 |
 |
 |
Front Page | |
Columns | |
Blogs | |
Multimedia | |
Contact | |
|
 |
|
|
|
Front Page | |
Columns | |
Blogs | |
Multimedia | |
Contact | |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Improving Critical Thinking Skills in History by Carl Savich
Table of
Contents Abstract
Introduction
and Topic Question Review of
Literature and Theory
Critical
Thinking Skills
Backward
Design Research
Methodology
Data
Collection Procedures
Data
Collection Tools Analysis
of the Data
Conclusion
References Appendixes
A.
Frequency
Line Graph
B.
Bar
Graph C.
Analyzing
Bias
D.
Multiple
Texts Comparison Abstract
The purpose of this action research was to investigate strategies and
techniques that would improve
critical thinking skills and higher order thinking in Improving Critical
Thinking Skills in History
Introduction and Topic Question
The research problem that was
investigated was how critical thinking skills could be encouraged in teaching
history at the secondary level. The issue is important because students show
apathy and boredom with history. History is considered worthless and useless
because all you do is memorize accepted, dry, and dead “facts”. Researchers
have found that in teaching history the critical component is missing in the
traditional lecture presentation or “transmission” approach (Foster &
Padgett, 1999). There is no “enduring understanding”, no analytical or critical
reflection or evaluation and long-term synthesis (Foster & Padgett, 1999; Goodlad, 1984; Loewen, 1995; Schug, Todd, & Beery, 1984; Schug,
Todd, & Beery, 1984; Shaughnessy & Haladyna, 1985; Shaver, Davis, & Helburn,
1979). Foster and Padgett emphasized that “authentic historical inquiry”, which
focuses on critical thinking skills, is needed to counter the transmission mode
and rote-memorization approach in teaching history (Foster & Padgett,
1999). Moreover, history classes are taught in a manner that encourages and
fosters ignorance and ideological indoctrination. Schools and universities
promote an uncritical and unthinking approach to history instruction that
advances a militaristic and interventionist foreign policy. War is glorified
and falsified. Education becomes a new instrument for indoctrination and
control. How can this be remedied? The focus question of this action
research was: How do you create a more critical approach to history? What
teaching strategies and methods will increase or improve the critical thinking
skills of students? Critical thought is a central focus of the Michigan
Department of Education benchmarks and standards for Social Studies. The
critical thinking benchmark for history is as follows: “ Standard
I.3 Analyzing and Interpreting the Past. All
students will reconstruct the past by comparing interpretations written by
others from a variety of perspectives and creating narratives from evidence.
History is not a succession of facts marching to a settled conclusion. Written
history is a human construction and conclusions about the past are tentative
and arguable. Documents, eyewitness accounts, letters, diaries, artifacts,
photos, historical sites, and other fragments of the
past are subject to analysis and interpretation. Credible reconstruction of the
past draws upon a variety of records and compares interpretations that reveal
more than one perspective on events. One can engage in “doing history” by
assessing historical narratives
written by others or by creating a narrative from evidence that has been
compiled, analyzed, and interpreted.” The plan for the action research consisted
of designing a research analysis to answer this question: How do you motivate
students in history classes at an alternative education high school and regular
education high school to perform better on tests and to engender greater
enthusiasm for the study of history? The problem in alternative education, as is
true in regular education schools as well, but to a lesser extent, is that
students are apathetic and show disinterest in history? How do you motivate
students? What techniques or strategies work to motivate students?
