Dana Park Malt 610 Masters Project

Running head: CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM
Confronting Bias in the History Classroom
Dana A. Park
July 28, 2018
University of Redlands
CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM i
DEDICATION/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to dedicate this project to my father. Thank you for showing me the world
and raising me to appreciate it. Your never-ending curiosity always inspires me. Thank you for
supporting me wholeheartedly in my dreams of becoming a teacher, and I hope my work makes
you proud! I love you!
I would like to thank my mother for always pushing me to work harder, for recognizing
my different ways of procrastinating and always guiding me back on track. Thank you for
supporting me in my education and my choices, always. I love you!
Lastly, I would like to thank Jeff for encouraging me and being a constant source of
positivity and energy. Thank you for pushing me to follow my passion and for being there when
the road got bumpy. I love you!

CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM ii
ABSTRACT
As a new teacher, I wanted to solidify my understanding of the purpose of teaching
history and address the issues related to its study, specifically bias and the dependence on one-
sided textbooks. I designed a unit plan template that outlines everything a teacher should
consider when designing a unit. By using this template, teachers create space for increased self-
reflection and focus on the whys of history, both of which make a more focused and exciting
classroom for students. History classes have fallen away from critical skill development and
source interpretation. Reduced to a bland, generalized study of what happened in the past,
students - and often teachers - have a limited understanding of the purpose of learning history.
My unit plan template addresses issues of bias, refocuses instruction on student inquiry, and will
ultimately increase student engagement by offering a multifaceted, meaningful look into the past.
CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication & Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………...i
Abstract…………...………………………………………………………………………………ii
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..…1
Background………………………………………………………………………………………..2
Personal Context.………………………………………………………………………….2
Literature Review………………………………………………………………………….4
History and Related Issues………………………………………………………...4
Purpose of Education in the West…………………………………………………8
Purpose and Reality of History Instruction in the United States………………...14
Assumptions and Beliefs.………………………………………………………..……….17
Research Question and Approach.……………………………………………………….19
Product Design………………....…………………………………..…………………………….21
Product Overview………...……………………………………………..……………….21
Product…………………....…………………………..………………………………….22
Product Rationale……....…………………………………..…………………………….25
Discussion of Results.…………….………………………………..…………………………….30
New Insights Into My Teaching, Theoretical Assumptions and Beliefs……..………….30
Applications and Changes in Curriculum, New Emerging Questions and Next Steps….31
Limitations……………………………………………………………………………….32
Conclusion……………………..……..………………………………………………………….33
Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………….34
References………………..…...………………………………………………………………….38
CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM 1
INTRODUCTION
“History is a weapon,” wrote educator James Loewen (Loewen, 2010, p. 12). One-sided,
biased textbooks have been taught as truth across the United States, leaving students at a
disadvantage. In the introduction to his book, Teaching What Really Happened, Loewen
encourages teachers to go beyond the “tyranny of the textbook” and get students excited about
doing history (Loewen, 2010, p. iii). Instead of studying events of the past, Loewen suggests a
focus on historiography, a crucial ingredient of critical thinking (Loewen, 2010, p. 12). “Who
wrote history, who did not, and for what purpose can make all the difference. That assertion
comes from historiography – the study of the writing of history – and every high school graduate
should know both the term and how to ‘do’ it” (Loewen, 2010, p. 12). So why do students need
to study history? “History is power … history can be a weapon. Students who do not know their
own history or how to think critically about historical assertions will be ignorant and helpless
before someone who does claim to know it. Students need to be able to fight back” (Loewen,
2010, p. 12). As many textbooks have attempted to glaze over the atrocities of America’s past,
Loewen encourages teachers to work with students to uncover it (Loewen, 2010, p. 19). In this
paper, I trace the purposes of education and history education over time, highlighting “who wrote
history, who did not, and for what purpose” (Loewen, 2010, p. 12) to support my claim that
history education needs to return to its intended purpose. My unit plan template is designed to
help both teachers and students consistently seek out bias in historical sources and how that
affects the history that is taught. By developing critical thinking skills through the uncovering of
purpose, students will learn to recognize bias, injustice, and the dangers of accepting the “status
quos” of history as absolute truth.

