"My country, right or wrong." In one sense I say so too. "My country; and my country is the great American Republic. My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."  What is right in war?   The topic of Vietnam is still very relevant, but touchy.   This is evidenced by the tension generated among the panelists.   Many insights were gained through our guest speakers, enlightening perspectives from all sides.   The individual stories of Vietnamese refugees are voices that are not addressed enough in U.S. history classes.   Not to ignore those personal experiences, but not having the resources to do so.   However, now we have "other voices" to be heard and "other stories" to be shared.   Welcome to the journey of the unknown...  

Participation in the CHOICES Vietnam Institute has made me aware that my Vietnam War unit has left out the following voices:   prisoners of war, women in the U.S. military (especially nurses), draft resistors, Vietnamese refugees, and more on the Vietcong and North Vietnamese perspectives and experiences.   My instruction was not providing a complete picture of the Vietnam War.   For the most part, my instruction focused mainly on those in the U.S. military.   Part of this could have been because my father was in the U.S. Navy in the Vietnam War and I know many other Vietnam veterans.   I now realize I am not disrespecting veterans if I also have students examine the experiences of draft resistors, Vietcong, and Vietnamese refugees.   Also, when I teach about Vietnam, it is probably a good idea to begin with the Troung Sisters and the Vietnamese struggle against Chinese rule.   If we are to better understand the Vietnam War and its aftermath, we must hear ALL the voices.

The discussion with janet Lang & James Blight was an interesting way of approaching the historical record.   While "true" historians may look down their nose at this approach I believe it has merit in the social studies classroom.   When students are thinking about the topic or subject they are creating or building upon prior knowledge.   I think that creates a meaningful learning experience.   It has been suggested over the course of the past few days that the historical record can be skewed in the minds of students if they are presented with alternative events that didn't actually take place.   I have taught from the multiple options point of view and feel that students are capable of separating what did happen from the options when given proper guidance.   It is critical to discuss and make clear what the options were and what the end result was.  

This also ties in with Hershberg's idea of exploring the historical record of the time and then going back to the declassified documents and aiding students in creating a new, synthesized or revised picture.   You must consider your audience and help them determine how much information is too much.   By having a conversation with your students while they sort through the history, they and you can remain aware of their capacity to retain the "correct" historical record and the options.

There is something useful in hearing McNamara recall his "wrongs" and wondering why he couldn't do it at the time.   I feel it is a good lesson for the students to know and understand that perspectives can and do change over time. It is not wrong to reappraise your choices and actions, but having the ability to recognize when it is a growth experience or a soul cleansing, self serving experience is sometimes difficult to ascertain.

When watching the panel discussion on Saturday, I was surprised to find a war protester on the panel. I began think about my father and what he would think about someone who chose not to fight for one's country. (To this day, I have no idea how my father feels about the war.   At the same time, I was thinking "this could be a very interesting discussion."  Jerry did not just state that the war was wrong.   He justified all of this reasons and points.   He explained that he was not a draft dodger, that he was a draft resister.   He explained that he felt that someone who moved to Canada to avoid war would be considered a draft dodger and some such as him would simply be a draft resister.   While I did not agree with much of what he (Jerry) said, having his perspective was interesting and informative.

Other voices are critical to allowing students to make up their own minds about historical events and future events.   Our panel of four was a wonderful opportunity for us to hear these voices and recognize that there were more than two sides to the war.   Bringing these perspectives back to our students will hopefully give them a more personal and meaningful look at the Vietnam War and those who were involved.

The topic of Vietnam is still very open, relevant, touchy, etc.   While the panelists maintained an extremely professional demeanor throughout the discussion the tension was often easy to detect.   As I have noticed in previous discussions and readings the Vietnam War is still very much a part of the lives of those who were touched by it.   As the panel told their individual stories, I found each one to be unique despite three panelists having served in the military.   Our fourth panelist spoke from a very different perspective about the war.  

Jerry Elmer referred to himself as a draft resister and was careful to differentiate between a draft resister and a draft dodger.   At first I felt he was feeding us some rhetoric that would elevate him from the status of common, peace-nick hippies to something more or something better.   While he was definitely making a differentiation between his ideas and those of the draft dodging drug culture, he was also making a profound political and social statement about cooperating with the government.   By taking on student status to avoid going to war, by getting a doctor to declare you medically unfit for combat or by filling out the forms to be a conscientious objector, he felt he would be cooperating with the government and therefore working within the system he saw as unjust.   By working within that system, he would have been not truly speaking out against the war but simply sending another American boy to fill his shoes.   He would have done nothing to halt or gain the attention of the system.

