Antonio Salazar

HIST 496
Merryfield Critique
Merryfield and Wilson start by introducing the reader to their rationale and objectives for
teaching world history. I agree with most of their reasons for wanting to teach it and why it is
important to teach to students today. Their arguments do pose some challenges that need to be
addressed as well. They state that students need to be informed about what is happening around
the globe because of the issues that are affecting their lives. Because students today live on a
global stage they may be more aware that their lives are connected to changes in the world, but
they also need to understand the cultural donations and historical contributions that helped create
the things that are affecting them. Teaching world history helps students understand their
connectedness in a broader context with deeper meaning. By pursuing multiple perspectives of
historical events students can widen the factors which affect how they think about issues and
events.
When we teach world history students benefit from the fact that controversial material is
viewed which allows them to experience other views and determine the veracity and validity of
the expansive descriptions. These views help students understand the world they live in and
gives them background rationale for other events in history. By better comprehending their
place in the world students can appreciate other cultures and recognize the commonalities that
we as global citizens share. Connecting to people and their experiences throughout the world
helps provide unique perspectives which enhance their learning experience when studying events
in their own local histories. Likewise, understanding more about their own experiences helps
students to decipher global events.
The biggest obstacle that I saw in this rationale is that some students may not see the
value in the experiences of any other people besides their own. The internet may allow students
of today to seem more globally aware but few have any tangible knowledge of what things are
like at the other end of the chat room connection. Teaching students world history may allow
them to learn the truth, however students must first be convinced that a need for a view other
than their own is a necessity. Another potential issue that may arise is that many students with
single-race white heritages may feel ostracized and defensive when learning about the depth of
the destruction of cultures that have been perpetuated worldwide throughout history. Being a
part of a newly more diverse classroom may make them feel as though their very heritage is
being attacked. The effort to appreciate world cultures and multiple perspectives may seem to
diminish the perspective that they identify with most.
I think that I would definitely pursue world history with these objectives in mind.
Learning history gives students an understanding of where we have been, why historical events
happened, and the impact that they left on the rest of the world. By seeing different perspectives
students can learn to appreciate a fuller scope of information and learn to be critically aware of
bias and the role it plays in accurate documentation. By seeing that world history has not
happened in a vacuum but instead has actively touched and donated to subsequent events,
students can understand how current events promise to do the same today. Done respectfully,
and with the understanding that current mores cannot determine judgment of past events,
students will have the opportunity to see multiple perspectives without projecting any
dissatisfaction onto their current classmates because of historical occurrences.
Worldmindedness as an underlying teaching philosophy is beneficial as well. By
pursuing this method students can learn content knowledge. This is good because it provides a
deeper connection in the awareness of the student using experience to bolster memory. One
drawback is that the best way to learn this substantive knowledge is to learn by doing which can
lead to many mistakes. For self conscious immigrants who are seeking to learn to fit in, this may
be embarrassing. Worldmindedness also teaches perceptual understanding which is a more
complex understanding and empathy for people and places. Students who gain this heightened
level of open-mindedness seek to get beyond the surface information and try to extrapolate
attitudes and feelings of the people that they are studying by putting themselves in their shoes of
experiences and wondering how they would feel. The drawbacks that can happen is that
sometimes students identify so much with these cultures that they can percolate resentment
against the historical oppressors of these peoples in a personal way.
Worldmindedness also impacts personal growth. When students actively participate in
other cultures by visiting them they can gain self confidence and use the experience to foster
independence in their own lives. The problem with this is that it is difficult to achieve this kind
of reaction in a classroom setting. Students work within the framework of their classroom and
find it difficult to find this level of independent personal reinforcement. Interpersonal
connections likewise help students identify with other cultures which can lead to the
understanding that there are many similar problems encountered by people and cultures
regardless of time or place. Again, this is sometimes difficult to achieve because these
interpersonal relationships usually result due to long term international experiences. Cultural
Mediation results when students due to cross-cultural experiences gain the knowledge necessary
to act as a mediator or go-between in regards to that culture. They can help interpret and explain
practices and mores to people who do not have experience with that culture. This level of
awareness is difficult to achieve in reality. Some students with a limited cross-cultural
experience may believe that their knowledge is in actuality, broad. This can lead to students who
think they know more than they do and stop actively trying to learn more.
I would definitely promote international and cross-cultural experiences. Not all students
can afford to travel to witness other cultures, but speakers of other cultures could be brought to
them. This is a limited way to expose the students to other cultures because they are not
immersed in them, but it encourages worldmindedness by bringing other cultural experiences
into the classroom. Bringing the cultures to the center of their thinking gets students to think
about the connections that they have allows them to see through someone else’s eyes when they
are witnessing others or themselves.
Course organization is an issue for all teachers of global world history. One method is
the western heritage/different cultures model. The benefit of this model is that this is what
people have used for a long time. There is lots of material to support this type of organization
and the topics are familiar to the students. The drawback is that like many classes that claim to
be world history, this is actually a token view of other civilization which lead to a western
civilization course. The view is very Eurocentric because it tends to promote western
civilization as the culmination of thousands of years of thought, the result being the pinnacle of
advancement and achievement. Another organization model is the universal patterns framework.
It places an emphasis on a more open focus of themes instead of on facts. It is good because it
gets students thinking about the big picture and is less biased toward western civilization. The
problem is that it is still biased toward Eurocentric focus. Also, there are fewer established
materials for teachers to use. Without studying cultures and multiple worldviews in depth,
students may not comprehend the importance of culture or appreciate the differences that
cultures have.
