|
As a history teacher, I strongly feel that teaching is much more than a list of facts and dates. In fact, I tell my students that what makes social studies such a great subject is that there are not always right and wrong answers. Social studies is about making arguments and backing up those arguments...
Teachers, therefore, should be the objective guides that simply provide the needed material and information from which those arguments will be formed. This type of teaching goes beyond the simple use of textbooks (way beyond). For example, in a recent lesson from my World War II unit we studied the use of the atomic bomb. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic bombs is part of the New York State curriculum. A teacher can present this fact for the kids to memorize, or the teacher can be much more creative by presenting
information about the atomic bomb and allow the students to discuss and argue
various critical thinking questions. In teaching the atomic bomb, my students
work in groups as if they are advisors to President Roosevelt and then President
Truman. Students receive reading material and advise the President on three
different decisions concerning the atomic bomb. First, whether to even build
the bomb. Second, whether to drop the bomb. And third, whether Truman made the
right decision. In this lesson I provided the students with the reading material, but their
argument, which they had to back up with specifics, was created on their own.
This teaching/learning style enabled the students to use higher order thinking
skills and leads to an increase in retention of the material. More importantly
though, the students actual enjoy learning history in this manner. As stated earlier, the use of the atomic bombs to end World War II is part
of the 8th Grade New York State curriculum, I do not think there is anything
wrong with having a specific and traditional curriculum, in fact, I think it
is absolutely essential. Where teachers have flexibility is how they teach that
specific curriculum. I wholeheartedly disagree with the many teachers today
who are pushing the notion that in order to teach multiculturalism, teachers
must move away from the traditional curriculum. Yes, we must move away from
the textbook, but not necessarily the curriculum. Don’t get me wrong, teachers must include all the cultures that make up
our history, but we must not do so in a way that we are forced to pull out each
culture and teach it as a separate entity such as Black History Month or Women’s
History Month. This is what I call intellectual segregation and it is wrong.
All cultures should be taught throughout all the units. Having separate months
for different cultures is exactly the opposite of what we should be trying to
achieve as teachers. Nor do we have to move away from the traditional curriculum
to a theme based curriculum as many suggest. Different cultures and perspectives
can and should be incorporated throughout the various units within the traditional
curriculum. For example, when teaching the Progressive Era (part of the traditional curriculum),
my students work in pairs to write and present an interview on one person from
the time period. I provide students with information from a variety of perspectives
and from a variety of races and genders. I do the same for many of my units.
Another example is from my World War II unit. Part of the New York State curriculum
is life on the “home front” during World War II. My students are split
into groups with each group receiving information on a different group of Americans
(African-Americans, women, children, Mexican-Americans etc.). Students use the
information they are provided to create a five minute newscast about their particular
group and present the newscast to the rest of the class. Likewise, in my unit on Vietnam, students examine various perspectives on the
war from various groups of Americans from different genders and races before
they write their five paragraph essay arguing whether they think the US should
be praised or condemned for their involvement in Vietnam. The students are allowed
to form their own opinions and arguments. My job is simply to provide them with
the information and be objective. Honestly, I can go on and on providing example
after example, but my point is this: The traditional curriculum can be taught
in way that is multicultural, that addresses various perspectives and allows
students to draw their own conclusions. The beauty of teaching history in this manner is that it addresses how students
learn. Arguing and judging are at the highest level of Bloom’s taxonomy
and by having students make arguments and back up those arguments, whether you
as the teacher agree with them or not, is how students will retain the information.
Fortunately, this retention will also translate into higher standardized test
scores for the simple fact that students will remember the information. This
is why it is imperative that all teachers focus on how it is that students learn,
rather than just the content (that goes for graduate professors as well). The bottom line is this: We can teach a variety of perspectives and cultures
on a given curriculum in a student-centered classroom that inspires active learning
and also increases standardized test scores. Adam Waxler teaches at the Springs Middle School in East Hampton, New York
and is the author of eTeach:
A Teacher Resource for Learning the Strategies of Master Teachers. For more information about how this ebook can greatly improve your teaching
career, visit the A
to Z Teacher Stuff store. -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © Adam Waxler
| 
