Sum and Substance

A Final Reflection on ED 3120: Social Studies Methods for Childhood Education

At the beginning of this course, I completed a Study and Pedagogical Skills Survey to pinpoint which skills, related to course objectives, I already had and which skills I needed to set as goals to be achieved throughout the course. Now, the semester having ended, I consulted the survey again, this time to determine whether I had achieved all of the goals I set for myself sixteen weeks ago. I was pleased to find that besides using Publisher and pbworks to design learning projects for children, I achieved all of my other goals (an awe-inspiring twenty goals). 

As I describe as part of this survey, I believe that my main areas of growth were improving the structuring of units which includes differentiating between models, strategies, and methods of instruction; integrating technology into lessons to engage students; and developing content knowledge of social studies.

1. In terms of unit planning, I learned to start by thinking about what I wanted students to be able to do by the end of the unit, which led me to consider authentic assessments that required the higher-order thinking skills of the upper levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. Then, I delineated a path to have my students arrive at those skills, as well as gain necessary content knowledge. Now understanding the strengths of the different methods used to plan lessons, I designed my unit to begin with interactive lecturing and questioning, a method that falls within the direct strategy and behavioral model of instruction, to provide the necessary content knowledge. After having led students to master the facts of the content, students were then prompted to expand upon that knowledge using higher-order thinking skills like analyzing, evaluating, comparing and contrasting, in lessons employing the inquiry method, which falls within the indirect strategy and information processing model of instruction. Lastly, to further deepen content knowledge as well as improve social skills, I ended my unit with a cooperative learning lesson, which is part of the indirect/interactive strategy within the social interaction model. Students created their culminating projects and then conducted group and peer evaluations. Prior to this course, I did not have a clear understanding of how the lesson plans differed for each type of lesson and was not aware of how to structure the unit in terms of the "teacher to student continuum," however now thinking about it, it seems to be common sense which makes me confident that I have grasped this skill.

2. As for integrating technology, prior to this course, becoming a technologically savvy teacher seemed daunting. However, with every new website I mastered during the semester, my confidence grew. While there are still many websites and skills with which I still need to become familiar, as growing in technological competency will be a life-long process as it is for everyone, I am confident that with time I will be able to achieve mastery of them as well. Prior to this course, I think I had a pessimistic attitude as to what my technological abilities would be so I did not leave my comfort zone to explore new websites and tools as I came across them. Dr. Smirnova and the requirements of the course forced me to confront my uneasiness, and develop the skills that were within my range of capability. With this new confidence, I believe that I no longer will need course requirements and grades to serve as motivators to access new technology. As Dr. Smirnova and I discussed, in my future classroom, it will be my responsibility to find new technological means of engaging my students. With my new found confidence, I firmly believe that I will be open to exploring technological tools with the same vigor with which I explore other resources and educative practices for which I am already passionate. I've already managed to successfully teach a whole-class inquiry lesson in which all students utilized iPads to create Voki web-based projects and take Socrative quizzes! 

3.   Thirdly, in terms of developing knowledge of social studies, prior to this course, I was guilty of overemphasizing the role of history within social studies (being a history major). I knew the other disciplines, especially economics, geography, and political science, played a large role in social studies curriculum as well, but had not considered how many disciplines can be interwoven into a topical unit. Similarly, having a firm grasp on the primary purpose of social studies: "to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world" has instilled in me the value of developing the reasoning and social interaction skills that come most overwhelmingly with the information processing and social interaction models of instruction (NCSS, 1994, p. 3). In all, social studies transcends far beyond memorizing historical content: facts, dates, names. Implemented correctly, with lessons achieving the five principles of powerful instruction, social studies curriculum is the means for producing citizens with the necessary abilities of thinking independently, evaluating information to form generalizations, and working collaboratively in heterogeneous groups.  

