Attn: Citizen, Question Your Source!

“Teaching students to read through and about the newspaper better prepares them to be educated citizens.  We believe that an active sense of citizenship entails being critical of how news is received and used in society.  Developing the practice of critically reading the newspaper fosters not only newspaper reading skills that are useful to citizens but also general practices that allow citizens to discern the world around them and act accordingly.”

Segall, A. & Schmidt, S. (2006, May/June).  Reading the newspaper as a social text. The Social Studies. 91-99.

            Avner Segall and Sandra Schmidt critically discuss society’s use of newspapers as a source of informational media and how students should be taught to read newspapers as a way to learn about their world around them.  Segall and Schmitt begin their article by stating, “media texts act as social texts” (2006, p. 91).  This statement begins the authors’ discussion of the use of media in order to further social constructions and ideological beliefs.  By understanding that media plays an important part in an individuals construction of what society is and how an individual fits within society, students to begin to perceive that newspapers are not purely objective sources.  Under the guise of objective and/or scientific language, newspapers have a profound influence on how people perceive issues, events, themselves and others.  It is for this reason that Segall and Schmidt offer strategies to encourage students to engage newspaper in a deconstructive way.  “Many students are inclined to believe that the newspaper reflects rather than creates the news and that what appears on the newspaper’s front page by definition constitutes the most important world events of the previous day” (Segall and Schmidt, 2006, p. 93).  If students continue to read and engage with media in this way, they will be left with the beliefs and constructions held by the newspaper in lieu of a critically reached viewpoint gathered by scrutinizing media coverage.  Segall and Schmidt offer that teachers should teach students to be aware of messages written “between the lines” of newspapers.  It is their believe that by encouraging students to critically engage with media such as newspapers, students will be active and informed citizens.  Segall and Schmidt state in their concluding paragraph, “Developing the practice of critically reading the newspaper fosters not only newspaper reading skills that are useful for citizens but also general practices that allow citizens to discern the world around them and to act accordingly” (2006, p. 98).

            Two weeks ago, we discussed Journell’s 2010, article on citizen types and I couldn’t help by consider the Segall and Schmidt article with Journell’s citizen types in mind.  In my own reflection on citizenship, I believe a citizen should participate actively and positively in society.  My belief of what constitutes a good citizen aligns most closely with Journell's deliberative, social justice, and participatory forms of citizenship.  I believe the best way to encourage people to participate is to encourage the questioning of the status quo.  Through questioning, as we learned in our methods class, the human brain learns.  Therefore, I agree with Segall and Schmidt that we, as Social Studies teachers, should encourage students to question the information that is presented to them as fact.  However, teachers have a responsibility to teach students how to go about questioning sources such as textbooks and newspapers in a constructive and meaningful way.  Segall and Schmidt’s article offers strategies to encourage students to consider language, placement of stories, audience, what groups are heard/not heard and agency when reading newspapers.  Newspapers being a common method of disseminating current information are often seen as objective sources of facts. Therefore, newspapers have the ability to exert a great amount of influence on the unquestioning reader.  However, unquestioning citizens do not always lead the most prosperous democratic societies.  Change and improvement are often sparked by questions, discourse and the need to improve.  Therefore, by teaching students to question the very avenue in which information is disseminated helps to grow students’ questioning skills regarding their intake of information from the world around them.  This skill then can be encourage students to question and deliberate information they hear in the State of the Union address, watching a documentary, or even when reading scholarly works.  

Journell W. (2010, April). Standardizing citizenship: the potential influence of state curriculum standards on the civic development of adolescents. The Teacher. 351-358.

Citizenship & Identity

“Most educators agree that schools need to prepare students for civic life, but differences in ideology make this requirement a complicated endeavor.  Although standards vary from state to state, one aspect remains common: teachers will use state standards as guidelines for instruction.  Therefore, an understanding of the type of citizenship a state advocates will allow educators to compensate for partisan or idelological imbalances found within the curriculum” (pg. 357).

Journell, W. (2010). Standardizing citizenship: the potential influence of state curriculum standards on the civic development of adolescents.

Wayne Journell set forth in his article, Standardizing Citizenship: The Potential Influence of State Curriculum Standards on the Civic Development of Adolescents, a split in how democratic participation might be taught in schools in order to promote political socialization.  Journell’s study uses the State of Virginia’s Standards of Learning to discuss the ideological rift between civic republicanism and liberal citizenship methods of instruction.  Journell states civic republicanism “emphasizes a common national ethos, a position that has gain momentum in the wake of poor student performances on standardized test of historical knowledge” (2010, p. 353).  This ideological stance also stresses a positive working relationship between citizens and the government.  In contrast, “liberal views of citizenship focus on political deliberation, questioning of authority, and social diversification.  In addition, liberal forms of citizenship do not prescribe any one doctrine, preferring to allow individuals the right to define their own view of morality and patriotism” (Journell, 2010, p. 353).  After reviewing Virginia’s Standards of Learning in light of Journell’s seven forms of citizenship (civic republicanism, character education, deliberative, social justice, participatory, transitional and cosmopolitan citizenship) found the standards to “perpetuate a certain ideological position (2010, p. 356).  In the case of Virginia’s Standards of Learning, the ideological position most perpetuated aligns mostly with civic republicanism perspective with facets of liberal citizenship mixed within. 

