OT: Gay History in California Public Schools

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

Agree, CBad. Over my full-time working life here in SD, I had many middle-aged adult co-workers of ALL races who had never left San Diego County (except maybe to travel to MX or LAX/Phillipines). Not only could they not point out SF on a map, many had NO IDEA it was in the State of CA. Nor could they find Lake Tahoe on a map or had ever heard of the Gold Rush or Native Americans. I’m dead serious here!

[quote-briansd1]… Children could write an essay about gay personalities and learn English skills at the same time.[/quote]

Agree with this, brian. They could start with Harvey Milk.

UR, I too, was educated in a bay area public school up until HS (schools were grades K-8 at that time). We DID cover all the missions in 4th grade (as children do now), had mandatory Spanish in 3rd grade and also covered the CA Gold Rush and the history of Placerville and Donner Pass but this era predated the history we are discussing here. There are many gays who have made their mark on CA and US history and should be discussed for their contributions, NOT necessarily because of their “sexual preferences,” unless THAT issue is ALSO part of their story (such as Harvey Milk).

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Hobie]Math>Reading>Writing>US/World History>Art/Music>Home Ec,Woodshop,Life skills( balance checkbook, resume, etc) all should be in front taking time for gay history. Once the test scores are up and we are turning out sharp kids, we can discuss adding esoteric topics to the curricula. [/quote]

I don’t think an entire month should be devoted to it (I really don’t think women’s history or black history should get their 1 month a year either), but it is certainly reasonable to integrate it into your US/World History component above. These areas are so LACKING from my 1970s public school education, my next example requires me to consult wikipedia to flesh it out (which I won’t do due to time constraints).

So here goes: when covering the revolutionary war in US History, for example, we discuss George Washington and the generals. Is it so much trouble to include a few paragraphs on the regimen of freed slaves that contributed to the winning of that war? And when the realization of our manifest destiny is covered, it’s reasonable to include a chapter or subchapter on the contributions of Chinese-Americans to the railroad effort and the place of the gay community in “settling” San Francisco. Art History can include Georgia O’Keefe and what some consider to be the inspiration for her work. English or World History can include information on Sappho (or was it Lesbos–again, my education was lacking.)

See–concise and relevant to core topics. I don’t think they are advocating for diagrams or anything….

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Hobie]Math>Reading>Writing>US/World History>Art/Music>Home Ec,Woodshop,Life skills( balance checkbook, resume, etc) all should be in front taking time for gay history. Once the test scores are up and we are turning out sharp kids, we can discuss adding esoteric topics to the curricula. [/quote]

I don’t think an entire month should be devoted to it (I really don’t think women’s history or black history should get their 1 month a year either), but it is certainly reasonable to integrate it into your US/World History component above. These areas are so LACKING from my 1970s public school education, my next example requires me to consult wikipedia to flesh it out (which I won’t do due to time constraints).

So here goes: when covering the revolutionary war in US History, for example, we discuss George Washington and the generals. Is it so much trouble to include a few paragraphs on the regimen of freed slaves that contributed to the winning of that war? And when the realization of our manifest destiny is covered, it’s reasonable to include a chapter or subchapter on the contributions of Chinese-Americans to the railroad effort and the place of the gay community in “settling” San Francisco. Art History can include Georgia O’Keefe and what some consider to be the inspiration for her work. English or World History can include information on Sappho (or was it Lesbos–again, my education was lacking.)

See–concise and relevant to core topics. I don’t think they are advocating for diagrams or anything….

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Hobie]Math>Reading>Writing>US/World History>Art/Music>Home Ec,Woodshop,Life skills( balance checkbook, resume, etc) all should be in front taking time for gay history. Once the test scores are up and we are turning out sharp kids, we can discuss adding esoteric topics to the curricula. [/quote]

I don’t think an entire month should be devoted to it (I really don’t think women’s history or black history should get their 1 month a year either), but it is certainly reasonable to integrate it into your US/World History component above. These areas are so LACKING from my 1970s public school education, my next example requires me to consult wikipedia to flesh it out (which I won’t do due to time constraints).