Implications for My Future Classroom 

       
Most overwhelmingly, this course has pushed me (rigorously) to become a better, more conscious educator. In fact, my fieldwork experience in this course equates to the teaching experience for which I am most proud in terms of planning, implementing and reflecting. (My previous blogs contain in-depth reflections for my direct instruction, inquiry, and cooperative learning lessons.) Therefore, I intend for my future classroom to be brought to life with many inquiry and cooperative learning lessons that promote civic competence in all of my students. Accordingly, I plan to utilize authentic assessments to determine what my students are actually capable of DOING as a result of my instruction as opposed to paper and pencil tests that fall short of preparing students for the demands of civic competence. With this in mind, one day in the future, I hope that when a person walks into my classroom, probably enticed by curiosity over why students are using odd words like "Voki," "Space Race," and "Glogging," he or she will observe students actively engaged, animatedly speaking with one another to solve a problem that they identified in society on their own. To arrive at their solutions, they are looking to their iPads, consulting primary documents, and asking each other questions to synthesize the information in front of them. For observers making an extended visit, they will see the students excitedly and professionally presenting the conclusions they reached, acknowledging and disproving counterarguments and elaborating on the processes undertook to arrive at the conclusions. Undoubtedly, in my classroom, observers will see students occupied with thinking shown through authentic assessments requiring analysis, evaluation, and creation (Bloom's Taxonomy).     

References

National Council for the Social Studies. “Executive Summary.” Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies.

National Council for the Social Studies. “Principles of Teaching and Learning.” Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies.

 Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. (n.d.). Bloom's Taxonomy. Retrieved May 10, 2015, from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/  

Interviewing, a Skill on Its Own

Throughout the semester, Dr. Smirnova has taught us the value of authentic assessment, "a form of assessment in which students are asked to perform real-world tasks that demonstrate meaningful application of essential knowledge and skills" (Mueller). Once again, she has modeled for us how to integrate into the classroom authentic assessments as opposed to more traditional evaluations in the "final" assignment: The Job Interview. 
For the assignment, our class of seven teacher candidates was separated into the roles of administrators and interviewee hopefuls. Each administrator was to design interview questions that zeroed in on one of three models of instruction: behavioral, information processing, and social interaction. Thus, interviewees had to channel all that they had learned about planning, implementing, and reflecting upon diverse lesson methods in the course. Additionally, administrators asked questions about forming objectives, incorporating technology, and integrating specific disciplines into the social studies curriculum. Thus, the job interview required interviewees, as well as administrators in picking the questions and evaluating interviewees' responses, to indicate mastery of the course objectives just as a final examination would assess. However, instead of determining whether the teacher candidates were capable of selecting correct responses or writing brief essays on a concept, the interview allowed teacher candidates to practice explaining their thinking and demonstrating their competence orally in the same manner they will need to when entering the job market. 
As the administrator with a preference for the information processing model, I imagined that I was hiring teachers to work in the school I opened, Enlightenment Academy. I described that the imaginary school's mission is to promote in its students an appreciation for reason and individuality, just as was the hallmark of the Enlightenment era in late seventeenth century Europe. Furthermore, I asserted that my goal in establishing this school was to create an environment in which students can learn and explore in ways motivated by their own natural curiosity. In other words, the school runs on the philosophy that we would rather set the stage for students to embark upon their own journey of exploration to find answers and make decisions, than provide students with an inauthentic learning experience in which all answers are provided by teachers. With this background information, interviewees knew to prepare themselves for questions about the information processing model and inquiry method of instruction. Scoring teacher candidates on a rubric that included preparation, first impressions, personal attributes, attitude, appearance, and quality of responses, it was easy to adopt the eyes of a critical interviewer. It became clear very early in the interviews which candidates understood the model and could present ideas clearly and succinctly and which could not.
In terms of actually responding to questions examining pedagogical knowledge, teacher candidates were expected (according to the rubric) to provide well-constructed, confident, and genuine responses, often citing resources, and providing examples from their own fieldwork experiences. It was in this area that many teacher candidates fell short as they attempted to answer with more generic, broad statements, and not with their own experiences. For example, I asked a specific follow-up question to a broad non-descriptive answer to one of my previous questions: "What would the students be doing during an inquiry lesson?" The teacher candidate replied, "I don't know," despite having already taught an inquiry lesson in fieldwork. Therefore, this teacher candidate could have easily referred back to her own experience even if she did not know the stages of the inquiry lesson or the five Es during the interview and commented on her own lesson, and what students were required to accomplish during that lesson.
I asked the following five questions while interviewing candidates:

