A good read...

New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes
Mark Warschauer and Tina Matuchniak
REVIEW OF RESEARCH IN EDUCATION 2010 34: 179

This article incorporates so many things that I am passionate about...improving technological incorporation, advocating student-centered learning, involving students in community to gain agency, etc...

Basic argument:

Today the digital divide resides in differential ability to use new media to critically evaluate information, analyze, and interpret data, attack complex problems, test innovative solutions, manage multifaceted projects, collaborate with others in knowl- edge production, and communicate effectively to diverse audiences—in essence, to carry out the kinds of expert thinking and complex communication that are at the heart of the new economy (Levy & Murnane, 2004). p. 213

Good suggestions for improvements discussed within article to reach these goals...

Why are teachers so angry?

Ravitch-Teachers-Wisconsin

Ravitch Follow Up

Diane Ravitch writes a response to the many responses she received from the first article she wrote.

Diane Ravitch with Jon Stewart

Kids do not come to school for test prep...

What does your PLN look like?

All the possibilities...

Maureen Downey: ‘Every child counts’ | ajc.com

Maureen Downey: ‘Every child counts’ | ajc.com

Congress is about to delve into a rewrite of the controversial No Child Left Behind law that was the signature legislation of the Bush White House.

NCLB: Change Needed

Dr. Terrie Epstein

I am very excited that I will have the opportunity to interview Dr. Terrie Epsteinin the near future. I thought I would share a review I wrote of her book Interpreting National History: Race, Identity, and Pedagogy in Classrooms and Communities.

Symposium Book Report

Jean O’Keefe

            Terrie Epstein’s Interpreting National History: Race, Identity, and Pedagogy in Classrooms and Communities advocates teaching United States History from a social justice perspective.  This paper seeks to explain the evidence and argument that Epstein presents by clearly stating the major generalizations while providing specific illustrations, discussing the persuasiveness of these arguments by looking at the validity of the evidence, and finally providing a critical assessment of the empirical findings using theoretical perspectives.

What does the author say?

The Study = The Evidence

            This book discusses the study that Epstein conducted in the 1990s of 5^th, 8^th, and 11^th, grade students, their teachers, their parents, and a working class community in Michigan that had about twenty thousand people.  Epstein sought to discover how these participants interpreted national history and how that affected their racial identities.  Epstein notes, “But history is more than just an academic subject; it is the reference point - an aspect of identity - from which people derive a sense of themselves, their communities and their place in the world” (xvii).  The author wanted to determine how history classes were developing students’ sense of themselves in their community and the world.

            Epstein retrieved this information by having students take surveys upon entrance and exit of the course.  She surveyed two fifth, two eighth, and two eleventh grade classes with a total of about sixty children all together.  She also interviewed many of these students, their parents, and their teachers, as well as people from the community.  All throughout the study, Epstein observed these classes and took part in community events.  She had a team of doctoral students that helped her collect the data.

            Epstein calls the survey she conducted a nation narration task, which is described in detail in Appendix C.  She designed this research task to elicit students “interpretive frames.”  The author did this by giving students an assortment of picture cards with captions of historical actors and events.  She asked the students to select and explain the most important.  Then she had students review this information and discuss what had and had not changed over the course.  The actors and events that were selected for the task included traditional nation building actors and events as well as African American experiences.  Lists of these actors and events can be found in Appendix A and B.  It is important to understand the students at the schools within the study that Epstein conducted were pretty evenly mixed between white and black children.  The author notes in the first chapter that she uses the term white to describe European Americans, and the term black to describe African Americans.  She uses ‘white’ and ‘black’ because they are shorter and because this is how participants most frequently referred to themselves and others.  Further elaboration of the research task and data collection can be found on p.18-19.           

            The findings from this study were quite riveting because the data revealed a racial divide.  Overall, white students perceived whites to be nation builders and perceived blacks as intermittent victims of unnamed forces.  They recognized racial inequality but not racial violence.  They believed rights are progressively inclusive and unifying.  In summary, whites identified with the nation.  Epstein found that white parents perceived national history in the same manner as their children.  They were satisfied with their children’s education and only requested that teachers add more content about the government into instruction.  On the other hand, black students perceived whites as nation builders like white students, but they also perceived them as oppressors.  They perceived blacks in history as subjects and victims.  They recognized racial inequality as well as racial violence.  These perceptions caused black children to identify with a racial identity but not a national identity.  Black parents thought the black history was limited and misrepresented in the schools and many enrolled their children in extracurricular programs in order to attain this missing cultural history.  In conclusion, whites interpreted the nation as progressively inclusive of racial diversity and rights while blacks interpreted the nation as perennially exclusive by maintaining white privilege and violence.