So here goes: when covering the revolutionary war in US History, for example, we discuss George Washington and the generals. Is it so much trouble to include a few paragraphs on the regimen of freed slaves that contributed to the winning of that war? And when the realization of our manifest destiny is covered, it’s reasonable to include a chapter or subchapter on the contributions of Chinese-Americans to the railroad effort and the place of the gay community in “settling” San Francisco. Art History can include Georgia O’Keefe and what some consider to be the inspiration for her work. English or World History can include information on Sappho (or was it Lesbos–again, my education was lacking.)

See–concise and relevant to core topics. I don’t think they are advocating for diagrams or anything….

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Hobie]Math>Reading>Writing>US/World History>Art/Music>Home Ec,Woodshop,Life skills( balance checkbook, resume, etc) all should be in front taking time for gay history. Once the test scores are up and we are turning out sharp kids, we can discuss adding esoteric topics to the curricula. [/quote]

I don’t think an entire month should be devoted to it (I really don’t think women’s history or black history should get their 1 month a year either), but it is certainly reasonable to integrate it into your US/World History component above. These areas are so LACKING from my 1970s public school education, my next example requires me to consult wikipedia to flesh it out (which I won’t do due to time constraints).

So here goes: when covering the revolutionary war in US History, for example, we discuss George Washington and the generals. Is it so much trouble to include a few paragraphs on the regimen of freed slaves that contributed to the winning of that war? And when the realization of our manifest destiny is covered, it’s reasonable to include a chapter or subchapter on the contributions of Chinese-Americans to the railroad effort and the place of the gay community in “settling” San Francisco. Art History can include Georgia O’Keefe and what some consider to be the inspiration for her work. English or World History can include information on Sappho (or was it Lesbos–again, my education was lacking.)

See–concise and relevant to core topics. I don’t think they are advocating for diagrams or anything….

[Shadowfax]

[quote=Hobie]Math>Reading>Writing>US/World History>Art/Music>Home Ec,Woodshop,Life skills( balance checkbook, resume, etc) all should be in front taking time for gay history. Once the test scores are up and we are turning out sharp kids, we can discuss adding esoteric topics to the curricula. [/quote]

I don’t think an entire month should be devoted to it (I really don’t think women’s history or black history should get their 1 month a year either), but it is certainly reasonable to integrate it into your US/World History component above. These areas are so LACKING from my 1970s public school education, my next example requires me to consult wikipedia to flesh it out (which I won’t do due to time constraints).

So here goes: when covering the revolutionary war in US History, for example, we discuss George Washington and the generals. Is it so much trouble to include a few paragraphs on the regimen of freed slaves that contributed to the winning of that war? And when the realization of our manifest destiny is covered, it’s reasonable to include a chapter or subchapter on the contributions of Chinese-Americans to the railroad effort and the place of the gay community in “settling” San Francisco. Art History can include Georgia O’Keefe and what some consider to be the inspiration for her work. English or World History can include information on Sappho (or was it Lesbos–again, my education was lacking.)

See–concise and relevant to core topics. I don’t think they are advocating for diagrams or anything….

[Shadowfax]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

But this is the point. Instead of my underfunded and lacking public schooling in Maryland, using a 1970s-era text book where every figure was white and male, the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking. The railroads west just didn’t magically appear–the Chinese labored and died to make them. That is part of our history. That is why SF has such a high Chinese population. I think the past focus on only one group has further pixelated the picture–if you teach a comprehensive version of history it is more wholistic and inclusive of the over all struggle to build America–even when the groups sometimes struggled against each other.

One other comment: I don’t think the school systems will have to have sex ed in first grade in order for elementary schools to incorporate the contributions of individuals into the curriculum. The books like “Dick and Jane Have Two Mommies” or whatever get the point across fairly well without going into the details.

High schoolers could definitely handle sexual orientation as one aspect of a given historical figure and, in fact, I think that’s where this material would do the most good since most teen suicides I am aware of happen during the high school years (duh) and many are attributable, at least in part, to peer hazing and feelings of alienation.

