I've heard many students say Howard Zinn's People's History is the central/sole textbook in their history course. That's a very bad practice.https://twitter.com/Slate/status/1043832455357190144 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Agreed. I find it very hard to believe that Zinn is being used as the *sole* textbook for a college course--and even if it is, the course would naturally presume students had already covered the mainstream stuff.
I am referring to high school history, not college. Most college courses use multiple texts.
"Mainstream" historians are nearly all on the left these days Zinn was useful 30 years ago but far better works abound now
It’s ok, he’s lying about having heard that anyway
Considering that most people retain just a fraction of high school history, a book that inserts in their brains the notion that the claims of the powerful deserve suspicion probably isn't that bad.
All history should be taught through multiple lenses. Zin is great because he teaches that all history is political and forces students to confront the biases of everyone including himself. This should start from day 1 with A Young People’s History of the USA.
Daft things can happen. But most high schools in the United State are not using Zinn's book. In fact, just three out of 258 undergrad college history courses are using A People's History per this 2015 study (http://www.dancohen.org/files/by_the_book.pdf …) Slate offers no evidence for its assertion.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.