No abstract

Using data from the Survey of the Status of Social Studies ( S4), this article describes the instructional decisions and practices of elementary teachers in two neighboring states, one where social studies is tested and another where it is not. We define students’ opportunity to learn within these states as a composite of three variables: time allocations for social studies (teacher reported instructional time), methods for teaching social studies (teacher reported instructional strategies), and content focus (teacher reported content emphases and state-mandated curriculum standards). Our guiding research question for this study was: To what extent do teachers’ perceptions of elementary school social studies instructional practices and content vary between two states with different testing policies for social studies? Initial findings revealed notable differences that could not be explained by testing policies alone. Therefore, we conducted an exploratory content analysis of the elementary social studies curricula in these neighboring states. We uncovered curricular differences that suggest that state standards influence teachers’ decisions in both what and how they choose to teach social studies. However, there were curriculum differences that did not align with S4 instructional methods and content focus output. Thus, we concluded that other factors apart from the curriculum guide teachers’ decision-making. Results provided evidence that students have different opportunities to learn based on (1) state testing policies in social studies, (2) curriculum content, (3) how social studies is delivered (e.g., stand-alone versus integration), and (4) time allocated to social studies. We concluded that these variables constrict or expand students’ opportunity to learn social studies and may influence teachers’ pedagogical and content choices in elementary social studies.

There are growing concerns among social studies professionals that social studies instruction is disappearing from elementary schools. These concerns have become more pressing as educational policies emphasize core curricula of reading, writing, mathematics, and science. Questions arise as to how social studies can resume its traditional role as one of these core curricula. One possibility is to have social studies included in the accountability movement through testing. This article contemplates the role of testing in impacting social studies instruction in the elementary curriculum through a comparative analysis of data collected from a study of practicing elementary teachers in two states: one in which social studies instruction is tested and the other in which social studies instruction is not tested.

As advocates of engaging students in historical inquiry and of the use of primary sources to aid in this inquiry, we support the claims of numerous student benefits, such as learning to detect bias, appreciating the interpretive nature of historical thinking, and the drawing of conclusions based on judgments about evidence (Fehn & Koeppen, 1998;Haeussler Bohan & Davis, 1998;Seixas 1998;Yeager & Davis, 1996). We developed a unit of study for our history and social studies teacher candidates that would address several issues: (a) motivate and inspire future teachers to use inquiry as a tool to build K-12 students' historical understanding and facilitate purposeful utilization of artifacts with ease; (b) help future teachers increase their knowledge of local history; and (c) present a unit that could be easily used in a secondary history course and, with some modifications, could be adapted for elementary and middle school history classrooms.

Teacher educators from six states invited their social studies methodology students to complete an abbreviated version of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Naturalization Test. The preservice teachers were also asked to share their conceptions of citizenship and evaluate the naturalization test. The findings from this study indicated that although this sample of preservice teachers had limited conceptions of citizenship, most were able to get a satisfactory score on the test. The authors discuss the implications of these results and suggest ways to broaden citizenship education in teacher preparation programs.