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)

Compares the skills and styles necessary to read articles in the "American Historical Review" 100 years ago and today. Analyzes five types of reading and notes that historians may combine two or more of these types. Discusses a type of reading called dialogic reading and argues that it offers insight into historiography. (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)

Authentic and constructive learning experiences that include analysis of primary source documents are necessary elements of effective social studies teaching (Bailyn, 1994; Leinhardt, Stainton, & Virji, 1994; Wineburg & Wilson, 1991; Young & Leinhardt, 1998). This study examines the abilities of 70 fifth and seventh grade students to complete…

Asserts that, although documentary film is nearly 100 years old, historical film did not have a place in the "American Historical Review" until recent years. Presents an interview with documentary filmmaker Ken Burns on the history and significance of documentary film. (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)

Argues that the enshrinement of the doctoral degree as the necessary credential for academic historians, the deemphasis on written narrative, and academic specialization have driven away a popular readership for history. Maintains that nonacademic historians now write popular history for the large market of history readers. (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)

Maintains that Marshall Hodgson's work, "Rethinking World History," is an interregional approach to world history. Argues that his chief contributions to historical writing were his consideration of epistemological issues, his revisionist views of the history of Europe, and his vision of world history as the center of a reinvigorated…

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)

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)

Maintains the enduring public fascination with the Civil War provides opportunities and dangers for history teachers. Reviews changes in historical interpretations of the Civil War. Asserts that recent scholarship suggests that both the South and North fought to preserve doomed social systems. (CFR)