DOCUMENT RESUME ED 343 623 JC 920 143 TITLE Committee for the Introductory Course in History (CINCH), 1988-1991: An Overview of Its Investigations and Findings. INSTITUTION Center for Faculty Development, Princeton, NJ. SPONS AGENCY National Endowment for the Humanities (NFAH), Washington, D.C. PUB DATE 92 NOTE 196p. AVAILABLE FROMCenter for Faculty Development, Department of History, 129 Dickinson Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 ($15.00). PUB TYPE Guides - Classroom Use - Teaching Guides (For Teacher) (052) -- Collected Works- General (020) EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS *College Curriculum; Community Colleges; Course Content; *Course Descriptions; Course Objectives; Course Organization; European History; *History Instruction; Instructional Material Evaluation; *Introductory Courses; Two Year Colleges; *Western Civilization; *World History ABSTRACT Between 1988 and 1991, the Center for Faculty Development undertook a project to evaluate the teaching of the Introductory Course in History at American community colleges. Rased upon a survey of over 100 introductory history teachers and conference discussions, it was determined that two sets of course guidelines for faculty were required, one for Western Civilization and one for World History courses, each divided into two semesters. In addition, the survey of teachers found several key isques, including a lack of commonality in the themes of Western and World History; a need for a practical alternative to courses emphasizinga superior Western cultvrci and a difference in conceptual approaches between Western Civilization and World History. The bulk of this report consists of course guidelines for the Western Civilization and World History courses. Separate guidelines are presented forthree approaches to teaching the courses: "Chronological,"a basic narrative, period-by-period course; "Sources," built aroundan intensive and interdisciplinary study of primarysources; and "Postholes," focusing on a close analysis of a few major historical periods. Each of the course guidelines contains: (1) detailed syllabi for both semesters; (2) course objectives; (3) suggested learning activities and discussion topics; (4) lists of primary and secondary sources; (5) sample expanded curricular guides; (6) study guides; (7) lists of recommended audiovisual materials; (8) expandedcourse outlines; (9) faculty reading lists; and (10) sample lectures.Other appendixes contain the original survey questions andresponses and a list of task force members. (JSP) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * ***********1*********************************************************** COMMITTEE FOR TEE INTRODUCTORY COURSE IN HISTORY 1988-1991 (CINCH) An Overview of Its Investigations and Findings "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS U.S. VEMRTIMINT OF EDUCATOR MATERIAL IN MICROFICHE ONLY Office or Educatenet Research ato0 Oopcoromtbot 0/ HAS BEEN GRANTED BY EDUCANONAL RESOURCES INFORMATtON CENTER IERICI Tht* document has Open reproduced as reCened rent the person or oroopistoon T. K. Rabb Ortipootrog it 0 t Woof charren have Doan m1cte to,toOtore taPtOduettOo Catioty T4 TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES PCHilts o vor* or oprmensstitett,n mc aoc. INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." moot do "Of FIPCescar Op re)resent ()motel OE Pi Dasanoo pot,cy BEST COPY AVAILABLE In the fall of 1988 the Committee for the Introductory Course in History (CINCH) received a grant from the NationalEndowment for the Humanities to evaluate the teaching of the IntroductoryCourse in History at American community colleges. The Project had five main goals at the outset: 1) To strengthen history education in the two-year college througha national effort to identify, develop, and disseminate guidelinesfor introductory history courses that can be adapted easilyto the needs of individual institutions. 2) To facilitate the adoption or improvement of such introductory courses through the dissemination of flexible models that have been considered appropriate by a variety of institutions representativeof the nation's two-year colleges. 3) To raise the awareness of faculty and administratorsat two-year institutions and within professional organizations aboutthe need for more effectivy introductory courses in history. 4) To identify criteria that would help deliberative bodiesconcerned with curriculum at two-year colleges in their effortsto define an essential core of materials and approaches that should be introduced toevery student. 5) To reduce the educational inequality to whichmany career-track two-year college students are now subjectedas a result of having inadequate tntroductions to the historical perspectiveon their world. Four activities constituted the main work of thegrantees from the spring of 1989 through the fall of 1991: 3 1) Gathering as much information as possible from a wide variety of two-year institutions about current practices and problems in the introductory history course; 2) Preparing a preliminary report on the basis of a survey instrument; 3) Assessing the survey's findings and the preliminary report at a specially convened Conference; and 4) The preparation of a detailed set of course guidelines and syllabi by task forces that reflected the variety of models for the teaching of introductory history courses in Western Civilization and World History. During the summer of 1989, the CINCH Committee devised a questionnaire surveying colleagues across the country. (A copy of the text and the results of the survey is enclosed as Appendix A.)Over one hundred historians responded, with extensive information about current practices and problems in teaching the introductory course in Western Civilization/World History. Over 70 sample course outlines were submitted, from a wide variety of rwo-year institutions in thirty-two/states.An evaluation of the results of this extensive effort of data collection from "those in the trenches" produced the following conclusions, and identified five key issues for serious discussion at a three-day Conference held at Princeton University in May 1990: 1) The lack of commonality in the themes of Western and World History in the twentieth century. There appears to be some support for the integration of the Western with the World Civilization course, but also a recognition that the general outlines followed by most traditional texts lack such flexibility. 2) Some faculty wonder whether there may be practical alternatives to a Western Civilization course that rests on the notion of the superiority of Western culture from around 1500 A.D. to the present. Is there a "coherence beyond chronology" -- i.e. a moral point of view that might serveas a "glue" for modern culture in the Western and non-Western worlds? 3) Is the difference in conceptual approach between teachers of Western Civilization and World History so great that thegap cannot be closed? It would appear from the comments of our respondents that the goals of World historians are far more general and are based on the assumption that there is no longer a prima facie case for studyingone society rather than another. 4) One common point of agreement for teachers of Western Civilization and World History is that they do not know enough about the students they teach. "What do they come in with?What are they leaving with?What does society expect of us?" is the way one respondent summarized the issue. The real point of our efforts may not be pedagogy: it may be knowing better the problems of the students we teach. Many respondents agreed that the content of the introductory course must now be organized around the assumption that students have no background at all, since secondary schools give them little sense of how historical evidence is used to arrive at conclusions. 5) Related to the question of content is the issue of academic rigor. In commenting on what should be taught in the introductory course,some respondents indicated that they felt "locked in" by a two-semester sequence and are considering moving toward a three-semester sequence so that students can cover less ground, but cover it more thoroughly. In an attempt to reach conclusions, not only about course contentbut also about broader issues having to do with the improvement ofthe Introductory Course in History, the CINCH Committee invited to the May1990 Conference approximately two dozen historians, who had submitted some of the more innovative course outlines andsuggestions, to join their deliberations. This Conference clarified the scope and substance of our further work. The need for new guidelines and syllabi for the teaching of the Introductory Course in History was unanimously approved, as was the need for the formation of new working groups to complete the undertaking. Conference participants also confirmed enthusiastically that: 1) Two sets of course guidelines for faculty would be required, one for Western and one for World Civilization courses, each divided into two semesters; and 2) Within each of these categories, it would be necessary to take into account the fact that there were three basic ways of teaching the introductory course: chronological, sources, and "postholes". Accordizgly, the enlarged r,roup of participants divided itself into six task forces, each taking responsibility for one of these setsof guidelines. Revision of our budget, to reflect this new organization of the task forces, was approved in the