The American Pageant, AP Edition, Updated

by David and Cohen, Lizabeth Kennedy, Lizabeth Cohen

The reputable authors of The American Pageant combine excellent scholarship with a witty, engaging narrative style and creative look at U.S. History to build critical thinking skills and a love of American history. The American Pageant, the best-selling AP US History text, is a clear and approachable book for any student studying American history. The Updated 16th Edition completely aligns to the 2015 Framework announced by the College Board in August 2015.

Genres: School, Read For School, Textbooks, Nonfiction, History

1008 pages, Hardcover

Published January 12, 2016

Reviews

[Laurel · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book uses the word "yeasty" too many times. More times than should be allowed in a textbook.

[Izzy. · Rating 2 out of 5]

“The metallic fingers of the railroad intimately touched countless phases of American life.”

not my favorite read of the year. kinda funny at some points but in an annoying way. too long, this could easily be cut down a few hundred pages. plot was kinda funny on this one there was a lot going on at once which i give it credit for. characters were mid, didn’t feel myself attached to any of them. overall i would not read again

[Trini]

I wasn't going to count this when I actually read it back in May, but I've now realized how hopelessly behind I am in my reading challenge, so I'm giving up the last shred of dignity I have and adding this

highlights: John Adams's Jackasses, random tangents about wartime hookups and politicians' romantic woes, one too many political cartoons drawing Thomas Jefferson as a barnyard animal (think cursed photoshop but worse)

I think that this + my teacher who wore Soviet Union shirts, watched CNN in the middle of class, and talked more about what book he was reading at the time than what was on the AP test truly made APUSH for me <3

[Layla Fisher · Rating 3 out of 5]

I did not need to know about Polk’s chronic diarrhea.

[cara · Rating 5 out of 5]

this book is hilarious. many chicken comparisons. many extraneous details that give the appearance of a founding father fanfiction.
5/5

[samantha · Rating 1 out of 5]

this book is bad i want cry every time i think about it. i have never wanted to burn a book more in my entire life. why write such a bad book? what’s the point? this book made me very uncomfortable at certain times, and the adjectives used should never be used ever again 👎 -1000/10 would never read again

[emma ⋆｡°✩]

um I basically read this whole thing! Definitely DID NOT use apnotes.net

[viv megenhardt]

Don’t let me ever contribute to history because I am petrified Kennedy and Cohen will describe me and forever ruin my reputation and self image

[Marielle Mullen · Rating 3 out of 5]

far too many weird adjectives. i think the authors are in love with thomas jefferson bc they spent A LOT of time describing him.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good not a great history read, so long as you can skim and extrapolate swiftly like a historian reads for the important elements of history, i.e., noting patterns, context and themes. Tons of wormholes that have little to do with the significance of movements and events. For example, the hight and appearance of xyz General, or the author’s right leaning biases which color the lenses through which events are presented and contextualized throughout. The fact that in the chapter covering WWII, they spend one (1) tiny subsection on the Holocaust but countless sections on military strategy and political campaigning/elections leaves me bereft of substantive takeaways from each chapter without conducting corollary work. Sad for students that THIS is College Board’s required textbook for AP History.

[Diana Sánchez · Rating 1 out of 5]

HORRIBLE THEY DO NOT KNOW HOW TO WRITE 0% RECOMMEND!!🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

[Kenzie Luckenbacher · Rating 1 out of 5]

i cried as many times as there are pages in this thing

[Graciela Batlle · Rating 1 out of 5]

WORST BOOK FOR AN AP COURSE VERY CONFUSING WRITING HORRIBLE ORGANIZATION OF EVENTS DO NOT RECOMMEND

[Sukriti · Rating 2 out of 5]

made me cry

[Abigail halttunen · Rating 1 out of 5]

usa🦅🦅

[Trinity Benstock · Rating 5 out of 5]

Heh. Heh. I read all the APUSH textbook and you didn’t! I’m so clever!


Really a brilliant work of synthesis and context for a cram, bam, jam curriculum. Appreciated their constant inclusion of culture aspects teacher’s usually do not cover (e.g literature, architecture, women, indigenous people, food.). I would probably reread again in 40 years.

[Lauren · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ve maybe actually read this thing thoroughly 7 times. So funny at parts, but also, I hate this book.

[Soren ♤ · Rating 1 out of 5]

this textbook is by far the most atrocious thing i have ever laid my eyes upon.

[Kharisma Vreeland · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not a fan.

