Should Social Studies be studied separately and other related fields and not as an integrated curriculum?

Introduction

It is postulated by Pistill (2012) that Social Studies should be studied separately in form of Geography, Economics, History, Political Science and other related fields and not as an integrated curriculum. The status quo and traditional approach to teaching and learning of social studies is through an integrated approach, which is questioned by the afore stated assertion. The assertion may just be propagated by radical thinkers, exams, jobs becoming specialized, revolutionists and evolutionists in education circles who may otherwise be positively or negatively advised by research, personal experiences, experimentation and the natural need for change (Gleeson & Whitty, 1976; Lawton & Dufour, 1973). However, it is the stern position of this essay that studying social studies in its current integrated approach serves the purpose than it would be when studied separately.

Considering that there is an ongoing assault on social studies (Singer, 2014) this essay will initially argue against this assertion by; shedding some light on what social studies is, what it purports to do, integration or interdisciplinary approach, international and African position and timeline on integration and lastly advance the associative arguments undergirding the position of this essay that social studies should not be independent of the disciplines it has traditionally partnered with in pursuit of its goals.

Social studies and its inherent goal

According to Salia-Bao (1990) the meaning of social studies differs from one country to another depending on how they view it and what they hope to achieve by teaching it. Albeit the differences suggested above, it is generally construed as an integrated, interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary course of the study of the social sciences and humanities to promote civic competence and help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions as citizens of culturally diverse, democratic society in an inter dependent world (Adeyemi as cited in Adeyemi, 2010; National Council of the Social Studies, 1992). It does so within the auspices of History, Geography, Economics, Civics and Anthropology as well as the arts (Department of Curriculum Development & Evaluation, 2010; Department of Curriculum Development & Evaluation, 1990; Salia-Bao, 1990). Its origins are traced to the United States of America where the term was first used (Okoth & Ndaloh, 2008), the chief goal of which is citizenship education (Boadu, 2013; Crick, 1998; Kerr, 1999) and as such every possible subject is used to help towards this goal in an integrated and interdisciplinary approach (Kotchhar, 1984).

Integration or interdisciplinary approach

In differentiating between the two, literature is inconsistent with concepts like integrated, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary often confusing, resulting in educators misconstruing them as interchangeable (Lintner, 2013). On the one hand, through the interdisciplinary approach some people view social studies as a subject that borrows ideas and concepts from other disciplines to clarify issues because one discipline may not be sufficient to explain a phenomena (Adeyemi as cited in Adeyemi, 2010). With integration or interdisciplinary approach, the curriculum is organized around common learning disciplines across the curriculum. It is imperative to make sure that connections and organization are congruent to real life situations, and are skill and knowledge based (Drake & Burns, 2004). In addition Forgarty and Stoehr (1991) allude that the patterns and designs of integration should use the basic elements of each discipline matching subjects for overlaps in topics and concepts. Thus (Hargreaves & More; Parker as cited in Holloway & Chiodo, 2009) emphasise that the curriculum then becomes more meaningful in the lives of the students and integration advances the relevance of classroom learning. Be that as it may, the common denominator here is that facts, generalization, concepts and disciplines are interwoven in the social studies.

International position and timeline on social studies integration

It is globally construed that social studies curriculum is composed of discrete subject areas, with a primary focus on history and to a lesser degree, Geography and Civics completing the triumvirate. The 1893 Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary School Studies advocated for an interdisciplinary approach in the social sciences. By 1916, the National Education Association (NEA) on the social studies propelled an interdisciplinary course of instruction based on the social studies. When the NEA 1916 established social studies as the name of the content area, it presented the scope and sequence that is still in use to date. The 1918 Cardinal Principles on Secondary Education would have the main aim of social studies as cultivation of good citizens. The afore developments were thus the continued mission and vision of the National Council of the Social Studies (NCSS) upon its formation in 1921 (Okoth & Ndaloh, 2008; Womack, 1966; www.stateuniversity.com). The above shows that social studies timeline internationally has evolved and seen much debates in its pursuit for good citizenship.