BACKGROUND
Personal Context for Study
History is somewhat of an outcast in modern American education. With high-stakes
testing focused on math and ELA, oftentimes history teachers are left to their own devices. I
found this to be true in my student teaching experience, during which there was no set
curriculum for history. Although we had the state standards and History Social Science
Frameworks to guide us, my master teachers and I had free reign on how to teach and assess. As
a follower of the constructivist paradigm, I knew I wanted my students to construct their own
knowledge. However, I still found myself leading students to the “right” answers - the answers I
wanted them to reach themselves. I would plan my lessons around the state standards and
essential questions related to them but often felt unorganized for lack of a curriculum. My lack of
direction, coupled with an uninterested group of 180 middle schoolers, held its own challenges.
As I was brainstorming my topic for this project, the first questions I asked myself were: “How
can I engage students? What is the real purpose of teaching history? Of education? What do I
want my students to know how to do?”
When I was in school, my teachers very much aligned with the essentialist paradigm -
they had all the answers and the facts were set in stone. It was my job to memorize and
reproduce these facts during tests, in essays, and during my AP exams. Although history is my
passion and I loved those classes, I could see how most students would find history pointless,
boring, and unrelated to their lives. I completed my undergraduate degree in International
Relations and became aware of the diversity of the world, and I found excitement in traveling to
new places and learning about new cultures. My desire to have students see the world how I
learned to see it - with an open mind, curiosity, and joy - grew even more during my
postgraduate travels and experience working at a high school in Spain.
My lack of direction with teaching history and my desire to share my love of the world’s
diversity led me to dive deeply into the purpose of history itself, the purpose of education over
time, and the issues in American classrooms today. I was frustrated that such a vibrant and
exciting genre like history was reduced to a dull, memorization-based class in schools, where
students could not see any connection to their own lives. My question was why, and how, did
this happen?
How has the purpose of education over time created the current climate of history
instruction in the United States? I am looking for a grander purpose of history education. Are
teachers addressing biases, bringing in different points of view, and placing importance on
diversity, power, race, money, and the effects these have on what history we are taught? It is
important to recognize bias and realize that multiple perspectives give us a richer version of
history that is alive and breathing. Students should work with history as a living subject instead
of just memorize “facts” that perpetuate the status quo, which I believe will increase student
engagement and understanding. By researching the issues of writing history, the history of the
purpose of education in the West, and history instruction in the United States, I will understand
how bias affects the history classroom and what must be changed to return history instruction to
its intended purpose – to help students become critical thinkers and contributors to society. My
unit plan template will check that all these aspects of history instruction are present so that
students can have full access to the intricacies, perspectives, and excitement of the human story
and be able to identify what that means for their own selves, identities, and futures.
Literature Review
History and Related Issues
Before addressing the issues of history instruction in the US, it is important to understand
the origins and issues of history in general. History is, according to Jacob Burckhardt, “what one
age finds worthy of note in another” (Commager, 1980, p. 1). As defined in Webster’s
dictionary, history is “a chronological record of significant events … often including an
explanation of their causes” (Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary, 1993). Already, one can
see several issues history faces. First, who decides what is “worthy” or “significant”? Second,
who is recording these events, and for what purpose? History has, more often than not, been the
history of the victors (Commager, 1980, p. 4). These “victors,” being in power, are able to create
and perpetuate a story that benefits, even exults, their power and achievements. History, then, is
often biased, one-sided, and incomplete. This stems from the lopsidedness of historical sources
and from the biases of historians themselves. For instance, because European and Western
history is more readily available, we equate that with importance, or the “whole past”
(Commager, 1980, p. 43). One must look at the components of history - its origins, the role of
the historian, historical data, and interpretation - to understand just how deeply bias affects
history.
So, where and when did history begin? The fact that history is based so largely on written
record ensures an unbalance in what history we have today (Commager, 1980, p. 43). That being
said, we look at Thucydides as the first to attempt to write history with objectivity. In her work
Thucydides and History Today, Phyllis Winter states, “At the end of the 5th century BC, Greek
historian Thucydides created a new literary form - a mix of art and science” in his writings of the
Peloponnesian War (Winter, 1959, p. 169). His art was his ability to tell a story, his science was
his approach to the story looking for truth. He adopted a quality of “high seriousness” in his
writing which distinguished his work from earlier storytellers, like Herodotus (Winter, 1959, p.
171). Herodotus was considered a master storyteller for his passionate, dramatic, and engaging
retellings of the Greco-Persian War (Winter, 1959, p. 169). However, because of his explicit
bias, his alignment with one side over another, and his focus on the virtue of characters,
subjectivity impairs his work (Winter, 1959, p. 169). While Herodotus was a great writer, it was
Thucydides who approached history in a way that still influences historians today. Objectivity
was central to his work - he writes of different people groups using the same tone (Winter, 1959,
p. 169). To him, detachment was the necessary virtue of the historian. About his own work,
Thucydides states,
The absence of romance in my history will, I fear, detract somewhat from its interest; but
if it be judged useful by those inquirers who desire an exact knowledge of the past as an
aid to the interpretation of the future … I shall be content. In fine, I have written my
work, not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession for
all time. (p. 171)
By writing for longevity rather than entertainment, Thucydides reiterates the importance of truth
in historical writing, which has been central to the discipline ever since. Now, the pursuit of truth
is a noble endeavor, but can history ever really be true or absolute? It comes down to
perspective. No two interpretations are ever quite alike (Commager, 1980, p. 4). Commager
(1980) asks, “Can a white, upper class man really ever understand the point of view of the
working person or the peasant” (p. 50)? We arrive first at the issue of the historian. Who is he?
Why is he writing? What does that mean for his version of history?
History is the collection, organization, and interpretation of facts. Each of these steps are
susceptible to bias on the part of the historian (Commager, 1980, p. 4). The mere selection of
materials represents subjectivity in itself (Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O., 2012, p. 39). How
then, can a historian be completely objective, “neutral, detached, unpassionate” (Adeoti, E. O.
and Adeyeri, J. O., 2012, p. 41)? Historians tend to focus on the “great men” that “made history”
because that is what appeals to the reader. Egyptian pharaohs, Alexander the Great, the
Athenians - these names spark images of greatness and riches. While we do know a great deal
about these people groups, and they undoubtedly made contributions to our society today, are we
getting the whole story (Commager, 1980, p. 44)? The historian’s involvement with the issues he
is researching undoubtedly affects his work in every aspect (Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O.,
2012, p. 40). Yet, this involvement, after all, is what adds passion, excitement, and zest to a
historian’s work (Commager, 1980, p. 51). Commager (1980) writes that “history isn’t scientific,
but subjective and passionate. There’s bias in the choice of subject, selection of material, its
organization and presentation, and its interpretation. Historians are creatures of their time, race,
faith, class and country” (p. 49). Since history cannot be truly objective, readers must “study the
historian before studying the past” (Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O., 2012, p. 40). What are his
values, biases, or purposes for writing? Lastly, the historian must consider the tendency of
present-mindedness while looking at the past. If he looks through the lens of his standards and
values, he is more susceptible to judging the past or making rapid conclusions, which prevents
historical understanding (Commager, 1980, p. 44).
Next, one must look at the issues of historical data. “History is based on facts but not
factual at all, but a series of accepted judgements” (Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O., 2012, p.
37). Sources are a challenge to the historian because they are the basis of research and, thus,
history, but are often missing or unavailable (Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O., 2012, p. 37). How
do we know that what has come down to us is either the most important or the most authentic
representation of any chapter of past history (Commager, 1980, p. 43)? The out-of-the-ordinary,
dramatic, unusual or romantic are often given more focus than mundane, daily life. These stories,
while engaging or entertaining, distort one’s view of the past (Commager, 1980, p. 43).
Commager (1980) reminds us that
we talk about ‘ancient history’ or pre-Columbian America as if we had even a fraction of
the facts. We take what we know from a few civilizations around the Mediterranean Sea
and call that ancient history … how little we know even now about the vast majority of
humans. At the other end of the spectrum, we know too much about the modern West -
Britain, France, America. (p. 46)
This unbalanced availability of sources has the tendency to promote one side – the West – as
more “important.”
Facts are subjective and open to interpretation by historians (Commager, 1980, p. 46, 48).
Since the past cannot be recreated, it really is not testable, so treating history as a science, free of
bias, is unrealistic. These facts are then selected by historians, with their own interests and
motives, and interpreted through the lens of their background, depth of knowledge, and
theoretical assumptions.
As teachers and students approach history in the classroom, it is vital to recognize that
bias affects every aspect of history. Instead of rejecting an obviously biased work, however, one
should instead analyze the bias and think about its consequences, asking questions like: “Who is
empowered by or included in the work?” “Who is oppressed or omitted?” and “Does it
perpetuate the status quo?”

