I am a history teacher, so therefore it would be safe to assume that I teach history. I mean, you would think that would be the case, but really I'm not so sure. This year I was excited to make the leap to high school, and pleased that I would be teaching U.S. history as well. I really wanted to get into a public school, but that wasn't going to work out. Luckily, my company merged with a company that runs high schools, so I had the opportunity to move up. This all seemed like good news going into the summer, and my biggest worry was that the drive would be a little bit longer.
We are about to finish the fifth week of school, and the entire thing has been a huge disappointment. There are a number of reasons that this job has been a giant let down. There was a lot of chaos at the beginning where there were constant changes, poor communication on those changes, and just a general lack or preparation somewhere in the process of starting a school year. All of those things are well over my pay grade to worry about why they happened or how to fix them, but they contributed to the massive disenchantment with my job.
However, the biggest point of friction and dissatisfaction has been with the thing that I thought I would be doing every day, which is teaching history. In that area of my job I feel like our system is a complete failure. The system fails students, it fails the goals of social studies education, and it fails the teachers who want to teach their subject, but the system has led to huge incentives for students to not do any work whatsoever and no incentive to worry about the content of our classes.
When I first met with my principal she told me that we used standards based grading. This didn't worry me much because at my last job we had something that I thought was similar in that each assignment was linked to a state standard in social studies. It's a more intentional way to track progress. I knew that students had multiple opportunities to take assessments to show growth and learning. This all seemed fine and I would just have to get used to the new tech systems and adjust a little bit here or there, but a pretty minor transition. However, that is not what I've experienced. The standards that they are being graded on are not social studies standards. For example, in the first semester they have two standards, standard one is perspective, standard two is cause and effect. Basically, the entire class is based on being able to interpret sources, generally primary sources. Can they identify the perspective of an author. Can they identify the main idea of a source. Can they explain what a specific key word or phrase in a source means, and explain how that key word or phrase supports the author's argument or main idea.
This is not a social studies required standard. I could do this with Harry Potter. I could do it with a comic book. I could do it with the script to the Karate Kid. In our instances, we are using speeches generally, but the point is, this skill does not require any real history do learn to do these things. Sure, we're using historical documents, but it doesn't need to be that.
Now, this isn't necessarily the worst activity to teach students. In fact, I've been doing variations on this for years. Reading and interpreting primary sources is important, and a skill to practice. So, if that's the case why are you crying like that person who wanted everyone to leave Brittney alone?
Well, here's the first problem, reading and interpreting primary sources is REALLY HARD. It's also not every fun. We are reading things from two hundred years ago, and teenagers generally really struggle trying to understand what they are saying, much less being able to figure out their main idea. Does this mean they shouldn't do it? No. Like I said, I've been doing it for years. However, the problem is that the entire class revolves around this. This is what they are being graded on the entire semester. This is the skill they are trying to practice every day. This is the central activity, and the history becomes secondary to all of that.
This brings us to the second problem. In order to be able to do all of the analyzing of these sources, you must know the context. Ok, so that means you must teach the history in order for them to understand the documents. So I see how this plan can work. You create a skill to repeatedly test, you teach the context, then they perform the skill. In theory, this could work. However, the way things are set up 80% of their grade is based on doing the skill, 10% of the grade is "moral focus" which is their participation in the class. The last 10% is on the content. There is no real immediate incentive to actually learn the material, to learn the history. If you think you can do the skill, there's no need to do the work, no need to do really participate too much because 80% is enough for most people to be happy with their grade. Further more, no assignments get grades, it's all just feedback. You grade it, but it doesn't affect their grade at all, except perhaps their moral focus participation grade. Further, those moral focus grades come later, it's a long term planning thing, and I'm not sure if you were away, but teenagers aren't the best with long term planning. In fact, we've been told that multiple times in our summer PD sessions that the brain of a teenager is not fully developed to be able to judge those type of things and plan that far ahead, yaddayaddayadd. Yet, we have a system where students have to think about the long term implications of not doing their work and how that will effect them in January when the semester is over? This is lunacy.
We've created an entire system where there is no incentive to bother learning any history as long as you can identify perspective, or the main idea of a document. If that's the case, why are we hiring any social studies teachers at all? This is a literature/reading skill. An English teacher would just as easily be able to do this. Yet, it seems to me giving the world and the way that our society has no idea about anything historical or civics related, that the teaching of history and social studies is more vital now than any time in living history. Meanwhile, every day I have to try to overcome the massive incentives students have to not bother worrying about my class or the content I'm trying to teach them. The content is secondary, the consequences are months int he future.
I try to remember that I'm not in a public school, where nonsense like this isn't the standard. However, I feel more and more like schools are actually failing. Not because they can't do the job, but because they are choosing to do absurd things like this.