Copyright © 2006 Heldref Publications

New Challenges in ElementarySocial StudiesJEFF PASSE

S ocial studies education has beenendangered Ibr a long time, with

no aspect more threatened than the ele-mentary program. This situation isproblematic in itself, but its effects onthe total social studies program are alsopernicious. Consider the followingrecent developments:

Tcstiui>

it is well documented that high-slakescompetency tests have influenced thequality of social studies education at thesecondary level by shifting teachers"emphasis from higher-level concepts tolower levels such as recall and compre-hension (Grant 2001; Romanowski1996). As troubling as that is, at least stu-dents are getting some exposure to socialstudies. At (he elementary level, howev-er, where most states do not require com-petency tests in social studies—focusinginstead on the so-called basics of read-ing, language, and mathematics—theentire subject area of social studies isdis-appeai'ing from the school day.

Jhtt PASSE teaches course.^ in elementary.school curriculum and .social studies ar theUniversity of North Carolina-Charlotte. Hei.s a past pre.mlenr of rhc National Councilfor the Social Studies.

This is not a brand new develop-ment. For many elementary teachers,social studies has always been a back-burner subject, attended to after thehigher-priority subject areas have beenaddressed {Perie 1997: Weiss 1978).Even when a state or district mandatesa minimum amount of time for socialstudies, reports from schools indicatethat some teachers still managed tooverlook this designation in the planbook. They run out of time, perhapsaccidentally, or feel compelled to pro-vide recreation for their fatigued stu-dents, worn out from the constantstream of drill and practice inherent intraditional instruction.

Now. according to many of my col-leagues, elementary teachers are gettingthe message that such oversights areacceptable and, in many cases, encour-aged. Administrators, understandablyfeeling pressured by their school dis-tricts" leadership to maximize theirschools" performance on non-socialstudies exams, send the not-so-subtlemessage that social studies is no longerrequired, needed, or desired.

The dangers of this message areapparent to any reader of this journal.Refutations are unnecessary amongsocial studies professionals. But leadersin the t1eld may not be paying attention

to the underdeve lop ment of elementarysocial studies and its contribution toproblems in secondary social sludies.The standard course of study is beingviolated, or ignored, in the early grades,but the rest of the system has yet toadapt to the repercussions.

Secondary School Repercussions

Teachers are often skeptical abouttheir students" experiences in previousschool years. "What, you never heard of

?! What did they teach you ingrade?"" is a common cry among teach-ers. In the secondary social studies class-room, it may now become a daily lament.Students may enroll in a social studiescourse without ever having been exposedto most of its basic concepts and skills.

In the very first lesson 1 planned as astudent teacher, I was expected to intro-duce the early exploration ofthe WesternHemisphere. I decided to introduce theCrusades as a major event that encour-aged Europeans to travel and tradebeyond their continent. Imagine my sur-prise as I gradually discovered that my.seventh-graders had not heard of Islam, itwas even shocking to some that religionsother than Christianity existed in the firstplace! My amazement increased as Icame to recognize that these students

THE SOCIAL STUDIES SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2006

were also unfamiliar wilh basic Huropeanand Asian locations. In short, they knewvery iittle about world hislory and geog-raphy, which ihcy were presumed to havestudied in previous grades. I had to forgomy wonderful lesson plan on the interac-tion of war and economics, and wasforced to attend to more basic concepts.

it was an important realization for meas a beginning leachet; I suspect thatthese realizations, while always amongus (mine happened thirty yeurs ago), arebecoming the fule rather than the excep-tion. Having to teach elementary socialstudies concepts delays consideration ofthe content and skills required tor sec-ondary level courses. Due to this expen-diture of time and energy, teachers maynot give proper attention to some of thedeeper knowledge and skills that aredemanded tor democratic citizenship.Performance on cnd-ot"-grade tests mayaiso suffer (assuming that the test is avalid measure of the course standards).

The ultimate result is that our stu-dents are poorly prepared for secondaryschool, grievously unprepared for uni-versity courses in the social sciences.and overwhelmed by the responsibilitiesof democratic citizenship. This sorrystate of affairs leads us to another rootof the problem of elementary socialstudies: teacher education.

Teacher Education

Although it is easy to blame the test-ing movement as the primary culprit inthe woes of elementary social studies,the situation is not that simple. Teacherswho choose to overlook the social stud-ies curriculum have a role in this crisis.While some elementary teachers pro-vide an excellent social studies curricu-lum and many others would surely teachmore social studies if it were not fortesting pressures, some would not do sounder any circumstances. Poor prepara-tion in social studies is one cause of thatdecision.

Methods professors will confirm thaitoo many elementary teachers just do notlike s(x;ial studies. This problem is alsoof great concern to science and mathe-matics educators (Weiss 1994). Someteachers feel uncomfortable with content

and skills lhat were inadequatelyaddressed in their schooling or perhapsnever developed any interest in the sub-ject. Some elementary teachers, as theycontemplate teaching social studies,become fearful that their lack of knowl-edge will be exposed. Under those cir-cumstances, as reported by Shulman(1986), such teachers used lo resort totextbook-based instruction. Now iheyskip the topic allogelher.

