PDA

View Full Version : Education State-by-state grades for teaching US History


SNR
02-19-2011, 11:36 PM
And the results are not good

Extensive report:

http://www.edexcellencemedia.net/publications/2011/20110216_SOSHS/SOSS_History_FINAL.pdf



http://www.allgov.com/Top_Stories/ViewNews/Education_Group_Gives_One_State_A_in_History_for_Schools__18_Fs_110219

The Thomas B. Fordham Institute has issued a report card on the teaching of history to K-12 students, and a lot of states won’t want to see their grades.

In producing its first study since 2003 on the quality of U.S. history standards, the Fordham Institute found a majority of states’ standards ranged from “mediocre to awful.” The average grade given out was a “D,” and 18 states earned an “F.”

Only South Carolina had strong enough standards to warrant an “A” grade.

Five other states—Alabama, California, Indiana, Massachusetts and New York, along with the District of Columbia—earned A-minuses.

The authors of the report accused schools of “creating a generation of students who don’t understand or value our own nation’s history.” They cited as the primary reason for this problem the fact that “few states and school systems take U.S. history seriously. So why should students?”

The amount of time devoted to social studies, according to the report, has been decreasing over the past two decades. By 2003-2004, students were spending an average of 18 hours less in social studies classes each year than they did in 1987-1988.

The report praises South Carolina for emphasizing the presentation of opposing views of history. For example, “After discussing the 1925 Scopes trial, the text calls attention to the debate, then and now, ‘between social conservatives who advocate conformity to a traditional moral code and liberals who advocate individual rights,’ stressing that ‘students should understand the positions of both conservatives and liberals in the 1920s.’”

Mississippi, on the other hand, is criticized for offering only “brief content outlines and mere fragments of historical specifics, arranged with little regard for chronology or coherence. Worse, students aren’t even required to learn the limited content included in these flimsy standards.”
-Noel Brinkerhoff

BucEyedPea
02-20-2011, 12:43 AM
The report praises South Carolina for emphasizing the presentation of opposing views of history. For example, “After discussing the 1925 Scopes trial, the text calls attention to the debate, then and now, ‘between social conservatives who advocate conformity to a traditional moral code and liberals who advocate individual rights,’ stressing that ‘students should understand the positions of both conservatives and liberals in the 1920s.’”


Excellent approach, imo, since history is about viewpoints and not just facts.

rrl308
02-20-2011, 01:21 AM
Excellent approach, imo, since history is about viewpoints and not just facts.

Exactly. All I know is that I wish they would have taught real history when I was in School. For example: Instead of the Civil War being about Slavery only, they left out that the fact of the other circumstances that had a part in starting that war.

SNR
02-20-2011, 01:10 PM
Where's Jenson? I posted this for him.

banyon
02-20-2011, 01:19 PM
What did we expect with standardized teaching to the test focusing on language skills and math to the exclusion of everything else?

Mr. Kotter
02-20-2011, 01:45 PM
What did we expect with standardized teaching to the test focusing on language skills and math to the exclusion of everything else?

Eh, the truth won't matter to some folks.

SNR
02-20-2011, 01:52 PM
Curiously, Texas received a D instead of an F even in spite of its misrepresentations and politicized textbooks.

From its report:

"Texas combines a rigidly thematic and theory-based social studies structure with a politicized distortion of history. The result is both unwieldy and troubling, avoiding clear historical explanation while offering misrepresentations at every turn."

banyon
02-20-2011, 01:58 PM
Curiously, Texas received a D instead of an F even in spite of its misrepresentations and politicized textbooks.

From its report:

"Texas combines a rigidly thematic and theory-based social studies structure with a politicized distortion of history. The result is both unwieldy and troubling, avoiding clear historical explanation while offering misrepresentations at every turn."

That's probably BEP's model. Have kids read a short summary of the 2,000 scholars on Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Lincoln, and then present the one or two kooks (like Thomas "Lincoln is a rapist" DiLorenzo) equally as "the other view", as if it had equal support or basis in evidence.

Rain Man
02-20-2011, 09:48 PM
I read that West Nebraska and Missibama got the highest grades for geography.

KC native
02-20-2011, 11:04 PM
Curiously, Texas received a D instead of an F even in spite of its misrepresentations and politicized textbooks.

From its report:

"Texas combines a rigidly thematic and theory-based social studies structure with a politicized distortion of history. The result is both unwieldy and troubling, avoiding clear historical explanation while offering misrepresentations at every turn."

Texas should get an F. The curriculum changes coming down the pipe are going to make it even worse.

teedubya
02-21-2011, 12:57 AM
Eh, the truth won't matter to some folks.

South Dakota... D. 3/10.
Kansas... C. 5/10
Missouri... F. 1/10 Ouch.

