February’s History Ed Blog Circle Topic= Planning for Historical Thinking: Unit and Lesson Planning
Last month we discussed some of the reasons that we value teaching our students to do more than simply recall facts. In the upcoming months, we will explore some of the ways that we have and can bring our ideas to fruition.
February’s theme focuses on the decisions we make before we engage with students. How do you plan units and lessons that promote historical thinking? What strategies and tips can you suggest? What pitfalls should we avoid?
If you did not get a chance to participate last month, I encourage you to join us! As before, if you'd like to post directly to this blog, please let me know and I will add you as an administrator. If not, just send me a link to your post, and I will add it.
I look forward to your contributions! (@joetabhistory)
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Monday, February 3, 2014
Friday, January 31, 2014
@clclyne
When I was in high school, I hated history. I only took the one mandatory history class, and even that was done begrudgingly. I was drawn to historical fiction, museums, art, politics, travel, philosophy. I knew that there I was an intricate connection between all of these and the past. What I couldn't see was how they had anything to do with the miscellany we were expected to memorize for that dreaded class. I remember the teacher boasting how students remembered facts (minutiae) from his class years later. I find that difficult to believe.
In university, I fell in love with history because it was all about thinking: why did that happen? What were the consequences of that action? How is this act different than the similar one 50 years ago? Why does it happen? How did this impact different peoples then? What are the ethical implications? All the key tenets of Seixas' Big Six. These are the questions that matter, the ones that make a difference in all of our lives.
I love teaching the intro grade 10 class of Canadian history. It is perfect for inquiry because there is a myth that is perpetuated about Canada the good, the nice, the accepting. I spend the course feeding them the fodder--residential schools, internment camps, racist immigration policies--so they debunk that myth. This is the crux in the shift of thinking about teaching history, I think, the shift from a focus on facts to a focus on historical thinking. I don't debunk the myths for them. I give them the information (or how to find it) so that they can use the skills we develop together to debunk the myth for themselves.
I agree with a lot of what others have already posted. Love this sharing of philosophies and approaches to our practices!
I don't use a textbook in the core grade 10 mandatory history class. I prefer to tell stories, share excerpts, video clips or to create document sets for inquiry projects. The very nature of the textbook implies an emphasis on facts (I have a new textbook for social science and it is much improved, and I will try it). I have Pinterest boards I have created on various topics as digital document sets, and we have access to the great resources at tc2.ca (Critical Thinking Consortium). We are not 1-to-1, but we have pretty regular access as (thankfully for me), there are still many Luddites in my building, so I don't have to share all that often.
I feel the need to control the direction of their learning, and, for me, that means structured inquiry around the historical thinking concepts. I follow the course content chronologically, using the facts as the jumping off point into the thinking concepts. Some topics fit better with certain concepts, like for cause and consequence the bombing of Pearl Harbor, then Japanese internment. If they understand this then when they have a test (yup, still see the value here--and yup, some multiple-choice), they know and understand the sequence of events. It would simply not make sense for the internment to have happened without the bombing first. (I know not all events in history work this way, but that's why I choose the concept that best fits the topic. These are junior students. We need to start somewhere).
Re: tests, I believe in their necessity, even though this would seem to contradict the philosophy on the textbook. There are many places there will be tests (provincial literacy for us, other classes, driver's license, aptitude for jobs, SATs). I make a conscious effort to minimize questions that are pure knowledge. It is challenging and time consuming to develop good multiple choice questions that test higher order thinking. Part of each test is source identification, images similar to, or on same topic as ones shown in class for which they need to explain the historical significance. And I always tell them in advance the paragraph writing question so they can think about how they would answer, at least those so inclined. On the WWII test students had to consider whether or not the horrors of WWII changed our sense of humanity. We had never discussed the question explicitly, but indirectly many times, then up to them to make sense of it and pull together. Many answers were beautifully crafted, well considered examples of historical thinking in action, exactly what we are looking for.
@phillige
A little while ago I was contacted by a friend on Twitter about joining this great project. Every month we are given a topic to write a blog post about dealing with aspects in history classes. The prompt for this month was Teaching students a list of facts about the past vs. teaching them to think historically. Here is my contribution to the blog:
Growing up, history was important to my family. My grandpa in particular would always tell great stories about his time in Vietnam or living in Alaska, Arizona, or Hawaii while in the armed forces. We also talked about the Civil War or listened to Civil War books on our trips to Florida for Spring Break. My grandparents also took me to Pow-Wows and other historically important places near where they lived in Pittsburgh. I can remember walking through graveyards to find gravestones of past relatives among the many other adventures we would have. History was a part of our life as a family. It just wasn’t facts strung together to make sense of an event or time period, it was more, much more.
