On Jan 25, 11:32am, Nancy Wynen wrote (edited):
> Subject: Re: History...was Atomic
> That in itself is a lesson as to WHY we need history to remain
> controversial and multi-sided.  Waiting until the upper levels of college
> to become aware of the dynamics of history means preaching only to the
> converted. We need to start in high school where we still reach everyone.
> Or through our museums and public programs that reach large groups.
> Nancy Wynen
> Florida Atlantic University
> Boca Raton, FL
>-- End of excerpt from Nancy Wynen
 
I do certainly agree that history must remain multi-sided.  The facts in a
chronology will always be interpreted differently based on bias, focus, and
maybe even morality.  I do disagree, however, that allowing the questioning
of historical methodology in upper-level university courses is"preaching only
to the converted."  Can anyone really begin questioning any process in terms
of fairness, logic, accuracy, etc. 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 favour 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 assignment.  (At least that has been my
personal experience with high school and university.)
 
 
 
--
Joshua Heuman
[log in to unmask]
Art History Undergraduate