Howard Zinn A People's Pedagogy Summary

In the article, A People’s History A People’s Pedagogy, the author Bill Bigelow discusses the beliefs of Howard Zinn, a historian, who was a popular orator who also wrote pieces in history that demonstrated passion through strongly supported arguments. Howard Zinn starts with a foundational belief that the lives of ordinary people matter. Furthermore, when learning about history, it should be examined from the lens of workers, women, and individuals of color. Additionally, the notion that the actions of individuals shape our society can be formed under Zinn’s premise of history. Interestingly, Zinn’s approach to history varies from that of a traditional textbook. Traditional textbooks are monotonous and finding energy to sit down and read …show more content…
He takes a stance in one of his pieces of writing that “…there is no such thing as impartial history” (Bigelow), and he provides two ways in which written history is partial. First, he states that history is partial because it serves as an insignificant part of what really happened because restraints can never be overcome. Second, he states that history is partial because it unavoidably takes sides through what it includes or excludes, accentuates or deemphasizes, whether it be unknowingly or purposefully. When Zinn writes stories and articles, he writes them from the opposite point of view of others, “flipping the script”. For example, when he writes about the Constitution, he writes it from the standpoint of the slaves and how they felt and what they went through. He takes an approach that goes beyond his own preferences and experiences, which allows him to see society in a fuller sense over others.
Bigelow discusses the pedagogy of traditional history, which is how it is taught to individuals. Traditional history is written as if it was a domino effect. One event tends to lead to the next. Further, social change seems to be laid out as if it was unfolding, not being created by individuals. Students are often seen as patrons when they are asked to read chapter and answer questions. They should instead, engage and talk with the text. However, Zinn views history …show more content…
The banking model of pedagogy is the standard way of teaching where the teacher is standing in the front of the room lecturing students. After the lecture, the teacher tests the student’s knowledge on the information presented in the lecture. However, this model was established from an outdated learning theory. Using a banking model of pedagogy nurtures passive engagements with the course content and the outside world. This leads into the traditional view of history in which people are taught that “history is essentially over”. Facts are viewed simply as facts, excluding the various interpretations of them that cause massive debates in history. For example, if the American Revolution and 1776 are examined, the facts such as the specific dates and who was victorious remain the same regardless of how someone views those events. However, when a person analyzes specific details of those events, such as who were the oppressed and how they felt, the facts begin to shift closer to interpretations. One person can interpret the oppressed individuals from the lens of the rich, upper-class political leaders, while someone else could interpret the roles of the oppressed through the lens of how an oppressed person felt, which would ultimately affect how the historical event is written. Viewing the events of 1776 from the lens of the oppressed