AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2007 > May > 16 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USSocial Studies: Can’t Get No Respect?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The latest national report cards in U.S. history and civics are being released this morning. The previous report cards (in 2001 and 1998, respectively) showed American students were not exactly social studies standouts.
Back then, less than a fifth of the kids tested in fourth, eighth and 12th grades proved to be “proficient” (the level experts say they should reach) or better in U.S. history and just a fourth hit the mark in civics.
If I were to guess what this year’s report might show, I’d say there’s a slim chance students fared any better on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and they might have even done worse.
With all the emphasis the federal No Child Left Behind Act has placed on students’ reading and math skills in recent years, teachers — particularly in elementary schools — have been forced to give other subjects short shrift.
Social studies may even take the proverbial back seat in Georgia’s new high school diploma requirements. Under the proposal currently being considered, students will have to earn four credits in all the other major academic disciplines (math, English and science). But they’ll still only need three credits in social studies.
Given all this, I can’t help wondering if social studies teachers these days feel a bit like Rodney Dangerfield: “No respect. I don’t get no respect!”
UPDATE: Well, turns out my prediction wasn’t too far off the mark. The percentage of students scoring in the “proficient” range in U.S. history at each grade level was basically the same as the previous exam. That stagnant pattern also held true in civics. Although, on each test, some improvement was made in the percentages of students scoring at the “basic” level.
Services »
Comments
By jim d
May 16, 2007 8:13 AM | Link to this
“Back then, less than a fifth of the kids tested in fourth, eighth and 12th grades proved to be “proficient” (the level experts say they should reach) or better in U.S. history and just a fourth hit the mark in civics.”
And we ask ourselves what is wrong with the youth of today!
By Billy
May 16, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this
I can’t help wondering if social studies teachers these days feel a bit like Rodney Dangerfield: “No respect. I don’t get no respect!”
No, they don’t feel that way, because at the high school level almost all of them are coaches just doing the bare minimum education-wise while they count down the minutes until practice starts.
By just a teacher
May 16, 2007 9:07 AM | Link to this
Given the state of affairs in this country and across the globe, I find this lack of regard for social studies truly alarming. I know all the “good jobs” are in math and science, but the reality is that only a fraction of our population really needs calculus and physics. Anyone who might someday be a voter, juror, or conscripted soldier would do well to know their social studies.
By he's right
May 16, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this
“No, they don’t feel that way, because at the high school level almost all of them are coaches just doing the bare minimum education-wise while they count down the minutes until practice starts.”
He’s right! I went to one of the best private high schools in Atlanta (starts w/ ‘M’), and I was a victim of the ‘coach teachers’….almsot all, conveniently, in the social studies! I still am angry I missed out on so much history. I feel I had to go back and teach it to myself, and I wish my parents could get some of their money back! I’m still trying to teach myself!
By wwww
May 16, 2007 9:22 AM | Link to this
When I went to take the social studies praxis exam several years ago, I sat next to a man who openly admitted that he’d failed the exam four previous times. FOUR. He was already teaching on provisional, because guess what, he was an assistant football coach. I was struggling to make ends meet while going to school to get my certification, while this guy could barely find his way to the practice field.
I should’ve known then to go into another subject.
Social studies is so far off the educational radar it isn’t funny.
By Janine
May 16, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this
I don’t know when this lack of emphasis on Social Studies {and I will clude History and Geography} began , but it was long before NCLB.
Back in the day, we began learning history of both state and country in elementary school. We had to memorize at least parts of the Gettysburg address, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights [I still believe memorization is terrific brain exercise…even if it’s years before you understand the content }. We had to know all about the major figures in the history of our country. People in my generation can still recite and relate stories about those historical figures.
Somehow, sometime all of that fell by the wayside.
Do Social Studies teachers today feel like Rodney D.? Some do, but also, there are many Math and Reading/Language ARts teachers who are also certified in Social Studies, who are on waiting lists to move to the first S.Studies vacancy in their school….just to get out of the NCLB pressure and rat race.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this
Actually jat,
I would think that, given the current political scene, politicans would find it expedient to perpetuate ignorance in this area of academics
By WFC
May 16, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
Billy… you got it partly right. Many “social studies” teachers are coaches with little interest in their subjects. But that’s not the whole story. There are MANY reasons for the woeful state of social studies in Georgia high schools.
