ORIENTATION CHOICE

You might think of the content of this posting as getting into the weeds of civics and social studies education. I hope you don't. My intent is to give you a bit of insight as to the options that civics educators – teachers and material developers – have when planning what approach they intend to take as they meet the challenges of their jobs. What I have to say here actually pertains to all social studies educators as well as educators in other fields (minus the references to social science content). My efforts are inspired by the work of Alan Tom. He wrote a paper many years ago which gives us a useful language as to the basic options these educators have as they address their subject matter. His paper identifies four basic goal oriented approaches. He arrives at these four orientations by posing two questions: What type of issues should social studies' lessons emphasize? And, what type of knowledge should social studies' lessons emphasize? Let me explain.

In terms of the first question, Tom offers two options. They are descriptive issues and proscriptive issues. An educator who chooses descriptive issues feels his/her main goal in the classroom is to present to students the content his/her subject offers in describing reality, either as it is now or how it used to be. On the other hand, an educator who chooses proscriptive issues feels that his/her main responsibility is to have students deal with visions – or ideals – of what reality should be or should have been. To give analogous expectations, if we want to be told about how the world is, we might turn to journalists, but if we want to get some take on how the world should be, we might turn to a minister. So one can view this choice as one in which an educator decides whether he/she is more like a reporter or a priest. My experience tells me that most teachers view themselves more like a reporter than a rabbi.

In terms of the second question – with what type of knowledge should his/her students be concerned – there are two options: product and process. Those who choose product see themselves imparting conclusions; for example, Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 or cleanliness is close to Godliness. Of course, these examples are offered only to illustrate the type of knowledge this choice entails; we would hope that teachers and material developers who choose product select more powerful conclusions. For those educators who choose process, their lessons would emphasize having students learn those processes by which conclusions are derived. This educator is not so interested in imparting content of the subject matter – its conclusions – but on how that content is discovered or reasoned.

With these two questions answered, the educator falls into one of four categories. I want to point out that these categories are ones of emphasis. By claiming an educator is of one orientation is not to say that he/she does not venture into one of the other orientations. It simply means, he/she will, through instruction or materials, dedicate more effort and concern over the demands associated with the category he/she favors. Let's look at each of the four categories.

• Descriptive/Product: This educator will emphasize the facts, concepts, generalizations, theories, etc. of his/her subject matter. He/she will want to make sure that he/she is imparting the subject's substantive content. Descriptive/Product in civics or social studies calls for an emphasis on understanding social phenomena. This, of course, will be calibrated so as to meet the sophistication of the students. In terms of the challenge this choice presents to the teacher, he/she needs to be able to gauge sufficiently well the level of abstract thinking his/her students can handle successfully. This is not easily done, especially in a class with more than twenty students, but that is the life of a public school teacher. Of the four categories, my experience tells me that most educators hold this orientation.
• Descriptive/Process: This choice calls for civics and social studies educators to have their students engage in research projects or lessons to become familiar with and practice the protocols of social scientists. This opens up lessons to a wide variety of activities that students could perform. This could include survey research, experiments, analysis of historical documents, analysis of gathered data from such sources as the US Census or opinion survey services. Here, the emphasis is on the methods by which understanding of social phenomena can be formed.
• Proscriptive/Product: This category includes those teachers who want to instill the values of some reference group. The reference group could be one that promotes religious views on morality, a political ideology, or an agenda of some interest group or faction. This promotion can vary from messaging that is direct and unambiguous or it can take the form of more subtle approaches. The methods used in this category can also include practices educators call the “hidden curriculum.” To give you a simple example, the use of bells in school reinforces the value of punctuality along with providing the practical signaling of classes beginning and ending.
• Proscriptive/Process: Educators who fall into this category will emphasize lessons in which his/her students engage in techniques of valuing. The main effort is to have students develop mental processes that employ logic as students are called on to reason through value dilemmas. As opposed to Proscriptive/Product category, this approach does not aim at having students incorporate a set of moral or political perspectives. Instead, students are to develop their own values over situations in which costs will be incurred by whatever choices they make in the dilemmas they are presented. The students are expected to defend their choices and to show consistency as the teacher questions the student. This approach is often compared with what is known as the Socratic Method.

I present these categories with parents in mind. If you are a parent, hopefully these categories will help you ask questions of the social studies teachers to whom your children are assigned in school. Remember, the categories are not exclusive designations. They simply identify the possible orientations which teachers will tend to favor. All teachers, for the most part, exhibit some of the traits associated with each of these options. For example, I can't think of a teacher who would not promote honesty as a value students should hold, but that does not mean these teachers fall within the proscriptive/product option. To determine where a teacher stands in relation to these categories, a parent would have to ask the teacher a set of appropriate questions. The effort to do so can be useful in understanding the teacher's philosophy. The parent will be more disposed to understanding the teacher's expectations. The same can be said of a parent reviewing the textbook used in civics or other social studies classes. What is interesting and possibly counterproductive occurs when there is a teacher coming from one orientation using a text based on another orientation. In most social studies classes, at least in public schools, teachers don't choose the textbook they use. They simply are given the text and have to coordinate their efforts with the structure, content, and activities the text contains. What usually happens is that the teacher simply follows the orientation of the text. As a matter of fact, most teachers view their jobs through the prism of one of these orientations, usually Descriptive/Product, and are unaware that a choice has been made.