            The results also had implications on how racial groups perceived citizenship.  Whites took a much more individualistic approach and believed that they needed to vote and improve themselves so they could support their own families.  Blacks had a much more collective approach and desired to improve the community and society by improving themselves.  Epstein includes quotes from the children that serve as touching evidence of these perceptions. 

So how does one conceptualize all of this data?  The study is excellently and concisely summarized in the series editor’s introduction by Lee Anne Bell:

Epstein finds that students bring to the classroom an interpretive frame, developed in their families and communities, about racial groups, race relations and rights that leads them to reject information that doesn’t fit.  According to Epstein, white teachers who develop neither a critical perspective on history nor an in-depth understanding of the role race and racism have played in U.S. history tend to teach history from a perspective that generally aligns with the interpretive frame of white students but conflicts with that held by black students.  Thus, white students believe their teachers teach “everybody’s history” while black students criticize them for teaching only “white history.”

One of the surprising things to note is that students did have more information about the topics at the end of the course in June than they did in the beginning of the course in September, yet it really did not change their perceptions.  In other words, the course had little effect on their overall interpretations of U.S. history.  They learned some more content but this did not influence their interpretive frame.  This especially held true for black students that were more influenced by lessons from their families and the community.  More importantly, the absence of race and racism within the classroom and the limited and often misrepresented historical teachings about black history are problematic whether they are intended or not.  It has consequences for all students because it does not teach them how to go about eradicating inequalities that persist today.  Even teachers that had good intentions to teach from a more multicultural perspective were still teaching views of U.S. history and contemporary society that are aligned with most national and state policies and teacher pedagogies of a “democratic state which has progressively extended rights to all and racism and other forms of inequality have been overcome” (12).  Epstein talks about this in the second chapter, which is appropriately, titled “Mixed Messages and Missed Opportunities: Teachers’ Perspectives and Pedagogies on Race and Rights in U.S. History.”

The Argument = Teaching for Social Justice

            Epstein states the purpose in writing this book is to help teachers improve their educational practice by exposing positive as well as harmful ways teachers talk about race including approaches for teaching national history in ways which promote social justice.  What exactly does it mean to teach for social justice?  According to the author, teachers need to: acknowledge the role of racism in history and contemporary society throughout the curriculum, teach students to critique historical and contemporary texts, and be able to manage classroom discussions and activities about racial and other forms of privilege and oppression (4-5).  She caveats the racial discussions are challenging since this enterprise is personal and emotional.

            The last chapter of the book highlights teachers that have been successful with the social justice approach.  These examples are promising and uplifting and definitely worth reviewing.  They supply further evidence to support Epstein’s argument on the postive benefits of this approach.  The conclusion of the book that is less than two pages long is the most compelling argument to promote social justice and outlines the direction that teaching history needs to follow:

More honest discussions about racial oppression and struggle may lead students to construct more realistic views of national history and identity.  Teaching history in ways that promote the examination of the failings of the nation’s past, as well as its virtues, may better equip young people to acknowledge and understand the roots of contemporary racism and inequality, to learn about the existence and effectiveness of cross-racial alliances, and to imagine themselves and act as citizens capable of change in contemporary society.

This is truly a beneficial way to equip students to become active citizens, which has always been one of the primary goals behind teaching social studies in general.  Epstein further emphasizes that we need to move beyond state sanctioned interpretations that alienate children and move towards methods that promote more critical and participatory democratic goals (137).

How well does the author say it?

Supportive evidence?

            Epstein is continuously referring to studies throughout the book to support her arguments.  The reference section is lengthy and includes many famous education specialists that are popularly read in the social studies field such as Michael Apple, James Banks, Walter C. Parker, and Samuel Wineburg to name just a few.  The author appears very well read and knowledgeable in the field of multicultural education as well.  The first chapter of the book outlines critical background information from former studies.  She succeeds in presenting the larger political and cultural contexts, which shape the teaching and learning of history and society in and out of schools.

Aesthetics

            This book is very well organized with the appropriate use of subtitles throughout the chapters to easily guide the reader.  Each chapter connects to the last making a well developed flow, yet each can stand alone offering insight to the reader about a particular component of the study.  The layout and design are exceptional. 