If we can overcome the tendency toremind teachers that they are not sup-posed to be an expert in evei7 topic, wemay stop to consider why they feel soinadequate. A significant reason is thequality of their university experiences. Acursory review of elementary teachereducation programs reveals that socialscience prerequisites are minimal. Therequired courses are usually surveycourses at the introductory level, focusingon history. Introductory sections lend tobe held in large lecture halls, with mini-mal opportunities for serious inquiiy. dis-cussion, or affective expression. It is nowonder, under these eircumstanees. thatelementary teachers feel unprepared for asocial studies cuiriculum that emphasizesthe intersection of economics, geography,and culture al both local and slate levels.At the upper-elementary levels, whenpolitical science becomes more promi-nent, the situation worsens.

Method.s Courses

While il is tempting to bash social sci-entists, teacher educators should be cau-tioned to examine their own conlribulionsto the dilemma of elementary leacherpreparation. They play an indirect role inthe structure ofthe social science require-ments. Most universities have a gover-nance structure, usually involving ateacher educalitin ctimmittee, whichselects requirements for leacher educa-tors. It is possible for teacher educators toinfluence those decisions, and to fighi formore social science, with more depth. Tobe fair, individuals who place a low pri-ority on social studies education at tbeelementary level often dominate thosecommittees. Another consideration is thatmany teacher education programs arehamstrung by university and state regula-

tions concerning course requirements.Just the same, there may be a window ofopportunity for change in the social sci-ence requirements.

While almost any change would bean improvement, the question remainswhether a handful of courses can everadequately overcome thirteen years ofweak or missing instruction in socialstudies. How many courses would itlake to prepare preservice teachers forthe demands of" the social studies cur-riculum? It is hard to imagine a move-ment for additional social sciencerequirements when stale governmentsare overwhelmingly focused on testresults in reading and mathematics.

Teacher Educators

Who is teaching the social studiesmethods course? In a surprisingly largenumber of programs, il is not a socialstudies specialist. A survey conducted forthe College and University FacultyAssembly (CUFA) of Ihc National Coun-cil for the Social Studies in 1998 attempt-ed to identify why more methods profes-sors were not joining theii* foremostprofessional organization. While somecritics expected the findings to pinpointthe quality of CUFA"s scholarly journal.Theory and Research in Social Education(TRSE). and dissension al meetings, therewas IItile retbrence to those issues.Results revealed that half the professorsteaching social studies methods did notidentify themselves as specialists. Someconsidered themselves generalists, andsome had their primary training in read-ing and language aits. Mosl had nevereven heard of CUFA or TRSE.

At my own university, our past twosearches for elementary social studiespositions yielded dozens of applicantsfrom other subject areas, but oniy ahandful wht) had either earned graduatedegrees in social studies or had beenprofessionally active in social studiesconferences and publications. Smallcolleges that cannot afford specialists ineach subject area allow the course to betaught by a nonspecialist or may assignthe task to a soeial scienee professor.

Professors from the social sciencescan be effective methods instructors

IW SKPTKMBKR/OCTOBER 20(16 THK SOCIAI. SIIIDIKS

because they possess substantial contentknowledge. Unfortunately, they may notbe familiar with the range of social sci-ences included in the social studies.They also may not have teaching expe-rience. If these professors are biasedtoward their own disciplines, such ashistory, they may not promote socialstudies in a favorable light.

Almost certainly, the socia! .sciencefaculty members would not have anyknowledge or experience regarding ele-mentary sociul studies. They may beunfamiliar with the relevant develop-mental considerations, the aims of theelementary curriculum, or appropriateinstructional teehniques for youngerchildren. As a result, beginning teachersreceive inadequate preservice educationin social studies.

This situation is problematic for ele-mentary preservice teachers, but it isparticularly troublesome for futureteachers of the primary grades. Any-one who has taught or studied theneeds of primary level students recog-nizes that there are major differencesbetween grades K-l and the rest of theelementary curriculum. It is not justthat the children are only beginning toread; developmental differences incognition, .social skills, physicalgrowth, and psychological needs dic-tate alternative curriculum and teach-ing methods.

The Challenge for the Primary Grades

A methods professor who has nevertaught cannot be expected to provide thekind of education necessary for preser-vice primary teachers. Nor can weexpect such perspectives from protc's-sors who have only taught at the sec-ondary level. Even professors withexperience limited to the intermediategrades have lo differentiate the contentof the methods course accordingly.

Where are the methods professorswith a specialty in primary education?An informal survey at the 2002 CUFAretreat indicates that they are some-where other than CUFA. Only one par-ticipant in the entire gathering had beena primary-level teacher before becom-ing a social studies specialist.

It is possible that such specialistsabound outside of CUFA circles. It ismore likely that they do nol exist. Wewould presumably have heard theirvoices somewhere along the way.When preservice teachers with limitedsocial studies knowledge take methodscourses with inadequate attentiontoward the primary grades and are thenthrust into schools thai discourage theteaching of social studies, the resultwill be anything but the developmentof primary social studies methods pro-fessors. Primary teachers would bemore likely to associate themselveswith reading, not social studies.

