Social Education 70(5), pp. 317–321 ©2006 National Council for the Social Studies Research and Practice

“Research & Practice,” established early in 2001, features educational research that is The Social Studies directly relevant to the work of classroom teachers. Here, I invited Ron Evans to provide an historical perspective on the Wars, Now and Then controversy that once again swirls around the social studies curriculum. Ronald W. Evans —Walter C. Parker, “Research and Practice” Editor, University of Washington, Seattle.

In his foreword to Where Did Social fashions and trends, a set of competing curriculum and often emphasize Studies Go Wrong?, published in 2003, interest groups is a relatively constant curricular attention to social problems. Chester Finn blames the “deterioration feature of the social studies arena. A fifth and related group is composed of social studies in U.S. schools” on There are five major competing camps, of social reconstructionists or critical the “lunatics” who have “taken over as I described in a recent book, The pedagogues, who cast social studies the asylum,” and who are imparting Social Studies Wars, struggling at in schools in a leading role in the “ridiculously little knowledge” to different times either to retain control transformation of American society. students. He lauds the volume’s intent of social studies or to influence its Other camps may be identified as well, to explain “where and how and why direction.2 The first, traditional and other curriculum historians may social studies went awry.”1 The book has historians, supports history as the provide a different breakdown. Herbert sparked a controversy over the current core of social studies and emphasizes Kliebard, in a classic work, Struggle for state of the social studies curriculum. content acquisition, chronology, and the American Curriculum, described But is controversy over social studies the textbook as the backbone of the four main interest groups: humanists, new, and does it matter to those engaged course. This camp defined its approach developmentalists, social efficiency in the day-to-day work of teaching in in the 1890s and has experienced a educators, and social meliorists.3 Hazel this subject area? My aims in this article revival in recent years. A second camp Hertzberg, in Social Studies Reform, are, first, to capture the main camps advocates social studies as social science discussed two main camps in social and patterns of the “social studies wars” and includes those who want a larger studies: federationists, who favor since the beginning of the twentieth place for teaching of the social science distinct disciplines, and unitarians, century and, second, to describe disciplines in schools and those who who favor curriculum integration.4 critical episodes from that long history support a structure-of-the-disciplines Regardless of how the interest groups that will help put the contemporary approach, which was at the heart of the are described, their rank and influence controversies in historical perspective. 1960s new social studies movement. A on schooling changes slowly over time. I’ll conclude by drawing three “lessons” third group, social efficiency educators, One is dominant, then recedes, as that social studies teachers today might hopes to create a smoothly controlled another comes to prominence. None consider from this history of curriculum and more efficient society by applying disappears, but rather remains present disagreement in social studies. standardized techniques from business with a lower profile. It is as if they are Pendulum swings are a regular feature and industry to schooling. Most often, parallel streams; while one is flooded, of the curriculum landscape, and the they have envisioned a scientifically another may be parched, nearly dry. primary pattern has been this: toward constructed, more directly functional Each of the streams has a history of traditional and discipline-based curriculum aimed at preparing students advocates and defenders, of innovators curricula during conservative times; for various life roles. A fourth group is and pretenders. Teachers can learn a toward experimentation, child-centered composed of social meliorists. These great deal about their own affinities, and inquiry or issues-oriented curricula are Deweyan experimentalists who and deepen their curricular identity, by during liberal times. If you don’t like the want to develop students’ reflective examining the various strands in some current direction of curricular reform, thinking ability and, thereby, contribute depth. take heart, it may not last. to social improvement. These theorists Frequently, the social studies Despite ever-changing curricular advocate a reflective or issues-centered curriculum and textbooks have served