Review of Literature and Theory The research on improving critical
thinking skills and student engagement and involvement has suggested various
strategies and techniques that have been successful in other settings. Mark Otten, et al., in “Performing History” from 2004, found
that dramatizations of historical events contributed to creating greater
enthusiasm and greater involvement in history (Otten,
Stigler, Woodward, & Staley, 2004). Elise Calabresi,
in “A Plan for Enhancing Student Achievement in an Eleventh Grade Large
Classroom American History Course through a Multicultural Curriculum”, a
practicum from 1993 presented as a paper at Nova University, was able to
stimulate enthusiasm and higher academic achievement in an ethnically diverse
course by focusing on the economic, gender, ethnic, racial, make-up of the
classroom and relating them to the issues taught in the course (Calabresi, 1993). Topics in history were chosen because
they related to the characteristics of the classroom. For example, the
classroom was majority Hispanic, so the lessons were tailored to have relevance
and meaning for Hispanic students and minorities. The lessons were made
relevant and topical by having students make oral presentations and discuss
current events as they related to them. The program was successful. An
important element of getting students to connect or identify with a historical
event or issue is by making it relevant and personal to them. In this way there
is engagement and connectedness to the issue. This is effective strategy in
reducing apathy and
boredom and lack of interest. In “Improving the critical thinking
skills of ninth grade world history students by integrating critical thinking
skills and course content”, Henry Milton found that student critical thinking
skills could be improved when the skills were applied and implemented in a
ninth grade world history class (Milton, 1993). The students in the class
examined and studied eight different historical issues or themes. Each issue
had an accompanying critical thinking skill that was used to resolve the issue.
The focus was on eight critical thinking skills. Students identified the frame
of reference, determining the viewpoint or perspective. The critical or crucial
elements inherent in an issue were determined. Students distinguished between
the factual or evidentiary and speculative bases for conclusions. Students
identified the main concepts or ideas presented. The consequences and
implications or ramifications of the issues were analyzed. Assumptions were
identified. Students distinguished between valid or “justified” inferences and
those that were “faulty” or invalid. Finally, the students synthesized the
content and concepts that were examined. Students applied the skills assembled
in small groups or working independently. Assessment was made based on written
and oral assignments and exercises. Based on the analysis of test results, from
knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis to evaluation.
Milton also found that critical thinking skills were mastered more effectively
when they were taught concurrently with the subject matter of the course rather
than separately. Research studies have found that students
in Coercion and exploitation need not be
restricted to physical and brute force. There is an even more subtle form of
control, domination, exploitation, and coercion. That form is education.
Teachers and professors become the elites who control what we think and how we
think. Their reward is monetary as well as psychological and egotistical. This
new elite class of paladins and mandarins becomes endowed with an elite and
preferential status in society and serves a bureaucratic function for the
government, military, and corporate interests. They become the intellectual
superiors of the mere primitive and unsophisticated masses, the majority. These
tyrants and sycophants and censors establish a new form of tyranny and
oppression over the majority. The government and corporate interests gain a
more dominant control over the education process. They control not only the
body, but also the mind. This is why history consists of parroting and
regurgitating “official truths” and “accepted wisdom” at the expense of
critical thinking and higher order thinking. Such mind control and manipulation
prevents “a clear understanding of reality” that allows the government to
launch “humanitarian interventions” in A strategy used to improve critical
thinking skills was the use of multiple texts which allowed students to see
different viewpoints and perspectives on historical issues and problems (Hynd, 1999; Rothman, 1987; Stahl, Hynd,
Britton, McNish, & Bosquet,
1996). When high school students were presented multiple texts and documents on
the Tonkin Gulf Incident, the strategy was found to be of limited value because
it was found that students do not benefit from multiple texts or viewpoints
unless “some specific instruction in integrating information” is given by the teacher
(Stahl, Hynd, Britton, McNich,
& Bosquet, 1996). Using multiple texts has
resulted in an overall improvement in student critical thinking skills and in
their level of intellectual sophistication (Shanahan, 2003). The use of position or research papers
was found to improve higher-level thinking skills (Mitchell, 1993). Students
increased their mastery of critical thinking skills when they were required to
write research papers on historical issues. Critical thinking skills were also
increased when there was a cooperative learning format that used the jigsaw
approach, when there were structured research experiences, and when there was
student role playing and game situations (Mitchell, 1993). Critical viewing skills were emphasized
in order to counteract the manipulation and distortion
of the media (Payne, 1993). Students need to be taught media literacy if they
are to develop critical thinking skills in the classroom. Students need to make
distinctions between entertainment and media spin and information. Media images
and sound-bites present a distorted and manipulated view. Students need to
understand that reality is complex and not black and white, not Manichean, and
that ambiguity is present in all complex phenomena (Payne, 1993; Hynd, Hubbard, & Holschuh,
2004). Different theories and approaches on the
role of history have been suggested by researchers. A postmodern approach
should be adopted that regards history as inherently subjective and relative in
nature, based on the particular experiences of nations, cultures, and peoples ( The inquiry approach has been emphasized
in the teaching of social studies in order to develop and reinforce critical
thinking skills (VanFossen & Shiveley,
1997). In the inquiry or “inquiry learning” approach, the first step is to
define the purpose for the inquiry, the problem. Tentative answers or solutions
to the problem are then postulated. The hypotheses are then tested. Tentative
conclusions can then be drawn from these results.