Purpose of Education in the West
History is subject to bias, but how does that affect history education? Before looking
specifically at history in the classroom, first we will look at the general purpose of education. To
understand contemporary purposes of education, a look into the past is necessary. “Education has
taken place in most communities since earliest times as each generation has sought to pass on
cultural and social values, traditions, morality, religion, knowledge and skills to the next
generation” (Gvelesiani, 2013, p. 169). Themes of citizenship, control, and nationalism weave
themselves into the legacy of education. What impact does that have on how students are
educated today?
One of the earliest purposes of education centered on citizenship. In ancient Greece, it
was the “responsibility of citizens to learn how to contribute to society” (Heater, 2004, p. 2). In
the city-states of Sparta and Athens, we see this contribution in the form of both military and
political participation. In the early 6th century BC, Sparta was looking to expand. Through brutal
physical education, Sparta “shaped its citizenry to its perceived needs” (Heater, 2004, p. 4). As
more and more land - and people - were brought under Spartan rule, there became a need for a
“highly-trained elite citizen class with unquestioning obedience” (Heater, 2004, p. 4). Sparta had
“the rigid militarism of a state-organized (totalitarian) system designed to produce brave (but
blindly conformist) sons and daughters of the fatherland” (Griffith, 2001, p. 23). Thus, education
in its earliest form was meant to equip citizens with the skills they needed to defend their state.
In Athens, on the other hand, we see the early development of democracy. In his Politics, ancient
Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote, “The citizens of a state should always be educated to suit the
constitution of a state” (Heater, 2004, p. vii). “As Athens became increasingly democratic
socially and politically … the broadening of educational facilities became increasingly needed”
(Heater, 2004, p. 7). Education’s purpose, then, was to “develop citizens capable of participating
rationally and articulately in the political process” (Griffith, 2001, p. 23). While Athenian
students were also trained for the military, “teaching academic subjects was highly valued within
the Athenian society” (Gvelesiani, 2013, p. 169). Whereas in Sparta education was more rigid
and state-focused, “Athenians believed that accomplishments in academics helped an individual
to find an appropriate place in the society. Education was a key component of a person’s
identity” (Gvelesiani, 2013, p. 169). Concepts of identity and one’s place in society were
becoming clear as early as the 5th century BC. However, the Athenian polis
was a compact community dominated by a relatively small and ethnically cohesive
group, for whom outsiders – the foreigners and slaves – undertook vital work. As a
consequence, the dominant group enjoyed the privileges of relative wealth and leisure to
participate in the government of the polis, to be, in short, citizens. (Heater, 2004, p. 1)
Though education today draws heavily from ancient Greece’s focus on citizenship, many were
left out of the narrative, while the small, elite class enjoyed educational and political
participation.
In the Middle Ages, education was bound to the Roman Catholic Church, which used its
power as a means of controlling society. When Germanic tribes took over the Western Roman
Empire in 476, the Church had already established itself as a high power.
Christianity had become the authoritative religion of the Roman world, and, through the
complete organization of the Church with the Bishop of Rome as its head, its power
became practically unlimited … It was natural that the Church should stand as the chief
guide and schoolmaster of the Germanic hosts. (Graves, 1923, p. 4)