[Avery Benderoff · Rating 2 out of 5]

Long, long, long

[Jordan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This honestly wasn't as bad as the other textbooks that I have had to read. Probably gonna get a 4 on the exam !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Becci · Rating 1 out of 5]

I cracked open this sucker last night (over two weeks after my AP test) because I have to return it to my teacher today, and I want to prove that I read something. I read the section on John C. Calhoun, my favorite person in US history because of his strange face, but it was much too brief for such an important figure in American history. It was a lot easier to find all the sections on Henry Slay than Johnny, and that was very upsetting. I love Heimler more than words can explain. Thanks to him, I got an A in my class and a 0 on my exam. I read the part about WW2 very briefly, and I found out that Hitler killed himself ! Quientin Tarnetino and David Lynch are both mentioned, which is very unimportant to American history but they are very cool people. Also, I learned that Clinton had SEX with an intern. What a naughty boy.

[Justine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yes—at last! I have finally read all 1,012 pages...What a read it has been!

I absolutely love this book, and it deserves high historical commendation. It is also written so eloquently—reading like a moving, intriguing, and fast-paced novel.

This is my favorite textbook I have ever read in all my educational experiences.

The only thing I can fault it on is A) lacking history on medicine—different systems/cultures of medicine, new bills, regulation, etc. and B) A sore but commonly seen underrepresentation of the Native Americans, who seem to largely drop off the page after the closing of the frontier in 1890.

More detailed review to come!

[jovie &#x1f408;‍⬛ · Rating 3 out of 5]

officially took my last chapter quiz today so… i think basically teaching myself apush based off this book counts as reading it even though quizlets and heimler were my primary saviors

also can i just say there was a very distinct narrative voice? like to a shocking degree for a textbook? it was kinda insane

jfk and lbj my goats

update: i got a 5 on the exam so i guess i have go give this book some credit. upgrades from 2 stars to 3

[Gazelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

top tier comedy

[faith croxdale · Rating 5 out of 5]

AHHAHAHHAHA TAKE THAT COLLEGE BOARD. ILL BE FREE AFTER THE EXAM TOMORROW *laughs*

[Belle Whiteherse · Rating 3 out of 5]

3 stars for the iconicness of this book

[sarah wilms · Rating 5 out of 5]

10/10, made me giggle numerous times. mildly boring but that’s all history textbooks. this is the second best textbook i’ve read, second only to the ap psych book; real ones understand 🙏🏽🙏🏽

[Vee · Rating 2 out of 5]

too heavy

[Aidan Mayhue · Rating 3 out of 5]

This textbook provides a good and comprehensive overview of American history but the book is certainly not without its issues. This book does a poor job of giving global context to the issues in each presidency. The book is about American history, but the authors failed to consider that American domestic policy is heavily influenced by other nations and their policy. They do bring up global events in passing, but I believe they do not give enough context to paint a full picture of the events in question. The textbook also passes over arguably crucial events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Bacons Rebellion. These events are mentioned, but not in enough detail to give a clear picture of what took place and their consequences. The book also makes strange attempts to rectify horrible events or to try to downplay the dark parts of American history. They make odd attempts to justify the Mexican American War and it’s blatantly imperialist beginning and end. The book also makes strange omissions when it comes to the abolition of slavery. They only mention Eurocentric countries that abolished slavery but fail to mention the several pre colonial empires that had long since abolished slavery. They make odd attempts to brush off the brutal acts committed during the colonization of the Americas. The writing in general is really boring as well. Historical writing is notorious for being dry, but this takes it to another level. The over abundance of strange figurative language heavily detracts from the books informative qualities. The book’s biases detract from its original purpose. It’s plain to see where both of the authors of this textbook differ in perspective, which is normally a good thing, but I feel both authors did not check each other’s biases and it paints a biased view of something that should be impartial. Bias is unavoidable but it is blatantly obvious where the authors lie. As a result the book paints a picture of American exceptionalism. History may vary in perspective but these perspectives should either be clearly labeled or put in separate historical works. A history textbook should not be used to prove a point, that’s what other kinds of historical writing is for. Something I do enjoy about this book is that it does point out varying perspectives, just not in the main sections of the book. These are relegated to one page sections where they introduce different historical interpretations of the facts along with their political leanings. The book also provides a wealth of historical documents that paint a more balanced picture of different historical positions and the people involved. It’s difficult to make a political subject like history without biases, but this book certainly missed the mark.