Finally, the conclusions can then be applied to new situations or scenarios. Critical thinking skills are most
effectively developed and learned when they are taught in conjunction or
embedded with content, not in isolation ( critical
thinking skills in isolation ( Research on improving critical thinking
skills in the teaching of history at the secondary level focuses on designing
lesson plans, assignments, and activities that challenge students to evaluate
different viewpoints and perspectives, to examine multiple texts in studying an
issue, to rely on factual evidence and primary sources and documents, to be
able to analyze deceptive and misleading arguments that distort and manipulate
the issues, to develop critical viewing skills, and to be able to synthesize
and conceptualize information. Group role play activities, oral history
presentations, the study of primary sources and original documents, the study
of multiple textbooks and textbooks from different countries, and student
research projects were strategies that improved critical thinking skills. The methodology I used consisted in
designing activities and assignments that would test the strengths and
weaknesses of various teaching approaches to see which induced the greatest
enthusiasm and understanding of history. I designed activities that comprised
group role play activities, simulations of historical events, dramatizations of
history, visual presentations of history, and oral presentations. The goal was
to determine which approaches generated the greatest increase or improvement in
critical thinking skills and created the most enthusiasm and engagement for
history. I assessed the results by tests, student participation and
interaction, and by student input. I combined a qualitative with a quantitative
approach, making the evaluation based on hard test score results, and by the
quality of the improvements, by the depth and breadth of their understanding of
history. I collected data by tabulating the test score results and making
statistical comparisons with test
scores before the new techniques were applied. I also used questionnaires,
essay questions, and surveys, to determine a qualitative improvement and to
gauge their improvement in critical thinking skills and their commitment and
enthusiasm. I used the results to make future changes
in the curriculum at my alternative education high school. I retained the most
effective strategies and techniques and incorporated them in the lesson
planning and curriculum design for the history courses I taught and in
developing lesson plans for upcoming units.
Critical Thinking Skills Critical thinking skills are essential
in history because all students need to evaluate, assess, analyze,
conceptualize, and judge what is presented as information or facts. Critical
thinking skills are important in a democracy where citizens need to be informed
in order to make judgments and decisions. Critical thinking skills consist of
fundamental concepts of how we understand and learn and are the epitome of
education (Shaughnessy, 1985). The student is able to
distinguish between fact and opinion and bias from reason. The student can
distinguish between primary and secondary sources, can evaluate information
sources, can recognize deceptive or misleading arguments, and can recognize
ethnocentrism and stereotypes. Critical thinking is “the careful and deliberate
determination
of whether to accept, reject, or suspend judgment about a claim” (Moore &
Parker, 2007). Critical thinking is “the process of evaluating what other
people say or write to determine whether to believe their statements.” Critical
thinking consists of “assessing
authenticity, accuracy, and worth of knowledge claims and arguments.” The impetus for improving critical
thinking skills gained momentum in the 1980s when many schools, districts, and
states began placing a greater emphasis on critical thinking skills in
teaching, curriculum design, and testing (Paul, 1984). In 1985,
Backward Design History is a subject that has been disparaged
because students merely memorize accepted truths and the accepted wisdom,
without critically thinking about the subject matter. History becomes merely
memorization of dates and key “facts” ( 1993). The goal of education, however, is to
achieve “enduring understandings”, to gain meaningful understanding of history,
not just to memorize and regurgitate memorized facts. The “backward design”
approach developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe emphasized
meaningful learning and enduring or lasting understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Backward design begins with the end or
goal of the lesson in mind. Backward design requires the teacher to begin with
the end in mind, the desired results, the goals or standards, and from there
designs the curriculum based on the evidence of learning, or “performances”,
“called for by the standard and the teaching needed to equip students to
perform.” The problem with the traditional lecture approach is that teachers
merely “cover” the text and students engage in activities where there is no
focus on a big picture and no plan to ensure that meaningful learning has
occurred. The backward design process consists in
teachers designing lesson plans in three stages, each with a focus question. In
the fist stage, the teacher determines the following: What is worthy and
requiring of understanding? In stage two, the question is: What is evidence of
understanding? In stage three, the teacher seeks to determine: What learning
experiences and teaching promote understanding, interest, and excellence. The issue that was researched and
investigated was how critical thinking can be
encouraged and developed in teaching
history at the secondary level. The issue is important because students
demonstrate apathy and boredom with history. History is considered
worthless and useless because all you do is memorize accepted, dry, and dead
“facts”. In teaching history, the critical component is missing. There is no
“enduring understanding”. The focus question of the action
research was: How do you create a more critical approach to history? What
teaching strategies and methods will increase the critical thinking skills of
students?
