African History Class Required
reasa
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Members, Constellation
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Philadelphia my city of birth</div> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->June 9, 2005
BY SUSAN SNYDER
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
PHILADELPHIA -- In what could be a unique move nationally, the Philadelphia School District will require every high school student to take a separate course in African and African-American history to graduate, starting with September's freshman class.
The School Reform Commission voted unanimously in February to offer courses in both areas at every high school, and said it would consider making one or both courses a graduation requirement.
On Wednesday, district officials confirmed that they would mandate a combined African and African-American history course in the 185,000-student district, which is about two-thirds black. The course becomes one of four required social-studies courses, as important as U.S. history, geography and world history.
"Given the history of this country and still given our problems of discrimination and racism, for all of our children to have a more accurate picture of history, a more complete picture of history, is important," said Commissioner Sandra Dungee Glenn.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.freep.com/news/nw/philly9e_20050609.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.freep.com/news/nw/philly9e_20050609.htm</a>
Funny, this seems like the kind of thing that would create <i>more</i> racism and discrimination.
BY SUSAN SNYDER
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
PHILADELPHIA -- In what could be a unique move nationally, the Philadelphia School District will require every high school student to take a separate course in African and African-American history to graduate, starting with September's freshman class.
The School Reform Commission voted unanimously in February to offer courses in both areas at every high school, and said it would consider making one or both courses a graduation requirement.
On Wednesday, district officials confirmed that they would mandate a combined African and African-American history course in the 185,000-student district, which is about two-thirds black. The course becomes one of four required social-studies courses, as important as U.S. history, geography and world history.
"Given the history of this country and still given our problems of discrimination and racism, for all of our children to have a more accurate picture of history, a more complete picture of history, is important," said Commissioner Sandra Dungee Glenn.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.freep.com/news/nw/philly9e_20050609.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.freep.com/news/nw/philly9e_20050609.htm</a>
Funny, this seems like the kind of thing that would create <i>more</i> racism and discrimination.
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is, of course, why students are required to take classes that cover Irish, English, French, German, Japanese, Chinese, and Mexican history.
Sorry for the short and snappy posts, but I'm in a bit of a mood. I'll go into more detail if anyone prods.
you wish.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"Given the history of this country and still given our problems of discrimination and racism, for all of our children to have a more accurate picture of history, a more complete picture of history, is important,"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is what I understand to be the unanimous feeling held by educators...
You could imagine my surprise when my psychology teacher a few semesters ago stated to the class, which had a black student, "African Americans are less intelligent than Whites and Asians" and cited this book:
<a href='http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0029146739/qid%3D1118728234/sr%3D8-1/104-6744770-4954364' target='_blank'>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...6744770-4954364</a>
That is extremely well put.
As for this class, it may seem a bit much, but well, good luck to them I guess. Still, I wonder how they are going to pull this off.
You missed some--I call <i>discrimination</i>! <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sorry for the short and snappy posts, but I'm in a bit of a mood. I'll go into more detail if anyone prods.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd actually be pretty surprised if there was a strong argument in favor of mandatory history lessons on a particular foreign culture from this forum's US readers.
---
US high school classes are typically Eurocentric when they shift away from native soil, and the creation of additional choices in high school history classes for those who are interested is laudable, but it's particularly dense to believe that teaching history for three continents (Europe, Africa and North America) instead of two fixes the problem of neglecting world cultures when there are cumulatively thousands of years of distinct civilizations missed by that expanded coverage.
I'm curious--how do other countries handle the distribution of history class subject matter? Does Europe attempt to cover the globe? Does Australia? Asia? Do African school kids learn about American history?
@ubermensch -- Yeah, <i>The Bell Curve</i> is a favorite book of idiots everywhere who'd rather crow about results than ask questions about quality of available education for test takers, economic conditions across those sampled, prioritization of scholastic studies in various US subcultures, etc. "Never mind that statistical sampling isn't an exact science--we have a number and it can only mean one thing!"