African position and timeline on social studies integration

The African Social Studies Program (ASSP) was unitedly formed by African countries in 1967, about four decades after the global social studies watchdog, the National Council of the Social Studies (NCSS) was established. In the long run it changed to the acronym ASSEP because it had added the environmental education component (Adeyemi, 2010). According to Munyandi-Mutebi (as cited in African Social Studies Program, 1984) the fledging organization wanted to promote curriculum development, research and development of new materials. By the late 1960s, new approaches to the colonially inherited History and Geography courses became known in Africa as Social Studies (Merryfeild, 1988). The Mombasa Conference of August 1968 which was preceded by the formation of the ASSP in 1967 the previous year consisting of African educators, British and American representatives concluded that a new approach based on integration of the traditional subjects (History, Geography & Civics) and some elements from Economics, Sociology and Anthropology was needed (Adeyemi as cited in Jotia & Matlale, 2011). According to Barth (1994) the NCSS upped the African social studies momentum by providing support in terms of expertise. He describes the turning point as the hosting of Third International Social Studies Conference on African soil. It has to realised here, that African social studies timeline is short when put on scale with the international one simply because it is an imported course of study.

Associative arguments undergirding social studies integration

Authors Kottler and Gallavan (2008) see social studies “…beginning as a river and the contributing disciplines as the streams that flow into the river. The river grows deeper and stronger as more streams (the contributing arts and humanities) make the integrated curriculum. Social studies therefore becomes the ocean…” (p.27). This part of the discussion departs by restating the essay position that social studies should be left as it is in terms of being taught as an independent discipline. It does so by reading between the lines of the thematic strands that have stood the times in pursuit of good citizenship education. Herczog (2010) list the following guiding strands for social studies curriculum;

·         people, places and environment

·         time, continuity and change

·         individual development and identity

·         individuals, groups and institutions

·         power, authority and governance

·         production, distribution and consumption

·         science, technology and society

·         global connection

·         civic ideals and practices

It is common within social studies that the above are adopted and incorporated into the curriculum by countries around the world. They should as a matter of procedure be taught in a spiral form (from the known to the unknown) and or increasing the scope and depth as standards go up yearly (Department of Curriculum Development & Evaluation, 2005; Department of Curriculum Development & Evaluation, 1990; Kochhar, 1984). The issue of scope and depth essentially provides a sense of direction to the adopted integrated teaching and learning of social studies. It in this view, that, this essay struggles to envisage the future teaching of social studies independent of these strands which are embedded within the various disciplines that make up social studies. Whitson (2003) sarcastically refers to social studies in this manner as an amalgam of subjects which will die a natural death in the future since cynical voices are beginning to strike the higher chords for people to wake up whilst Evans (2004) cynically sees it as an omnibus course of study. In spite of the sarcasm, it has to be reiterated that making social studies independent of these disciplines is akin to flushing it down the black hole. This analogy is used here to imply that social studies will be left with nothing but very little to teach with regards to the subject matter.

Undeniably, counter statements may be made contrary to the above, for example, it could be argued concepts like citizenship education and nation building can provide the perfect content for social studies when explored in depth in the event that it is taught separately. Contrariwise, it becomes almost impossible to teach for citizenship without paying visit to the knowledge of politics, economics and governance as sources of social studies content. Statements undergirding the independent teaching of the subject are deficient of and indeed disregarding the knowledge bases of the teacher like pedagogical content knowledge which are the weapons of the teaching cadre (Cogil, 2008; Shulman, 1986; Turner-Bisset, 1999)

One particular counter statement that should otherwise have preceded the above is the assertion that social studies as a combination of different disciplines is narrow and shallow. Oats (2014) boldly posit that “the content of different disciplines in social studies do not deeply expose learners to meaningful contexts and are relatively fragmented facts and generalizations” (p.42). The essay would like to, on the rebound, hasten that this should not be the dismissing factor of social studies integrated approach but rather as suggested by (Kerr & Cleaver cited in Oats, 2014) opposite views should be seen as part of the continuum not a mutually exclusive position in its entirety. Thus, in short, fragmentation coexists with some integration (Strauss, 1997) implying that the suggested fragments of the social studies are better off integrated than when social studies is left to stand in isolation. As observed by Schug and Cross (as cited in Lintner, 2013) the ten themes of social studies purposefully integrate science, technology, global connections, civic ideals and practices. In fostering cross disciplinary integration, the NCSS sent the message that its standards play down separate social studies disciplines and play up curriculum integration thus further dismissing the teaching of social studies as an independent subject.