Research Methodology Both qualitative and quantitative
approaches can be used effectively for doing action research in a history
classroom at the high school level to determine effective teaching methods to
increase critical thinking skills in history. Both approaches were used in this
research, a mixed approach, using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses. The research question posed was the
following: How can critical thinking skills be most effectively taught in
history classes at the secondary level? A corollary to the first question was:
How can students be motivated to change their negative attitudes and apathy
about history? An experimental action research project
was designed at a high school which compared the effectiveness of two different
methods of instruction. One method of instruction was to lecture using the
traditional lecture format. The other method was to present the material in an
interactive format, by combining an inquiry format and a discussion format, and
by using group role play activities. These were the independent variables. Students in the different hours of the
history classes were exposed to either the lecture method of teaching or the
interactive method of teaching. The conceptual knowledge
of the students was then tested and the results compared between the hours that
were taught by the different methods. Student learning in each hour or group was
assessed or measured using an objective test. The average scores on these
objective tests, which were the dependent variables, were used to measure or
evaluate the effectiveness of the two teaching methodologies. The first and second hour classes were
both American History II classes that were both studying the same period in The timeline for implementing the two
methodologies, lecture versus interactive format, consisted of two, four week
periods that would cover two units in the semester. The lecture format was
followed for the first hour period while the interactive method was followed in
the second hour period. Every attempt possible was made to
ensure the internal validity of the research results by controlling for
extraneous variables and uncontrolled variables. A systematic random assignment
of students to treatment groups was not possible. The intact classes were
already in place before the action research was conducted. The classes were so
similar that the extraneous variables were accounted for and controlled to the
best extent possible. The third and fifth hours were also
American History II classes that consisted of students from the same population
pool as those in the first and second hours. The third and fifth hour classes
were the comparative or control groups. The traditional straight lecture format
method of instruction was applied in the third and fifth hour classes. The
lecture format was thus applied to the first, third, and fifth hour classes.
The interactive teaching format was applied to the second hour class. The action research project timeline
continued over the entire semester, for approximately 12 weeks. Mid-term and
final semester grades were assigned using the
selected teaching methods. Both qualitative and quantitative
approaches were applied. One way that qualitative research was used in the
school for action research was to create simulations using group or team role
play or role playing activities. Simulations were created of historical
settings that were based on the period that was being studying. For example, in
studying the Cold War, the class simulated the United Nations General Assembly.
The class was divided into three groups or teams. One group represented the in role
play activity, or a simulation of the Cold War conflict. The 1949 Berlin Crisis
and Berlin Airlift were examined and analyzed by having the groups act out or
role play as the UN delegations from the countries they were assigned to
represent. Another interactive teaching approach
that was used was to have the class discuss the role that minorities and women
played in key historical events in American history, such as World War I, World
War II, the Great Depression, and the Civil Rights Movement. The students were
assigned research projects that they presented to the class for discussion and
debate. This assignment was successful in that the levels of student
engagement, enthusiasm, participation, and interest were radically increased.
