|
Recent and unprecedented congressional funding
for the Teaching American History grants (which are intended to
encourage collaboration among K12 teachers, post-secondary
faculty, and public historians) has sparked new interest in history
teaching within the schools. Although historians at all levels have
been involved to some extent in professional development of K12
teachers, more and more historians are now participating in such
collaborative programs because of this important federal initiative.
In June 2002, Bruce Craig, director of the
National Coalition for History, organized a meeting with staff from
the U.S. Department of Education to discuss the Teaching American
History Grants. The executive directors of the American Historical
Association, the Organization of American Historians, and the National
Council for the Social Studies attended the meeting. These three
organizations have encouraged and supported collaboration among
teachers at all levels for many years and have produced materials
including publications and pamphlets that integrate sound historical
and pedagogical scholarship with suggested classroom practice.
One of the outcomes of the meeting was that
the Department of Education staff asked the three organizations
to create a document that sets out benchmarks for sound professional
development for teachers of American history. They asked the organizations
to address what constitutes a good program and what outcomes should
be expected. As a result, in August 2002, a small group of K12
teachers, faculty from history departments and schools of education,
and public historians, selected by the three organizations, met
to discuss professional development for teachers of American history.
The following document reflects their thinking and experience.
History
is the study of the past (including the study of change and continuity
over time). According to historian Peter Stearns, "the past causes
the present, and so the future. Sometimes fairly recent history
will suffice to explain a major development, but often we need to
look further back to identify the causes of change. Only through
studying history can we grasp how things change; only through history
can we begin to comprehend the factors that cause change; and only
through history can we understand what elements of an institution
or a society persist despite change." Studying history not only
trains students to place events in historical perspective, it also
develops research skills and sharpens student analytical thinking.
Professional development projects should be reviewed over time to
insure that these thinking and research skills are being met.
This document suggests that collaboratives
for professional development in history teaching need to be planned
and viewed from several vantage points. First, they must be set
up according to certain general criteria, in terms of planning procedures,
participation and duration. Second, they must involve sound approaches
to historical content. Third, they must pay due attention to pedagogy
and to active learning. Fourth, they must emphasize several definable
habits of mind, ranging from uses of evidence and interpretation
in forming arguments to understanding issues of change over time.
Fifth and finally, collaborations must help teachers deal with appropriate
methods of assessment. Above all, the collaborative programs must
rest upon two fundamental assumptions:
• Content,
pedagogy, and historical thinking should be interwoven
• Content, pedagogy, and historical
thinking should be related to classroom experience.
COLLABORATION
BENCHMARKS
• For
sound professional development, K12 teachers should be involved
at the beginning of planning.
Collaboration
should involve K12 teachers from the beginning as part of
an Advisory Committee to consider the interests for their schools
and how they perceive development of their history program. The
Advisory Committee should consider whether an entire department
(either in the university or in the K12 school), or only teachers
of certain grade levels or specific subjects (American history,
World history, Economics, Geography, Civics, and other social science
disciplines) will be involved. The discussions should include potential
books, articles, web sites for colloquia; speakers to be invited
for institutes; and requirements and expectations of teachers.
•
Content and classroom needs of teachers and students should be assessed
at the beginning
The collaboration
should consider the strengths and weaknesses of content knowledge
of the students and teachers in the program and availability to
them of teaching materials.
• The goals
of teachers and students as determined through the assessment should
be the central focus of the program.
The collaboration
should involve teachers in writing the goals for the grant and/or
responding to the goals of the grant for revision.
• Professional
development programs should be sustained over time.
The collaboration
should include arrangements (perhaps through the university partners)
to invite teachers to annual symposiums and conferences for further
professional development so the grant emphasizes sustainability.
• Professional
collaboration of teachers with their colleagues should be encouraged.
The collaborations
should include discussions at colloquia and seminars (and their
virtual versions on web sites), collaborative publications, and
presentations at professional conferences.
• Workshops
conducted by master teachers for their colleagues at home institutions
should be a requirement.
