RE: Response (again)
BY: Ken Woodard to Barb Luongo on Sun May 26 1996 16:05:00
 > I'm certainly not one for lists. I fear that when it comes to history
 > I'm not even a big fan of it....too much "memorizing" of facts for me
 > and not enough relevance....at least that's the way I was taught it. My
There are two reasons for teaching history:
First, is to give a person a sense of "roots". You can start with family
history and work outward from there.
The other is to understand the cause and effect of whats going on in the
world around us...and possibly to even to keep from making the same mistakes
that were made in the past. We learn why they are fighting over a tiny strip
of "useless desert" in the middle east...or why there are racial tensions in
Bosnia, despite the fact that outwardly to they all look like the same race.
We also learn why our culture in the US developed as it did...who shaped it.
By learning the events leading up to World War II, we can see the pattern 
there
and not follow the same tragic course that the Germans of that time did,
misled by a charismatic leader.
Often it's not the memorized "facts", such as dates and names, that are
important, but how the events worked together toward the end result.
If you were not taught to see the relevance of events, then you have a
classic example of how NOT to teach your children. Find the relevence and
make it part of your lessons. I think both you and your children would enjoy
it a lot more ;)
                               ...peace...
                               Alinda Sue...
--- Skyhawk's Nightmare
---------------