EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
1
EDUC 544-11: Social Sciences in Elementary Education
Summer 2011 Hull Education Building, Room #248
Professor:
David Locascio, Ph.D.
Longwood University
Department of Education
Office: Hull Room 215
Farmville, VA 23909
Contact information:
E-mail: locasciod@longwood.edu
Phone (office): (434) 395-2609
Phone (home): (434) 239-3307
Phone (cell): (434) 258-5368
Office Hours
By app’t in summer
I. Course description and rationale:
An overview of theory and methods related to the social sciences in the elementary
school curriculum. Emphasis will be placed upon the historical development and
characteristics of the individual disciplinary components of this curriculum (history,
geography, economics, and civics primarily) and the emergence and expansion of the
umbrella school subject known as “social studies.” The course will focus on
characteristics of early learning in these subjects and how teachers use this knowledge
and available resources to plan, implement, and assess meaningful learning experiences
for elementary social studies students. Through course activities, readings, discussions
(in-class and on-line), and some fieldwork and independent study, students will develop a
deeper appreciation of the challenges and opportunities inherent in teaching social studies
within the contemporary standards-based educational setting. (3 Credits)
In order to foster this understanding of social science education in both historical and
contemporary contexts, students must take an active part in their learning in this course
by staying up-to-date with readings and assignments, attending class sessions, and
participating in activities and discussions both in-class and online. The course will meet
four Fridays spanning from mid-May through early July. The first two class meetings
(5/20 and 6/3) will be in the evening (4-7 PM) as most schools are still in session. The
final two class meetings (6/17 and 7/1) will be from 9 AM to 3:30 PM. The remainder of
the class will consist of on-line components and the independent completion of
assignments. The instructor is available to address individual student concerns after class
or throughout the day. Do not hesitate to call, e-mail, or drop by my office to discuss any
questions you may have.
II. Course objectives:
The objectives for this course are directed toward the ten professional teacher outcomes
contained within the Longwood University Conceptual Framework, referenced as
follows;
CF1: Content Knowledge
CF2: Planning
CF3: Learning Climate
CF4: Implementation/ Management
CF5: Evaluation & Assessment
CF6: Communication
CF7: Technology
CF8: Professional Responsibilities/ Dispositions
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
2
CF9: Diversity
In addition, the following objectives pertaining directly to INTASC performance
objectives as well as ACEI (Elementary) standards are identified as such.
Upon completion of this course sequence, the students will be able to…
Knowledge-based Objectives
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Identify important historical antecedents and philosophical underpinnings relating to the
development of the social studies in American education (CF1,CF4;
INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3).
Identify and consider current and emerging concepts and trends in social studies
education, including efforts to move from traditional teacher-centered models to more
constructivist learner-centered models (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4,
3.1, 3.3)
Identify the impact of curricular and developmental theorists on the teaching of the
various disciplines embedded within the social studies (CF1,CF4; INTASC3a, 3b, 3c, 3e,
3f, 7c; ACEI 1.0; 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Consider and evaluate the curricular application of the various social sciences fields
within the elementary social studies scope and sequence in Virginia schools (i.e. the
SOLs) (CF1, CF2; INTASC 1a, 1c, 7a, 7d; NMSA 3, 5)
Develop and describe various strategies for effectively teaching social studies within the
construct of four “commonplaces” of education (as presented in the course texts);
learners and learning, teachers and teaching, subject matter, and classroom environment
(CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Critically evaluate the role of social studies education as it relates to responsible
citizenship, cultural transmission, values inculcation, moral development, social justice,
and critical activism (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Develop and evaluate various student learning assessment strategies for the social studies
curriculum (CF1,CF4, CF5; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3, 4.0)
Identify state and national social policy and political issues and consider how these
influence the social studies curriculum and prevalent teaching strategies (CF1,CF4;
INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Identify the curricular contributions as well as the complementary and conflicting
interests of national organizations like the National Council for the Social Studies
(NCSS), the National Council for Geographic Education (NCGE), the National Center
for History in the Schools, etc. (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1,
3.3)
Identify and assess sources of curriculum materials for effectively teaching social studies,
including both hard-copy and on-line resources (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e;
ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Skills Based Objectives
11. Use two or more of the various influences that “leverage” the social studies curriculum
beyond the scope of the SOLS (various social science disciplines, local
resources, technology, interdisciplinary subjects, etc.) and develop and present a
micro-teaching plan (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3)
Dispositional Objective
12. Consider and appreciate the importance of social studies education given the
characteristics of our pluralistic American society and the increasingly interconnected
“global village” (CF1,CF4; INTASC1a,1b,3a,4a,4c,8e; ACEI 2.4, 3.1, 3.3).
