History books...allll lies??

After reading the Christopher Columbus article by James Loewen, I began to question all the information I was taught in history classes I have taken and even other subjects too. It seems that many things we are taught in textbooks, are not the truth or actual facts we need to know, but instead a set of facts or ideas that “someone” or some group of people want us to know. Perhaps it is our govt. or educational leaders because they want us to grow up having certain similar values. I went through as I read the story about Christopher Columbus and wrote down thoughts or questions I had about why I thought our educators or govt. groups might do this....and for what reasons they believe it is their responsibility to do so. (instead of teaching the truth or other possibilities for what has happened throughout history). For one, books try to humanize Columbus in order to make his story more appealing to the public and less controversial. There are so many inconsistencies between books and also large amounts of information that disprove the accounts that are in our books, I find it incredible that we all believe anything that we read. It is almost as if schools or the govt…or whoever chooses to feed us these half true stories is out to trick us and force us to all believe as they do. Isn’t the point of education to teach us what is true…or how to determine the difference? Quite ironic isn’t it. It is also almost like the writers of textbooks are just too lazy to take the time to try to explain the facts, as unruly or shocking as they are. Not all of the true stories of history are that bad! They just need to be backed by substantial evidence in order to prove their relativeness and impact on our current society. I feel cheated though, thinking that there is probably soooo much more that I have been taught in school that is false or only half-true!

Blog 2-Chapters 1, 4, and 12

I read these articles in the order that they were assigned meaning I read chapter 4 first, entitled, "Educational Vision," by Henry A. Giroux. The idea of a teacher's vision seems to be a common subject among my education and even art education classes here at UNCG. I enjoyed this article specifically because the author seems to realize that teacher's need visions to guide them in their teaching, but he focuses on what aspects of our educational systems, that hender us from doing so... even though ultimately our goals for educators are to be critical thinkers that "struggle for principles of equality, freedom, and justice"(Giroux, 2009, 30). Does this not seem like a contradiction? I felt that several issues the author discussed here related to our class discussions directly also! For instance, he talks about how our govt. cuts spending for public schools and how this directly effects the poorest of our societies and keeps those students behind.. often being the people that need help and education the most! He also discusses President Reagan's program,the "Reagan commitment," and how he implemented topics like patriotism using the "cold war ideology of military preparedness" and concentrating on indv. achievement for the greater good of all(Giroux, 2009, 30). I wanted to pose several questions for you all from this perspective. Because these implementations on our systems have obviously not led us into a nation of peace, Why don't we teach classes on peace rather then war...or the benefits of togetherness and working in groups to create positive impacts on our society? It seems more logical to me, but does not seem to the case. Giroux goes on to discuss the 1990s and how our educational programs should ultimately be responsible for creating a better workforce in our country, but what about everything else our students need to be equip to do in order to survive and think for themselves? I often wonder if our educational aims, are too centered around problems facing the country currently and not the bigger picture of what theses programs will do in the long run!