One of the incidental benefits of serving as a reader of Advanced Placement history essays concerns the sharing of experiences and perspectives in teaching courses in history. It was in the course of an informal colloquium during the 1981 reading that one reader, an AP European history teacher at the high school level, outlined the benefits he had derived from meetings with instructors in history at a local university in his area. As the newly elected chairman of La Salle College’s Department of History, I became interested in presenting a similar program for AP teachers in the Philadelphia area for two reasons: (1) discussions of this kind would be mutually beneficial: AP instructors would, it was hoped, benefit from exposure to current teaching practices at the post-secondary level; and (2) La Salle’s history faculty would gain valuable insight into the instructional techniques employed on the secondary level, and thus into the level of preparedness of entering freshmen as well. And, more pragmatically, La Salle’s history program would achieve some degree of exposure and recognition among area secondary schools. [Editor’s note: Approximately one quarter of the more than 200,000 AP examinations taken in 1983 were in either American or European history.]
With all of this in mind I sought assistance in organizing an AP history conference from Professor John S. Grady, director of La Salle’s honors program. While reviewing student records, Professor Grady discovered some interesting data regarding those entering students who had completed the AP history courses while in high school (each entering class consists of approximately 750 students; total day-school enrollments at La Salle number around 3,300 students). For example, of the approximately 100 students in this category, the majority scored a “3” or better on the examination, and were awarded credit for American or European history when they matriculated at La Salle. It was also found that not only had most of these students distinguished themselves academically at La Salle, but also, of the thirty-seven undergraduate Fulbright Fellowship winners at La Salle during the past ten years, thirty had entered with AP history credit.
Quite apart from these considerations were the questions: From which schools should we invite teachers of AP history? Should the invitations go only to those schools that have traditionally served as “feeder schools” for La Salle? Or should the program include representatives from schools—especially private schools—not accustomed to sending students to La Salle? Beyond all of this, how should we determine which schools in the latter category offer AP history? And for all schools, how should we identify individual teachers of AP history?
As an initial step toward resolution of these problems, I requested from the Educational Testing Service (ETS) a listing of all schools in the geographical area from which most of our students come: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. I also asked for the names of individual AP teachers in each of the institutions listed. From the list sent by ETS of approximately fifty schools, Professor Grady and I began to narrow our focus according to specific criteria. First, there was the consideration of manageable proportions. An ideal size for the sort of panel program we had envisioned would be around twenty-five participants. Buttressing this figure were budgetary considerations. Although at no time did the administration of La Salle impose strict fiscal guidelines, Professor Grady and I felt that an outside figure of $500 should be our limit. As it turned out, this figure was projected as an estimated cost by La Salle’s Director of Food Services; the final bill amounted to $499.25. A second concern was that, at least for the initial program, we ought to involve those schools and teachers that had, over the years, developed especially close ties with La Salle. Thus, a survey of all students with AP credit currently enrolled at La Salle revealed that ten institutions were represented among the student body, having from two to thirteen representative students each. Yet another factor in our deliberations was that of time and distance. Not only might it prove unfeasible for a teacher from, say, the Pittsburgh area to travel 300 miles to La Salle for an afternoon and evening program, but also it might prove economically impractical for us to invite him. As a final matter, Professor Grady and I did feel it worthwhile to extend invitations to schools within a fifty-mile radius that had not traditionally delivered strong students to the college.
At this stage we decided to solicit prima facie indications of interest in the program. To this end, I telephoned selected teachers from a variety of schools, both those with long-standing affiliations with La Salle and those with no previous connections. Without exception, those in the former category responded enthusiastically to the idea; those in the latter category showed little or no interest (one teacher from an affluent, suburban preparatory school even snapped, “I’ve been teaching AP history for thirteen years, and I don’ t have to come to La Salle to learn how to do it!”). Finally, invitations were sent six weeks before the program’s date to thirty schools. We hoped for acceptances from twenty-five; twenty-two eventually attended the conference.
The format of the program was designed to emphasize collegiality between history instructors on the secondary and postsecondary levels. Therefore, the program was structured around two principal events: an afternoon panel discussion, “The Teaching of History: Yesterday and Today”; and an evening presentation—following a reception and dinner—by Dr. Lawrence Beaber, consultant for the Advanced Placement European History program at ETS.
The afternoon session featured two presentations, each focusing on two subjects: recent historiography in American and European history; and problems and perspectives in the classroom. Professor Joseph P. O’Grady made the presentation in American history. After reviewing trends and developments in historical literature, he shared his perceptions concerning the teaching of American history on the college level, giving special attention to what he described as “fads” in history and their impact on the historical profession. Professor John P. Rossi then delivered some remarks on approaches to European history, including a comparison of the old war-horse course of history departments—Western civilization—with the more modern course in “global” history. A spirited discussion followed, in which invited teachers and other members of La Salle’s history department participated.
