Few things are more important to classroom success than good planning. Please read TSSFFAP Chapter 3 (Once Around the Race Course: Developing Effective Social Sciences Curriculum) and do on-line quiz. Then look at the South Dakota State Social Studies Standards and the National Council of Social Studies Teachers standards in any one social studies area of your choice:
Do you find the material here helpful in clarifying what/how you should teach? In what ways do the materials here go along with the suggestions for good curriculum planning suggested in TSSFFAP? What problems do you see with these standards?
The content for the first link I have read over multiple times. It seems like it can be very restrictive in what I think is important for students to know compared to what the state and national government consider important. Although it is important to have standards so that students are on the same page once they enter the college curriculum, I feel that often times we are having to make history boring so that we can cover everything that they ask of us.
ReplyDeleteThe standards are good having an outline of what students need to know as mentioned above. They also cover some of the most important themes of American history. The standards can also help teachers break down what needs to be covered into units.
I think that the standards pose a bigger problems than anything. In a sense, they can stifle the creativity of the teacher who is trying to make history exciting for the students. When we are limited to certain subjects, we are leaving out vast amounts of history. It is definitely unfortunate, but more unfortunate is that I don't have a plan to offer to replace the current one.
I ultimately agree with Clint's post. Additionally, I do not believe that the content standards make it very clear exactly what needs to be taught. They provide somewhat of a blurry explanation behind each standard and there is not very much clarification in my opinion. There is something wrong with our history education. We cannot teach history in a timeline fashion. It is foolish to teach ancient history in early grades and then simply move on to later history as children progress through grades. Following this method means we are leaving important ancient history in the past and sending a message to children that it simply doesn't matter. Children are going to retain and remember more recent history as it is taught to them more recently! Standards of education seem to be, as Clint explained, stifling the creative possibilities of instructors to motivate students learning. We are ultimately telling a story that spans thousands of years and our current system of telling the story is more focused on telling things that "matter" according to our government overlords...
ReplyDeleteThese links are helpful for the fact, it does bring out some ideas. I agree with the two posts above in that these standards are restrictive. Ironically these are restrictive to the teachers who are trying to do their job in teaching. Each person relates or teaches others in their own unique way. So having a standard helps, but limits some teachers. One size shoe does not fit all, the government should have more options in these standards that allows for working outside the box.
ReplyDeleteI am going to have to dissent from the group so far. I will admit that I didn’t read the entire table of contents of the NCSS, but I look at their 10 themes in social science. Then I took a careful look at how the State had their learning objective broke down, but don’t see a great restriction. These were not, “Memorize George Washington’s Birthday,” all or nothing type history questions, they were broad themes that I think I’ll be able to work within do develop lesson plans that are fun, exciting, and purpose driven. Most of the specifics mentioned in these standards I interpreted as mere suggestions anyway. The State regulation does seem long and cumbersome at 27 pages of standards to meet.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Scott's post on this one. On both the state and national level it seems as though these are broad themes of history and what students should have a basic understanding of. Yes, it does seems as though there is very little emphasis on ancient history and a very concentrated effort for students to understand all the themes and ideas of American history. These do shed a lot of light on what is expected of teachers to have their students learn. I do not find it restrictive as Clint said because for a teacher to make history exciting it is not about the vast amount of information you are to cover but HOW you cover it. If the information is presented in a fascinating way the students should eat it up and in turn gaining them vast knowledge of what you are teaching and at the same time you can cover all the information that is expected of you as a teacher from the state and national curriculum. There are problems with these standards as I believe like Franklin said it seems to put ancient history at the wayside and could confuse students in which order history is being taught to them. At the same time it seems that it may be much easier to present ancient history at a later time as older students may have an easier time grasping the concepts. Younger students would have a much easier time with American history as they have an idea of what a President is or perhaps what wars have been fought with Americans involved. The standards that have been set at the national and state level seem to be just basic themes for the teacher to follow and as I said before it is really up to the teacher to involve the student and make it interesting by presenting the material in a proper manner.
ReplyDeleteAfter looking through these standards I can say that I can agree and disagree with the both sides of the line. If you are effectively teaching History classes then you will cover the standards outlined by the NCSS. You will strive to make sure your students understand what happened, who was involved, when it happened, and the effects of it. Some points of history will be left out so others can get more time. The neglect of ancient history from high school history is a draw back but at the same time with limited classes and time I think it makes it easier on the teachers to integrate the other areas of Social Studies into their courses. The down side is that their are some things that students should know by the time they are out of history classes could be neglected in a pursuit to cover all ten areas of the NCSS.
ReplyDelete