S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 6 317 as a lightning rod, attracting comment and economics. Only the National The Rugg textbooks melded materials and criticism regarding the nature of Association of Secondary School from history and the social sciences the field and the purposes of schooling, Principals gave a strong endorsement to into an issues-oriented, unified-field and reflecting competing visions of the the report.6 approach to social studies. Virtually worthy society, as if the curriculum was a Criticism abounded during the 1920s, every topic was introduced through screen on which critics of various stripes coming from advocates of traditional a social issue or problem connected project their vision of a preferred future. history and the social sciences. Anna to students’ lives, and the series drew Moreover, the social studies wars reflect Stewart accused the 1916 report of on recent scholarship from the “new” the nation’s cultural divide, manifest in “many inconsistencies,” and wrote progressive historians and other the 2004 presidential election: red disparagingly of the trends it had set “frontier thinkers.” The writing was states versus blue states; democrats in motion, like the move “to damn lively and engaging, and the series was versus republicans; conservatives and history in order to boost civics.”7 Ross thoroughly illustrated and filled with cultural fundamentalists versus liberals L. Finney, a sociologist, criticized the interesting charts and graphs. It became and moderates. These are deep fractures, new POD course, arguing for a general the best-selling social studies series of a reflection of long-term trends, and are social science rooted in the disciplines its time. For the ten-year period from not easily healed. and weighing in against “the mere 1929 to 1939, the series sold 1,317,960 forensic exchange of ignorant opinion” copies at approximately $2 each, and Critical Episodes that would occur in a course focused more than 2,687,000 workbooks.11 Since the inception of social studies in on “problems.”8 Much of the criticism Despite his professed aim of balance, the early twentieth century, a number of centered on POD’s failure to advance Rugg’s materials contained significant critics have assailed the field for alleged “scientific study.” But there was also amounts of social criticism and raised sins against history, one or more of the criticism of the idea of “social studies,” serious questions about the traditional social sciences, or mainstream values mostly from advocates of traditional role of government in matters such as and the American way of life. Here I’ll history. Henry Johnson, for example, regulation of business, providing for feature six critical episodes beginning lamented the idea of “history controlled social welfare, and treatment of the with reactions to the 1916 Report on by present interests and problems.”9 unemployed. The texts also critiqued Social Studies and concluding with the Because of these differences among advertising as wasteful and portrayed 1980s’ revival of history. the competing approaches, by the late the framers of the Constitution as men 1920s the field’s status was described by of wealth interested in protecting their Reactions to the Report on Social one observer as “Chaos in the Senior own interests. Studies High Social Studies.”10 Despite these Consequently, critics viewed the Rugg The first episode to be considered is controversies, the broad and modern materials as “against private enterprise,” the early period of reactions to and approach to social studies, championed as a “subtle, sugar-coated effort to criticisms of the 1916 Report of the by the Report on Social Studies, became convert youth to Communism,” as part Committee on Social Studies of the modal practice for much of the twentieth of a “reconstructed” educational system National Education Association’s century, and POD became a common geared to teaching that “our economic Commission on the Reorganization offering until its virtual disappearance and political institutions are decadent.” of Secondary Education. This report from schools in the 1970s, superceded Later critics accused the Rugg books called for a broad, interdisciplinary, by a new wave of reform. and others of being “un-American.”12 and modern approach to social studies.5 Attacks on the Rugg textbook series And it called for a 12th-grade capstone The Rugg Textbook Controversy were at first centered in the New course, Problems of Democracy During the 1930s and early 1940s, York City metropolitan area, and (POD), which focused on social issues controversy and criticism centered on were orchestrated by an interlocking and fused government, economics, and social reconstructionism as embodied directorate of critics, including Amos sociology. Reactions from professional in Harold Rugg’s avant-garde series Fries, E. H. West, and Augustin G. associations in the 1920s were mixed. of social studies textbooks. Social Rudd of the American Legion; Bertie C. The report received partial support reconstructionists believed that social Forbes, publisher of Forbes magazine; from several disciplinary associations; change could be directed by schools Alfred T. Falk of the Advertising however, the majority disagreed with and wanted teachers and the curriculum Federation of America; and Merwin K. curricular fusion and the creation of to play a strong role in the social Hart of the New York State Economic the POD course. Critics called instead transformation of American society, Council, among others. The controversy for a strong grounding in the social spearheading an effort to overcome intensified in 1939-1940 with a series of science disciplines through separate social injustice and the failures of critical articles in nationally circulated courses in sociology, political science, capitalism. magazines including Nation’s Business

