|
|
|
The Wisconsin Collaborative United States History Professional Development Program
Dorothy Zeisler-Vralsted, Project Director
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
|
A FIFTY MILLION DOLLAR GRANT PROGRAM for history education was announced by the United States Department of Education in April 2001. To many of us in the profession it was almost inconceivable that the study of history would receive such generous funding. While we as historians were convinced of the merits of improved history education, we had to ask what were the motivations behind the program? Congress was allocating all the resources: what were the planned outcomes? Even assuming that the objectives included historical literacy and cultivating a historical perspective, how would the nation be better served? In other words, what would be the impact of a more historically conscious generation upon American society? |
1
|
|
On a practical level, however, the grant guidelines seemed to respond to a serious need in the State of Wisconsin, in that history teachers only needed three history courses for certification to teach middle and high school level history. Our proposal, "The Wisconsin Collaborative United States History Professional Development Program," was successful and represents an effort to address the lack of content preparation with professional development opportunities through the development of K-16 collaborations led by the National Council for History Education (NCHE). The major components of the grant include one pre-colloquia assessment; three, five-day summer colloquia; six, two-day follow-up retreats (two each year); e-mail discussions; and a website—all aimed at improving the knowledge of American history among participating K-12 teachers. Underlying these measurable goals are more abstract objectives, such as the further development of historical empathy, applying a historical perspective in the classroom, and the improvement of critical thinking skills. |
2
|
|
Most of the participants in the grant teach in rural and semi-rural areas in northern and western Wisconsin. Both target regions exhibit numerous factors that put students at risk for educational failure, including low academic test scores, low community education levels, poverty, limited English proficiency students and parents, and large Native American and Hmong populations. (Even with these great needs, funding for content-based professional development has been almost non-existent.) The schools involved are from the school district of La Crosse (with two high schools and three middle schools) and the Cooperative Educational Service Agency (CESA 12) that serves eighteen rural schools in northern Wisconsin. A total of twenty-three public high school and middle school teachers are involved. At the university level, eight historians from the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse and the University of Wisconsin-Superior (serving the CESA 12 region) will participate in all grant activities. One professor from the School of Education, UW-La Crosse, teaches history and social studies methods. |
3
|
|
In addition to responding to a need for content—in one instance, one of the high school history teachers had taken only one college-level history course, and the mean for all of the teachers was three post-secondary history courses—the grant also offers a venue for collaboration between university faculty and public school teachers. Rarely do university historians interact with practicing teachers. Yet current literature on teacher education emphasizes the need for mastery in the academic discipline to ensure student proficiency, and staying current with the literature of the discipline through greater communication between professors and K-12 teachers is one approach to this mastery. Recognizing this, one of the subsidiary goals of the grant is to foster collaboration between practicing K-12 history teachers and the university faculty who will be charged with preparing the history teachers of the future. After the grant period, it is hoped that these learning communities or cohorts of historians and teachers will be sustained. Research demonstrates that cohort models are highly effective in building community, connections, support and networking. |
4
|
|
The professional development activities that have been selected to increase content knowledge are three five-day summer colloquia led by the NCHE. These colloquia are the centerpiece of the grant and will allow the participants to steep themselves in the subject matter. Each of the three colloquia follows one of NCHE's eight strands for a successful history curriculum and reflects an attempt to cover the entire chronology of Euro-American history beginning with the colonial period. The first colloquium, which was held in June 2002, was entitled "Colonial and Revolutionary Thought." In addition to the NCHE team of facilitator, education specialist, and master teacher, noted historian Gary Nash led discussions on colonial history. For the second year, the theme will be "Different Voices" which will be an examination of United States history in the late 19th and early 20th centuries with an emphasis on the different cultures and people that began to populate and influence American society. Discussion will include immigrant groups along with the growing political and social presence of women, African-Americans, and Hispanics. Again, a NCHE team will lead the colloquium, and Eric Foner will serve as the principal historian. The theme for the final year will be "The Major Successes and Failures of the United States in the 20th Century" with Gordon Wood as the main historian. This colloquium will focus on major events of the 20th century such as two world wars and the Cold War. Wood will compare 20th century American political ideology to the ideals of the Founding Fathers. Participants will examine how Americans describe their successes and failures and whether the United States has realized the promise of a democracy. |
