So there’s a debate about whether or not living histories are conducive to learning. Some believe they portray history incorrectly, because of modern influences. Others believe they give a more appealing, memorable, and sometimes interactive presentation of what past histories were like.
Some believe first person interpretations of history are more entertainment than education, so shouldn’t be taken seriously.
So this debate had me thinking about textbooks. Granted these books are filled with letters and words not humans acting as if they’re really a part of colonial times, but still aren’t textbooks creations and interpretations as well? What makes a text book a better medium for learning than living histories?
This reminded me of what Steven Johnson talked about in his book “Everything Bad Is Good For You.” He said there are a lot of objections to video games, virtual realities, and multi-media advancements because they detract people, especially children from “real” learning material such as books. Granted books are very important and I’m not advocating for the abandonment of reading, but what’s wrong with computers, games, tv shows, and living histories? Why can’t we take lessons from all of these different mediums?
Our society is so stuck on the value of books we are missing the many opportunities and learning experiences that can be extracted from other sources as well.
I just thought the whole topic of living histories and the ongoing debate about the validity of these interpretations were ironic. No one ever questions the validity of a book. Some books give false information and quite frankly no medium is without its biases.