There was a concomitant large improvement in critical thinking skills because
students were able to personally relate to the issues and to have a deeper
understanding of the underlying issues and problems involved. Data
Collection Procedures .Data collection for the quantitative
component consisted primarily of student scores on assignments, quizzes, and
examinations or tests, the dependent variables. For the qualitative
component, a log book and a daily journal were kept to assess and evaluate a
separate participation, discussion, and activity score. The time frame
consisted of two, four week periods where two units were covered. The results were plotted and graphed on
a bar or line graph. The x axis represented the type of instruction that was
used for the lessons, lecture and interactive. The y axis was a tabulation of
the student scores. Both a line and bar graph were generated that reflected a
generalized and more individual breakdown of the results. The score of each
student within each class and the average scores for the entire class were
plotted. A line graph was used for a more individualized breakdown of each
student score plotted on the graph. Assignment scores, quiz scores, and test
scores individually, were also plotted, and the overall student grade in the
course was plotted. The qualitative research component
consisted of observations and evaluations and assessments of student
participation. I taught all the classes as an active and direct participant, so
I was able to observe the degree and level of participation, motivation,
interest, engagement, and critical thinking. The simulation role play format
was a data collection tool and was assessed based on its effectiveness as a
teaching method. The research results demonstrated that role play simulation
activities and assignments gave students a
better understanding of historical events by allowing for greater empathy and
sympathy and greater internalization. Students were able to experience the
events and to develop improved critical thinking skills. Ultimately, the
students had a fuller understanding of the issues which was revealed in higher
essay and test scores. Test scores were compared between the
classes where role playing was used with those classes where role playing did
not occur, in the first, third, and fifth hours. The action research showed
that students who engaged in role play gained a greater and more meaningful
understanding of the subject. Their understanding was deeper and more thorough
and meaningful. They learned to appreciate the complexities, uncertainties, and
ambiguities inherent in all historical issues and problems. Rubrics were created that specifically
measured or assessed the degree and level of student interaction and
participation. Students were assigned points based on the originality of their
presentations, how involved they were in the debate, how critical they were of
the assumptions of the textbook, how creative and independent were their
presentations and discussions, and how effectively they used critical thinking
skills in resolving the issues and problems presented. A series of essay
questions were also designed which assessed the same characteristics. I then
was able to obtain a qualitative assessment using these data collection
procedures which allowed me to determine whether the interactive or the lecture
format was more effective in increasing critical thinking skills. Based on the
action research results, the interactive method of instruction was more
effective in improving student critical thinking skills. The research relied on test scores and
student achievement and also examined changes in student attitudes about
critical thinking. A questionnaire or survey was prepared that each student in
all the history classes answered. The results were then tabulated to determine
if student attitudes had changed. The second hour class students were asked to
evaluate and assess the interactive teaching format. The students in the
classes where the lecture format was used were asked to assess and to evaluate
that method. The results were then compared. This occurred in the last two
weeks of the eight week action research project. The results demonstrated that
an overwhelming majority of the students in the interactive format class
preferred that method of instruction over the lecture format. Conversely, in
the lecture format classes, the majority of students were dissatisfied with the
lecture format. For future practice, lesson plans were designed that
incorporated interactive and role play assignments and activities. For future
lessons, a lecture format was retained but simulations and interactive
activities were added.
Data Collection Tools In the qualitative research portion, the
research tools consisted of observations logged in a daily journal, surveys, questionnaires,
interviews, videotaped presentations, and a log book. In the role play simulations, the
equipment in the classroom was used: Computers, chairs, desks, TV screens, VCR
monitors, and video, audio, and TV recording equipment. These were
all used as data collection tools.
Analysis of the Data I tabulated the assignment, quiz, and
test scores for each student in all the hours. I then computed the averages for
the entire class for each hour. I compared the average of the overall
assignment, quiz, and test scores for each class or hour, comparing the second
hour class scores with the first hour class scores, and then compared these
average class scores with those from the comparative or control group classes,
the third and fifth hour classes. I then graphed the results on a bar
graph. The method of instruction, lecture versus interactive, was the
independent variable on the x axis. The dependent variable, the test scores,
was plotted on the y axis. I then generated a bar graph which showed which
teaching method resulted in the highest average test score. This was the
quantitative component of the research. Based on these results, the interactive
teaching method resulted in the highest test scores. I then analyzed the data collected, both
qualitative and quantitative. After I plotted
the results on the bar graph, I compared the scores of all the classes to
determine whether there was a difference in the scores for the interactive
format class when compared to the straight lecture classes. The difference in
the test score results was large. Both average and individual student test
scores were much higher when the interactive teaching format was used. Based on
these results, I was encouraged to design a future action
research plan that would further assess interactive teaching strategies and
methods. Based on the test score results, I concluded that there was a
substantial difference between the interactive and lecture formats that
warranted making future changes in how I approached teaching the history
classes and in designing lesson plans and class assignments and activities.