The evening session began with brief remarks by La Salle’s president, provost, and the dean of arts and sciences, followed by a presentation by Dr. Beaber entitled “Recent Developments in Advanced Placement History.” With accompanying handouts Dr. Beaber outlined the process by which AP examinations, especially essays, are graded. Additional comments concerned changes in the examination formats in 1981 and 1982. The principal concern during the following question-and-answer sessions was about the testing and grading procedures employed by ETS.
Reaction to the program was overwhelmingly positive. La Salle’s history faculty were impressed with how well-educated and informed the secondary school teachers were, and found that they had a great deal more in common with them than they had originally thought. Moreover , they were pleased with the teachers’ enthusiasm about the future of history as a subject in the secondary schools, and the impact that “gifted and talented” legislation is having on fostering AP history programs.
La Salle’s administrators were similarly impressed, especially with the potential of the program for other disciplines. As the provost remarked:
Concerning a repeat of that program next year, at this time I would suggest that we place that issue on an agenda for our review in the spring semester—perhaps during the annual departmental review. I have in mind the appropriateness of our seeing whether we can interest other humanities departments in sponsoring such a program; that direction would indicate some need to cycle such programs.
The AP history teachers were equally enthusiastic; many sent unsolicited responses to the program. They felt that they had learned a great deal from the afternoon programs on historiography and that they had developed contacts with the college faculty that they might use when they were planning their courses for 1982-83 or for advice on organizing specific aspects of their courses. One teacher wrote that he found the program “informative, stimulating, and encouraging.” He added that “it is nice to know that the work of high school instructors can be beneficial and is worth the extra effort.” Another teacher wrote that he had “benefited immensely from the presentations and interactions, as well as from the opportunity to discuss cogent issues with colleagues.” Yet another felt that “too often the role of a teacher is overlooked. It is gratifying to know that you in the history department at La Salle are recognizing the teachers’ contributions to the program.” Perhaps the best summary of the results of the program was offered by Sister Dorothy Connor, SSJ, who related that she “found it a rare treat to listen to and participate in the question-and-answer session with Professors O’Grady and Rossi. In an age that so glorifies science, math, and technology on one hand and wonders about the utility of history on the other, I was and still am extremely delighted that you and your colleagues saw fit to honor this happy history teacher.”
There was finally a response from Dr. Beaber himself, who felt that the La Salle program might serve as a model format for other areas of the country:
I believe the format developed by La Salle could be easily and relatively inexpensively replicated at other colleges where AP history candidates enrollment is increasing and where the history departments have an interest in developing better relations with outstanding AP history teachers, and not incidentally, in attracting more of these fine-calibre history students to their institutions. Although the huge national public and private universities might not be interested in this model, I would suspect that the history departments at smaller institutions where they are just beginning to get sizeable numbers of AP history students matriculating would be very interested. I would like to see ETS Program Direction and College Board central and regional Program Service Offices suggest the “La Salle model” to institutions as a way for fostering better secondary school-university history teacher contacts, and as a means of attracting more AP history candidates.
A short while after the program’s conclusion, members of the history department conducted an open and freewheeling postmortem of its positive and negative points, along with suggestions for any future programs. Some felt that the program needed no improvement. Others, however, felt that the afternoon panel presentations by Professors O’Grady and Rossi were too one-sided, and that they could have been designed to offer more practical information for our colleagues on the secondary level. Thus, two attractive ideas were suggested: the next program should focus on matters of bibliography, calling attention to the latest monographs and articles in European and American history; future sessions should also emphasize new offerings in audiovisual aids (including university lending libraries and possibilities for securing relevant television documentaries.)
There is a postscript. Professor Grady submitted a proposal outlining La Salle’s AP history program for inclusion as a panel session at the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools annual meeting in Philadelphia in fall 1982. Entitled “AP—A Shared Perspective,” the proposal was accepted, and included as panelists Dr. Beaber, Sr. Dorothy Conner, Professor Grady, and me. Each participant summarized his or her perceptions of the program at La Salle; this was followed by a lively question-and-answer session with the overflow audience. As a measure of the interest in the topic, the room originally designated by the Middle States program committee quickly proved too small, and the panelists were forced to interrupt the proceedings until a larger, more suitable room could be located. Among the audience were many high-ranking teachers and administrators from East Coast schools and colleges, including the Commissioner for Higher Education for Pennsylvania, Dr. James P. Gallagher.
George B. Stow is professor and chairman of the Department of History at La Salle College. His field of specialization is medieval England (Richard II), and he has served four years as an AP reader.