Despite the influences of Greco-Roman learning, the Church soon had all pagan schools closed,
leaving itself as the sole educator of the masses (Graves, 1923, p. 4). The monasticism
movement arose out of the corruption of 3rd century Rome and the need some Christians felt to
“flee from the world and its temptations” and take “refuge in an isolated life of holy devotion”
(Graves, 1923, p. 5). These monks “turned to the cultivation of the soil, the preservation of
literature, and teaching” (Graves, 1923, p. 7). Monastic education, where established, was
primarily literary and focused on the three ideals of obedience, chastity, and poverty (Graves,
1923, p. 13). Essentially, education ensured students became obedient and stayed loyal to the
Church and its ideals. In 800, Charlemagne became Holy Roman Emperor, welding the Church
and state together and ushering in a wave of reforms. He realized that a “genuine unity of his
people could be brought about only … by means of a common language, culture and set of
ideas” (Graves, 1923, p. 27). Charlemagne recognized the deterioration of education, the Church,
and preservation of learning in general (Graves, 1923, p. 27), and in the late 700s he elected a
minister of education and set to revive monastic, cathedral, and parish schools, as well as a
higher institution called the Palace School (Graves, 1923, p. 28). At Charlemagne’s insistence to
“increase standards and improve facilities” (Graves, 1923, p. 30), reading and writing were
taught, and elementary education was free for all. Charlemagne used education to mold a
homogenous western European kingdom - the Holy Roman Empire. The Roman Catholic
Church continued its hold over society in the middle ages through the Reformation of the 16th
century. “Submission to the authority of the Catholic Church was paramount … education fell
back … into the grooves of formalism, repression, and distrust of reason” (Graves, 1923, p. 235).
As feudal lords began to lose power in Europe around the 15th century, it was transferred
into the hands of national monarchs. This led to the age of the nation-state. States were
expanding and consolidating, developing distinct languages and cultures. Where did education’s
purpose lie in the promotion of national identity and power? Susanne Wiborg compares the
theories of two Enlightenment philosophers - Jean Jacques Rousseau of France and Johann
Herder of Germany - constructing the purpose of education in the rise of nationalism and state-
building. Rousseau claimed that “not only could patriotism be created but indeed moulded. The
task of governments was to carve the mould- the education institution - in which the children of
nations should be shaped” (Wiborg, 2000, p. 235). Similarities in the purpose of education for
the nation-state and for the polis in ancient Greece are quite apparent. Rousseau saw nationhood
in political terms - citizens united for the state - while Herder saw nationhood in cultural,
linguistic terms (Wiborg, 2000, p. 235). Both saw education as key in developing their respective
nations (Wiborg, 2000, p. 236). Rousseau “emphasised the role of education, as he contended
that education elevates the individual to national status” (Wiborg, 2000, p. 237). In education for
citizenship, Wiborg (2000) says,
the intellectual development of a child was more or less neglected and social realities
were among the most important issues to be addressed … He suggests that in order for
the curriculum to be patriotic it should emphasise the symbols, language and literature of
the nation-state, and that subjects like history and geography should cover only the
territory lying within national borders. (p. 238)
Herder believed a nation “was to be regarded as a separate natural entity whose claim to political
recognition rested on the possession of a common culture rooted in language” and thus,
“education was a vehicle to effect the transmission of a cultural heritage from one generation to
the next, as the means of ensuring the historical consciousness of the people in question”
(Wiborg, 2000, p. 240). Herder and Rousseau both believed the role of education was significant
“because of its accessibility to all the citizens, the promotion of national language and literacy,
and the codification of indigenous national history and symbols” (Wiborg, 2000, p. 241). In this
system, states shaped loyal citizens and disciplined workers through a “standardised school
system [which] attempted to force the homogenisation of the culture … minorities living in
France were compelled to integrate into a universal system in order that a 'homogenous culture’
be maintained” (Wiborg, 2000, p. 241). Homogenization of a nation’s culture and the focus on
national vernacular, history and ethnicity in education, led to the development of a new kind of
nationalism in the 19th century. “From 1870 to 1918 this developed into a chauvinistic
nationalism of race and cultural exclusiveness” (Wiborg, 2000, p. 241), the impact of which can
be seen clearly in Hitler’s Germany.
Through the lenses of citizenship, control, and nationalism, one can clearly see the
purpose of education in the West was to produce citizens for the benefit of the state, whether that
be a city-state, a religious empire, or a nation-state. This often involved the indoctrination of
national, religious, and philosophical ideals meant to homogenize the population and keep power
structures in place. These notions of citizenship, control, and nationalism have combined in the
purpose of education in the United States.
Education for citizenship has been imbedded in the American rhetoric since the nation’s
formation. The founding fathers recalled ancient Greek philosophers when they defined the
purpose of education as preparing students to be citizens in a democratic society. Thomas
Jefferson believed that “creative and rational thought would lead to an orderly and stable
society” (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013), one in which citizens freely exercised their individual
rights. Horace Mann, founder of the modern public school, also thought education should be the
center of a democratic society and that knowledge would lead to social empowerment and an
extension of rights and liberties to all (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013).
In reality, however, education was used to control, reproduce the social order, and
homogenize “American” culture. While the American government was promoting their
“democracy,” where all were entitled to their individual rights, any person who did not fit the
white Protestant male profile was systematically ousted from the education their white
counterparts received (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013). Those who considered themselves truly
“American” – Protestant, white, and English-speaking – feared new immigrants from different
parts of Europe would threaten the established American image. Education reformers in the early
twentieth century sought to establish religious and moral order (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013).
This “Americanization” sought to eliminate the “other” or anyone who was not Anglo-Saxon and
Christian. Immigrant students were expected to assimilate to their new American culture, and
adopt its virtues. English-only laws were passed in attempts to eradicate differences (Oakes, J.
and Lipton, M., 2013).
In the modern age, nationalism and education are used as tools to increase a nation’s
participation and successes in the global market. “Governments see education as a process of
nation building that involves both economic and social objectives … the formation of national
citizens and the preparation of future workers for the national labour market” (Wiborg, 2000, p.
241). International competition urges countries to develop a highly-skilled citizenry. Capitalism
and the increase in manufacturing created the need for more workers in the early twentieth
century. Students were taught various job skills in addition to the work ethic needed to be part of
the huge capitalist machine. Tracks were developed in schools that divided students between
academic and vocational routes (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013). As international tensions rose
in the early twentieth century, education was looked at to raise the educational level of American
students. Post-WWII tensions between the US and Russia increased when Russia launched the
satellite Sputnik into space (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013). American politicians blamed
schools for losing to their Cold War enemy. Science and mathematics were designated as top-
priority subjects, and standards increased for both schools and students to do better. As the world
economy continues to globalize, American politicians continue to push schools to produce
competitive, intelligent citizens. Acts like President Bill Clinton’s Goals 2000 and President
George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act held schools to high academic standards meant to
increase national cohesiveness and international competitiveness (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M.,
2013).
Purpose and Reality of History Instruction in the United States
If the purposes of education have overwhelmingly been for the benefit of the state, how
has that affected history instruction? What is the purpose of history instruction? With the onset
of standardized testing and creating citizens to participate in the global economic market, history
instruction has taken a backseat to science and math curricula. A comparison of the purpose of
history instruction and its reality in a textbook-focused classroom reveals a disconnect between
ideals and actions.
The Bradley Commission on History in Schools was created in 1987 in response to the
inadequacy in quantity and quality of history instruction in schools. The Commission (1988)
states the purpose of history instruction and best practices for the classroom:
History is the discipline that can best help [students] to understand and deal with change,
and at the same time to identify the deep continuities that link past and present. Without
such understanding, the two foremost aims of American education will not be achieved –
the preparation of all our people for private lives of personal integrity and fulfillment, and
their preparation for public life as democratic citizens. (p. 5)
The Commission’s recommendations create a vision of a history classroom that is meaningful,
exciting, and multifaceted. The Commission (1988) highlights the purpose of history education:
To develop judgment and perspective, historical study must often focus upon broad,
significant themes and questions, rather than short-lived memorization of facts without
context. In doing so, historical study should provide context for facts and training in
critical judgment based upon evidence, including original sources, and should cultivate
the perspective arising from a chronological view of the past down to the present day. (p.
6)
The Commission (1988) also recognizes the need for multiple perspectives and sources:
History can best be understood when the roles of all constituent parts of society are
included; therefore the history of women, racial and ethnic minorities, and men and
women of all classes and conditions should be integrated into historical instruction. (p. 7)
Finally, the Commission (1988) states that history is interdisciplinary and multifaceted, not a set
of facts to be memorized:
Each kind of history offers narrative and case studies to test and illustrate concepts drawn
from other disciplines, which in their turn give added meaning to the historical record.
History, by its nature, is an interdisciplinary subject. It should never be reduced to a thin
recital of successive dates and facts, but carry what has been called ‘thick narrative,’
which combines lively storytelling and biography with conceptual analysis drawn from
every relevant discipline. Biography in particular reveals the significance of individual

lives, both of leaders and of ordinary people, as a way of making historical processes and
their human consequences real to students. (p. 24)
Thus, the purpose of history education is to develop critical, higher-order thinking skills, to see
history as a multidisciplinary subject with multiple perspectives, and to find one’s identity as a
citizen within society.
However, essentialist views of education, combined with a reliance on one-sided, biased
textbooks, have reduced history instruction to a dull, static look at the past. Instead of viewing
the past as a set of agreed-upon facts, teachers must ask questions like: “Who writes the story?
What is left out? Who decides what events are ‘significant’? Why are certain narratives included
- or excluded?”
From the essentialist perspective, the role of education is to transmit the dominant,
accepted culture to the next generation (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013). Learning is passive,
students learn by taking in information presented by teachers. Essentialism aims to ready
students for participation in the dominant social order by teaching them the skills, knowledge,
and virtues needed to succeed within the dominant culture (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013).
Students are expected to learn the essentials and – more importantly – not question them. An
over-importance is placed on Western culture, to the point that other cultures are discredited and
ignored. Also, the student’s lack of an active role in the classroom likens him to being just
another cog in the Western machine – unquestioningly accepting and following what he’s being
taught. Intellectual thought is developed, but not so much so that students start questioning
reality, injustice, and inequality (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013).