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
3
III. Texts:
Levstik, L. S. & Barton, K.C. (2001). Doing history: Investigating with children in
elementary and middle schools (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. ISBN # 0-8058-3562-8
Steffey, S. & Hood, W.J. (1994). If this is social studies, why isn’t it boring? Portland,
ME: Stenhouse Publishers (ISBN 1-157110-003-2)
Additional readings will also be included in this course, which will be posted on the class
Blackboard site. In some cases, additional reading materials may also be distributed in
class.
IV. Class policies:
Course structure: This graduate seminar course will explore the content and pedagogy of
the Social Sciences in a manner that examines the disciplines of history, geography,
economics, civics, and sociology within the context of elementary and middle grades
instruction, as well as examining the independent and interdisciplinary instructional
potentials of the amalgam known as Social Studies. In order to allow time to properly
process assigned readings and to explore some of the technological potentials of this
content, the class will also have substantial expectations of reading and on-line activities.
The class will rely on the Longwood Blackboard site for asynchronous online discussions
and for the distribution of some materials and web links.
Assignments and grading: All readings and assignments should be completed on-time
and work turned in must be typed. All assignments may be turned in online or in hard
copy. On-line work should be submitted via the Blackboard “Activities” function.
Students should not e-mail assignments as attachments except as a last resort. Make-ups
of assignments or late submission of assignments must have prior approval of the
instructor.
The course will be structured to maximize the potentials of students to individually
choose assignments that they complete for course credit. Assignments are listed below in
Section V with a preliminary number of “points” assigned to them. Some of these
assignments will be required of all students, but approximately half of the semester points
will be accumulated through the completion of independent assignments selected by
individual students. Grades for the course will then be calculated in a “points
accumulated” manner. There are TENTATIVELY scheduled to be 800 total points
available through the duration of the course, therefore the following point scale
approximates what will be used for the calculation of grades:
A
B
C
F
At least 720 points accumulated
640-719 points accumulated
560-639 points accumulated
Fewer than 559 points accumulated
90%-100%
80%-89%
70%-79%
69% or below
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
4
Note that there is no grade of “D” in Graduate Studies. Students need to earn a grade of at
least “C” in all graduate courses in order to pass the course, and must maintain a
minimum cumulative grade point average of 3.00 to remain in the graduate program.
In accordance with Longwood policy, students missing the on-campus class over 10% of
the time (in this case more than 2 hours) will have their course grade lowered by one
letter grade. Students missing class over 25% of the time (5 or more hours) will receive a
grade of “F” in the course. Students not fully participating in the online facets of the
course will also have their grades lowered accordingly.
Citations: Students will use APA style for all assignments requiring references (see the
Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA) 5th edition, July
2001). For a few examples of APA (5th) citation style, students may also refer to the
required reading list or the references section in the back of this syllabus.
Accommodations: Any student requiring accommodations should promptly inform the
instructor so that appropriate and equitable arrangements can be made.
Code of Honor and Academic Integrity: The Longwood University Honor Code prohibits
lying, cheating, stealing, and plagiarism. Students are expected to abide by this code at all
times. All written work submitted in this course must be pledged, meaning that students
are to do their own independent work unless an assignment is clearly designated as
collaborative. Any violations of the stipulations or the ethical and moral essence of the
Code of Honor will not be tolerated.
V. Evaluations and assessments:
NOTE: AS DISCUSSED IN “ASSIGNMENTS & GRADING” IN SECTION IV
ABOVE, STUDENTS WILL HAVE A CHOICE OF APPROXIMATELY HALF
OF THE ASSESSMENTS THEY COMPLETE FOR THIS COURSE. ALL
STUDENTS, HOWEVER, WILL COMPLETE ASSESSMENTS #R1, AND #R2
BELOW, AND ALL WILL BE ASSESSED ON THEIR OVERALL
PARTICIPATION (#R3).
R1. Mid-term assessment: The learning experience being used in lieu of a mid-term for
this course will involve students working with the Levstik/ Barton text Doing History.