5
|
|
During the colloquia, participants will also visit local historical societies and museums. These activities will strengthen the participants' historical understanding by providing a regional component. For example, during the first year when historian Gary Nash discussed colonial settlements in New England and Chesapeake Society, participants spent an afternoon at the Madeline Island Historical Society and learned about the work of the French voyageurs in exploring and settling the Great Lakes region. Visits to local historical societies and museums will also familiarize the participants with regional primary sources. |
6
|
|
The second major part of the grant is the six, two-day retreats (two a year) that follow the summer colloquia. During the retreats, the participants will engage in further discussion of the material they read during the summer or prepare for the next colloquium. For the first retreat which was held in September 2002, colonial and women's historian, Mary Beth Norton, and a NCHE team of master teacher and facilitator came to La Crosse. All of the participants were present while Norton discussed areas of the colonial experience not covered by Gary Nash. Her presentation was rich in content and participants gained from the experience, building as it did on the knowledge provided by Nash while also offering new perspectives on America's colonial past. The NCHE master teacher added to Norton's expertise and offered teaching strategies for incorporating primary sources when teaching about this era. |
7
|
|
As for the other follow-up retreats, those in the spring will serve as introductions to the next summer colloquia, with the April 2003 retreat in La Crosse scheduled for a reenactment of a Civil War encampment followed by a one-day conference on war and memory. Agendas for the remaining four retreats have yet to be determined. We realize that if there is one area in which the grant proposal could have been refined, it is that we failed to realize the full potential of the retreats. Only the first retreat included all of the participants. The other five are scheduled to be held in two parts in the CESA 12 and La Crosse regions. By not meeting as a whole we fear that the participants will miss the opportunity for developing a larger learning community. The rationale, however, for the regional retreats was to foster greater collaboration with the local historians and teachers. |
8
|
|
Although the themes and content areas were pre-selected for the colloquia and first follow-up retreat, a pre-colloquium assessment with NCHE and La Crosse and CESA 12 curriculum specialists was held to design professional development activities to align with the Wisconsin history standards. Thus, throughout the colloquia and retreats, NCHE presenters will be aware of the Wisconsin standards and work to include curriculum material that will assist teachers in addressing the standards. One of the hoped-for outcomes of the grant is improved performance by students in participating schools on the social studies Wisconsin State Assessment System tests based on the standards. |
9
|
|
A final component of the grant is the creation and use of a website along with e-mail discussions to further encourage the collaboration of faculty and teachers. Developed for use as a resource site, the website has numerous links to sites that have primary sources or forums that are discussing pertinent topics. Although its use is increasing, the website is underutilized; yet it is the only means to sustain e-mail discussion led by the director among all of the participants outside of the colloquia and retreats. At present, the technology for discussions is similar to a listserv but by the third year of the grant, Blackboard will be introduced which will not only streamline discussion but offer the participants another use of technology for their classrooms. |
10
|
|
Having given this general outline of the grant activities, the inner workings and group dynamics of the first colloquium and retreat will now be reviewed. One of the most striking features of the 2002 summer colloquium was the strong sense of collegiality displayed. Sam Wineburg, the well-known scholar of history education and evaluator of the grant, commented on the lack of status differences. In his evaluation of the summer colloquium, he stated, "For whatever reason...an atmosphere of camaraderie and bonhomie prevailed. This is an accomplishment in itself, a valuable foundation upon which further work can build." Contributing to the camaraderie and success of the first colloquium was the physical location. The colloquium was held in a semi-remote, resort type setting where the participants were removed from their daily routines. The setting allowed for a week devoted to intellectual inquiry during which even in the evenings many of the participants met for dinner and continued earlier discussions. Reinforcing the sense of collegiality was NCHE with its team and particularly its choice of major historian, Gary Nash. While the UW La-Crosse and UW-Superior historians were familiar with his work, his depth of knowledge and his low-key manner of delivery impressed all of the participants. Further, he was accessible to all, welcomed questions, and encouraged discussions. After his presentations, he stayed with the group for the remainder of the day, taking part in the other activities. But his most outstanding contribution was his accessibility to all the participants throughout the colloquium. He established equality among the participants, challenging any status differences, and furthering the creation of a learning community. Other members of the NCHE team also contributed to this sense of equal partnership by mixing up the participants for group activities and ensuring comments from all members. |
