The Study
In recent years, high stakes testing and renewed national standards have reestablished social studies as a core K-12 subject. But with this increased focus, educators also must grapple with several longstanding issues that have plagued this diverse and complicated area of study. Written by MSU Distinguished Professor Jere Brophy, Professor Janet Alleman, and doctoral student Carolyn O’Mahony, this article addresses these issues. The authors define social studies education, explore ways to make it more meaningful to students, outline effective methods to teach it and reflect on how best to keep social studies a basic K-12 subject.

The Findings
Social studies encompasses a wide range of academic disciplines, which can include lessons in areas such as economics, geography, history, civics, and the social sciences. The writers favorably cite the definition supplied by the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS), because it emphasizes citizen education using an eclectic approach. NCSS states that the primary purpose of social studies is to prepare students to "make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good," and the organization suggests 10 major themes as a venue for organizing curriculum. But how can teachers take these themes like culture or time and give them meaning to students? The authors suggest that merely memorizing disconnected bits of information long enough to pass tests will not address the larger goals of understanding, appreciating and applying what is learned to real life. This is best achieved by planning lessons in which students have access to a range of fiction and nonfiction sources that complement the text, have opportunities to apply what they are learning out of school, and can make connections between prior knowledge and new learning. In terms of the most effective way to go about creating powerful social studies learning, some examples include classroom discourse with sustained focus on a few topics rather than superficial coverage of many and teachers who press students to clarify or justify their assertions, rather than accepting them indiscriminately. The final point the authors make is that even though standardized testing has a legitimate role to play, educators should not plan full social studies curricula around these tests. Rather, they suggest keeping tests in an appropriate perspective within the larger picture of accomplishing citizenship education goals.

What It Means to You
Ultimately, the classroom teacher, not the standards or the testing, is the pivotal force in assuring powerful teaching and learning in social studies. Any modifications of practice are under teacher control. If such modifications are guided by the goals and standards, these modifications are likely to be improvements. If, however, teachers narrow the curriculum to teach to tests, then these changes are likely to be counter-productive. It will be teachers who decide whether major social education purposes and goals or high-stakes testing guide social studies renewal efforts.

More Information
Brophy, J., Alleman, J. & O'Mahony, C. (2000). Elementary social studies: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In T. Good (Ed.) Elementary, middle, and junior high schools in America: Yesterday, today and tomorrow (95th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II), pp. 256-312. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

<back to 2000 ed-Research Reports