This is an excellent, if somewhat dense, treatment of constructivist “investigatory”
approaches to historical study. The first three chapters of this text will be assigned to all
students (see section VI. Course Outline below), with the remaining chapters (4-13) being
divided up two-to-a-student. Students will read their assigned chapters and develop two
separate 1-2 page hand-outs summarizing what they view as the most important aspects
of these chapters. Students will be provided example summaries for Chapter 1-3 that they
can use as an anchor. These summaries will be submitted on or before June 10th so they
can be redistributed to the class through Blackboard. During the following week, students
will complete a brief take-home quiz on the material from the first three chapters, while
also writing a commentary on a chapter summary other than one of their own (these
commentaries will be collected and read by the instructor, then copied and distributed to
the individual writing the summary you reviewed). This activity will be worth 200 points,
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
5
with 50 points coming from each of the chapter summaries you write, 50 points from the
quiz (on chapters 1-3), and 50 points for the follow-up commentary.
R2. Micro-Teaching: This assignment will be discussed in greater detail in class, but the
essence of the learning experience will be to frame out a 10-15 minute instructional
“episode” to deliver to the class. All instruction would be related to the Virginia SOLs
(evidenced by the lesson plan to be turned in). The lesson should also involve active
student engagement through the manipulation of artifacts, maps, charts or tables, and/or
images, either through hard-copy or instructional technologies (remembering that our
room has a Promethean Board). The lesson component that students deliver should
include a lesson plan that focuses on how the unit/.lesson is conceptualized (meaning the
clarity and authenticity of the central concepts and connections and the design of the
scope and sequence) rather than the delivery details for the entire unit. Foremost, students
should be able to point to the authentic learning that their unit will endeavor to elicit from
students and how this learning would be developed and assessed. The micro-teaching
will be presented to the class during the last third of the semester (see Section VI below).
The lesson plan itself will be rubric assessed and will count for 100 points. The microteaching presentation will be peer assessed and will count for 50 points.
R3. Class Participation: This course will be demanding and full participation in the
activities of the course is expected. Part of the class participation grade for the course will
involve the participation in on-line discussions, along with a rotation through which
various students will lead these discussions. Students’ class participation grade will also
include a “presentation” to the rest of the class on which optional assignments they chose
to complete. Student participation, including both in-class and online interaction, will
represent a total of 100 points.
INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS: (Students choose their own assessments from
these options sufficient to take them to the 800 points total available in the course)
I1. Literature review: Students will develop a literature review related to a topic in
social studies education from the educational periodicals available either on-line or in the
Longwood University library. The review should include at least five articles. A literature
review is intended to be a piece of research-based writing that can be either “expository”
OR take the form of a position paper. In other words, the review could look at the
research pertaining to a particular technology like GIS in the classroom, OR it could use
the literature base to support a position on an issue like whether some controversial
public issues (CPIs) are appropriate for inclusion in the elementary classroom. In either
case, the development of the topic is framed around cited sources from the literature.
Students may choose the topic of their review, so long as all articles are related to each
other and to the content of the course and/or texts. Try to be sure that at least some of
these articles are from hard-copy journals (i.e. Social Education, Social Studies and the
Young Learner, Journal of Geography, etc. or the more “generic” publications like
Educational Leadership or Kappan). Students do not need to submit the articles
themselves, but will provide a complete set of citations in APA format after the lit review
(in addition to APA citations throughout the document).
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
6
Numerous acceptable articles are cited in the references section of this syllabus. Many of
these are available in pdf format on the class Blackboard site (designated with *** in
Section VIII below). The italicized suggested readings in Section VI offer a sequence of
articles as they pertain to course content. A comprehensive list of articles related to
history instruction can also be accessed at
http://www.cshc.ubc.ca/sigreferences.php?view=sig.
The “base” point amount for the literature review will be 150 points. More developed
reviews (using more than five sources, and/or including book sources, for example) can
be negotiated to count for more points.
