Community Chat

[Sooner]

I got something today from Ancestry that said With AncestryClassroom™, more than 7 million students now have access to historical records as well as resources developed to help them learn about themselves and the world around them.

They did say that parents should give permission to looki into family backgrounds but if not use impotant historical figures. . .

To me this seems totally inappropriate for classrooms.  Teach history.   Seems to focus on who kids are and not on the kids as individuals.  Some kids have enough trouble getting away from family issues as it is. And even if they use historical figures, it's looking at a touchy subject area for some kids.  

[new nickname 4]

I've been a firm proponent for teaching the basics, and making sure that the children are learning them.  Maybe teaching something more by the time they are upper classmen in HS can keep them entertained, but they need to be taught how to survive on their own once they graduate.

[millieshops]

@Sooner   I have no dog in the race as to whether the materials are appropriate or whether teachers even have any time to use them.  

I do know that one of the sadnesses of my life is that by the time I became seriously enough interestedly in the details of my grandparents and great grands, there's no one left who knows morer than I do.  

I can't blame anyone -  I heard snippets here and there, but only recently have I realized how little I remember.  Of course, computers have changed the ancestry landscape completely.  I have family documents that date back to the late 1800's -  just not enough info there to tell me what I hadn't heard at home.

I am encouraging the generations younger than mine (3 now that are old enough to use Ancestry) to start exploring now. I know they need to do it.  Just this summer, the son of a first cousin named his son to honor someone in his wife's family, having no idea his own mother and he also were related to a man with that name!  

[Laura14]

I really don't see the difference between looking a historical figure up on ancestry or taking a field trip to the natural history museum or other historical landmark. 

But I would hesitate on the individual personal histories for a whole host of reasons including children who may not have the information to even start a search such as those who are adopted or may come from surrogacy, blended families, etc. 

Nice to see the educators are looking for more unique ways to engage the kids though.  

[Janey2]

No. There are lots of reasons why not, but the main reason I see. Is that People who have no reason to gather information about you are now using Ancestry to get information that should be kept private. Our children are way down on the list of educated well in the world. How about teaching the basics so when they go out in the world they have good skills.

[ThinkingOutLoud]

I think it's a great idea!

 - maybe looking at old documents will spark their interest in history

 - maybe looking at old documents will help them see the art in cursive writing

 - maybe they'll come across someone they want to emulate

 - maybe learning about someone in their family will build character (ie reading an account that required courage/compassion/sacrifice can be empowering)

 - one of the problems of today is that too many don't know who they are/have a sense of family and this could help with that

 - it would be a plus if more understood that we're all connected

Every family has good and bad but ignoring the good to avoid the bad seems foolish.

To me, anything that expands their thinking beyond their small view is a good thing.

[gertrudecloset]

Yes it is INAPPROPRIATE for History Teachers to be using Ancestry and other sites like it to find out family structure data.  Has nothing to do with history.

There will be some children who will not find any useful data.  How will those children feel amongst their peers.  This is an undertaking that should be done by the family.  Loved ones working together, gathering information from the elders of their families to do the research.  

This is something that is extremely rewarding for a family with several generations still intact.  This does NOT belong in a class room.

Teach History; YES.  Teach the TRUTH about History YES.  Not Geneaology.

[eadu4]

@gertrudecloset Perfectly said.  Agree 100%.  What they are calling "personal history" is genealogy.   There are things that are not told to children in a family for a reason.  Genealogy should be taught by the parents not the teacher.  That's way too much personal info on a child.  Some things need to be kept within the family.  A child with a less than happy family, family history will definitely not appreciate this assignment.     

[gertrudecloset]

---

@eadu4 wrote:

@gertrudecloset Perfectly said.  Agree 100%.  What they are calling "personal history" is genealogy.   There are things that are not told to children in a family for a reason.  Genealogy should be taught by the parents not the teacher.  That's way too much personal info on a child.  Some things need to be kept within the family.  A child with a less than happy family, family history will definitely not appreciate this assignment.     

---

I agree with your assessment as well @eadu4 .  There is plenty of other history that can be taught!

[mspatmac]

Absolutely NO NO NO.  If a family chooses to use it that's fine and they control whats learned.   But for a teacher to use it at a personal level with students is wrong on so many levels.

@gertrudecloset  I'm with you on this