| |
|
The
Problem with Any World History Textbook: James Loewen and the World History
Survey
Eric Lane Martin
Lewis-Clark State College |
|
Which world history textbook should I use? This
question resurfaces on H-World annually as new groups of teachers struggle
to develop a coherent world history survey course. And it is not only a
question for those new to the classroom. Those of us who have taught more
sections of the survey than we care to recall also ask ourselves this question
time and time again. It seems fitting that the sixth issue of the newest
publication devoted to world history teaching and research should discuss
the value of various textbooks. The decision to use or not to use a particular
textbook is of critical importance for the simple reason that textbooks
offer an organizational structure to frame the course, and thereby have
the potential to shape the type of knowledge and the style of learning taking
place in world history surveys. But before we decide on which textbook to
use, let us consider an equally important issue: why should we use a textbook
in the first place? In the pages that follow I question the desirability
of organizing the world history survey around textbooks through an examination
of the most successful tool I have ever used in the world history classroom.
|
1 |
If success is measured by lively and meaningful
classroom discussion, then James Loewen's, Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything
Your American History Textbook Got Wrong,1
is easily the most successful book I have used in the world history survey.
The historical themes Loewen chose naturally lend themselves to a type of
global contextualization that not only meets the needs of the post 1500
world history classroom, but also positions U.S. history within the broader
framework of the history of the planet. Additionally, Loewen does an excellent
job of analyzing the discipline of history as a whole, emphasizing the difference
between national mythology and analytical history. This approach encourages
students to think not only about historical content, but also about historical
production.
|
2 |
|
Loewen's introduction, "Something Has Gone Very
Wrong," begins with the following statement:
High School Students
Hate History. When they list their favorite subject, history invariably
comes in last. Students consider history "the most irrelevant" of the
twenty-one subjects commonly taught in high school.2
|
3 |
|
Although I have never asked my college freshman
to list their favorite subjects, I do ask about their expectations for the
class on the first day. Of course there are a wide variety of answers, some
students are excited at the prospect of learning about the world outside
of the Idaho panhandle where I teach, but too many students tell me that
they expect a boring, irrelevant, and difficult semester from a required
course. Loewen's thesis is essentially that students dislike history courses
because these courses are committed to a pedagogical model dependant on
poorly conceived textbooks and that, moreover, "the teaching of history,
more than any other discipline, is dominated by textbooks."3 |
4 |
|
Loewen's textbook critique can roughly be summed
up as follows. Texts have too much information, which reinforces the idea
that studying history is about memorizing names, dates, and facts —
which are usually presented as disconnected. At the same time, too few texts
contain primary sources. It is assumed students cannot handle the ugly truth
that history "is a furious debate informed by evidence and reason."4 The narratives are predictable,
portraying problems as resolved and avoiding controversial issues, frequently
promoting national pride over critical inquiry. And while we tell our students
that the study of history sheds light on our contemporary world, the present
and past are rarely connected in a meaningful way to illuminate one another
in history textbooks. Although Loewen's critique is directed specifically
at American history high school textbooks, world historians would do well
to pay attention to it, since we face similar problems in higher education. |
5 |
An additional problem with organizing a course around
a survey textbook that Loewen does not address directly is that textbooks
are not very effective tools for sharpening analytical thinking skills.
My college teaching career has been on campuses composed primarily of working
class students who were products of public education systems. Many of the
college freshmen that pass through my class need to be taught how to critically
read a book. How do you identify an author's thesis statement? What kinds
of evidence did the author use? How did this connect with other knowledge
you have on the subject? Were you convinced by the author's argument? Perhaps
our students should be better prepared academically, but many are not and
survey texts provide few opportunities to develop these skills. Additionally,
in order for our students to become better analytical writers we need to
offer models that illustrate how to set up a thesis and support it by using
evidence. Due to their encyclopedic nature, world history survey textbooks
— and there are some good ones —simply cannot serve these functions.
This is a job for good old fashioned monographs — like Loewen's.
|
6 |
In the first chapter, "Handicapped by History: The
Process of Hero-making" Loewen examines the process of heroification through
two cases studies: Woodrow Wilson and Helen Keller. Here he sets out the
modus operandi he will use for the rest of the book, examining the
hero-making process through what twelve popular high school history textbooks
have to say about a topic, and then comparing that to what scholars know.
In the case of Helen Keller, Loewen points out the broken link between her
radical socialist politics, which are practically ignored in textbooks,
and her physical disabilities, which she attributed to her social class.