I2. Book review: There are myriad books in the common press that tackle topics relating
to the social studies. Obviously, there are books relating to teaching and learning history,
multiculturalism, etc., but there are also books that delve deeply into the content we teach
in elementary classrooms. For example, Kirkpatrick Sale’s 1990 book The Conquest of
Paradise is a wonderful treatment of Christopher Columbus and the Columbian legacy
that enriches a teachers’ knowledge of that component of the standards. In addition to
“focused” histories and biographies, entire sections of bookstore shelves are devoted to
contemporary cultural studies, American demographics, globalism, etc. All of these
topics relate to the social studies, and effective teachers seek opportunities to bring such
topics into their own teaching. This assignment involves students writing a review of a
book of their choosing, framing the author’s argument(s) and connecting the book to
instruction in the elementary or middle grades social studies classroom. Books should be
approved in advance, but there is a wide scope of topics that will be considered. The
“base” point amount for the book review assignment will be worth 150 points. This is
somewhat determined by the length and relative complexity of the book
I3. Exploring Student Learning in the Social Sciences: This is a small-scale qualitative
research project in which students will explore conceptualizations of knowledge and
characteristics of learning with elementary school students in a social studies subject area
of their choosing. As teachers, it is important that we understand what elementary
students already know and think about the subject areas we teach, and this assignment
allows the opportunity to explore this. For this assignment, you will interview a child,
either recording the interview or working with another student to take notes during the
interview. You may work in pairs for the interview portion but the paper must be written
individually. Your interviews can focus intently on one of the individual social studies
disciplines (history, geography, etc.) or it can more broadly survey multiple areas of
knowledge and understanding. The idea here is not to “quiz” students on what they know,
but rather explore them as learners. For example, asking “who is your favorite person to
learn about from history, and why?” is a more valuable question here than “who was our
nation’s first President?”
In the research report, you will identify 3-4 main assertions you have reached from the
interviews, support each with the use of specific examples from the interviews, and
explain 2-3 instructional implications for each of these assertions. Your assertions should
be generalizations which identify patterns in students’ responses, not a description of
students’ responses to every question you asked. Student names must be changed to
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
7
insure student confidentiality. Instructional implications should include APA-style
references if applicable. The project will have a “base” point amount of 200 points.
I4: Teaching the NCSS Standards through Film: The National Council for the Social
Studies (NCSS) has published ten thematic strands that constitute the framework of the
National Social Studies Standards. The strands are concept-based and provide a valuable
resource relating to instructional scope to complement the sequence of instruction as it is
framed in the Virginia SOLs (scope and sequence being the two important components of
a curriculum). The ten strands are as follows;
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
Culture
Time, Continuity, & Change
People, Places, and Environment
Individual Development & Identity
Individuals, Groups, & Institutions
Power, Authority, & Governance
Production, Distribution, & Consumption
Science, Technology, & Society
Global Connections
Civic Ideals & Practices
While the strands are intended to support teachers toward more conceptually based
instruction, the actual use of the strands by many elementary teachers often includes only
a cursory mention on the lesson plan(s). In this assignment, students will be expected to
teach aspects of the strands directly through the use of film. For example, students might
develop a unit plan where students would learn about Individual Development &
Identity or Power, Authority, & Governance through the Disney film Cinderella. Or
perhaps the class may use the Bill Murray film Groundhog Day to develop a deeper
understanding of Time, Continuity, & Change.
Students opting for this assignment will submit an overall unit plan, with a rationale,
lesson plans, and assessments. The unit should be at least three days long, with a lead-up
day where-in the theme is introduced and framed, the “movie day”, and a follow-up day.
The “base” point amount of the NCSS lesson assignment will be 100 points.
I5. Historical Scene Investigation (HSI) Case Development: One of the examples of
instructional technology we will be discussing this semester is the Historical Scene
Investigation (HSI) project developed by Kathy Swan of the University of Kentucky and
Mark Hofer of the College of William & Mary (can be found on-line at hsionline.org).
HSI offers teachers a streamlined and aesthetically engaging web site that combines
hyperlinks to rich and varied historical primary sources with document-study prompts
and activities intended to distill the analytical skills and processes of evidentiary
reasoning used in authentic historical investigation. The site was developed to help
teachers explore the tremendous curricular resource that the web represents, providing
them with self-contained document-based “cases” in which investigatory processes are
scaffolded through prompts and student activities.
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
8
Students opting for this assignment will develop an HSI case consisting of primary
sources centered around a central investigatory question (see the site itself for examples).
There should be at least 5 sources included within the case. A completed HSI case with
all necessary components will have a “base” value of 150 points. Larger and more
developed cases may be negotiated to count for more.
