Thread: My only brush with how history is taught in South Dakota is going along on a field trip to Fort Sisseton with Mike that his granddaughter's grade school class took to Fort Sisseton the year before last. https://twitter.com/govkristinoem/status/1350139920334127104

We were happy to go along. Mike's an elder citizen in the Sisseton Wahpaten Oyate, Dakota is one of his first languages, and his great-grandfather Charles Crawford was a scout along with 200-some other SWO members during the Civil War who worked for US Army out of the fort.

Charles' brother was Gabriel Renville, who became the first chief of the SWO in 1867 when they negotiated the treaty that year to secure the Lake Traverse Reservation. Both men signed the treaty. We were hoping kids in class would learn about SWO role at fort.

Also maybe about the role of the Galvanized Yankees, former southern prisoners of war who changed their allegiance and served in union in the west, including at what was then Fort Wadsworth. Name of fort later changed to Fort Sisseton commemorate role of SWO scouts.

So what did the kids learn? We walked through a room where interpretative panels explained the role of the scouts. One panel was devoted to Charles Crawford, Dren's great-great-great-grandfather. Not even a mention. She wasn't the only native kid or descendant in very small class

So what was lesson in room we ended up in? A little material culture about a spoon or fork that had been dug up. We also saw a historical re-enactor dressed like union soldier. He talked about how life was hard at the fort, but he didn't mention the scouts or why fort was needed.

We went to a room where the old fort flag was displayed, where an older veteran volunteer who had an American first, English-only agenda--which the teacher embraced--was the interpreter. Mike asked what languages were spoken at the time the fort was active. They didn't know.

The tour concluded with the historical site's director dressed in Victorian clothes. She told audience everybody in late nineteen century was always dressed up, men and women, even when they worked in the fields or kitchens. Just look at the photographs.

I remembered seeing otherwise when I worked at The Library Company of Philadelphia, which has a great 19th century photography collection. Thought about bringing up another passed-up exhibit at Fort about washer women who worked at Fort Sisseton.

Then she mentioned Barbie Dolls. I seemed to remember that they were introduced by Mattel in the mid-1950s, so I did bring that up. Trust me, the last thing Mike's grand-daughter needs to learn at field trip to a 19th century fort was Barbie. Is there a settler Barbie?

We were told by one of the staffers, in private conversation, that they weren't supposed to talk to the kids about who the adversaries were when the fort was established by the US Army, just that it was protecting settlers.

Sure, teaching history should be age-appropriate. By way of comparison, I thought of what I learned in St. Peter Public School, back when kids walked uphill both ways to school. We learned about Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, 1862 War, James & Younger brothers, etc. Complex.

That scout Charles Crawford? He's in history books about tax law, @govkristinoem, because of a Supreme Court case called United States v. Rickert. A field trip that erases him, the SWO, working class women at fort, etc, in favor of chatter about tableware & Barbie isn't history.