Ferlazzo (2012) presents an interesting anecdote saying that educators should push their teaching beyond the traditional peripheries of our discipline to show that social studies is rightly positioned as an integrated subject. He state that there are pressing issues facing mankind like climate change which teachers somewhat feel belongs to scientists and are extra-terrestrial to social studies. However, the social impact, mitigation proposals and ultimately how we can create a habitable world of sanity are social studies issues, albeit being marginalized by those who dismiss the integrated approach of our beloved subject. This further reinforces the notion put forward by this essay that social studies is better placed in its integrated nature. To drive the argument home Kirby-Gonzalez (as cited in Ferlazzo, 2012) as a matter of diplomacy states “we need a little help from our friends” implying the disciplines undergirding social studies. Thus a foundation for the future citizens and social studies requires concepts from other disciplines lest we render the foundation weak if it is to stands alone.

It is the view of this essay that social studies should be left to sit comfortably on the chair with its integration hat on. To be precise, stripping social studies off disciplines like Politics will be injustice to the young citizenry who need political knowledge from a young age. According to Michaels, Michaels and Michaels (as cited in Ajiboye, 2009) who use Botswana as an example,  propose that children should typically be introduced to the constitution as part of the social studies curriculum at an early age. This is an important movement because the constitution is the citizens’ handbook and the governments book of agreement. The same should be extended to other countries such that good citizens are seen as knowledgeable about government processes (Dube & Moffat, 2009). Moreover, if Politics were to be adrift of social studies, those unfortunate learners who would for whatever reason fail to cross the bridge to the next level of education besides elementary or primary levels where Politics may be an independent subject will be left in the darkness of political illetracy. The fact that they will eventually attain full citizenship status as grown-ups means they need political knowledge otherwise we risk having a politically illiterate group of young failures especially those in the peripheries occupied by the minority.  The sovereignty of countries and dominance of democracy as a form of governance globally needs social studies and political knowledge (Barth, 1994).

According to the Department of Curriculum Development and Evaluation (2010) it is vital to include national issues like road safety, citizen economic empowerment, civic and voter education, globalization, rights and responsibilities into the syllabus. Looking at the above examples, their inclusion in social studies shows the integrated nature of the subject. They are important elements synonymous with citizenship education which is the chief goal of social studies (Ajiboye, 2009) and are borrowed from other disciplines to make up social studies. Welton (2005) caution that “not every child will become an engineer, doctor, or a scientist, but everyone will become a citizen, it is an office that everyone of us occupies” (p.5). It is the view of this essay that scrapping off these disciplines from social studies defeats its very purpose of citizenship attainment. Unless or otherwise those proposing for independence of the subject from other disciplines have a different overarching goal of the subject besides the current one. In fact, it is fundamental to see social studies as a field of study whose existence axis on its interdisciplinary and integrated nature (Banks & Martorella as cited in Owen, 1997).

In describing the role of social studies in the changing society, Merryfeild (1988) assert that the ASSP Conference articulated three areas where the subject could make a contribution; national integration, economic development and the promotion of self-confidence and initiative based on understanding of ones’ own worth and of the essential dignity of man. What then becomes relevant to this discussion in support of an integrated social studies is “national integration and economic development”. Arguing that the afore conference was African in origin and therefore not relative to the world is neither here nor there, the point is, what happens in one part of the world has the inherent potential to influence the global village whether positive or negative. National integration through an integrated social studies curriculum is not such a bad idea that can be dismissed. Moreover, for countries to prosper, especially in Africa, there is a greater need for economic development as suggested at the conference implying that knowledge of Economics is crucial to citizenship education as the overriding purpose of social studies.

There is a reflex shortage of social studies subject specialists in Botswana (Jotia & Matlale, 2011) and worldwide too. This is also relative to other disciplines like Geography and History (Starkey, 2000). Thus, the argument that social studies should be taught as a separate subject does not hold water for this essay because the initiative will be faced with manpower shortage even before implementing agents hit the ground running if the initiative is to be adopted. Within this shortcoming, there is also the unfortunate scenario wherein the subject is taught by generalist teachers and not specialists. Scholarly reflections have shown that Historians and Geographers are not trained to handle vast subjects like social studies prompting the propagation of calls for the subject to be taught separately out of desperation and desire to be seen at the fore in education circles (Lawton & Dufour, 1973). Shifting to teaching the subject in isolation hiding behind the rhetoric that educators possess insufficient knowledge of the contributing disciplines like Economics and dismissing it as lacking depth and cohesion (Oats, 2014) will not solve the puzzle. There is already a concern that the products of teacher institutions are lacking in some respects like citizenship, multicultural and global education (Mhlauli, 2011) hence calls for the review of teacher education programs (Hillburn & Maguth, 2014). It is against this backdrop that, this essay feels the problem here is not with teaching social studies separately but an organizational matter of policy and program review (Gleeson & Whitty, 1976) to restore the faith of people in the subject which is however at an all-time low (Tlou, O’Mara & Mautle, 1989).

