Ever since middle school, I had wanted to be a chemical engineer. I saw that there was a lot of money involved, and naturally, with relatively high science and math scores, I became enchanted with the idea. I had held that interest in engineering throughout high school and continued with it during my transition to Lehigh. I had taken Project Lead the Way courses, setting me on an engineering-oriented track. I had spent countless hours studying for calculus exams, and I had taken three years of chemistry and physics courses. I was committed to my goal; I was committed to earning that money to fit my definition of "success."
When I got to Lehigh, however, something felt "off" about my schedule. Sure, my passion for both science and math were thriving (and I was really happy that I'd never have to write another term paper again), but I realized that something else was missing from my academic experience.
After some reflection, I realized that in all of my rush to get through college, I had neglected the humanities. I had focused far too much on STEM-related courses that I simply overlooked the arts, English, history, and the social sciences. Sure, these classes aren't directly "related to my major," but I strongly believe that they are an important part of being a versatile, well-rounded student in today's rapidly globalizing economy. Disciplines such as international relations, argument, and psychology enable you to understand the perspectives of others, analyze them, and to apply them to real world situations. They are what empowers group work, and it is for this reason that I believe they are a necessary component to any curriculum. It was because of this revelation that I decided to find a way to integrate history into my bachelors' degree curriculum.
I genuinely think that in general, history is taught very poorly. There is far too much an emphasis on memorization of arbitrary facts, dates, and statistics that it can be quite overwhelming to approach. For a discipline that's supposed to teach us not to repeat the mistakes of the past, I find this highly ironic. Should it not make every attempt to be accessible and easy to learn from? Clearly, there is interest in learning about past events, as the tourism industry continues to boom. I don't think there's anything wrong with history as a discipline, but rather, simply a better way to go about teaching it.
Personally, I think that we need to put more of an emphasis on understanding the cause and effect nature of history (and other social sciences for that matter), and less of a spotlight on rote memorization of facts. We need to understand causality, and what events in history lead to others happening. By doing so, we teach history's greatest lesson: to not repeat the mistakes of the past. We need analysis, observation, not robotic answers to potential Jeopardy questions.
My junior year world history teacher exemplifies this aspect of history perfectly. He asked us to go much further than merely memorizing facts and repeating them. We would have class discussions, during which we would make claims and support them with evidence that we found from our readings. We had to be critical, objective, and deliver high-caliber results. Simply put, it was demanding. Not only did you have to be well-versed in each era that you studied, but you also had to be able to contextualize, analyze, and make connections. Yet, despite these high standards, I can also say that it was easily one of the most rewarding classes I've ever attended, and it was definitely one of the higher points of my high school experience.
In short, history is something that's such an important part of my life and my experiences that I simply cannot go without it being integrated into my curriculum in some manner. I'm proud to be a history nerd, and hope to continue to travel and integrate it into my life whenever and wherever possible!