S o c i a l E d u c a t i o n 318 and the American Legion Magazine. Hugh Russell Fraser, who joined what National Council for the Social Studies The stakes were raised considerably came to be referred to as The New York had largely caved in to the critics and on December 11, 1940, when the Times crusade against social studies, followed their recommendations for a National Association of Manufacturers blamed “extremists from NCSS and its social studies curriculum built around announced its “survey” of textbooks twin brother, Teachers College,” for the the disciplines. The 1950s critiques to see if it could find evidence of decline in the teaching of history.16 were the culmination of a trend begun subversive teaching. Then, on February These charges led to a spirited and much earlier, and amounted to the 22, 1941, a headline at the top of the heroic defense of social studies from villainization of social studies as a kind front page of The New York Times read: Edgar B. Wesley, Wilbur Murra, Erling of national sport. “Un-American Tone Seen in Textbooks M. Hunt, and others who provided Aftermath of the New Social Studies. on Social Sciences: Survey of 600 Used evidence that U.S. history was a Another round of criticism occurred in Schools Finds a Distorted Emphasis “universal requirement” in the nation’s in the aftermath of another period of on Defects of Democracy, Only a Few schools. innovation, the era of the “new” and Called Red.” Rugg’s textbooks were Despite the overwhelming evidence “newer” social studies during the 1960s featured prominently in the story.13 supporting social studies—and dis- and 1970s. The “new” social studies Rugg and many of his colleagues at proving the claims made by Nevins— focused primarily on inquiry and the Columbia University and elsewhere many of the charges stuck, again “structure” of the disciplines, with the organized a defense, and Rugg engaged undermining social studies in the public notable exception of the public issues his critics directly, often in person.14 mind. The controversy over American model developed by Donald Oliver and Despite the protests, corrections, and history combined with the turmoil over associates. According to Jerome Bruner replies that followed, the damage had the Rugg textbooks to serve as a major and other theorists, each discipline been done. The controversy generated turning point, transforming a turf battle had a structure, including key concepts a national media feeding frenzy and among competing camps into a war on and forms of inquiry, that could serve left the lingering impression that social social studies. as the basis for an inquiry approach to studies was some sort of radical plot. teaching and learning. Students would The Cold War Years become “little league” historians and The Controversy over American In the late 1940s and early 1950s, a social scientists, emulating the scholar’s History growing crescendo of criticisms aimed at approach to knowledge. A prime A third controversy occurred in the “progressive education” emerged—with example was the work of Edwin Fenton 1940s. At its center were charges from a many of the most negative observations who developed an approach to teaching respected historian, Allan Nevins, that focused on social studies—packaged history through historical “problems” U.S. history was no longer sufficiently and marketed under colorful titles such using primary source documents.19 taught in the nations schools. Nevins as Educational Wastelands, Quackery The newer social studies, which fol- wrote in The New York Times Magazine in the Public Schools, Progressive lowed on the heels of the new social that “requirements in American history Education is REDucation, and Who studies, embodied a flurry of interest and government” are “deplorably Owns Your Child’s Mind?17 Arthur in teaching social issues and the subse- haphazard, chaotic, and ineffective,” Bestor, a historian and one of the most quent mini-course explosion. This was and he cited uneven laws requiring respected critics, called social studies a time during which traditional social American history in schools (22 states an anti-intellectual “social stew.”18 The studies courses were frequently broken had no law). He argued that this authors critiqued the “scrambling” of into short courses with a topical, the- “neglect” undermined the “patriotism history, geography, and government into matic, or issues focus (e.g., the Civil War, and unity of the country” needed in a the social studies; they bemoaned the the Presidency, Minorities in American time of war.15 The article led to a New “anti-intellectualism” of educators who History, Revolutionary Movements, or York Times survey of college level they derisively called “educationists”; Human Sexuality). history teaching and a New York Times and they frequently linked progressive These movements spawned a num- test on American history that was then education to Communism. ber of disagreements, among them aca- given to 7,000 college freshmen at 36 Educators responded with articles demic freedom cases involving teachers institutions across the nation to collect and books countering the charges— Keith Sterzing and Frances Ahern, in evidence on their lack of knowledge in though it was a relatively muted which teaching innovations were liter- the subject. Nevins’s own experience response, reflecting the times. In 1955, ally put on trial. Book and textbook with his daughter’s schooling, “without the Progressive Education Association controversies occurred in Kanawaha any American history whatever,” went out of business. And in 1957, the County, West Virginia, and in the state of apparently lay behind his concerns. journal Progressive Education ceased Georgia, the latter involving the Fenton Once again, the bogey was social studies. publication. By the late 1950s, the textbook series. But the most famous

