Name 3 Civil War Generals for the CSA and 3 for the Union

My sister in law is a retired school teacher in St.John's county which has the highest rated system in the state of Florida and all she can say is the lack of education for the students is in bad shape.she says it is not the teachers fault but they have to fight the system on every thing that they try to do.
It is really sad.
I wonder if the FCAT places any emphasis on American history and civics....
 
At least nobody said Eisenhower or something outrageous like that, but I agree...it's a shame history these days appears to be neglected in a lot of classrooms across the country.
It might have been worth awarding half credit for at least naming a general....
 
I'm doing a project about High Schoolers knowledge of American history for my current issues class. :furious:
Perhaps that is part of the problem: does your school have classes in American History or Civics? Or have these been replaced by 'Current Events' or a "current issues class".
 
It's not that history is "neglected" in classrooms. I'm pretty sure that most high school American history curriculum would include at least 3 Civil War generals on each side, but it wouldn't be information that would be emphasized or expected to be remembered.

As an 8th grade history teacher myself, I can assure everyone that all my students would be able to name Lee, Grant, Jackson, Sherman and McClellan, and possibly Longstreet and a few others.

The Texas standards for historical figures that need to be covered during the Civil War are: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, William Carney, and Philip Bazaar.

History teachers are hindered by the state requirements, which are tested at the end of each school year. Since student scores on those tests largely determine the professional future of the teachers, it's no big surprise that teachers are compelled to craft their teaching to ensure that everything likely to be tested is covered. On the surface, this is not so bad, since it ensures that the entire curriculum is covered over the course of the school year. But it certainly does limit the freedom of action a teacher might have. I got to devote about a week-and-a-half to the Civil War. Now, I am sure it was the finest week-and-a-half of Civil War education any kids in the country received, but my personal opinion is that the war is such an important part of American history that much more emphasis needs to be placed on it.
 
As much fun as it is hacking on the school system of the United States, I would say there are infinitely more important things people need to know rather than the generals on either side of the Civil War. Even as a history teacher I can safely say there are more important things my students should know over Grant, Lee, Sherman, Bragg, Halleck or either Johnston. But what do I know...I just do this for a living.
I agree with you a general understanding of American History is better than naming 100 generals. We have kids in this country who can't tell you who is on the $1 bill.
 
Perhaps that is part of the problem: does your school have classes in American History or Civics? Or have these been replaced by 'Current Events' or a "current issues class".

They do, Current Issues is an elective (optional) class. US History is a must have class to graduate. (I'm taking the AP version next year). From what I've heard from people taking it this year, the Civil War itself isn't touched much, just the slavery aspect.
 
They do, Current Issues is an elective (optional) class. US History is a must have class to graduate. (I'm taking the AP version next year). From what I've heard from people taking it this year, the Civil War itself isn't touched much, just the slavery aspect.
Thanks for your response.
I can understand not covering all of the individual battles, but how does one teach about slavery in America without discussing the terrible war necessary to achieve Emancipation?
 
Applaud if you are inclined.

That description isn't far from actual in some opinion here in Georgia.
Thanks for your response.
Regardless of whose reputation is enhanced or harmed, there is no substitute for the truth.
 
As an 8th grade history teacher myself, I can assure everyone that all my students would be able to name Lee, Grant, Jackson, Sherman and McClellan, and possibly Longstreet and a few others.

The Texas standards for historical figures that need to be covered during the Civil War are: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, William Carney, and Philip Bazaar.

History teachers are hindered by the state requirements, which are tested at the end of each school year. Since student scores on those tests largely determine the professional future of the teachers, it's no big surprise that teachers are compelled to craft their teaching to ensure that everything likely to be tested is covered. On the surface, this is not so bad, since it ensures that the entire curriculum is covered over the course of the school year. But it certainly does limit the freedom of action a teacher might have. I got to devote about a week-and-a-half to the Civil War. Now, I am sure it was the finest week-and-a-half of Civil War education any kids in the country received, but my personal opinion is that the war is such an important part of American history that much more emphasis needs to be placed on it.
First, thank you for your efforts to educate our youth in this vital area.
Obviously all of us here are biased, but it seems unthinkable that we expect our youth to be good citizens without the lessons and perspectives of our history.
 
Okay, I'm going to throw a grenade here, I don't think students should take the full blame for not knowing something, I don't even think that the curriculum is at fault, I blame teachers, it's their job to teach, the responsibility doesn't fall to anyone else. One could argue that parents have a significant role in their child's education but some parents either don't have the capacity or willingness to get involved, its not an ideal situation but that is the reality.

Some of the best teachers that I ever had could turn a dry and boring subject into something that enthused and enthralled. If a teacher stands in front of a class and churns out a load of dry and boring information then kids will naturally switch off. A necessary skill for any teacher has to be the ability to connect with their students. I had one very memorable history teacher whom had enthusiasm for his subject by the bucket full, he took us on field trips and made us aware of the relevance of history and how it had impacted on our modern lives, as students we were able to make a connection with the past and it held relevance for us. A good example would be the time when we were learning about medieval farming and irrigation, at the start of the subject it was dull, extremely dull but then we were taken to a museum site where we were able to handle the tools and use them, we could engage with the very things that we were learning about. My point is that even today I remember those lessons very well and I can still recall the information that I learned, obviously people can tell me that knowing the difference between a Harrow and a Flail isn't useful but what it did do was encourage me to learn.
If a teacher asks students to name three civil war generals and the kids are unable to answer then the question needs to be asked, 'have they been taught the information' and if they have 'why aren't they able to recall it', my feeling is that it wasn't made relevant to them and that it was probably taught in a fashion that was exciting as watching paint dry.

I hasten to add that I have a great deal of respect for teachers but at the end of the day they need to stop blaming the system and the kids and anything else for that matter. If a teacher is enthusiastic then the students will be to.
 
I'm doing a project about High Schoolers knowledge of American history for my current issues class. I've gone around and asked the students multiple questions ranging from The American Revolution to Regeans presidency. Every question I asked at least 1 person got the answer correct except one

"Name 3 Civil War Generals for the CSA and 3 for the Union"

Out of the 22 People asked, all 22 named Grant and Lee, 12 people named Stonewall 8 people named Sherman and 1 person named Longstreet.

I'm not too surprised about the no one being able to name 3 on each side. I know I'm the only History buff in class; however, I am surprised no one named anyone from the state of South Carolina, I mean after all we live here! I was expecting someone to name Wade Hampton at the very least. :banghead:

It's unimportant of course, but slightly annoying seeing other students not know any Generals from South Carolina. Wade Hampton has a big statue at our state house! Sigh*

Its a good thing I didn't ask if they knew who "the Swamp Fox" was. Might have threw something. :furious:
Mercy! Stonewall Jackson ahead of ....of.......Longstreet!! :smile coffee:
 
Back
Top