Fifth-grade students with learning disabilities (LD) and their typically achieving (TA) peers participated in an 8-week investigation about 19th-century U.S. westward migration. During their investigations, the students analyzed primary and secondary sources to understand the experiences of these emigrants and Native peoples. The analysis of source material was preceded by teacher-led discussions about the possibility of bias in evidence that affects the trustworthiness of historical documentation. Quantitative analyses showed that these investigations were associated with gains in students' knowledge about the period of westward expansion and a better understanding of historical content and historical inquiry; however, these gains were not always comparable for students with LD and their TA peers. Furthermore, misconceptions about this historical period and the processes of historical investigation were evident in students' responses before and after instruction. We discuss how design features of the instruction and its implementation may have contributed to the development and persistence of these misconceptions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashby, M.G., & Lee, P. (1987). Children's concepts of empathy and understanding in history. In C. Portal (Ed.), The history curriculum for teachers (pp. 62—88). London : Falmer Press.
2.
Bear, G.G., & Proctor, W.A. (1990). Impact of a full-time integrated program on the achievement of nonhandicapped and mildly handicapped children. Exceptionality, 1, 227—238.
3.
Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (2002). Primary students' knowledge and thinking about the economics of meeting families' shelter needs. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 423—468.
4.
Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (2003). Primary students' knowledge and thinking about the supply of utilities (water, heat, and light) to modern homes. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 79—112.
5.
Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (1991). The rhetoric of literary criticism. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in the professional communities (pp. 77—96). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
6.
Ferretti, R.P., MacArthur, C.A., & Okolo, C.M. (2001). Teaching for historical understanding in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 59—71.
7.
Ferretti, R.P., MacArthur, C.A., & Okolo, C.M. (2005). Misconceptions about history: Reflections on teaching for historical understanding in an inclusive fifth-grade classroom. In T. E. Scruggs & M. A. Mastropieri (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (Vol. 18, pp. 261— 299). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science/ JAI Press.
8.
Ferretti, R.P., & Okolo, C.M. (1996). Authenticity in learning: Multimedia design projects in the social studies for students with disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 450—460.
9.
Fischer, D.H. (1970). Historians' fallacies: Toward a logic of historical thought. New York: HarperPerennial .
10.
Grossman, L. (2004, September 27). The reign of Roth. Time, pp. 66—67.
11.
Judd, C.H. (1915). The psychology of high school subjects. Boston: Ginn.
12.
Lee, P., & Ashby, R. (2000). Progression in historical understanding among students ages 7—14. In P. N. Stearns , P. Sexias, & S. Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing, teaching, and learning history: National and international perspectives (pp. 199—222). New York: New York University Press.
13.
Leinhardt, G. (1994). History: A time to be mindful. In G. Leinhardt, I. Beck , & C. Stainton (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 209—255). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Leinhardt, G. (2000). Lesson on teaching and learning in history from Paul's Pen. In P. N. Stearns, P. Sexias, & S. Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing, teaching, and learning history: National and international perspectives (pp. 223—245). New York : New York University Press.
15.
Leinhardt, G., & Young, K.M. (1996). Two texts, three readers: Distance and expertise in reading history. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 441—486.
16.
Morocco, C.C. (2001). Teaching for understanding with students with disabilities: New directions for research on access to the general education curriculum. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 5—13.
17.
Okolo, C.M., & Ferretti, R.P. (1997a). Knowledge acquisition and technology-supported projects in the social studies for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology , 13, 91—103.
18.
Okolo, C.M., & Ferretti, R.P. (1997b). The impact of multimedia design projects on the knowledge, attitudes, and collaboration of students in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Computers in Childhood Education, 7, 223—251.
19.
Seixas, P. (1996). Conceptualizing the growth of historical thinking . In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development (pp. 765—783). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
20.
Young, K.M., & Leinhardt, G. (1998). Writing from primary documents: A way of knowing in history. Written Communication, 15, 25—68.
21.
Wineburg, S.S. (1991a). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 73—87.
22.
Wineburg, S.S. (1991b). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 495—519.
23.
Wineburg, S.S. (1996). The psychology of learning and teaching history . In D. C. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 423—437). New York: Macmillan.
24.
Wineburg, S. (1998). Reading Abraham Lincoln: An expert/expert study in the interpretation of historical texts. Cognitive Science , 22, 319—346.
25.
Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia : Temple University Press.