[Shadowfax]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

But this is the point. Instead of my underfunded and lacking public schooling in Maryland, using a 1970s-era text book where every figure was white and male, the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking. The railroads west just didn’t magically appear–the Chinese labored and died to make them. That is part of our history. That is why SF has such a high Chinese population. I think the past focus on only one group has further pixelated the picture–if you teach a comprehensive version of history it is more wholistic and inclusive of the over all struggle to build America–even when the groups sometimes struggled against each other.

One other comment: I don’t think the school systems will have to have sex ed in first grade in order for elementary schools to incorporate the contributions of individuals into the curriculum. The books like “Dick and Jane Have Two Mommies” or whatever get the point across fairly well without going into the details.

High schoolers could definitely handle sexual orientation as one aspect of a given historical figure and, in fact, I think that’s where this material would do the most good since most teen suicides I am aware of happen during the high school years (duh) and many are attributable, at least in part, to peer hazing and feelings of alienation.

[Shadowfax]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

But this is the point. Instead of my underfunded and lacking public schooling in Maryland, using a 1970s-era text book where every figure was white and male, the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking. The railroads west just didn’t magically appear–the Chinese labored and died to make them. That is part of our history. That is why SF has such a high Chinese population. I think the past focus on only one group has further pixelated the picture–if you teach a comprehensive version of history it is more wholistic and inclusive of the over all struggle to build America–even when the groups sometimes struggled against each other.

One other comment: I don’t think the school systems will have to have sex ed in first grade in order for elementary schools to incorporate the contributions of individuals into the curriculum. The books like “Dick and Jane Have Two Mommies” or whatever get the point across fairly well without going into the details.

High schoolers could definitely handle sexual orientation as one aspect of a given historical figure and, in fact, I think that’s where this material would do the most good since most teen suicides I am aware of happen during the high school years (duh) and many are attributable, at least in part, to peer hazing and feelings of alienation.

[Shadowfax]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

But this is the point. Instead of my underfunded and lacking public schooling in Maryland, using a 1970s-era text book where every figure was white and male, the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking. The railroads west just didn’t magically appear–the Chinese labored and died to make them. That is part of our history. That is why SF has such a high Chinese population. I think the past focus on only one group has further pixelated the picture–if you teach a comprehensive version of history it is more wholistic and inclusive of the over all struggle to build America–even when the groups sometimes struggled against each other.

One other comment: I don’t think the school systems will have to have sex ed in first grade in order for elementary schools to incorporate the contributions of individuals into the curriculum. The books like “Dick and Jane Have Two Mommies” or whatever get the point across fairly well without going into the details.

High schoolers could definitely handle sexual orientation as one aspect of a given historical figure and, in fact, I think that’s where this material would do the most good since most teen suicides I am aware of happen during the high school years (duh) and many are attributable, at least in part, to peer hazing and feelings of alienation.

[Shadowfax]

[quote=CBad]I totally agree with Hobie. Also, I wish we could get over covering all of the politically correct categories and focus on actual History. All people should know about important people and events in history and the fact that they are black, white, gay, straight, men or women is besides the point. I’m not against kids learning about Harvey Milk but they had better be able to know where San Francisco is on a map, which Native Americans lived there, and the impact of the Gold Rush first.[/quote]

But this is the point. Instead of my underfunded and lacking public schooling in Maryland, using a 1970s-era text book where every figure was white and male, the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking. The railroads west just didn’t magically appear–the Chinese labored and died to make them. That is part of our history. That is why SF has such a high Chinese population. I think the past focus on only one group has further pixelated the picture–if you teach a comprehensive version of history it is more wholistic and inclusive of the over all struggle to build America–even when the groups sometimes struggled against each other.

One other comment: I don’t think the school systems will have to have sex ed in first grade in order for elementary schools to incorporate the contributions of individuals into the curriculum. The books like “Dick and Jane Have Two Mommies” or whatever get the point across fairly well without going into the details.

High schoolers could definitely handle sexual orientation as one aspect of a given historical figure and, in fact, I think that’s where this material would do the most good since most teen suicides I am aware of happen during the high school years (duh) and many are attributable, at least in part, to peer hazing and feelings of alienation.

[briansd1]

[quote=Shadowfax]the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking.[/quote]

Based on my interaction with my nieces and young cousins, I can say that kids today are better educated and more socially conscious than my generation was.