First, my credentials and how they affect the situation. My undergraduate degree was in pure “history,” No fluff education courses. Almost all new teachers have degrees in “social studies education” with many fewer subject matter courses. I did all the “education” stuff as part of my master’s degree. I probably have ten more courses under my belt than the average teacher coming along today. I retired with 30 years of service. In 20 of those years I coached in various combinations… basketball, baseball and football. In my last year, 27 of my 36 Advanced Placement students in American history scored “4’s” or “5’s” on the AP test so don’t tell me that all “coaches” can’t teach. However, I probably couldn’t have achieved this had I still been a head coach that year.
The state of Georgia has forced coaches into the social sciences. Back in the day, almost all head coaches taught either driver’s ed or physical education. Georgia all but abolished driver’s ed back in the 1980’s and have reduced PE to a minimum. This forced principals to hire coaches who were expected to “teach” academic courses. Some (but not all) of these guys are truly awful.
The public in Georgia values athletic success more than academic success. Most schools give the people what they want.
There are very few true academic scholars among the leadership of Georgia schools. Name me ONE high school principal in the public schools of Georgia who was a true scholar in one of the four “core subjects” (math, science, English/Literature, history) and I’ll shut-up about this.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 9:42 AM | Link to this
janine,
funny you should mention “back in the day”
The things I still recall from then was memorizing, the entire list of amendments, the gettysburg address, the articles of confederation, and a poem by Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, entitled In Flanders Fields. Most of which still remain partially burned to memory.
By JAYBEE
May 16, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this
What students need most is to be profecient in social studies. It teaches one to respect others, how to get along and negotiate; not riot,not take up arms, not drive by, not flare up at the least little provocation. You learned how to count your money in 4th grade, as it turns out, that is all the “average” American needs to know about math.(adding, subtracting) You learned how to speak some form of English at three years old and you still don’t have it right. So, what is it that we don’t have ? We don’t have a firm grip on this social thing. There must be courses in our curriculum to teach us how to respect the rights of others and get along in the world. Those courses should be taught from K-12 in the Social Studies Dept.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 9:49 AM | Link to this
JB,
I agree and along with that we should have a class that focuses entirely upon the Bill of Rights. Many of the younger politicans I’ve spoken with really have no idea what they are or what they mean. Especially the 1st amend. and who the drafters of the document truly were or what they were about.
By Mark Erb
May 16, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this
AS a 23 year veteran of teaching HS social studies AND coaching, I will say that, unfortunately, a large percentage of SS teachers are coaches and more unfortunate is the lack of emphasis many place on the teaching aspects of their jobs. The reality is that it is VERY DIFFICULT to provide quality instruction five or six hours a day, do the necessary planning and grading AND coach two to five hours per day…BUT it CAN be done. In defense of some of the coaches who don’t spend much time on the teaching aspects of their jobs, part of it is societal. I RARELY have parents come into my classroom to see me or their children in action, but I am astounded by the parents who show up to watch football, baseball or basketball PRACTICE on a daily basis. I am equally astounded by the parents who expect coaches to “coddle” their kids in order to keep them eligible for sports or enhance their GPAs for scholarships…unfortunately, many of their teacher/coaches are willing to comply.
By high school teacher
May 16, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
Name me ONE high school principal in the public schools of Georgia who was a true scholar in one of the four “core subjects” (math, science, English/Literature, history) and I’ll shut-up about this.
I have only had one principal who fulfilled this criteria; he had a PHd in History in addition to the education stuff, and he was by far the best principal I worked for.
I know several social studies teachers who are the “real deal.” Many of them also coach. However, for every one good ss teacher, there are three coaches who happen to have passed the certification test in history so that they could coach.
By Joe
May 16, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this
As a social studies teacher and coach, it is important to me to point out that many of the comments in this blog are based on a miniscule portion of our profession and are in fact incorrect.
My career has taken me through South Carolina, North Carolina, and now Georgia. NCLB standards… at least how they are interpreted by the state… are varied in each locale. For example, in NC, social studies are state tested in rigorous form and are scrutinized for optimal performance. Here in Georgia, Gwinnett County utilizes the GATEWAY exams as an excellent tool for monitoring the performance of social studies teachers.
I can assure you that the social studies teachers and coaches I have worked with, and continue to work with are some of the most productive and dedicated individuals in this profession. One must take into account that an effective teacher is also an effective coach, as it takes an effervescent personality as well as dedication to the craft of teaching to maintain both. What we teachers and coaches try to accomplish in the class room and on the field does not differ at all. They are one and the same… we want our kids to succeed. Perhaps it was my fortuitous luck to have such great social studies teachers throughout my life who were also coaches. For what they tried to instill in me while I sat in a desk, was the same ‘life lessons’ as I was taught under the hot August Sun.