S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 6 319 controversy of the period centered on substantial funding from the conserva- transformation of American society. For Man: A Course of Study (MACOS), a tive Bradley Foundation. Despite several these choices to matter, teachers need project of the new social studies era ini- criticisms of the revival of history from to examine the alternatives and develop tially led by Bruner. MACOS drew on social studies scholars, the response their rationales and teaching practices anthropological sources, and focused from NCSS leaders was to create a new thoroughly. inquiry on the question “What is human consensus definition for social studies An important corollary to the first about human beings?” It was described and to lend support to the standards lesson is that freedom is powerful, and by Congressman John B. Conlan as a movement via creation of NCSS stan- fleeting. Academic freedom is essential “dangerous assault on cherished values dards.22 The new definition developed for democracy to flourish, and for teach- and attitudes,” because of its “approv- by NCSS offered social studies as an ers to enact thoughtful visions to guide ing” depiction of “killing the elderly and umbrella for the teaching of history and their work. Teachers need to defend female infants, wife-swapping and trial the social sciences, and further weak- the integrity of the field and the rights marriage, communal living, witchcraft ened support for alternative approaches. of teachers and curriculum workers to and the occult, [and] cannibalism.”20 In The net result was an increase in course- make educated choices from among the defense of social studies, NCSS issued taking in history and the social sciences, alternatives. The freedom of the child statements on academic freedom, and notably in world history and geography, to learn, and of the teacher to make well- organized the NCSS Legal Defense and a decline in elective social studies informed curricular decisions within Fund. The Wingspread Conference, offerings. broad parameters, is the essence of pro- organized by NCSS in 1976 in response Recent years have witnessed the fessional practice in education. to the MACOS controversy, focused on increasing pressure of money on the A third lesson is that, in the social stud- understanding and overcoming the criti- social studies wars through the well- ies wars, the traditional discipline-based cisms, but had little impact. Aside from heeled influence of conservative foun- approaches seem to have staying power.24 MACOS, these academic freedom cases dations and interest groups. Wedded to This may be due to the fact that the dis- appear largely forgotten. the corporate, business-driven agenda ciplines have a large number of ready The overall pattern seemed a replay- for schools, they have emphasized tradi- advocates in colleges and universities boom and bust, innovation followed by tional history, geography, and civics; pro- across the nation, along with their allies criticism and reaction. These incidents moted curriculum standards and high- in the teaching field. It is also a reflection again contributed to the impression that stakes testing; and sought to vacate the of the fact that social studies educators social studies was influenced by radi- term “social studies” from curriculum and scholars often get little respect out- cals with an un-American bent, and they governance.23 side schools of education. Nonetheless, combined with the “failure” of the ‘new’ it is important to note that a number of and ‘newer’ social studies to leave the Lessons for Teachers scholars have elaborated well-grounded field seemingly directionless. What lessons might teachers take away and persuasive arguments for alterna- from this long, colorful, and controver- tives to a strict disciplinary approach as The Revival of History sial past? As a curriculum historian, I use the defining framework for the field, and Into the void left by the failure of the the term “lessons” advisedly. There are that these have a strong, if small, follow- new and newer social studies stepped no hard and fast lessons. History is open ing. As we have seen, in the 1920s Rugg the revival of history in the 1980s. to interpretation. But here are a few of my developed a unified-field approach Historian and former assistant secretary thoughts on what we who teach can gain to social studies, framing and melding of education Diane Ravitch made social from a study of the social studies past. the study of history and the social sci- studies a scapegoat for the “decline and One important lesson is that teach- ences in a manner that would illuminate fall of history teaching,” portraying it ers have choices. Among the options are perennial issues. In Rugg’s words, “To as a vacuous form of “tot sociology.”21 those offered by each of the camps in the keep issues out of school curriculum is Ravitch and other critics charged that social studies wars: traditional histori- to keep meaning out, to keep life out!”25 social studies was poorly defined and ans, who support history as the core of During the 1950s, Oliver criticized the directed by fashion. This was largely a social studies; advocates of social studies traditional discipline-based approaches revival of the disparaging commentary as social science education; social effi- on the grounds that they often failed to on social studies from the 1950s and ciency educators, who hope to create take into account the “ferment and con- earlier. In essence, the revival of history a smooth-running and efficient society; flict over competing ideas and values” represented the citizenship education social meliorists, who want to develop in American society. Later, with James wing of a much larger conservative resto- reflective thinking and contribute to Shaver, he developed an approach to ration in schools and society. The move- social improvement; and social recon- social studies centered on the study ment gathered steam with formation of structionists, who want social studies of “existing and predicted conflicts” in the Bradley Commission and received in schools to play a leading role in the our society.26 In addition, a number of

