random dada

From the Mind of a Pathologically Curious Teacher

Category: Uncategorized

Classes I Would Love to Teach

Image

My dear friends,

I recently discovered what appears to be a perfect school for me to call home. Fortune appears to have smiled on me and they have a social studies position open. What makes this school perfect for me is that both students and teachers initiate classes in their discipline and curiosities. If I correctly interpret the school’s website, they encourage teachers to be themselves and promote a vigorous form of self-direction for both teacher and student. Although, it was not asked for in the application package I wanted to offer them a sample of classes that I can see myself teaching in the core areas I would be expected to teach, namely:

  • US History

  • Economics

  • Government

  • Geography

  • World History

  • Current Events

  • Psychology

  • World Religions

 

The common themes that keep coming back to me and how I teach are:

  • humor

  • popular culture provides a convenient starting point

  • dichotomies cloud clear thinking

  • traditional subject boundaries no longer have meaning

  • learning must be fun

  • questions are more important than answers

With this in mind, below is a short list I threw together of classes I would love to teach or at least offer. I would like to hear any thoughts on my approach. Please keep in mind that this is still in brainstorming phase and I still have a day or two to refine the final product. 

 

Humor during the Cold War.

Brains as scarce resource: zombies and economics

I’m not crazy, my mother had me tested: psychology and The Big Bang Theory

Roman coliseum, Quentin Tarantino,  and True Blood: Are humans inherently violent?

Power to the People: Political and cultural revolutions

Is America the new Rome?

Gods, old and new: comparative history of the rise and fall of religions

Uncle Sam Wants You: American history through our propaganda

Eat the Rich: Class war in American history

 

Back to the blog-oh-sphere

Since my last post almost a year ago I wrapped up my graduate degree and student-teaching U.S. History. As I look for a full-time teaching job I have been tutoring various subjects. I also plan to pick up where I left off posting items that can be used teaching high school social studies.

World War II Propaganda as Rorschach Test

So much propaganda was created during WWII that you can find great art defending what now seems odd and peculiar.  Try doing a Google image search for WWII posters and be amazed.   The more obvious and well known works are for war bonds and working hard.  Not to be missed are the posters encouraging such things as saving bacon fat for explosives, scrap metal for bullets, and of course my favorite, reading books, or at least not burning them.

Modern Economics in less than 10 minutes.

The guys that brought the amazing video”Fear the Boom and Bust” are going to be coming out with a sequel.  So you know the proper response is giddiness.

Just watch it already.

“Fear the Boom and Bust” a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem

Culture is What?

Many people run to Wikipedia or http://www.urbandictionary.com/ when they begin to think about a subject.  I on the other hand, almost always pull the The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy off my  bookshelf and begin there.  I am not sure why or how I began this ritual, but there it is.  This ritual has been part of my culture for so long the book has oil stained edges and it tends to open to the page that ends the entry on Hume and begins the one on humour (the book is printed in England, so they get to spell it that way).

I have been on a quest to question my assumptions about what most people take for granted and lately I have been pondering the meaning of culture.  It is easy to be glib, such as the fellow that said, “culture is roughly anything we do and the monkeys don’t.”  However, I am not sure this is helpful, and it also assumes monkeys do not have a culture.  By way of illustrating why I love the Routledge Encyclopedia I thought I would quote the entry by Anthony O’Hear as a way of starting the conversation.

CULTURE

Culture comprises those aspects of human activity which are socially rather than genetically transmitted.  Each social group is characterized by its own culture, which informs the thought and activity of its members in myriad ways, perceptible and imperceptible.  The notion of culture, as an explanatory concept, gained prominence at the end of eighteenth century, as a reaction against the Enlightenment’s belief in the unity of mankind and universal progress.  According to J.G. Herder, each culture is different and has its own systems of meaning and value, and cannot be ranked on any universal scale.  Followers of Herder, such as Nietzsche and Spengler, stressed the organic nature of culture and praised cultural particularity against what Spengler called civilization, the world city in which cultural distinctions are eroded.  It is difficult, however, to see how Herder and his followers avoid an ultimately self-defeating cultural relativism;  the task of those who understand the significance of human culture is to make sense of it without sealing cultures off from one another and making interplay between them impossible.

Over and above the anthropological sense of culture, there is also the sense of culture as that through which a people’s highest spiritual and artistic aspirations are articulated.  Culture in this sense has been seen by Matthew Arnold and others as a substitute for religion, or as a kind of of secular religion.  While culture in this sense can certainly inveigh against materialism, it is less clear that it can do this effectively without a basis in religion.  Nor is it clear that a rigid distinction between high and low culture is desirable. It is, in fact, only the artistic modernists of the twentieth century who have articulated such a distinction in their work, to the detriment of the high and the low culture of our time.

Mistakes Were Made

In light of the article in last weeks Washington Post, Many errors spotted in Va. history texts, by Kevin Sieff some folks are shocked, shocked that big mistakes have made it into high school textbooks.  Granted the mistakes that were  made are egregious and shameful.  How do you get the years of World War I wrong?    I am moderately amused at the widespread shock.  Why are we still surprised by this?  This is why fact checkers have jobs.  Check and re-check your facts friends.  Just a reminder from someone that makes a lot of errors.