Today’s education is better for those who want to learn.

Kids today know so much more. (I was lucky that when I was young, I was curious and read the encyclopedia)

[quote=flu]But no worries, if our kids fall further behind in core skills, there’s plenty of folks from asia/india/europe who don’t have a problem filling those opportunities our kids should have had (end sarcasm)…[/quote]

Today, education in America is definitely better than it used to be decades ago.

The problem (if we can call it that) is that globalization of technology and education is allowing students in other countries to catch up with us faster than we can adapt. An American child who has everything will think about playing and entertainment and he/she won’t study as hard.

It’s amazing to me that an Indian born into the untouchables class could enter a US university and earn a PhD. It’s also amazing to me that a Chinese scientist working at a prestigious institution might have been born into a family of illiterate peasants. Eastern Europeans were well-educated but they were constrained by their political system.

The world has changed a lot.

[briansd1]

[quote=Shadowfax]the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking.[/quote]

Based on my interaction with my nieces and young cousins, I can say that kids today are better educated and more socially conscious than my generation was.

Today’s education is better for those who want to learn.

Kids today know so much more. (I was lucky that when I was young, I was curious and read the encyclopedia)

[quote=flu]But no worries, if our kids fall further behind in core skills, there’s plenty of folks from asia/india/europe who don’t have a problem filling those opportunities our kids should have had (end sarcasm)…[/quote]

Today, education in America is definitely better than it used to be decades ago.

The problem (if we can call it that) is that globalization of technology and education is allowing students in other countries to catch up with us faster than we can adapt. An American child who has everything will think about playing and entertainment and he/she won’t study as hard.

It’s amazing to me that an Indian born into the untouchables class could enter a US university and earn a PhD. It’s also amazing to me that a Chinese scientist working at a prestigious institution might have been born into a family of illiterate peasants. Eastern Europeans were well-educated but they were constrained by their political system.

The world has changed a lot.

[briansd1]

[quote=Shadowfax]the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking.[/quote]

Based on my interaction with my nieces and young cousins, I can say that kids today are better educated and more socially conscious than my generation was.

Today’s education is better for those who want to learn.

Kids today know so much more. (I was lucky that when I was young, I was curious and read the encyclopedia)

[quote=flu]But no worries, if our kids fall further behind in core skills, there’s plenty of folks from asia/india/europe who don’t have a problem filling those opportunities our kids should have had (end sarcasm)…[/quote]

Today, education in America is definitely better than it used to be decades ago.

The problem (if we can call it that) is that globalization of technology and education is allowing students in other countries to catch up with us faster than we can adapt. An American child who has everything will think about playing and entertainment and he/she won’t study as hard.

It’s amazing to me that an Indian born into the untouchables class could enter a US university and earn a PhD. It’s also amazing to me that a Chinese scientist working at a prestigious institution might have been born into a family of illiterate peasants. Eastern Europeans were well-educated but they were constrained by their political system.

The world has changed a lot.

[briansd1]

[quote=Shadowfax]the history we are encouraging be taught today would be MORE accurate and encourage more analytical thinking.[/quote]

Based on my interaction with my nieces and young cousins, I can say that kids today are better educated and more socially conscious than my generation was.

Today’s education is better for those who want to learn.

Kids today know so much more. (I was lucky that when I was young, I was curious and read the encyclopedia)

[quote=flu]But no worries, if our kids fall further behind in core skills, there’s plenty of folks from asia/india/europe who don’t have a problem filling those opportunities our kids should have had (end sarcasm)…[/quote]

Today, education in America is definitely better than it used to be decades ago.

The problem (if we can call it that) is that globalization of technology and education is allowing students in other countries to catch up with us faster than we can adapt. An American child who has everything will think about playing and entertainment and he/she won’t study as hard.

It’s amazing to me that an Indian born into the untouchables class could enter a US university and earn a PhD. It’s also amazing to me that a Chinese scientist working at a prestigious institution might have been born into a family of illiterate peasants. Eastern Europeans were well-educated but they were constrained by their political system.

The world has changed a lot.

[Author]

Posts