Because there was a marked difference in the results for the two teaching
methods, I would encourage other teachers to replicate my research methods to
determine whether critical thinking skills are improved when they use the
interactive format. This would increase the “generalizability”
or external validity of my results or findings. A frequency polygon was constructed to
show graphically the scores achieved by the two groups. The raw scores for the
student group taught by the interactive or inquiry method were listed on the
left column in the table and the raw scores for the group taught by the lecture
method were listed on the right. The frequency of the scores was then
determined. The frequency chart data was then used to construct or plot a
frequency polygon graph that tracked the performance of the two groups
comparatively. The frequency graph showed that students taught by the
interactive method consistently had higher test scores than those in the
lecture group. Finally, I examined potential threats to
the internal validity of my results. One possible threat was data collector
bias. I may have skewed the results because I wanted a pre-conceived result or
outcome. I may have looked for only certain answers and ignored or
discounted others because they did not fit into my prior expectations. I wanted
to find an improvement in critical thinking skills. This pre-set conviction
guided my research. Implementation and attitude can also threaten internal
validity. I was a priori biased against the straight lecture format and wanted
or expected to find an improvement in test scores when the interactive format
was used. This may have had an impact on how I implemented
my methods of instruction and my research collection. The second hour class, the subjects of
the research, may also have learned that they were being taught a different way
than the other hours. This may change their attitude. This “Hawthorne effect”,
conscious knowledge on the part of participants that they are receiving
“special” attention, may have skewed the results in a more positive direction,
resulting in inflated results. Moreover, these second hour students may have
been more active and more participatory in the interactive approach due to
novelty, as a channeling of attention-seeking behavior, as a way to avoid the
lecture format, and as a way to accommodate the instructor and to receive a
higher grade.
Conclusion This project can be designed or replicated
as either a practical action research project, which would address the issue of
student apathy and disinterest to history classes at a local high school, or a
participatory action research project that would address ways of increasing
student critical thinking skills in schools in the entire district by
increasing the stakeholders to include other students and teachers and
administrators in the district. Rethinking and reflection was the final
step in the action research process. The research results have demonstrated
that the interactive or inquiry method of teaching history ensures that
students will achieve a more meaningful understanding of the subject matter.
This method also creates greater engagement and interest in the issues and
motivates and polarizes students. The lecture format is necessary, however, to
establish the background information and to present the fundamental concepts
and terms. In future lesson plan designs, the lecture format should be retained
but interactive assignments and exercises should also be added. This action
research project showed that an interactive teaching method, which includes
group role play and simulations, gave students a better understanding of
historical events by allowing for greater empathy and sympathy and greater
internalization that resulted in improved critical thinking skills. The
research results of this action research project could be used to design future
lessons in high school history courses that would increase student critical
thinking skills. By implementing an interactive teaching format, teachers can
increase student scores on tests and the level of student engagement. This
improvement would be reflected in higher grades and improved academic
achievement. References Andolino,
M. (2002). Practical guide to critical
thinking. Bennett,
C. & Forney, L. (1997). Oral history: A bridge in thinking historically. Southern Social Studies Journal, 22(2), 11-25. Calabrese,
E. (1993). A plan for enhancing student
achievement in an eleventh grade large
classroom American history course through a multicultural curriculum. Retrieved March 21, 2008 from http://newfirstsearch.oclc.org.huaryu.kl.oakland.edu/
Chomsky,
N. (2000). Chomsky on miseducation.
Collingwood,
R.G. (1946). The idea of history. Press. Craver, K.
(1999). Using internet primary sources to
teach critical thinking skills in history. Foster,
S., & Padgett, C. (1999). Authentic historical inquiry in the social
studies classroom. The Clearing House, 72(6), 357-363. Gagnon, P.
