. It is foolhardy to ignore the details of our everyday world in favor of looking at the world like a Monet painting. Details count, too.

We'll cover a year of American history next, like I said, and relate it to the world, but as we get further into history and a study of high-school level government, that background will be absolutely necessary to draw from. Since we don't have monuments or museums to visit we'll dedicate the year and relate it to the rest of the world, not add it as a sideshow that is given little attention and would rely too much on the "drivel" passed off as history.

 

 

:iagree: I think that the study of one's country's history, civics, and government is vital to create productive participants in that society. There is so much more to learn about than just the typical "highlights" of American history. There are social movements and political policies that have affected the way we live our private lives and conduct our national business. The more people know about these things, the more engaged they can become in our country's future.

[*Lulu*]

I ponder the same thing. American History is part of world history. I don't really want to take a year out to do that. I wouldn't mind supplementing and extending our history year to include more detail... Not sure how to go about that, though.

 

So, while not being helpful at all, I can relate.

 

Eta: oh good. Mom in High Heels nailed my leanings while I was posting. Excellent. I was starting to think no one did that. Whew.

 

This is how I feel as well. Back before I discovered TWTM on our library shelf, I laid out a plan for pre-k to 12th and a 5year cycle for content subjects. Taking 5years for history instead of 4 allows me to add extra reading and information about what was going on here in addition to around the world. The plan is that the student completes 2 cycles from 1st to 10th, then 11th and 12th become more of cross-curricular research paper years.

[Ellie]

You can cover 400 years of history in less than one year? :001_huh:

[wintermom]

I guess it depends on what your goal is with your history studies. If you want to really get to know the people and places of a region, it requires time. Growing up in Canada, there was definitely an over-kill regarding Canadian history and geography, to the detriment of ancient and world history.

 

I just spent 2 school years studying American and Canadian history from the 1600s to the 1800, and we have part of a year to go. I think it was time well spent, and the American and Canadian compontents didn't happen in a vaccuum. Other countries in the world had major roles in the development of these two countries. I guess it's like looking at an ant coloney from the ant's point of view, getting to know the queen ant (or is this just bees), the tunnels, who made new tunnels, where their food comes from, etc. compared to looking at the ant coloney within the context of the whole backyard.

[marbel]

I don't think it's narcissistic at all. As a citizen or resident of a country, learning the history can help one see how politics, civics, and daily life have developed and gain a better understanding of their immediate surroundings.

 

:iagree: I don't get the narcissism comments at all. A person who understands his country's history is going to be a better citizen.

[chepyl]

I also think that it is good to dedicate a year (or two: one in middle school and one in high school) to the study of the history of your home country. To truly understand your government and laws, you need to know how they came about. I don't think you can cover this in enough detail by just adding reading to world history. Most colleges around here want a semester of civics/gov., a semester of state history, and a year of American History along with world history classes.

 

I do agree that my time spent in public school was too focused on American History and not enough on world history (I learned about Columbus, the First Thanksgiving, George Washington, and Abraham Lincoln every year for 5 years with little about the rest of the world. But when I moved to a private school, we had more even coverage of topics, but it still included a year on American History.

[Night Elf]

Well, you could read through Hakim's A History of US. We really enjoyed those books. They are easy to read.

 

My son did 2 full years of American History. One in middle school and one in high school. Those were 2 of his favorite school courses because he loves history.

[EKS]

If you take most of the American history out of years 3 and 4 of the world history cycle (leaving the parts relevant to world history, but covering them in the same depth as you would any other event), it is easy to compress the two years into one, which frees up a whole year for American on either end of the cycle.

 

As for importance, American history is incredible important if you live in the United States. To be culturally literate, kids should have a working knowledge of American history from they time they are small, which is why I'm a proponent of (age appropriate) American history in K before getting started with the ancients in 1st and then another, more formal round in grade 4/5 or so.

 

If you're concerned that doing a separate year of American somehow makes it seem more important than everything else, I disagree. I've done it both ways, that is, I've added American into the world cycle, and I've done it the way I've described here. If you add it in in the amounts necessary to give a decent American history education, it makes the American part seem like the most important thing because it becomes disproportionately large compared to everything else--you are not adding all the same types of details for any of the other countries.