And that is the key to teaching social studies. You might not need to grapple with the concepts of Adam Smith to balance your checkbook, but you should grasp the inherent qualities of WHY his concepts are important and be able to communicate your opinion.
As a previous blogger typed, “I can’t help wondering if social studies teachers these days feel a bit like Rodney Dangerfield: “No respect. I don’t get no respect!” I agree. However I’d add that seemingly derogatory term… “coach” to that sentiment. Apparently any commitment one might have to our children outside of the classroom in a learning environment is frowned upon.
By OldSchool
May 16, 2007 10:20 AM | Link to this
Wow! Sounds like most of you have met my school’s Social Studies coaches! My husband taught middle school social studies and Georgia history for 31 years. Most of his students always blew the top out of the standardized test scores and won many geography bees. His degree was pure history and his insatiable love for reading broadened his education. He passed that on to his students through anecdotes and stories that textbooks omit. Field trips grounded in history rounded out their knowledge.
When he subs for a history/social studies teacher, he still tries to bring some of that richness to the lesson. I’m sure the state will “fix” things by mandating 4 years of social studies. Yep, that’ll do it.
By Travis
May 16, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
I have to second what Mark said. I am a social studies teacher who coaches but unlike many I realize that my pay is based on my teaching not my coaching. I feel that many of my students walk out of my class prepared to be active citizens. When I began teaching I broke down my coaching salary and quickly realized that the $1.90 an hour I get for the hours I coach will not pay my bills so I focus on my teaching first and then my coaching.
By mike p
May 16, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this
I teach Social Studies and coach. I think both are important, and I take them both seriously. I enjoy teaching and I enjoy coaching. I like to be around my students as much as possible. The more time I get to spend with them, the more I feel like I can have a positive influence on their lives. I take some offense to the assumptions of many of you that say the Social Studies teachers that are coaches do not do much teaching. Yes, it is hard to do. I spend 8 hours during the day teaching and planning, then spend the afternoons and evenings coaching. My wife makes a great sacrifice. I do, however, hold teaching in the classroom as a high importance. My teaching comes first, and then my coaching. Is this the case with all coaches, no, it is not. But, there are also many teachers who are involved in other things that take away from their teaching. Their are bad teachers in all subject areas. I have found that my worst and best teacher that I ever had were both coaches. My best teacher was a teacher in the classroom and a teacher on the football field. He was great. My worst teacher did not care much about the classroom and only cared about winning. Coaching is teaching. We teach life skills that are vital to our society. We teach kids how to handle adversity, how to hand winning/losing, how to work hard, integrity, etc. These things are important, and they take time.
Overall, Social Studies teachers get the shaft. We are looked down upon by other teachers, especially if we are coaches. There are good teachers and bad teachers in all educational fields. Unfortunately, there is a negative steroetype for coaches that teach social studies.
By OldSchool
May 16, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
Well, welcome to my world, mike p! I’m a vocational instructor (now called CTAE…guess that’s to make us feel better over the lack of support/update funding). At least you have the luxury of teaching a class students MUST have to graduate. How would you like being an elective teacher and have to hear “I don’t need this class” and “It’s just an elective…not like it’s important.”
Then there are the counselors who put kids in our classes because there is no other place to put them. I was even told one time a kid was put in my drafting class because “he was too sorry to put anywhere else.”
Most of our students don’t even know our mayor’s name or who our state reps are…
…but they can sneak around and text their buddies whenever…
By DB
May 16, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this
The whole teacher/coach issue really fries my grits! On the flip side of the coin, our private school lost a truly outstanding history teacher because he did NOT want to coach, and the school wanted him to a*’t coach an athletic team. It made me ill when he chose to go to another school that didn’t expect him to coach, where he could do what he wanted to do: teach. (What a concept …) The guy was so great that the next year, even while at his new school, he continued to take phone calls with questions from kids at our school who were prepping for an AP exam, and even shared his course outline with interested students in the class below his who wanted to take advantage of his years of experience in preparing kids for the AP exam (his students consistently score 4s and 5s).
As with any subject, the only teachers who can get a kid excited about a subject are teachers who are, themselves, excited about the subject. When you have a coach who is marking time until practice, the kids know it immediately and give it the same importance that the teacher does — i.e., none.