I6. Teacher pamphlet: For this assignment, students will research an aspect of their own
local history or geography and develop an original teacher pamphlet developmentally
appropriate for distribution to elementary school students. This pamphlet can be based
upon oral histories (original or existing), historical or geographic landmarks, or other
local resources and should include both text and images. The assignment can be
completed in any area community, or the scale can be expanded to be state-wide. The
“base” points available for this assignment are 100 points.
I7. Reading response journal: Students will keep a journal in which they will respond
to the readings in the Steffey & Hood text. There are 15 chapters in this book, and
students may write responses to up to six (6) of these chapters. Journal entries will be 1-2
pages in length and will each count for up to 25 points, so there is a maximum of 150
points available for this assignment.
VI: Course Schedule
Week:
Topic/ activity
Precourse
5/20
Distributed Readings
Course introduction & expectations
Fundamental concepts and perspectives in
Social Studies Education
Historical development and contemporary
refinement of the Social Studies in
American Education
6/3
6/17
Readings / assignments
(completed in advance of class)
For week of 5/9
NCSS and Lopez Reading
For week of 5/16: Dr. L leading
Framing the field:
McCall, Bryant, Engle, and Gerwin,
readings (note that Gerwin is a
response to Engle and can be found
several pages later in the Engle pdf)
For week of 5/23: Abbi leading
Social Studies examined:
Cornbleth, Frazee, Olwell, and
Wade readings
For week of 5/30: Megan leading
Teaching and Learning History
Looking at History:
Historical Thinking and its development Slekar, Barton(2), Kobrin, and
and assessment in the Elementary Wunder readings
Classroom. I will also meet with individual
students to discuss their plans for the For week of 6/6: Maggie leading
independent assignments.
Connecting to text:
Avery, Berson, Chick, and
Two chapter summaries from Levstik & Hicks/Ewing readings
Barton due by 6/10
For week of 6/13: Lydia leading
Geography Education: Developing a
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
9
Geography:
Gritzner, Haas, Schoenfeldt, and
“Mid-term” due (summary reviews & quiz) Siverly/McDowell readings
spatial lens
7/1
Multiculturalism, Pluralism &
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Micro-teaching: Controversial Public
Issues (CPIs) in the Social Studies
For week of 6/20: Erin leading
Considering culture:
Brophy/Alleman, Lipman,
Merryfield, and Jones readings
For week of 6/27: Dr. L. or guest
leading
Controversial issues:
Bolgatz, Hess, Dever, and
Berson/Berson readings
VII. Content outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Teachers and teaching
a. Examining prior experiences with teaching and learning social studies
b. Challenges/ opportunities in teaching social studies within the standards movement
c. Diagnostic and responsive teaching
d. Reflective instructional leadership
Philosophies and historical development of the social studies curriculum
a. Historical aims of the social studies curriculum
b. The role of social studies in the elementary curriculum
c. Influences on the contemporary curriculum
Students and learning
a. Statistics of change in society and its impact of schooling
b. Application of theories of learning in the social studies
c. “Received curriculum” and how students learn and consider social studies
d. Behavior management
e. Attribution theory
Curricular issues within the contemporary classroom
a. Disciplinary separation versus interdisciplinary social studies
b. Developing curriculum in a pluralist society
c. Character/values education
d. Inquiry-based learning and the depth vs. breadth debate
Curriculum and standards
a. Interpreting and aligning curriculum with standards
b. Ensuring coherence and integrity in the integrated curriculum
c. Curriculum models
d. Unit planning
e. Developing foundational skills through the curriculum
Models of instruction
a. Defining effective instruction.
b. Families of teaching strategies
c. Differentiating instruction
d. Formative assessment and questioning
e. Theory and research on homework
Classroom assessment in the social studies
a. The language of assessment
b. Norm and criterion referenced assessment
c. Reliability, validity and assessment quality
d. Classroom strategies for evaluating and reporting student progress
e. Ethical considerations in assessment
Classroom structure
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
10
a. Organizing schools and classrooms
b. Democratic vs. autocratic classrooms
c. Theory and research on classroom management
9. Contemporary research and commentary in Social Studies Education
a. Goals and components of the social studies
b. Theory to practice in social studies education
c. History and historical thinking
d. Geography, Economics, and Civics
10. Technology in the social studies
a. Web-based instructional resources
b. Legal and ethical issues in cyberspace
c. Other educational technologies
d. Web-based professional development for teachers
11. Reflective practice
a. Nurturing reflective thought
b. Strategies for improving practice through reflection
c. Action research
VIII: References
***Alleman, J., & Brophy, J. (1999). The changing nature and purpose of assessment in the social studies
classroom. Social Education, 65(6), 334-337.
