Proven Climate Solutions: Leading Voices on How to Accelerate Change
Edited by BF Nagy
Reviewed by Hank Bitten, NJCSS Executive Director
Our world made a monumental change during the Industrial Revolution when homes and buildings converted from wood-burning fireplaces to coal and oil furnaces allowing for heat and hot water. This change came 4,000 years after the invention of fire and revolutionized the way people live. Eventually, it brought electricity and light into their homes. Every aspect of home life became more efficient than it had been when people split wood for fireplaces.
Around 1950 the world converted to natural gas. As a young boy I shoveled coal into the two furnaces in our basement around 6:00 a.m. each morning. In 1957, I remember the backhoes and tractors digging up our Paterson, N.J. street to install natural gas lines. By 1970, most areas of New Jersey were using natural gas for heating and cooking. This change took about 20 years.
By 2,000, we began to realize that combustion engines and fossil fuels were harming our environment and were a cause of respiratory and cancer-related deaths. We understood that “natural” gas was not natural because the release of methane was even more harmful than the soot and smoke from coal and oil. We began to look for new sources of energy in solar, wind, nuclear, biomass, geothermal, tidal, and hydrogen.
From the perspective of a social studies educator, our students need to focus on the solutions to these problems. Proven Climate Solutions includes nineteen concise chapters that take less than ten minutes to read. Each chapter provides a solution on the technology, economics, and empirical examples of how and where they are working. For teachers who use classroom debates or a simulated congress, the chapters in the book provide information on the advantages of solar and wind over every other source of renewable energy!
An example of factual information for a classroom debate is in the chapter, “Opportunity Costs and Distractions” by BF Nagy, editor of this book. Here are some examples:
“In 2022, massive leaks of oil in Thailand, Peru, Ecuador, and Nigeria led to explosions, fatalities, fires, and extensive water pollution.” (Page 50)
“The world’s biggest tanker containing 1.1 million barrels of oil began leaking after being abandoned in the Red Sea near Yemen by a Chevron subsidiary.” (Page 50)
“In 2023, Massachusetts state regulators denied a permit modification that would allow discharge of more than one million gallons of toxic wastewater into cape Code Bay.” (Page 50)
“Nuclear power costs about $180 per megawatt/hour compared with $50 for wind and $60 for solar.” (Page 51)
“Just two generations ago, in 1979, the United States built the Runit Dome in the Marshall Islands. Below an eighteen-inch concrete cap, they stored 111,000 cubic yards of radioactive debris from twelve years of nuclear tests. It is already cracking and leaking into the sea.” (Page 52)
The chapter on VPP (Virtual Power Plants) fascinated me because I had never heard about them. As I learned more about the need to use a decentralized electric grid and the technology that is making this feasible, I realized the connections for students in their lessons on the Industrial Revolution and the efficiency of how VPP and DERs (Distributed Energy Resources) are making a difference in our economy and environment. In addition, they foster community engagement and shared resources.
The information on artificial intelligence in constructing pre-fab housing units, passive house designs meeting low carbon standards, virtual power plants, and the recent research on battery technology will engage students in thinking ten years into the future. The possibilities of airplanes and homes powered by batteries is transformative in the ways we are currently conditioned to think about travel, energy, and home heating systems.
“Sendero Verde means ‘green path’ and is among the signature achievements of two brilliant women: engineer Lois A. from Steven Winter Associates and architect Deborah M. from Handel Architects.
The duo designed Sendero Verde within the confines of an affordable housing budget, and their companies also collaborated on The House, a twenty-six story passive house certified student residence for Cornell University’s tech school on New York’s Roosevelt Island. Another of their projects is the massive fifty-three story Winthrop Center in Boston, which in the early 2020s, was considered the biggest passive house office project in the world.” (Page 110)
“The House” Cornell University’s Student Residence using a Passive House design.
Teachers who use an interdisciplinary approach will find helpful research on the new carbon sinks being formed as the ice caps are melting. These polar foodwebs are helpful as deforestation has reduced the amount of carbon being absorbed by rainforests. The information on biodiversity and the impact of how our planet is adapting to a warmer climate with melting ice is an area of research that students should find interesting.
“Less than half of all carbon captured by polar phytoplankton or macro algae is stored in foodwebs, and nearly all the rest is recycled into the water column by bacteria in what is termed the microbial loop (rotting). Vast numbers and biomass of water column (pelagic) zooplankton, such as copepods or krill, which are shrimp-like crustaceans, store much of this carbon.” (Page 136)
Perhaps the most informative chapter in this book is titled “Circular Food Systems: Feeding the Urban World” because it identifies small innovative companies that are implementing important solutions. Examples for students to research include the White Moustache Yogurt Company, Back of the Yards Algae Sciences, Spare Foods Company, LivinGreen, Evergrain, TripleWin, and Portland Pet Center. When I was a 16-year-old high school student, my Earth Science teacher’s lesson about the impact of the end of civilization as we knew it with the birth of the 3 billionth person had a lasting impact on me. In just ten years, the world’s population will be 9 billion and in 2050 it will likely be 10 billion. As the population increases, the urban density will also increase from 55 percent today to 63 percent by 2050 and provide an urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Solutions are needed!
Year
Population
Net Change
Density (P/Km²)
2025
8,231,613,070
69,640,498
55
2026
8,300,678,395
69,065,325
56
2027
8,369,094,344
68,415,949
56
2028
8,436,618,886
67,524,542
57
2029
8,503,285,323
66,666,437
57
2030
8,569,124,911
65,839,588
58
Students need to understand how hydroponic agriculture and circular food systems can sustain life on our planet in the future. Our current dependence on rice, wheat, soybeans, and corn contribute significant amounts of carbon and methane into our atmosphere through their production and distribution. The current agricultural revolution needs to produce food in urban areas and reduce food waste. Source
“The food system we have in place today, one we have nurtured for a half-century and that produces some 43 percent of the world’s calorie supply, is itself in jeopardy due to the growing climate crisis, rising temperatures and prolonged droughts are withering crops; frequent floods are destroying them. The reliance on intensive farming practices such as tilling and heavy fertilizer and pesticide use robs the soils of their productivity, jeopardizing yields necessary to continue feeding rising populations.” (Page 150)
An important thread throughout this book is that proven climate solutions are likely to be local. Heating and electric power will be de-centralized, food production will be on urban rooftops and in parks, and transportation will be redesigned. The school curriculum needs to include case studies from urban ‘smart’ cities. One suggestion for the next edition of Proven Climate Solutions might be to include information on the importance of recycling clothing.
Men at Work: The Empire State Building and the Untold Story of the Craftsmen Who Built It
by Glenn Kurtz
Reviewed by Dr. Alan Singer, Hofstra University
In this book published by Seven Stories Press, Glenn Kurtz uncovers the identities of the Empire State Building construction workers, made famous by Lewis W. Hine’s legendary portraits. The book features more than 75 photos and other illustrations, some by Hine that have never been previously published. Astonishingly, no list of workmen on this historic landmark was ever compiled. While the names of the owners, architects, and contractors are well known, and Lewis Hine left us indelible images of the workers, their identities—the last generation of workmen still practicing these time-honored trades, have not been identified until author Glenn Kurtz unearthed their individual stories for this book. Drawing on eclectic sources — census, immigration, and union records; contemporary journalism; the personal recollections of their descendants — Kurtz assembles biographies of these workers, providing not only a portrait of the building’s labor force, and a revolutionary re-interpretation of Hine’s world-famous photographs, but also a fundamental reimagining of what made the Empire State Building a fitting symbol for the nation, built as it was at the very height of the Great Depression.
According to Erik Loomis, author of A History of America in Ten Strikes, “Capitalists build nothing. Workers build everything. Glenn Kurtz recovers the stories of the brave men who constructed the Empire State Building masterfully using Lewis Hine’s famous photographs of them. A wonderful book for anyone who cares about the stories of real workers.” Alastair J. Gordon, author of Naked Airport, praises Kurtz for “Working with a minimum of historical data, Kurtz has broken through the urban mythologies and written an insightful social history, not about the capitalist owners, investors, architects or contractors, but about the every day mortals — ironworkers, carpenters, crane operators and other unsung heroes — who actually built the Empire State Building during the height of the Great Depression… a revelatory contribution to the legacy of New York’s built environment.”
Revolutionary New York: 250 Years of Social Change
Edited by Bruce Dearstyne
Reviewed by Dr. Alan Singer, Hofstra University
Revolutionary New York celebrates the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution and the many historical changes that have occurred since, as reflected through the history of the state. This book explores “unfinished revolutions” in the Empire State: the two-and-a-half century struggle to realize the revolution’s ideals and bring increased freedom and opportunities to previously marginalized populations. Itis an Excelsior Edition published by SUNY Press. It includes sixteen essays that explore different aspects of New York State history starting with a chapter on “The Oneida Rebellions, 1763 to 1784.” Editor Bruce Dearstyne provided chapters on the birth of New York State in 1777 and September 11, 2001. There are also chapters on the Erie Canal, slavery in New York State, the Triangle Fire and workplace safety, the Harlem Hellfighters, the struggle by women to win the right to vote, prohibition, the origins of the United Federation of Teachers union, Stonewall, and the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to Jennifer Lemak, Chief Curator of History, New York State Museum, “From Indigenous uprisings and the building of the Erie Canal to suffrage and LGBTQ+ rights, New York State has long been at the forefront of America’s most significant social transformations. This book explores the people, places, and pivotal moments that shaped a more just and inclusive society—revealing how New Yorkers challenged injustice, redefined freedom, and left a lasting impact on our nation.”
