Assignment C - Teachers Role in the Debate on Standards

“Over the years Congress has created hundreds of programs intended to address problems in education without asking whether or not programs produce results or knowing their impact on local needs ” (NCLB, Executive Summary, 1) . I found this statement to be ironic as the sweeping reforms of NCLB came from the federal government with little or no input from the schools that would be affected. Unfortunately teachers hold little sway when it comes to the debate, development, and implementations of policies that impact curriculum and classroom practice. These debates have been dominated by special interest groups and the government. The push for national standards and standardized testing looks to take control of what is taught in the classroom away from teachers. “By limiting teachers’ responsibilities for conceptualizing, planning, and evaluating the curricula they teach, reform efforts like the standards movement and GOALS 2000 impose more external control and intervention on the classroom level (Ross, 221)”. If social studies teachers were to strictly follow the curriculum that is associated with the standards movement they would be reduced from educational professionals to shift workers who dispense “knowledge”.
When it comes to the actual implication of policies that impact curriculum, teachers have the final responsibility. While federal, state and local governments can mandate standards, they have no control (thankfully) to what actually happens in the classroom. Teachers have the ability to act on their own initiative to teach what will benefit their students most. For these teachers who act autonomously, standards can be a useful tool. Standards can act as a point of reference that teachers can look to for guidance. Well written standards can be especially useful to new teachers.
The voice of teachers has been largely missing from the debate on standards. While individual teachers would have an extremely difficult time influencing national and state policies that involve curriculum and standards, teachers unions could effectively lobby on behalf of teachers interests. Unfortunately this has not happened. “In fact, the AFT recommends that the common core curriculum defined by standards should account for 80 percent of instructional time in the classroom (Ross, 219)”. Teachers unions seem to focus more on the job of teachers (sick days, length of lunches, and the number of prep periods per day) than the actual work of teachers.

Ross, Wayne. "Diverting Democracy: The Curriculum Standards Movement and Social Studies Education." Democratic Social Education: Social Studies for Social Change, 2000. pp. 203-228

Bush, Gerorge W. No Child Left Behind.

"ESEA: Myths Versus Reality Answers to Common Questions About the new No Child Left Behind Act." Published by The Education Trust

Karp, Stan. "Bush Plan Fails Schools." Rethinking Schools Online. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_report/bushplan/BUSH153.shtml