(And I can still remember the names of the ships that sailed to Jamestown, thanks to a song we had to learn in 4th grade, 40+ years ago!)
By Rick G.
May 16, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
I have taught social studies for 32 years - I also coached Scholar’s Bowl for 21 years, a little different kind of coaching. I have known many good and bad social studies teachers, and many of them(not all) were coaches. The problem seems to be in the hiring- when our system tries to fill coaching slots first and recruit teachers of high academic standards second, we get what we deserve. I’m especially annoyed when a head football coach can simply tell his new principal who the assistant coaches are and what they teach. My department chair, an excellent leader who used to have impact on hiring, has been introduced to five of our last six social studies teachers by the head football coach. I know many great teachers who are also coaches, but the time strain on the teacher who is performing essentially two full-time jobs is too much.
By Cammi317
May 16, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this
LOL…I never realized this was across the board. Although, I loved my high school World History teacher, Coach Davidson. He was, apparently, one of the rare greats. He LOVED history, and, in particular Winston Churchill. He is one of the reasons why I remain a history buff to this day.
By Me
May 16, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this
Three social studies credits is PLENTY. Civics, World History, and US History… that’s three. How many more do you need?
By wwww
May 16, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
Me:
GEOGRAPHY. Students can’t find their way out of a paper bag. In fact, one asked me where Washington, D.C. was earlier this year. So yeah, I would say that’s important.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this
The best teacher my child has ever had, has my deepest respect. (although he isn’t a coach)
http://www.millcreekhighschool.org/myinfo.php?id=140
By Me
May 16, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
GEOGRAPHY? In high school? Are you trying to tell me that high school students should take an entire year of geography? That’s absolutely ridiculous.
By JustMe
May 16, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this
Remember everyone, there isn’t a ‘limit’ on social studys, just a set ‘minimum.’ If students want to take 4 social studies they can.
Heck, if high school students would only learn the content of those 3 required ones we should be so lucky!
IMHO, the problem is the same old problem that we are dealing with in education. Students don’t want to learn and don’t have to learn, so why should they learn? The parents don’t care as long as their kid gets the ‘grade.’ The administration doesn’t care as long as the parents are happy and there is no trouble to deal with. The teachers are thereby trained to not teach (aka ‘give up’)and give out ‘gift grades’ (aka grade inflation) so the students don’t learn a darn thing.
Right now, the GHSGT and school AYP only consider math and English. Only when school AYP takes science and social studies into account will things change - then the administrators may care. To me, that is the only good thing coming out of NCLB - it forces the administration to care about real teaching and real learning.
By onebetter
May 16, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this
wwww: i had a new student in my 8th grade language arts class last week who moved here from california. after he told the students where he came from, 1/2 the class had a short debate about whether or not california was part of the united states. !!! worse, the kid himself, when pressed to settle the debate, was not quite sure, but “he thought it might be.” i am not making this up!
By JustMe
May 16, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this
If other social studies courses are taught well, geography is integrated into them. For example, how can you teach US History without see and learning where the States are located?
By ssteach
May 16, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this
As a 3rd year social studies teacher (and the only female and non-coach in my department) I fully understand the various points of view concerning the quality of social studies teachers.
I moved to a new school last year and was told (after the fact) that I would be coaching tennis - I had never even played tennis before! But I was a social studies teacher and as such was expected to coach as well. I later found out that my principal refused to hire social studies teachers that did not coach!
No we don’t get respect because our subject is not considered important for testing at the lower levels, but also because there are some very lazy social studies teachers (just like any other subject I will add). So do we get frustrated? Absolutely!
In the meantime I will keep trying to broaden the horizons of my small-town rural students who think Obama and Osama are the same person.
By wwww
May 16, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
Me:
Geography at the high school level is a one semester course. It is not a course only about landforms, longitude and latitude, but encompasses cultures and historical information about locations. So yes, I do think it’s improtant for our very US centered students to at least have a brief glimpse into what they rest of the world is doing and where they are located. Trying to explain the war in Iraq and subsequent cultural differences in the middle east is quite difficult to do without knowing where they are. And no, you can’t just “look on a map” or “look it up on the internet”. That is rather hard to do when in the middle of a conversation, especially when there are no maps or internet search engines to guide you.
Remember when our esteemed president was running for office and had not even a basic understanding of the world abroad? I don’t know about you, but I find that to be very embarrassing, and telling about how self centered the US really is.