11
|
|
Nowhere did these group dynamics become more apparent, however, than in the discussion concerning the NCHE "Habits of the Mind." More specifically, the topic asked the participants to focus on "the significance of the past to their own lives, both private and public, and to their society." Discussion occurred in small groups comprised of professors and teachers. Significant for several reasons, the intimacy of the small groups, combined with a topic that prompted introspection and lively engagement, dissolved any reticence on the part of the participants. The activity revealed the need for instructors to reflect upon their discipline and to rediscover why they believe history is important. Comments ranged from how students benefited from historical knowledge and the universality of emotions in the human experience to the pragmatic aspects of instructing diverse student populations. In large part, due to the skill of the moderator who was not intrusive, differences in status were non-existent in this session. Participants worked together to find a meaning in historical knowledge and to realize how to convey this to their students. A learning community of fellow teachers was evident along with a need for further reflection concerning the discipline. The evaluator also observed this small group discussion and commented on "teachers' hunger for discussions of this sort" and "how valuable they are in workshops of this sort." Again, the larger question was what would be the end result of this increased historical perspective on the part of these more-engaged teachers? |
12
|
|
Paralleling this aspect of the colloquium was the level of content that each participant acquired. With the exception of one historian, whose research was in colonial history, everyone left with a new understanding of colonial history. There were a few surprises such as when Gary Nash reviewed the trial of Anne Hutchinson and one of her disciples, Mary Dyer. He revealed a tradition of religious fanaticism in colonial America that many would not have recognized. Less than a year after September 11th, the comparison was inevitable—religious fanaticism was not unique to the Arab world. Mary Dyer, for example, was willing to lose her life for a religious principle that today seems unimportant. Further, in Nash's discussion of the Puritans, participants learned of the pervasiveness of religion in early New England society and how it controlled all aspects of Puritan lives, ranging from the selection of children's names to business practices. Often recounted in a story-telling format, the information provided participants will be relevant to their classroom teaching and help students to better understand the world in which they live. |
13
|
|
But the Hutchinson and Dyer episodes were also instructive in revealing how history is written. Throughout American history, Hutchinson and the Puritan community's response to her has undergone several interpretations. Initially placed within the broader context of Puritan history, her place in history has recently been of interest to scholars of gender in early America. These changing perspectives reveal more about the eras in which they were written than the incident itself and show the dynamism of the discipline. For many of the teachers with a background of only a few history courses, this new perspective enlivened the discipline in a way that subsequently will be communicated to their students. |
14
|
|
Building on the content of the summer colloquium was the fall 2002 retreat, also led by NCHE. At the retreat, principal historian Mary Beth Norton introduced participants to more colonial era history. In her presentations, she complemented Nash's earlier sessions by stressing the role of women and other topics, including the far-reaching consequences of the slave trade and the role of disease. With the foundation that Nash provided, Norton's material enriched the colonial era for the participants. In addition, she reviewed her most recent book In the Devil's Snare: The Salem Witchcraft Crisis of 1692, and showed how her interpretation of the Salem witch trials challenged earlier conclusions of historians. Coinciding with this publication, Norton's revised United States history textbook will also offer a new look at the extensive influence of the slave trade because she presents a convincing argument that the New England economy was as closely bound to the institution of slavery as that of the American South. Again, the participants were reminded of history's fluidity as each of the principal historians, with years of working at their craft, exposed the richness of changing historical interpretations. |
15
|
|