 

A great resource for a 10yo would be the *concise* version of Hakim's A History of US. Be sure to get the concise version, as it is light years better than the original.

Edited June 25, 2012 by EKS

[AimeeM]

Autumn attended brick and mortar (private and then a partial year of public) until last year (last year was our first full year of homeschool). In the bm schools, she did NOTHING but American/State history. She's burnt out on it and has NO interest in it. Since history isn't a favorite of hers, I would really rather focus on something she has at least *more* interest in (world history and cultures). She hasn't retained much in the way of American history, but I'm having a very difficult time justifying ANOTHER year of American right now, considering how much she's had it in the past (the reason, I suspect, that she doesn't care for it now).

 

We plan to use either All Ye Lands or Oak Meadow for world history. I was hoping we could make our lit list reflect some American history using the following books (not a refined list - just tentative):

 

The Witch of Blackbird Pond

Graphic Library's The Salem Witch Trials

Fever 1798

Caddie Woodlawn

... and several more, of course.

[Farrar]

 

I know a lot of people on the boards feel like doing American history separately somehow imparts more importance to the subject and feels narcissistic (for lack of a better word). However, I feel that (1) people should know the history of their own country best and (2) supplementing with a great deal of American history in a rotation that is supposed to be focused on world history is much more out of balance than spending a year or two focusing solely on American and spending 3-4 years focusing on world history. When you separate American history, you can study the details of it, having fun with it. Then when you study world history, your supplements can be about the rest of the world. I would argue that you will learn significantly more about the rest of the world doing it this way.

 

:iagree:

 

I don't think you have to somehow manage to do this three times in homeschooling or anything, but if a child in the US didn't make it through school without at least one year really focused on US history, I would think would be a deficiency in their education.

Edited June 25, 2012 by farrarwilliams

[Alte Veste Academy]

That's not to say children who are from the US shouldn't learn US history a little more in depth, but I think it can be done while studying world history. When we got to the explorers, we spent a little more time learning about the "discovery" of America and when we got to the the American Revolution we spent more time on it and added extra books. This was easy to do for all the big American events and of course even the not quite so big events.

 

But see, my point is that doing this feels more narcissistic to me. When studying world events, to then hyperfocus on America to the neglect of the rest of the world sends a message I am not comfortable sending. There are only so many hours in the day for supplements and if you spend more time on America here and there throughout a world history study, that's less time you have to spend on India and Honduras and Iraq and Poland and Russia and... If you separate American history, you don't need to supplement with American history and that time can be spent learning details that you would otherwise miss. I think that is much more respectful of other nations and is more likely to teach kids that America is not more important. To me, separating American history sends my kids the message that, as Americans, they have a duty to know the history of their country, while studying it concurrently with world history and heavily supplementing sends the message that Americans are more important.

 

Basically, I'm trying to say what EKS said, but less eloquently. :tongue_smilie:

 

If you're concerned that doing a separate year of American somehow makes it seem more important than everything else, I disagree. I've done it both ways, that is, I've added American into the world cycle, and I've done it the way I've described here. If you add it in in the amounts necessary to give a decent American history education, it makes the American part seem like the most important thing because it becomes disproportionately large compared to everything else--you are not adding all the same types of details for any of the other countries.

 

You can cover 400 years of history in less than one year? :001_huh:

 

We do 2/4, 2/4 but I guess I'm just super narcissistic. :tongue_smilie:

 

I do agree that my time spent in public school was too focused on American History and not enough on world history (I learned about Columbus, the First Thanksgiving, George Washington, and Abraham Lincoln every year for 5 years with little about the rest of the world.

 

I completely agree that the American history focus in schools is offensive. However, we don't need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

 

Autumn attended brick and mortar (private and then a partial year of public) until last year (last year was our first full year of homeschool). In the bm schools, she did NOTHING but American/State history. She's burnt out on it and has NO interest in it. Since history isn't a favorite of hers, I would really rather focus on something she has at least *more* interest in (world history and cultures). She hasn't retained much in the way of American history, but I'm having a very difficult time justifying ANOTHER year of American right now, considering how much she's had it in the past (the reason, I suspect, that she doesn't care for it now).

 

See, now this is completely different. We started debating before hearing this. In this case, I would absolutely just move to something else. Better to repair her sentiment about history than to do something she's burned out on.