An Education: How I Changed My Mind About Schools and Almost Everything Else
by Diane Ravitch
Reviewed by Dr. Alan Singer, Hofstra University
According to Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, “Diane Ravitch’s telling of her remarkable journey — from a child of working-class immigrants to one of the most vital national education treasures and leaders — tells us so much about her unwavering support for public education and its role in our society. That would be beautiful enough, but the second thrill is how she brings her curiosity — an essential trait we nurture in students — to question her own views and change her mind. The result is this clarion call to protect and strengthen public schooling in America as the foundation of our young people — and our democracy. If you care about the future, read this book.”
Diane Ravitch has spent five decades analyzing and advocating for national and state education policies designed to reform and reshape public schools. Her work supporting school choice made her the intellectual darling of the right. But when she renounced school choice as a failure, she was abandoned by many old friends and colleagues. Today she is a champion for public schools, a foe of standardized testing, and proclaims herself to be “woke.” Her latest book, An Education: How I Changed My Mind About Schools and Almost Everything Else is published by Columbia University Press
Ravitch was one of eight children from a Jewish family in Houston, Texas, where she grew up with no television, no air conditioning, and, often, no shoes. In college she met and married a man from a wealthy and connected New York City family, where they lived and raised a family. She began working for a socialist magazine, which led to writing about education and, eventually, a PhD in education history.
Ravitch’s writings favored strengthening and expanding school choice and rigorous testing, ideas that aligned well with conservative donors and think tanks who supported her work and led to positions in the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations. Meanwhile, a chance encounter at an education conference with a New York City high school social studies teacher, Mary Butz, led to a clandestine romance. Ravitch’s new relationship upended her previous “life of comfort and plenty” and led to her marriage to Mary.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg sought Ravitch’s support and counsel for the changes he and school commissioner Joel Klein instituted during his administration, but it was at this time that Ravitch began to question the results of standardized testing and school choice programs like charter schools. Improved test scores at lauded schools proved illusory and charter schools only seemed to thrive because they were able to weed out the most challenged pupils. Gradually, Ravitch abandoned her long-held views on the power of testing or the promise of choice. She began to write and speak out in favor of saving America’s besieged public schools.
Ravitch’s involvement in education idea and policy have earned her a reputation as education’s best-known living historian and its most controversial figure. An Education is the story of the making, unmaking, and remaking of a public intellectual and a remarkable testament to the importance of a mind open to truth and possibility in a world, she writes, “of masks and artifice”.
Original and deeply researched, The Slow Death of Slavery in Dutch New York: A Cultural, Economic, and Demographic History, 1700–1827 (Cambridge University Press, 2025) provides a new interpretation of Dutch American slavery which challenges many of the traditional assumptions about slavery in New York. With an emphasis on demography and economics, Michael J. Douma shows that slavery in eighteenth-century New York was mostly rural, heavily Dutch, and generally profitable through the cultivation of wheat. Slavery in Dutch New York ultimately died a political death in the nineteenth century, while resistance from enslaved persons, and a gradual turn against slavery in society and in the courts, encouraged its destruction.
This important study is expected to reshape the historiography of slavery in the American North. It joins several recently published works in the same subject area:
Christopher Verga is a social studies teacher at the East River Academy for incarcerated youth on Rikers Island, an instructor of Long Island history and Foundations of American History at Suffolk Community College, and an instructor in Politics of Terrorism at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Nazis of Long Island: Sedition, Espionage and the Plot Against (The History Press,2025) is his seventh book on Long Island History. It is about the American Nazi movement prior to and during World War II and is a timely book because there is a resurgence of Nazi like ideology in the world today. While Verga argues that Long Island, New York was a breeding ground for an “American Reich,” the story as he spells out is much broader encompassing the entire New York metropolitan region in the midst of the Great Depression. New York City and its metropolitan area in this period was also a target for German spies and a center of anti-Nazi resistance.
Long Island in the 1930s was a Republican Party and America First stronghold. Verga attempts to draw connections between them and Nazi sympathizers, but the connection may have been tenuous and certainly dissolved once the United States entered the war.
Like in all the local histories written by Christopher Verga, this book is richly documented and easy to read. The village of Breslau, later renamed Lindenhurst, was originally established as a New York City commuter suburb for German immigrants with beer halls and traditional German festivals. It also had a strong pro-German following before the war. Glen Head, Long Island resident Cornelius Lievense was the American financial manager for German industrialist Fritz Thyssen, who was the financial backer of the early Nazi Party activities in the United States. The Nassau County chapters of the America First Committee in the Five Towns, Freeport, Hicksville and Valley Stream hosted the pro-Nazi members of Congress on speaking tours. In the early spring of 1941, Freeport organized a 1,600-person rally for the committee in the Freeport High School auditorium. Guest speaker Republican Senator Gerald Nye of North Dakota called on the audience to do “all in your power to prevent the proposed assignment of American warships to convoy duty.” He declared that “this is nothing but madness.”
The best known pro-German and pro-Nazi facility on Long Island was Camp Siegfried, operated as a vacation point, for pro-German rallies, and for training Hitler Youth. Camp Siegrfried and the town of Yaphank were considered “a little piece of German soil—a Sudetenland in Amerika—planted on this side of the ocean.” The roads at the camp and in the town were named after high ranking Nazis including Adolf Hitler Street, Joseph Goebbels Street and Hermann Göring Street. During the summer, the Long Island Railroad provided special train service on weekends for visitors to Yaphank and Camp Siegfried. Camp Siegfried’s annual August rally attracted an estimated forty thousand people
Because Long Island was home to Army-Air Force bases and major war industries, it was targeted by Nazi spy rings. The Ludwig ring was the second spy operation discovered in New York. German spies imbedded themselves in Republic Aviation, Grumman, and Brewster factories and the smaller defense plants in the Nassau County Roosevelt Field area like the Sperry Gyroscope Company in Garden City. Shortwave radio and telegram transmission stations on the north shore of Eastern Long Island and in Nassau County sent industrial intelligence to Hamburg, Germany.
During wartime, German prisoners of war were incarcerated on Long Island at Camp Upton, Mason General Hospital in Deer Park, and Mitchel Field in Uniondale. If they died the German prisoners were buried in section 2C of Long Island National Cemetery. The local POW camps had open dorms and prisoners were assigned to work on farms. Camp Upton in Brookhaven with 1,500 POWs was the largest facility on Long Island. Heavyweight boxing champion Joe Lewis was the most famous guard at the Upton POW camp.
The Tourist’s Guide to Lost Yiddish New York City by Henry Sapoznik
Edited by Alan Singer
Henry Sapoznik is a Peabody Award-winning coproducer of NPR’s Yiddish Radio Project, a five-time Grammy-nominated producer and performer, and the author of Klezmer! Jewish Music from Old World to Our World. The Tourist’s Guide to Lost Yiddish New York City (SUNY PRESS, 2025) is a history of New York’s Yiddish popular culture from 1880 to the present. In twenty-three chapters on theater, music, architecture, crime, Blacks and Jews, restaurants, real estate, and journalism, it retells the story of Jews in New York City by focusing on Yiddish, a Germn dialect that was the language of Ashkenazy Jewish immigrants, and the center of their culture. Sapoznik’s research draws on Yiddish and English language newspapers from the period and previously inaccessible materials to offer fresh insights into the influence of Yiddish culture on New York City. The book includes fifty images and is linked to an online interactive Google Map with over one hundred sites discussed in the book.
Enhancing Social Studies Instruction through Disciplinary Literacy Practices Aligned to the Science of Reading
by Dean Bacigalupo
The New York State Portrait of a Graduate, finalized in July 2025, emphasizes preparing students who are academically skilled, literate across disciplines, and capable of critical thinking, independent learning, and effective communication (New York State Education Department, 2025). Central to this vision is culturally responsive-sustaining (CR-S) education, which ensures that students build respectful relationships, value diverse perspectives, and engage meaningfully in inclusive learning communities. Graduates who demonstrate both cultural responsiveness and academic readiness are well-positioned to thrive in a diverse and rapidly changing world.
These planned types of creative engagement open the door to new ideas in students. It also empowers students to take intellectual risks that challenge assumptions and spark curiosity. These behaviors form the basis for sustained and meaningful critical inquiry. Critical inquiry then enables them to analyze information, evaluate evidence, and understand complex issues from multiple angles. In addition, building strong communication skills support students in articulating their thinking with clarity, and intentional lessons designed to build students self-reflection nurtures metacognition. These are essential to helping them recognize strengths and identify areas for growth. When coupled with a developing sense of global awareness, these competencies equip students to become “lifelong learners” and contribute meaningfully to an interconnected world.
To realize this vision, literacy instruction must extend beyond English Language Arts (ELA) to encompass all content areas, including social studies. The NYS Science of Reading (SoR) literacy initiative, woven into the finalized NYS Portrait of a Graduate, offers research-based strategies for building foundational skills such as decoding, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (Lesaux & Carr, 2023). SoR is not a single curriculum or program. Instead, it reflects decades of interdisciplinary research on how children acquire reading and writing skills and provides guidelines for effective instruction. In this context, SoR represents the “how” of literacy development, while the Portrait of a Graduate articulates the “why.” Instruction should empower students to transfer literacy skills across disciplines and engage critically with academic content.