@Lolfighter -- the Irish, Italians and Germans in particular have a history of facing racial intolerance in the US that was mostly resolved within the last hundred years; I'd be surprised if this forum doesn't have epithets for all three in its obscenity filter. There's no evidence either way to suggest whether a change in classroom curriculum had any effect on these prejudices, which are rarely seen today in any segment of US society.
It's ridiculous to suggest that black people are the only group in the United States facing racial intolerance today. Which brings us back to Legionnaired's point and mandatory classes in Chinese, Mexican, Cuban, Korean, Philippine, Puerto Rican, Indian, Arabic, etc. history. In an ideal world I'd have optional classes in each of those cultures so that kids who want to know more about any particular ethnic or national background have a ready resource. That doesn't mean that we should dilute coverage of each to the point where nothing of substance can be taught due to time constraints.
Perhaps I should start a spinoff thread about the damage well-intentioned affirmative action that enforces favoritism for one minority can do to other minorities. It is noble to work toward leveling the playing field and abolishing ignorant attitudes. Picking one particular group to champion above others, however, is a mistake that highlights racial divisions instead of focusing on the fact that all people are equal.
I'm not sure if it's still the case, but when I did A-Level* History, the scope of the course was pretty much the whole of English history. However, it also accomodated other countries when they affect us.
The exam was composed of ~50 questions, each worth 25 marks. You'd have to do four. Schools would select area(s), but a student could learn a subject on their own if they wanted. Our class did 1815-~1890 English history (the boring bit after the French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars and before World War One), and The Rise and Fall of Nazi Germany. There were questions in the exam paper starting from Roman occupation and ending at the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The coursework element was a 5000 word essay on any historical subject of choice. (I chose Hiroshima/Nagasaki). It had to be done professionally - cite sources, bibliography, etc.
*UK national exam for ~18 year olds. For GCSE (national exam for ~16 year olds), I remember doing the period between 1914 and 1938 (1914-1920 global, the rest Germany), but I can't remember whether there was a choice between that and, say, Roman occupation. You'd have to study another culture at some point. Then again, it would be pretty hard to learn history otherwise.
However England has a different culture and tends (in general and imo) to not class people by race so much. Of course we have our racists etc but it seems much less a war against racism and more "well dumb people think dumb things" and leave it at that.
Of course that is only the view from my particular section of the country/society so others might have different opinions.
Not that I didnt have classes in that but THOSE ones should be mandatory, not african history classes. (of course some are but I didnt have a logic class in my HS, they had finances but it wasent mandatory, usually they just gave us a basic business class which helped but wasent enough.) (and yes they had post secondary classes but what Im trying to say is those SHOULD be mandatory)
Im several years out of high school now and I look around and I dont see alot of my peers doing so well.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is exactly why African History should be taught....teaching a course in African history is not the same as teaching irish, or mexican history, its like teaching a course on European History, or Latin American history (sadly I only ever got the first one high school...and the class was listed as "World History").
Nobody in this country seems to a damn thing about African history, beyond prehaps when we wandered over there and bought slaves. African is a huge continet with a long varied hiistory and a mulittude of culutres. Here in the states however, we still treat it as the "dark contintent", as though it has no history, except where we, or colnizing powers are invovled, that is all the same, and as such ishould be treated as one large country, like Ireland or Japan. Even at my college, which otherwise has an outstanding history program that covers all other areas of the world has no class on African History (unless you count the Ancient Egyptian religous studies course). This needs to change.
However, making it a mandatory at the high school level is somewhat questionable, expecialy as a seperate course. Intergrating Africa better into exsisting world history makes far more.
I also question just how much these new classes could possibly do to help racism. Very few people, if any, base their of views of other people, off their knowelge of the history of that persons history. I don't look at a German and think Nazi, nor an Italian and think Roman.
Maybe you should ask yourself why anyone would need to know about African history.
Aside from Egypt and Carthage and the relatively brief period of time when the British tried to take over there is very little in actual African history that anyone in America well ever need to know.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->More than a million Europeans were captured and enslaved by North African pirates between 1530 and 1780, according to a new study.