Adding to the cumulative effect being realized in content was an increasingly sophisticated methodology. Juxtaposed with the content building was a growing refinement of how to introduce complex historical concepts. Always working within the NCHE framework of "Vital Themes" and "Habits of Mind," Betty Franks, the NCHE master teacher for the retreat, familiarized participants with strategies that posed the big questions. For example, through the use of primary sources Franks reviewed the Louisiana Purchase. First, she revealed how each source inferred different reasons for the United States to purchase the territory. Second, while providing various primary sources, she helped place the historical facts in a broader context. Thus, for the Louisiana Purchase, she showed how a student might view a primary source with either a military or a scientific perspective, revealing that the purchase was a product of several influences. She also suggested that students might study an event like this looking for alternatives and the long-range and short-range consequences of each action. Students would thus learn that history is not fixed and that instead there were many choices. Practice in doing this would offer valuable problem solving skills that students could apply in their personal lives. |
16
|
|
After exercises such as these, the participants not only possessed a greater depth and breadth of knowledge about colonial history but also appreciated the interconnectedness of historical events. Through presentations led by Norton, Nash, and the NCHE team, participants were led to recognize the multifaceted richness of history. For example when Norton discussed the slave trade she reviewed how New England merchants were an integral part of this heinous practice because they were the middlemen for several of the triangular slave trade products. This level of understanding is only possible when an expert in the field discusses the subject matter. |
17
|
|
The mix of master teacher and principal historians by NCHE proved to be an effective model because the participants not only mastered the content of an era but also learned strategies to introduce the material into their classrooms. In addition, the NCHE team with its belief in the importance of primary sources, also revealed the multidimensional aspects of history. Yet always keeping in mind the prospective audience of students, master teachers such as Franks urged the instructors to use stories in recounting the past in order to recapture the idea of a "dramatic moment in history." |
18
|
|
Finally, both the colloquium and retreat included a session during which the principal historian was interviewed. Each time a NCHE team member asked Nash and Norton questions that ranged from why they chose a career in history to what influenced them to study colonial history. The relaxed and informal nature of the interviews put participants at ease and encouraged a climate of open discussion. Further, the interviews revealed the commitment and passion each historian felt toward his/her subject. Their enthusiasm for history was infectious and the interviews were an ideal initial activity. |
19
|
|
In reviewing the NCHE-led colloquium and retreat, the benefits to the teachers in grades 6-12 who had had few university history courses are obvious. However, the post-secondary teachers not only learned new content and attained a greater mastery of colonial history, but also experienced other less tangible benefits. One of the more significant returns for the college faculty was in learning what their colleagues taught in the high schools and their teaching methodologies. For university instructors, freshman survey courses are often the most challenging. With little communication between university and high school teachers, post-secondary faculty have limited knowledge of how history is presented at the high school level. As a result, students arrive in college classes that frequently use a lecture format, with the professor assuming a certain level of historical literacy. Yet oftentimes the student has learned through more active formats such as in-class simulations and small group discussions. Methods of learning aside, however, there is a more general problem revealed by national tests. For instance, in 1994, the National Assessment of Education Progress in United States History found that only a dismal eleven percent of American 12th graders were "proficient" in United States history, a level of achievement defined as representing "solid performance and demonstrated competence over challenging subject matter." In 2001, a similar test, the National Assessment of Education Progress displayed the same dismal test scores. |
20
|
|
One approach to improving the test scores, and ultimately the level of competence at the college freshmen level, is for increased communication between the university and high school faculty. Because this poor showing in history might be attributed in part to the lack of historical background on the part of secondary school teachers, the establishment of a learning community among instructors at both levels could improve this situation. At a minimum, by learning what is being taught at the secondary level, college instructors could have more accurate expectations of the student's level of historical understanding. Further, by interacting with their colleagues at the secondary level, college faculty can learn what teaching strategies work best for eighteen- and nineteen-year olds. As a result, the retention rate for the freshmen class should also rise, an important indicator of a university's overall performance. |
21
|
|