According to DCDE (1990) “social studies was created to integrate knowledge not fragment it. We do not face life problems as sociologists or historians. Rather, we face them as citizens who have to take into consideration all of the knowledge that we have so that we might live effective lives” (p.3). The point of contention here is that, we do not live fragmented lives as human beings, but live an integrated kind of life. It is in this sense that social studies integrated and interdisciplinary approach prepares citizens for an integrated life than fragmented one which is found within the arguments of those proposing for the teaching of the social studies as a separated subject. Besides, we live in an interconnected global world than fragmented cohorts of nations and people.

It has emerged from discussion herein that, arguably, no other discipline has the innate pressure to integrate than social studies. On the other hand, it has been marginalized and suffers credibility crisis thus being pushed further to the proverbial back burner of educational importance. Yet, regardless of perspective or position, remains ripe for integration (Lintner, 2013). The subject has been credited with its integrated approach of borrowing from other disciplines that, each of them share a common identification and use of research guidelines, principles and generalizations and hypotheses (Womack, 1966). In lieu of the above, Lintner (2013) reiterate that “ social studies is never singular, it seeks the rich plurality of the perspectives, the purposeful interplay between content areas and the guiding belief that more is better” (p.12). Further, plaudits are found in the outstanding assets of integration that students develop the ability to use great and unavoidable interrelationships in the socials sciences into creating a single body of content needed to accomplish the purposes of social studies (Costley, 2015; Whitson, 2003; Womack, 1966). Besides, guest speakers can always be invited in the event that educators have problems (Ferlazzo, 2012).

Conclusion

It is claimed that social studies may not exist in the future in light of efforts to establish separate subjects (Whitson, 2003) and cynic analogies that integration is akin to squeezing a lemon wherein the juice is removed and only the useless rind and fibres remain (Lawton & Dufour, 1973). It is the opinion of this essay that the above is immaterial and social studies as integrated subject should never be thought of under auspices and pretext of being studied as a separate subject. This essay has consistently and tersely argued against the isolation of social studies from the social sciences citing among others the importance of integrating knowledge of other disciplines to citizenship education which is the sole purpose of social studies and the guiding thematic strands being intertwined. Good social studies pulls not just from its core, but from all other complimentary disciplines and in doing so, creates an interrelated and interdependent web of presentation and practice (Lintner, 2013). Hence the position adopted by this essay that social studies should not be studied separately in the form of Geography, Economics, History, Political Science and other related fields.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Adeyemi, B. M. (October, 2010). Social studies as pedagogy for effective citizenship. An inaugural             lecture delivered at the University of Botswana. Centre for Continuing Education (CCE). University of Botswana.

African Social Studies Programme. (March, 1985). Report on the seminar of the coordinating      committee of the ASSP. Nairobi, Kenya.

Ajiboye, J. O. (2009). Beyond cognitive evaluation in primary schools in Botswana: Issues and    challenges. Journal of Social Sciences, 7(4), 48-57

Barth, J. L. (1994). After Nairobi: New horizons for social studies. Social Education, 58(6), 371- 372. 

Boadu, K. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions on the importance of teaching citizenship education to   primary school children in Cape Coast, Ghana. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 2(2), 137- 147.

Cogil, J. (2008). Primary teachers’ interactive whiteboard practice across one year: Changes in pedagogy and influencing factors. Doctoral Thesis. University of London.

Costley, K. C. (2015). Research supporting integrated curriculum: Evidence for using this method          of instruction in public school classrooms. Retrieved from Eric Database: ED 552916

Crick, B. (1998). Education for citizenship and the teaching of democratic skills: Final Report of             the Advisory Group on Citizenship. London. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority            (QCA).

Department of Curriculum Development and Evaluation. (1990). The Botswana social studies      teaching methods: A resource book. Gaborone. Government Printers.

Department of Curriculum Development and Evaluation. (2010). Junior secondary school social             studies syllabus. Gaborone. Government Printers.

