Whatever happened to social studies?

Since the advent of No Child Left Behind, state departments of education have geared up for testing students in grades 3-8 in the areas of reading and math. In 2007, science testing will be added to the accountability measures required through adequate yearly progress (AYP). This leaves us with the question, "Whatever happened to social studies?" Social studies is not on the high-stakes testing roster for No Child Left Behind, and so we can only conclude that this important discipline, itself has been left behind.

The articles reviewed in this issue are concerned with either social studies education or social forces that impact education. I reviewed the first two articles, while school administrators and teachers reviewed the last four.

CONFECTIONS OF APARTHEID CONTINUE IN OUR SCHOOLS. Kozol, J., Education Digest, 2006, 71(6), 4-22. The absence of social studies education, especially for poor children, is indeed appalling, Jonathan Kozol states in this remarkable article. He takes both a macrosystemic and microsystemic approach in considering the effects of the No Child Left Behind Act and state government policies on everything from postmodern segregation to curriculum and instruction. Much of the article can be summarized in one sentence. As Kozol reports,

Relentless emphasis on raising test scores, rigid policies of nonpromotion and nongraduation, new empiricism and the imposition of unusually detailed lists of named and numbered "outcomes" for each isolated parcel of instruction, an oftentimes fanatical insistence upon uniformity in teachers' management of time, an openly conceded emulation of the rigorous approaches of the military, and a frequent use of terminology that comes out of the world of industry and commerce-these are just a few of the familiar aspects of these new adaptive strategies. (pp. 5-6)

Several urban classroom vignettes are described. The appalling effects of what Kozol calls bizarre rituals are highlighted, as are problems with trying to meet the current mandates. The shaming of kids and schools, the squelching of discovery learning, the meaningless learning, the push for higher test scores, and the absence of social education are all chronicled. Kozol specifically lashes out at the "teacher-proof" materials and singles out Success for All as one example of a particularly problematic program.

One of the most interesting anecdotes in the article involves a rubric for grading how children walk down the hallway. "'Rubrics for Filing' is the printed heading of a lengthy list of numbered categories by which teachers are supposed to grade their students on the way they march along the corridors in another urban district I have visited" (p. 17).

After carefully documenting ways the microsystem of children and teachers has gone astray, Kozol concludes by focusing on the macrosystem. The bottom line, according to Kozol, is that rich schools receive one type of curriculum and poor schools receive an entirely different one. What results is a new apartheid that will widen the achievement gap rather than narrow it.

DOES HALLOWEEN BELONG IN SCHOOL? Drevitch, G., Instructor, 2005, 115(3), 27-29. Several professional organizations have taken a negative view of the seasonal curriculum in which teachers, especially early childhood educators, move through the year from Halloween to Thanksgiving to Christmas to Valentine's Day--all the way to May Day. This article takes an important look at whether or not Halloween should be a part of the school curriculum.

Drevitch takes an historical approach to dealing with the topic. He describes who started Halloween, how it came to the United States, how much money is spent on Halloween each year, and the most popular costumes worn each Halloween. He goes on to describe an approach to Halloween used by Bill Amburn, a 7th-grade social studies teacher from Oklahoma. Amburn "shares articles on Halloween with his students and urges them to think critically about what place the holiday should have in society. For example, the modern practice of trick-or-treat evolved in the 1920s and 1930s, in part because young people were committing serious acts of vandalism on October 31" (p. 29).

The article cleverly poses more questions than answers. Since Halloween is considered by many Evangelical Christians and Muslims as having roots in pagan religions, many are opposed to its celebration. Furthermore, "A teacher could lead any number of lively discussions on the nature of Halloween, but an in-class party is another issue" (p. 29). This article is a must-read for any teacher or administrator seeking more information on the history of Halloween and the school issues related to it.