Over the past quarter-century, many historians, politicians, and educators have argued for an increase in the amount of history taught in schools, for a clear separation of history and social studies, and for an emphasis on disciplinary structures and norms as the proper focus for the subject. Unfortunately, discussions of history education too often rest on the problematic belief that the academic discipline can provide direction for the nature of the subject in general education.
Description of Prior Research
Throughout much of the 20th century, U.S. history educators made common cause with other social educators to promote principled and critical understandings of society. Both groups stood in opposition to calls for more nationalist views of history education. In the mid-1980s, however, this situation began to change, as a coalition of historians, educational researchers, and political pressure groups promoted history as a subject distinct from and independent of the larger realm of the social studies. This new coalition has been unable to avoid conflicts over the selection of content, however, and approaches favored by nationalists often clash with the more critical and inclusive perspectives of historians.
Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study
In this article, we trace the relationship between historians and other social educators during the 20th century and explore how the forces favoring a realignment of history and social studies coalesced in the mid-1980s. We argue that this coalition has led to an unproductive emphasis on history as a “separate subject” and a resulting lack of attention to the goals of history in general education.
Research Design
This analytic essay draws on curriculum theory, historical sources, and contemporary cognitive research to outline the changing relationships between historians and other social educators and to examine the limitations of a purportedly disciplinary curriculum.
Conclusions/Recommendations
The academic discipline of history cannot, by itself, provide guidance for content selection because educators face restrictions of time and coverage that are not relevant in the context of academic historical research. In addition, educators must concern themselves with developing students’ conceptual understanding, and this necessarily requires drawing on other social science disciplines. If students are to develop the insights that historians have most often promoted for the subject, historians must return to their place within the conversation of social studies education.
AlexanderP. A., & JudyJ. E. (1988).The interaction of domain-specific and strategic knowledge in academic performance.Review of Educational Research, 58, 375–404.
3.
American Historical Association. (1899). The study of history in schools.New York: Macmillan.
4.
ArthurJ., DaviesI., WrennA., HaydnT., & KerrD. (2001). Citizenship through history teaching.New York: Routledge Falmer.
5.
BanksJ. A. (1982). Foreword. In DowneyM. T. (Ed.), Teaching American history: New directions (pp. ix–xi). Bulletin no. 67 of the National Council for the Social Studies. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
6.
BartonK. C. (2008). Students’ ideas about history. In LevstikL. S. & TysonC. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 239–258). New York: Routledge.
7.
BartonK. C., & LevstikL.S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. New York: Routledge.
8.
BeardC. A. (1938).A memorandum from an old worker in the vineyard.Social Education, 2, 383–385.
9.
BennettW. J. (2002). Why we fight: Moral clarity and the war on terrorism. New York: Doubleday.
10.
BillingtonR. A. (1966). The historian's contribution to Anglo-American misunderstanding. New York: Hobbs, Dorman.
11.
BolsterA. S. (1962).History, historians, and the secondary school curriculum.Harvard Educational Review, 32, 39–65.
12.
Bradley Commission on History in Schools. (1988). Building a history curriculum: Guidelines for teaching history in schools. Washington, DC: Educational Excellence Network.
13.
Bradley Commission on History in Schools. (2000). Building a history curriculum: Guidelines for teaching history in schools (2nd ed.). Westlake, OH: National Council for History Education.
14.
BrownS. D., & PatrickJ. (2006). History education in the United States: A survey of teacher certification and state-based standards and assessments for teachers and students. Retrieved May 17, 2008, from http://www.oah.org/reports/surveys/50state/index.html
15.
BrophyJ., & AllemanJ. (2006).A reconceptualized rationale for elementary social studies.Theory and Research in Social Education, 34, 428–454.
16.
California Board of Education. (1988). History-social science framework for the California public schools. Sacramento:California Department of Education.
17.
CheneyL. V. (1987). American memory: A report on the humanities in the nation's public schools. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Humanities.
DeweyJ. (1966). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
20.
DowneyM. T. (1985). The status of history in the school. In DowneyM. T. (Ed.), History in the schools (pp. 1–12). NCSS Bulletin No. 74. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
21.
EganK. (1983).Social studies and the erosion of education.Curriculum Inquiry, 13, 195–214.
22.
ElsonR. M. (1964). Guardians of tradition: American schoolbooks of the nineteenth century.Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
23.
EvansR. W. (2004). The social studies wars: What should we teach the children?New York: Teachers College Press.
GeraldF. (1979). America revised: History schoolbooks in the twentieth century. Boston: Little, Brown.
26.
GagnonP., and the Bradley Commission on History in the Schools. (Eds.). (1989). Historical literacy: The case for history in American education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
27.
GardnerH. (1999). The disciplined mind: What all students should understand.New York: Simon and Schuster.
