This message is in response to a message written by Joshua Heuman on
Jan. 26 which was in response to Nancy Wynen's message.  Below is an
edited quote from Joshua Heuman:
 
"...Can anyone really begin questioning any process in terms of fairness,
logic, accuracy, ets. without the chronological base?  Of course not.
You must know the facts before you can interpret them! In high school,
they teach chronology, whereas in University, they teach analysis.  This
does not mean I favor such a separation between fact and analysis, rather
it is understandable that there are specific abilities which develop at
certain 'life stages'  Analytical thought is not usually stressed for
high school students because more research, more patience, more
thought is required than merely writing a fact filled research assign-
ment.  (At least that has been my personal experience with high school
and University)
 
Joshua Heuman
Art History Undergrad"
________________________________________________________________________
 
Josh is right--specific abilities do develop at different stages in a
human's life.  Josh is also right when he says that analysis is not
stressed for high school students.  This I think is a terrible shame.
My experience with high shcool is two fold: I once went to high school,
I'm now dealing with my 5th year class reunion this summer, and because
I was both a history major and secondar education major during my under-
graduate career.  I had numerous experiences in some of the worst
inner city schools in the Dayton, OH area, and did my student teaching
at one of the best schools in the state and nation.  I taught junior
level American History to honor students, as well as to the average
students.  The National School of Excellence, where I did my student
teaching apalled me.  History was taught chronologically and facts were
rained down on all, with no opportunity for discussion and analysis.  In
fact, all 140 students that I taught had NEVER had to write an essay
in history either for research or for testing.  I changed that by
discussing history with them after giving them facts from not only their
textbook, but from outside sources as well.  then we discussed.  It was
hard, even for the honors students who were used to taking notes and
then taking Scantron tests.  I slowly worked them up to a full essay
exam shortly before my student teaching was over.  by the time I left,
they had made great strides and showed a real grasp for historical
analysis.  Unfortunately, I think our society writes kids off.  High
school students are intellectually prepared for abstract analysis--
they need to prctice it before they enter college.  I've talked to
many history professors at my undergraduate institution, as well as
to history professors in my graduate program where I am a first year
grad student in PUblic History.  They are scared and appalled at in-
coming students and their knowledge base, writing skills, and analytical
skills.  We are doing not only our young adults a great disservice,
but the nation as well.  I agree with Nancy Wynen, we need to start
in high school and teach analytical skills, then maybe, in the
future, we won't have as many of the problems we do have in being un-
able to agree to disagree on various historical interpretaions.  Or,
maybe I'm currently deluding myself with optimism that comes with
youth.  If you think I'm crazy, let me know.  You don't have to
point out my long windedness--I know I'm verbose.
 
Bryan Kimmet
1st Year Public History Grad Student
Archival and Museum Administration Program
Wright State University
e-mail address: [log in to unmask]