1. What type of music do you associate with the information processing model of instruction?
2. If I walked into your classroom during an inquiry lesson, what would I see?
3. How would you incorporate technology into an inquiry lesson focusing on the discipline of “geography”?
4. You have a diverse class that consists of the following students: 3 gifted, 10 average, 3 LD, 7 ELL, 1 ADHD, and a selective mute student --- How will this impact the choice of methods you utilize in the classroom?
5. What is the one question you would most like to explore at this moment using the inquiry process?

I believe this was a good range of questions, that allowed me to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates, and provided an honest sampling of candidates' understanding and potential to apply the information processing model. At first, I did not think the first question, which I found strange for a formal interview, would produce thoughtful responses indicative of pedagogical knowledge. However, it became my favorite question because all of the candidates had a unique answer and from their explanations of their answers, I was able to garner information about their thinking processes. My favorite response to this question was Amanda's, as she indicated that the information processing model is most clearly associated with rap because rap music requires you to think about the lyrics just as information processing requires deep thinking. As to the other teacher candidates, I liked Nicole B.'s response to the third question in which she provided specific examples of how technology can be incorporated to integrate geography into the curriculum referencing Google Earth and Skype. She went on to describe a current events lesson she taught in which she utilized Google Earth to show pictures from countries around the world who were working to empower women. Additionally, I appreciated that Nicole S. was able to answer the second question delineating the steps of an inquiry lesson without hesitancy. She described that she would pre-assess the steps of the inquiry process, present students with a problem, place students in groups so they could solve the problem together talking about the information, and then presenting their solutions to the class. Nonetheless, she could have improved the answer further by discussing her own experience teaching an inquiry lesson. Similar to Nicole S., Ainsley also described in detail the steps of an inquiry lesson, but then expanded upon how she would determine if students were mastering the objectives. She described that she would circulate and take anecdotal notes while students were working, and would pay particular attention to whether students were forming their own questions and asking them to their peers, as a sign of deep thinking and analyzing.  

Thus, I valued when they utilized specifics from their fieldwork experiences, however was disappointed that not a single candidate discussed research that they had studied. For example, as I was asking questions about the information processing model, the candidates could have expanded upon their artifact bag lessons (no one mentioned artifact bag), and referenced the Fuhler, Farris, and Nelson (2006) article, "Building literacy skills across the curriculum: Forging connections with the past through artifacts." Overall, this experience as an administrator has allowed me to better understand what interviewers are looking for in interview responses, and has caused me to be much more cognizant of the errors that can be easily made.

References

Fuhler, C., Farris, P., & Nelson, P. (2006). Building literacy skills across the curriculum: Forging connections with the past through artifacts. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 646-659.

Harvard Extension School. (2013, March 27). How to Ace an Interview: 5 Tips from a Harvard Career Advisor. Retrieved May 7, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHDrj0_bMQ0

  

Exploring Within: My Educational Philosophy

© 1999 LeoNora M. Cohen, OSU - School of Education

The Philosophies 
To begin my exploration into my own educational philosophy and psychological orientation, I utilized the Oregon State Educational Philosophies Self-Assessment and Scoring Guide. After evaluating forty statements to determine whether I agree or disagree, the tool indicated my inclination for Progressivism and Cognitivism/Constructivism over other philosophies. After reading more about what these philosophies entail, I agree that these accurately describe my thinking with some influence from Critical Theory and Humanist philosophies as well.                   

Progressivists believe that in education, the child is more important than the content. Teachers must make connections between their teaching and students' interests and daily lives. Students should solve real world problems by "thinking, feeling, and doing" and then reflect upon their solutions to develop values. 

Similarly, constructivists or cognitivists feel that teachers should establish the environmental conditions that allow students to freely construct or develop their own knowledge. Students are provided with a challenging question or idea which they must make sense of using the inquiry process, interacting with peers, and drawing on prior experiences.