28.
GayP. (1985). Freud for historians. New York: Oxford University Press.
29.
GiffordB. R. (Ed.) (1988). History in the schools: What shall we teach?New York: Macmillan.
30.
GoodladJ. I. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.
31.
GrantS. G. (2006). Measuring history: Cases of state-level testing across the United States. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
32.
GrossR. E. (1977).The status of the social studies in the public schools of the United States: Facts and impressions of a national survey.Social Education, 41, 194–200, 205.
33.
HertzbergH. W. (1980). The teaching of history. In KammenM. (Ed.), The past before us: Contemporary historical writing in the United States (pp. 474–504). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
34.
HertzbergH. W. (1981). Social studies reform, 1880–1980. Boulder, CO: Social Science Education Consortium.
35.
HirschE. D.Jr. (1987). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
36.
JennessD. (1990). Making sense of social studies. New York: Macmillan.
37.
JohnsonH. (1940). Teaching of history in elementary and secondary schools with applications to allied studies (Rev. ed.). New York: Macmillan.
38.
LappM. S., GriggW.S., & Tay-LimB. S.-H. (2002). The nation's report card: U. S. History 2001. NCES 2002-483. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
39.
LeeJ., & WeissA. (2007). The nation's report card: U.S. history 2006. (National Center for Education Statistics, U. S. Department of Education, Publication No. 2007-474). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
40.
LevstikL. S. (1996). NCSS and the teaching of history. In DavisO. L.Jr. (Ed.), NCSS in retrospect (pp. 21–34). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
41.
MarsdenW. E. (2001). The school textbook: Geography, history, and social studies. London: Woburn Press.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
46.
National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for the social studies.Washington, DC: Author.
47.
NevinsA. (1942, June 21).American history for Americans.The New York Times, pp. 6, 28.
48.
NewmannF. M. (1985). Educational reform and social studies: Implications of six reports. Boulder, CO: Social Science Education Consortium.
49.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law No. 107-110, §2351, 115 Stat. 328 (2002).
50.
NovickP. (1988). That noble dream: The “objectivity question” and the American historical profession. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
PierceB. L. (1926). Public opinion and the teaching of history in the United States. New York: Knopf.
54.
Public Law No. 106-554, Appendix A, 114 Stat. 2763A-39 (2000).
55.
RavitchD. (1987).Tot sociology, or what happened to history in the grade schools.American Scholar, 56, 343–354.
56.
RavitchD. (2001, October 17).Now is the time to teach democracy.Education Week, p. 48.
57.
RavitchD., & FinnC. E.Jr. (1987). What do our 17-year-olds know? A report on the first national assessment of history and literature. New York: Harper and Row.
58.
RogersP. (1995). History and economic awareness: Theory and empirical test. In DickinsonA., GordonP., LeeP., & SlaterJ. (Eds.), International yearbook of history education (pp. 190–208).Portland, OR: Woburn Press.
59.
St. JarreK. (2008).Reinventing social studies.Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 649–653.
60.
SaxeD. W. (1991). Social studies in schools: A history of the early years. Albany: State University of New York Press.
61.
SchlesingerA. M.Jr. (1993). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York: Norton.
62.
SchultenS. (2001). The geographical imagination in America, 1880–1950. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
63.
SingletonH. W. (1980).Problems of democracy: The revisionist plan for social studies education.Theory and Research in Social Education, 8, 89-104.
64.
SpencerH. (1910). Essays on education and kindred subjects. New York: Dutton.
65.
SymcoxL. (2002). Whose history? The struggle for national standards in American classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
66.
ThorntonS. J. (1996). NCSS: The early years. In DavisO. L.Jr. (Ed.), NCSS in retrospect (pp. 1–7). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
67.
ThorntonS. J. (2001). Legitimacy in the social studies curriculum. In CornoL. (Ed.), A century of study in education: The centennial volume (pp. 185–204). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
68.
ThorntonS. J. (2005). Teaching social studies that matters: Curriculum for active learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
69.
ThorntonS. J. (2008). Continuity and change in social studies curriculum. In LevstikL. S. & TysonC. (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 15–32). New York: Routledge.
WatrasJ. (2004). Historians and social studies educators, 1893–1998. In WoyshnerC., WatrasJ., & CroccoM. S. (Eds.), Social education in the twentieth century: Curriculum and context for citizenship (pp. 192–209). New York: Peter Lang.
72.
WesleyE. B. (1944). American history in schools and colleges: The report of the Committee on American History in Schools and Colleges of the American Historical Association, the Mississippi Valley Historical Association, the National Council for the Social Studies. New York: Macmillan.
73.
WilentzS. (1997, April 20). The past is not a “process.” The New York Times. Retrieved May 17, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/
74.
WineburgS. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