Chiefspants
02-21-2011, 01:25 AM
I received a four on my AP History exam last year, I was rather content with that result. I was so inspired by my experiences in that course that I am now focusing on becoming a history teacher.

Jaric
02-21-2011, 06:49 AM
Five other states—Alabama, California, Indiana, Massachusetts and New York, along with the District of Columbia—earned A-minuses.

PBJ

orange
02-21-2011, 01:35 PM
WE Earn Perfection for Colorado!

tmh
02-21-2011, 02:25 PM
Curiously, Texas received a D instead of an F even in spite of its misrepresentations and politicized textbooks.

From its report:

"Texas combines a rigidly thematic and theory-based social studies structure with a politicized distortion of history. The result is both unwieldy and troubling, avoiding clear historical explanation while offering misrepresentations at every turn."

that report most likley doesnt cover the new Texas ciriculum approved last year.

blaise
02-21-2011, 05:45 PM
Yeah, I'll take the school district my kids are part of in Texas against anything in South Carolina, thanks.

mnchiefsguy
02-21-2011, 05:47 PM
What was Wisconsin's grade? After all, those teachers are severely under compensated for their work.

Aries Walker
02-21-2011, 07:24 PM
Wisconsin: F. "Wisconsin's U.S. History standards, for all practical purposes, do not exist."

Maryland (my state): C. I'll take it!

Thig Lyfe
02-21-2011, 07:38 PM
Exactly. All I know is that I wish they would have taught real history when I was in School. For example: Instead of the Civil War being about Slavery only, they left out that the fact of the other circumstances that had a part in starting that war.

Yeah, like state's rights* and the preservation of the South's economy**.


*The state's right to keep slavery legal.
**Which relied heavily on slavery being legal.

SNR
03-14-2011, 10:23 AM
Bump

So Wisconsin not only received an F, but they received a hard F. 0/10. That's worse than most F states who got 1/10 or 2/10 sometimes

The concluding report:

"The state’s social studies “scope and sequence” guide vaguely describes what is “usually” done or “may” be done—but hardly any guidance is offered at all. Course scope is undefined, detail is nonexistent, and even the nebulous performance standards are offered for just three grade levels. This is part and parcel of the entire document: Wisconsin leaves all decisions on substance and sequence to districts and teachers. Students require specific knowledge before they can analyze or understand history, but the Wisconsin standards are happy to leave such details to others. The state seems to deride the very idea of a shared, core education as mere rote memorization. It appears to be concerned only that students somehow enrich their understanding of, and relationship with, the world. Wisconsin’s empty standards earn a zero out of three for Clarity and Specificity."

Innnnnnnnteresting.....

HonestChieffan
03-14-2011, 10:31 AM
Clear indications why young folks have such a strange view of many issues. They have not ben taught.

orange
03-14-2011, 11:23 AM
Bump

So Wisconsin not only received an F, but they received a hard F. 0/10. That's worse than most F states who got 1/10 or 2/10 sometimes

The concluding report:

"The state’s social studies “scope and sequence” guide vaguely describes what is “usually” done or “may” be done—but hardly any guidance is offered at all. Course scope is undefined, detail is nonexistent, and even the nebulous performance standards are offered for just three grade levels. This is part and parcel of the entire document: Wisconsin leaves all decisions on substance and sequence to districts and teachers. Students require specific knowledge before they can analyze or understand history, but the Wisconsin standards are happy to leave such details to others. The state seems to deride the very idea of a shared, core education as mere rote memorization. It appears to be concerned only that students somehow enrich their understanding of, and relationship with, the world. Wisconsin’s empty standards earn a zero out of three for Clarity and Specificity."

Innnnnnnnteresting.....



They gave the same score to Colorado and for the same reasons ...

.. and therein lies the dilemma. The Fordham study is as political as any other. They have a view about education that there must be hard "standards" - i.e. test answers - which is not universally held to say the least. Colorado and Wisconsin, to name two, don't adhere to it obviously.

HonestChieffan
03-14-2011, 11:27 AM
Damn standards.

Math is hard because of standards. Who made themselves God and said 2+2=4? And Who says we have to believe that Lincoln was shot? Or that The Revolution even happened?

Standards suck and mess up the creative side of education.

And Tests suck too. Just because you ask what 3 times 5 is doesn't mean on that day at that time I have to know its 15. Plus its al biased toward the smart kids.

orange
03-14-2011, 11:32 AM
"We readily acknowledge that standards, in and of themselves, do not yield student achievement. We’ve ample evidence that standards, even good standards, absent proper implementation and accountability, do little more than adorn classroom bookshelves. Academic standards are simply the recipe with which the education system cooks; educators supply and mix the essential ingredients."