Philosophies Simplified: 
I feel that the purpose of education mirrors directly the primary purpose of the social studies curriculum defined by the National Council for the Social Studies: "help[ing] young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world." Thus, the purpose of social studies and education is not for students to memorize and repeat facts. While it is critical that students gain knowledge, it is more important to develop students' capabilities of applying the knowledge after attainment. Instead of assessing with the traditional selected-response paper-and-pencil tests whether a student successfully memorized important names, dates, and other facts, to me it is more important to assess what students can do with the information. For instance, after observing a demonstration or listening to contradictory viewpoints on an issue, are they capable of asking pertinent questions that were not covered explicitly? Do they know how to find the answers to those questions? Most importantly, are students able to form generalizations based on that knowledge that are meaningful to future situations? I am more interested in evaluating these abilities, and consequently planning instruction that increases students' success on authentic assessments (when knowledge is applied in different real-world contexts), because these are the abilities that students will need in the real world.     
       

 Knowing that I will maximize the use of authentic assessment in my classroom to prepare students for the high levels of thinking the real world requires, I can prepare my students to be successful by matching the authenticity of the assessment to the authenticity of instruction. To facilitate students' development of the higher-order thinking skills of Bloom's Taxonomy, I will regularly employ inquiry-based lessons that capture students' interest and lead to formulations of generalizations. Similarly, believing that students learn through interacting with peers and knowing that students retain ninety-percent of what they teach to others, I want to infuse methods within the social interaction model of instruction into my lessons as well. As opposed to direct instruction, in which students passively receive facts, I believe the frequent and quality use of inquiry-based and cooperative learning lessons will equate to more powerful instruction. 

By powerful instruction, I mean instruction that is meaningful, integrative, value-based, challenging, and active. In my view, the only instruction in which teachers and students should engage. Instruction is meaningful when: Students make connections between their personal lives and the content they are learning; emphasis is placed upon deep understanding of important topics as opposed to fragile knowledge of too many topics; and teachers remain reflective and flexible in adjusting lessons based on assessment data and students' needs. I believe inquiry-based and cooperative learning methods are meaningful as students are encouraged to recall prior experiences and knowledge when forming hypotheses and become experts on specific topics when researching them and teaching their peers. Next, instruction is integrative when: Connections are made between topics; technology is incorporated; and multiple disciplines and/or content areas are intertwined to expand understanding and skill formation. Inquiry-based and cooperative learning methods can be easily structured to meet the needs of all disciplines and content areas. In fact, I feel students should explore social studies topics from multiple different entry-points. For example, each member of a cooperative learning group can investigate the role of a social studies discipline on a given issue. Furthermore, web projects make for excellent exploration tools in inquiry lessons and group projects in cooperative learning lessons. Thirdly, instruction is value-based when students: Confront controversial issues; make ethical determinations; evaluate the pros and cons that come with a course of action; and accept differences in opinion. Cooperative learning projects ensure discussion among group members, and activities such as six hats allow for critical evaluation of arguments without hostility. Fourthly, instruction is challenging when: Students strive to meet goals individually and as group members; well-reasoned arguments are required; and a commitment to deep thinking is necessary to meet goals. Cooperative learning and inquiry-based lessons place the responsibility of learning on the students while still allowing flexibility for students to incorporate their strengths and preferences. This helps to ensure an intrinsic motivation for being successful, while still facilitating an expansion in skill attainment. Similarly, the inquiry process scaffolds students through forming arguments, as conclusions are based upon specific data collected and analyzed. Lastly, instruction is active when: Students are independent and self-regulated; instruction and assessment emphasize real-world applications; and students construct knowledge using discourse and reflection.         

Thus, I argue that the purpose of education is to create well-rounded people capable of thinking deeply, making reasoned decisions, and socializing across cultural divides, in an increasingly complicated world. I feel the best way to ensure that students have these skills throughout their lives is to develop them in the classroom with authentic assessments in which students solve real-world problems. Then, to prepare for these types of assessments, corresponding instruction must rely on powerful teaching methods like inquiry and cooperative learning lessons in which students are central. 