Assignment B - Traditional vs. Progressive

The Social Studies Wars have played out over the past hundred years focusing on the following questions: What is the source of content; history, the various disciplines of social sciences, or issues in society? Should content be integrated across disciplinary boundaries? What is more important, student interest or study of knowledge for its own stake? What is the best form of education? (33). The ideological battles over these questions about how and what to teach led to the formation of two rival camps within the field, the traditionalist camp and the progressive camp. The traditionalist believed that social studies education should transmit American culture and myth, and instill patriotism and good citizenship. Progressives wanted students to focus on social issues, develop decision making skills and practice critical patriotism.
The debate began when the Committee of Ten and later the Committee of Seven tried to create a national standardized curriculum for social studies. Albert Bushnell Hart, the leading member of the Committee of Ten believed that the value of social studies education was in “training of the mind” and in promoting the “mental powers” of judgment and compassion and cause and effect The methods that were promoted included “minimal” use of lectures, “wise” use of multiple textbooks, and discussion and debate. Henry Baxter Adams, the most influential member of the Committee of Seven argued for the development of intellect over a sense of social awareness. The Committee of Seven promoted textbook-centered learning and limited use of primary sources.
James Harvey Robinson advocated teaching the “new history” with a focus on learning about matters that were relevant to present concerns and conditions of society. Later progressives would follow the pedagogical lead of John Dewey. Dewey believed that the problem with the system was that it “attacked the subject matter first and the student second (22)”. The Report on Social Studies combined the “new history” of Robinson with the pedagogy of Dewey and created a curriculum that focused on interest and needs of the students. Out of this report the Problems with Democracy course was developed. The course focused on social problems and content was selected based on student interest and importance to society. Harold Rugg created a series of pamphlets and textbooks that supported the progressive views of social studies education. Rugg aimed to create an integrated social studies curriculum that was organized around the problems of contemporary life. Rugg viewed social studies education as means to reconstructing society by creating awareness for social problems and potential reforms. George Counts advocated social reconstructionism, and believed that the goal of social studies education was social change. According to Counts, schools could not be neutral. Educators should face the reality of social issues and “develop a realistic and comprehensive theory of social welfare (50)”.
Traditionalist viewed progressive and reconstructionist education as “anti-traditional and anti-academic” and believed that it led to lower standards. W.C. Bagley advocated social efficiency and believed that progressivism was “soft”. Dewey became a critic of progressive education as it had been put into practice, believing that freedom had caused content to stray far away from organized subject matter. Anti- Communist sentiment led to a backlash against progressive education. David Snedden called reconstructionism “nonsense” and believed that it played into the hands of the communist.
There was a shift in the debate over social studies education as America entered World War II. Wartime commissions recommended that social studies curriculum be modified so that citizens should be prepared to fight and die for their country. Allan Nevins argued that progressive education was failing at teaching American history and that patriotism could not exist without knowledge of the past. Nevins said that soldiers could not understand what they were fighting for unless they understood how their democratic principles had developed. As the Cold War developed the attacks on progressive education heated. Progressivism and reconstructionism were seen as being linked to socialism and therefore seen as being un-American. Social studies education began to shift towards American history and citizenship based education that promoted patriotism.
The social and political upheavals of the sixties led to a rebirth of progressive education. The goal of the “New Social Studies” was for students to act as junior historians and social scientist. Leaders of the “New Social Studies” included Jerome Bruner, Charles Keller, and Edwin Fenton. The “New Social Studies” failed to address the major social issues of the time, including the Civil Rights movement, campus unrest, and the Vietnam War. In response the “Newer Social Studies” developed. The “Newer Social Studies” was a return to an issues-oriented approach to social studies that expected children to become activists.
The publication of A Nation at Risk was the beginning of the end of the “Newer Social Studies”. E.D. Hirsch believed that “to be culturally literate is to possess that basic information needed to survive in the modern world (161)”, no emphasis was placed on social activism or hands-on learning. Conservatives including Lynne Cheney, Diane Ravitch and Chester Finn believed that issues centered social studies was failing and should be dropped in favor of traditional American history and geography. They believed that the purpose of education was not to reform American society, it was to “restore its luster (173)”.

Assignment A - Citizenship Education

The views on citizenship by Banks et. al. in Democracy and Diversity, combine aspects of different discourses on citizenship as presented by Knight, Abowitz and Harnish in Review of Educational Research.
The discourse of citizenship that mostly closely aligns with Banks et. al. is transnational citizenship. Transnationalism traces its roots to the stoic tradition that idealized equality, compassion, democracy, universalism and humanism. Individuals and groups can share identity as citizens and at the same time share identity with communities of diverse people and nations around the world. The skills that need to be taught to students are tolerance and empathy, so that students can overcome the gaps that segregate people across intellectual, philosophical, and cultural lines. Citizenship education should help students gain a perspective on the personal, academic, pluralist, and global view of the human condition. The curriculum needs to be focused on universal human rights and needs to move away from a nation centered perspective to a “world-centered” view.
Banks et al. also borrow from the discourses of cultural citizenship. Diversity is seen as a resource, not a threat. Citizenship education should help students develop the skills to examine unity and diversity within their own country and comparatively to other nations. Students should be able to study the problems and questions related to major social groups including race, class, religion, ethnicity, gender, disability and sexual orientation. Students should be engaged in multicultural and anti-racist education.
Banks et al. agree with the reconstructionist discourse that students need to engage in active learning. Rather than being told about how democracy works students need to engage in democracy. Citizenship education should foster both engagement and criticism of the government. Teachers should emphasize critical patriotism, encouraging reasoned loyalty rather than teaching students to love their country without reason as advocated by the civic republican discourse.

Articles Cited:
Knight-Abowitz and Harnish. "Contemporary Discourses of Citizenship." Review of Educational Research 76 no. 4 (2006): 653-690

Banks, James et. Al. Democracy and Diversity: Principles and Concepts for Educating Citizens in a Global Age. Center for Multicultural Education. p. 7-38.