The collaboration
should provide opportunities for in-service training or programs,
conducted by master teachers or department members, on use of primary
sources and content drawn from monographs and the application of
content to the classroom. The in-service opportunities should include
a summary of the content gleaned from readings and speakers and
sample lesson plans based on the material presented that teachers
can implement in their teaching.
• Teachers
with strong abilities as facilitators should be identified and given
leadership roles within the project.
• As many university/college history
faculty should be involved in the project as is possible, especially
those with experience in primary and secondary school education.
• If the professional development
program is focusing on a particular school district, the coordinator
of history and social studies in that school district should be
consulted at the start of planning a project. In such cases where
specific schools and colleges are involved, activities should be
held both at schools and the college. Those responsible for training
new history teachers should be included in these activities.
CONTENT
BENCHMARKS
• Teachers
should be provided opportunities to maintain awareness of major
new research in the field.
• Teachers should discuss main
periodization schemes applied to U.S. history content, and issues
involved in these schemes.
• Because content is more than
a dry recitation of historical "facts," teachers should be enabled
to develop ways of enriching content.
• Teachers should be helped to
utilize sound content models already available. Documents such as
the U.S. History Framework for the 1994 National Assessment of Education
Progress can be helpful guides. Professional development in history
can conform to state standards when history is a distinct subject
within the standards.
• The program should provide a
sound reading list.
Reading lists
should include relevant primary, recent secondary sources, and web
sites on the historical topic. It should also include sources that
discuss how children learn history.
• Teachers
should be helped to place U.S. history content in the appropriate
global perspective, including comparisons where applicable.
Examples
could include understanding the 1930s Depression in terms of global
forces as well as a national event. Comparisons can also be global—comparing,
for example, patterns of violence in settler societies and the American
frontier society or comparing the end of slavery in the United States
with the Russian emancipation of serfs.
PEDAGOGY
BENCHMARKS
• All
pedagogical presentations should be framed with student learning
in mind, and methods to analyze this student learning need to be
included in the professional development plan.
• A prime goal of professional
development needs to be the engagement of participants so that they
will convey their excitement to their students.
• Participants should be given
opportunities to learn how historians conduct research, and, in
particular, how they evaluate the reliability of sources.
Pedagogy needs
to focus on the use and interpretation of primary sources. Presenters
need to formulate activities that engage participants in primary
source evaluation, using both traditional paper methods and web-based
primary source materials.
• Pedagogy
needs to focus on placing primary sources in historical context
and interpreting those primary sources.
Presenters
need to model such activities as discussion, lecture, group activities,
role-playing, and simulations that place primary sources in the
proper context.
• Discussion
of teaching methods should always begin with content—presenters
and participants need to realize that method is merely a tool for
presenting intellectually challenging subject matter to learners.
Method should never be presented in a vacuum, divorced from content.
For example,
PowerPoint or other presentation software programs should not be
used just because they are available. Rather, such programs might
be used as a tool for fostering historical thinking by displaying
otherwise inaccessible primary sources in an appealing format.
• Methods
need to begin with the latest content and scholarship. Presenters
should model how to frame a presentation around historical scholarship
rather than on terms from a textbook.
• A variety of methods should be
presented. This is to accommodate different learning styles and
provide for the presentation of multiple perspectives, a critical
component in the understanding of the current field of history.
• Presenters need to introduce
active methods as part of the variety of methods presented. Presenters
need to model active learning techniques that go beyond lectures
and discussion—group activities, role-playing, simulations, and
debates, etc. Presenters must show the intimate relationship between
these activities and in-depth historical content.
HISTORICAL
THINKING BENCHMARKS
• Analysis
of primary and secondary sources.
For example,
using primary and secondary sources on the experience of 19th-century
immigrants, teachers can look for different points of view or bias
(for instance, in comments by immigrants themselves compared to
comments about immigrants by the press or politicians). Weighing
the representativeness of certain kinds of sources such as diaries
and considering a mixture of quantitative and qualitative (visual
as well as textual) sources would be another important exercise
on this kind of topic. Discussing how to rate different levels of
reliability in sources on the immigrant experience might round off
an exercise on this skill.
