Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 3 Orientations to the Social Studies Social studies as a discipline is very dynamic and

in many ways can be taught and interpreted in a wide variety of ways. In the twenty first century where education seems to be more and more of a high stakes profession; with stakeholders on the local, state, and even national levels, with state and national standards to conform to and meet, and a wide array of diversity that permeates all levels of a school environment one could easily be overwhelmed in trying to determine the most optimum strategy for educating the future generations of the United States. Educators such as Diane Ravitch and E.D. Hirsch argue that the traditional approach or the transmission of information through direct instruction of precise information is the most optimum strategy for student learning in the twenty first century. Cultural Literacy (having a thorough understanding of how the knowledge and skills developed by society at large over the long term affect and impact the modern world we live in) is an absolutely elemental and indispensible condition for success in the modern world, it is the duty of social studies educators to promote and nurture cultural literacy so as to improve not only the education system, but the nation at large. Educators of the traditionalist persuasion center their practices on the central dogma that cultural knowledge is an absolutely critical foundation for success. Cultural knowledge serves as the background for why the world exists in the form that it currently exists in. It is the collective memory of generations, and can be interpreted and analyzed to identify patterns and pathologies that have guided previous communities and people. This information can prove useful in giving modern citizens context as to their place (in a cultural sense) in the community (which is an ongoing almost living entity) and how to ensure the continuation, continuity, and growth of the society at large for future generations. Without this context and background it would be nearly

Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 impossible for anyone to develop a genuine understanding of the social studies and their impact on the world and the societies that have risen and fallen over time. In my own experience as a Practicum I student teacher I have seen the cost of how not having the critical cultural literacy necessary for understanding the subject of social studies costs students. While the students I observed may have been literate (can proficiently use the cultural vernacular to express themselves and interact with others) and in some cases may possess a very high degree of literacy they often would not be able to connect the things they would read in class work, or in their own personal endeavors within the overall context of the society itself. Often times the students would internalize the information and individualize the experience of the information (often writing on how they personally felt about an exercise as opposed to how it impacted themselves and their peers as a society) this would prove unfruitful to them because when asked to, say, explain the cultural impact of the Cold War on American society (as the students I worked with were asked to do) the students would usually write about specific events or ideas of the cold war (the iron curtain, the Korean, Vietnam, and soviet Afghan wars, containment, etc) but could not (or simply negated to) explain why or how the items referenced impacted their lives today. I would often find myself giving the same background information again and again as I would help students in assignments because without the critical significance of the item being studied the students were unable to progress with their work. Many of them were very literate in the discipline of social studies itself (being able to read primary sources, or understand the contextual organization of a specific discipline of the social studies, such as history). This is because they are products of educators under the influence of theorists such as Sandra Schmidt and Bruce VanSledright who both promote knowledge of the discipline over how that knowledge can be applied to the overall understanding of the society itself. While it is

Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 important to understand how field experts such as historians conduct their work, research shows that cognitively speaking it is far more significant for a student to understand the context of the information as it aids in its retention over the long term. There has been much research and study that supports and defends the traditionalist approach to the social studies. Primarily through the research of E.D. Hirsch (cognitive psychologist) which focused on how information is constructed within the mind itself. Consequently the result of his research confirmed the long held notion held by educators: students learn best when they construct schemas and prototypes of information through memorization and reinforce and improve the information through repetition. Hirsch concluded that without the primary processes of memorization and retention students could not move on to secondary processes of interpretation and connection to other subjects. The research of Diane Ravitch (and also Hirsch to a certain extent) clearly places the cause of the decline in cultural literacy in the hands of progressive educators. In stark contrast to the studies of Walter Parker and D.W. Oliver, who argue that social studies education should center on an interdisciplinary approach that covers broad ambiguous themes within the social studies; Ravitch argues that without the required background knowledge (which can only be gained through instruction, memorization, and repetition in the primary stages of education) students will be unable to make connections with other disciplines. This is because students under the progressive influence of education never developed the skills necessary on the primary level (background knowledge) that would help them contextualize the themes presented by progressive educators, thus the themes have only a limited benefit for students. The traditionalist approach is by far the most valuable and useful method for social studies instruction in the twenty first century. In this world where things can change at a

Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 moments notice it is absolutely critical for one to possess the cultural literacy and background to make well informed, reasonable, and responsible decisions as a member of the society at large. Supported by powerful research in cognitive psychology that shows a direct correlation between memorization and repetition and successful connection of the background information to the modern world in which they live, the traditionalist approach can give the student a more authentic educational experience that can directly benefit them. In my own experiences I have seen this approach work in the classroom. In the lessons that I taught during the practicum experience I noticed that activities that were more disciplinary in nature (such as reading a pertinent primary source document) that did not necessarily provide detailed, structured background information were always some of the most challenging lessons. Students were often able to read the document with ease (not being overly confused with the academic language and grammar used) however struggled immensely with connecting the document they read to the unit that the activity was a part of, or connecting it with the overall message of the course. Similarly when more progressive activities were done in the class (reading and analysis of current events for example) students seemed to be almost completely confused as to what the point of the activity was. The critical element missing from both the latter and the previous examples that would have made them far more effective and meaningful for the students is the background knowledge of the primary source document. This would have contextualized and directed the students in their assessment of the concepts and been more beneficial to them academically. If I would have had an opportunity to lecture on some of the concepts ahead of the activities to establish background knowledge I feel the lessons would have been more fruitful and the students would have had a better experience overall. By closely adhering to how students

Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 construct information and meaning cognitively, traditionalist educators ensure that their students get the full experience that the social studies have to offer. As secondary social studies educators it is important to understand the various methods and theories that surround the instruction of the discipline. In the work environment traditionalists, disciplinary, progressive, and many other educators of many different persuasions must all work together for the common benefit of the students that we all serve. Even if an educator primarily identifies themselves with one school of thought it is beneficial for them to understand and even implement elements of the other schools of thought so as to improve their own instruction.

Kevin Sweeney 4/16/16 SEC 4019 Work Cited Hirsch, E.D. (1983). Cultural literacy. American Scholar, 52, 159-169. Oliver, D.W. (1966). The selection of content in the social studies. In D.W. Oliver & J.P. Shaver (Eds.), Teaching public issues in the high school (pp. 3-18). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Parker, W. (2005). Teaching against idiocy. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 344-351. Ravitch, D. (1987). Tot sociology, or what happened to history in the grade schools. American Scholar, 56, 343-353. Schmidt, S. (2011). Who lives on the other side of that boundary? A model of geographic thinking. Social Education, 75(5), 250-255. VanSledright, B. (2004). What does it mean to think historicallyand how do you teach it? Social Education, 68(3), 230-233.