[LittleIzumi]

See, now this is completely different. We started debating before hearing this. In this case, I would absolutely just move to something else. Better to repair her sentiment about history than to do something she's burned out on.

 

:iagree::iagree: If she already had American history, move on to something else.

[CalicoKat]

You could study Am. History and what was going on in other countries around the world during that time period too. MFW spends a year on it too and this is their approach. George Washington's World was the main spine for this.

[wapiti]

Autumn attended brick and mortar (private and then a partial year of public) until last year (last year was our first full year of homeschool). In the bm schools, she did NOTHING but American/State history. She's burnt out on it and has NO interest in it. Since history isn't a favorite of hers, I would really rather focus on something she has at least *more* interest in (world history and cultures). She hasn't retained much in the way of American history, but I'm having a very difficult time justifying ANOTHER year of American right now, considering how much she's had it in the past (the reason, I suspect, that she doesn't care for it now).

 

We plan to use either All Ye Lands or Oak Meadow for world history. I was hoping we could make our lit list reflect some American history using the following books (not a refined list - just tentative):

 

The Witch of Blackbird Pond

Graphic Library's The Salem Witch Trials

Fever 1798

Caddie Woodlawn

... and several more, of course.

 

Well, then she's had some American history, so I wouldn't necessarily feel as pressured to do a year of it right now (is this the dd that might spend more time in a B&M school at some point for middle school? I can't remember). I'm all for US history, but she's had some and will probably have more eventually - certainly in high school - so reading books sounds fine to me, even if she doesn't remember much of what she learned in past years at school. You could throw in a few movies as well - they can be easier to remember and can cover a lot of ground quickly, if you find some good ones.

 

All Ye Lands looks great - I picked up a used copy a while back to use next year, though my dd will be attending a school instead. FWIW, if you wanted to add in some chapters on US history from a text, dd really enjoyed From Sea to Shining Sea this past year and the workbook that goes with it. There's a PDF workbook for All Ye Lands too.

 

ETA, around this age, if she's interested in current events/news, I might try to use that as a context to teach basic divisions of government, etc. I do think that it's important to have at least some understanding of these things prior to high school, so that high school isn't the first time these topics are encountered. I find that dd is much more interested in these things from news stories than learning it the first time from history of the country's founding. Current events may make the historical stuff more relevant and interesting.

Edited June 25, 2012 by wapiti

[ktgrok]

Autumn attended brick and mortar (private and then a partial year of public) until last year (last year was our first full year of homeschool). In the bm schools, she did NOTHING but American/State history. She's burnt out on it and has NO interest in it. Since history isn't a favorite of hers, I would really rather focus on something she has at least *more* interest in (world history and cultures). She hasn't retained much in the way of American history, but I'm having a very difficult time justifying ANOTHER year of American right now, considering how much she's had it in the past (the reason, I suspect, that she doesn't care for it now).

 

We plan to use either All Ye Lands or Oak Meadow for world history. I was hoping we could make our lit list reflect some American history using the following books (not a refined list - just tentative):

 

The Witch of Blackbird Pond

Graphic Library's The Salem Witch Trials

Fever 1798

Caddie Woodlawn

... and several more, of course.

 

I'd just wait and not do any American history this year then. Wait and do it when it fits more with what you are studying.

[Nestof3]

I know many people who do not study American History separately. I think it is important, though, and my 7th grader is spending the next two years studying it before starting a 4-year history cycle in high school.

[tiffanieh]

I'm sorry but I just simPly don't understand the narcissistic remarks. I think this is what's part of the problem with our country. We are so afraid to have pride in our nation, to embrace our heritage, our language, etc without "offending" someone. We have all become way too politically correct for our own good. I'm not a world traveler, but do other people from other nations despise their country as much as many Americans do? Sure we are far from perfect, but find me any nation that hasn't had its struggles or embarrassment from moments in its past. But that's not a reason to not embrace all the good that's come from and out of our nation.

 

I find it sad that many schools are even making history an elective, not a core subject. Our students, whom are our future, will have a harder time navigating our country forward without fully understanding where we've come from.

[vmsurbat]

The hyper-focus on one's history isn't merely an American narcissistic attitude. Here in Montenegro (a country of 600,000 people) they spend the first NINE years on their own history.