• An understanding
of historical debate and controversy.
Working on
the diverse interpretations of United States involvement in the
Cold War, for example, could focus the issue of how to sort out
conflicting interpretations, including examining the ways different
"sides" build their argument and adduce evidence.
• Appreciation
of recent historiography through an examination of how historians
develop differing interpretations.
For example,
shifting concepts about race have changed the way historians interpreted
key aspects of slavery and reconstruction in United States history,
as well as the kinds of evidence and theories they used. What, in
fact, are the main differences from earlier approaches?
• Analysis
of how historians use evidence.
For example,
examining recent articles in leading historical journals in several
different fields—political history, diplomatic history and social
or gender history—would be a good way to look at different kinds
of evidence but also to examine any patterns in the ways historians
build arguments from evidence.
• An understanding
of bias and points of view.
This skill
applies most obviously in assessing primary sources, but it is vital
also in dealing with secondary accounts. Teachers can compare textbook
treatments of controversial topics, such as slavery, and how they
have changed over time, as a means of testing for bias or point
of view.
• Formulation
of questions through inquiry and determining their importance.
There might
be two ways to work on this aspect of historical thinking: first,
take a work regarded as seminal, such as several of the pathbreaking
studies of slavery, and tease out which two or three major questions
guided the work; or second, simply think through two or three questions
about U.S. history that seem open-ended, not yet answered or even
directly addressed, and discuss how their importance might be assessed.
• Determination
of the significance of different kinds of historical change.
For example,
a teacher might take any 25-year slice of U.S. history, undoubtedly
filled with new developments, and determine which two or three of
these developments are the most important changes—and how these
can be defended against other options, discussing, for instance,
how other outcomes or changes are less likely given the initial
conditions.
• Sophisticated
examination of how causation relates to continuity and change.
For example,
how does one go about explaining the historic shift in the work
patterns of married women in the United States in the 1950s and
1960s, which so dramatically altered women's lives and family structures?
And how does one determine, amid such a striking shift, elements
in women's roles that persisted—and why they persisted?
• Understanding
of the interrelationship among themes, regions, and periodization.
For example,
a topic such as the nature and role of cities can be explored in
terms of major American regions (south, west, northeast), using
comparative techniques, and also in terms of periodization. Two
questions that can be asked are: When did major changes take place?
What is the relationship between periodization for this topic and
conventional survey history periodization more generally?
• Understanding
that although the past tends to be viewed in terms of present values,
a proper perception of the past requires a serious examination of
values of that time.
For example,
what aspects of the Federalist Papers seem particularly hard to
understand in terms of current political issues and values, and
how can we appreciate why they were important at the time? How can
we appreciate why many parents tried to "break the will" of disobedient
children, by isolating them in their rooms often for days, in the
early 19th century—and how can we try to understand the impact of
this experience on children themselves?
ASSESSMENT
BENCHMARKS
1. Assessment of the professional
development program
• Learning
outcomes on the part of all participants (K12 teachers, post-secondary
teachers, and public historians) in the program should be assessed.
For example,
classroom observations are used to assess the extent and quality
of the use of primary and secondary sources as evidence. In focus
group interviews, students should be asked about the ways in which
they formulate inquiry questions in their coursework, and the amount
of attention devoted to conflict and controversy.
• Student
historical understanding should be tested prior to and after conducting
collaborative programs.
The tests
should be performance assessments, examining student understanding
of historical thinking and important, in-depth, contextualized subject
matter rather than discrete historical "facts." Professional development
needs to provide participants the tools to administer such assessments
to their students. Pedagogical presentations need to include discussions
of historical reading and historical writing. Presenters discussing
professional development need to provide methods to make relevant
assessments useful and manageable.
•
Assessment should be directed toward the continual and constructive
improvement of teaching, learning, and professional development.
Program goals and procedures should be adapted as necessary based
on assessment evidence.