Please see onebetter’s comment to further emphasize why the learning of Geography is important.
By wwww
May 16, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Just Me:
Take a look at the US History standards - the new ones - there is nothing in there about locating the 50 states. No kidding.
And yes, common sense would dictate what you said, but you and I both know that common sense in education is an oxymoron.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Gee bridget,
history knowledge kind of coincides with family income levels.
Think it could have something to do with parents?
By jim d
May 16, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
Geography in Gwinnett;
“9th Grade World Geography builds the foundation for the high school program of study. Students earn elective graduation credit for this two semester course. World Geography is vital for all students as preparation for both the 10th Grade Gateway Writing Assessment as well as the Georgia High School Graduation Test. Core courses required for graduation begin with 10th Grade World History, followed by 11th Grade U.S. History and conclude with Economics and Political Systems.”
By wwww
May 16, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
Jim d:
The state requires one semester (or the course can be taught in one semester), but as you know Gwinnett often does it’s own thing. I know it’s one semester in Cherokee, Fulton and Forsyth, because I’ve taught in those counties.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
www,
I find it more embarassing that geography is considered an elective.
“Back in the day” it was required for graduation.
By em
May 16, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
Me forgot to include Economics. Although the State of Georgia expanded Economics with the new GPS, they did not expand the unit requirement from 1/2 unit to one unit and it is an EOCT course. No, Me, three Social Studies are not enough and with all of the electives offered, there is plenty of room for four.
By SET
May 16, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this
It seems to me that “Social Studies” would be unwelcome in government schools because of the problems with Political Correctness. Any study of history may have a problem in that hindsight is 20/20.
More likely the gov’t schools will use the subject to teach “Current Events” where thay can put their PC lies into play. Our schools indoctrinate, they do not educate. Smart kids have the Internet and their parents/employers for that.
And I do believe that PC is more important than anything else to our local government secondary schools. They won’t even teach the students sex-ed, disease control and health issues anymore because it’s not PC to do so. (Gee, if the Mexican girl in the back row is coughing all the time should I think TB? - Which diseases can be transmitted by food handlers? What are the HIV rates per thousand for the principal ethnic groups - and their trends over the last 25 years? What are the standard dental exam periods and why? What medical routines are normal protocol for sexually active people in this area and why? etc. etc.
If these schools honestly served these kids like CA schools did in 1960 we wouldn’t have so many “victims” walking around in the age range 18-28.
But if the gov’t made people strong and self-reliant, the gov’t wouldn’t amass so much power.
By Truth Filter
May 16, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this
wwww: Regarding locating the states — it’s not in U.S. History because it’s built in to the K-5 standards. Read the Geographic portions of the K-5 standards.
If students can’t point out the 50 states by the time they get to High School, U.S. History is going to be lost on them!
Heck, I have the worst memory in America and I can point out the 50 states (although I tend to get lost in the Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado vortex)
By JustMe
May 16, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this
Didn’t ya’ll watch “Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader” last week?
A question was…… where is the Cape of Good Hope located?
So, I guess geography (US, World, whatever) is taught in elementary school.
By wwww
May 16, 2007 1:33 PM | Link to this
Truth Filter:
I’ve got news for you. The K-5 standards are often only taught minimally - like on a rotating 3 week basis with science - most students leave elementary school with next to no meaningful social studies instruction.
This is done because of NCLB’s emphasis on reading and math. Now, the US has been removed from the 6th grade SS geography curriculum. That means students will only get US geography sporadically during K-5, and that’s it for their entire educational careers.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this
www,
Indeed I do know about gwinnett. That is why I just cut and pasted from their website. Personally I like that they offer a full credit over the entire year. What I am not crazy about is that it is an elective.
By Jay
May 16, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this
History is an impractical field of study, especially at the high school level. Why past events occurred and what we should learn from them are highly subjective topics. We can’t even agree on why we invaded Iraq just four years ago, so how can we purport to understand the Revolutionary War or Great Depression with any confidence? History diguises itself as the truth but is really just poorly written literature.
I can see some value in a civics class that explains the political process, though.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this
on learning the states—3rd grade in Gwinnett.
http://www.gwinnett.k12.ga.us/aks.nsf/9bc2b8506f11df5385256e920050b6c8/08dca13bfe7cd5f38525674700778a92?OpenDocument
By jim d
May 16, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this
jay,
the reason we seem to have a prooblem all agreeing on why we invaded Iraq might have something to do with having the reasoning changed so many times by Bush. Hell, he can’t even honestly tell you why
By susan lapp
May 16, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
I am a Social Studies teacher who is not a coach. Social Studies has long suffered from the “coach” problem. I have lost count with the number of interviews I went on that had coaching attached to the job. It is sad because it is the history, language and ideas that holds this nation together. Students are ignorant of their history.