Social studies provides an especially strong context for building disciplinary literacy through engagement with academic texts and primary sources. Unlike fictional narratives, which often feature familiar vocabulary and predictable plots, these texts pose unique challenges. They introduce abstract concepts beyond students’ everyday experiences and typically employ complex sentence structures and specialized organizational patterns. Additionally, they integrate both academic and discipline-specific vocabulary (Cervetti & Hiebert, 2011; Shanahan, 2021; Lesaux, 2020; McKeown et al., 2021). As students move from reading narrative fiction to academic and historical texts, they must navigate dense information, interpret primary and secondary sources, analyze cause-and-effect relationships, track chronological sequences, and consider multiple perspectives (Lee, 2022; Fisher & Frey, 2021).
Writing in social studies reflects a similar shift. Students are asked to construct coherent explanations, synthesize information across sources, and present reasoned arguments that reflect historical thinking (Fisher & Frey, 2021; Moje et al., 2022). Disciplinary literacy instruction supports students in meeting the academic demands of each discipline. By explicitly teaching subject specific vocabulary, sentence structures, discourse conventions, and organizational strategies, teachers help students build the knowledge and skills necessary for deep understanding and clear communication (Lesaux, Kieffer, & Kelley, 2021; McKeown et al., 2021). By embedding such instruction, teachers create classrooms in which students move beyond memorizing facts to reasoning and producing knowledge in ways that mirror historians and social scientists (Shanahan, 2021; Moje et al., 2022).
Disciplinary Literacy in Social Studies
At its core, disciplinary literacy involves developing the specialized ways of reading, writing, and reasoning that characterize experts in each academic field. Each content area demands specific cognitive skills, including attention, working memory, and reasoning strategies. Students also need to master the linguistic features unique to the discipline, such as specialized vocabulary, complex syntax, and distinctive discourse structures, to engage successfully with academic content (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2020; Moje et al., 2020; Lesaux et al., 2021). Focusing on disciplinary literacy helps students move beyond relying solely on personal experience or background knowledge. It enables students to engage meaningfully with historical work. Through this process they analyze primary and secondary sources, evaluate evidence, consider multiple perspectives, and construct arguments grounded in evidence (Wineburg, 2001; Lee, 2022; Moje et al., 2022).
Providing explicit instruction in how historians read, write, and reason gives students the strategies they need to create meaning from complex texts and make historically grounded inferences. The principles of disciplinary literacy align closely with the Science of Reading, as both highlight vocabulary, syntax, and comprehension as foundations for deep understanding. (Castles et al., 2018; Seidenberg, 2017; McKeown et al., 2021). By integrating these approaches, teachers help students develop strong word-level decoding, higher-order comprehension and the reasoning skills necessary to think, read, and write like experts in history and the social sciences.
In social studies, disciplinary literacy requires students to develop several core language skills. These include mastering both academic and subject-specific vocabulary. Academic vocabulary encompasses words that appear across multiple subjects. This allows students to engage in higher-order thinking and cross-disciplinary reasoning (August & Shanahan, 2022; Lesaux et al., 2021). Content-specific vocabulary, in contrast, is unique to social studies and supports students in analyzing and interpreting historical texts.
Disciplinary literacy expands to include instruction in language functions within an academic discipline. Language function refers to how students use language to think, reason, and interact with content. These skills are integrated into learning objectives and reflected in classroom activities. By applying these skills consistently, students deepen their understanding and mirror the work of historians—comparing events, analyzing causes and effects, interpreting sources, and synthesizing information across texts (Wineburg, McGrew, Breakstone, & Ortega, 2020; Lee, 2022).
Syntax is another critical component of disciplinary literacy. Historical and academic writing often features complex sentences with multiple clauses, embedded phrases, and relational markers such as because, although, and therefore. These are used in writing to signal logical relationships like cause and effect, contrast, or comparison. Understanding syntax allows students to follow intricate reasoning, interpret nuanced arguments, and construct their own ideas with clarity (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2021; McKeown et al., 2021).
Discourse is the final part of disciplinary literacy. Discourse refers to the larger structures of communication that guide how knowledge is shared. In social studies, discourse encompasses how historians organize evidence, sequence ideas, and construct arguments. Recognizing these patterns enables students to produce organized, purposeful writing and strengthen their ability to reason critically and communicate effectively (Fisher, Frey, & Hattie, 2023; Moje et al., 2022).
By explicitly teaching both academic and content vocabulary, language function, syntax, and discourse, educators create learning environments where students move beyond superficial understanding and engage in authentic historical inquiry. These skills not only support disciplinary thinking within social studies classes, but also foster transferable literacy skills across other subjects and multiple grade levels (Moje et al., 2020; McKeown et al., 2021).
Strengthening Vocabulary Instruction
Vocabulary instruction in social studies must address the layered nature of the words students encounter. According to the Science of Reading framework, vocabulary can be grouped into three tiers. Everyday conversational terms form the first tier, while the second includes academic words that recur across disciplines. Research by Averil Coxhead (2000) provides a widely used Academic Word List, which can be used to map high-frequency academic words across subjects and grade levels. The list is available online through Victoria University of Wellington (Victoria University of Wellington, n.d.) at https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/lals/resources/academicwordlist. Examples of Tier 2 words include analyze, influence, and structure. Effective instruction in academic vocabulary requires more than providing definitions. Students need opportunities to explore how these words function within texts and discussions. Planned alignment and instruction in academic vocabulary helps students notice subtle differences in meaning and recognize common word pairings. These strategies support students in applying academic language confidently in reading, discussion, and writing tasks across different contexts. (August & Shanahan, 2022; Lesaux et al., 2021).
Tier 3 words are discipline-specific and central to historical reasoning. These include terms like reform, diplomacy, and industrialization. These are most effectively learned through carefully chosen primary sources, historical narratives, contemporary accounts and other authentic text. Exploring these words in context helps students develop a precise understanding of their meaning and significance. Seeing how words function in authentic reading, discussion, and writing tasks helps students to deepen their comprehension and learn to use language accurately and confidently (McKeown et al., 2021; Moje et al., 2022).
Teachers can scaffold discipline-specific vocabulary using a variety of strategies aligned with the Science of Reading. Frayer Models, word maps, and charts that incorporate synonyms, antonyms, text-based examples, and opportunities for students to create original sentences are all effective tools. Sentence frames provide students with language support that guides the use of both academic and content vocabulary. For example, “I can analyze ___ by ___” or “This structure helps ___ because ___” give students a clear structure for expressing their ideas. Teachers can also leverage morphology and word families to help students predict the meanings of new words. For instance, influence can become influential or influencer, and structure can become structural or restructure. Understanding the suffix -ism, which denotes a system, ideology, or practice allows students to analyze and apply terms such as feudalism, mercantilism, capitalism, communism, and socialism.
Visual supports, such as anchor charts, offer reference points for key terms across lessons. Vocabulary journals encourage learners to record new words, include text examples, write original sentences, and reflect on how each word connects to the topic. These personalized exercises reinforce both literacy growth and historical reasoning (Fisher, Frey, & Hattie, 2021).
Teaching Academic Language Functions in Social Studies
The New York State K–12 Social Studies Framework (NYSSED, 2023) outlines a range of academic functions that students should develop to think, communicate, and reason like historians and social scientists. These functions are embedded in the framework’s disciplinary practices and include gathering and using evidence, analyzing and interpreting information, reasoning and argumentation, communication and expression, and problem solving or decision making. Within these practices, students learn to formulate questions, design inquiries, and evaluate sources as part of historical investigations (New York State Education Department, 2023;https://www.nysed.gov/curriculum-instruction/social-studies). These functions are central to disciplinary thinking and must be aligned from instruction through assessment. Doing so connects comprehension to expression and deepens understanding (Wineburg, Martin, & Monte-Sano, 2020; Langer & Applebee, 2020).
Teachers can support language function through a variety of strategies informed by the Science of Reading. Graphic organizers help students compare perspectives or categorize causes and effects. Timelines clarify chronological relationships. Structured prompts encourage evidence-based argumentation. For example, in a unit on the Civil Rights Movement, students might hypothesize causes, examine primary sources, and revise interpretations based on evidence. These tasks mirror historians’ methods and promote critical thinking over memorization (Singer, 2021).
Additional Science of Reading strategies include analyzing contemporary political speeches to identify rhetorical techniques and historical parallels. Peer debates provide opportunities for learners to justify their positions using evidence. Historical simulations, such as mock congressional hearings or town hall meetings, immerse students in applying analytical and inferential skills in authentic contexts. Connecting history instruction to current social issues further enhances relevance and fosters civic engagement (Singer, 2019).
Targeted prompts make language functions explicit. Examples include:
“Compare the motivations of these two historical figures using evidence from primary sources.”
“Sequence these events and explain how one led to another.”
“Based on this speech, what inferences can you make about public opinion at the time?”
“Evaluate the credibility of these sources and justify your reasoning.”
By integrating these strategies, students will move beyond surface-level recall and engage deeply in evidence-based reasoning. They learn to interrogate sources, construct coherent arguments, and articulate well-supported claims. Developing these skills is critical for cultivating historical literacy and preparing students to participate as informed, active citizens (Reisman, 2020; Singer 2021).
Teaching Syntax for Disciplinary Literacy in Social Studies
Syntax instruction plays a vital role in helping students navigate complex texts and articulate sophisticated ideas. When students understand how different sentence structures function, they become more confident readers and writers. Subordinate clauses, cause and effect constructions, and embedded modifiers each offer ways to convey nuance and complexity. As students learn to recognize and use these structures, they strengthen both comprehension and written expression. These skills also enable them to read more analytically and construct clearer arguments (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2019).
Consider the sentence: “Although governments have pledged to reduce emissions, many countries continue to rely on fossil fuels, which has delayed progress on climate goals.”