Citizenship provides groups of people with a common identity and culture.  As human beings we are drawn to others and have an inherent need to belong.  Journell’s article discusses the means in which schools should convey citizenship and the rights and responsibilities of citizenship to students.  The subject and manner in which citizenship is instructed will have an effect on students’ identity.  In his article, Journell states, “Moreover, it has become commonplace to acknowledge the role family and public schooling in developing the civic identities of individuals within American society” (2010, p. 351).  Identity, it affects both our sense of self and our belonging in society.  We belong to families, clubs, religions, sporting groups, professional and student organizations, and more.  Our identity is something that we as human beings search for and find meaning in.  As we progress through life we are learning and developing our identities.  So what is the role of teachers in forming students’ identities?  Specifically, how do Social Studies teachers ask students to identify with their studies?  Furthermore, what influence does citizenship and the responsibilities associated with citizenship have on identity.  Barton and Levstik, authors of Teaching History for the Common Good state argue that identity has three components, family, national, and in chronological time.  “The belief that history should provide a source of identification is a popular one in modern Western thought, and it is at the core of much of the historical activity in U.S. schools” (p.46).  The thought that teachers and schools are encourage students to identify with the shared story of the United States does not fully take in the reality that much of American society is built upon various cultures and beliefs.  Therefore, to push one aspect or method of engagement between people and government does not take into account the cultures of those citizens who wish to interact with their government in a different way.      

Barkton, K. & Levstik, L. (2004). “Teaching history for the common good.”           New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor, and Francis Group.

the growth of exhibiting students

“Moreover, the purpose of history education is to prepare students for participatory democracy, these displays [exhibition] have no particular relevance.  Being able to display historical information does not demonstrate that students have an expanded view of humanity, that they are able to make reasoned judgments, or that they can deliberate about the common good.” Barton & Levstik, 2004, p.114)

Barkton, K. & Levstik, L. (2004). “Teaching history for the common good.”           New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor, and Francis Group.

            In chapter one of Teaching History for the Common Good, authors Keith Barton and Linda Levstik discuss the purpose and goals of history education in the United States.  Participation in democratic society is cited as the chief justification for history education in American schools.  However, it is not simply the ability of reciting name, dates, and places on a homework assignment or standardized test that best prepares students for participation in our democratic society.  Barton and Levstik state, “we believe students will best prepared for democratic citizenship if they receive a broadly humanistic education” (p. 35).  One challenge many teachers face in their classroom is one or few students wishing to use the history classroom as the forum for their recitation of names, dates, and places in the “belief that someone else will be better off for knowing it” (p. 119).  These types of exhibitions seek to provide some sort of validity to the student at the cost of silencing the rest of the class.  Furthermore, exhibiting students require that teachers must ensure that their lessons include authentic intellectual work in order to help keep these students challenged and engaged.  What about the fate of the exhibiting student?  How can teachers help exhibiting students to grow in their understanding and confidence so that they do need to take over the class in order to feel self worth?

            In my seventh grade Social Studies class, I have such a student.  While he is generally a nice person to be around in the hallways and around the school, in class he tends to try to dominate conversations with tidbits.  In many cases, his interjections are helpful and add to the class.  However, more often than not, his hand raised usually means he will offer information that is unsubstantiated or irrelevant to the direction of the lesson.  His offerings usually come from something he supposedly saw on PBS.  When asked to back up a statement, his common response is “I saw it on PBS”.  In many cases, he offers insight while also editorializing the information and passing unjustified judgment.  Keeping up with him in class is taxing on me, as the teacher and facilitator of discussion, and it also takes me away from interacting with other students.  In one instance, the student offered that ‘Turkey is not welcome in the European Union because they are a Islamic country and terrorists are Islamist”.  This sort of misinformation must be immediately corrected for both the exhibiting student and with the rest of the class, thus often taking the class of course from my lesson plan.  As a teacher, I am happy that I have a student actively participating in class.  However, as a teacher, I struggle each day with trying to open his eyes to expand his view of humanity.  In my own practice, as a way of engaging the student in a way to provide him with a way to exhibit in a productive way, he has begun to research topics and he is given time in class to offer this information from sources he can make reference to in the class.

           

           

Historical Fiction: Friend or Foe?

“One of the chief advantages of history instruction that emphasizes individual narratives is its motivational power for children:  They are captivated by stories that help them explore how people responded to dramatic situations or give them the chance to imagine taking part in the events of the past” (Barton & Levstik (2004), p.155).

Barkton, K. & Levstik, L. (2004). “Teaching history for the common good.”  New York, NY: Routledge,    Taylor, and Francis Group.