Coherent and Interesting Story?

            This book is an short and easy read.  It is appropriate for an extensive audience.  It is quite the page-turner keeping the reader captivated and desiring to know more.  The research is innovative and therefore eye-opening.  While Epstein does refer to other similar studies, she claims that this is book is the first in many arenas.  First, she claims it is among the first to address parents’ beliefs about the purposes and creditability of school history.  Next, it is among the first to examine how adolescents engage in and interpret history beyond the classroom door (xi-xvii).  The stories she tells in chapter four about blacks’ participation in the community are also heart warming and worth review. Epstein hopes that researchers will continue to explore how communities outside of school influence students’ historical interpretations since there is not much research in existence on this subject.

            Unfortunately, book reviews are scare most likely because the book was recently published in 2009.  The only review I found in my research is within the Teacher’s Record that requires payment for access.

What evidence is presented in the book?

Implications & Significance

            Epstein offered these pieces of advice for teachers when she lectured at Georgia State University: First, one must recognize and respect young people’s historical interpretations.  In her conclusion, she recommends that teachers use the nation narration task that she used in her study with their own students to achieve these ends.  It would also serve as a refection tool if teachers used it at the end of their courses.  Second, teachers must recognize their own sociopolitical identities on their own interpretations of history.  She recommends that teachers perform the nation narration task themselves to become aware of their own interpretations.  Third, she recommends that teachers show differences in textbook explanations of historical actors/events across time as well as in contemporary textbooks.  Finally, teachers need to challenge students’ interpretations by introducing and discussing multiple and alternative explanations of history.  A good way to do this is to incorporate primary resource documents into study.  The author explains that teachers should not fear multiculturalism and encourages teachers to be honest with students and practice open-mindedness.

            As noted earlier, this book is significant in the fact that it reveals new research that is comparable in only a few other studies.  Epstein says that cognitive studies have not taken into account how culture has shaped young people’s historical thinking.  She explains, “Socio-cultural studies have broadened our understanding of how cultural identities like nationality, race-ethnicity or religion influence people’s interpretations of the past.”  And she concludes that these studies as well as the research in this book “demonstrate that teaching and learning history is much more than the cognitive or academic exercise about argumentation or evidence; teaching and learning are cultural and political acts in which schools promote state sanctioned knowledge and silence alternative interpretations of history and society” (6).  She hopes further socio-cultural studies will be attempted to study this further.

            Epstein specifically claims that the “findings (of her study) are significant because teachers who understand how students’ racial identities shape their historical thinking can begin to challenge the limits of students’ knowledge and beliefs and do so in ways which might be more effective than those employed by teachers in the study” (xvii).  Although I cannot even begin to express how immensely important I think Epstein’s information will be in my future classes, I know only certain people will agree with its value.            

Early in the book (12-15), Epstein writes about the various perspectives of social studies education in which she explains purposes and rationales in teaching history.  These can be linked to the broader purposes and rationales or theories that exist about what schools should teach and why.  The author defines the nationalist perspective, the disciplinary perspective, the participatory perspective, and the critical perspective.  She notes, “The various approaches to social studies education have different implications for the teaching of history and promotion of citizenship, and the latter two promote teaching for social justice” (15).  The nationalistic perspective serves a functionalist theory promoted by people that are satisfied with society and desire to maintain the status quo.  This is the dominant way of teaching history today appropriated by state and national policies that teachers are often hesitant to be critical about because of the fear of job security.  The participatory perspective as well as the critical are linked to critical race theory.  In laymen’s terms, if you do not buy into the camp of critical theory and believe that education should promote change, then you most likely will not buy into Epstein’s teaching history for social justice.  I argue along the lines with Epstein that teaching for social justice is necessary in our multicultural democracy:

If national history in the twenty-first century is to have a positive and educative effect on all of the nation’s young, history teachers, policy makers and researchers need to address more directly and deeply the relationships among young people’s social identities, the roles of racism and inequality in national history and life, and contemporary aims of citizenship education in a multicultural society. 

On a personal note, this book has deeply inspired me as a teacher and researcher. 

I can only hope that I may contribute to this body of research and will always strive to teach for social justice.

Epstein, T. (2009).  Interpreting National History: Race, Identity, and Pedagogy in

Classrooms and Communities.  New York: Routledge.