Zinn vs. We Have A Story to Tell

I thought that the curriculum guide would be a helpful tool when teaching students about Native Americans. The lesson introduced students to the Chesapeake region Indians and what their life was like before 1600 as well as during the colonial period and after the United States was founded. I do believe that it is important to teach students about Native Americans from the English perspective and the Indian perspective.
The English perspective is that of a happier one. Columbus landed and colonized while remaining friendly with the Indians. However, as we all know now, he captured and took Indians back to England to show off what he had done. It is a teacher’s job to explain both sides to students, not just the “nicer” version.
In relation to Howard Zinn’s article, he focused more on the bad of what happened with the Native Americans. Zinn was more concerned about the historiography of how the story is told. From the beginning, Zinn did not want to tell the “nicer” story of what happened to the Indians when the English began to colonize in the new world. I think that Zinn sympathizes with the Native Americans not only because of what the English had put them through, but also because their story is usually told only from an English perspective.
Both articles gave different perspectives of the Native Americans during colonial times, but I think that Zinn’s article tells it more like it was.