 Another type of organization is the universal patterns and particular cultures model. As
the name suggests it combines both approaches. The advantages are that by showing students
both ways students get to reinforce lessons from both aspects. The problems that arise from a
model like this one are that it is difficult for the teacher to organize and requires a great deal of
teacher knowledge into every cultural background. The final model of organization is the world
cultures focus. This is a good model because it is interdisciplinary and because students are
learning about whole regions at a time from beginning to end, they get to experience the passage
of history right up to the present for each and every region. The issue with this model is that the
amount of material taught is shortened. Also, since each region is taught independently of each
other there are no connections made. There are no commonalities developed between regions.
I agree with Merryfield that the best way seems to be to combine the models and teach in
chronologically, but only within a thematic framework. This allows for the students to make
clear connection between different regions and historical events. It also promotes the revisiting
of topics since the themes direct the material of each lesson. By broadening the material instead
of merely studying what are in reality, without the bias of western civilization which permeated
historical teaching in the past, arbitrarily chosen chronological events, students can gain context
for the major events of history.
In comparing and contrasting the Teaching Ideas 7, 9, and 10 it is easy to see what the
benefits of these lessons are and what the detriments are. Comparatively, all three ideas focus on
the development of knowledge as it pertains to other cultures and places. They also get students
to be active in this pursuit. What is different about them is in idea seven the students are learning
through the experiences of someone else and are being asked to interpret the postcards without
any personal knowledge of their own. In idea nine culturally aware students isolate themselves
in order to discuss strategies that they are already employing. Students who are not international
or cross-culturally experienced are not included in the discussion. Idea ten has students be active
in accomplishing a goal, but there is little actual experiencing taking place.
The benefits of these ideas are that they are trying to promote more awareness for other
cultures and experiences. They attempt to engage students in an active manner which is better
than merely inundating them with facts that make no personal connection to the students. In idea
seven they can see the places on the postcards and interpret what they are looking at. In idea
nine students are using a common shared experience to help each other learn coping techniques
which is beneficial to all of the international and cross-cultural students participating. Idea ten
lets students feel like they are actually doing something that is making a difference in the world.
The problems with these teaching ideas are that they are incomplete. Idea seven goes as
far as to suggest that students use pictures from a magazine. These do not help teach the students
anything about the culture of these places. The lesson is limited by the knowledge that the
teacher has which is fine if the postcards and pictures belong to the teacher because of the
personal experience. The problem arises when students use other pictures which the teacher has
a limited amount of knowledge about. Idea nine does not include students who could also
benefit from the discussion. By including the students who are not immigrants or cross-
culturally experienced, they may be able to better understand the struggle and difficulties that
those students feel when they are learning to adjust to their new culture. This could lead to
tolerance and understanding and also give them awareness for when they do decide to travel and
experience other countries. Teaching idea ten in the eyes of students would be out of sight, out of
mind. There is no tangible evidence that they can see for their efforts. Also, students do not get
the opportunity to experience the communities in the Peace Corps countries in any direct way.
They can be sent letters and trinkets but have no basis of knowledge to make connections to.
The way I would change the lessons would be to ask students to bring in postcards and
pictures from their own homes as well in idea seven. Then they could participate in answering
the questions of other students and be more engaged in the lessons. They would have a personal
connection to the material. Idea nine could be made better just by including the other students to
participate in the discussion. I think they stand to benefit as much if not more than the
international and cross-cultural students. Idea ten is a difficult one because the students clearly
cannot visit the Peace Corps country, but perhaps if the students also supplied the Peace Corps
volunteers with a video tape they could get back live footage from the country which would be
better evidence of the real life events that they could experience. They could then witness the
culture and make personal ties to the country.
There are many methods to convey a global education. One method is to teach for
understanding of world cultures. This way is good because it helps students be prepared for a
multicultural American society and the larger global society. This displays a deeper appreciation
for diversity and interconnectedness. Detractors point out that it may dilute the vaunted
significance of our own American culture, but I do not believe this can happen because culture is
constantly evolving and is not a static component. The evolution of our American culture
through diverse donations only ensures the promise of equality upon which our freedom is based.
Another method is to connect United States history to World history, because after all, the U.S. is
in the world. This means that it has been affected by the world as much as it has affected it.
This is a good way too because it places American history in the larger context of world history
and lets students see that the interconnectedness which now seems apparent has in fact been
happening for a long time. It places an emphasis on the efforts of today’s students to be
proactive in seeking multicultural awareness. The drawback is that many students will not want
to learn opposing perspectives of what up until now have been considered the greatest American
moments. Likewise, teaching global issues focuses on the larger context of American action in
world history which can point to the benefits of making connections. This however also brings
attention to topics of which America has not fulfilled its promise as a leader of the world to act.
This inadequacy may make some students feel as if the coursework is attacking the values and
ideologies of the United States. Others may actually over-identify with those who have suffered
as a result of American decisions and view the United States as malicious or apathetic. The last
method which I will mention is teaching current events from a global perspective. This is useful
because it reminds students to be activists and to see the larger ramification of current events on
other cultures in the world. The difficulties associated with this method lie in the sensitivity of
certain issues especially because they are usually still unresolved.
My methods will try and employ the best combination of these practices. I will continue
to pursue learning on a daily basis so that my content information is valid and reliable. I will
continue to be on the constant lookout for resources which provide a variety of perspectives.
These resources need to come from reliable collections and may or may not be what I am
working on at that moment. It is important to think about the big picture when harvesting
resources and plan ahead. I will try and pay attention to current events so that I can connect the
topics and issues to other relevant material in the coursework and lessons. By using different
media and encouraging the students to actively participate I hope to instill a sense of
responsibility that guides students thoughts and understanding.