Read on Twitter
I'd like to add that the time I take to actively teach about modern protests & nationalist movements in #apeuro (not covered by the course outline) gives my Ss a leg up in understanding our present day while putting them at a disadvantage on the AP exam. It's zero sum. https://twitter.com/TomRichey/status/1267134645256290305
By that I mean we read, watch, and unpack together the rise of modern nationalist movements in Europe and American *first* before covering textbook content:
I'd argue it's vastly more important for students to understand Brexit and Charlottesville to inform their present than it is Garibaldi, but we could otherwise spend a week on Italian unification.
How do we justify spending months on history content that never helps students understand the impact of the Syrian war and refugee crisis on the rise of European nationalist movements that takes us all the way to the massacre in Christchurch? https://www.npr.org/2016/06/25/483400958/from-brexit-to-trump-nationalist-movements-gain-momentum-around-world
How many years do we spend on the battles of WW2 compared to understanding Rhodesia and the context that led Dylann Roof to slaughter a Black church? https://www.vox.com/2015/6/18/8806633/charleston-shooter-flags-dylann-roof
What's the benefit of teaching dead history if we can't deal with the issues that are very much alive in our present? Yes, history is an important starting point, but if history comes at the COST of understanding the present, we've done nobody any favors.
This is how we start our "French Revolution" unit. After brainstorming a list of modern protests/revolutions, I queue up clips from YouTube and we note the commononalities: Ukraine, Hong Kong, Ferguson, Occupy...
THEN we layer in context from pre-revolutionary France through the conceptual frame of Crane Brinton's "Anatomy of a Revolution" to "diagnose" the situation...
So how can we get MLK Jr. to speak backwards AND forwards across time to illuminate not just his particular context, but to help us understand the relationships of people to power as a constant theme in history and have STUDENTS make those connections as well?
So then when we get to 1789, students already have in their mind's eye the scenes from Ferguson 2014, Occupy 2011, Hong Kong 2019, Arab Spring 2010....
They understand how it's going to play out because they've seen the barricades in Kiev on YouTube.
They understand how it's going to play out because they've seen the barricades in Kiev on YouTube.
If we say "WAIT! Teach France FIRST!" when do we ever get to 2010? 2014? 2019? 2020? Is that "enrichment" to make additional connections to the French Rev, or are we enriched through seeking past connections to our understanding of present events?
Or take it further, when do we get to the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan? The Syrian Civil War? Charlottesville? Or even Brexit?
Rhodesia doesn't even show up in the CollegeBoard outline!
Rhodesia doesn't even show up in the CollegeBoard outline!
