Teaching History in Reverse

I think that's an interesting concept! When I was in school, I always thought it was strange that we never 'made' it to the more recent events (sometimes even the past 50-75 years). To us (as high schoolers) THAT was ancient history!

Related to discussion:

Lies My Teacher Told Me
James W. Loewen

Chapters 11 and 12

The reason to teach in chronological order is because you abandon cause and effect if you don't. Teach WW2 as a result of WW1, oh wait we have not studied that. Civil War causes? Sorry we'll get to that later. I teach a Contemporary US History class thematically (not chronologically) though. I think it makes for interesting groupings of information and events. I am not sure what would be gained by teaching History backwards. I had a colleague who tried it and it was a disaster.

Like ladywclass I wasn't taught the connection between current events and history. Beginning in the present is an appropriate order of inquiry because it takes advantage of students' background in current events. Start with "How do you feel about Obama?" and then talk about race and political polarization using historical snippets that jump from MLK Jr. to George Wallace back to Jeff Sessions. We always return to chronological order to tell stories and show cause and effect, but why limit our planning that way?