            All teachers begin teaching with the hope that their students will come to class each day with the same passion and desire for their content subject as they do.  The reality is many students require some level of motivation from the teacher in order to encourage a high level of active engagement with the work.  Barton and Levstik discuss the power of narrative as a powerful cultural and motivational tool in the history classroom.  The use of narrative is long standing practice in American society.  Socially, students are raised to admire certain qualities.  From an early age, we teach young children about superheroes, such as Superman, and encourage children to look to positive role-models.  American students are long told the stories of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Harriet Tubman, and Neil Armstrong.  We encourage students to look to these influential Americans as role models and heroes of our society.  Students are encouraged to examine these “heroes” choices and convictions during times of danger and adversity in hopes that during times in their lives where they might be faced with adversity that they will take the moral high ground in the same respect as our heroes.  However, one must question whether teaching students to regard the individual narrative as complete truth, is beneficial to students’ comprehension of the past.  While stories of George Washington and the cherry tree, for example, can be captivating, does this story accurately describe the human characteristics of George Washington?  Furthermore, does this story provide explanations for General Washington’s decisions in the Revolutionary War?

            As a motivational tool, the use of individual narratives has clearly seen positive effects.  One can take a stroll around any Barnes and Noble and find a large section of historical fiction.  Therefore, it can be assumed that if adults take pleasure in reading individual narratives in their free time, then students might also enjoy reading similar works.   In my own practice, I have encountered and used individual narratives to assist students in my cooperating teacher’s classroom.  At the beginning of the school year, my cooperating teacher and I discussed strategies to help struggling students understand American life in the 1700’s.  A fan of historical fiction myself, I suggested asking the librarian to pull historical fiction novels for one particular student who is an avid reader.  I made this suggestion thinking that if the student could read the content in a medium other than the textbook, that perhaps the information would “click” in her mind.  After reading Barton and Levstik, I am conflicted by my decision.  As a motivational tool, I believe that this approach worked.  The student began to become more engaged in the class.  Her formative and summative assessments slightly improved, but did not reveal mastery of the content. Thus I am not convinced in the ability of individual narratives to provide a complete understanding of events of a time period or a balanced conception of the individual.  

History Education: It’s about the Journey!

History Education: It’s about the Journey!

“If students can overcome this perception that there is a ‘right answer’ and gain confidence in their abilities to interpret historical sources, address the commonalities and disparities among those sources, and formulate and defend an interpretation, then they will be on their way to gaining proficiency in thinking historically” (Lesh, 2011, p. 39).

Lesh, B.A. (2011). “Why won’t you just tell us the answer”: Teaching historical thinking in grades 7-12.         Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers

For decades, history has been taught in terms of timelines, names, and dates.  History tests have long been built upon multiple choice, map skills, short answer with an essay question, which usually requires students to repeat or regurgitate a portion of the prescribed narrative.  This practice has perpetuated a subconscious understanding in American schools that in your history class, memorization is the key skill to acquire.  Lesh calls for students to reject this notion that a students’ goal in a history class should be to search for the right answer to assessments.  Instead, Lesh encourages students to move beyond the traditional teaching of names and dates to deciding how and why historical events occurred and how or why we remember these events in a particular way.  For Lesh, this means students must “question authority” (2011, p. 38) whether this be a teacher, textbook, source, or narrative.   In order to encourage students to move past end of section review questions and rote memorization. Lesh, Barton and Levstik promote teaching students to undergo the same review as professional historians through a process called historical thinking.  Barton and Levstik (2004) identify the historical thinking process in four steps: identify, analyze, respond morally and display.   For Lesh, as a student progresses through each of these steps, the emphasis is placed on questioning.  Lesh calls upon skills used in other disciplines such as Science in order to encourage questioning in his own history class.  By integrating skills used in the instruction of other educational subjects, Lesh creates “history labs”.  For Lesh, “a key component of a laboratory experience in history is what students do with the historical sources once they have analyzed the text, placed sources in to context, and addressed the questions of subtext” (2011, p. 62).  Lesh argues that this method of instruction encourages students to develop the necessary historical thinking skills for students to transcend the superficial comprehension of history into a deeper understanding of historical events and people. 

In our society, the manner and purpose of history education is in desperate need for review.  The culture of standardized testing only intensifies the dichotomy of right and wrong and the importance of a single right answer in students’ minds.  As adults we understand that answers are not always as simple as right or wrong.  In many instances, the choices we make are based upon what is best given the present circumstances.  Far more important than the decision one makes is the thought process and reasoning one goes through in order to make the best decision with the information at the time.  For students to simply learn what decisions a historical figure might make does not get at the substance of how one comes to make the decision.  Therefore, for students to understand history as a series of events without studying the deliberations presents a superficial understanding of historical events.  As a history teacher, I feel that it is my responsibility to convey to my students not just an understanding of historical events but the reasoning, which led to the occurrence of these events.  It is for this reason that I agree with and admire Lesh’s method of teaching History.  As stated above, Lesh’s method is strengthened by Barton and Levstik’s four components of historical thinking.  I especially like the organization of a “lab” in order help students develop historical thinking skills.  The notion of a lab is inherently inquiry/discovery based which assists teachers in developing lesson that encourage students to develop their understanding of a particular event for themselves as opposed to the teacher developing the idea for them.  I especially like the natural development of hypotheses, which occur from a lab-type framework.  Furthermore, this method of instruction also promotes the development of life-skills such as group work.