(1988). Why study history? The Atlantic
Monthly, 262(5), 43-66. Goodlad,
J. I. (1984). A place called school. Herman,
E., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. NY:
Pantheon. Herman,
E., & Chomsky, N. (1997). The myth of the liberal media: The propaganda model of news. Hynd,
C. (1999). Teaching students to think critically using multiple texts in
history. Journal
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(6),
428-436. Hynd,
C., Hubbard, B., & Holschuh (2004). Thinking like
a historian. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(2), 2, 141-176. Kida, T.
(2006). Don’t believe everything you
think: The 6 basic mistakes we make in thinking. Kidwell,
F. (1996). “Why do I have to study history?” Social Studies Review, 36(1), 66-69. Lacey, B.
(1994). Evaluating viewpoints: Critical thinking in History Teacher, 27(4), 502-503. Loewen,
J. W. (1995). Lies my teacher told me:
Everything your American history textbook got wrong. Macedo,
D. (1994). Literacies of power: What Americans are not allowed to
know. Milton, H.
(1993). Improving the critical thinking
skills of ninth grade world history students by integrating critical
thinking skills and course content. Ed.D Practicum, Mitchell,
W. (1993). Using the position paper to teach higher-level thinking skills in American history. OAH Magazine of History, 7(4), 5-7. Moore, B.
& Parker, R. (2007). Critical
Thinking. Norman, B.
(1996). A postmodern endeavor. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 28(6), 713-723. O’Reilly,
K. (1990). Spanish-American war to history. Otten,
M., Stigler, J., Woodward, A., & Staley, L. (2004). Performing history: The
effects of a dramatic art-based history
program on student achievement and enjoyment. Theory
and Research in Social Education, 32(2),
187-212. Pattiz,
A. (2004). The idea of history teaching: Using Collingwood’s idea of history to promote critical thinking in the
high school history classroom. History
Teacher, 37(2),
239. Paul, R.
(1984). Critical thinking and educational reform: The emerging revolution. Position paper. Paul, R.,
& Elder, L. (1999). Critical thinking: Teaching students to seek the logic
of things, part II. Journal of Developmental Education, 23(2),
34-35. Payne, B.
(1993). A word is worth a thousand pictures: Teaching students to think critically in a culture of images. Social Studies Review, 32(3), 38-43. Rothman,
R. (1988). Ending the silence on the Vietnam war. Education Week, 7(37), 1- 19. Rothman,
R. (1987). Americans, Soviets critique texts. Education Week, 7(12), 5. Schug,
M., Todd, R., & Beery, R. (1984). Why kids don't like social studies. Social Education, 48, 382-387. Shanahan,
C. (2003). Using multiple texts to teach
content. Retrieved March 24, 2008 from
http://www.learningpt.org/pdfs/literacy/shanahan.pdf Shaughnessy, J. M. (1985). Critical thinking: Attitudes, skills and ambiguity.
Position paper. Shaugnessy,
J. M., & Haladyna, T. M. (1985). Research on
student attitudes toward social studies. Social Education, 49, 692-695. Shaver,
J., Davis, O. L., Jr., & Helburn, S. M. (1979).
The status of social studies education: Impressions from three NSF
studies. Social Education, 43,
150-153. Stabile,
C. (2001). Improving the performance of
sixth-grade social studies students through exposure to philosophy. Doctoral dissertation. Stahl, S.,
Hynd, C., Britton, B., McNish,
M., & Bosquet, D. (1996). What happens when students read multiple source
documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly, 31(4), 430-456. VanFossen,
P. & Shiveley, J. (1997), Things that make you go
“hmmm…”: Creating inquiry “problems” in the
elementary social studies classroom. Social
Studies, 88(2), 71-77. VanSledright, B. A. (1998). I don’t remember--The ideas are all jumbled in my
head: 8th graders
reconstructions of colonial American history. Journal of Curriculum Supervision, 10, 317-345. Teacher, 37(2), 193-209. Wiggins,
G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development. |
|
|
|
 |
| Copyright Serbianna.com since 1999 | eLEGANCE Edition 2008 All Rights Reserved | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About | Contact us | |