References

Cohen, L. (1999, January 1). Educational Philosophies Self-Assessment and Scoring Guide. Retrieved May 4, 2015, from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/selfassessment.html

National Council for the Social Studies. “Executive Summary.” Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies

National Council for the Social Studies. “Principles of Teaching and Learning.” Expectations of excellence: curriculum standards for social studies.

  

The New Definition of Anti-Bias: Appreciation

What else is social studies? 
An in-depth look at the anti-bias curriculum. 

As a future educator of social studies, it is my responsibility to promote students’ civic competence considering that: “The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world” (National Council for the Social Studies, 1994, p. 3). To fully prepare students to engage in their roles as global citizens in a “culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world,” students must be provided with authentic experiences that challenge them to appreciate differences in their peers’ cultures and perspectives. Thus, teachers become responsible for providing students with these experiences so that they may lead students to analyze the inaccuracies and stereotypes within their own thinking and what they have been told, considering that “prejudice is contagious” (Anti-Defamation League, 2000). Failing to prevent the early formation of prejudicial attitudes in the elementary grades, when prejudice is at its most vulnerable, increases the likelihood that students will embark upon a life-long path of hate and violence: “Stereotyping, prejudice, discrimination, bias, and hate are part of a broad continuum of behavior.  Along that continuum are a number of negative behaviors, including bullying, threats, exclusion, harassment, bias-motivated behavior, and hate-motivated violence” (Partners Against Hate, 2001, p. 9). Exercising the inquiry process, I have explored how to incorporate anti-bias instruction into the social studies curriculum, and uncovered activities that can be utilized to impede the hate escalation continuum, and foster appreciation for diversity instead. Therefore, this assignment has expanded my content knowledge of what social studies entails, underscored the value of controversial discussions and cooperative learning to promote civic competence, and developed my pedagogical knowledge of how to target anti-bias and cultural appreciation domains in my future classroom.

Prior to my inquiry journey exploring anti-bias and anti-violence curriculum, I understood that prejudicial attitudes were typically passed down generationally within families and were largely the result of ignorance, unfamiliarity, and fear. However, I minimized the role teachers can play in challenging prejudices and curbing their development in such young children: “Both the seeds of respect and the seeds of intolerance are planted when children are very young and nurtured by their experiences and by the attitudes of those around them as they grow” (Partners Against Hate, 2001, p. 25). Similarly, Caryl Stern of the Anti-Defamation League asserts: “No child is born a bigot. Hate is learned and there is no doubt it can be unlearned.” Recognizing that, “after age 9, racial attitudes tend to stay the same unless the child has a life-changing experience,” I now can appreciate the critical importance of specifically teaching the main tenets and emphasizing the essential questions that come with anti-bias curriculum (Aboud, 1988). The essential questions of the anti-bias curriculum that I think are most important, and even incorporate and weave in some of the global education and character formation curriculum that my colleagues discussed, include: How is prejudice different from dislike? How does humanity as a whole benefit when people from all backgrounds are appreciated and included? How does hate influence negative behavior, and why does this harm our global community? Specifically, my inquiry process has led me to generalize, as I expressed in my presentation, that the highest form of anti-bias, the goal teachers should have for all students, is appreciation of differences: “We can learn to respect differences, to see them as a source of strength in our lives and society, even celebrate them” (Anti-Defamation League, 2000).

To develop this appreciation, which goes hand-in-hand with students reaching the highest level of civic competence, students must be provided with genuine opportunities to determine for themselves why diversity is something to be valued as opposed to hated. Prior to this inquiry process, I was most familiar with teachers directly telling students that hate, bullying, and prejudice are wrong, and this having limited benefits. At most, I felt that this approach following the behavioral model could accomplish tolerance as students come to find that any prejudice at school will not be allowed. Research has confirmed my hypothesis, and overwhelmingly advocated that activities falling within a combination of the other three models of instruction – information processing, social interaction, and personal – are superior in promoting the ultimate goal of the anti-bias curriculum: to foster appreciation of cultural diversity. In particular, the cooperative learning method is celebrated for showing “consistently positive effects on student achievement, conflict reduction, and intergroup relations. Of particular interest in the area of interrelationships, students who experience cooperative learning techniques have shown gains in friends of different backgrounds and have made more positive attributions to other groups” (Partners Against Hate, 2000, p. 43). By having students engage in tasks cooperatively, and more specifically, challenging students to engage in cooperative problem solving in which an interpersonal conflict must be resolved utilizing a non-confrontational framework, students are required to confront their prejudices and adjust them in light of new information (Four Worlds Development Project, 1988). In other words, positive interaction breeds improved relations.

