Numerous studies have shown how elementary social studies instruction has been constrained or curtailed in states that do not test social studies as part of their mandated accountability system. South Carolina is a state that tests social studies as well as English, mathematics, and science in grades three through eight as part of its accountability system. However, in an effort to decrease student test fatigue and associated costs, the state recently adopted census testing which reduced the number of students taking the social studies test. This longitudinal study was designed to further understand the impact of mandated testing initiatives on instruction. It focuses on changes in elementary teachers ’ beliefs about the role of social studies in the curriculum and their perception of time they spend on social studies instruction since the implementation of census testing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boyle-BaiseM.HsuM.JohnsonS.SerriereS. C., &StewartD. (2008). Putting reading first: Teaching social studies in elementary classrooms. Theory and Research in Social Education, 36(3), 233-255.
2.
BrophyJ. & VanSledrightB. (1993). Exemplary elementary teachers’ beliefs about social studies curriculum and instruction: Elementary subjects center series no. 93. East Lansing, MI: Center for the Learning and Teaching of Elementary Subjects, Institute for Research on Teaching. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED358032)
3.
BurroughsS.GroceE. & WebeckM. L.,. (2005). Social studies education in the age of testing and accountability. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(3), 13-20.
4.
Center on Educational Policy. (2006). From the capital to the classroom: Year 4 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved from http://www.cep-dc.org/nclb/Year4/CEP-NCLB-Report-4.pdf
5.
DeWittS. W. & FreieC., (2005). Focusing methods on goals: Problems and possibilities. The Social Studies, 96(6), 241-245.
6.
FirestoneW. A.SchorrR. Y., & MonfilsL. F. (2004). The ambiguity of teaching to the test. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7.
GerwinD. (2004). Preservice teachers report the impact of high-stakes testing. The Social Studies, 96(6), 71-74.
8.
GoodladJ. (1984). A place called school: Promise for the future. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
9.
GrantS. G. (2007). High-stakes testing: how are social studies teachers responding?Social Education, 71, 620-624.
10.
HeatherT. L.LipscombG. B., & RockT. C. (2006). To test or not to test?: The role of testing in elementary social studies a collaborative study conducted by NCPSSE and SCPSSE. Social Studies Research and Practice, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.soctrp.org/issues/PDF/1.2.1.pdf
11.
HindeE. (2005). Revisiting curriculum integration: A fresh look at an old idea. The Social Studies, 96(3), 105-111.
12.
HogeJ.NickellP. & ZhaoY., (2002, November). What elementary students say about social studies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council for Social Studies, Phoenix, AZ.
13.
HouserN. O. (1995). Social studies on the back burner: Views from the field. Theory and Research in Social Education, 23(2), 147-168.
14.
KohnA. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
15.
KohnA. (2001). Fighting the tests: A practical guide to rescuing our schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(5), 349-357.
16.
LibrescoA. S. (2005). Elementary social studies in 2005: danger or opportunity? A response to Jeff Passe. The Social Studies, 97(5), 193-196.
17.
McEachronG. (2010). Study of allocated social studies time in elementary classrooms in Virginia: 1987-2009. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 34(2), 208-228.
18.
McGuireM. (2007). What happened to social studies? The disappearing curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(8), 620-624.
19.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). State Education Reforms. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab2_15.asp
20.
RexJ. (2007). Transition leadership team report: A vision for comprehensive South Carolina public school report. Retrieved from http://ed.sc.gov/agency/superintendent/transitionteamreport
21.
RockT.HeafnerT.OldendorfS.PasseJ.O’ConnorK.GoodA. & ByrdS., (2006). One state closer to a national crisis: A report on elementary social studies education in North Carolina. Theory and Research in Social Education, 34(4), 455-483.
22.
Russell IIIW. B., (2009). Social studies, the lost curriculum: A research study of elementary teachers and the forces impacted the teaching of social studies. Curriculum and Teaching, 24(2), 75-86.
23.
SacksP. (1999). Standardized minds: The high price of America’s testing culture and what we can do to change it. Cambridge, MA:: Perseus Books.
24.
SingleyM. K. & AndersonJ. R., (1989). Transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA:: Harvard University Press.
25.
South Carolina Department of Education. (2009). Palmetto assessment of state standards (PASS) social studies test blueprint for grades 3-8. Retrieved from http://ed.sc.gov/agency/Accountability/Assessment/documents/PASS_SSBlueprint10_06_09.pdf
26.
South Carolina Department of Education. (2010). Social studies sample items. Retrieved from http://ed.sc.gov/agency/Accountability/Assessment/documents/SampleItems000.pdf
27.
ThorntonS. & HouserN.,(1996). The status of the elementary social studies in Delaware: Views from the field. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED404239)
28.
VanFossenP. J. (2005). ‘Reading and math take so much of the time…’: An overview of social studies instruction in elementary classrooms in Indiana. Theory and Research in Social Education, 33(3), 376-403.
29.
United States Department of Education. (2002). Strategic plan: 2002-07. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/ssi/
30.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary.
31.
VoglerK. E. (2003). Where does social studies fit in a high-stakes testing environment?The Social Studies, 94(5), 207-211.
32.
VoglerK. E.LinterT.LipscombG. B., KnopfH., HeafherT. L., & RockT. C. (2007). Getting off the back burner: Impact of testing elementary social studies as part of a state-mandated accountability program. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 31(2), 20-34.
33.
WillsJ. S. (2007). Putting the squeeze on social studies: Managing teaching dilemmas in subject areas excluded from state testing. Teachers College Record, 109(8), 1980-2046.
34.
WillsJ. S. & SandholtzJ. H. (2009). Constrained professionalism: Dilemmas of teaching in the face of test-based accountability. Teachers College Record, 111(4), 1065-1114.
35.
WoodR. (1989). Status of social studies education in South Dakota elementary schools: Status report. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED314341)