 

We've followed a path of light history coverage in the early years (so many fun living books for the K-3 crowd), World history for the next four years (again, so many fun living books), a solid one year study of American History at the junior-high level, followed by world geography.

 

At that point, world history in depth (aka TOG-style, not merely living books any more, but real meaty texts even if not a text-book) takes over center stage for the remaining school years. The elementary overviews give pegs to hang later information; the high school material challenges them with real world issues (nothing new under the sun!)

[Alte Veste Academy]

I'm sorry but I just simPly don't understand the narcissistic remarks. I think this is what's part of the problem with our country. We are so afraid to have pride in our nation, to embrace our heritage, our language, etc without "offending" someone. We have all become way too politically correct for our own good. I'm not a world traveler, but do other people from other nations despise their country as much as many Americans do? Sure we are far from perfect, but find me any nation that hasn't had its struggles or embarrassment from moments in its past. But that's not a reason to not embrace all the good that's come from and out of our nation.

 

Well, I'm the first one who used the word and that was only to succinctly state the position I've heard so often here. I think that the typical pattern of history studies in public schools is where the bad feelings stem from. I was an Army brat and I am now an Army wife. I love my country and I'm not ashamed of that. But I think it is narcissistic to focus almost completely on American history and only learn a paltry, token amount of world history.

 

ETA: I haven't heard anyone in this thread speak in such a way that would imply that they despise America. :confused:

 

Our students, whom are our future, will have a harder time navigating our country forward without fully understanding where we've come from.

 

True, and I would also argue that they will have an impossible time navigating politically, socially, commercially, etc. without fully understanding the history of the whole world and its people. Balance is key.

 

The hyper-focus on one's history isn't merely an American narcissistic attitude. Here in Montenegro (a country of 600,000 people) they spend the first NINE years on their own history.

 

:lol: That makes me feel better...or not. It does crack me up though.

[Slartibartfast]

We are intending to study both World history alongside American history this year.

 

I don't think it is narcissistic at all and I am surprised people think so, I am sure many countries spend extra time on the history of the country in which they reside. I think there is more to it than "pilgrims, pioneers, and politicians" just walking through our family tree is a study in American history.

 

I admit to being a huge history nut but I find it pertinent.

[Slartibartfast]

I haven't met too many people who fear pride in our country. Just the opposite.

 

Well, IMO narcissism can come from ignorance just as "too much" focus.

 

A lot of it isn't actually happy stories. Some of it is tragic and shameful. It is important to know.

Edited June 25, 2012 by Sis

[Alte Veste Academy]

Well, IMO narcissism can come from ignorance just as "too much" focus.

 

A lot of it isn't actually happy stories. Some of it is tragic and shameful. It is important to know.

 

:iagree:100%, especially with the bolded!

[Alte Veste Academy]

Ok and then there is the added fact for us that my husband and children are also citizens of another country. So there is that history to contend with. It's hard to do it all AND focus heavily on both. It feels right to me to cover history from a more global perspective.

 

But perhaps that's an entirely different discussion.

 

In your shoes, I would spend a good deal of time on German history. I mean, after all, we spend a goodly portion of our American history study hyper-focusing on Texas as well, given that was DH's "country" of birth. :tongue_smilie::lol:

[Alte Veste Academy]

I've had a hard time finding materials that don't just talk about WW2. And frankly I don't want to freak my kids out just yet.

 

Not long ago DS and I read a book about the Trail of Tears. He said it made him ashamed to be American. I can't wait to see he feels about WW2 (joking...I can wait a bit). :001_huh:

 

That is hard. I do think the atrocities of America's past might actually help soften the blow of the atrocities in Germany's past. Every country has made major mistakes, I imagine.

[Shellydon]

We just finished two full years of American History and loved it. I can't imagine why it would need to be justified or skipped.

[Cricket]

I'd just wait and not do any American history this year then. Wait and do it when it fits more with what you are studying.

 

:iagree: OP, are you planning on doing a history rotation? We follow a 6-year cycle. Right now my 11 yo is studying the time of the Revolutionary War so obviously we are studying American history but also the French Revolution and other events happening at that time. If you plan on following a rotation, then you can start at the beginning (before there was an America :001_smile:).

 

Although I would like to find living books that deal with North and South American history during pre-Columbian times and weave that into our ancient and medieval time periods.