This sourcebook contains more than twelve hundred easy-to-follow and implement classroom activities created and tested by veteran teachers from all over the country. The activities are arranged by grade level and are keyed to the revised National History Standards, so they can easily be matched to comparable state history standards. This volume offers teachers a treasury of ideas for bringing history alive in grades 5?12, carrying students far beyond their textbooks on active-learning voyages into the past while still meeting required learning content. It also incorporates the History Thinking Skills from the revised National History Standards as well as annotated lists of general and era-specific resources that will help teachers enrich their classes with CD-ROMs, audio-visual material, primary sources, art and music, and various print materials. Grades 5?12

This volume contains the original version of United States history standards, along with standards-based activities. The standards were produced as part of the "Goals 2000" program by the US Department of Education. Post-critique, the standards were later revised and in 1996 were published together with the world history standards in one volume without activities.

An incisive overview of the current debate over the teaching of history in American schools examines the setting of controversial standards for history education, the integration of multiculturalism and minorities into the curriculum, and ways to make history more relevant to students. Reprint.

Examines the idea of national standards and assesssments in American education; reviews evidence about student achievement in the United States; and analyzes the prospects for a national system of standards and assessments.

In the 1990s the debate over what history, and more importantly whose history, should be taught in American schools resonated through the halls of Congress, the national press, and the nation's schools. Politicians such as Lynne Cheney, Newt Gingrich, and Senator Slade Gorton, and pundits such as Rush Limbaugh, John Leo, and Charles Krauthammer fiercely denounced the findings of the National Standards for History which, subsequently, became a major battleground in the nation's ongoing struggle to define its historical identity. To help us understand what happened, Linda Symcox traces the genealogy of the National History Standards Project from its origins as a neo-conservative reform movement to the drafting of the Standards, through the 18 months of controversy and the debate that ensued, and the aftermath. Broad in scope, this case study includes debates on social history, world history, multiculturalism, established canons, national identity, cultural history, and "liberal education." Symcox brilliantly illuminates the larger issue of how educational policy is made and contested in the United States, revealing how a debate about our children's education actually became a struggle between competing political forces.

How the Common Core standardizes our kids’ education—and how it threatens our democracy. The Common Core State Standards Initiative is one of the most controversial pieces of education policy to emerge in decades. Detailing what and when K–12 students should be taught, it has led to expensive reforms and displaced other valuable ways to educate children. In this nuanced and provocative book, Nicholas Tampio argues that, though national standards can raise the education bar for some students, the democratic costs outweigh the benefits. To make his case, Tampio describes the history, philosophy, content, and controversy surrounding the Common Core standards for English language arts and math. He also explains and critiques the Next Generation Science Standards, the Advanced Placement US History curriculum framework, and the National Sexuality Education Standards. Though each set of standards has admirable elements, Tampio asserts that democracies should disperse education authority rather than entrust one political or pedagogical faction to decide the country’s entire philosophy of education. Ultimately, this lively and accessible book presents a compelling case that the greater threat to democratic education comes from centralized government control rather than from local education authorities.

A volume in International Review of History Education Series Editor Peter Lee, Rosalyn Ashby, Stuart Foster As educators in the United States and Europe develop national history standards for K-12 students, the question of what to do with national history canons is a subject of growing concern. Should national canons still be the foundation for the teaching of history? Do national canons develop citizenship or should they be modified to accommodate the new realities of globalization? Or should they even be discarded outright? These questions become blurred by the debates over preserving national heritages, by so-called 'history wars' or 'culture wars, ' and by debates over which pedagogical frameworks to use. These canon and pedagogical debates often overlap, creating even more confusion. A misconceived "skills vs. content" debate often results. Teaching students to think chronologically and historically is not the same as teaching a national heritage or a cosmopolitan outlook. But what exactly is the difference? Policy-makers and opinion leaders often confuse the pedagogical desirability of using a 'framework' for studying history with their own efforts to reaffirm the centrality of national identity rooted in a vision of their nation's history as a way of inculcating citizenship and patriotism. These are the issues discussed in this volume." Today's students are citizens of the world and must be taught to think in global, supranational terms. At the same time, the traditionalists have a point when they argue that the ideal of the nation-state is the cultural glue that has traditionally held society together, and that social cohesion depends on creating and inculcating a common national culture in the schools. From an educational perspective, the problem is how to teach chronological thinking at all. How are we to reconcile the social, political and intellectual realities of a globalizing world with the continuing need for individuals to function locally as citizens of a nation-state, who share a common past, a common culture, and a common political destiny? Is it a duty of history education to create a frame of reference, and if so, what kind of frame of reference should this be? How does frame-of-reference knowledge relate to canonical knowledge and the body of knowledge of history as a whole?