reflection

Point of View

Musings on Meaning, Meatloaf, and Moe: Reflections on “The State of Social Studies” Ron Levitsky

Good teachers really do care passion- ately about their subject, but they don’t always agree what should be taught or how best to teach it. “The State of Social Studies,” published in September’s Social Education (vol. 70, no. 5), prompted me to think further about the conclu- sions of authors James Leming, Lucien Ellington, and Mark Schug. The follow- ing are reflections of a veteran eighth grade social studies instructor in his final year of teaching. Like “The State of Social Studies” article, my hope is that these musings will encourage even more discussion.

Respect In his novel 1984, George Orwell wrote that the best books tell us what we already know. The authors’ findings that, accord- ing to those interviewed, schools show social studies less respect than other subjects—come as no surprise to vet- eran teachers. There is a perception, by many administrators and the public, that “anyone can teach social studies.” During my first year of teaching, when I disagreed with my principal, he put his arm around me and said, “Ron, don’t you know that social studies teachers are a dime a dozen?”

Why is our profession so devalued? In part, it is the way that social studies has traditionally been taught—the way many parents remember being taught in “the good old days.” If geography meant memorizing all the state capitals and history knowing all the presidents in order, why couldn’t anyone teach social studies?

Yet we all know that social studies is much more important than that. Why else would the Chinese government seek to eradicate any mention of Tiananmen Square? Why would both Japan and Turkey continue to deny their heinous war crimes of the past? Why would the president of Iran engage in Kafkaesque history by denying the Holocaust? There seems, among those most willing to sub- vert history, an understanding that is lost on many of our own citizens. History, and the rest of social studies, is more than a Jeopardy game.

Testing If social studies is the Rodney Dangerfield of disciplines, getting no respect, then No Child Left Behind exacerbates this situation. At a time when our govern- ment stresses the importance of patrio- tism, including history and government,

NCLB requires testing of the “important subjects”—reading and mathematics. This can have a devastating effect on our sub- ject area. Last year, I participated in an NCSS panel discussion on NCLB. One of the participants, a textbook publisher, frankly admitted that his company had pulled significant resources from social studies to put into reading and math. My own state of Illinois has stopped testing social studies as part of its yearly state exam. Since the federal government does not require this assessment, the state can save money by not administering an extra test. After all, it’s only social studies.

Of course, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, sometimes the worst thing in the world is getting what you want. Would a federally required social studies exam really ben- efit our discipline? Many states do test for social studies. Do these tests take into account various curricula, problem-solv- ing strategies, and higher level thinking skills? Or do they emphasize minutiae and rote learning—continually spiraling down their standards until the requisite number of students pass? What about the time taken away from teaching to prepare students for such a test and the inspiring lessons that might be sacrificed?

It’s interesting that the authors of “The State of Social Studies” found that “many teachers do not perceive the impact of standards, testing, and No Child Left Behind as harmful.” Yet the study also showed that, were there no state test, teachers would engage in more inquiry

In the film Back to School, comedian Sam Kineson plays an American history professor who excoriates a co-ed for her dovish interpretation of the Vietnam War but congratulates Rodney Dangerfield for his rant against Truman’s refusal to unleash General MacArthur in Korea. Afterwards, Dangerfield says to another student,

“Good teacher. He really cares … about what, I have no idea.”

Social Education 70(7), pp 405–408 ©2006 National Council for the Social Studies

N o v e m b e r / D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 6 405

UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador Angelina Jolie travels by truck with Congolese refugees just arriving in Tanzania. In recent years, the country has hosted nearly one million victims of persecution and war. (March 2003)

UNHCR/ N. Behring-

Chisholm

and cooperative learning—crucial skills for any citizen. Not surprisingly, the study indicated that the group most dissatis- fied with such testing was eighth grade teachers, who by far have the strongest background in social studies of those teachers sampled in the second, fifth and eighth grades.

Curriculum The authors’ study draws a sharp distinc- tion between “solid world geography and history content” (including the study of heroes) versus “cultural diversity.” Over the years, I’ve read many articles on this topic, but as a classroom teacher I’ve never recognized a dichotomy. Teaching American history, for example, must be inclusive and recognize the richness of our diversity. As a high school student in the 1960s, I remember learning from both textbook and teacher that Lincoln and Johnson’s Reconstruction plans were good, because they were based on mercy, and that Congress was filled with vindictive individuals intent on punishing an already prostrate South.

No attention was paid to the African American experience—as far as I knew, African Americans had neither aspira- tions nor ability. Today, students learn that this historical period was far more complex and that African Americans made significant contributions both to the Union victory and to state govern- ments during Reconstruction.

Why is it that in poll after poll, high school students rank history as their least favorite (i.e., most boring) subject? Brain research has shown that we learn best, in part, when we can connect learning to our own experience. As our classrooms contain an increasingly diverse student population, shouldn’t our curriculum reflect this diversity? George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are, indeed, cru- cial to a study of American history, but my eighth graders know far more about Martin Luther King, Jr. Certainly, one reason is because elementary school teachers emphasize Dr. King as part of cultural diversity. Yet it’s also because children relate to issues of race and that King’s courage in the struggle for civil

rights is intimately connected to their own struggle as adolescents for self-worth and recognition.

