Writing Opportunities in the History Classroom

• In Event: Multiple Lenses for Understanding Source-Based Analytical Writing Development

Abstract

Writing plays a central role in students’ development of academic language, critical thinking, and reasoning in diverse content areas. The role of classroom teachers in establishing a positive sociocultural classroom context includes a writing-focused climate and enacting instruction that allows students to develop. Thus, the norms, expectations, and practices of a classroom community are crucial to understanding a writer’s development.

Graham, Kiuhara, and MacKay’s (2020) meta-analysis found that writing enhances student learning of academic content (ES = 0.3) and argumentative writing has been found to provide greater benefits for content learning (ES = 0.42). Despite its importance, history/social studies teachers devote little time to writing in their classrooms, with most assignments requiring a page or less of text (Applebee & Langer, 2011). However, the introduction of the Common Core State Standards and California’s History-Social Studies Framework (California Department of Education, 2017) increased writing requirements within the history/social studies curriculum. The purpose of this study is to better understand writing instruction in secondary history/social studies classrooms as these are crucial contexts for writing development.

This study took place in a California school district that serves predominantly (80%) Latinx students, and (73%) students eligible for the National School Lunch program. 98% of the district’s secondary grade history/social studies teachers completed our Teaching Writing Practices survey. This survey addressed teachers’ instructional goals, their writing instructional practices, their use of sources in writing assignments, and their sense of preparation for teaching writing. The survey drew from a number of validated measures (see Drew et al., 2017; Gilbert & Graham, 2010; Graham, et al., 2002; Graham, et al., 2014; Kiuhara, Graham, & Hawken, 2009) and recent NAEP surveys.

We found that extended writing assignments were uncommon, with 55% of the teachers reporting that they gave assignments that were two pages in length or longer, no more than twice a year. Instead, most student writing consisted of short assignments that could be completed within a single class period. Writing assigned weekly included completing graphic organizers (56% of teachers), note-taking (76% of teachers), summary writing (50% of teachers), and written responses to materials read (66% of teachers). Analysis of open-ended questions revealed that teachers’ goals for incorporating writing included assessing and deepening students’ content knowledge and improving students’ skills at communicating their understanding of historical events. Teachers believed that effective writing instruction in history/social studies classes requires that teachers understand: their students and how to address their learning needs; history/social studies content; the writing process; using evidence to support claims; and how to scaffold student reading comprehension and writing processes. Finally, history/social studies teachers had limited preservice and in-service professional development in writing instruction.

These findings inform where efforts to improve writing development may begin, by targeting beliefs and practices of teachers participating in classroom writing communities. Our findings also inform professional development that can help secondary history/social studies teachers use effective writing instruction to meet their goals of promoting culturally and linguistically diverse students’ historical content knowledge and communication skills.

Authors

• Tamara Powell Tate, University of California - Irvine

• Penelope Collins, University of California - Irvine