By Truth Filter
May 16, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this
I thought the idea was for students to learn the basics early and apply them during their later school years. Wouldn’t a standard like this one include geography in an applicable sense?
SSUSH6 The student will analyze the nature of territorial and population growth and the impact of this growth in the early decades of the new nation. a. Explain the Northwest Ordinance’s importance in the westward migration of Americans, and on slavery, public education, and the addition of new states. b. Describe Jefferson’s diplomacy in obtaining the Louisiana Purchase from France and the territory’s exploration by Lewis and Clark. c. Explain major reasons for the War of 1812 and the war’s significance on the development of a national identity. d. Describe the construction of the Erie Canal, the rise of New York City, and the development of the nation’s infrastructure. e. Describe the reasons for and importance of the Monroe Doctrine.
Seriously, if my child’s class was required to “memorize the 50 states” in high school, I’d be very concerned. They should already know the 50 states and be putting that knowledge to use in high school.
By Jay
May 16, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this
History is an impractical field of study, especially at the high school level. Why past events occurred and what we should learn from them are highly subjective topics. We can’t even agree on why we invaded Iraq just four years ago, so how can we purport to understand the Revolutionary War or Great Depression with any confidence? History diguises itself as the truth but is really just poorly written literature.
I can see some value in a civics class that explains the political process, though.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this
Jay
“History is an impractical field of study”
I agree somewhat since history is generally writen by the victor. However, here’s a little about a book that I highly recomend for every 3rd grade student.
http://www.accd.edu/pac/philosop/Phil1301/lieshist.htm
I’ve found arming them with facts often drives their teachers a bit frantic to study a bit more about what they are teaching.
By wwww
May 16, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this
Truth Filter:
I agree with you, and this is how it should work in a perfect world where every child comes to school prepared to learn every day, is motivated to learn, and has a teacher that does the same.
This is not even close to reality.
It sounds as though your children fall into that category, and it sounds like you support their education from home. That’s 90% of the battle.
We do spend a lot of our time reviewing and reinforcing what students should already know. So, it doesn’t seem that silly to me to have high school students learn the locations of the 50 states - at least have a working knowledge. Come teach a regular ed class (not gifted or AP), you will get your eyes opened big time!
By Zoe
May 16, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this
Our department has 3 coaches. All three of us coach and teach advanced placement. It just happened to work out that way. Our our county, not that many social studies teachers coach and there is no pressure to. Also, someone forgot the other position that always goes to a coach- ISS teach. Lately, I’ve noticed a lot of the collab SpEd teachers are coaching….
By thomas
May 16, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
In all actuality, social studies is quite relevant to the lives of our students. In fact it is MORE RELEVANT THAN SCIENCE, the subject that everybody is so hot over. Most science, especially at the elementary and middle school level is garbage. This comment is coming from a science guru— a man with a degree in science. Our science curriculum is full of excessive verbiage that the students are supposed to master. These are things that are irrelevant to elementary and middle schoolers.
It is more important for students to master how to read a map, key points of history and their causes and effects, and basic economics, than differentiating between transparent, opaque, and translucent objects or the difference between pitch and frequency of a sound wave. Another stupid fourth grade science standard- The student should identify conditions that cause changes in pitch, volume, and loudness.
The reality is that most of what the educational establishment and schools tout so much, push so much, make out to be so important is MEANINGLESS. MEANINGLESS. MEANINGLESS!!!!!! This is why so many students are turned off on school. They are bored by irrelevant nonsense. I believe that we should return to an ESSENTIALIST form of education for the elementary and middle school years. Save the high falutin’ fluff for high school. If kids learn the BASICS at the early years, they will be successful later on.
By thomas
May 16, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this
In all actuality, social studies is quite relevant to the lives of our students. In fact it is MORE RELEVANT THAN SCIENCE, the subject that everybody is so hot over. Most science, especially at the elementary and middle school level is garbage. This comment is coming from a science guru— a man with a degree in science. Our science curriculum is full of excessive verbiage that the students are supposed to master. These are things that are irrelevant to elementary and middle schoolers.