Finally in reviewing outcomes, one session of the colloquium always comes to mind—the small group discussion regarding American identity and its relevance to students' lives. The session was remarkable not only because of the reactions of the participants in that all showed the need for introspection and reflection, but also because it revealed what the humanities do best. In this discussion, people were given time to be thoughtful and think critically, a rare commodity in today's world. But when given the chance to think critically, people usually make better decisions, and better decision-makers mean better citizens. |
22
|
| | |
Looking Ahead | |
|
Despite the first year's successes, however, there have been shortcomings in the "Wisconsin Collaborative United States History Professional Development Program." One of the major disappointments has been a failure to sustain a dialogue among the participants outside the colloquium and retreat. When first designing the grant the mechanism for maintaining continued discussion was to be technology, such as e-mail at first, graduating to the use of Blackboard. While the listserv approach has been used for bi-monthly discussions, so far the number of respondents remains small. The goal of the listserv, namely to provide a forum to maintain the level of dialogue that was present at the colloquium and retreat, has not been realized. One of the goals of the project director is to implement Blackboard discussions by the third year of the grant with the hopes that the technology will also be used in participants' classrooms. We will also want to evaluate how and to what extent the materials, whether primary source documents or suggested methodologies, have been integrated into the classroom. Another future topic will center on the books provided to all of the participants. One of the most appreciated features of the grant is the library allowance. Each year a book allowance has been built into the budget and by buying in bulk, the project director has been able to purchase twelve books on the colonial and early national period for each participant. Every year the participants will receive works that examine the chronological period that they are studying. But perhaps the best part of the library is the texts written by the principal historians who lead the colloquia and retreats. (Both Nash and Norton were gracious authors and stayed after their sessions to autograph their books.) |
23
|
|
A shortcoming related to the earlier one regarding the use of technology, is the absence of technology instruction. During the first colloquium one half-day session could have been devoted to the use of technology with instructions on how to use e-mail (later Blackboard) and other technologies for discussion purposes. If the participants used the technology in their individual classrooms, they might be more receptive to using it among themselves. But this flaw is small compared to the overall success of the first year. |
24
|
|
In conclusion, we believe that at the end of the three-year grant period several outcomes will be achieved. First, the participating teachers will have the equivalent of at least a minor in history. Second, the project will create a cohort model because the same teachers and historians will work together throughout the grant. In addition, the project director hopes to see another level of outcomes involving content. The "Teaching American History Grant Program" is a response to the lack of content-driven curricula in teacher education and history in particular. Within the public schools the discipline of history is subsumed under the heading of "broad field social studies." Without a distinct niche within the curriculum, students graduate from public schools with no clear understanding of their national past or the skills necessary to develop a historical perspective when assessing their contemporary world. After a three-year immersion in the discipline, however, teachers will not only acquire an expertise in United States history but also a commitment to teaching historical skills and perspectives and a desire to act as advocates for the study of history as a separate discipline. In contrast to the earlier more specific outcomes, these last outcomes will not be easily measurable but perhaps will be the most important. |
25
|
|
Given that the "Teaching American History Grant Program" has received funding for at least the next four years, it is interesting to ask what the result of a generation of students well schooled in United States history will be. During the Cold War era and after the success of Sputnik, Americans and their representatives saw the need for increased science and math education in the school curriculum. In many instances, the results were measurable with student test scores improving and a vigorous space program. In comparison, even though the first "Teaching American History Grant Program" was funded before September 11th, it is worth asking if the tragedy of that day has convinced Americans of the importance of knowing their past. Has September 11th prompted the search for a coherent national identity rooted in the American past? Or is there recognition that in order to become global citizens, one needs to understand the complexity of the past? And in studying the past will the student see the universality of the human experience and develop a historical empathy for other cultures? Will students realize that for every decision that was made, there were alternatives, and that every historical episode is rich in layers of causes and consequences? For our part, we see the "Teaching American History Grant Program" as providing historians a unique opportunity to convince others of the importance of the discipline. If the next generation of students is truly historically literate, the rewards will be multiple. |
26
|
|
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|