As for Wilson, Loewen argues that textbooks portray him as a leader who
reluctantly brought the U.S. into World War I and worked to establish the
League of Nations afterwards, while ignoring the imperialist interventions
that occurred during his administration in Latin America and his white supremacist
views. The point is not to besmirch the reputation of this or that historical
"hero," but rather to point out the hero-making process. Loewen does not
directly address the equally distorting counterpart of heroification, the
process of demonization, but students quickly figure it out and are eager
to point out cases of each for the rest of the semester where historical
figures have essentially been "Disneyfied."
|
7 |
Loewen's introduction and first chapter have proven
excellent at provoking discussion and debate on basic conceptual questions
such as: what is history, should we study it, and how is historical knowledge
created in the first place? I assign these two sections for our second class
meeting along with a 250 word written assignment that asks students to address
the following questions: What is the overall thesis of this book? What kinds
of evidence is Loewen going to use to prove his thesis? Were you able to
relate to the issues Loewen brought up? Unlike survey textbooks, Loewen's
book has a clear argument with supporting evidence built into every chapter
lending itself to these types of questions.
|
8 |
|
On the second day of class, I organize students
into groups of five for about 15 minutes. I ask them to discuss what they
have written amongst themselves and to develop some collective answers to
share with the whole class. Although there are a great variety of responses,
in general my students indicate that they were able to relate, at least
in part, to Loewen's critique of the high school history experience. Those
students who were unable to relate to negative experiences studying history
are often eager to explain to the class why they liked their history courses.
Usually it was because of a memorable teacher. Either way, students reflect
upon the nature of the discipline of history, consider the pros and cons
of the basic pedagogical tool — the textbook — and look for
connections to their own intellectual experiences. |
9 |
|
The rest of the book is organized around thematic
chapters that analyze what twelve popular U.S. history textbooks say and
do not say. Each chapter is written in such a way that it could work as
a stand alone reading, and although focused on U.S. history, the topics
that Loewen has chosen to examine naturally lend themselves to discussion
during the second half of the world history survey. Loewen begins by examining
the narratives told about the Columbian voyages and the first thanksgiving,
followed by a discussion on the absence of Native Americans in American
history textbooks. All three of these chapters fit nicely within a broader
discussion of the creation of an Atlantic world zone of interaction and
the role of the Columbian exchange at the global level. His next two themes,
the absence of both racism and anti-racism in American history textbooks,
also connect into the Columbian exchange discussion as well as a discussion
of slavery at a more global level. The chapters focus on a time period from
just before the American Revolution through the American civil war and into
the early 1900's, opening up opportunities to discuss issues related to
enlightenment thought, revolution, industrialization, and colonialism. Loewen's
chapters on the absence of social class from American history textbooks
and on the heroification of the state also relate to a broader discussion
of industry, empire, and the growth of the nation state. His critique of
the absence of the recent past from most textbooks, the role of "progress"
in historical narrative, and the results of teaching history like this provoke
end of the term reflection by both students and teachers. |
10 |
|
Loewen does not provide a magical solution to the
world history textbook question. However, Loewen does provide a clear thesis
for each chapter, supported by primary and secondary sources that students
can analyze critically. I use variations of the following questions for
the duration of the semester. What was the thesis of this chapter? What
evidence did Loewen present? Did the evidence in your reader support/contradict
Loewen's historical interpretation? Were you convinced? How did this chapter
fit in with his overall argument for the book? Developing answers to such
questions promote analytical thinking skills. These are simply not the kinds
of questions that can be asked of world history survey texts. |
11 |
|
Many students credit Loewen for helping them to
get over a personal history phobia by pointing out that history is as much
about the process of documenting and interpreting the past as it is about
the actual past. These students are relieved to learn that there is nothing
wrong with them, that history is not supposed to be read from a textbook
and then memorized. Some appreciate Loewen's lowering of their historical
blinders by highlighting some of the (mis)information they had been taught
as history. Not only are these students interested in this new information,
but it also helps some understand why they thought history was so boring
in the first place. |
12 |
|
Others think that Loewen's interpretation of U.S.