Alter, G., Monson, J., Larson, B., & Morgan, J. (2000). Social studies content for the elementary school
teacher. Upper Saddle River: Merrill/ Prentice Hall.
Avery, P.G. (2002). Teaching tolerance: What research tells us. Social Education, 66(5), 270-275.
***Avery, P.G., & Graves, M.F. (1997). Scaffolding young learners' reading of social studies texts. Social
Studies and the Young Learner, 9 (4), 10-14.
Bailyn, B. (1994). On the teaching and writing of history: Responses to a series of questions. Hanover, NH:
University Press of New England.
Banks, J. A. (1985). Teaching strategies for the social studies. New York: Longman.
Barr, R. D., Barth, J. L., & Shermis, S. S. (1977). Defining the social studies. Arlington, VA: National
Council for the Social Studies.
Barton, K. C. (1997). "I just kinda know": Elementary students' ideas about historical evidence. Theory and
Research in Social Education, 24, 407-430.
***Barton, K. C. (2001). A picture's worth: Analyzing historical photographs in the elementary grades.
Social Education, 65(5), 278-283.
***Barton, K.C. (2005). Primary sources in history: Breaking through the myths. Phi Delta Kappan, 86
(10), 745-753.
Barton, K. C. & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associations.
Bednarz, S. W., Bettis, N. C., Boehm, R. G., DeSouza, A. R., Downs, R., M., Marran, J. F., et al. (1994).
Geography for life: National Geography Standards. Washington, DC: Geography Education
Standards Project.
Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America's
public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Berson, M. J. (1996). Effectiveness of computer technology in the social studies: A review of the literature.
Journal of Research on Computing in Education., 28(4), 487-499.
Berson, M.J., & Berson, I.R. (2001). Growing up in the aftermath of terrorism. Social Studies and the
Young Learner, 14 (2), 6-9.
Berson, M. J., Lee, J. K., & Stuckart, D. W. (2001). Promise and practice of computer technology in the
social studies. Critical issues in social studies research for the 21st century, 209-229.
***Berson, M. J., Ouzts, D. T., & Walsh, L. S. (1999). Connecting literature with K-8 national geography
standards. The Social Studies, 85-92.
Brantlinger, E. A. (2003). Dividing classes: How the middle class negotiates and justifies school
advantage. London: Falmer Press.
Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (1996). Powerful social studies for elementary students. Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt Brace.
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
11
Brophy, J., & VanSledright, B. A. (1997). Teaching and learning history in elementary schools. New York:
Teachers College Press.
***Bryant, J.A. (2005). The fax about history. Phi Delta Kappan, 86 (10), 754-756.
Burke-Hengen, M., & Gillespie, T. (Eds.). (1995). Building community: Social studies in the middle school
years. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Carnes, M. (1995). Past imperfect: History through the movies. New York: Henry Holt.
Cooper, S. (2009). Making history mine: Meaningful connections for grades 5-9. Portland ME: Stenhouse.
***Cornbleth, C. (2002). What constrains meaningful social studies teaching? Social Education, 66 (3),
186-190.
Cornbleth, C., & Waugh, D. (1995). The great speckled bird: Multicultural politics and education
policymaking. Mahwah, NJ: LEA Publishing.
Davidson, J. W., & Lytle, M. H. (1992). After the fact: The art of historical detection (Vol. I). New York:
McGraw Hill.
Davis, O.L. Jr., Yeager, E.A., & Foster, S.J. (Eds.) (2001). Historical empathy and perspective taking in the
social studies. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press.
Douglass, M.P. (1999). The history, psychology, and pedagogy of geographic literacy. Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Downey, M. T., & Levstik, L. S. (1988). Teaching and learning: The research base. Social Education, 52,
336-342.
Edinger, M. & Fins, S. (1998). Far away and long Ago: Young historians in the classroom. York, ME:
Stenhouse.
Egan, K. (1989). Layers of historical understanding. Theory and Research in Social Education, 17(4), 280294.
***Erickson, J. (2001). Learning civics by changing the community. Social Studies and the Young Learner,
13 (3), 10-12.
Fulwiler, B.R., & McGuire, M.E. (1997). Storypath: Powerful social studies instruction in the primary
grades. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 9 (3), 4-7.