The problem of bias in history textbooks is outlined by Doctor of Education Michael H.
Romanowski, who states that textbooks perpetuate the status quo through their use of language
and source selection. He (n.d.) writes
textbooks define and determine what is important in American history. In making
judgments about what should be included and what should be excluded, and how
particular episodes in history should be summarized, textbook authors assign positive or
negative interpretations to particular events, thereby asserting a set of values. The fact
that these values are often not declared explicitly, but remain implicit, does not make
them less powerful. (p. 1)
Since textbook authors do not address these values they put forth, their work is
“presented in the printed and bound textbook with its aura of authority that is beyond question
and criticism” (Romanowski, n.d., p. 1). However, Romanowski (n.d.) states that “textbooks are
influenced by the … beliefs of their authors, which usually support the status quo, or
conventional understandings about what is praiseworthy or blameworthy in history” (p. 1). To
counteract the dangers of teaching one-sided history in the classroom, Romanowski (n.d.)
proposes that “we must begin to respond critically to the meanings and impressions history
textbooks construct. History classes must begin to use strategies that identify and challenge
biases found in textbooks, and develop ethical frameworks based on justice and equality that
students and teachers can use to interpret and evaluate American history” (p. 1).
Assumptions and Beliefs
I believe learning happens when students work with the subject matter and see the
subject’s connection to their own lives and the present. The essentialist paradigm, with teachers
as the holders of all knowledge and students as recipients, prolongs the failures of history
instruction because the focus on fact memorization and testing leaves no room for asking
questions and looking for answers.
I identify with the constructivist paradigm, where students construct their own knowledge
through doing, asking questions, and drawing conclusions. This approach to instruction increases
engagement simply because students are moving, looking, and working together, not just
copying notes down that they will have to memorize later. Learning happens best in the
constructivist paradigm.
My role as a teacher is that of facilitator. My teaching practice will include limited time
at the front of the room, enough to clearly explain learning goals and expectations and review
complicated topics to solidify understanding. The rest of my time will be spent moving around
the room, working with students individually and in groups, checking progress, and redirecting
with a question or comment. This allows students to take responsibility of their education and
develop their reasoning, research, and writing skills. However, the beginning and end of each
class will include a whole class discussion to review student progress and share conclusions to
ensure students are understanding the content and purpose of the class.
A history curriculum should be comprehensive, focused not only on learning about the
past but developing the skills necessary to think, analyze, and conclude critically. The curriculum
should cover learning goals, objectives, standards, accommodations, and assessment practices. In
addition, the curriculum should include the how and why of history, not just the what. A space
for teacher reflection before and after each unit is taught should be given high importance.
Beforehand, the teacher needs to ask questions like: “Why am I teaching this? Am I teaching the
whole story?” After the unit is complete, the teacher should ask: “Did students achieve the
learning goals? Could some aspect of the unit have gone better or differently?” Most
importantly, a history curriculum needs to address more than one side of the story. Concepts
such as purpose and bias need to be identified in all sources used in the class so that students
understand not only what happened in the past but the importance of analyzing how the past has
been told.
Research Question and Approach
I will design a unit plan template that addresses historical bias and redirects history
classrooms to their intended purpose. This unit plan template includes the steps necessary to
offer students a comprehensive, meaningful look at history that is rich in stories, offers multiple
points of view by bringing in outside sources, and teaches critical skills such as research, source
checking, and analysis. My literature review, by addressing the issues of history, the purposes of
education, and the purposes and realities of history instruction, prove that history classrooms
need to return to their intended purpose. The purpose of history instruction is to teach students
how to think critically, communicate well-researched arguments, and participate in a democratic
society. Students need to know how bias has affected history and who it empowers (and
oppresses) so that they can learn to recognize injustices. By connecting history to the present,
bringing in outside stories, and looking at power and oppression, students will see that history is
not just a set of events in the past but a continuous power struggle that affects their lives.
I approached the issue of bias in the history classroom by designing a unit plan template
because this will offer needed structure to the history classroom. It will make it easier for
teachers to create meaningful unit plans that address history’s issues, connect content across
units and themes, and engage higher-order thinking. By working through the template, teachers
will rationalize each segment of their unit of instruction to ensure meaningful and well-planned
lessons. Comprehensive unit plans will improve history courses by making them meaningful and
interactive, which will lead to the “preparation for private lives of personal integrity and
fulfillment, and their preparation for public life as democratic citizens” (The Bradley
Commission on History in Schools, 1988, p. 5).

PRODUCT DESIGN
Product Overview
The purpose of this unit plan template is to confront the fact that history instruction often
strays from its purpose and fails to leave room for critical analysis and inquiry. The template is
aligned with the new History Social Science Framework for California Public Schools, which
reemphasizes student inquiry as the means of studying history (California Department of
Education, 2017). In the Framework (2017),
students critique the relevancy, credibility, and utility of historical sources for a specific
historical inquiry or as used in a secondary interpretation based on the author, date, place
of origin, intended audience, and purpose … they understand that history is an
interpretive discipline. They analyze historians’ interpretations of the past, including the
limitations in historical evidence, and the authors’ arguments, claims, and use of
evidence. Finally, students integrate evidence from multiple relevant historical sources
and interpretations into a reasoned argument based on evidence about the past and
present it in oral, written, and multimedia presentations. (p. 280-281)
Below is the complete unit plan template. Each section is elaborated upon and its purpose
justified in the Product Rationale section that follows.

Product
Class/Grade: ___________ Semester: _____
Unit #: _______ Title: ____________________
Big Question:
Unit Rationale:
*Planning Checkpoint for Unit Rationale

Does the Big Question connect to the key themes of this unit?
Can the Big Question be answered through student inquiry?
Have you highlighted the historical context and timeframe of this unit in the rationale?
Why do students need to know this unit?
Section 1: Standards, Themes, Objectives, Connections

California State Content Standards Common Core Skills
- -
- -
- -
Essential Questions
-
-
-
Unit Objectives Cognitive Level

- Students will be able to … -
- -
- -
- -
*Planning Checkpoint for Standard and Objective Alignment

Do the essential questions align with the standards?
Do they push students to think deeper (not just the what, but the why and how)?
Do the essential questions address excluded, oppressed and/or minority groups? Do they
address bias?
Are the unit objectives student-achievement focused and measurable?
Is the cognitive level of each objective rigorous yet appropriate for students?
Key Themes: Relation to Other Units:

