Why not teach a balanced curriculum.

[Jackie S]

Why not teach a balanced curriculum, showing America's greatness, and it's fuck ups.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/24...culum-changes/

If you do not know the real truth about history, then you will repeat the mistakes of the past. We need a curriculum in our schools that the teaches the true history of our Country, good and bad.

Then students can decide for themselves if being lucky enough to be born in the greatest country on the Planet is a good thing, or a bad thing.

[Old-T]

It is impossible to argue against a balanced teaching of history. The hard part is getting agreement on the definition of balanced. Sadly, when the people developing the "balanced" curriculum are described by their political leanings (in either direction) I suspect I would disagree with their definition of balanced.

I believe as you stated, that we should cover both the good and the bad, emphasizing understanding the consequences, interconnections, and patterns that are bigger than individual events.

I wonder, if someone on a school curriculum committee wants to pretend civil disobedience didn't really happen, how would they explain the civil rights changes of the 50s/60s/70s, and what would they say about the VN unrest that lead in significant part to the way the US was for the next 20 years? If they want to downplay civil disobedience, I am sure they would feel even more strongly about downplaying armed insurrection, wouldn't they?

[Yssup Rider]

Agreed.

How do the "balanced" curriculum folks feel about men and dinosaurs living together?