A Plea for Critical Writing in the History Classroom
I found myself nodding in agreement as I read Johann Neem’s recent column on the importance of writing in the humanities. He sums up his argument in the final paragraph:
It is easy to panic in the face of ChatGPT. For those of us in the humanities, it is easy to become despondent. But we cannot. In a world in which we may be bombarded by computer-generated text, it becomes more necessary than ever that we teach citizens to read deeply and to analyze texts critically. The question may not be whether but where ChatGPT belongs. And the answer to that question may depend on (re)discovering where the thinking happens in each discipline.
As much as I miss the classroom, I have to admit that I don’t miss having to face the challenges that ChatGPT poses to the teaching of history and the emphasis on the development of critical thinking and writing skills.
That said, I don’t view ChatGPT as an existential threat to student writing. I’ve noticed a declining emphasis on writing over the course of my roughly twenty years teaching high school history and as a result of working with history teachers from around the country.
The traditional essay or research paper has increasingly been displaced by a wide range of assessments, some of which are challenging and reinforce critical thinking skills and others which I suspect do little to advance student understanding of history and the historical process.
I remember being told that many forms of critical writing would be displaced by new and increasingly accessible tech platforms. My students took advantage of these platforms, but it never displaced the importance of writing and depth of understanding that it offers.
The research essay was absolutely essential to achieving the pedagogical and broader goals for my history classes. More important than the content of my class, I wanted my students to taste what it is to think historically. Unlike other projects, the traditional research essay forced my students to appreciate the importance of framing the right question(s); collecting and analyzing primary sources; and working through multiple drafts of their essays.
Perhaps, as Johann suggests, the traditional essay will be displaced by other form of critical writing:
Another option is for us as instructors to encourage more in-class writing. We write for many reasons. One reason is to communicate, and the formal academic essay is primarily in this rhetorical mode. It is intended to communicate ideas to another reader. The formal academic essay still has its place, but perhaps it will play a less prominent role in the future relative to other forms of writing. It’s possible that smaller forms of writing—memos, emails, letters to the editor—are better preparation for the writing that students will be expected to do as citizens and in the workforce.
Either way, it’s the clarity of thought that analytical writing offers that matters.
When I met with parents at the beginning of the school year, I emphasized the critical thinking skills that their children would learn rather than the content of the course.
As I read through Johann’s piece, I couldn’t help but think that this emphasis on critical thinking and writing skills has been almost entirely absent from the larger public debate about history education. The debate has been driven almost entirely by the question of content.
That is unavoidable, but it would be helpful if more people emphasized the kind of analytical thinking skills that a history course offers, regardless of the content that is being taught.
Much of the general public has little idea about what happens in history courses at the secondary level. Perceptions are being driven by people who also have little, if any, knowledge and who have no interest in educating themselves about what takes place in the classroom.
But history educators also need to do a much better job of educating politicians, parents, and the public at large.
ChatGPT is an opportunity to rethink the importance and place of critical writing and thinking skills in our history courses. It may also help to refocus us on what ultimately matters in the teaching of history.
I taught social studies for seven years, primarily to newcomer English language learners Virginia. Finding ways to incorporate writing into the classroom was difficult for many reasons in this context. Here in Virginia we have the high stakes end of course exams that are entirely multiple choice. Teachers feel rushed to get through the “knowledge rich” curriculum and rarely have time to teach critical writing. In my last year in the classroom I actually decided to emphasize sentence writing with my students. (How many student essays are full of poor sentences, right?) Some of the exercises in “The Writing Revolution” by Judith Hochman and and Natalie Wexler were extremely helpful for not only teaching foundational writing, but assessing student understanding as well. If I decide to return to the classroom, I’d use that resource again.
So true.