S o c i a l E d u c a t i o n 320 16. Fine, “U.S. History Study is Not Required in 82% of Conservative Challenges to the Undergraduate other scholars have addressed the costs Colleges,” The New York Times (June 21, 1942): 1, Course of Study: Linking Capital, Culture, and the of strict adherence to the traditional dis- 36; Fine, “Ignorance of U.S. History Shown by Undergraduate Curriculum,” (Paper presented at the ciplines as the basis for social studies in College Freshmen,” The New York Times (April 4, annual meeting of the American Educational Research 1943): 1, 32-33; “Fraser Quits Post in History Association, San Diego, Calif., 2004); Vincent Stehle, 27 schools. Dispute,” The New York Times (April 11, 1943): “Righting Philanthropy,” The Nation (June 30, 1997): Far from being simply an academic 30. 15-20. 17. Arthur E. Bestor, Educational Wastelands: The 24. This is somewhat less true for the structure-of-the- matter, controversy over the teaching of Retreat From Learning in Our Public Schools disciplines approach. social studies in schools represents a tan- (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1953); Albert 25. Rugg, That Men May Understand: An American in gible forum through which Americans Lynd, Quackery in the Public Schools (Boston: Little, the Long Armistice, xi-xii. Brown, 1953); Kitty Jones and Robert Olivier, have struggled over competing visions of 26. Donald W. Oliver, “The Selection of Content in the Progressive Education is REDucation (Boston: Social Sciences,” Harvard Education Review 27 the good society and the desirable future. Meador, 1956); John T. Flynn, “Who Owns Your (1957): 271-300; Donald W. Oliver and James P. Child’s Mind?” The Reader’s Digest (October, 1951): At its heart, this is a struggle over both Shaver, Teaching Public Issues in the High School 23-28. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1966). the nature of social studies and the kind 18. Bestor, Educational Wastelands. 27. Shirley H. Engle and Anna S. Ochoa, Education for of society in which we want to live. 19. Edwin P. Fenton, The New Social Studies (New York: Democratic Citizenship: Decision Making in the Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967); Jerome Bruner, Social Studies (New York: Teachers College, 1988); The Process of Education (Cambridge: Harvard Maurice P. Hunt and Lawrence E. Metcalf, Teaching Notes University Press, 1960); Donald W. Oliver, “The High School Social Studies: Problems in Reflective 1. Chester Finn, “Foreword,” in Where Did Social Selection of Content in the Social Sciences,” Harvard Thinking and Social Understanding (New York: Studies Go Wrong?, eds. James Leming, Lucien Education Review 27 (1957): 271-300. Harper and Brothers, 1955 and 1968); Henry Giroux, Ellington, and Kathleen Porter (Washington, D.C.: 20. John B. Conlan, “MACOS: The Push for a Uniform Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics Fordham Foundation, 2003), I. National Curriculum,” Social Education 39, no.6 of Education (New York: Routledge, 1992). 2. Ronald W. Evans, The Social Studies Wars: What (1975): 388-392. Should We Teach the Children? (New York: Teachers 21. Diane Ravitch, “Decline and Fall of History Teaching,” College, 2004). The New York Times Magazine (November 17, 1985): 3. Herbert M. Kliebard, Struggle for the American 50-53, 101, 117. Curriculum, 1893-1958 (London: Routledge and 22. National Council for the Social Studies, Expectations Keegan Paul, 1986). of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Ronald W. Evans is professor in the School of 4. Hazel W. Hertzberg, Social Studies Reform, 1880- Studies (Washington, D.C.: National Council for the Teacher Education at San Diego State University Social Studies, 1994). 1980 (Boulder, Colo.: Social Science Education in California. Consortium, 1981). 23. Leming, et. al., Where Did Social Studies Go Wrong?; 5. United States Bureau of Education, The Social Steven Selden, “Fifty Years of Sponsored Neo- Studies in Secondary Education (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, Bulletin #28, 1916). 6. P.W.L. Cox, “Social Studies in the Secondary School Curriculum,” Sixth Yearbook, National Association of Secondary School Principals 6 (1922): 126-132. 7. Anna Stewart, “The Social Sciences in Secondary 5IF
#JMM
PG
3JHIUT
*OTUJUVUF
Schools,” Historical Outlook 12 (1921): 53. :PVS
3FTPVSDF
GPS
"MM
:PVS
$POTUJUVUJPO
%BZ
/FFET 8. Ross L. Finney, “Tentative Report of the Committee on the Teaching of Sociology in the Grade and High Schools of America,” The School Review 28 (1920): 5IF
#JMM
PG
3JHIUT
*OTUJUVUF
PõFST
'3&&
FEVDBUJPOBM
255-262. NBUFSJBMT
UP
IFMQ
ZPVS
TUVEFOUT
UP
DPNNFNPSBUF
9. Henry Johnson, “Report of Committee on History $POTUJUVUJPO
%BZ
4FQUFNCFS