Meaningfulness also relates to another point made by the authors. They express concern that elementary school teachers give little emphasis to American heroes, because “academic and media elites have denigrated heroes.” It’s certainly true, as Daniel Boorstin noted years ago in his book, The Image, that people often con- fuse genuine heroes with celebrities who are simply famous for being famous. As the operatic rock star Meatloaf shouted in one of his songs, “If you want my view of history, there’s something you should know: The three men I admire most are Larry, Curly, Moe.” Yet celebrities can contribute to social studies. Using Bono, a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, I discuss world hunger with my students, and I capitalize on the star quality of Angelina Jolie, the Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to teach about the inter- national refugee crisis. Even the Three Stooges find their way into my discussion

S o c i a l E d u c a t i o n

406

of World War II. Theirs were the first Hollywood films that had the courage to ridicule Hitler during American iso- lationism.

When I was in school, our heroes were almost entirely white men. As Langston Hughes reminds us in his poem, “I, Too, Sing America,” there was “the darker brother” like Frederick Douglass and sis- ters like Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks. When one of my Latino students proudly proclaims that his hero is Cesar Chavez, isn’t he engaging in “solid history” by admiring one of the great labor leaders of the twentieth century? As James Loewen, in Lies My Teacher Told Me, reminds us—what of women, Native Americans, and other minorities, each of whose representative, like Sacajawea, is often relegated to a quarter-page little blue box

“hero section” of the textbook? There’s also the question of who is a

hero? I ask students to consider whether or not Andrew Jackson was a hero. Here’s a figure larger than life, who defeated the greatest army in the world at New Orleans, yet defied the Supreme Court and forced the Cherokee on the brutal

“Trail of Tears.” With a man as complex as Jackson, the answer is complicated by his own actions and by one’s own perspective (my students had a real eye-opener when they read about Jackson on a Native American website). One’s perspective may also affect which of the following pairs is the hero—Andrew Carnegie or Emma Goldman, Harry Truman or Douglas MacArthur.

In high school, I was taught that kings and military leaders made history. One of the great revelations of my life was reading E.P. Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class in college. My father worked on an assembly line for half his life. It was Thompson who taught me that working people, like my father, could be heroes of history too. I didn’t need a teacher to tell me who my heroes were. I just needed to be given the opportunity to find out for myself.

Pedagogy All teachers want their students to know the material, but as Bill Clinton might

ask, what do you mean by “know”? One interpretation is to retain informa- tion because American citizens should know certain things—like who George Washington was, the importance of Henry Ford’s assembly line, and what happened at Gettysburg. Not remember- ing this kind of knowledge, so valuable on a standardized test, makes people in the street look foolish when questioned by Jay Leno. Facts, the building blocks of social studies, are important to know, but if a fact is only memorized for a test, it will be as memorable as one Big Mac out of a million.

Another way of proving one knows the material is by doing something with it—for example, what Bloom in his Taxonomy identified as higher-level thinking. The authors chart different types of instruction that teachers tradi- tionally use, such as teacher presentation, reading textbooks, workbooks, and a gen- eral category entitled, “problem solving or critical thinking activities.” I believe this last category is the most important and probably the one least frequently evaluated on standardized exams.

Students who are asked, not to memo- rize, but to grapple with, analyze, and evaluate problems in history are far more likely, not only to remember information but understand why they are remember- ing it. Students who take the curricu- lar material they have learned on the Holocaust and organize a campaign to

“Free Tibet” or help to combat genocide in Darfur are also learning—and learning more deeply. I suspect when, years later as adults, they run for the school board or organize a coffee for a local politician, they are still using the information they learned in social studies.

How then do we teach kids to really learn the material? What is the typical response when a teacher asks students to complete a worksheet or to take notes in the text? Often a sigh accompanied by a glassy-eyed stare. This type of school- work may be necessary at times, but its purpose should be to prepare students for the real meaning of the curriculum— engaging in the material.

Too often the purpose of a lesson is for

the student to tell the teacher what the teacher already knows. In the authors’ study, teacher-centered instruction and discussion were rated the most popular method of instruction. How often does

“discussion” mean telling the teacher the “right” answer? And what of the tradi- tional term paper (such as my “favor- ite,” a five-page piece on Adolf Hitler)? James Moffett, a noted teacher of writ- ing, referred to these types of essays as

“dummy runs”—both the teacher and stu- dent know that nothing original is going to come from this kind of research.