- -
- -
- -
*Planning Checkpoint for Connections

Are key themes from the course embedded into the essential questions and lesson
objectives?
Does this unit fit in to the larger sequence of study? Are topics, themes and skills in this unit
relatable to other units?
Section 2: Lesson Plans and Sources

Lesson Plans
List the title and brief rationale for each lesson plan within the unit:
-
-
-
*Planning Checkpoint for Complete Lesson Plans

Does each lesson plan align with specific standards and essential questions?
Is student inquiry central to your lesson plans? Will students look at bias?
Is there time for students to have discussions and improve their academic conversation
skills?
Sources
List all sources that are going to be used in the unit (organized by lesson plan):
-
-
-
-
-
*Planning Checkpoint for Source Bias
Are sources from multiple perspectives so that students get a comprehensive view?
What do certain groups have to say about themselves? Are these sources included?
Is source analysis (looking at who wrote what, when, and why) embedded into lesson plans
so students can assess purpose and bias?
Section 3: Reflection
Is student-led inquiry central to your lesson plans? Yes/No
Are students supported in their academic literacy development? Yes/No
Do instructional strategies draw on student backgrounds? Yes/No
Will students understand why they’ve learned this unit? Yes/No
If No to any of the above, rework the unit and lesson plans until you can answer each
question with a Yes.
Do you have biases in regard to this unit? Yes/No

If yes, what will you do to address those biases when you teach the unit?
Product Rationale
Big Question
This questions summarizes the point of the entire unit. It is engaging, thought-provoking,
and “a question of significance,” as encouraged by the History Social Science Frameworks. For
example, in a Revolutionary War unit from E. R. Murrow High School, the Big Question was
“When should people question authority and revolt against it?” Instead of simply asking, “What
was the Revolutionary War?” the question sparks interest and sets the stage for critical thinking
on the part of the students.
Unit Rationale
This is the why of the unit. It can begin with, “Students need to learn the content and
skills embedded in this unit because …” or “This moment in history is important to students
because …” The unit rationale guides the unit as well. When students and teachers understand
the whys of history, they see history not as a concrete past but as a living document, open to
interpretation and analysis, which develops critical thinkers.
Planning Checkpoint for Unit Rationale
This checkpoint is to make sure teachers know where their unit is headed. A clear Big
Question generates interest in the unit, while the Unit Rationale covers the importance. The
rationale is a great place to put the historical context, timeframe, and relation to units before and
after this unit. Include any biases or exclusions this unit of study has been historically subjected
to. For example, if the unit is on WWII, rationalize why the inclusion of Japanese testimonies is
necessary.
Standards
The California State Content Standards are legally required to be followed in the
classroom. Having standards that guide the unit is an excellent way to stay on topic and deliver
content in an organized fashion. Common Core Skill Standards should be embedded in every
lesson so that in all circumstances students are improving their academic literacy skills.
Essential Questions
The Essential Questions are even more specific than the content standards. Essential
Questions should guide lesson planning. For example, a teacher can design lessons with the
purpose of answering an Essential Question. Students will use Common Core literacy skills to
answer such questions. Essential Questions should not only ask about the happenings of those in
power but include historically repressed or excluded groups. For example, John McNamara (n.d.)
writes Essential Questions for a unit on the Revolutionary War could be “Was colonial America
a democratic society?” or “Was slavery the basis of freedom in colonial America?” (p. 1)
Unit Objectives and Cognitive Level
Unit Objectives identify exactly what students will be able to do. For example, “Students
will be able to evaluate whether or not the colonists were justified in seeking independence.” For
each unit objective, there is a space to write the objective’s cognitive level. Utilizing Bloom’s
Taxonomy (Appendix A), from lowest to highest level these are: remember, understand, apply,
analyze, evaluate, and create, with specific verbs within each level (Vanderbilt University Center
for Teaching, n.d.). By writing down each objective’s cognitive level, teachers can make sure
students are exposed to differentiated and advanced means of working with material as opposed
to just memorizing facts. This leads to increased engagement of the various learning styles.
Planning Checkpoint for Standard and Objective Alignment
Standard alignment is key for a well-designed, meaningful unit plan. Content and skill
standards must be aligned with Essential Questions. These Essential Questions must push
students to think deeper by accessing higher levels of thinking. Unit Objectives must be
measurable, which allows for clarity and explicitness in what students should know. Finally,
Essential Questions must include groups often excluded from the narrative. This means asking
about oppression, violence, and power, which are sometimes excluded from or made more
palatable in history curricula.
Key Themes
Key themes should be presented at the beginning of every year. These should be broad
and referenced to throughout the year to provide cohesiveness in the course. In the context of a
class that addresses bias and analyzes the power struggles of history, themes such as power,
oppression, identity, freedom, and money allow students to analyze causes of certain events,
their consequences, and reasons for injustice and bias.
Relation to Other Units
This unit should make sense in the context of the semester and year. Does it build upon
content and skills gained in previous units? Will it set students up for the next unit? These can be
connections in theme (oppression, racism) or continuity (a unit on the Roaring 20s followed by a
unit on the Great Depression).
Planning Checkpoint for Connections
Recurring themes in history are important for students to understand and recognize.
Essential Questions and Objectives should include these themes to offer students a
comprehensive look at the unit so they can connect it with other units and points of history. Why
do certain patterns emerge in history? Teachers must make sure to highlight and emphasize the
importance of such connections.
Lesson Plans
Here, the teacher will list the title and rationale for each lesson within the unit. This is to
provide the context in which these broad unit goals and objectives will be carried out. Lesson
plans should be thorough and include instructional strategies, student activities, resources and
materials needed, and modes of assessment. The rationale for each lesson should make sense
within the unit rationale and include what students will be doing and why.
Planning Checkpoint for Lesson Plans
Lesson plans should be aligned with the standards and Essential Questions of the unit.
Inquiry-based learning should be central to every lesson because students make the most out of
material they actively engage with. Students also need the time to look at bias in any given unit.
How has bias affected the material they are taught? Time for discussion is also important
because in addition to reading and writing about history, students benefit from practicing
academic conversation. This allows students to share their informed opinions and listen to what
others have to say in a safe and productive environment. Students learn to see history from
different perspectives and address their own biases they may have.
Sources
By listing the sources used in the entire unit, teachers can make sure they include various
sources from different viewpoints and people groups. They can also quickly identify the origins
and potential biases in their sources and if their selection might be one-sided. History from
multiple perspectives offers a more complete view of the past.