Subordinate clauses and modifiers help students make sense of contrasts, causal relationships, and the sequence of events. These skills are fundamental to the ways students engage in historical and civic thinking. In the classroom, teachers can build this understanding through brief focused mini-lessons. These lessons might guide students through the role of dependent clauses, transitions, and modifiers as they appear in authentic texts. By slowing down and examining these structures together, teachers help students see how syntax shapes meaning in ways that support deeper reading and writing.
Close reading and annotation provide valuable opportunities for students to analyze how authors construct meaning through syntax. As students mark up a text, they begin to notice how authors signal causality, highlight contradictions, and add meaningful layers of detail. These insights help students read more intentionally and understand how structure supports meaning.
When teachers model these strategies in their own writing, students gain a clear example of how syntax works in practice. They can observe how deliberate sentence structures clarify ideas and reinforce arguments. Seeing these techniques in action helps students apply them in their own writing with greater confidence and skill.
Modeling logical connections in writing reinforces syntax. For example: “Young activists are organizing global climate strikes. Therefore, governments are facing increased pressure to act.”
Classroom applications can be interactive. Students might collaboratively build sentences combining ideas from multiple sources. Peer syntax review encourages attention to clarity and logical flow. Analyzing historical documents or political speeches helps learners notice argumentative structures and rhetorical strategies (Singer, 2019).
Explicit instruction in syntax gives students the skills they need to read critically and think analytically. As they learn how sentence structures work, students begin to make sense of complex texts and strengthen their ability to craft evidence-based arguments. Intentional instruction in this area also helps them to build disciplinary literacy aligned to the Science of Reading. This will support meaningful engagement with content and ideas across subjects. By weaving these practices into daily teaching, educators can empower students to approach learning with confidence and build a deeper understanding of the material.
Promoting Academic Discourse in Social Studies
When academic discourse is deliberately structured, students articulate their reasoning and engage in evidence-based dialogue with classmates (Fisher, Frey, & Hattie, 2023; Singer, 2021). They engage with texts, data, and visual sources to make sense of complex information together. Carefully designed discussion protocols elevate classroom talk from simple recall to deeper, concept-driven conversations. Students strengthen their understanding of content and develop habits of disciplinary thinking. By creating space for purposeful dialogue, educators help students to communicate more clearly and connect ideas meaningfully (Singer, 2021).
Academic discourse supports higher-order cognitive processes, including critical thinking, perspective-taking, and evaluative reasoning. For example, when students analyze the causes of the American Revolution in a Socratic seminar, they have opportunities to articulate and defend their interpretations. They can also question and evaluate the reasoning of their peers. In addition, multimedia debates that draw on oral, written, and visual sources require students to synthesize evidence from a variety of sources. These activities help to further develop understanding and strengthen students’ ability to communicate complex ideas.
Classroom extensions bring these practices to life. Students work together to analyze primary sources and build arguments collaboratively, learning from each other’s reasoning in the process. Structured peer feedback encourages reflection on their own thinking and rhetorical choices, which strengthens metacognitive skills. When teachers connect discourse to contemporary social and civic issues, students see the relevance of their learning and understand themselves as active participants in society (Singer, 2021).
Teachers can scaffold academic discourse through a range of Science of Reading informed practices that strengthen students’ reasoning and communication skills. Strategies such as think-pair-share, small-group discussions, Socratic seminars, and debates create structured opportunities for students to verbalize their thinking. Discourse prompts help learners express complex ideas clearly while maintaining academic rigor. For example, posting sentence frames for students to refer to during a lesson like, “A historical event that connects to this is ___ because ___” helps to guide learners in articulating more nuanced interpretations. Through these approaches, classroom talk becomes a space where students communicate more effectively by using the reasoning and language of historians and social scientists (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2020; Reisman, 2012).
By integrating structured dialogue with Science of Reading principles and CR-S practices, teachers create environments where students develop both disciplinary literacy and cultural awareness. Students practice reasoning like historians by examining evidence and constructing claims in both discussion and writing. Students grow more confident in analyzing complex ideas as they collaborate, question, and explain their thinking. These experiences make learning interactive, meaningful, and relevant. With this students are able to connect their historical thinking to the broader world.
Conclusion
Integrating the Science of Reading, disciplinary literacy, and CR-S pedagogy gives teachers a clear framework for preparing students to think and work like historians and social scientists. When students receive explicit instruction in academic vocabulary, syntax, language functions, and structured discourse across K–12 social studies, they build the skills to reason critically, communicate evidence-based ideas, and engage deeply with complex content (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2019; Wineburg, Martin, & Monte-Sano, 2020).
High-impact instructional practices enable teachers to support students in working with information presented in text, visuals, and spoken language. When we guide students in reading and annotating complex texts, we help them analyze sources and deepen their comprehension. Structured group discussions provide opportunities for students to practice oral reasoning and consider multiple perspectives. Writing essays encourages them to synthesize ideas and develop well-supported arguments, while presentations that blend visual and spoken components strengthen their ability to communicate effectively. Together, these practices mirror how professional historians and other social scientists think and work to help to prepare students to interpret and construct knowledge independently (Reisman, 2020; Fisher, Frey, & Hattie, 2023).
CR-S pedagogy helps students engage meaningfully with diverse perspectives while building the skills they need to succeed across content areas (Singer, 2021). By integrating literacy supports with culturally responsive teaching, classrooms become inclusive environments where all learners can access rigorous content and participate in evidence-based discourse. This approach not only deepens historical reasoning and literacy but also fosters civic competence.
Equally as important, this approach aligns with the recently adopted NYS Portrait of a Graduate, which emphasizes critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and civic engagement (New York State Education Department, 2025). By weaving together explicit literacy instruction, disciplinary literacy strategies, and CR-S practices, teachers prepare students to become academically confident and socially conscious graduates that are ready to contribute thoughtfully to contemporary society.
Addendum: Applications Across Elementary, Middle, and High School
Elementary School: Instruction emphasizes foundational content knowledge, vocabulary development, and comprehension strategies. Graphic organizers, role-playing, and guided discussions support learning (Lesaux, Crosson, & Kieffer, 2020). Activities such as historical story mapping, primary source observation, and age-appropriate explorations of current events help students begin engaging in historical thinking. Cause-and-effect relationships, sequencing events, and identifying multiple perspectives are introduced in developmentally appropriate ways. Linking content to students’ lived experiences fosters engagement and civic understanding (Singer, 2019).
Middle School: Students encounter more complex texts, historical arguments, and analytical tasks. Instruction emphasizes annotation, sentence frames, and graphic organizers that support higher-order thinking, analysis, and synthesis (Moje et al., 2020). Structured debates, document-based journals, and comparative analyses connecting contemporary issues to historical contexts encourage evidence-based argumentation. Culturally responsive strategies ensure students critically engage with diverse narratives and social issues (Singer, 2021).
High School: Instruction centers on authentic historical inquiry, requiring analysis of multiple primary and secondary sources, evaluation of evidence, and synthesis of findings in written, oral, and multimedia formats (Wineburg, Martin, & Monte-Sano, 2020). Explicit instruction in syntax, transitions, and argumentation supports coherent and persuasive expression. Thematic writing, multimedia presentations, reflective oral history projects, and civic engagement initiatives allow students to practice the habits of historians. Civic engagement projects link historical analysis to contemporary democratic participation (Singer, 2021).
By scaffolding disciplinary literacy practices across developmental levels, educators ensure students build the cognitive, linguistic, and analytical skills needed for rigorous historical reasoning and civic engagement. This continuum supports a trajectory from content comprehension in elementary school to authentic historical inquiry and civic participation in high school.
References
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2022). Developing academic language in content-area classrooms. Educational Researcher, 51(2), 90–101.
Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Reading acquisition from novice to expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51.
Cervetti, G., & Hiebert, E. (2011). What differences in narrative and informational texts mean for the learning and instruction of vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 544–552.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A New Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2021). Visible learning for literacy, grades 6–12: Implementing the practices that work best to accelerate reading and writing. Corwin.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2023). Visible learning for literacy in content areas: Science of Reading practices for middle and high school. Corwin.
Lesaux, N. K., Crosson, A., & Kieffer, M. J. (2020). Language and literacy development in culturally and linguistically diverse learners: Implications for practice and policy. Harvard Education Press.
Langer, J., & Applebee, A. N. (2020). How writing shapes thinking: A study of teaching and learning in the disciplines. Teachers College Press.
Lee, H. (2022). Supporting disciplinary literacy in middle and high school history classrooms: Strategies for navigating complex texts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 65(4), 415–428.
McKeown, M., Beck, I. L., & Omanson, R. C. (2021). Vocabulary instruction for disciplinary literacy: Integrating academic and content-specific terms. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(3), 345–362.
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2020). Working toward third space in content area literacy: Disciplinary literacy in middle and high school classrooms. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(2), 131–144.
Moje, E. B., Overby, M., Tysvaer, N., & Morris, K. (2022). Disciplinary literacy for all students: Expanding access to historical reasoning in middle and high school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1), 101–124.
Reisman, A. (2020). Historical thinking in practice: Classroom strategies for disciplinary literacy. Routledge.
Shanahan, T. (2021). Disciplinary literacy and content-area reading: What we know and where we need to go. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), S41–S62.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2019). Disciplinary literacy meets the Science of Reading. The Reading Teacher, 72(6), 739–748.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2020). Bridging the gap between reading research and disciplinary instruction: Evidence from middle and high school classrooms. Journal of Literacy Research, 52(4), 487–510.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2021). Bridging the gap between reading research and disciplinary literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(2), 145–154.