In school I was lucky enough to have some great history teachers and some really bad ones! They would still lecture to a class and we had to take notes, but many of my history teachers brought it to life. It wasn't just about reading out of a textbook and answering some questions at home. Then in class discussing the answers to the homework and repeating like a bad Boy Band song on the radio, they could make you feel like you were there. Yes, we would do the occasional project, but it was more used to break up the doldrums of the textbook. It was about bringing history to life. I remember one of high school world history teachers well. When we would cover a new era in history we had “visitors” come in to our class. He of course dressed the part and acted the part. It made it more real, and weird, but you could see how understanding was vital to the experience of history.
In college I had both types of professors. The ones who were really passionate, taught with a tenacity you would have thought you just ran a marathon after class. In fact, one of my college professors was so passionate about his big ideas, he actually created a new form of history called the Big History Project. (You should look up Craig Benjamin from Grand Valley State University and the Big History Project). Anyways, I digress. And I had those professors who would lecture strait out of the textbook or books we had to read for class. BORING!
The most valuable lessons I took from my teachers and professors was this, that no matter what form of history you teach, it is important your students have an understanding, no a grasp of conceptional understanding of what happened. This does not mean teaching a list of facts, that may or may not connect to an event, have a quiz or test, then repeat. Information like this that lives in Bloom’s Taxonomy Lower Levels does not need to be taught. Yes, some students are going to memorize facts and tell you what happened on that date, etc. But does that mean they really know and understand what happened?
We need to get away from a form of teaching where students will only study and dump that information. It’s more important for us as history teachers to give our students experiences that will last with them forever. Give them the primary and secondary sources to intense and stimulate their brain instead of memorizing facts and regurgitating them for a score. We need to use more inquiry to attract our students to our subject.
Here is how I do it. I always start a lesson with an image, map, a piece primary source, a movie clip, etc. to get the students hooked on what we will be covering. This usually revolves around a central question Google cannot answer easily. Then I have the students discuss in small groups or as a large group what this has to do. I am activating their prior knowledge to make sense of what we are learning. From here, students then either watch a video or read the lesson in the textbook or read more primary sources, or find information online to help them further their understanding of the topic. From here, students then need to apply their information they have gained in a way that demonstrates understanding. This could be a Socrative Seminar, a Fish Bowl, a PowerPoint (done with pictures and no words), iMovies, a mock trial, a business plan for a new company, a regular old test, etc. The sky is the limit. All along this way, I can see if my students are actually comprehending the information and by applying it to new situations, if they have a firm grasp of the ideas. If they had to learn a list of facts and pass a test, I can see what they knew for that test.
It is time we move our programs to the current century and teach our students the necessary skills they will need to survive outside of school.
Let me know what your thoughts are. I would be happy to discuss them.
http://www.reversingsocialstudies.com/1/post/2014/01/history-ed-blog-circle-january.html
Growing up, history was important to my family. My grandpa in particular would always tell great stories about his time in Vietnam or living in Alaska, Arizona, or Hawaii while in the armed forces. We also talked about the Civil War or listened to Civil War books on our trips to Florida for Spring Break. My grandparents also took me to Pow-Wows and other historically important places near where they lived in Pittsburgh. I can remember walking through graveyards to find gravestones of past relatives among the many other adventures we would have. History was a part of our life as a family. It just wasn’t facts strung together to make sense of an event or time period, it was more, much more.
In school I was lucky enough to have some great history teachers and some really bad ones! They would still lecture to a class and we had to take notes, but many of my history teachers brought it to life. It wasn't just about reading out of a textbook and answering some questions at home. Then in class discussing the answers to the homework and repeating like a bad Boy Band song on the radio, they could make you feel like you were there. Yes, we would do the occasional project, but it was more used to break up the doldrums of the textbook. It was about bringing history to life. I remember one of high school world history teachers well. When we would cover a new era in history we had “visitors” come in to our class. He of course dressed the part and acted the part. It made it more real, and weird, but you could see how understanding was vital to the experience of history.
In college I had both types of professors. The ones who were really passionate, taught with a tenacity you would have thought you just ran a marathon after class. In fact, one of my college professors was so passionate about his big ideas, he actually created a new form of history called the Big History Project. (You should look up Craig Benjamin from Grand Valley State University and the Big History Project). Anyways, I digress. And I had those professors who would lecture strait out of the textbook or books we had to read for class. BORING!