Planning Checkpoint for Source Bias
This section addresses the often one-sidedness of history textbooks and ensures the
teacher has included sources from multiple perspectives. Minority voices are given high
importance because, historically, minority groups have not been able to speak for themselves.
Room for students to analyze sources is also important because it teaches them to recognize bias
and, thus, historical accuracy and validity.
Reflection
Student inquiry, support, connection, and understanding are of highest importance in any
unit. In this section, teachers are asked simple but important yes/no questions so that they can
easily assess the completion of their unit plan and rework any aspects that are missing. Lastly,
the teacher is asked to address his or her own biases that may have unknowingly influenced the
design of the unit or selection of sources. As the teacher’s role is that of a facilitator, it is
important not to transfer his or her ideals, biases or values onto the students and instead let
students draw their own, well-informed conclusions.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
New Insights Into My Teachings, Theoretical Assumptions, and Beliefs
My research has made me an expert on just how much bias affects all aspects of history.
One’s background, values, and interests add a subjectivity to studying the past. Knowing this, I
am much more aware of my own biases and the biases of others. I have also realized that one
cannot be completely objective in anything – history and education included. Instead, as an
expert on bias in the classroom, I have learned to recognize bias and analyze how that bias
affects historical sources. Acknowledging bias in myself and others has made me more critical
when I read, write, and argue. This will help me in the classroom because I can now model these
critical thinking skills to my students. Knowing that I have biases makes me more open to
others’ perspectives, which is vital for progress in all areas of life.
I am now aware of how education has been used as a political tool since antiquity, and
how that has affected the modern American classroom. Those in power have used education to
perpetuate the structures that keep them in power, which involves keeping the powerless
oppressed. The paradox that this creates in the United States, a major proponent of democracy
and equality for all, is both angering and motivating. I will not perpetuate the status quo in my
classroom, but instead teach students to recognize this irony and work to change it.
This project has shown me the importance of planning and having a clear vision for my
classroom. I will use this unit plan template in my own classes because it gives me the direction I
was lacking in my previous teaching experiences. Students benefit from well-planned,
meaningful lesson plans because it helps them see historical significance and improve critical-
thinking skills. I want source analysis and discussions on bias to be central in my classroom
discussions. Student inquiry will guide all of my units because I realize that inquiry allows
students to become academically independent.
My knowledge about history itself has changed immensely. My research on the issues of
history has shown me that all aspects of history are subjective – from the historian, to the topic
and sources chosen, to the interpretation of them. However, I also learned that there will always
be uncertainty in any historical event because I will never have the whole story. What I can do
instead is focus on sources from the periphery – minority voices, the oppressed, the powerless,
those that make up the majority of the human race but have been consistently excluded from the
historical narrative. Reading what people have to say for themselves opens up a world of
knowledge and understanding. By bringing these realizations into the classroom, students will
learn to look at primary sources from multiple perspectives because it is what will give them the
whole – or at least more complete – story.
Applications and Changes in Curriculum
I plan to use this unit plan in my classroom. It is easy to use and addresses what I believe
to be the most important aspects of a history course. It will remind me to constantly be checking
my own bias and to have an explicit purpose for everything that goes on in my classroom.
New Emerging Questions and Next Steps
The first question that arose is: Are teachers actually going to use this template? Will I?
Teachers have so much on their plate that I envision this template being used at the beginning of
the year and then forgotten about. But, I hope that by using this template even a few times, the
planning steps will become engrained in teachers’ minds so it will become a natural process and
teachers intrinsically check for bias, include multiple perspectives, and focus on student inquiry.
My next question is about the discussion of bias. Are school environments equipped for
teachers to bring up their biases and have honest discussions? Teachers have gotten fired for
expressing opinions. When will we create a safe environment for them? Since teachers need to
watch what they say, how does that affect students’ willingness to have honest discussions?
Since this project was research-based, my next step would be to bring this template into
the classroom. I would like to observe teachers planning with it and observe lessons based on the
template. I would conduct interviews with teachers, students, and administration to see how this
template fits into the school setting. That way, I could make improvements and changes. I would
like to see this template used across an entire history department so that history teachers could
have discussions about their use of the template and any biases that come up. Hopefully this
would create a culture of honest discussion and history classrooms focused on inquiry and
critical analysis skills.
Limitations
The biggest limitation on this project was time. There is always more research to be
reviewed, professionals to interview, and different aspects to delve into more deeply. This
project is the beginning of what has the potential to redefine how students and teachers view
history education. Other limitations would be teacher interest in this template. Teachers stuck in
routines or simply without time might not want to use this in-depth planning template. Also, my
own biases placed limitations on this project. My family background, teaching perspective,
education, race, social class, and moral values have all influenced this project immensely, in
ways I perhaps do not even realize.

CONCLUSION
History can and has been used as a weapon – against students, minority groups, and those
who have historically been out of power. A massive shift in history education has the potential to
change how students feel about history and interact with it. This shift includes a heavy focus on
historiography, which will get students thinking about why a source was written and for what
purpose. The shift will guide classrooms back to student-based inquiry, where students ask
questions and find answers through research. Multiple historical perspectives (minority and
women voices) will give students a well-rounded view of the world, while helping them address
their own biases and assumptions. My unit plan template works to include all of these aspects of
the vibrant, living document of history, in hopes of leading students to become more open-
minded, critical, and powerful.

APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Class/Grade: ___________ Semester: _____
Unit #: _______ Title: ____________________
Big Question:
Unit Rationale:
*Planning Checkpoint for Unit Rationale

Does the Big Question connect to the key themes of this unit?
Can the Big Question be answered through student inquiry?
Have you highlighted the historical context and timeframe of this unit in the rationale?
Why do students need to know this unit?
Section 1: Standards, Themes, Objectives, Connections

California State Content Standards Common Core Skills
- -
- -
- -
Essential Questions
-
-
-
Unit Objectives Cognitive Level

- Students will be able to … -
- -
- -
- -
*Planning Checkpoint for Standard and Objective Alignment

Do the essential questions align with the standards?
Do they push students to think deeper (not just the what, but the why and how)?
Do the essential questions address excluded, oppressed and/or minority groups? Do they
address bias?
Are the unit objectives student-achievement focused and measurable?
Is the cognitive level of each objective rigorous yet appropriate for students?
Key Themes: Relation to Other Units:

- -
- -
- -
*Planning Checkpoint for Connections

Are key themes from the course embedded into the essential questions and lesson
objectives?
Does this unit fit in to the larger sequence of study? Are topics, themes and skills in this unit
relatable to other units?
Section 2: Lesson Plans and Sources

Lesson Plans
List the title and brief rationale for each lesson plan within the unit:
-
-
-
*Planning Checkpoint for Complete Lesson Plans