He also saw another side to the deferment of service option offered by the government.   Many of those who could use this option to prevent going to Vietnam were of a privileged status.   To have a doctor falsify documentation was generally an expensive way out.   Simply having access to a medical person was not an option for many in the poverty stricken areas of the U.S.   He admitted that he had this option available to him, but would not use it because again it did not send the message to the government that this war was unjust in its principles and morally questionable in his view.

I found his approach to discussing civil disobedience beneficial in our curriculum because we touch on the concept in Regional World Studies and in both sections of our U.S. History.   I also feel that his acts of burglary and destruction of draft papers to be an interesting juxtaposition to what he was saying about not harming others and only having an effect upon himself in his personal protests.   He did not elaborate on this, nor did we ask the question, but I hope to contact him regarding his rationale.

One of the most impacting statements I heard from the panel, was that of volunteer women replacing drafted men.   As a woman, I find it compelling and encouraging that women were just as willing to serve their country as men.   The most publicized period of time where women were allowed to be women supporting not only their country but their men, came about through the "Rosie the Riveter" era.   Though women had discretely been doing this in previous wars, World War II women were in the spotlight for serving their country in a variety of capacities.   First and foremost they took over the workforce to not only continue production but to feed their families.   They also served as nurses and support staff in order to directly facilitate the military.   Listening to Linda Schwartz, she shared personally that by her volunteering to serve in a medical capacity during Vietnam, she replaced a young man who would have otherwise been drafted.   This is the first I had heard of that, and it struck up diverse thoughts in my mind: she had not only taken the place of a young man, husband, or father, but she also took the place of a "draft dodger".   Not to demean the men of that generation, but she had more courage than many of her gentlemen colleagues.   She gave herself integrity and strength to her country.  

"One of the most dehumanizing experiences for my father was being ordered around and beaten by a teenage officer." —Quyen Truong

Quyen Truong's art and story had the most profound effect on me in terms of gaining multiple perspectives of the Vietnam War for several reasons.   First, she brought in more information about reeducation camps than what I had read in the past.   Sure enough I was aware of the fact that reeducation camps did exist similar to that of China's reeducation camps.   However, I did not pay much attention about the effects of this camp on a more personal scale.

Secondly, her story alone not only contains her father's experience, but her own experience as a Vietnamese in the United States studying the Vietnam War.   The process of interviewing anyone who had horrid experience is already tough enough, let alone interviewing your family member, your own father.   On top of that, some of her other family members either had opposing views and stories or loathed the idea of even sharing these experiences.   For example, when I questioned her about her family back in Vietnam and how they view the Vietnam War she told us a story about her uncle commenting about what a great piece the Ho Chi Minh monument is, yet her father talked about disliking this work and refused to even take a picture under the monument.   Here you have family members who were around during the Vietnam War, yet all their experiences vary from one another.      

Lastly, with her remarkable artwork and brief descriptions about each work, I began thinking about another way to present the Vietnam War to the students.   Photos and movies are definitely available, but it does not necessarily convey the same effect as seeing artwork along with its story.   Quyen's artwork illustrates her artistic skills, her father's story, and her own history.

I too found Quyen's presentation very interesting.   I have never taught my students about the re-location camps.   I myself was aware, but I never shared this side of the war with my students.   I will now do so.   Her artwork was very detailed and you could really see the hurt and pain on her fathers face.   What was even more amazing is that she painted all of them in two weeks.   When I return home I am going to watch the video (from Brown's website) of Quyen and her father.   It was great to speak to Quyen after her presentation one-on-one.   She explained how she had family on both sides of the war (North and South).   She said her family has put the war behind them (they just don't talk about it). We often forget that this war divided many families on many levels.   This reminded me of my father and how he just doesn't talk about the war.   Maybe the day will come when we can discuss the war.

The individual stories of Vietnamese refugees are voices that are not addressed enough in my U.S. history classes.   Quyen Truong's presentation and artwork helped me see these are voices that also must be included in a Vietnam War unit's curriculum.   Too often, we as teachers end the Vietnam War with the fall of Saigon in April 30, 1975.   We forget about the voices of those who were persecuted in Vietnam after the war...reeducation camps, boat people, etc.   Because we are in the United States, we as teachers often just focus on the American voices.   But hearing what Ms. Troung's father went through in the reeducation camps helped me better understand the suffering after April 30, 1975.

