Cal Thomas: Whatever happened to teaching history? |
Featured Commentary

Cal Thomas: Whatever happened to teaching history?

Cal Thomas

According to a report by the National Assessment of Education Progress , the teaching of U.S. history to American students lags behind all other subject matters.

The latest NAEP survey finds that proficiency levels for fourth-, eighth- and 12th-grade students are in the 20th, 18th and 12th percentile, respectively.

Part of this, I suspect, is the way the subject is taught. History is boring to many students. It was boring to me in high school and college. Who wants to read about a bunch of dead white men one cannot view on video, or even in high-resolution photographs?

I asked David M. Rubenstein about this. Rubenstein has so many titles and accomplishments, including co-founder and co-executive chairman of the private equity firm the Carlyle Group, and chairman of the Board of Trustees for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

His new book, “The American Story: Conversations with Master Historians,” is a series of interviews with contemporary writers, including Jon Meacham, Doris Kearns Goodwin, David McCullough, Robert Caro and Jay Winik. All have written highly readable biographies that metaphorically raise America’s Founders and other important historical figures from the dead, making readers feel they are in the same room where they speak to us today.

Why does Rubenstein think U.S. history has taken a back seat to every other subject? He replied: “To some extent it started after Sputnik in 1957, when people were concerned that our science and technology were not as good as the Soviets. … Then when China came along as an economic and technological threat … the emphasis on STEM [science, technology, engineering and mathematics] became a bigger deal. Also, I think parents said to their children ‘make sure you study something that will get you a job when you graduate.’ All of this made history go down and therefore we don’t teach it very much.”

Rubenstein tells me this is not in his book, but something he finds shocking: “Today you can graduate from any college in the United States without having to take an American history course and you can graduate as a history major in 80% of the colleges and not have to take an American history course.”

As if this were not stunning enough, he adds: “A recent survey revealed that if one is foreign born and wishes to become a citizen, you have to be a resident for five years. It used to be 14. After five years you take a test. Ninety-one percent of the people pass. The same test was given to native-born citizens in all 50 states by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. A majority failed in every state, except Vermont. This shows you how bad the situation has gotten.”

Rubenstein says when history is taught, it is more about world civilizations than American history. While he says he doesn’t think learning about other countries is a bad idea, “it’s good to know your own history. I do find as I travel around the world that people know more about American history than people in the United States do.”

While he won’t comment on the role political correctness has played in the spinning of American history, the stories one hears coming from public schools and universities seems to confirm that the facts of America’s past are being revised to reflect a liberal and contemporary view. That is because some of the Founders owned slaves and explorers like Christopher Columbus are said to have wrecked a society of indigenous people and these “stains” can never be washed away, or at least seen in the context of their major achievements.

Rubenstein’s interviews are a thrilling trip to the past and ought to be required reading for anyone who cares about America’s future because, as Shakespeare wrote, “What’s past is prologue.”

Cal Thomas is a syndicated columnist.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.