 | In November, I applied for the 2020 summer teacher institute at Thomas Jefferson's Monticello. This is the second time in as many years that I have answered the questions on the application. After looking back at last year's answers, I knew I needed to address the questions more directly and with more specifics. The application process is pretty thought-provoking, and it took a while to prepare my responses to some of Monticello's questions. Outside of a two-page resumé and some logistical information, the questions range from research, to personality and collaboration, to usage of materials. |
One question asks, Monticello is committed to the study and teaching of difficult history. Give an example of how you approach a challenging topic (i.e. race, religion, gender, politics) with your students. My answer:
I constantly tweak my teaching methods and lessons concerning difficult history. Rather than read textbooks or trade books about slavery, my fourth graders enjoy pawing through primary sources and evaluating artwork from the 18th century before conducting a real discussion about their findings.
For example, in most history lessons, I start by displaying a piece of art depicting an event from the 18th century. Students take a moment to quietly appreciate all of the details of a piece before they make observations. I do not allow students to make initial assumptions or infer anything from the art, but after they share their observations, I do allow them to wonder about the things they observed. Usually these curiosities come in the form of questions.
Fortunately, many of the paintings I select have people from various races and social backgrounds: they are there, in a supporting role, working in the shadows while the main subject fills the spotlight. It is incredible to see nine-year-olds who can maintain a civilized conversation about them, standing to take the floor, and not waiting for a teacher to call on their raised hands. All others concede the floor as their classmates take turns adding to the conversation, questioning one another for clarity, and honestly agreeing or disagreeing with civility.
I never shy from such conversations involving race, gender, or religious inequality, but I understand that figures in history – often larger than life – are understood better through the honest investigation of artifact evidence and the evaluation of these real resources. Finally, students can look into the eyes of historical figures like Thomas Jefferson from a more level plain.
My students understand that history is ugly and complex. As in literature, our historical characters have particular thought patterns, make difficult decisions, fail to hide their flaws, and learn from mistakes. Their attempts at solutions often misguided. As the heirs to the nation they planted, we share some of their imperfections.
There are many paradoxes involving the founding generation. The question of how the esteemed Thomas Jefferson could declare that all men are created equal while owning a plantation full of enslaved people is a question that can be difficult to square. Without a doubt, it was a dilemma for our third president, as well.
I approach difficult subjects with truthfulness, but we must also consider artwork as telling a story from the point of view of a biased artist who may depict a version of reality that is slightly or extremely off kilter. I give my students the freedom to wonder how far away from reality the artist strayed.
Now, when students face a controversial topic such as defacing monuments to certain historical icons, they have a discussion and try to understand both sides of the controversy. I interject as little as possible just to keep the conversation moving when it lulls. Students find that they should understand all aspects of an argument before “taking sides”. We find common ground and remain civil with one another.
