Curriculum Standards For History Debated, Are They Effective?
January 15, 1999
GAINESVILLE — For years, a debate has raged over curriculum standards and who controls them. The locus of the standards movement now has shifted to the states and two researchers at the University of Florida offer some issues to consider as this shift takes place.
Their report, “National vs. State Curriculum Standards for History in the United States: Where Will the Debate Lead Us?” appears in the summer issue of The Curriculum Journal.
Many advocates of national standards have asserted that they should be voluntary and not federally funded. As a whole, they feel national standards go against the individualistic traditions of the country and are an unconstitutional usurpation of the local control reserved for the states.
On the opposite side, the report shows some critics feel state standards can never be effectively implemented because teachers simply don’t have the time or resources necessary to meet state guidelines.
Researcher Frans Doppen has been a history teacher for 15 years and currently teaches at P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School. Doppen said some standards are needed because he gets students who transfer into his classes from other schools, aren’t familiar with the information he’s teaching and must catch up with the rest of the students.
“There’s no course-to-course balance,” he said. “That balance is missing.”
He said Florida’s curriculum frameworks are so specific and detailed there isn’t much time for teachers to cover day-to-day issues in the news or to show students the relevance of what they are learning.
Doppen said that while subject matter is important, so are the skills students learn while in class. He did say, however, that students need some level of basic knowledge on the subjects they study.
Although the responsibility of education rests at the state and local level, Doppen said the United States is such a diverse country it is difficult to impose strict state or national standards.
Forty-eight states have statewide curriculum standards, with Florida having the Sunshine State Standards. Doppen said creating a national standard and taking local control away from the individual school systems might result in a focus on American history and could hurt other national and international multicultural issues that need to be taught.
“Political reality dictates that parents want it,” Doppen said about curriculum standards.
Elizabeth Yeager, assistant professor of social studies at UF, said three specific issues need to be addressed in the implementation of state curriculum standards.
Yeager said the first issue is teachers and their professional development. She said it’s crucial that teachers get the time and training they need to implement the standards they are asked to follow. Teachers need an opportunity for discussion of standards and how they can best be taught in particular school settings.
The second issue is testing. Yeager said that if there are to be curriculum standards, then standard tests must be appropriately designed to align with the content of the standards.
Finally, Yeager said a discussion of equity issues is central to any examination of the effectiveness of state standards. For example, standards will need to be modified to help meet the needs of schools where the majority of students speak English as a second language.
When it comes to history standards specifically, Yeager said the big issue is “whose history is it, how should it be interpreted and how should it be emphasized.” A resumption of culture wars over history standards would be unfortunate, she said, adding that what is needed is a broad-based discussion on standards policy and reform involving a variety of stake-holders.