Singer, A. (2015). Educating for civic engagement: Theory and practice in social studies classrooms. Teachers College Press.
Singer, A. (2019). Education for democracy: Teaching history and civics in the twenty-first century. Routledge.
Singer, A. (2021). Social studies for a new generation: Pedagogy, curriculum, and assessment. Routledge.
Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Temple University Press.
Wineburg, S., Martin, D., & Monte-Sano, C. (2020). Reading like a historian: Disciplinary literacy in history classrooms. Teachers College Press.
Wineburg, S., McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., & Ortega, T. (2020). Civic online reasoning and evaluating information. Stanford History Education Group.
Documenting the 250th Anniversaryof theDeclaration of Independence
Prepared by Fabrizio Caruso and Sophia Sanchez
Common Sense by Thomas Paine (1776)
Remember the Ladies by Abigail Adams (1776)
Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776
Preamble to the United States Constitution (1787)
Declaration of the Rights of Man, August 26, (1789)
Celebrating the Declaration of Independence by John Q. Adams (1821)
Speech on the Oregon Bill by John C. Calhoun (1848)
Declaration of Sentiments (1848)
What to the Slave is the Fourth of July by Frederick Douglass (1852)
Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln (1863)
Thirteenth Amendment (1865)
The New Colossus by Emma Lazarus (1883)
Release from Woodstock Jail by Eugene V. Debs (1895)
Nineteenth Amendment (1920)
Four Freedoms Speech by Franklin Roosevelt (1941)
The Struggle for Human Rights by Eleanor Roosevelt (1948)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
Declaration of Conscience by Senator Margaret Chase Smith (1950)
Farewell Address by Dwight D. Eisenhower (1961)
Nation’s Space Effort by John F. Kennedy (1962)
I Have a dream by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1963)
Civil Rights Act (1964)
Bicentennial Ceremony by Gerald R. Ford (1976)
The Hill We Climb by Amanda Gorman (2021)
Common Sense – Thomas Paine, January 10, 1776
Thomas Paine published Common Sense anonymously in a pamphlet in 1776. In it, he called for independence from Great Britain, which was a foreign idea at the time. He argued that his claims were common sense and that breaking away from the rule of Great Britain was a necessity for the good of the colonists.
In the following pages I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense…
I have heard it asserted by some, that as America has flourished under her former connection with Great-Britain, the same connection is necessary towards her future happiness, and will always have the same effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that is never to have meat, or that the first twenty years of our lives is to become a precedent for the next twenty. But even this is admitting more than is true; for I answer… that America would have flourished as much, and probably much more, had no European power taken any notice of her. The commerce by which she hath enriched herself are the necessaries of life, and will always have a market while eating is the custom of Europe.
But she has protected us, say some… We have boasted the protection of Great Britain, without considering, that her motive was interest not attachment… This new World hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe… As Europe is our market for trade, we ought to form no partial connection with any part of it…
Europe is too thickly planted with Kingdoms to be long at peace, and whenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, the trade of America goes to ruin, because of her connection with Britain… There is something absurd, in supposing a Continent to be perpetually governed by an island…
Where, say some, is the king of America? I’ll tell you, Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the royal brute of Great Britain… So far as we approve of monarchy… in America the law is king…
A government of our own is our natural right… Ye that oppose independence now, ye know not what ye do: ye are opening the door to eternal tyranny. . .
Questions:
How does Paine compare America to a child? How does this compare to the situation of America wanting independence?
Why is Great Britain protecting America, according to Paine?
What happens to America whenever Great Britain is at war? Why?
According to Paine, who is the king of America?
What does Paine say of people who are opposing independence?
“Remember the Ladies” – Abigail Adams, March 31, 1776
Abigail Adams was the wife of revolutionary and second president John Adams. She herself fought for the rights of colonists and advocated for equal rights for women in a time where this was uncommon. In one of her frequent letters to John Adams, she urged him to “remember the ladies” as he was working on the initial draft to the Declaration of Independence. Ultimately, the wording of the Declaration of Independence was exclusionary and women did not receive equal rights until the twentieth century.
Tho we felicitate ourselves, we sympathize with those who are trembling least the Lot of Boston should be theirs. But they cannot be in similar circumstances unless pusillanimity and cowardise should take possession of them. They have time and warning given them to see the Evil and shun it. — I long to hear that you have declared an independancy — and by the way in the new Code of Laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favourable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies, we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation.
That your Sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute, but such of you as wish to be happy willingly give up the harsh title of Master for the more tender and endearing one of Friend. Why then, not put it out of the power of the vicious and the Lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity with impunity. Men of Sense in all Ages abhor those customs which treat us only as the vassals of your Sex. Regard us then as Beings placed by providence under your protection and in imitation of the Supreme Being make use of that power only for our happiness.
Questions:
What is Abigail Adams asking of John Adams?
What does Abigail Adams believe of all men?
Why must men pay attention to the ladies, according to Adams?
Declaration of Independence – July 4, 1776
On July 4, 1776, the most important foundational document in the history of the United States was approved by the Second Continental Congress. The Declaration of Independence, penned by Thomas Jefferson, outlined a formal “declaration” of the 13 colonies as an independent, sovereign state that had broken away from the British Crown and listed various grievances that the new country had against the King. Jefferson scattered the document with political and social ideological thought that would become ingrained principles of American government and society.
“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government…”
Questions:
What are the three “unalienable Rights” Thomas Jefferson identifies?
According to Jefferson, what must the people do if a government fails to safeguard these unalienable Rights?
In your opinion, has the U.S. government upheld the message and liberties outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Explain.
Preamble to the Constitution, 1787
Once the United States declared its independence from Great Britain, the nation’s founders needed a stronger, more structured set of laws for government. The initial Articles of Confederation were weak and did structure the government in a way that would be sustainable. Thus, the Constitution was formed after deliberation at the Constitutional Convention. The Preamble serves as the introduction to the Constitution as a whole and establishes the tone and goals for this new budding nation.
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Questions:
What is the importance of the first three words of the Constitution?
List the six goals outlined in the Constitution.
Why was it important for the United States to write the Constitution after the Articles of Confederation?
Select one of the goals of the Constitution. Why do you think the authors believed it was important to include the goal that you chose?
“Declaration of the Rights of Man” – National Assembly of France, August 26, 1789
Just a few years after the end of the American Revolution, France was experiencing a revolution of their own. The Third Estate had become overwhelmingly frustrated by the poverty, stagnant economic growth, inept leadership, and poor quality of life they faced while the First and Second Estates lived in luxury and prosperity. The newly formed National Assembly released the Declaration of the Rights of Man in the midst of this violent revolution.
“The representatives of the French people, organized as a National Assembly, believing that the ignorance, neglect, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole cause of public calamities and of the corruption of governments, have determined to set forth in a solemn declaration the natural, unalienable, and sacred rights of man, in order that this declaration, being constantly before all the members of the Social body, shall remind them continually of their rights and duties…Therefore the National Assembly recognizes and proclaims, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and of the citizen:
Articles:
1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.
2. The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, and security, and resistance to oppression.
3. The principle of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No body nor individual may exercise any authority which does not proceed directly from the nation.
…7. No personal shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law. Any one soliciting, transmitting, executing, or causing to be executed, any arbitrary order, shall be punished.
…9. As all persons are held innocent until they have been declared guilty…
10. No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law.
11. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights…
Questions:
According to the preamble, what is the purpose of this declaration?
In the context of the French Revolution, why is the wording of “equal in rights” significant?
Discuss the extent in which this declaration compares to the Declaration of Independence?
How do the two declarations define the rights guaranteed to all men?
“Celebrating the Declaration of Independence” –John Quincy Adams, July 4, 1821
While serving as Secretary of State under President James Monroe, John Quincy Adams was invited to Congress to give a speech to commemorate the 45th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Adams spends much of this speech praising the Declaration and commending the Founding Fathers’ bravery and triumph over the British Crown in establishing the new nation. This speech has become synonymous with the idea of “American exceptionalism.”
“…In the long conflict of twelve years which had preceded and led to the Declaration of Independence, our fathers had been not less faithful to their duties, than tenacious of their rights. Their resistance had not been rebellion. It was not a restive and ungovernable spirit of ambition, bursting from the bonds of colonial subjection; it was the deep and wounded sense of successive wrongs, upon which complaint had been only answered by aggravation, and petition repelled with contumely, which had driven them to their last stand upon the adamantine rock of human rights.
…It was the first solemn declaration by a nation of the only legitimate foundation of civil government. It was the cornerstone of a new fabric, destined to cover the surface of the globe. It demolished at a stroke the lawfulness of all governments founded upon conquest. It swept away all the rubbish of accumulated centuries of servitude.
…It will be acted o’er [over], fellow-citizens, but it can never be repeated. It stands, and must forever stand alone, a beacon on the summit of the mountain, to which all the inhabitants of the earth may turn their eyes for a genial and saving light, till time shall be lost in eternity, and this globe itself dissolve, nor leave a wreck behind. It stands forever, a light of admonition to the rulers of men; a light of salvation and redemption to the oppressed…so long shall this declaration hold out to the sovereign and to the subject the extent and the boundaries of their respective rights and duties; founded in the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Five and forty years have passed away since this Declaration was issued by our fathers; and here are we, fellow-citizens, assembled in the full enjoyment of its fruits.”
Questions:
What does John Quincy Adams say the Declaration of Independence was the “first” declaration to do?
Why does Adams call the American Revolution a “resistance,” not a “rebellion?”
Why does Adams call the Declaration a “beacon on the summit of the mountain?”
Do you agree with Adams’ perspective of the revolution and the Declaration? Explain.