Called corsairs, the Muslim pirates abducted thousands of white Christians each year, forcing them to work as slaves in what is today Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.
"Anyone who travelled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland, was at risk of being seized," U.S. historian Robert Davis, an Ohio State University professor and the author of the research, told Discovery News.
"Italian coastal towns were raided in particular, and many seaside villages ended up being depopulated."
In his new book, "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery In The Mediterranean, The Barbary Coast, And Italy, 1500-1800," Davis concluded that between 1 million and 1.25 million ended up in bondage. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll be here waiting patiently for my reparations.
Not that I didnt have classes in that but THOSE ones should be mandatory, not african history classes. (of course some are but I didnt have a logic class in my HS, they had finances but it wasent mandatory, usually they just gave us a basic business class which helped but wasent enough.) (and yes they had post secondary classes but what Im trying to say is those SHOULD be mandatory)
Im several years out of high school now and I look around and I dont see alot of my peers doing so well. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well Sake, you raise a good question. Does HS exist to prepare you for work? Or to create well rounded <b>citizens</b>? Just as you say that you don't see alot of people qualified for the job world, I don't see alot of people qualified to vote. So what's the balance? Although, I'd like to mention, that currently HS isn't doing a very good job in creating citizens, although it does try.
Just think what a drop the Germans went though. In PA for example many many many schools were taught primarily IN German due to the large amounts of Germans living there. Then WW1 came around and that practice was put down by the government.
On another note now that Hispanics are the primary minority in the US in both numbers as well as compromising the "2nd spoken language of the US" maybe classes on them should be mandated as well.
btw Im asian and despite all the crap asians have taken in the us historically, (everything from bans from entering the country to being unconstitutionally detained in prison camps) we never get anything lol.
Where is asian history month lol. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You laugh, but you have a good point.
Blacks have so much because all those lovely liberal organizations have basically been trying to make whites feel bad for slavery when there isn't a person alive now whose life has been even indirectly affected by it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is, of course, why students are required to take classes that cover Irish, English, French, German, Japanese, Chinese, and Mexican history.
Sorry for the short and snappy posts, but I'm in a bit of a mood. I'll go into more detail if anyone prods. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with you 100% and I think it would be a lot better to be educated about the Native people first. You know, all those American Indians who were butchered, slaughtered and smallpoxed into reserves. Nobody seems to care about acknowledging that part of American history, and it might put a few of Americas 'problems' between races today into some perspective.
This is similar to how in New Zealand I think we should learn some New Zealand history around the treaty of Waitangi with the Maori. Then we should contrast it with the above American history, how the British massacred the Aborigines and then with the depopulation and destruction of the Aztecs/Incas by the Spanish.
That should put NZ history WELL into perspective.
Oh wait, there I go ranting again.
I apologise, do ignore my little rant against New Zealands over-PC idiocy.
I don't think the issue is any attempt at guilt tripping for slavery. I think it has more to do with the age of the teaching population. People growing up in the 60s and 70s didn't have black people in their history books whatsoever. Now that these people are teachers they are teaching us not only all the black history we need to be taught, but adding in all the black history our parents weren't taught.
While I obviously agree that the ideal approach is just to incorporate this history into the rest of the history classes, textbooks haven't been revised as much as you might think in the last 30 years. Personally, given the tensions that influence so much of culture in inner aging cities such as Philadelphia, I would rather the history be over taught rather than under taught. Without a grounding in the history of this country that left most black people empoverished, it would be far too easy to arrive at the easy conclusion that black people are inherently or genetically inferior. This history is essential knowledge for understanding and overcoming urban poverty, and for a kid growing up in urban Philly, it is probably more important than a lot of more traditional subject matter.
And this sounds narrow-minded, but I really only care about the group that had the best technology of its time in history.
In college though I'll definitely be looking for a course about Asian history, I found European fascinating already.
We focused mainly on Australian colonial history and on Australia's involvement in both world wars. The advanced course covered the Cuban and Chinese revolutions of the 20th century. That course though could have been focused on any revolutions; the teacher just happened to chose those areas.
