You deserve a nice rest Allyson.

Laura, is your profile address good?

Yes dear.

So, I (as part of a group, which makes everything so much more fun) am trying to work up a unit plan on the American Revolution for 7th graders, based around a chapter that was given to us. I'm actually learning a lot (the heavens preserve the Internet!), but the more I try to plan, the more things I realize I have to put in there, partly because the chapter is ridiculously simplistic (in ways I'd be wicked pleased to share, but unless someone is interested I'm gonna rein myself in). Oh, did I say simplistic? I meant simplistic and, it turns out, wrong. Just realized that it has one fact simply and blatantly incorrect. I don't know what book it's from, I just know it's what we're supposed to plan the unit around. I'm going to add stuff about "questioning the author" and some primary references which should give the right information, but I'm wondering how one would, in the case of a real lesson, address the textbook being just simply wrong.

but I'm wondering how one would, in the case of a real lesson, address the textbook being just simply wrong.

I had one teacher who instructed us to open to page such&such, and with a black pen, go to the line where it said blablahwrongcakes AND CROSS IT OUT BECAUSE IT WAS WRONG. (Caps because he kinda yelled. He was excitable.) I don't recall any explanation being given. This was for a biology text.

The Melbourne Cup has a holiday?

It surely does in Melbourne. Not the rest of the country, they just stop work while the actual race is on.

As far as I know, Melbourne is the only place in the world that gets a day off for a horse race.

Cause, see:

But the British did not repeal the Stamp Act. In fact, they put new taxes on the colonies. . . .

Many people were angered when the British would not change the Stamp Act or the new Townshend Act.

See, the Stamp Act was passed in October 1765 and the Townshed Act in 1767... and the Stamp Act was repealed in March 1766. Great. Now I have real confidence in this book. Oh, and! They totally give no explanation for the Proclamation of 1763 which mumble mumble...

Sorry. Reining.

t looks around furtively

Slumbernut?

billytea is extra evil

Emily, I see nothing wrong with explaning that books are fallable. And, part of a reader's job is to read with a critical eye and to question. Since this is a history lesson, you could also bring in the subjectivity of history and how much of history is someone's interpretation.

I know some teachers who have contests with their students to find incorrect information, incorrect grammar, etc. in books or articles. They get extra credit points if they bring it in.

Emily, if you haven't, read Lies My Teacher Told Me.

It only covers the stuff in history books, but the staggering amount of stuff that people think because of wrong textbooks in grade school is enough to make you want to burn the lot of them.

Strength and healing to Ouise's sister, Calli's mother and both families.