So why should we care about him then? Why not read someone who can express themselves more clearly? A good writer is one who can explain things to other people, who can open up new worlds for other people. There are ample good writers on the planet, why waste our time on an incompetent one?

Now I live in Northern Virginia, supposed to have some of the best schools possible. I’ve taught here, and my daughter graduated here. She says that every time they studied history, no matter what grade, they always began more or less in prehistory, and never got much beyond the Middle Ages.

At this point I’m not sure how this got into a discussion about Freire,but I’m going to try to get a bit more familiar with his work.

Look, the syllibi of ed. school intro courses are just plain… Well, let’s say they are tired. Awefully, awefully tired. So, it might be fun here, with so many participants, suggest some new titles. How about adding The Autobiograpy of Malcom X, The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas, and, at least, the chaper, “Reading” from Walden? There’s a trio of minds bent on the nature of education!

Tom, What cheer, netop? Your comments are so cryptic. Debbie Gist a Red? Surely you jest. But what a story her tenure will be! Former D.C. overseer of Michelle Rhee, will she be chewed up and spat out by the establishment here? Is that faint scraping in the Rhode Island night our first cricket heralding of coming summer, or is it the sharpening of knives? If, Tom, you are not pledged to silence, pray tell. Where and when will the cloaks be dropped?

As for the GLE’s, they’ve been long since digested. A little chewy at first, but they settled well enough. My students are doing just fine with them, too. What I hope doen’t happen before I retire is another change in the menu.

Do you know if Cuban schools use traditional direct-instruction with a prescribed curriculum or something more student-centered and “progressive”?

I’m not sure what you mean asking if I see my curriculum as “definitive”. I see it as a primer coat –setting up the schemata of various historical episodes which students can hang additional details on (or modify) as their education progresses. Do I tell them to think critically about what I’m telling them, because teachers lie and you should be suspicious of all authority, and there exist radically different perspectives on everything I’m telling you, and I’m only telling you a bare-bones version of events? No. It’s hard enough for most of them to simply “get” the narrative I give. Is it a perfect one? By no means. But if the alternative is no history in their heads, I don’t feel so bad about my imperfect version. The scary reality is that for most of my kids, especially the non-college bound, this is the ONLY course in medieval and early modern world history they will EVER get. It’s dismaying to me that, as flawed as I feel my teaching to be, I’m pretty sure that most 7th graders in California get a whole lot less history knowledge than what I provide my kids. For instance, from what I’ve heard, it’s common to lop off the Reformation, Age of Exploration, Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment. Most middle school principals lump history with language arts and literature, hoping that the teacher will divert some energy from history to STAR language arts/reading test prep. And now Jack O’Connell, our state superintendent, wants to water down our wonderful history standards with “21st Century Skills” –guaranteeing that even less actual history gets learned. Add to this the fact that our state’s big professional organization for social studies teachers seems steeped in progressive ed orthodoxy, and the prospects for good history teaching in this state seem bleak.

Do you see your curriculum as definitive so that your students will have only the knowledge that is treated in your class?