Also, while in the throes of researching for this presentation, I attended a seminar entitled, “Building Bridges for Our English Language Learners through the Introduction and Analysis of Latino Literature,” given by Karen H. Dakin and Jenice Mateo-Toledo. While they did not explicitly claim to be presenting on anti-bias curriculum, I quickly recognized that their presentation aimed at incorporating quality multicultural literature and analyzing how literature changes with culture, meets not only standards for English Language Arts but also works toward fostering a better appreciation and understanding of cultural differences. The seminar taught me that selecting literature written by cultural insiders that challenges dominant stereotypes provides students a “greater self-awareness and greater understanding of others, a more realistic view of the world, and the ability to use what they have learned to make meaningful changes in their own lives” (Ada, 2003, p. 84). The Partners Against Hate confirm that, “Children’s literature serves as both a mirror to children and as a window to the world around them by showing people from diverse groups playing and working together, solving problems, and overcoming obstacles” (2001, p. 36). Consequently, the Partners Against Hate demand that: “Because there is such a relatively small number of children’s books about people of color, people who are gay and lesbian, or people with physical and mental disabilities, it is extremely important that adults make every effort to see that high-quality children’s literature by and about these groups is made available to children” (2000, p. 36). Through this “window,” students’ empathy and appreciation for cultural diversity can be increased while fear of the unknown is decreased.

Thus, the anti-bias curriculum goal of leading students to appreciate differences among cultures as opposed to progressing down a continuum of hate that leads to bullying and violence targets the first theme of the National Curriculum Standards for the Social Studies: Culture. Through this curriculum, “students will acquire knowledge and understanding of culture through multiple modes, including fiction and non-fiction, data analysis, meeting and conversing with peoples of divergent backgrounds, and completing research into the complexity of various cultural systems” (NCSS). Similarly, the curriculum integrates New York state social studies and English Language Arts standards across all grade levels. For example, a lesson emphasizing peaceful conflict resolution using a cooperative problem solving method within the social interaction model of instruction targets the Common Core sixth-grade social studies civic participation standard: “Participate in negotiating and compromising in the resolution of differences and conflict; introduce and examine the role of conflict resolution.” Similarly, an anti-bias lesson using multicultural literature as described above would meet the sixth-twelfth grade New York State Common Core Career and College Readiness Standard for Reading 11: Students will “Respond to literature by employing knowledge of literary language, textual features, and forms to read and comprehend, reflect upon, and interpret literary texts from a variety of genres and a wide spectrum of American and world cultures.”

As I explained in detail in my glogster presentation, to target these and other standards, as well as integrate anti-bias curriculum with the disciplines of social studies and other content areas, Partners Against Hate present a plethora of activities for all grade-levels. For kindergarten and first-graders, I would suggest beginning by exploring differences and how they are not essentially bad, which will hopefully help to prevent students from making rash judgments of the unknown later in life. To explore differences, students can read a poem by Nikki Giovanni titled “Two Friends.” By analyzing this poem, students can make the generalization that people can have differences between them and still be friends. Second and third-graders can engage in an anti-bias curriculum research project by interviewing their parents and relatives about their own culture and sharing these stories with the class. The teacher can then promote communication and bridge-building by asking students to identify at least one similarity between their family’s story and a classmate’s family story. Fourth and fifth-graders should focus on exploring the difference between prejudice and dislike and the harmful effects of intolerance and violence. In this way, the anti-bias curriculum can be taught in conjunction with both historical accounts, utilizing primary documents, and present-day accounts, using non-fiction world news articles like those on Newsela, of intolerance and violence. A Partners Against Hate activity (2001, p. 71) that addresses the essential question regarding the difference between prejudice and dislike is to have students act out different scenarios, and then evaluate whether prejudice or simply dislike is present in the conflict.