Gabella, M. S. (1994). Beyond the looking glass: Bringing students into the conversation of historical
inquiry. Theory and Research in Social Education, 22(3), 340-363.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, & Practice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Grant, S.G., & VanSledright, B. (2006). Elementary social studies: Constructing a powerful approach to
teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
***Gritzner, C. F. (2002). What is where, why there, and why care? Journal of Geography, 101, 38-40.
***Haas, M.E. (1989). Teaching geography in the elementary school: ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse
for Social Science Education.
Hanson, S. (1997). 10 geographic ideas that changed the world. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press. (*** Relph chapter)
Hardwick, S. W., & Holtgrieve, D. G. (1996). Geography for educators: Standards, themes, and concepts.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Heilman, E.E., Fruja, R., & Missias, M. (2009). Social studies and diversity education: What we do and
why we do it. New York: Routledge.
***Hess, D.E. (2005). How do teachers' political views influence teaching about controversial issues?
Social Education, 69 (1), 47-48.
Hess, D. E., & Marri, A. (2002). Which cases should we teach? Social Education, 66 (1), 53-59.
Hess, D.E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York:
Routledge.
***Hicks, D., & Ewing, E.T. (2003). Bringing the world into the classroom with online global newspapers.
Social Education, 67 (3), 134-139.
Hicks, D., Doolittle, P.E., & Ewing, T. (2004). The SCIM-C strategy: Expert historians, historical inquiry,
and multimedia. Social Education, 68 (3), 221-225.
Hill, A. D., & LaPrarie, L. (1989). Geography in American education. In G. Gaile & C. Willmott (Eds.),
Geography in America. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Hochschild, J., & Scovronick, N. (2003). The American dream and the public schools: Oxford University
Press.
***Howard, R.W. (2003). The shrinking of social studies. Social Education, 67 (5), 285-288.
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
12
Jenkins, K. (1991). Re-thinking history. London: Routledge.
Keiper, T. A. (1999). GIS for elementary school students: An inquiry into a new approach to learning
geography. Journal of Geography, 98, 47-59.
Kliebard, H. M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum: 1893-1958 (2nd ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Kobrin, D. (1996). Beyond the textbook: Teaching history using documents and primary sources.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
***Kobrin, D., Abbott, E., Ellinwood, J., & Horton, D. (1993). Learning history by doing history.
Educational Leadership, 50(7), 39-41.
***Larson, B.E. (1999). Current events and the internet: Connecting "headline news" to perennial issues.
Social Studies and the Young Learner, 12 (1), 25-28.
Leming, J., Ellington, L., & Porter, K. (Eds.). (2003). Where did social studies go wrong? Washington,
DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Levstik, L. S., & Barton, K. C. (2008). Researching history education: Theory, method, and context. New
York: Routledge.
Lindquist, T. (1997). Ways that work: Putting social studies standards into practice. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
***Lipman, P. (1995). "Bringing out the best in them": The contribution of culturally relevant teachers to
educational reform. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 202-208.
Loewen, J. W. (1995). Lies my teacher told me: Everything your American history textbook got wrong.
New York: The New Press.
Maxim, G. W. (1987). Social Studies and the elementary school child (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
***Merryfield, M. M. (2004). Elementary students in substantive culture learning. Social Education, 68
(4). 270-273
***Milson, A.J., & Downey, P. (2001). WebQuest: Using internet resources for cooperative inquiry. Social
Education, 65 (3), 144-146.
Monmonier, M. (1996). How to lie with maps. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Murphy, A. B. (2000). Geography's expanding place in American education. The College Board Review,
191, 2-6.
Nash, G.B., Crabtree, C., & Dunn, R.E.(2000). History on trial: Culture wars and the teaching of the past.
New York: Vintage.
National Council for the Social Studies (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for
social studies. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
National Research Council. (1997). Rediscovering geography: New relevance for science and society.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Natoli, S. J. (Ed.). (1994). Strengthening geography in the social studies. Washington, DC: National
Council for the Social Studies.
Noonan, K. M. (1998). Untangling the web: The use of the world wide web as a pedagogical tool in history
courses. The History Teacher, 31(2), 205-219.
***Parker, W. (1989). How to help students learn history and geography. Educational Leadership, 47(3),
39-43.