There are, of course, many methods that do engage students. There are teach- ers who ask open-ended questions, in which students know that their answers are truly valued. Utilizing current events makes history more relevant (e.g., Lincoln’s use of war powers compared to Bush’s). Simulation and cooperative learning allow students to engage in a decision-making process similar to real historical figures. Use of civic discourse or debate—such as those provided by the Constitutional Rights Foundation, Opposing Viewpoints, or Choices for the 21st Century—provide both the content and process that help to build an effec- tive citizenry.

Personal Beliefs As a high school freshman, I had a World Civilization teacher who was so blatantly conservative that my friend would imitate her voice and ask, “So, class, what did President Kennedy do wrong today?” The error, of course, was not her personal beliefs, but that she imposed those beliefs on her class.

In the authors’ study, most teachers stated that their personal beliefs influ- ence their teaching. But how can they not? Planning any lesson, the teacher makes many decisions regarding what to include and what to omit? For example, how one presents the Spanish American War and the Philippine Insurrection, or the Haymarket Square bombing, is neces- sarily a reflection of one’s values.

What troubles me is the authors’ con- clusion that if a teacher does not share his/her community’s values, then “the

N o v e m b e r / D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 6 407

social studies classroom may be politi- cized in a manner inconsistent with com- munity values.” (p.326) It seems doubtful that all communities have one single set of values on every issue. Often, a teacher faces a different problem—that whatever he or she does is likely to offend some parent.

It seems to me that there should be a universal set of values, which reflects what we as a profession believe to be the significance of social studies. My school district has included in its curriculum beliefs set forth by Professor John J. Patrick. They include constitutionalism (rule of law), republicanism (constitu- tional government by the people’s repre- sentatives), liberalism (personal liberty), and communitarianism (commitment to the public good, e.g., service learning). Certainly teachers will disagree on how to apply these values, but these beliefs create an excellent foundation for teach- ing social studies.

Is it ever appropriate to challenge a community’s beliefs? Three years ago,

shortly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the American public, including my community, was solidly behind the war. I didn’t believe that my students were being given the opportunity by the media to hear opposing viewpoints. Therefore, I invited a speaker from Voices in the Wilderness, a group that had practiced civil disobedience against the war, to present its position. From the discus- sion I held later with my classes, stu- dents, whether or not they agreed with the speaker, appreciated the chance to hear another point-of-view. My decision to invite this speaker was supported by my principal, whose son at the time was a Marine serving in Iraq.

Conclusion: Should We Be Worried? The authors end their article with the opinion, “... we find much to be concerned about,” including the lack of respect accorded social studies compared to other disciplines and the low importance given to economics and American heroes.

Ron Levitsky has taught junior high social stud- ies for 35 years, including a two-year stint in the Dominican Republic and the last 26 years at Sun- set Ridge School in Northfield, Illinois, where he will retire at the end of this year. He currently serves on the executive board of the National Social Stud- ies Supervisors Association. He recently received the 2006 Aharonian Award from the Genocide Educa- tion Project.

There is no question that social studies, like any discipline, can stand improve- ment. But are things that bad?

In the same issue of Social Education as the authors’ article, Ronald Evans commented on “The Social Studies Wars, Now and Then.” He noted that nearly every generation in the twentieth century was concerned about social studies. For example, in the 1940s, historian Allen Nevins criticized the teaching of U.S. history in the public schools for failing to instill historical knowledge and patrio- tism in its students. Sound familiar?

Cultural historian Lawrence Levine has written of the reluctance of academia to change. In the years following the Great Bard’s death, scholars in England ques- tioned including Shakespeare’s plays in classrooms alongside those of the ancient Greeks. The same debate occurred in late nineteenth-century America regarding whether homegrown American authors like Twain and Whitman should be stud- ied alongside the English masters. And so it goes today with the debate over the role of cultural diversity.

The authors have provided a great service with their article, “The State of Social Studies.” The issues they bring forward—respect, testing, curriculum, pedagogy, and personal beliefs—deserve further discussion. Hopefully my mus- ings will join those of the authors in encouraging our colleagues to do the same.

CENTER FOR CIVIC EDUCATION /

Cen ter for Civic Edu c a ti on 5145 Douglas Fir Roa d Ca l a b a s a s , CA 91302 8 1 8 . 5 9 1 . 9 3 2 1 • 8 0 0 . 3 5 0 . 4 2 2 3 w w w. c ivi ced . org cce@c ivi ced . org

REQUEST A FREE CATA L O G

WE THE PEOPLE THE CITIZEN & THE CONSTITUTION

N E W

This text on the history and principles of constitutional democracy in the United States features critical-thinking exercises, problem-solving activities, cooperative- learning pra cti ce s , and a culminating perfo rm a n ce assessment.

The teacher’s edition includes lesson plans, directions for conducting a simulated congressional hearing, a mu l ti pl e - ch o i ce te s t , and a bi bl i o gra p hy.

M I D D L E S C H O O L ( L E V E L 2 )

0609.bw-adv.csp.qk6 10/18/06 9:06 AM Page 1

The editors invite further discussion of this topic, either for the Point of View section of Social Education or the letters column.

S o c i a l e D u c a t i o N

408