Other anti-bias activities can be utilized and adapted for students in upper elementary, middle school, and high school grades. An activity with which I was familiar before researching this assignment was having students draw pictures of a certain population before receiving instruction about that group. Typically, many students will draw pictures incorporating stereotypes about the given population. In fact, when I participated in this activity at a recent workshop for teachers and teacher candidates, I was surprised to find that many educated adults still fell into the trap of stereotyping when asked to draw a Native American. While this activity is typically succeeded by a multicultural book about the population to alter students’ perceptions, I think the lesson would be even more powerful if teachers could arrange through Skype for students to interact with the given population from another place in the world or a person of that culture who transcends a negative stereotype, whichever is more appropriate for the given population. Students can then form the generalization that stereotypes inaccurately label individuals, and that they should interact with individuals to learn about them, not trust what they have heard from others.

As can be seen from all of these examples, it is critical to the anti-bias curriculum, as with all curricula, that students actively engage the material with peers of heterogeneous backgrounds, make personal connections to the material, and form generalizations that are meaningful to them. Overall, students must be provided with opportunities to progress through the inquiry process to explore examples of both hate-based and appreciation-based behaviors in history and presently. This will allow students to form generalizations about the side-effects of those actions, and apply these new understandings to their own lives and how they perceive their peers. As I explained in my presentation, students who develop appreciation for differences through reasoning as opposed to biased opinions passed down from ignorant adults or fear of the unknown are far less likely to employ cyber-bullying or hate-based violence. This is why I chose to emphasize the formation of appreciation, as opposed to the side-effects of not instilling it in students. Most importantly, the cultivation of appreciation, the ideal  for which the anti-bias curriculum strives, cannot be taught through a behavioral model of instruction. Students must discuss the information, have their own views challenged, and connect personally in order for the curriculum to be successful in exterminating the “racial attitudes that begin to harden by the fourth-grade” (Partners Against Hate, 2001, p. 16). As students are learning, there will be instances in which students express prejudices. While it is important that these hurtful ideas be corrected, it is more important that students understand why they are incorrect in the first place: “Telling the children that their behavior is hurtful and inappropriate is certainly in order, however, without explaining why, little learning will take place” (Partners Against Hate, 2001, p. 31). Students must be challenged to think beyond the stereotypes and prejudices that they have previously encountered, and form the generalizations that appreciation of all groups leads to a better world and that people of all cultures are more the same than different, through participation in activities that fall within the scope of the information processing, personal, and social interaction models of instruction.

References

Aboud, F. (1988). Children and prejudice. Oxford, OX, UK: B. Blackwell.

Ada, A.F. (2003). A magical encounter: Latino children’s literature in the classroom. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Dakin, K., & Mateo-Toledo, J. (Speakers) (2015, April 18). Building bridges for our English language learners through the introduction and analysis of Latino literature. 22nd Annual Conference on Literacy. Lecture conducted from Collaborative for Equity in Literacy Learning, Newburgh, NY.

Four Worlds Development Project. (1988). Unity in Diversity Curriculum Guide. Lethbridge: Four Worlds Development Project, University of Lethbridge.

LaRosa, C. (2000). The Anti-Defamation League's hate hurts: How children learn and unlearn prejudice. New York, NY: Scholastic.

National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies. Washington, D.C.: NCSS.

National Council for the Social Studies. (n.d.). National curriculum standards for social studies. Retrieved April 28, 2015, from http://www.socialstudies.org/standards/strands

New York State Education Department. (2011). New York State P-12 Common Core learning standards for ELA and literacy. Retrieved April 28, 2015, from https://www.engageny.org/resource/new-york-state-p-12-common-core-learning-standards-for-english-language-arts-and-literacy

New York State Education Department. (2015). New York State K-12 social studies framework. Retrieved April 28, 2015, from https://www.engageny.org/resource/new-york-state-k-12-social-studies-framework

Partners Against Hate. (2001). Program activity guide: Helping children resist bias and hate. Retrieved April 25, 2015, from http://www.partnersagainsthate.org/publications/pahprgguide302 .pdf