The most valuable lessons I took from my teachers and professors was this, that no matter what form of history you teach, it is important your students have an understanding, no a grasp of conceptional understanding of what happened. This does not mean teaching a list of facts, that may or may not connect to an event, have a quiz or test, then repeat. Information like this that lives in Bloom’s Taxonomy Lower Levels does not need to be taught. Yes, some students are going to memorize facts and tell you what happened on that date, etc. But does that mean they really know and understand what happened?
We need to get away from a form of teaching where students will only study and dump that information. It’s more important for us as history teachers to give our students experiences that will last with them forever. Give them the primary and secondary sources to intense and stimulate their brain instead of memorizing facts and regurgitating them for a score. We need to use more inquiry to attract our students to our subject.
Here is how I do it. I always start a lesson with an image, map, a piece primary source, a movie clip, etc. to get the students hooked on what we will be covering. This usually revolves around a central question Google cannot answer easily. Then I have the students discuss in small groups or as a large group what this has to do. I am activating their prior knowledge to make sense of what we are learning. From here, students then either watch a video or read the lesson in the textbook or read more primary sources, or find information online to help them further their understanding of the topic. From here, students then need to apply their information they have gained in a way that demonstrates understanding. This could be a Socrative Seminar, a Fish Bowl, a PowerPoint (done with pictures and no words), iMovies, a mock trial, a business plan for a new company, a regular old test, etc. The sky is the limit. All along this way, I can see if my students are actually comprehending the information and by applying it to new situations, if they have a firm grasp of the ideas. If they had to learn a list of facts and pass a test, I can see what they knew for that test.
It is time we move our programs to the current century and teach our students the necessary skills they will need to survive outside of school.
Let me know what your thoughts are. I would be happy to discuss them.
http://www.reversingsocialstudies.com/1/post/2014/01/history-ed-blog-circle-january.html
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
@KaelynBullock
As a high school student I hated history. From what I remember, I took notes all the time. Then I would memorize a list of terms for a test, spit it back out, and forget it. It was not until I was forced to take a history class in college that I experienced primary sources that conflicted and I had to form an argument. This allowed me to fall in love with history and helped me identify a subject I wanted to teach.
Entering my teaching career, I did my best to make history class a fun experience. I had some good activities that kept us out of the textbook, but at the end of chapter students were still doing a lot of reading the textbook and memorizing. My curriculum was too content heavy and did not incorporate the skills of historians very well.
I have made a conscious effort to move away from so much history content. Over the years, I added more primary sources to my repertoire. I still struggled to find time to incorporate them regularly. Flipping my history classroom helped to solve that problem. By moving lectures outside of the classroom space, my students and I could use class time to investigate documents. I do owe a lot to the Stanford History Education Group for putting together some great, ready-to-use investigations.
Ideally, I will keep moving toward inquiry-based units. I want to start with an inquiry question and have students gather background information, while I introduce primary sources to challenge and deepen their knowledge. I also think there is much potential in the C4 Framework: Collect, Collaborate, Create, Communicate. These steps have been a natural framework for my classroom as I let students explore various topics, without needing them to be glued to the textbook.
This year, I have truly tested how well I am preparing students to do the work of historians, we are completing National History Day projects. Students have selected topics, done extensive research with primary and secondary sources, developed a thesis, and they are currently forming their arguments. This has been challenging for students and for myself. In class we regularly look at primary sources, but we usually work in small groups or as a whole class. This has challenged students to be accountable as individuals. I am eager to see their final products. When I first heard about this program, I thought to myself that these are the things I want my students to be able to do, and if they aren’t able, I wanted to teach them those skills. I believe students have learned a great deal, historical content and skills.
I will continue to refine my teaching to help students articulate the big ideas of history (not just memorize the little details). I still try to incorporate fun experiences. I also believe, that students can have fun engaging work of historians, being challenged to think critically. I’m encouraged so many Social Studies teachers are striving to do the same.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
What are some of your best tips/ best practices for unit planning? What does your process look like?
One of the most powerful parts of this blog, I think, will be giving history teachers a place beyond Twitter's 140 characters to discuss questions and answers. If you'd like to post a question as a new post, DM me (@joetabhistory) and I will add you as a moderator. My question:
What are some of your best tips/ best practices for unit planning? What does your process look like?
What are some of your best tips/ best practices for unit planning? What does your process look like?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)