“Speech on the Oregon Bill” – Senator John C. Calhoun, June 27, 1848
As the nation crept closer to an impending Civil War, American politics became engulfed over the issue of slavery. One of the leading voices of the pro-slavery movement was South Carolina Democrat senator John C. Calhoun. After serving as Andrew Jackson’s vice president, he ended his career in the Senate. There, he was one of the Democratic Party’s most outspoken supporters for “states’ rights” to defend and uphold slavery within its borders. This speech was in response to the Oregon Bill, which was set to outlaw slavery practices in the new Oregon territory.
“The proposition to which I allude, has become an axiom in the minds of a vast majority on both sides of the Atlantic, and is repeated daily from tongue to tongue, as an established and incontrovertible truth; it is, that “all men are born free and equal.” I am not afraid to attack error, however deeply it may be entrenched, or however widely extended, whenever it becomes my duty to do so, as I believe it to be on this subject and occasion.
Taking the proposition literally (it is in that sense it is understood), there is not a word of truth in it. It begins with “all men are born,” which is utterly untrue. Men are not born. Infants are born. They grow to be men. And concludes with asserting that they are born “free and equal,” which is not less false. They are not born free. While infants they are incapable of freedom, being destitute alike of the capacity of thinking and acting, without which there can be no freedom. Besides, they are necessarily born subject to their parents, and remain so among all people, savage and civilized, until the development of their intellect and physical capacity enables them to take care of themselves…
If we trace it back, we shall find the proposition differently expressed in the Declaration of Independence. That asserts that “all men are created equal.” The form of expression, though less dangerous, is not less erroneous…
… [G]overnment has no right to control individual liberty beyond what is necessary to the safety and well-being of society. Such is the boundary which separates the power of government and the liberty of the citizen or subject in the political state, which, as I have shown, is the natural state of man—the only one in which his race can exist, and the one in which he is born, lives, and dies.”
Questions:
What does Senator Calhoun say about the phrase “all men are created equal?”
According to Calhoun, how should the government’s role be limited?
What is the connection that Senator Calhoun makes between liberty and race? What does this mean about his message in this speech?
Declaration of Sentiments – Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention, 1848
At the Women’s Rights Convention in 1848, 68 women and 32 men signed the “Declaration of Sentiments”, which was essentially a Bill of Rights for women. The document called for equal social, civil, and political liberties for women, which included the right to vote, equal education opportunities, and more legal protections. Elizabeth Cady Stanton served as the primary author as well as Lucretia Mott and Martha Coffin Wright. The Declaration of Sentiments was modeled after the Declaration of Independence, which was written just 72 years prior.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. […]
“The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise. He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice. He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men – both natives and foreigners. Having deprived her of this first right as a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides. He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead. He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages she earns. […]
“Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation, – in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of these United States.”
Questions:
What other document is the introduction to the Declaration of Sentiments modeled after?
What is the purpose of this excerpt of the Declaration of Sentiments?
List two of the grievances that the authors included.
Do you believe that this declaration is convincing enough to help women gain equal rights? What would you change if anything?
“What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” – Frederick Douglass, July 5, 1852
Frederick Douglass was born into slavery in Maryland in 1818. He escaped slavery in 1838 and used his tutoring of the English language to become a renowned orator and writer. He used the strength of his words to call for the abolition of slavery and worked to ensure freedom for all enslaved people. This speech was written to encourage people to think about what the Fourth of July means for those in America who are not free and who do not experience the same rights and opportunities as their White counterparts.
“This, for the purpose of this celebration, is the 4th of July. It is the birthday of your National Independence, and of your political freedom . . . There is consolation in the thought that America is young […] The simple story of it is, that, 76 years ago, the people of this country were British subjects . . . You were under the British Crown . . . But, your fathers . . . They went so far in their excitement as to pronounce the measures of government unjust, unreasonable, and oppressive, and altogether such as ought not to be quietly submitted to […] Citizens, your fathers made good that resolution. They succeeded; and to-‐day you reap the fruits of their success. The freedom gained is yours; and you, therefore, may properly celebrate this anniversary. The 4th of July is the first great fact in your nation’s history—the very ring-‐bolt in the chain of your yet undeveloped destiny.
“What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy—a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour. Go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the old world, travel through South America, search out every abuse, and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the every day practices of this nation, and you will say with me, that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival […]
“Allow me to say, in conclusion . . . I do not despair of this country. There are forces in operation, which must inevitably, work the downfall of slavery. “The arm of the Lord is not shortened,” and the doom of slavery is certain. I, therefore, leave off where I began, with hope.”
Questions:
What words does Douglass use that show he does not align with free Americans?
How is the fourth of July different for enslaved people and free people? Use one example from the text.
How does Douglass conclude his speech? Why do you think he feels this way?
“Gettysburg Address” – Abraham Lincoln, November 19, 1863
Between July 1 and 3, 1863, the bloodiest battle of the Civil War took place in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Both the Union and Confederacy faced catastrophic losses, with casualties totaling over 50,000 men. The Battle of Gettysburg remains the deadliest battle of American history. Four months later, President Abraham Lincoln arrived at Gettysburg to declare the battlefield as a national cemetery. Many in the crowd were anticipating a long speech from President Lincoln, however this famous address only lasted about 3 minutes. Nevertheless, the Gettysburg Address would become enshrined as one of Lincoln’s, and U.S. history’s, most powerful speeches.
“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
…But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate–we can not consecrate–we can not hallow–this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us–that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion–that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain–that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom–and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Questions:
According to Lincoln, what is the “proposition” that the nation was founded on?
What is this civil war “testing?”
What is Lincoln’s tone throughout the speech? Use at least two pieces of textual evidence to support your response.
How does President Lincoln use ideas from the Declaration of Independence in this speech? To what extent is it effective? Use at least two pieces of textual evidence to support your response.
Thirteenth Amendment, 1865
The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States. Slavery had been an institution in the United States since the first ship holding enslaved people arrived from the shores of Africa in 1619. Prior to the entire United States abolishing slavery, some states had already dismantled the system of slavery. Many became champions for the abolition of slavery and helped enslaved people escape to freedom. The amendment was ratified in December 1865 after being passed by Congress in January 1865. The Thirteenth Amendment serves as the first of the three Reconstruction Amendments. While it ended legal slavery, Southern states later used the “punishment for crime” clause to create “Black Codes”, which prevented Black people from voting and limited their rights.
“Section 1
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
“Section 2
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
Questions:
1. What did the thirteenth amendment accomplish?
2. Where is involuntary servitude still legal?
3. Who has the power to enforce the thirteenth amendment?
4. Do you believe that it is justified for involuntary servitude to be used for criminal offenders? Why or why not?
The New Colossus – Emma Lazarus, 1883
Emma Lazarus was an American poet who wrote the poem “The New Colossus” in 1883. When writing this sonnet, she was inspired by the Statue of Liberty and what the statue represents. In 1903, this poem was engraved onto a bronze plaque and is now on the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York.
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Questions:
How does Emma Lazarus describe the Statue of Liberty in the poem? Use one line from the text that supports your answer.
What group of people might lines 10-14 be referring to? How do you know?
Why is it appropriate that Emma Lazarus’s poem “The New Colossus” appears on the base of the Statue of Liberty?
“Speech on Release from Woodstock Jail” – Eugene V. Debs, November 22, 1895
Eugene V. Debs was one of the nation’s leading critics of big business and corporations. He was an adamant socialist and sought to educate workers to unionize to combat malicious business practices by their employers. In 1893, there was a massive strike organized against the Pullman Sleeping Car Company. Debs helped organize a boycott with the American Railway Union. President Grover Cleveland had sent the U.S. military to handle the strike, and Debs was later arrested for federal contempt and conspiracy charges.
“Manifestly the spirit of ‘76 still survives. The fires of liberty and noble aspirations are not yet extinguished. I greet you tonight as lovers of liberty and as despisers of despotism. I comprehend the significance of this demonstration and appreciate the honor that makes it possible for me to be your guest on such an occasion. The vindication and glorification of American principles of government, as proclaimed to the world in the Declaration of Independence, is the high purpose of this convocation.
Speaking for myself personally I am not certain whether this is an occasion for rejoicing or lamentation. I confess to a serious doubt as to whether this day marks my deliverance from bondage to freedom or my doom from freedom to bondage…It is not law nor the administration of law of which I complain. It is the flagrant violation of the Constitution, the total abrogation of law and the usurpation of judicial and despotic power, by virtue of which my colleagues and myself were committed to jail, against which I enter my solemn protest; and any honest analysis of the proceedings must sustain the haggard truth of the indictment.
In a letter recently written by the venerable Judge Trumbull that eminent jurist says: “The doctrine announced by the Supreme Court in the Debs case, carried to its logical conclusion, places every citizen at the mercy of any prejudiced or malicious federal judge who may think proper to imprison him.”. .
The theme tonight is personal liberty; or giving it its full height, depth, and breadth, American liberty, something that Americans have been accustomed to eulogize since the foundation of the Republic, and multiplied thousands of them continue in the habit to this day because they do not recognize the truth that in the imprisonment of one man in defiance of all constitutional guarantees, the liberties of all are invaded and placed in peril.
Questions:
What ideas is Debs referencing when he says “the spirit of ‘76 still survives?”
What rights does Debs claim the government has taken away from him and/or denied?
Do you agree with Debs’ analysis of the situation he faced during the Pullman Strike? Explain your answer using evidence from the speech.
