Presents a survey of historians conducted by the "Journal of American History." Asserts that a comparison with the National Research Council indicates that the sample was representative of the profession. Includes a summary of major findings statement correlations. (CFR)

Contends that the results of a survey of historians indicate a profession divided within itself. Maintains that cultural diversity was considered one of the "best" and "worst" attributes of contemporary U.S. society. Discusses the concept of progress and its current historical interpretations. (CFR)

Discusses differences among the objectives, course content, and teaching methods of history instruction at high-school and college levels. Argues that improved communication and interaction among all professionals in the field, including teachers, archivists, librarians, and others, is necessary to improve teaching and learning. (CFR)

Criticizes a survey of historians as an exercise in banality. Asserts that only 1 of every 10 historians who received the survey answered and returned it. Concludes that the Organization of American Historians should forget the survey and focus its attention on matters of U.S. history. (CFR)

Maintains traditional interpretation of the Reconstruction Era tends toward intellectual incoherence instead of probing the historical forces at work. Reviews seven college textbook treatments of the Reconstruction Era and finds three adhering to the traditional approach while four project strong thematic schemes. (CFR)

Discusses attitudes toward history instruction from a survey of historians. Contends that historians who prize history seem less interested in dispensing knowledge than in imparting a historical perspective. Concludes that many historians are comfortable with the relatively low status of teaching because it provides autonomy. (CFR)

Maintains that, as a historian, social critic, and moralist, Christopher Lasch was a powerful presence in U.S. intellectual life. Presents an interview with Lasch prior to his death in February 1994. Reports that Lasch believed that optimism is a kind of investment in the future whereas hope is the rejection of envy and resentment. (CFR)

Reports on a study of the opinions regarding the state of the art of historical research, writing, and instruction among 1,047 readers of the "Journal of American History," the journal of the Organization of American Historians. (CFR)

Provides an interpretation of survey results of historians by an Italian scholar of American studies. Maintains that U.S. historians and historiography are changing the way Italian and other European scholars view history and its societal role. Concludes that cultural and intellectual pluralism is deeply rooted in U.S. political culture. (CFR)

Reports on two interviews between a historian and Ken Burns, the documentary filmmaker. Discusses the role and interrelationship of academic historians in the making of documentary historical films. Argues that academic historians have lost touch with the public and this role has fallen to amateur historians. (CFR)

Discusses historians' attitudes expressed in a survey about cultural diversity, social change, and historical research. Questions basic public interests and needs that people feel. Concludes that the great strength of the United States is that individuals have the freedom to pursue individual searches for memory and meaning. (CFR)

Reflects on the responses of historians on a national survey. Maintains that historians profess affection for history and teaching, but not for the scholarship that historians produce. Discusses differences between tenured faculty and the U.S. middle-class. (CFR)

Contends that history is a nearly "sense-less" profession because reading is almost the only source of historical understanding. Reviews content related to sensory experiences in college history textbooks. Argues that including language about the senses in historical writing and instruction will enlarge the audience and the field of…

Discusses responses related to the nature and purpose of history from a survey of historians. Contends that it is the appeal of history, rather than teaching methods, that captures the interest of high-school and college students. Applies Ernest Boyer's four principles of scholarship to the survey results. (CFR)

Asserts that, although no one can predict what kinds of history U.S. historians will be writing in the 21st century, it is reasonable to ask what history might be needed and how scholars might address these needs. Provides four suggestions for priorities in historical research. (CFR)