It is more important for students to master how to read a map, key points of history and their causes and effects, and basic economics, than differentiating between transparent, opaque, and translucent objects or the difference between pitch and frequency of a sound wave. Another stupid fourth grade science standard- The student should identify conditions that cause changes in pitch, volume, and loudness.
The reality is that most of what the educational establishment and schools tout so much, push so much, make out to be so important is MEANINGLESS. MEANINGLESS. MEANINGLESS!!!!!! This is why so many students are turned off on school. They are bored by irrelevant nonsense. I believe that we should return to an ESSENTIALIST form of education for the elementary and middle school years. Save the high falutin’ fluff for high school. If kids learn the BASICS at the early years, they will be successful later on.
By high school teacher
May 16, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this
jimd,
a dirty little trick with regard to geography as an elective credit:
Several systems require their freshmen to take a geography class; some of them on block are a full semester, which equates to a full unit. A unit of World Studies is required for graduation. If a student on the technical diploma track fails World History, his or her geography credit is then counted as the World Studies course.
By BG
May 16, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this
Strangely enough, I half agree with Thomas. I have three degrees in science/engineering, and I can tell you that true “science” is most definitely not taught in middle and elementary school. Most of what’s taught in the early grade levels is completely useless. They should focus on reading, writing, arithmetic, and history.
However, I do disagree with Thomas’ nonsense about social sciences being more relevant than the hard sciences. Check out the want ads and compare the demand for history teachers with that of auto mechanics, plumbers, and engineers.
By Janine
May 16, 2007 4:50 PM | Link to this
BG..along that line of reasoning…to those specialties for which you recommended checking the want ads, check for the ads requiring some kind of training, as opposed to a college degree. OUr often discussed “everyone doesn’t need a college degree to be a successful, contributing citizen” is born out here also.
By Janine
May 16, 2007 4:57 PM | Link to this
Back in the day,I went to elementary school and jr. high in Virginia. There was no science lab until 9th grade. We did have a small amount of time allotted to science in 5th -8th. However, it was mostly read, discuss, take a test, watch the teacher do a simple experiment or 2. I had no trouble getting into the groove of Chemistry and Physics later.
History/civics/social studies , however, were major all through elementary, jr. high, and high school.
By jim d
May 16, 2007 5:06 PM | Link to this
hst,
Gwinnett systematically, shall we say, “encouages” freshmen to take the course.
By BG
May 16, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this
Janine… I have no idea what point you’re trying to make.
By thomas
May 16, 2007 5:33 PM | Link to this
BG,
My “nonsense” about SS vs. science refers to its relevance at the elem/middle school level. 12 yr olds are not auto mechanics, plumbers, and engineers. That stuff is learned in high school and beyond.
By catlady
May 16, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
Our school system strongly “encourages” 1st year students to take a useful, but unnecessary, social studies course. Those without savvy parents sign up for it, and then find out that it did not count the way they thought it was going to for graduation. I fought the counselors and refused to allow my daughter to take the course. I reasoned that, when she was a senior, she could make the judgement whether to spend an elective that way. She chose a course more relevant to her college career, and has not yet regretted it. It is a shame so many kids got rooked into it. If it was so valuable, it should appear as a requirement.
At the elementary level, most of our kids get very, very little social studies instruction because they are sent to math and reading intervention classes (on top of 2 hrs. 40 min of reading and an hour and a half of math each day). I recall elementary school social studies fondly. Junior high and high school social studies mostly seemed like a waste of time, since 3 of the six years were taught by—coaches—whose focus was not really on the classroom. It was a long-standing joke about how easy it was to get them off track to talk about something else. Of course, this was in Alabama, and I am sure that is not a problem in Georgia!
By catlady
May 16, 2007 5:53 PM | Link to this
And the encouragement to take the extra class is to justify hiring decisions—there is so much “demand” we just have to hire these people, many of whom just “happen” to be coaches.
I’d love some others’ perspectives on teacher workloads. Our h.s. is on block, and several of the coaches have 2 periods with no student intructional duties, and get paid an extra supplement for their after school time as well. In my mind, when I don’t have time to use the bathroom, the idea that the football coach is paid for half a day of non-teaching PLUS his after school stipend seems rediculous. My experience has never been that the female coaches have this kind of perk, although the male coach of the female basketball team does come close. Anyone else care to share, or is this a blog for another day? And what about salaries? Our head football coach, in addition, is paid $15,000 more than the most highly degreed and experienced teacher (PhD with over 21 years experience, although the coach can claim neither), and he will certainly have time to use the bathroom.