Nineteenth Amendment, 1920
From the founding of the United States, women have been championing for equal rights and the ability to vote. From Abigail Adams calling for John Adams to “remember the ladies” to the suffragettes of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, women and their allies had been calling for equal opportunities since America’s inception. In 1920, the nineteenth amendment was ratified and women were guaranteed the right to vote.
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
“Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
Questions:
What did the nineteenth amendment accomplish?
Who holds the power to enforce this amendment?
Do you think that any women were prevented from voting following the 19th amendment? Who? Why?
“Four Freedoms Speech” – President Franklin D. Roosevelt, January 6, 1941
As World War II engulfed Europe, President Roosevelt and the U.S. government navigated the tightrope of effective foreign policy. The United States had long held a strong position of isolationism, and many Americans were firmly opposed to any involvement in Europe’s second world war. However, the U.S. government had shifted away from its isolationism by the end of the 1930s. FDR’s State of the Union address in 1941 echoed a new dawn of American interventionism, as he outlined the four freedoms everybody in the world was entitled to.
“Since the permanent formation of our Government under the Constitution, in 1789, most of the periods of crisis in our history have related to our domestic affairs. Fortunately, only one of these–the four year War Between the States–ever threatened our national unity. Today, thank God, one hundred and thirty million Americans, in forty-eight States, have forgotten points of compass in our national unity.
…In like fashion from 1815 to 1914–ninety-nine years–no single war in Europe or in Asia constituted a real threat against our future or against the future of any other American nationf…In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression–everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way–everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want–which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants–everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear–which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor–anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very anthesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.”
Questions:
What does FDR say has been the reason for (most) periods of crisis in U.S. history? Why is the current situation in Europe (World War II) different?
What are the four freedoms FDR lists in this speech?
In your opinion, do people “everywhere in the world” experience the four freedoms today? Explain your answer.
“The Struggle for Human Rights” – Eleanor Roosevelt, 1948
Eleanor Roosevelt was the first lady of the United States from 1933-1945 while her husband, Franklin D. Roosevelt, was president. She redefined the role by speaking out often and calling attention to important social issues. Her speech “The Struggle for Human Rights” was given at the United Nations, to which she served as a delegate to its General Assembly, where she served as chair of the commission that drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
We must not be confused about what freedom is. Basic human rights are simple and easily understood: freedom of speech and a free press; freedom of religion and worship; freedom of assembly and the right of petition; the right of men to be secure in their homes and free from unreasonable search and seizure and from arbitrary arrest and punishment. We must not be deluded by the efforts of the forces of reaction to prostitute the great words of our free tradition and thereby to confuse the struggle. Democracy, freedom, human rights have come to have a definite meaning to the people of the world which we must not allow any nation to so change that they are made synonymous with suppression and dictatorship…
The basic problem confronting the world today, as I said in the beginning, is the preservation of human freedom for the individual and consequently for the society of which he is a part. We are fighting this battle again today as it was fought at the time of the French Revolution and at the time of the American Revolution. The issue of human liberty is as decisive now as it was then. I want to give you my conception of what is meant in my country by freedom of the individual…
Indeed, in our democracies we make our freedoms secure because each of us is expected to respect the rights of others and we are free to make our own laws…
Basic decisions of our society are made through the expressed will of the people. That is why when we see these liberties threatened, instead of falling apart, our nation becomes unified and our democracies come together as a unified group in spite of our varied backgrounds and many racial strains…
It is my belief, and I am sure it is also yours, that the struggle for democracy and freedom is a critical struggle, for their preservation is essential to the great objective of the United Nations to maintain international peace and security…
The future must see the broadening of human rights throughout the world. People who have glimpsed freedom will never be content until they have secured it for themselves. In a true sense, human rights are a fundamental object of law and government in a just society. Human rights exist to the degree that they are respected by people in relations with each other and by governments in relations with their citizens.
Questions:
What are the basic human rights that Eleanor Roosevelt claims are “simple and easily understood”?
What does Roosevelt say makes freedom secure?
In your opinion, why are freedom and democracy essential for all people?
“Universal Declaration of Human Rights” – United Nations, December 10, 1948
Following the end of World War II, the victorious European powers and the United States created a new global organization to govern international affairs. The United Nations was created to replace the failed League of Nations, and serve as the leading world institution to maintain peace, protect human rights, and prevent future wars and conflict. One of the first declarations of the United Nations was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Below are Articles 1 through 7 of the UDHR.
Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person.
Article 4
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Questions:
Identify three (3) rights that are guaranteed by the UDHR.
According to Article 2, what kinds of “distinctions” are prohibited from deny people their rights?
Which phrases of ideas in the UDHR connect to the Declaration of Independence?
How does the UDHR expand on the phrase “all men are created equal?”
In your opinion, does the world today uphold these human rights? Explain.
Declaration of Conscience – Senator Margaret Chase Smith (1950)
In June 1950, in the midst of an anti-communist campaign identified with Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wisconsin), Senator Margaret Chase Smith (R-Maine) spoke out against “selfish political exploitation” targeting innocent people and threatening basic American rights.
“I would like to speak briefly and simply about a serious national condition. It is a national feeling of fear and frustration that could result in national suicide and the end of everything that we Americans hold dear. It is a condition that comes from the lack of effective leadership either in the legislative branch or the executive branch of our government. … I speak as a Republican. I speak as a woman. I speak as a United States senator. I speak as an American. … I think that it is high time for the United States Senate and its members to do some real soul searching and to weigh our consciences as to the manner in which we are performing our duty to the people of America and the manner in which we are using or abusing our individual powers and privileges. I think that it is high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think that it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech, but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation.”
Whether it be a criminal prosecution in court or a character prosecution in the Senate, there is little practical distinction when the life of a person has been ruined.
“The Basic Principles of Americanism”
Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism –
The right to criticize.
The right to hold unpopular beliefs.
The right to protest.
The right of independent thought.
The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood nor should he be in danger of losing his reputation or livelihood merely because he happens to know someone who holds unpopular beliefs. Who of us does not? Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own. Otherwise thought control would have set in.
The American people are sick and tired of being afraid to speak their minds lest they be politically smeared as “Communists” or “Fascists” by their opponents. Freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America. It has been so abused by some that it is not exercised by others. The American people are sick and tired of seeing innocent people smeared and guilty people whitewashed.”
Questions:
1. What is the national feeling identified by Senator Smith?
2. What does she want American leaders to do?
3. What basic rights does Senator Smith believe are threatened?
4. In your opinion, why did Senator Smith focus on “The Basic Principles of Americanism”?
Farewell Address – President Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961
On January 17, 1961, President Eisenhower delivered a ten-minute farewell to the American people on national television from the Oval Office of the White House. In the speech, Eisenhower warned that a large, permanent “military-industrial complex,” an alliance between the military and defense contractors, posed a threat to American democracy.
“We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.”
Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. … Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations. … This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted.”
Questions:
1. According to President Eisenhower, why does the United States need to maintain a strong military?
2. Why is President Eisenhower concerned about a “military-industrial complex”?
3. What does President Eisenhower alert the American people to do?
“The Nation’s Space Effort” – President John F. Kennedy, September 12, 1962
Five years prior, the Soviet Union had successfully launched Sputnik 1 into orbit, sparking the beginning of the Space Race between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. The United States quickly sought to catch up to the Soviet Union’s many “firsts” in the Space Race (first satellite, first man in space, first man to orbit the Earth, etc.). Then, in September 1962, President Kennedy gave a speech at Rice University discussing the new goal for America’s space program: put a man on the Moon before the end of the decade.
“…We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.
There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation may never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”
Questions:
Why does President Kennedy say it is important to “set sail on this new sea?”
What justification does President Kennedy give that the United States should be the first nation to conquer space?
How does Kennedy’s vision for space reflect the ideals in the founding documents?
“I Have a Dream” (from the March on Washington) — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., August 28, 1963
On August 28, 1963, in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement, civil rights leaders and organizations planned a momentous rally in Washington, D. C. Officially known as the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, over 200,000 people gathered to protest and advocate for the end of segregation and guarantee of civil rights for African Americans. At the end of the march, at the Lincoln Memorial, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., one of the Civil Rights Movement’s most influential leaders, delivered his most famous speech.
“…It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro’s legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. 1963 is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual…
…We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: for whites only…
…So even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.”
Questions:
How does Dr. King describe the current situation of African Americans in 1963?
Why does Dr. King call 1963 “not an end, but a beginning?”
What founding document does Dr. King reference in this speech? Why does he reference this document?
In your opinion, has the “dream” described in this speech been achieved? Explain.
Civil Rights Act of 1964
On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law. This act called for desegregation of public spaces, schools, and made voting free and fair for all. This was the most sweeping civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. The act made segregation illegal but it also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to enforce laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or age in hiring, promoting, firing, setting wages, testing, training, apprenticeship, and all other terms and conditions of employment.
To enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the Attorney General to institute suits to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “Civil Rights Act of 1964”.
TITLE I: No person acting under color of law shall … apply any standard, practice, or procedure different from the standards, practices, or procedures applied under such law or laws to other individuals within the same county, parish, or similar political subdivision who have been found by State officials to be qualified to vote; deny the right of any individual to vote in any Federal election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting … employ any literacy test as a qualification for voting in any Federal election unless (i) such test is administered to each individual and is conducted wholly in writing…
TITLE II: All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof…
Questions:
What era of history led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
What does Title I of the Civil Rights Act pertain to?
What caused Title I to be necessary?
What is the goal of Title II?
Why do you believe that the Civil Rights Act was essential?