Department of Curriculum Development and Evaluation. (2005). Upper primary school social     studies syllabus. Gaborone. Government Printers.

 

Drake, S. & Burns, R. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. New York.        Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Dube, O. & Moffat, P. (2009). Towards accomplishing the goal of the world of work through       social studies instruction: Possibilities and challenges. International Journal of Scientific            Research in Education, 2(1), 1-12

Evans, R. W. (2004). The social studies wars: What should we teach the children? New York.     Teachers College Press.

Felarzzo, L. (2012). Several ways we can teach social studies more effectively.      http://www.edweek.org

Forgaty, R. & Stoehr, J. (1991). Integrating curricula with multiple intelligences: Teams, themes             & threads. Gaza. I. L. Skylight Publishing, Inc.

Gleeson, D. & Whitty, G. (1976). Developments in social studies teaching. London. Open Books.

Herczog, M. M. (2010). Using the NCSS National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies: A     Framework             for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment to Meet State Social Studies         Standards. Social Education.       74(4), 217–222

Hillburn, J. & Maguth, B. M. (2014). Spatial citizenship education: Civics teachers’ instructional             priorities and approaches. Journal of Social Studies Research. Retrieved from             http://dx.doi.org/10.1016

Holloway, J. E. & Choido, J. J. (2009). Social studies is being taught in the classroom: A contrarian        view. Journal of Social Studies Research, 33(2), 235-261.

Jotia, A. L. & Matlale, O. J. (2011). Use of instructional materials in social studies: Impact on      students’ performance in Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) in Botswana.           European Journal of Educational Studies, 3(1), 111-122.

Kerr, D. (1999). Citizenship education: An international comparison. National Foundation for     Educational Research (NFER). Retrieved from http://nationalarchives.gov.uk

Kochhar, S. K. (1984). The teaching of social studies. New Delhi. Sterling Publishers.

Kottler, E. & Gallavan, N. (2008). Secrets to success for social studies teachers. California.         Corwin Press.

Lawton, D. & Dufour, B. (1973). The new social studies. A handbook for teachers in primary,                  secondary and further education. London. Heinemann.

Lintner, T. (Ed).  (2013). Integrative strategies for the K-12 social studies classroom. New York.             Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Merryfeild, M. (1988). The African Social Studies Programme: An effort to improve curriculum & instruction across 17 African nations. Retrieved from Eric Database: ED 291665

NCSS. (1992). Testing and Evaluation of Social Studies Students Social Education. Social           Education, 55 (5), 284-293.

Oats, R. (2014). The responsiveness of social studies teacher training curriculum towards            democratic citizenship education in Botswana. University of South Africa.

Okoth, A. & Ndaloh, A. (2008). Social studies for primary teacher education. Nairobi. East African             Educational Publishers Ltd.

Owen, T. (1997). The challenge of teaching social studies methods to preservice elementary         teachers. Social Studies, 88(3), 113-126.

Salia-Bao, K. (1990). African Social Studies Program. A handbook for teachers. London. Evans Brothers.

Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15(2), 4-14.

Singer, A. J. (2014). Social Studies for secondary schools: Teaching to learn, learning to teach.   4th Ed. New York. Routledge.

Starkey, H. (2000). Citizenship education in France & Britain: Evolving theories and practices.    The Curriculum Journal, 11(1), 39-54.

Strauss, S. (1997). Partly fragmented, partly integrated: An anthropological examination of          “postmodern fragmented subjects”. Cultural Anthropology, 12, 362-404. DOI: 10.152

Tlou, J., O’Mara, R. & Mautle, G. (1989). The teaching of social studies in Botswana. Report      presented to BOLESWA Educational Research Symposium. Gaborone.

Turner-Bisset, R. (1999). The knowledge bases of expert teacher. British Educational Research   Journal, 25 (1), 39-55.

Welton, D. A. (2000). Children and their world: Strategies for teaching social studies. 8th Ed.      Boston. Houghton Mifflin Co.

Whitson, J. A. (2003). What social studies teachers need to know. The new urgency of some old disputes. In Adler, S. (Ed.). Critical issues in social studies teacher education (9-35). New      York. Information Age Publishing.

Womack, J. G. (1966). Discovering the structure of social studies. New York. Benzinger Brothers.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Teaching for Results at the expense of Understanding

  Botswana’s education system is increasingly caught in a paradox. On the one hand, it aims to produce critical thinkers and capable citizen...

Popular on OBMSELLO_BLOG