The first half of this book was excellent, but the second half dragged on me. Nash, Crabtree, and Dunn (NCD) base this book on the National History Standards controversy in the mid 1990s. The first half of the book is an outstanding tour of how the teaching of history has evolved throughout US history. This section punctures the idea that at any point in US history there was a clearly agreed upon conventional narrative about the American past, which is what right-wing critics alleged when the supposedly revisionist national standards came out. NCD also show a clear division in how liberals and conservatives approach the past: Liberals, who constitute the majority of historians (although distinct from leftists), see the past as something that must be interpreted and re-interpreted as new evidence and perspectives come to light. This doesn't mean that all interpretations are equally true but that we never quite reach final truths. Most historians are also quite skeptical of the idea that we should teach facts first and interpretation second; history is best and most naturally learned when those things are taught in conjunction. Conservatives, at least those who blasted the NHS, are more likely to see the past as a fixed set of facts that should offer clear moral lessons and a foundation for unity and patriotism in the present day. They do not look kindly on the process of revision, although they are not completely against it. Obviously, NCD and I agree with the former approach, which is not only more intellectually rigorous and humble but leads to way better teaching.
Unfortunately, the 2nd half of the book really dragged on me. This was a narrative of the NHS creation and controversy, but it was just way too detailed; way too much about the processes and panels that created the standards as well as the critiques and politics of the standards. This is important, but it could have been pared down considerably. Nonetheless, it is good to have a record of this process, and NCD do a great job parrying attacks on teh standards.
THis is a good book to reference on the history of teaching history in the US, although maybe not a great full-read for everyone. Gary B. Nash I have been teaching American History to prospective teachers all semester, and so really thinking about history standards and what kinds of standards my students will have to deal with. Basically I'm trying to show them how to work some of the most recent scholarship into the existing standards.
So this book is about an effort to do that, with nationwide recommended standards, and how it all blew up in the Gingrich revolution of 1994, when all these conservatives who used to be in favor of the standards (Lynne Cheney) suddenly realized that they were terrible! Communistic! Revisionist! Where is George Washington? Where is the Constitution? (They were in there, but don't think about that) The most important thing is won't somebody please think of the children?!
This is a bit one-sided and inside baseball, since it is by the historians who had to fight against all these republican revolutionaries during the 90s to try and defend the standards. It probably could have been a little shorter. It also is just so infuriating to read about this culture war stuff, especially because the book was published in 1997 and so I had to read it with the knowledge that things would really not get better! Or I guess, get better for a little while and then go back to being bad? The thing that was the most valuable to me was the early material, on how this kind of fighting about US history has been going on since the 19th century, and really flared up in the 20s, and 50s, and 60s, and 90s, obviously...it never ends. It helps my blood pressure a teensy bit to realize that the argument will never end so there is no point in wishing it would. But it only helps a teensy bit. Gary B. Nash In the US - history really is a battlefield! This book provides excellent coverage of the history of history curriculum in the US leading up to the 1990's collaborative and professional development of national history standards for the 20th century. These history standards were created using the most recent work of historians and were more inclusive and more engaging for students. After hours of work by top educators and drawing support from a cross-section of citizen groups in a grass roots democratic process, their excellent work was challenged and almost brought to a standstill by pundits of the far-right with the sole motive of easy political gain rather than the improvement of education. This travesty of uninformed (most critics had not even read the history standards) and the clear manipulation of fake news, particularly Mrs. Cheney's role in this debacle, is an indictment of the worst of American politics. Whipping up public sentiment by using misinformation in self-serving populistic sound bits is still playing out as an effective strategy in US politics as is evident in the election of President Trump! While it is now 25 years since the events in the book occurred ... this is still an important and sobering read! Gary B. Nash As the current debates rage over monuments, the US constitution and faux 'originalists', racism, slavery, critical race theory, et al. this book - written during the Clinton presidency (with superpredators, and crack babies and ending both welfare and restrictions on Wall Street) - reminds us that political and economic interests have ALWAYS argued for teaching history aligns with their views - and that theirs is the 'factual' truth. Neither the struggle to overcome oppression and erasure of the oppressed, nor intense reaction to those efforts is new. Even the 'founding fathers' disputed, sometimes bitterly, meanings of the war of independence, the Articles of Confederation and Constitution.
At times there is almost so much detail in his story that it distracts, but is aimed at maximizing the evidence that the right wing is disingenuous and unreasonable. By now we've learned that the white supremacist right cannot be reasoned with.
Gary B. Nash Skimmed the second half, because it just wasn't as relevant as the beginning, which very clearly lays out the culture wars argument and the historical antecedents for the fight. Very relevant to what's happening literally right now. Gary B. Nash
WITH A NEW INTRODUCTION
A deeply informed, balanced, and compelling book. --Los Angeles Times
In History on Trial, authors Gary B. Nash, Charlotte Crabtree, and Ross E. Dunn examine the controversy and criticism over how our nation's history should be taught, culminating in the debate about National History Standards. The book chronicles a media war spearheaded by conservatives from National Endowment for the Humanities veteran Lynne Cheney to Rush Limbaugh, posing questions with regard to history as it relates to national identity. What, the authors ask, is our objective in teaching history to children? Is the role of schools, textbooks, and museums to instill patriotism? Do we revise and reinterpret the past to tell stories that reflect present-day values? If so, who should articulate these values? Wonderfully clear, timely in its intentions, History on Trial provides a thoughtful account of the ways in which Americans have, since the beginning of the Republic, perceived and argued about our past. History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past
Interesting on world history; got too liberal-partisan and into the nitty gritty of educational policy and standards for my taste at the end. Gary B. Nash Good study on the teaching of history over the past 50 years. I found the writing to be very heavy on history and lite on interpretation. I also found the book to be a bit too heavily focused against the conservative viewpoint. I would hve liked to see more balance between liberal and conservative viewpoint. Gary B. Nash
Download History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past