Bicentennial Ceremony at the National Archives – President Gerald R. Ford, July 2, 1976
On August 9, 1974, President Richard Nixon had resigned from the presidency following the disastrous Watergate scandal. Gerald Ford, Nixon’s vice president, assumed the office immediately and pardoned Nixon one month later. The entire Watergate scandal and Nixon’s resignation created great disdain against the U.S. government. Many Americans became extremely untrustworthy of elected officials and had little faith in the government. Becoming President during the bicentennial of the U.S., Ford dealt with difficult challenges both domestically and abroad.
“The Declaration is the Polaris of our political order–the fixed star of freedom. It is impervious to change because it states moral truths that are eternal.
The Constitution provides for its own changes having equal force with the original articles. It began to change soon after it was ratified, when the Bill of Rights was added. We have since amended it 16 times more, and before we celebrate our 300th birthday, there will be more changes…
Jefferson’s principles are very much present. The Constitution, when it is done, will translate the great ideals of the Declaration into a legal mechanism for effective government where the unalienable rights of individual Americans are secure. In grade school we were taught to memorize the first and last parts of the Declaration. Nowadays, even many scholars skip over the long recitation of alleged abuses by King George III and his misguided ministers. But occasionally we ought to read them, because the injuries and invasions of individual rights listed there are the very excesses of government power which the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments were designed to prevent…
But the source of all unalienable rights, the proper purposes for which governments are instituted among men, and the reasons why free people should consent to an equitable ordering of their God-given freedom have never been better stated than by Jefferson in our Declaration of Independence. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are cited as being among the most precious endowments of the Creator–but not the only ones.”
Questions:
What role does President Ford say the Constitution has in relation to the Declaration?
Why does President Ford say it is important to read the grievances listed against King George III in the Declaration?
Do you agree with President Ford that the Declaration is unchanging while the Constitution changes over time? Explain your answer.
“The Hill We Climb” – Amanda Gorman, 2021
This poem was read at the inauguration of President Joseph Biden in 2021 by its author, Amanda Gorman. She is a poet, activist, and author who wrote this poem for the inauguration under the theme of “America United”.
…We, the successors of a country and a time where a skinny black girl descended from slaves and raised by a single mother can dream of becoming president only to find herself reciting for one. And, yes, we are far from polished, far from pristine, but that doesn’t mean we are striving to form a union that is perfect, we are striving to forge a union with purpose, to compose a country committed to all cultures, colors, characters and conditions of man.
So we lift our gazes not to what stands between us, but what stands before us. We close the divide because we know to put our future first, we must first put our differences aside. We lay down our arms so we can reach out our arms to one another, we seek harm to none and harmony for all…
That is the promise to glade, the hill we climb if only we dare it because being American is more than a pride we inherit, it’s the past we step into and how we repair it. We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it. That would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy, and this effort very nearly succeeded. But while democracy can periodically be delayed, but it can never be permanently defeated.
In this truth, in this faith, we trust, for while we have our eyes on the future, history has its eyes on us, this is the era of just redemption we feared in its inception we did not feel prepared to be the heirs of such a terrifying hour but within it we found the power to author a new chapter, to offer hope and laughter to ourselves, so while once we asked how can we possibly prevail over catastrophe, now we assert how could catastrophe possibly prevail over us. We will not march back to what was but move to what shall be, a country that is bruised but whole, benevolent but bold, fierce and free, we will not be turned around or interrupted by intimidation because we know our inaction and inertia will be the inheritance of the next generation, our blunders become their burden. But one thing is certain: if we merge mercy with might and might with right, then love becomes our legacy and change our children’s birthright.
So let us leave behind a country better than the one we were left, with every breath from my bronze, pounded chest, we will raise this wounded world into a wondrous one, we will rise from the golden hills of the West, we will rise from the windswept Northeast where our forefathers first realized revolution, we will rise from the lake-rimmed cities of the Midwestern states, we will rise from the sunbaked South, we will rebuild, reconcile, and recover in every known nook of our nation in every corner called our country our people diverse and beautiful will emerge battered and beautiful, when the day comes we step out of the shade aflame and unafraid, the new dawn blooms as we free it, for there is always light if only we’re brave enough to see it, if only we’re brave enough to be it.
Questions:
Why does Amanda Gorman urge readers to look towards the future?
What does Gorman believe that being an American includes?
What is the overall tone of the poem? Cite two quotes that support your answer.
MLB Scandals: From the Black Sox to Modern Pitch-Rigging
Prepared by John Staudt
Rule 21 governs misconduct in baseball and is posted in English and Spanish in every clubhouse. Key Provisions: Section (a) – Permanent ban for anyone who agrees to lose or fails to give best effort in a game, induces others to do so, or fails to report such solicitation to the Commissioner.
Section (b) – Minimum 3-year ban for offering or accepting gifts/rewards for defeating competing clubs, or failing to report such offers. Section (c) – Permanent ban for players bribing umpires or umpires accepting bribes to influence decisions. Section (d):(d)(1) Betting on any baseball game where you have no duty to perform: 1-year ban
● (d)(2) Betting on any baseball game where you have a duty to perform: Permanent ban
● (d)(3) Placing bets with bookmakers: penalty determined by Commissioner; operating an illegal bookmaking operation carries minimum 1-year suspension Section (e) – Commissioner determines penalties for physical attacks on umpires or misconduct during games. Section (f) – Any conduct “not in the best interests of Baseball” is prohibited and subject to penalties including permanent ineligibility.
Rule 21(d)(2)- bet on any game you’re involved in, banned for life. (This rule ended Pete Rose’s career and now threatens Clase and Ortiz, who allegedly manipulated their own pitches for gambling profits).
Baseball’s troubled history with gambling:
● The 1919 Black Sox Scandal remains baseball’s darkest moment. Eight Chicago White Sox players conspired with gamblers to throw the World Series, leading Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis to ban them permanently. This established baseball’s zero-tolerance gambling policy.
● Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays (1979-1983) faced lesser consequences. Both Hall of Famers accepted public relations jobs with Atlantic City casinos after retirement – Mays for $1 million over ten years, Mantle for $100,000 annually. Commissioner Bowie Kuhn banned both from baseball employment, arguing any gambling connection threatened the sport’s integrity. Critics called this excessive; both were struggling financially in retirement while owners invested in racetracks and casinos. New Commissioner Peter Ueberroth reinstated them in 1985.
● Pete Rose (1989) received a permanent ban after evidence showed he bet on baseball games, including his own team’s, while managing the Cincinnati Reds. Unlike Mantle and Mays, Rose directly wagered on games he could influence, crossing baseball’s biggest line.
The Clase-Ortiz Case
Cleveland Guardians pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz were indicted November 9, 2025 on charges of rigging pitches for illegal gambling profits. According to prosecutors, the scheme operated from May 2023 through June 2025, netting bettors over $460,000. Clase coordinated with gamblers via text and phone calls during games, predetermining specific pitches-usually sliders in the dirt-so bettors could wager on pitch speed and ball/strike outcomes. Clase allegedly received kickbacks and even provided advance money for bets. He later recruited teammate Ortiz, who received $12,000 for throwing predetermined balls during two starts. If convicted on all charges-wire fraud, conspiracy to influence sporting contests, and money laundering-both face up to 65 years in prison. The amounts seem small compared to their salaries: Clase earned $6.4 million in 2026; Ortiz made $782,600 in 2025.
MLB’s hypocrisy
While Commissioner Rob Manfred has partnered with FanDuel, DraftKings, and other betting platforms, integrating gambling advertising into every broadcast, players face these temptations constantly. Fans can now bet on individual pitches – the exact bets Clase and Ortiz allegedly rigged.
MLB profits from gambling partnerships while maintaining strict anti-gambling rules for players. The league promotes instant gratification betting to young fans whose developing brains are particularly vulnerable to dopamine-driven gambling addiction. As one observer noted, Manfred’s legacy may be defined by inviting new “fans of betting on sports” rather than baseball fans, creating the very corruption he claims to oppose. The Clase-Ortiz scandal demonstrates that when you flood the sport with gambling temptations and revenue, someone will inevitably succumb-potentially destroying not just careers, but the game’s integrity.
Discussion Questions:
1. Should Clase and Ortiz receive permanent bans like Pete Rose, or lesser punishment since they rigged individual pitches rather than game outcomes?
Perspective A: Permanent bans are justified. They actively manipulated play during games through organized conspiracy involving wire fraud and money laundering. They betrayed teammates, fans, and the sport for personal profit. Rigging “only” individual pitches is irrelevant, they sold their integrity and damaged public trust in baseball.
Perspective B: Their actions didn’t determine wins or losses, Clase blew only one save during the scheme. Pete Rose’s betting was much worse and could have affected lineup decisions and team strategy. Clase and Ortiz are also victims of MLB’s gambling-saturated environment. A lifetime ban is hypocritical when the league profits from the same prop bets they rigged.
2. Is MLB at least partially, though indirectly, responsible for the Clase-Ortiz scandal through gambling promotion, or are players solely responsible for their own criminal choices?
Perspective A: Clase earned $6.4 million, he wasn’t desperate. Rule 21 is posted in clubhouses; players receive gambling education. Millions see gambling ads without committing crimes. Organizing wire fraud requires deliberate criminal intent. Blaming MLB absolves criminals of responsibility for premeditated betrayal.
Perspective B: MLB created an environment with saturated broadcasts of gambling ads, normalized betting on individual pitches, and targeted young fans and players with poor impulse control. They profit from prop bets on pitch speed, then act shocked when young players corrupt those same bets. You cannot flood the sport with gambling infrastructure and claim innocence when the inevitable corruption occurs.
njcssjournal 