Teachers’ Perspectives on Text Selection and Use for History and Social Studies Lessons

• In Event: Reading for Understanding: Initial Studies of Students and Teachers Using Multiple Sources in Content Areas

Abstract

Objectives: This study explores content-based texts used in the history and social studies lessons of four teachers and their rationales and explanations of when, why, and how the texts were used. Specifically, interview and observation field note data were analyzed to determine: a) number and types of texts teachers selected and used in their lessons; b) teachers’ perspectives on the affordances of different types of texts, why and how they used various text sources, and the challenges associated with using multiple sources of different types.

Theoretical Framework: In history, discipline-based knowledge entails reconstruction of the past through close analysis and interpretation of texts (Andrews & Burke, 2007; Wineburg, 1991). Considering the central role of texts in history, teachers’ decisions about texts are some of the most important decisions they have to make. These decisions are multifaceted and involve complex considerations of history, literacy, and student learning. Although research encourages history teachers to support students’ text analysis and interpretation (Monte-Seno, 2008; Neumann, 2010), little is known about how teachers think about the selection and uses of texts for these purposes.

Methods/Data Sources: Four teachers from two Midwestern urban and two nearby suburban schools were observed teaching history and/or social studies lessons across two consecutive days. Prior to the lesson, teachers completed a pre-observation interview survey via email. After the observed lesson, post interviews were conducted in person or over the phone. These interviews were audiotaped and transcribed.

Analysis/Findings: Texts mentioned in the interviews or used during the observations were catalogued along several pre-determined dimensions (type of source, mode, medium). Teachers tended to use one type of source to the exclusion of others, with some gravitating toward tertiary sources (textbook/encyclopedia), but others to primary sources. Teachers also tended to use different media depending on the topic. For historical events, they tended to use printed text but for current events they tended to use audio and video sources.

Using grounded theory methods, interview data were coded to capture teachers’ perspectives on the sources used. A primary distinction emerged around whether teachers discussed texts in terms of literacy goals and needs or in terms of instructional goals related to history. Three teachers’ textual explanations most often related to literacy issues, such as how texts were used to teach reading strategies. The fourth teacher’s conceptions of texts were characterized as history focused, as over half her textual explanations related to history content and disciplinary practices. There was no clear association between teachers’ explanations and the numbers and types of sources used in their lessons.

Implications: Neumann (2010) calls for more professional development for history teachers to refine their discipline-based epistemology of texts. The lack of secondary source use (non-textbook sources that interpret/analyze primary sources) in each lesson and the tendency for three teachers to focus on literacy over history content or disciplinary practices in their textual explanations suggest a need for further research of teachers’ text selection and use to inform subsequent professional development on the use and role of documents in historical reasoning.

Author

• Jacquelynn S. Popp, University of Illinois at Chicago