Parker, W. C. (2001). Social studies in elementary education (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Percoco, J.A. (2001). Divided we stand: Teaching about conflict in U.S. history. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Reinhartz, D., & Reinhartz, J. (1990). Geography across the curriculum. Washington, DC: National
Education Association.
***Risinger, C.F. (2001). Teaching elementary and secondary history using the internet. Social Education,
65 (5). 297-298.
Ross, E. W. (Ed.). (1994). Reflective practice in social studies. Washington, DC: National Council for the
Social Studies.
Ross, E.W. (Ed.). (2001). The social studies curriculum: Purposes, problems, and possibilities. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Salter, C. L. (1989). Teaching geography across the curriculum. NASSP Bulletin, 73(521), 19-22.
***Schoenfeldt, M. (2001). Geographic literacy and young learners. The Educational Forum, 66, 26-31.
Schur, J.B. (2007). Eyewitness to the past: Strategies for teaching American history in grades 5-12.
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
13
Seixas, P. (1994). Students’ understanding of historical significance. Theory and Research in Social
Education, 22, 281-304.
Slekar, T.D. (1998). Epistemological entanglements: Preservice elementary school teachers'
"apprenticeship of observation" and the teaching of history. Theory and Research in Social
Education, 26(4), 485-508.
***Slekar, T.D. (2001). Disciplinary history versus curricular heritage. Journal of Thought 3(36), 63-70.
Stahl, S. A., Hynd, C. R., Britton, B. K., McNish, M. M., & Bosquet, D. (1996). What happens when
students read multiple source documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly, 31(4), 430-456.
Stearns, P.N., Seixas, P., Wineburg, S. (2000). Knowing, teaching & learning history. New York: New
York University Press. (***Wineburg chapter)
Stoltman, J., & Libbee, M. (1994). Geography in the social studies scope and sequence. In S. J. Natoli
(Ed.), Strengthening geography in the social studies (pp. 42-50). Washington, DC: National
Council for the Social Studies.
Symcox, L. (2002). Whose History? The struggle for national standards in American classrooms. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Takaki, R. (1993). A different mirror: A history of multicultural America. Boston: Little & Brown.
Thornton, S. J. (1991). Teacher as curricular-instructional gatekeeper in social studies. In J. P. Shaver (Ed.),
Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning. New York: Macmillan.
Thornton, S. J. (1994). Perspectives on reflective practice in social studies education. In E. W. Ross (Ed.),
Reflective practice in social studies (pp. 5-11). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social
Studies.
Thornton, S.J. (2003). Silence on gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum. Social Education, 67 (4),
226-230.
Thornton, S. J. (2008). Continuity and change in social studies curriculum. In L. S. Levstik & C. A. Tyson
(Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 15-32). New York: Routledge.
Thornton, S. J., & Wenger, R. N. (1990). Geography curriculum and instruction in three fourth-grade
classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 514-531.
Tilbury, D., & Williams, M. (Eds.). (1997). Teaching and learning geography. London, UK: Routledge.
Tunnell, M.O. & Ammon, R. (1993). The story of ourselves: Teaching history through children’s
literature. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Tyack, D. B. (2004). Seeking common ground: Public schools in a diverse society. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Van Ausdale, D., & Feagin, J. R. (2001). The first R: How children learn race and racism. Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
VanFossen, P.J. (2003). Best practice economic education for young children? It's elementary! Social
Education, 67 (2), 90-94.
VanSledright, B. (2002). In search of America's past: Learning to read history in elementary school. New
York: Teachers College Press.
VanSledright, B.& Meuwissen, K. (2004). Does it last? Still in search of America's past five years later.
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS),
Baltimore, MD.
Vender, J. C. (2003). Teaching to the standards: A K-12 scope and sequence in geography. Washington,
DC: The Geography Education National Implementation Project (GENIP).
***Wiggins, G. (1989). The futility of trying to teach everything of importance. Educational Leadership,
47(3), 44-59.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice
Hall.
Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past.
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Wyman, R.M. (2005). America’s history through young voices: Using primary sources in the K-12 social
studies classroom. Boston: Pearson .
Yeager, E. A., & Davis, O. L. Jr. (1996). Classroom teachers' thinking about historical texts: An
exploratory study. Theory and Research in Social Education, 24(2), 146-166.
Young, K.A. (1994). Constructing buildings, bridges, & minds: Building an integrated curriculum through
the social studies. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
EDUC 544
Dr. David Locascio; Longwood University; Summer 2011
14