Senate Hearing on History
I thought this might be of interest:
SENATE HEARING: "U.S. HISTORY: OUR WORST SUBJECT" On 30 June 2005,the Senate Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions conducted a hearing on "The American History Achievement Act," legislation (S. 860) introduced by senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA). The legislation seeks to authorize a 10-state pilot study to provide a state-by-state comparison of U.S. history and civics test data for 8th and 12 grades administered through the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP).
During the hearing that was chaired by Alexander, NAEP officials announced that beginning in 2006 the U.S. history NAEP test would begin to be administered every four years. Furthermore, in response to criticism from historian David McCullough about the impact of the president's "No Child Left Behind" initiative on the teaching of history, Senator Kennedy promised that when the "No Child Left Behind" legislation comes up for reauthorization, history will be added as a core element in the initiative's teaching mission.
Panelists who testified included historian David McCullough; Executive Director of the National Assessment Governing Board Charles Smith; Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies Director Stephanie Norby; and Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals Field Representative James Parisi.
In his thoughtful remarks, McCullough told the senators that one of the central problems in the teaching of history is that teachers who possess degrees in education rarely possess the needed subject matter expertise to teach specific subjects such as history. He stated that history
majors make the best history teachers because they are able to
communicate a love of history to students. He also called on colleges
and universities to place renewed emphasis on the importance of a
liberal arts education.
McCullough also stated that, with some notable exceptions, history texts are often written in a style far to boring to interest students; he called for a renewed effort to emphasize the "literature of history." McCullough then returned to a familiar theme that he often raises in his appearances before congressional committees -- that it is important for teachers to focus on narrative history to reach students. McCullough minced no words when he pointed out the detrimental impact that the "No Child Left Behind" initiative -- with its emphasis on math and English testing -- is having on the teaching of history. Finally, he called on the committee to explore ways that school teachers can benefit from the superb educational opportunities that exist at the historic sites and places administered by the National Park Service. The national historical parks, stated McCullough, needed to be better tapped "as educational resources especially as locations for summer institutes and workshops."
In his prepared remarks, Charles E. Smith of the National Assessment Governing Board reviewed the widely known NAEP assessment results relating to history testing at the 4th, 8th, and 12th grade levels. In what perhaps was the most important news item to emerge out of the hearing, Smith announced that during the 19-21 May 2005 meeting his board of governors a new history testing schedule was adopted. He said that beginning in 2006, the NAEP U.S. history exam would be conducted every four years -- in 2006, 2010, and 2014. Smith also stated that as embodied in the legislation under consideration by the committee, the objective of conducting history assessments in at least ten geographically diverse states was "a reasonable goal" provided "a sufficient and timely appropriation" was forthcoming.
Stephanie Norby focused her brief remarks on the work of the Smithsonian Institution in offering teaching workshops throughout the country. James Parisi looked at the legislation from a state perspective. He expressed the opinion that S. 860 was particularly important as "state departments of education have a limited capacity to develop and implement any more assessment programs....Clearly, if states are to develop high-quality assessments" said Parisi, "federal assistance will be needed."
For the written testimony of the witnesses, please visit http://help.senate.gov/calendars/all.html and tap into the appropriate hearing link.
SENATE HEARING: "U.S. HISTORY: OUR WORST SUBJECT" On 30 June 2005,the Senate Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions conducted a hearing on "The American History Achievement Act," legislation (S. 860) introduced by senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA). The legislation seeks to authorize a 10-state pilot study to provide a state-by-state comparison of U.S. history and civics test data for 8th and 12 grades administered through the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP).
During the hearing that was chaired by Alexander, NAEP officials announced that beginning in 2006 the U.S. history NAEP test would begin to be administered every four years. Furthermore, in response to criticism from historian David McCullough about the impact of the president's "No Child Left Behind" initiative on the teaching of history, Senator Kennedy promised that when the "No Child Left Behind" legislation comes up for reauthorization, history will be added as a core element in the initiative's teaching mission.
Panelists who testified included historian David McCullough; Executive Director of the National Assessment Governing Board Charles Smith; Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies Director Stephanie Norby; and Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals Field Representative James Parisi.
In his thoughtful remarks, McCullough told the senators that one of the central problems in the teaching of history is that teachers who possess degrees in education rarely possess the needed subject matter expertise to teach specific subjects such as history. He stated that history
majors make the best history teachers because they are able to
communicate a love of history to students. He also called on colleges
and universities to place renewed emphasis on the importance of a
liberal arts education.
McCullough also stated that, with some notable exceptions, history texts are often written in a style far to boring to interest students; he called for a renewed effort to emphasize the "literature of history." McCullough then returned to a familiar theme that he often raises in his appearances before congressional committees -- that it is important for teachers to focus on narrative history to reach students. McCullough minced no words when he pointed out the detrimental impact that the "No Child Left Behind" initiative -- with its emphasis on math and English testing -- is having on the teaching of history. Finally, he called on the committee to explore ways that school teachers can benefit from the superb educational opportunities that exist at the historic sites and places administered by the National Park Service. The national historical parks, stated McCullough, needed to be better tapped "as educational resources especially as locations for summer institutes and workshops."
In his prepared remarks, Charles E. Smith of the National Assessment Governing Board reviewed the widely known NAEP assessment results relating to history testing at the 4th, 8th, and 12th grade levels. In what perhaps was the most important news item to emerge out of the hearing, Smith announced that during the 19-21 May 2005 meeting his board of governors a new history testing schedule was adopted. He said that beginning in 2006, the NAEP U.S. history exam would be conducted every four years -- in 2006, 2010, and 2014. Smith also stated that as embodied in the legislation under consideration by the committee, the objective of conducting history assessments in at least ten geographically diverse states was "a reasonable goal" provided "a sufficient and timely appropriation" was forthcoming.
Stephanie Norby focused her brief remarks on the work of the Smithsonian Institution in offering teaching workshops throughout the country. James Parisi looked at the legislation from a state perspective. He expressed the opinion that S. 860 was particularly important as "state departments of education have a limited capacity to develop and implement any more assessment programs....Clearly, if states are to develop high-quality assessments" said Parisi, "federal assistance will be needed."
For the written testimony of the witnesses, please visit http://help.senate.gov/calendars/all.html and tap into the appropriate hearing link.
posted by Mark Horney at 11:03 AM
0 comments