history is too negative, his confrontational style a bit repetitive, and
his political leanings too leftist. Students do not all agree with each
other or with Loewen, but the vast majority of my students indicate that
they think I should continue to use the book in the world history survey
because our discussions of it have encouraged them to be a more critical
of the sources they use for information. Students may not agree with Loewen,
but they form an opinion about his work and want to discuss it in a way
that I have not seen with any world history survey text. In fact, I do not
think any world history text is able to generate as much discussion as Loewen's
book because most textbooks are descriptive rather that argumentative, and
those that have an argumentative element to them certainly are not putting
forth the argument that the stuff you learned in high school, which you
thought was history, was in actuality a bunch of lies. |
13 |
|
Not only are all of Loewen's themes easily globalized,
but he makes a solid effort to place U.S. history within the history of
the wider world. Loewen's focus on American history texts can help students
connect to larger process by starting from something that they already know,
or thought they knew. However, his work cannot stand alone in a world history
survey; it will need to be further contextualized in class lectures, in
discussions, and through accompanying readings. I currently use Kevin Reilly's
Worlds of History, which is an edited reader with both primary and
secondary sources, for this purpose.5
Many of the other world history readers could also complement the Loewen
book. One advantage to using such a reader is that students can test much
of Loewen's argument with their own primary/secondary sources. I have found
that even simple assignments, such as "did the assigned readings in Reilly
support/contradict Loewen's historical interpretation?" generate lively,
document based discussion among students. |
14 |
|
Now that I have questioned the pedagogical value
of the survey oriented textbook, especially if one is interested in teaching
critical thinking skills, I have a confession to make. In addition to Loewen
and a primary/secondary source reader, I usually assign one of the world
history survey texts. Most of my students know so little history that they
need a basic reference text. But I have taken a new approach to the
survey texts and encourage students to read them as they would an encyclopedia
— in small chunks, with the purpose of getting some broader historical
background. I also encourage my students to take the critique Loewen offers
of American history high school textbooks and apply it to their college
level world history text, an exercise which can produce some wonderful end
of the semester discussions assessing Loewen, the reader, and the survey
text in connection with one another. I'd like to find a monograph that served
a similar function as the Loewen book for the pre-1500 world history survey,
but the expanded time scale of the pre-1500 survey has made this a much
more difficult task. |
15 |
|
I do not think that it is pedagogically desirable
to organize the world history survey around an encyclopedic textbook. This
model reinforces the myth of an authoritative, all encompassing meta-narrative
that need only be memorized. It also reinforces the idea that the field
of world history is limited to issues related to teaching the surveys. In
both instances, world history is implicitly defined as content -- the history
of everything that happened in the world. Promoting world history as a conceptual
approach to content, even at the survey level, would help distinguish the
specialized characteristics of the field, including world history research. |
16 |
|
It is clear, however, that students need a resource
that provides basic historical background as well as an introductory bibliography
from which to begin their own historical investigations. And the truth is
that many teachers/professors have never given the field much, if any, thought
until they received a world history survey as part of their course load.
So it is not just students who need such a resource. Fortunately, the field
of world history has several good texts that accomplish these tasks. The
trick is providing a resource to students (and teachers) who need it and
using it effectively, without allowing that resource to dominate the organizational
structure of the course in such a way that students (and teachers) disengage
because they are overwhelmed by content. |
17 |
|
This last summer the issue of improving the historiographic
consciousness of the field was raised at the fourteenth annual meeting of
the World History Association in Ifrane, Morocco. Participants in the discussion
argued that future world history research, methodology, teaching, and conceptualization
would all benefit from a stronger awareness of the field's historiography,
which could be developed through a more explicit use of this literature
in our research and teaching. At the same time a debate concerning exactly
what the world history literature included also emerged. A very useful discussion
for future issues of World History Connected, or on the H-World listserv,
could focus on various sets of books that together form the backbone for
a coherent world history survey, both pre and post 1500. I'd like to hear
from those who have successfully disposed of the world history survey text
all together. I think such a discussion would not only improve our historiographic
consciousness, but would also promote the development of world history surveys
based on monographs, journal articles, and primary sources. Such courses
could bridge the gap between world history 'the teaching field' and world
history 'the research field,' furthering the intellectual development of
both. |
18 |
| Biographical
Note: Eric Martin is an assistant professor of history at Lewis-Clark
State College in Lewiston, Idaho. He received his Ph.D. from Northeastern
University in 2002 and is one of the Editors of H-World as well as a Co-Editor
of the World History Section of History Compass. |
|
Notes
1
Touchstone Press, 1996.
2
Loewen, 12. Emphasis in original.
5
Kevin Reilly, Worlds of History: A Comparative Reader, 2nd
edition (Bedford/St. Martins, 2003).
|
|