As someone who just finished an arts degree witbh a double major in history, I'm generally in favour of more history being taught. That said, to try and cram all of world history into even a 6 year high school history program is extreamly difficult, and if such a program was instituted everything would be rushed and covered only very briefly. Thus history courses tend to focus on a particular country, in almost all cases the country where the course is being taught.
With that in mind, I do believe that some African history should be taught in American schools. A complete history of the continent would not only be overwhelming but unnessesary; a high school student in Philadelphi has little need to understand the history of the Bantu, for example. But that student will almost certainly come into contact with African-Americans, and he or she may wonder how so many Africans came to live in the United States, just as they may wonder why there are so many Europeans on a continent far from their homeland. Teaching some African history, focusing on the period between 1450 and 1850, would help American students to understand their own history, which is essentially what high school history aims to achieve.
Im Italian, ive got no beef with anyone, but i want a Italian Class, to learn about my heritage.
Edit: Made things nicer... To a point.
Ehmm.. you forgot a major time in history <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
As long as the subject is taught objectively, I don't see any reason against it, unless a more important part of the curriculum is going to suffer as a result.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->More than a million Europeans were captured and enslaved by North African pirates between 1530 and 1780, according to a new study.
Called corsairs, the Muslim pirates abducted thousands of white Christians each year, forcing them to work as slaves in what is today Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya.
"Anyone who travelled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland, was at risk of being seized," U.S. historian Robert Davis, an Ohio State University professor and the author of the research, told Discovery News.
"Italian coastal towns were raided in particular, and many seaside villages ended up being depopulated."
In his new book, "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery In The Mediterranean, The Barbary Coast, And Italy, 1500-1800," Davis concluded that between 1 million and 1.25 million ended up in bondage. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll be here waiting patiently for my reparations. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The reason that you, or any other descendant of those particular slaves for that matter, won't recieve any reparations is twofold. Firstly, the governments of the North African states which participated in this practice no longer exist; virtually every part of Africa was taken over by European colonial governments by the late 1800's. Hence, trying to extract reparations from present day governments that control this region would simply not work: these governments could, and would, claim that they are entirely new governments with no link to slave holding former states.
Secondly, though a case could be made for finding the descendants of the original slave traders and asking them for reparations, or an apology, would also likely be utterly futile, as trying to track down that kind of information would be a monumental and probably impossible task. Records from the era in question are sketchy to say the least, and most will not be dealing with the names of slave traders or the names of their cargo. Furthermore, even if one was to find these descendants, they would most likely ignore any requests for reparations, as there is little to no established social precident for doing this.
The reason why descendants of African slaves in the United States today can make claims for reparations is because the opposite applies. The government that controls the United States today is the same government that controlled the country since it's birth. A case can be made that because each election places new people in government positions, the government therefore is constantly changing and not related to slave holding governments. However, the key factor is that the government has always adhered to the same constitution (albeit with amendments). Because of this, slave descendants can make claims for reparations from the government. Whether or not they recieve them is of course dependant upon the individual cases.
In addition to this, we have far more detailed records of slave trading in the United States than we do of North African slave traders. A slave descendant today in the US has a far better chance of tracking down the people who enslaved his ancestors. And having found them, a slave desendant has a better chance of extracting reparations because there is a social precident for this sort of thing in the United States. Neither of these factors ensure reparations, but they do make it more likely.
No government should have to put up with such nonsense. In fact anyone who asks for reparations for slavery should immediately have their house confiscated, razed, and replaced with a Dollar Tree, which they are prohibited from entering.
Maybe you should ask yourself why anyone would need to know about African history.
Aside from Egypt and Carthage and the relatively brief period of time when the British tried to take over there is very little in actual African history that anyone in America well ever need to know. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
educate yourself? its a part of our planet just like every other place and has its own history. of course if <u>you</u> dont care then suit yourself.
this applies to everything else as well by the way, not just africa.