There is little doubt that the efforts on the part of Republican lawmakers to control how certain aspects of American history are taught has had an impact on teachers.
I would love to see a curriculum survey like what you describe - though I’m not sure how practical it would be to do on a large scale. I have been researching the development of American history education from the founding era to the present day. History courses used to be very textbook centered, so to learn about history education you could simply look at available textbooks. Since we’ve moved away from that model, it’s become harder to keep track of what resources are being used and how. I don’t think that’s a bad thing by any means, the textbook centered model has a host of problems, it’s just more challenging for me to get detailed data on small trends.
One other thing : you seem to suggest that having more data about what is actually used in classrooms could help calm the current hysteria around history education. I don’t think that’s actually the case, though I’d love to be wrong. There’s already a lot of information available that is being ignored by the folks driving this moral panic. For example, I don’t think many folks have actually read the 1619 project essays, or spoken to local history teachers, or reviewed state/local curriculum standards, etc. I’m sure some have, but it is glaringly obvious that most have not. So I’m not sure if having more data would help stop this panic.
Controversies around American history education are not new; we’ve been having them fairly regularly since at least the 1830’s. Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like they’ll be stopping anytime soon.
I wish some of the recertification requirements for us included taking some content related coursework. Of course with a Social Studies certification that is a broad area. I think in 32 teachers I've only taken the class to get AP US History certified & once I got Grad credit for a conference I went on the Supreme Court. Other than that my re-certification were whatever was convent & preferably low cost plus my Master's degree which is Ed Leadership. After 10 years as an Assistant Principal, I ended up back in the classroom teaching 8th grade SC History. Had to teach it to myself and the textbooks on the subject lean heavily into Lost Cause territory.
Thanks for sticking up for those who have coach or have coached in my case. Not all of us our bad although I've worked with a few who fit the stereotype, but I've worked with plenty of noncoaches who were terrible too. One thing we are seeing in SC at least, is with US History being the class that takes an End of Course test, there is a lot of pressure to perform. Those folks, coaches or not, are fleeing that class because of it.
My experience teaching tough things is if you approach it right, the kids are not the ones with the problem handling it. One thing I noticed in the last few years I taught SC History was a turn towards the kids asking, "Why did they think this (slavery, Jim Crow, etc) was okay to do to people." It coincided with the kids being young enough to not remember a time before Pres Obama and when kids stopped talking about the birther movement they were hearing at home.
Hi Warren. Thanks so much for taking the time to share your own experience. I completely agree with you that our students want to understand this history. When they ask the tough questions our teachers need to be properly equipped and free to engage.
I was on a regional high school BOE about 20 years ago. I thought if the director of curriculum and school board approved, the material could be used. I feel this should take some pressure off the teachers and put it where it belongs with administration. This is what they are paid to do as far as I am concerned. Politics needs to stay out.
I have also always thought that political party affiliation should not come down to lower levels of government. A mayor or council needs to run the town / county without the influence of party policies. Take care of the streets department, police and fire, schools, etc. Democrat or Republican should not be a party of it.
Hi Mike. Thanks for sharing a bit about your own personal experience. This is another aspect of the story that needs to be highlighted. There is a structure in place shapes what materials are actually used in the classroom.
Thanks for this post, Kevin--at last, some sanity in an overheated debate. I always wanted to teach high school history, but eventually I opted for grad school, and five years later a doctorate in American History. Then, guess what? There were no college jobs available (this was 1973), so I decided to check private secondary schools, and--wait for it!--was offered a teaching job at a fine "prep school," where I spent nearly forty years before retiring. I was (perhaps) "overprepared" for teaching on the secondary level (though I doubt it), and, truth to tell, it took a few years to adjust my approach to the intellectual level of my students, but, once I made the transition from wannabe "professor" to "teacher" I never looked back. And, in retrospect, I wouldn't trade those four decades for anything!
When I was President of the Board of Trustees of our 16 school, $65M annual budget school district, the history positions were held for athletic coaches with a minor in history. And we wonder why so many of our kids don't like history class ...
Totally fair, Kevin. Naturally, my comment is directed to the administrative tendency rather than any particular instructor, however ... I've experienced the contrary (and not just in history classes) and it would be interesting if one could evaluate the performance of coach/history-teachers; probably impractical to structure such an evaluation. What seems indisputable to me, is that students are better served by history teachers whose primary area of interest is ... drum roll ... history.
Thanks for the follow up. I agree that it would be interesting to evaluate coach/history teachers. One of the points I tried to make in the post is that the amount of history that history teachers are exposed to during their training differs widely.
Absolute truth there. Let me hasten to add that I am a life-long strong supporter of public education, teachers, and librarians. The latter are almost demigods in my eyes. The current climate alarms me.
