Why and How Should History Departments Train Secondary Social Studies Teachers?

Abstract

MY TITLE IMPLIES that history departments, under certain conditions, can be more effective producers of good teachers than those programs in which instruction in pedagogy is entirely in the hands of departments of education. There are several reasons why I think this is so, but I will emphasize only two, one practical and one philosophical, connected with a greater involvement in teacher training programs by historians. The first advantage has to do with the simple fact that secondary social studies teachers teach a subject. Although various factors make up a good teacher, among the most important traits outstanding teachers possess is knowledge of subject matter. In my view, the curriculum typical of American education departments stays on the generic level of teaching too long, with treatment of social studies content coming late, if ever, in the program. Some undergraduate programs for secondary social studies teachers require as few as eighteen hours of college credit in social sciences, amounting to twelve hours of survey and only two upperdivision courses. To use an analogy for training a different professional, namely a surgeon, it is of course true that much can be taught to the physician-in-training about surgery in general: how to scrub up; how to use a scalpel; how to make stitches, etc. But eventually, the novice surgeon must master knowledge and skills specific to a particular kind of