Ms. Troung's artwork further illustrated the horrible persecution after 1975.   In addition, Professor Appy's presentation further examined what the boat people experienced.   I was amazed that at least 50,000 people died on the seas.   Vietnamese refugees must have had a tough time adjusting to life in the United States.   Ms. Troung lived in West Hartford, Connecticut.   In college, I had a Vietnamese friend named Cuong who also lived in West Hartford.   I wonder now what Cuong went through to get to the United States...and what his experiences were like when he first arrived in America.   Starting this year, my Vietnam War unit will include reeducation camps, the plight of the boat people, and Vietnamese refugees in the United States.

Unlike textbooks, individual stories provide compassion and empathy.   Listening or reading about actual people who experienced the Vietnam War helps contribute to gaining multiple perspectives and having a clearer picture of this historical event.   Individual stories also keep history alive.   Without individual stories, the Vietnam War becomes just like any other historical event: dates and facts.   

From today's forum, having various speakers about the Vietnam War was extremely interesting.   Sure enough I was aware of the fact that the Vietnamese and the Americans would have different Vietnam War experiences.   However, it did not occur to me how different people within the United States see the Vietnam War even up to this present day because of their past experiences.   Having Jerry Elmer, an anti-war activist during the Vietnam War, and three Vietnam War veterans: Linda Schwartz, Al Bergstrom, and Porter Halyburton, helped me understand why the Vietnam War is still a sensitive subject and that there are still people who are living through this historical event.

What I find most interesting is the fact that although Linda Schwartz, Al Bergstrom, and Porter Halyburton are all Vietnam War veterans, they all have different views and experience about the war.   Prior to this forum, my thinking was that Vietnam War experience for the veterans would be very similar to each other, the typical "Full Metal Jacket" story.   However, I did not consider the experiences of veteran women like Linda Schwartz or P.O.W. like Porter Halyburton.   I thought you can easily categorize Americans during the Vietnam War as "Pro-War" and "Anti-War", and that those veterans who served the war were seen as "Pro-War."  I did not consider the fact that there were veterans who decided to serve because they were trying to put an end to the Vietnam War.   The stories of the Vietnam War veterans we met today shed a new light for me by bringing in the question of "Why did you fight in the Vietnam War?" rather than asking the question "How could you fight this unjust war?"  If I bring up this question to any veterans including the three members of the panel I now know that the answers will vary and it will help me have a better picture of the Vietnam War.  

At the end of the Missed Opportunities: Dialogue of the Enemies film, a non American gentleman made the following commentary regarding victory.   He said "the Vietnam victory was freedom; the American victory was that of those who were against the war."  My first reaction to this comment was I wouldn't say that South Vietnam became "free" on April 30th.   However, being American I guess I was more stalled by the commentary that our victory lay with those who were against the war.   Did he mean that victory accompanied those who took part in sit-ins and those who carried signs?   Was there victory in those who paraded the streets and wore peace signs?   Did victory consume those mothers who helped other mothers get their sons to Canada?   I wouldn't say that these so called "protestors" ever felt victorious.   I honestly feel that they felt just as disappointed as the rest of us; not because we "lost" the war, but because we lost so many of our own.  

The other facet of this, is what about the soldiers themselves who didn't support the war but didn't have a choice as to whether or not they could be there?   I hardly feel that they felt victorious coming home to hatred and disapproval.   How about the permanent scars that will live with them forever, both mentally and physically—those who did live?

After thinking about it, is there any victory in war at all?

As a whole group we discussed the use of journaling.   Some of us agreed that we do in fact use journaling as a tool in our classrooms, while others of us don't for specific reasons.   Though all of us feel that journaling is great in order to enhance the practice of writing skills, we did come up with the discomforts we feel with journaling.   Some of us feel it can be too personal for our students and they misunderstand what is actually being asked of them.   Some topics can just be too dangerous to have students write about.   We all agreed that assigning more structured and direct prompts elicit more specific responses.   One member who does use journaling throughout the year said that they begin their class each year with the following prompt...   "Why study American History?" Throughout the year, student's journal approximately 20 entries; but what we really enjoyed as a whole is at the end of the year this teacher requires the class to write and reflect back to that first essential question again...   Why study American History?   They do this to see if their response has changed from that first day; this is an activity I think we will all use in the future.  

Other Teaching Strategies:

•  talk show
•  simulation activity
•  museum exhibits
•  role playing
•  guest speakers; dead or alive

Reflective writing prepared by:
Sean Gilligan—Windham High School, Willimantic, CT
Mark Klein—Millard West High School, Omaha, NE
Heather Quagliaro—Metropolitan Learning Center, Bloomfield, CT
Melanie Tevis—Normal Community West High School, Normal, IL
Zarah Vinola—Harry S Truman High School, Bronx, NY