Program participants
should meet regularly to discuss examples of student work and to
develop plans for further developing students' historical thinking.
Program participants should also meet at the midpoint and at the
end to discuss the results of classroom observations and focus group
interviews, and to develop procedures to meet needs that have been
identified through these discussions.
• Assessment
should provide aggregate data on students, teachers, and other participants,
not summary evaluation of individuals.
Classroom
observations should be combined to provide overall portraits of
the range of practices among participants rather than descriptions
of individual teachers. Participants' collaborative analysis of
student work should be confidential and should not be used as a
basis for assigning grades or determining promotion.
• All assessment
measures should be developed, implemented, and analyzed with the
full participation of teachers, historians, post-secondary educators,
and when possible, students.
The use of
assessment evidence to develop and adjust program goals should result
from joint discussions among teachers, historians, and other participating
educators. Teachers should share assessment criteria with students
before the activity begins, help students understand how to apply
these criteria to their own work, and engage students in creating
their own assessment measures.
• Assessment
should provide evidence of learning over the course of the professional
development program by including measures of student achievement
or teacher performance both before and after participation in the
program.
Examples
of student work from the beginning and end of each year of the program
should be analyzed and compared for evidence of improved achievement
in historical thinking. Classroom observations from the beginning
and end of each year of the program should be analyzed and compared
for evidence of improved teaching.
2.
Assessment of Teachers and Students
• Teachers'
classroom practices should be assessed on the extent to which they
incorporate the "Pedagogy Benchmarks" and are directed toward students'
achievement of the "Historical Thinking Benchmarks."
For example,
classroom observations are used to assess the extent and quality
of the use of primary and secondary sources as evidence. In focus
group interviews, students should be asked about the ways in which
they formulate inquiry questions in their coursework, and the amount
of attention devoted to conflict and controversy.
• Student
assessment should be tied directly to elements of historical thinking
as outlined in "Historical Thinking Benchmarks." Additionally, assessment
may include attention to state or local curriculum standards.
For example,
students should be assessed on the extent to which they collect
primary and secondary source evidence to reach conclusions about
controversial events in U.S. history. Students should also be assessed
on the extent to which they can describe how particular historical
interpretations maybe influenced by the incompleteness of evidence
or by biases that are part of surviving evidence. Aggregate data
from local or state tests should be collected and used as a supplement
to other assessment measures.
CONCLUSION
Sound professional development
must involve real collaboration between different partners. Meaningful
collaboratives can enhance the quality of history teaching and provide
mutual insights to teachers at all levels. Collaboratives offer a
chance for mutual dialogue about teaching and scholarship productive
to everyone involved. Professional development should be planned from
the beginning with teachers at all levels and teachers' needs must
be considered. The object of professional development in history is
to train teachers for intellectually sophisticated best practices
in the classroom. Therefore, professional development for teaching
history must include three interrelated and integrated parts: Content,
Pedagogy that includes Student Learning, and Habits of Mind for History/Thinking
Historically. These three parts should be mutually enforcing
rather than separated. Training in content and thinking historically
must be connected with pedagogy. Lastly, assessments must be directly
tied to the goals of professional development, most importantly the
"historical thinking benchmarks" that are, in turn, dependent on content
and pedagogy.
| Members
of the Working Group |
| |
Peter
Stearns (chair), George Mason University |
Bob Bain,
University of Michigan
Keith Barton,
University of Cincinnati
Bruce Craig,
National Coalition for History
Frederick Drake,
Illinois State University
Fritz Fischer,
Northern Colorado University
Cathy Gorn,
National History Day
|
Cynthia Mostoller,
Deal Junior High School
William Weber,
California State University at Long Beach
Noralee Frankel,
American Historical Association
Cliff Jacobs,
American Historical Association
Stacy Kotzin,
Department of Education (observer)
Alex Stein,
Department of Education (observer) |
For further information,
contact
Noralee Frankel
American Historical Association
400 A Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003-3889
202-544-2422. Fax: 202-544-8307.
|
|