Textbooks

The situation is further exacerbated bythe role of textbooks in the elementaryeurricuium. In many school districts,social studies textbooks are not providedbefore the intermediate grades. The pre-sumed explanation is the limited readingskills that primary students possess:another explanation may be the cost sav-ings of two grades" woiih of textbooks.Fither way, primary teachers have toteach without a textbook. For manyteachers, not having a textbook would bean exercise in liberation. For those whoare feari'ul and embarrassed about theirsocial studies knowledge, it is an excuselo bypass the subject area altogether.

A recent trend is toward Open Court, areading series that encourages strict con-formanee wilh the teacher's manual.Many teachers claim that Open Couilmaterials include social studies, whichmeans that the subject doe.s not need tobe taught separately. While many cur-riculum leaders wouid applaud attemptsfo integrate the elementary cuniculum, aclose look at the Open Court manual pro-vides quick confirmation that the socialstudies content is extremely shallow andusually not aligned with the standardcourse of study established by eaeh state.

In-.senice

Because the testing programs of moststates focus on reading and mathemat-ics, and because social studies achieve-ment is seldom, if ever, measured al the

elementary level, school systetns havenot been marshalling their resourcestoward social studies. In-serviee insocial studies is seldom offered. When itis, teachers are nol likely to view it as apriority. After all, tests and bonuseshave become the new goal. Citizenshipeducation once again takes a backseat.

What Can We Do About It?

Like any other aspect of educationalreform, this situation has a variety ofcomplex causes. No single solution willadequately address the problem. Yet.those of us concemed about social edu-cation in general and elementary socialstudies in partieular can consider someinitial steps:

• Call attention to the problem. Thepublic should be aware of the crisis insocial education. A thoughtful discus-sion may lead to a movement to improvethe quality of elementary social studie.s.

• Call on states to enforce the stan-dard course of study. The official docu-ments of each state describe the socialstudies curriculum in great detail. Ifthose standards are to be ignored, thereis no sense in publishing them. Stateleaders should be called to task on theirmanagement of the curriculum.

• Strengthen accreditation standardsfor elementary social studies. Teachereducation programs are supposed to bepenalized for assignment of unqualifiedprofessors. If the accreditation agenciescan be convinced that a nonspeeialist islikely to be unqualified, the accreditationprocess may avert tho.sc assignments.

• Develop programs to identify andsupport potential scholars in primaryand elementary social studies. There areteachers who do wonderful work insocial studies but are unaware of theoppoiiunilies in higher education. Evena handful can make a difference.

• Work to develop authentie testingfor elementary social studies. Whilemany of us dread the thought of yetanother test, most scholars are in favorof assessment that is educationally valid.

• Increase the activities of the Fle-mentary-Early Childhood Communityin the National Council for the Social

THE SOCIAL STUDIES SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2(HMi 19t

Studies (NCSS). This group has doneexcellent work in the past. They can bevery persuasive and effective.

Key words: elementary social studies,methods. testini(. textbooks

REEKRENCES

Grant. S. G. 2001. Teachers, tests, and ten-sions: Teachers respond to the New York

slate ginbiil history exam. IiilcnialionalSocial Sliidics Foniiii I (2): 107-25.

Perie. M. 1997. Time spent leaching coreacademic siibjecls in elementary .schools:Comparisons across commimily. school,teacher, iiiul sliiilent characteristics. Sta-tistical Analysis Report. KRIC, ED4064.%.

Romanowski, M. 1996. Issues and intlu-ences that shape the teaching of U.S. his-tory, in Advances in research on teaching.vol. 6. ed. .1. Brophy. 291-312. Green-

wich. CT: JAl Press.Shuhiian, L. I9H6. Those who understand:

Knowledge growth in teaching. Educa-tional Researcher \5.A—\A.

Weiss. I. R. 1978. Report of ihe NationalSio'vey of Science. Mathematics, andSocial Studies Education. National Sei-ence Fonnilatlon, SE-78-72. Washington,DC: Government Printing Office.

. 1994. A profile of science and math-ematics education in the United States:

?. ERIC, ED 382461.

Can forPapers

The Social Stui/ies, a bimonthly, independent, peer-reviewed journal, .seeks articles of interest to educators at all levels that con-

tain new classroom techniques and approaches, research, or viewpoints. Topics of current interest are peace education, meeting

state standards for social studies, science and social studies, civic education, and techniques for promoting students' reading

and writing. Articles are usually ten to fifteen pages long and follow The Chicago Manual of Style. Shorter pieces that contain

information about a teacher's classroom success with a project or technique are also welcome. Before submitting articles,

authors are cncotiraged to read the Directions to Authors, which are printed on the inside back cover of each issue of the jour-

nai. Submissions should be sent to

Managing Editor/TSSHeldref Publications

1319 Eighteenth Street, NWWashington, DC 20036-1802

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2006 THE SOCIAL STUDIES