ClevelandBronco
03-14-2011, 11:41 AM
"We readily acknowledge that standards, in and of themselves, do not yield student achievement. We’ve ample evidence that standards, even good standards, absent proper implementation and accountability, do little more than adorn classroom bookshelves. Academic standards are simply the recipe with which the education system cooks; educators supply and mix the essential ingredients."

Tell the teachers that I'd like fries with that quality education they're cookin' up.

Jaric
03-14-2011, 11:49 AM
Tell the teachers that I'd like fries with that quality education they're cookin' up.

Do you really want fries from people with no standards?

They'll probably be burnt to a crisp or undercooked, soggy, and oily.

HonestChieffan
03-14-2011, 11:56 AM
"We readily acknowledge that standards, in and of themselves, do not yield student achievement. We’ve ample evidence that standards, even good standards, absent proper implementation and accountability, do little more than adorn classroom bookshelves. Academic standards are simply the recipe with which the education system cooks; educators supply and mix the essential ingredients."


Far be it to expect the students to live up to even a minimum standard. God knows when they move on they wont be required to take tests or have a mastery of a subject. No business has expectations like that. And most jobs don't use math, or reading.

Just relax and let them self actualize.

mikey23545
03-14-2011, 11:58 AM
Texas should get an F. The curriculum changes coming down the pipe are going to make it even worse.

Let me guess - the history books haven't been written by liberal/progressive revisionists?

mikey23545
03-14-2011, 11:59 AM
Far be it to expect the students to live up to even a minimum standard. God knows when they move on they wont be required to take tests or have a mastery of a subject. No business has expectations like that. And most jobs don't use math, or reading.

Just relax and let them self actualize.

Well, you certainly don't have to be able to read to master a history text.

orange
03-14-2011, 12:06 PM
"We readily acknowledge that standards, in and of themselves, do not yield student achievement. We’ve ample evidence that standards, even good standards, absent proper implementation and accountability, do little more than adorn classroom bookshelves. Academic standards are simply the recipe with which the education system cooks; educators supply and mix the essential ingredients."

...

Tell the teachers that I'd like fries with that quality education they're cookin' up.

Far be it to expect the students to live up to even a minimum standard. God knows when they move on they wont be required to take tests or have a mastery of a subject. No business has expectations like that. And most jobs don't use math, or reading.

Just relax and let them self actualize.

That quote is from THE STUDY. It's the authors - standards enthusiasts - acknowledging the controversy (they go on to explain why they back standards).

Or as a wise man might have said:

They have a view about education that there must be hard "standards" - i.e. test answers - which is not universally held to say the least. Colorado and Wisconsin, to name two, don't adhere to it obviously.

HonestChieffan
03-14-2011, 12:07 PM
Well, you certainly don't have to be able to read to master a history text.

Especially if the history is written with no conclusions so students can make up their own endings to things like wars, how areas were settled, who moved where, why...and dates are just a pain no need to have dates that are hard and fast.

As long as they know somebody attacked Pearl Harbor, why does it matter who, when, why was the reason...I mean who really knows why they attacked. Its not like you can ask that guy who was like their king or head dude person.

orange
03-14-2011, 12:12 PM
Let me guess - the history books haven't been written by liberal/progressive revisionists?

As for you:

Texas combines a rigidly thematic and theory-based social studies structure with a politicized distortion of history. The result is both unwieldy and troubling, avoiding clear historical explanation while offering misrepresentations at every turn.

...

Texas has constructed a bizarre amalgam of traditionally ahistorical social studies—combining the usual inclusive, diversity-driven checklists with a string of politically and religiously motivated historical distortions. It is particularly ironic that the aggressively right-tilting Texas Board of Education embraced the mindset and methodology of social studies, traditionally the tool of a left-leaning educational establishment. The result is the worst of both worlds.


Ooops, no support there. :doh!:

orange
03-14-2011, 12:15 PM
They gave the same score to Colorado and for the same reasons ...

.. and therein lies the dilemma. The Fordham study is as political as any other. They have a view about education that there must be hard "standards" - i.e. test answers - which is not universally held to say the least. Colorado and Wisconsin, to name two, don't adhere to it obviously.

And I should add that I mean "standards from on high," i.e. the State. I imagine the CO and WI education boards would claim that they DO have specific content guidelines at lower levels, e.g. districts.

Baby Lee
03-14-2011, 12:20 PM
I see both sides of the 'standards' issue. I've known my share of folks who could tell you the capital of every state, but had no knowledge beyond simple word association.

Nevada?
That's easy, Carson City.
OK, where IS Nevada.
Ummmm.

Same could go for every concept.

Who attacked Pearl Harbor and when?
Japan, December 7, 1941.
OK, Why?
Ummmmm.

ClevelandBronco
03-14-2011, 12:55 PM
That quote is from THE STUDY. It's the authors - standards enthusiasts - acknowledging the controversy (they go on to explain why they back standards).

Please don't explain the obvious to me. I tend to become angry.