Does each lesson plan align with specific standards and essential questions?
Is student inquiry central to your lesson plans? Will students look at bias?
Is there time for students to have discussions and improve their academic conversation
skills?
Sources
List all sources that are going to be used in the unit (organized by lesson plan):
-
-
-
-
-
*Planning Checkpoint for Source Bias
Are sources from multiple perspectives so that students get a comprehensive view?
What do certain groups have to say about themselves? Are these sources included?
Is source analysis (looking at who wrote what, when, and why) embedded into lesson plans
so students can assess purpose and bias?
Section 3: Reflection
Is student-led inquiry central to your lesson plans? Yes/No
Are students supported in their academic literacy development? Yes/No
Do instructional strategies draw on student backgrounds? Yes/No
Will students understand why they’ve learned this unit? Yes/No
If No to any of the above, rework the unit and lesson plans until you can answer each
question with a Yes.
Do you have biases in regard to this unit? Yes/No

If yes, what will you do to address those biases when you teach the unit?
REFERENCES
Adeoti, E. O. and Adeyeri, J. O. (2012). History, the Historian and His Work: Issues, Challenges
and Prospects. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology, Vol. 3
(4), 36-41.
California Department of Education. 2017. History Social Science Framework for California
Public Schools. Sacramento: California Department of Education.
Commager, H. (1980). The nature and study of history. Columbus: Merrill.
Graves, F. P. (1923). A History of Education During the Middle Ages and the Transition to
Modern Times. New York: The MacMillan Company.
Griffith, M. (2001). Public and Private in Early Greek Institutions of Education. Y. L. Too (Ed.).
Leiden, Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV.
Gvelesiani, I. (2013). Ancient and Contemporary Educational Systems. European Scientific
Journal, Vol. 4, 168-172.
Heater, D. (2004). A History of Education for Citizenship. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Loewen, J. W. (2010). Teaching what really happened: How to avoid the tyranny of textbooks
and get students excited about doing history. New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University.
Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (10th ed.). (1993). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
McNamara, J. (n.d.). Essential Questions in Teaching American History. Retrieved July 24,
2018, from https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/default/files/inline-
pdfs/Version_1_Essential%20Questions_Gilder%20Lehrman.pdf)
Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (2013). Teaching to change the world. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Romanowski, M. H. (n.d.). Problems of Bias in History Textbooks. Retrieved July 8, 2018, from
http://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/publications/se/6003/600310.html
The Bradley Commission on History in Schools. (1988). Building a History Curriculum:
Guidelines for Teaching History in Schools. Washington, D.C.: Educational Excellence
Network.
Wiborg, S. (2000). Political and Cultural Nationalism in Education. The Ideas of Rousseau and
Herder Concerning National Education. Comparative Education, Vol. 36, No. 2, Special
Number (22), 235-243.
Winter, P. (1959). Thucydides and History Today. Greece & Rome, 6(2), 168-175. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/641421
Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. (n.d.). Bloom's Taxonomy [Digital image]. Retrieved
July 13, 2018, from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/
(n.a.). (n.d.). Social Studies. Retrieved July 18, 2018, from https://www.ermurrowhs.org/social-
studies.html

Dana Park Malt 610 Masters Project

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Dana Park Malt 610 Masters Project

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Running head: CONFRONTING BIAS IN THE HISTORY CLASSROOM

Confronting Bias in the History Classroom

July 28, 2018

supporting me wholeheartedly in my dreams of becoming a teacher, and I hope my work makes

you proud! I love you!

supporting me in my education and my choices, always. I love you!

the road got bumpy. I love you!

As a new teacher, I wanted to solidify my understanding of the purpose of teaching

Dedication & Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………...i

History and Related Issues………………………………………………………...4

Purpose of Education in the West…………………………………………………8

Purpose and Reality of History Instruction in the United States………………...14

Assumptions and Beliefs.………………………………………………………..……….17

Research Question and Approach.……………………………………………………….19

New Insights Into My Teaching, Theoretical Assumptions and Beliefs……..………….30

quos” of history as absolute truth.

Personal Context for Study

History is somewhat of an outcast in modern American education. With high-stakes

want my students to know how to do?”

boring, and unrelated to their lives. I completed my undergraduate degree in International

postgraduate travels and experience working at a high school in Spain.

History and Related Issues

dictionary, history is “a chronological record of significant events … often including an

all time. (p. 171)

then, can a historian be completely objective, “neutral, detached, unpassionate” (Adeoti, E. O.

historical understanding (Commager, 1980, p. 44).

Commager (1980) reminds us that

we talk about ‘ancient history’ or pre-Columbian America as if we had even a fraction of

Britain, France, America. (p. 46)

empowered by or included in the work?” “Who is oppressed or omitted?” and “Does it

perpetuate the status quo?”

Purpose of Education in the West

One of the earliest purposes of education centered on citizenship. In ancient Greece, it

and state-focused, “Athenians believed that accomplishments in academics helped an individual

was a compact community dominated by a relatively small and ethnically cohesive

guide and schoolmaster of the Germanic hosts. (Graves, 1923, p. 4)

citizenship, Wiborg (2000) says,

territory lying within national borders. (p. 238)

be seen clearly in Hitler’s Germany.

be a city-state, a religious empire, or a nation-state. This often involved the indoctrination of

purpose of education in the United States.

purpose of education as preparing students to be citizens in a democratic society. Thomas

and Lipton, M., 2013).

241). International competition urges countries to develop a highly-skilled citizenry. Capitalism

economy continues to globalize, American politicians continue to push schools to produce

Purpose and Reality of History Instruction in the United States

ideals and actions.

their preparation for public life as democratic citizens. (p. 5)

The Commission’s recommendations create a vision of a history classroom that is meaningful,

History, by its nature, is an interdisciplinary subject. It should never be reduced to a thin

every relevant discipline. Biography in particular reveals the significance of individual

their human consequences real to students. (p. 24)

citizen within society.

However, essentialist views of education, combined with a reliance on one-sided, biased

students learn by taking in information presented by teachers. Essentialism aims to ready

reality, injustice, and inequality (Oakes, J. and Lipton, M., 2013).

The problem of bias in history textbooks is outlined by Doctor of Education Michael H.

and source selection. He (n.d.) writes

textbooks define and determine what is important in American history. In making

particular episodes in history should be summarized, textbook authors assign positive or

them less powerful. (p. 1)

conventional understandings about what is praiseworthy or blameworthy in history” (p. 1). To

Assumptions and Beliefs

Class/Grade: _______ Semester: _

Unit #: _ Title: ______________

Class/Grade: _______ Semester: _

Unit #: _ Title: ______________