On the Syllabus

In the next few weeks I plan on putting together the rough drafts of Syllabi for the classes I might be teaching in a year.  I have always found the range of classes that the state of Oregon says I can teach to be a little absurd.  I understand why I would be credentialed to teach history, but, economics, psychology, and civics?  I am not saying that I do not want to teach these subjects because I do.  I think it odd, and a bit overwhelming to say I am just as qualified to teach economics as European history.  So, back to the topic of the syllabus, I used to be of the opinion that they were little more than the place teachers put their rules for the classroom.  Nothing wrong with that.

However, as the day I get a real job as a teacher looms on the horizon and the anxiety of  teaching classes I am not fully prepared for sets in, I realized that I need a plan.  As I reviewed the pile of notes collected while getting my degree in history, I understood that the syllabus is indeed more than I imagined.

The syllabus is a road map.  It is a battle plan, if you will.  United States history is not an amorphous blob, it follows a narrative arc.  Yea, I know this is really obvious.  However, it is easy to lose sight of the big picture.  When studying history, it is easy to jump from place to place and time to time.  Today I might be studying Athens of Herodotus and Socrates.  Tomorrow, I could be writing about George Washington, without so much as a thought to the leap in time and place.  To most people this is as disorienting as teleporting from New York City to Tokyo.  It is essential that teachers remind themselves that most students need a moment to reorient themselves.  They need a map, they need a syllabus that acts like a guide for the trip through time.

Like going on a road trip, I can alter the path as I go but it helps to have a general direction and sense of destination.  Thus, we get back to the syllabus.  It is not set in stone.  It is a guide.  So, as I compile the rough drafts of syllabi for the various disciplines that get assigned to social studies teachers, it is with this in mind.  I feel more qualified already.

Samurai Status, Article Critique

 

“Samurai Status, Class, and Bureaucracy: A Historiographical Essay” by Douglas R. Howland

Article Critique by Sam Del Biaggio


Though decidedly not very funny, it is possible to imagine the joke that asks, “What is the difference between a historian’s work and an Ikea catalog?” With the answer being, “Historians provide context and a cohesive narrative while the Ikea catalog only provides descriptions and a price.” Catalogs aim to inspire consumption by its audience. Historians don’t make catalogs. Historians figure things out, and then put those conclusions into a context as they create a narrative story to explain events or social change—we call the result, history. Howland reminds the reader that the author is investigating historiography as much as samurai status and class with the second part of his title “A Historiographical Essay.” While Howland’s object of study is the development of class and status of the samurai during the Tokugawa period of Japanese history—the essay is equally about the problems that have troubled those historians that study Asian history around the transition of samurai culture into modernity (Howland 365).

In his introduction Howland states his purpose as being “to review and clarify current descriptions of the samurai and to link status and class to another concept…their administrative labor in governmental bureaucracy.” Howland goes on to explain his intentions and design for his essay as he concludes his introduction, “What follows is a historiographical essay that examines the conceptual basis of ongoing discussions” (Howland 355). These concepts, class and status, are essential to understanding the foundation of the samurai warrior culture based on martial rank as Japan transitioned into a bureaucratic system. The article begins by establishing that E.H. Norman’s “seminal work, Japan’s Emergence as a Modern State, established the parameters of debate” (Howland 353). According to Howland, Norman posed the questions that would later be either reconfirmed or expanded by consequent research. This research becomes the heart of Howland’s article. The author establishes the nature of the territory as murky waters. He begins with the conceptual distinctions associated with class and status within the context of historians of Japanese society during the transition from the Tokugawa period into the Meiji. Questions abound for historians on the issue of status, class, and rank. While mibun (status) is an actual term from the Tokugawa period; the word for class (kaikyu) is a construction by historians and serves a theoretical function—thus, the historian must be mindful that one term is a historically accurate word while the other is a construct. Historians arrive at opposing conclusions as to the reality of the function and operation of status in samurai culture. These are indeed murky waters, as Howland summarizes, “Rigorous conceptual clarity is rare” (354).

The Confucian concept of “four divisions” lies at the heart of the development of status during the Tokugawa period (Howland 355). The Confucian model defined social relationships as hierarchal and specified rights and duties prescribed according to an individuals place in any particular social exchange. The Confucian conception of hierarchy developed to resolve issues in a different milieu than that which faced Japan over a millennium after Kung Fu-Tzu. The issues which later faced Japan revolved around ranking and status based on military service at its center. To Howland, the answers to questions of the cultural transition from a one of warriors to that of a bureaucratic one centers on issues around the ideology and education of the ruling class (371).

It can be assumed that the research and conclusions arrived at by Howland are sound—status and class work together as an explanation of change during the Tokugawa period (373). Howland arrives at other conclusions based on the exhaustive research he discusses. This becomes the problem of the article—the discussion centers purely on the research of other historians. Narrative thread is non-existent. Context is either buried or merely hinted at. While it would be possible to list and ascertain aspects of life in the Twenty-First century by reading several hundred catalogs—it would be ill advised to assume such a list made good history. By drawing exclusively on the debate in the historic literature little is accomplished other than cataloging facts centered on a theme. Without rigorous context and cohesive narration, the mere stringing together of facts—interesting though they might be—begins to look like a catalog more than history.

 

Good bye Google

This first day of 2011 is a little sad because I am bidding Google blogger farewell.  Sad because I typically love all things Google.  I will not use Bing, ever.  Google is the only search engine I ever use.  Google was one of my daughter’s first words to read.  I am still a loyalist to Google.   Nevertheless, Blogger has been unworkable.  This begins the new site for the repository of all things related to my classroom and general history geeky-ness.  Also, with this new blog and new year, comes a renewed desire to blog everyday, let us see how that goes.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

%d bloggers like this: