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)”.