Blog #1-EDCI 602

Planning social studies lessons tends to be different that other subjects. Granted, the only time I taught another subject was last summer, but I've noticed that whereas many other subjects tend to be skills based (how to work a certain problem, how to conjugate a verb, how to solve chemistry equations, how to recognize examples of alliteration, etc.), social studies tends to be very factual. There are some skills involved (how to read a map, graph, chart, etc), but the majority of information that students are responsible for is strictly memorization based (Who was president during WWII? Why did people settle in the Great Plains? What were conditions like for the industrial working class in the 1800s?). You can definitely expand these ideas and find creative ways of presenting them, but it's not something that lends itself well to guided practice or independent practice. Without continuous innovation, social studies can easily become a monotony of reading the book and answering questions, lecture, and essay responses. I'm sure all the other teachers would disagree with me and argue that their subjects are just as challenging, but this is my obviously biased opinion.

With that said, I started planning my lessons this week by focusing on the state curriculum. Thankfully, the curriculum for U.S. History is much less vague than the other social studies frameworks. Since history is generally taught chronologically (so that students can see cause and effect) and since textbooks generally follow this format, I found the corresponding chapters in the textbook and started at the beginning. My objectives for the first two lessons were similar to everyone else's: classroom management related and giving a pretest. For the rest of the first day, I focused on two skills that are surprisingly lacking in students: How to make and use a timeline and how to use a textbook. I'm a firm believer in teaching these skills from day one, so that the rest of the year you can use them without confusion. The second day focused on "The West" and various topics about settlement in the west (mining, cattle ranching, the Great Plains, and Native Americans).

My experience with student needs and development is that they are familiar with timelines, but they've rarely examined exactly how they are created. I've noticed that students can often answer questions about a timeline, but when you ask them to create one, inevitably 1981, 2000, and 2001 are equidistant on the timeline. This strikes me as such a fundamental gap in the understanding of the function of a timeline. The point is not only to put things in order (why not just make a list??), but also to show the relative positions in time of certain events. Teaching students to create their own timeline, step by step, generally gives them a better understanding than just reading timelines and answering questions. Also, asking them to include significant events from their personal lives on the timeline allows me a glimpse into their life outside of school. (Students inevitably list their mother's birthday, their birthday, and their babies' birthdays...they also tend to include their parents' marriages and divorces). Using the textbook is simply something every student should know how to do, but most students are never taught. I started my world geography class in January with a lesson on how to use the textbook and never again had to answer "What page is this on??" I also make it a point to explain to students that sometimes knowing how to find information is more important than memorizing information. Students don't realize how often adults have to look things up. As far as teaching within the chapters after the first day, I approached the course as if the students were seeing the material for the first time. Even though these students took the class during the regular school year, they obviously missed something, so no assumptions should be made about what they already know. I actually found that I had mistakenly made an assumption on the second day when my 17 year old student did not know which state was indicated on the map by CALIF. I did teach her, however, how to look at the U.S. map in the front of her book and find the same state to get the answer (the most important things I teach my students are rarely in my lesson plans).
My instructional decisions were driven by one core belief that I hold, which is that students who have difficulty in a class (for whatever reason) are the ones who most need varied instructional strategies. Obviously, something didn't work the first time around. Maybe the student is a kinesthetic learner and their teacher lectured the whole year. Maybe the student has reading difficulties and their teacher gave them chapters to read with review questions. Maybe the student has A.D.D. and simply can't focus long enough to learn the material. Maybe the student has just always hated history class (like I did in high school) and has never thought of history as fun or relevant. Regardless of the reason, these are the students that most need varied activities and strategies (i.e. the ever-present "differentiated instruction"). (I've had a long time to think about this since I was required to "remediate" students once a week in U.S. History by reading a list of facts to them from January through April).
My first lesson was basically a "preview" of the chapter, that involved a worksheet I created where students look at all of the pictures, drawings, graphs, etc. in the chapter and answer questions about them. This strategy (which was thankfully suggested to me by a veteran teacher at my school) engages visual learners as well as students who have difficulty reading. The chapter usually includes graphs or charts for the more analytical students and pictures to be described ("List 3 adjectives that describe the man in the picture") for the more creative students. By the time we actually start reading the text, the whole class can pretty much tell me what the main points of the chapter are (in "edu-speak"= I created background knowledge for the students who didn't have any).
My second lesson asked students to read a couple of paragraphs about the Comstock Lode in Nevada ("chunking text"--or, not making students read the whole page when all they need is two paragraphs) and then drawing a 4 panel comic strip to summarize the story. I love this activity because it engages those kids who are horrible at social studies but great at drawing, it allows me to easily see if students understood the material, and it forces students to use higher level thinking because they have to process the information and put it in another form.

An example of an inductive strategy that I used was my set in my third lesson. I basically presented the students with a historical situation and asked them to explain the problem to me and what would happen next (this doesn't exactly fit in any one of the inductive teaching strategies listed in our notes, but may be a modified version of unguided inquiry). I had three people at the front of the room with a long piece of butcher paper, which I explained was a railroad. I put nametags on each of the 3 according to their profession (one was a factory owner whose factory made pants, one was a factory owner whose factory made shirts, one was a farmer). I explained to one factory owner that her family wanted to eat corn for dinner, where would she get it? She told me she would buy it from the farmer. I asked her how she would get there and she said she would walk. We went through a few other scenarios like this. Then I brought up another volunteer and explained that he was the railroad owner. I explained that he was very unhappy and asked students what the problem was (no one using the railroad because no one lives on the other end, no money for the railroad owner). I asked what the railroad owner might do about it? (encourage people to move down there). We went through the whole scenario of the farmer moving and the crops being shipped on the railroad. Students had "discovered" the course of historical events before I ever gave them the notes.

This blog has become really long, so I'm going to wrap up by explaining my basic philosophy on planning. Working in a district where we constantly have professional development by cheerful elementary school teachers who want to teach us cutesy words for situations that don't need cutesy words (the kids sitting next to each other are "shoulder partners") instead of useful teaching strategies, I've become fairly embittered toward the "edu-babble" or "buzz words" that teachers are constantly required to document in our lesson plans. I do, however, believe that a lot of these strategies hidden in ridiculous terms are very useful. Whenever I plan a lesson I tend to think of certain students I taught this year who had difficulties learning material (because they may have been "dyslexic", "kinesthetic learners", or "at risk students"--whatever special category they fit in to) and I just think "How could I teach this so that someone like W.A. would get it?" "What could I do in this lesson to make it interesting to someone like J.E.?" "How can I teach this in a way that M.J. won't have to read too much?". I may be stubborn about using the terminology, but I think in the end, I do try to incorporate what I've learned into my teaching strategies.