and Education for Citizenship: Part II, History in the Grades,” Historical Outlook, 12 (1921): 93-95. 7JTJU
XXX#JMMGPG3JHIUT*OTUJUVUFPSH/$44
BOE
10. Edwin J. Dahl, “Chaos in the Senior High Social Studies,” The High School Teacher (1928): 185- HFU
MJOLFE
UP
NBUFSJBMT
BWBJMBCMF
BU
OP
DPTU
UP
ZPV

188. )JHIMJHIUT
JODMVEF 11. Elmer A. Winters, “Harold Rugg and Social Reconstructionism,” (Unpublished doctoral disserta- t .JEEMF
BOE
IJHI
TDIPPM
$POTUJUVUJPO

tion, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1968). MFTTPO
QMBOT 12. Bertie C. Forbes, “Treacherous Teachings,” Forbes (August 15, 1939): 8; Alonzo F. Myers, “The Attacks t -FTTPO
PO
GSFFEPN
PG
UIF
QSFTT
WT

on the Rugg Books,” Frontiers of Democracy 7 (1940): OBUJPOBM
TFDVSJUZ 17-21. 13. Benjamin Fine, “Un-American Tone Seen in t "
$POTUJUVUJPO
$VCF Textbooks on Social Sciences,” The New York Times t "OE
NPSF (February 22, 1941): 1, 6; Fine; The New York Times (December 11, 1940): 29. 'PS
'3&&
$POTUJUVUJPO
%BZ
MFTTPO
QMBOT
PUIFS
14. Harold O. Rugg, That Men May Understand: An SFTPVSDFT
BOE
UP
WJFX
PVS
DBUBMPH
WJTJU

American in the Long Armistice (New York: NEW FIRST XXX#JMMPG3JHIUT*OTUJUVUFPSH

Doubleday, Doran, 1941); Rugg, “Confidential AMENDMENT Analysis of the Current (1939-1940) Attacks on the PS
DBMM


FYU
 Rugg Social Science Series, Prepared by Harold Rugg LESSON in May-June 1940,” Harold Rugg folder, box 58, AVAILABLE! William F. Russell Papers, Milbank Memorial Library, The Bill of Rights Institute is a non-profit organization Teachers College, Columbia University. and our mission is to provide materials that teach 15. Allan Nevins, “American History for Americans,” students about the Founding of our nation and what it The New York Times Magazine (May 3, 1942): 6, means to be an American citizen. 28.

S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 6 321