By Teacher
May 16, 2007 6:07 PM | Link to this
Scores are much higher than other subjects when you have competent teachers. Look at www.greene.k12.ga.us for evidence.
Greene’s Supt. ran off almost every middle school teacher for next year. Morons like that are what keep decent teachers away.
By Jmarsh
May 16, 2007 6:17 PM | Link to this
Social studies and civics are not the same. I’d still rather the kids “reed gud” before they start learning about tribal cultures and how many committees a bill must pass through before it becomes law.
By Janine
May 16, 2007 6:50 PM | Link to this
catlady..In my middle school , all the so-called “exploratory ” teachers had over 2 hours off each day because their class time was cut to allow more time in “core” classes. Talk about bitterness!!!!!
By jim d
May 17, 2007 8:09 AM | Link to this
Bridget,
After re-reading some of the posts on this blog, I’m hopeful that a Teacher / Coach will write a guest blog entitled “High School Coaches: Can’t Get No Respect!” (even amongst peers)
It never ceases to amuse me when teachers who complain of being spoken about in generalizations use generalizations when speaking of parents or “other” educators.
Cat,
On a block schedule that can happen, if you have evidence that it is favoritism, raise hell. As for the $15000? Would you give up your evenings; even your days during spring practice; and the morning weight training hours which I assume would total to well over 800 hours a year for a measly $15K. That would break down to about $18.75 an hr. before taxes and doesn’t provide any stipends for having to deal with little “ No talent Johnny’s” parents who feel he should be the starting quarterback. You think you have problems with parents!!
Nope I’d say coaches deserve any break they can get.
By V for Vendetta
May 17, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this
Ouch, I’m gone for one day and you start bashing coaches? You should be ashamed!
:-)
By Billy
May 17, 2007 9:48 AM | Link to this
WFD et al:
My gripe is not that some or even most Social Studies teachers are also coaches. It’s that when I have a conversation with someone about teaching, it goes like this:
Me: Well, I have a degree in History.
Them: History? What are you going to do with a History degree?
Me: Teach. I’ve passes the Social Sciences Praxis II. I’m working on my certificate now.
Them: Well, I hope you want to coach something!Yes, I’ll frakkin’ coach something. I played football and soccer and wrestled in high school, played organized baseball and basketball as a kid, and play the occasional game of golf and tennis as an adult.
The issue is that I shouldn’t have to coach something any more than the math teacher across the hall.
By SET
May 17, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this
In reading the post I am reminded that there are two distinct groups of public school students involved, the college bound who will presumably be taught further and those for whom a High School Diploma represents the pinnacle of formal education.
To some degree the college bound can take care of themselves. They could learn most of what they need to know from the internet, their families, self study and summer school intensive classes. This group is not racially diverse.
The HSD group will go to work early. They will make less, be treated more shabbily by employers, they will not travel as much, they will have shorter life expectancy, different marriage and family demographics (more bastard children, more jail time, more drug/alcohol use, more VD, etc). I’m not saying they won’t have a full life and be happy, but their stats will be different.
Therefore their curriculum needs in high school are different. It’s abusive to put them into college prep classes rather than schedule them for those classes that will train them to stay employed and function in the economy, keep out of trouble and the courts, and teach them how to cope when trouble periodically arrives (like when the buggy whip factories they work in close down).
Social Studies is important to the HSD group as is vocational training. They need to understand enough of social history to be able to ride the waves that come in the future. They need to understand the price they pay for tribal dress and ebonics, for early and excessive childbearing, and the role of the sexes - how people attract and keep a spouse (key to stability for this group).
So yes I believe in a strong social studies program in the public secondary schools. But it would be by no means a walk in the park. It would be arduous. and it wouldn’t resemble the program for the college bound. We might see less memorization of world geography and more applied organizational behavior. We might have less study of the early US Presidents and more study of the events of the Great Depression. We seriously cover Criminal Law but ignore “literature”. Less study of Queen Elizabeth I and research papers on the life of Pamela Harriman. Less Civil Rights Movement material and more emphasis on Thomas Sowell’s “Ethnic America”. Segments covering sanitation, modern epidemiology (VD and infectous diseases) and mortality tables.
If High School is all these kids are going to get we need to increase their odds of staying alive and doing as well as they can.
By SET
May 17, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
The above post meant to say more research papers on Pamela Harriman!