I would love to see a curriculum survey like what you describe - though I’m not sure how practical it would be to do on a large scale. I have been researching the development of American history education from the founding era to the present day. History courses used to be very textbook centered, so to learn about history education you could simply look at available textbooks. Since we’ve moved away from that model, it’s become harder to keep track of what resources are being used and how. I don’t think that’s a bad thing by any means, the textbook centered model has a host of problems, it’s just more challenging for me to get detailed data on small trends.
One other thing : you seem to suggest that having more data about what is actually used in classrooms could help calm the current hysteria around history education. I don’t think that’s actually the case, though I’d love to be wrong. There’s already a lot of information available that is being ignored by the folks driving this moral panic. For example, I don’t think many folks have actually read the 1619 project essays, or spoken to local history teachers, or reviewed state/local curriculum standards, etc. I’m sure some have, but it is glaringly obvious that most have not. So I’m not sure if having more data would help stop this panic.
Controversies around American history education are not new; we’ve been having them fairly regularly since at least the 1830’s. Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like they’ll be stopping anytime soon.
I wish some of the recertification requirements for us included taking some content related coursework. Of course with a Social Studies certification that is a broad area. I think in 32 teachers I've only taken the class to get AP US History certified & once I got Grad credit for a conference I went on the Supreme Court. Other than that my re-certification were whatever was convent & preferably low cost plus my Master's degree which is Ed Leadership. After 10 years as an Assistant Principal, I ended up back in the classroom teaching 8th grade SC History. Had to teach it to myself and the textbooks on the subject lean heavily into Lost Cause territory.
Thanks for sticking up for those who have coach or have coached in my case. Not all of us our bad although I've worked with a few who fit the stereotype, but I've worked with plenty of noncoaches who were terrible too. One thing we are seeing in SC at least, is with US History being the class that takes an End of Course test, there is a lot of pressure to perform. Those folks, coaches or not, are fleeing that class because of it.
My experience teaching tough things is if you approach it right, the kids are not the ones with the problem handling it. One thing I noticed in the last few years I taught SC History was a turn towards the kids asking, "Why did they think this (slavery, Jim Crow, etc) was okay to do to people." It coincided with the kids being young enough to not remember a time before Pres Obama and when kids stopped talking about the birther movement they were hearing at home.
Hi Warren. Thanks so much for taking the time to share your own experience. I completely agree with you that our students want to understand this history. When they ask the tough questions our teachers need to be properly equipped and free to engage.
I was on a regional high school BOE about 20 years ago. I thought if the director of curriculum and school board approved, the material could be used. I feel this should take some pressure off the teachers and put it where it belongs with administration. This is what they are paid to do as far as I am concerned. Politics needs to stay out.
I have also always thought that political party affiliation should not come down to lower levels of government. A mayor or council needs to run the town / county without the influence of party policies. Take care of the streets department, police and fire, schools, etc. Democrat or Republican should not be a party of it.
Hi Mike. Thanks for sharing a bit about your own personal experience. This is another aspect of the story that needs to be highlighted. There is a structure in place shapes what materials are actually used in the classroom.
Thanks for this post, Kevin--at last, some sanity in an overheated debate. I always wanted to teach high school history, but eventually I opted for grad school, and five years later a doctorate in American History. Then, guess what? There were no college jobs available (this was 1973), so I decided to check private secondary schools, and--wait for it!--was offered a teaching job at a fine "prep school," where I spent nearly forty years before retiring. I was (perhaps) "overprepared" for teaching on the secondary level (though I doubt it), and, truth to tell, it took a few years to adjust my approach to the intellectual level of my students, but, once I made the transition from wannabe "professor" to "teacher" I never looked back. And, in retrospect, I wouldn't trade those four decades for anything!
Hi George. Thanks for sharing and thanks for everything you've done for your students over the years.
When I was President of the Board of Trustees of our 16 school, $65M annual budget school district, the history positions were held for athletic coaches with a minor in history. And we wonder why so many of our kids don't like history class ...
when I was in junior high (a very long time ago), a coach was assigned to teach my French class. Would have helped if he'd known some French.
Hi Kenneth. I appreciate the comment, but I want to note that I know plenty of high school coaches who do a fine job in the classroom.
Totally fair, Kevin. Naturally, my comment is directed to the administrative tendency rather than any particular instructor, however ... I've experienced the contrary (and not just in history classes) and it would be interesting if one could evaluate the performance of coach/history-teachers; probably impractical to structure such an evaluation. What seems indisputable to me, is that students are better served by history teachers whose primary area of interest is ... drum roll ... history.
BTW, liking your switch to substack.
Thanks for the follow up. I agree that it would be interesting to evaluate coach/history teachers. One of the points I tried to make in the post is that the amount of history that history teachers are exposed to during their training differs widely.
Absolute truth there. Let me hasten to add that I am a life-long strong supporter of public education, teachers, and librarians. The latter are almost demigods in my eyes. The current climate alarms me.