Blogs > Cliopatria > HS Heroes

Feb 8, 2008

HS Heroes




An interesting item in USA Today, first mentioned below by Ralph Luker, about a poll of high school students, asking them to name the 10 most famous Americans, outside of Presidents. Number one on the list, unsurprisingly, was Martin Luther King, Jr. (67 percent). The remainder of the list, however, was revealing as to the type of American history offered in today’s high schools: Rosa Parks (60%), Harriet Tubman (42%), Susan B. Anthony (34%), Benjamin Franklin (29%), Amelia Earhart (25%), Oprah Winfrey (22%), Marilyn Monroe (19%), Thomas Edison (18%), and Albert Einstein (16%).

The breakdown: three white males, three white females, one black male, and three black females, with African-Americans (including Harriet Tubman, who would not have been an obvious choice) occupying the top three spots.

The directors of the study seemed pleased with the results. Stanford’s Sam Wineburg: “over the course of about 44 years, we've had a revolution in the people who we come to think about to represent the American story . . . There’s a kind of shift going on, from the narrative of the founders, which is the national mythic narrative, to the narrative of expanding rights.” In this narrative, Harriet Tubman is more important than Alexander Hamilton—or, for that matter, William Lloyd Garrison or William Seward or even John Brown.

As for Winfrey, Wineburg fantastically asserted that she had “a kind of symbolic status similar to Benjamin Franklin.” He also rejoiced that a survey of adults showed a similar list—proof that “what's studied in school affects not just children but the adults who help them with their schoolwork.”

Dennis Denenberg, whose 50 American Heroes include Jackie Joyner-Kersee but not Hamilton or Madison, nor Dwight Eisenhower, nor John Marshall (or any other Supreme Court justice, except for Sandra Day O’Connor), justified the list’s seeming imbalance on the grounds that “the Cold War is over and gone. The civil rights movement is ongoing.”

The article notes that Wineburg will summarize the study for a forthcoming JAH. The problems he identified? The list’s lack of Hispanics, Native Americans, or labor leaders. Of course.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


R.R. Hamilton - 2/14/2008

From the FWIW department, my 6th grade daughter answered the following:

Martin Luther King
Marilyn Monroe
[Long Pause]
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Edison
[Long Pause]
Robert E. Lee
Rosa Parks
Anna Nicole Smith


Oscar Chamberlain - 2/12/2008

Thank you for your reply.

One reason I questioned you the way I did is that you were conflating two problems in K-12 education, insufficient instruction in history by qualified people and an excessive concern with self esteem in structuring class goals and outcomes.

The two are not some combined PC conspiracy. They have separate roots and, more important in this context, the proponents of one are not necessarily proponents of the other.

When one lumps a disparate group together with such a label, one only increases resistance to reform among all of them.


mark safranski - 2/11/2008

A very easy question to answer Oscar.

At the elementary level - greater content area class requirements in History and the Sciences for teaching credentials. American history as a regular, integrated, age-appropriate, portion of the reading/LA curriculum. On a related note, foreign language study should begin at this level, not high school.

Replace "Social Studies" at the Middle-school/Jr. High level with Geography, American History and World History classes. Have teachers who are at least history minors and/or who majored in a Social Science field.

At the High School level require four years of social science and history divided into two years of required history ( world and US)and two years of of history and social science electives. This provides the curricular time for both depth in core classes as well as a rich palette of electives that investigate themes or subfields.

Teachers would have majored in the subjects that they teach and would be encouraged to get Master's degrees in a content area rather than in education unless they are going into administration.


Oscar Chamberlain - 2/11/2008

"PC identity cheerleading "

This is one of those really irritating phrases that obscures much and says nothing.

It does not identify which courses need to be eliminated to bring more history in. It does not counter the arguments that brought those other courses into being. It's just another TV-type soundbite.

So you want changes? Cool. What are they? and what arguments would you use to support them?


mark safranski - 2/11/2008

The list reflects what is taught in elementary schools where a history lesson is a very sporadic event, usually a "social studies day" connected to a holiday or theme like Black History Month. I'm not so sure that Dr. Moise would be as pleased with the results if the students were asked to identify what century Harriet Tubman had lived in or why she was historically noteworthy.

Most American students never have a serious American or World history course in the k-12 system; that is, a course taught by a teacher who has majored in history or a cognate field, and who can teach something beyond staying one chapter ahead of the kids in the textbook.

AP classes are an exception as are some Honors programs but they serve a small numerical minority of students. Most states require but a year or two of history in high school that comes after a very sketchy prior exposure. Even this meager experience is under threat from the need for schools to post passing scores in reading and writing under NCLB. The picture is slightly better for science, but not much.

Feel-good, superficial, PC identity cheerleading probably does little overall harm but it is not a substitute for giving students a quality education in their own history, much less the important aspects of world history and foreign cultures.


Edwin Moise - 2/9/2008

They asked a bunch of high school students to name the most famous Americans, other than presidents. The list that resulted was made up overwhelmingly of serious people, with only a few media celebrities. Also the list shows an awareness of the past; I would have expected a much heavier bias toward present or very recent figures.

I am surprised and pleased. If this is the result of PC in the educational system, chalk up a point for the merits of PC.


Michael Green - 2/9/2008

Unfortunately, lists like these are as useless as the commenters above suggest, except that they provide opportunities for those who should know better to claim that history teaching focuses only on the "politically correct."


David Lion Salmanson - 2/8/2008

Gee KC, maybe you could write some cool songs about John Marshall and Alexander Hamilton that 4th graders could sing in their winter assemblies to address this glaring imbalance. After all everybody knows that 4th graders should be learning about Hamilton's influence on government because they totally can handle Fed 10 at that age. More seriously, my 10th graders (who spend a week on Hamilton vs. Jefferson) would probably have answered the question the same way despite being thoroughly grounded in political history. It's a stupid question and generated stupid answers.


Sherman Jay Dorn - 2/8/2008

I think the better question to ask is why such a name-recognition survey means anything about how history is taught, other than a matter of repetition among various sources of influence throughout a child's life. My guess is that the list might look fairly similar if you asked the same question of 9-year-olds, because the cultural stories told to children repeatedly are about elites and those who fight the elites who do bad things -- so it's not a surprise that if you exclude the obvious elite category in politics (presidents), you end up with classic stories told over and over again about holding your head up high etc.

... or about pop culture. I just asked a teenaged acquaintance of mine the same question, and here was the list provided:

Harriet Tubman
Martin Luther King
Susan B. Anthony
Frederick Douglass
Mark Twain
Al Capone
Jimmy Hoffa
Elvis Presley
Bruce Springsteen
Rudy Giuliani

Three of them are famous for writings among other things (King, Douglass, and Twain), and if you include Presley and Springsteen, that's half accorded to people who have produced significant works of culture. That leaves two famous women of 19th century activism and two (in)famous men of 20th century organized crime. Go figure.

I really think the survey is eye-catching (at least to USA Today editors) but fairly useless as research.