Colonel Lowell was my first U.S. History teacher. He had a patch over his eye and walked around with one of those long, wooden pointer sticks. He spoke with a heavy New England accent and his tone resembled something of a bark. We followed the same routine in every class — come in, sit down, don’t talk and begin copying the day’s notes from the blackboard. My classmates and I would judge a particular day as a "good" one if only four sections of chalkboard were filled with notes instead of the usual six or seven. Colonel Lowell would begin his lecture as we diligently copied the notes from the board. If you fell asleep, he smacked his wooden stick on your desk. He kept the notes for each section of his lecture hidden behind white screens and only revealed the contents when he was ready. Those with slow penmanship were forced to stay after class to finish copying the notes from the board — the Colonel’s orders.
As a student with no background in American history (I came to the United States when I was 15), I had a lot of catching up to do. But Colonel Lowell made sure I learned every bit of history he taught, from Colonialism to World War II. He didn’t insert his political beliefs into the lecture although his family ancestry suggests his great great great grandfather probably considered heading to Canada with the loyalists instead of staying in Boston. Regardless, not once did Colonel Lowell sing the praises of the Canadian universal healthcare system or its mosaic model of multiculturalism. That wasn’t his job. His job was to teach us about American history, and that’s what he did. Colonel Lowell is retired now but his work lives on with each of his students.
Few Colonel Lowells exist in today’s education system. Those who do are forced to teach material that doesn’t even begin to address the basics of American history and our government’s structure. New curricula dictate that multiculturalism and tolerance of other nations is more important than understanding the history and make-up of Americans. The growing trend is to teach our students why everyone hates America, not why America is what it is today.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, 33 percent of 4th grade students perform at or below the basic level in their knowledge of U.S. History. This number increases dramatically among high school seniors. An astounding 57 percent of high school seniors perform at or below the basic level in U.S. History.
The response of educators to this demonstration of historical illiteracy is not what we should expect. According to a Maryland Humanities Council report in April 2003, social studies instruction time has been cut in various counties throughout the state. Both Maryland and New Jersey have canceled plans to implement statewide social studies tests altogether. Perhaps educators in these two states should reconsider this decision because according to the Thomas B. Fordham Institute’s "Effective State Standards for U.S. History: A 2003 Report Card," Maryland and New Jersey earned a "C" and an "F" respectively. Overall, the Fordham Institute awarded only six states a grade of "A" while 22 states plus the District of Columbia received an "F."
State Legislatures magazine reports in its July 1, 2003, edition that "the reason behind the [social studies reduction] movement is a simple one: Young people, according to a series of studies, don’t generally care much about government, whether it’s based in Washington, D.C. or any of the state capitals." Since when do students determine the curriculum? If a study were conducted on how students feel about algebra, experts would probably find a similar sentiment. That is not a responsible excuse to justify reduction (or total elimination) of social studies programs in our public schools.
Just where does student apathy towards government and civic participation come from? In a recent report by the National Association of Secretaries of State, nine out of 10 students think that government in general is run by a "few big interests." Where did students learn the term, "big interests?" The Constitution does not include the phrase "big interest," neither does the Bill of Rights. Speeches by Madison and Jefferson don’t convey this term either.
How does such terminology make its way into the public school system? Not surprisingly, the terms "big interests" and "special interests" are favorites of the Democratic National Committee and the Green Party, to name only two. Perhaps students should be asked to define the term "big interests" in the next series of national assessment tests.
Instead of learning about the influence of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, students are encouraged to become apathetic (or hostile) to the democratic process and to disdain the system without understanding its foundation, premises and structure. Perhaps left-wing, liberal interests would classify the Pilgrims as "big land interests" because they chose to leave Great Britain for the New World.
Some educators across the country have chosen to follow the mantra, "if it ain’t tested, it ain’t taught." If this attitude prevails coupled with the anti-American agenda put forth by liberal interests, we will be faced with a generation of decision makers who don’t even know what our Constitution is, let alone know how to understand and preserve it. When history repeats itself, who will know?
Efforts to restore and maintain educationally sound civics curricula at state and local levels must be strengthened. Actions by state legislators like those of Colorado Senate President John Andrews should be replicated. During this past legislative session, Senator Andrews introduced legislation that mandated high school students complete a course in federal and state government in order to graduate.
That sounds like such a simple class for high school students.
But unfortunately, such a basic class is needed today. Nineteen percent of teenagers could not identify our three branches of government; only 24% of 4th grade students could do the same. Again, the U.S. Department of Education reports that 57% of 4th grade students could not identify the President’s role in making laws. In that perspective, the basic course in state and federal government doesn’t seem so elementary.
While current high school knowledge regarding U.S. history, civics and social studies is dismal, there is hope. With a combination of parental activism and legislative action, we can reverse this trend. With due diligence, the problem can and will be fixed.
More Colonel Lowells and an intensive effort at curricula redevelopment are essential to the preservation of what we are as a country.