Evidence-Based Reasoning in Discussing Democratic Values in U.S. History

• In Event: Focusing the Analytic Lens on Evidence-Based Reasoning: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go

Abstract

Objectives and Theoretical Framework

History education engages students in using evidence-based reasoning to develop arguments about events in the past (NCSS, 2013, p. 45). Often these arguments are empirically-based, in which students conduct an inquiry using available resources. Another form of evidence-based reasoning is value-based decision making about events in the past, using democratic values (e.g., liberty, diversity, life, common good, truth) as justification for decisions made by individuals and groups (Halvorsen, 2018). In history education, these stances are often not evaluated as “right or wrong” but in terms of how well-reasoned and justified they are. This study examines the ways that students craft and defend arguments about ethical decision-making in the past, drawing on (1) empirical evidence presented in texts and (2) reasoning grounded in democratic values.

Methods

In the 2019-2020 school year, we explored how students in two classrooms responded to a curriculum intervention based on texts about US history that have an intensive focus on individuals and the internal struggles they experience as they make difficult decisions in a particular historical context (Halvorsen, 2018a, 2018b). Here, drawing on data from one classroom, we analyzed the arguments students used to justify their stance on ethical issues from U.S. history such as “Should Governor Murphy have ejected the sit-down strikers from the Fisher Body Plant in Flint?”
After determining their stance on the issue, students engaged in the instructional experience of both small group and whole group discussion. The use of discussion was based on prior scholarship that has shown that rich classroom discussions can help students think beyond their self-interest, consider how their opinions compare with those of their classmates, build respect toward different viewpoints, and build political knowledge (Hess, 2009). In these discussions, the teacher played the role of an active facilitator, interjecting with counterpoints and inviting students to contribute (Parker & Hess, 2001).

Results

In this paper, we demonstrate the kinds of evidence-based reasoning students draw on related to the historical event of the execution of US Army soldier, Private Eddie Slovak, who was court-martialed and executed for desertion during World War II. Students defended their response to the question, “Was it wrong to execute Private Eddie Slovak?” with evidence from the text and their ethical reasoning. Three findings emerged. First, students often drew connections between life in the past and life today. Second, students used similar justifications to argue different ethical stances. Third, students justified their stances using values such as life and liberty over other democratic values.

Significance

This paper contributes to the aims of the symposium by (1) describing the kinds of evidence used in history education; (2) demonstrating the higher-order thinking skills involved in historical evidence-based reasoning and argumentation: perspective taking, judgement, speaking and listening, and re-evaluating one’s original perspective (Milligan, Gibson, & Peck, 2018); and (3) demonstrating the instructional experiences possible for engaging students in historical evidenced-based reasoning.

Authors

• Anne-Lise F. Halvorsen, Michigan State University

• Betul Demiray Sandiraz, Michigan State University