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