History, Now and Then: Teaching Historiography with the American History
Textbook Project at Ramapo College of NJ

Christina Connor and Daniel J. Willever

Rationale

One of the foremost challenges in social studies education is overcoming the danger of a single narrative. High school history classes that are structured around a textbook are particularly prone to this inhibition. History is not one set of facts — it is an argument. Relying too much on one secondary text to guide instruction fails to establish this key principle for understanding what history is, how it is done, and how it is significant to the present. The challenge of textbooks is that as tertiary sources, they vary widely in quality, and tend to offer overly simplistic narratives of the past that leave little room for debate or acknowledgement of tension over what really happened and why.

While textbooks are a necessary tool for establishing a basic set of facts for history instruction, as well as providing primary source resources and activities to support effective social studies pedagogy, they greatly undermine students’ understanding of history as a discipline with its own distinct theories and skills. It should be acknowledged that authors and publishers have generally made progress including diverse primary sources in their products, thought it has come to be widely accepted that the editorial choices made by textbook companies are often driven by politics, and
textbooks that are outdated will ultimately fail to expose students to the changing narratives of the past that are continually being written and debated. And, as with any piece of historical writing, textbook narratives are ultimately shaped by the times in which they are written.

These limitations present secondary social studies teachers with an obligation as well as an opportunity to introduce students to the theory behind how historical narratives are crafted and why history is constantly changing. How could history instruction be improved if students were exposed to different interpretations of the past and an evolution of historical narratives over time? In 2020, the authors’ utilized the American History Textbook Project (AHTP) at Ramapo College of NJ to develop and implement a lesson that introduced seventy high school juniors to the basics of historiography. Two years later, a cohort of sixteen students was invited to use the collection at Ramapo College for the purposes of developing historiographical thinking through text analysis.

While many history teachers may take issue with introducing secondary students to historiography, it is hardly a new idea or practice. Both Hoefferle (2007) and Zucker (2016) define the benefits of and
propose strategies for bringing historiography into the social studies classroom. Caroline Hoefferle realized that, while her undergraduate students knew how to analyze primary documents, they “had
never before thought critically about the histories that they read” (pg. 40). One of the chief benefits of bringing historiography into the social studies classroom, therefore, is that it both supports content acquisition as well as the development of critical thinking skills. Hoefferle writes that, upon being
introduced to historiography, many of her students “wished that they had been exposed to the course in high school. . . so that they knew beforehand how to read history and how to make sense of it all” (pg. 40). In this sense, exposing younger students to historiographical thinking compliments and reinforces the work that they regularly do with primary sources. Students are frequently asked to analyze, synthesize, and develop conclusions or arguments. This same thinking should be encouraged with textbook use.

How frequently do social studies teachers present students with the opportunity to understand that history is not just a “set of facts” but an ongoing debate? Professional scholars are continually offering new perspectives and interpretations that are in turn influenced by factors such as contemporary events or personal experiences and philosophies. History classes that are structured around a single textbook minimize the need for students to think critically, and undermine their understanding of why history is always changing. In Hoefferle’s words,

“Historiography not only enlightens students as to the inside story of the historical profession, but it also makes history more alive and interesting to them. It helps them to understand that everything is not already known and agreed upon, that there is a place for them in the profession, that in the future
they can contribute to the ongoing historical debates about the past. This takes them away from being simply passive receivers of the truth, to active pursuers of the truth” (pg. 41).

Similarly, AP US History teacher James Zucker (2016) takes issue with the current approach to teaching students history which relies primarily on primary source analysis. This often assumes that students are at the same level as professional historians and often forces them to analyze sources without proper contact. Rather, Zucker moves his students’ historical thinking beyond “fact gathering” through a multi-tier approach to teaching the American Revolution. First, students read
and analyze academic articles by prominent historians, such as T.H. Breen and Gary Nash. They find thesis statements, assess the supporting evidence, and discuss the validity of the arguments in a Socratic seminar. Only after students have come to the realization that there are multiple narratives of the American Revolution do they engage in primary source-based research for deeper historical context. Finally, the class circles back, assessing the relationship between the primary sources and the scholarly articles they first analyzed. Zucker expects his students to be able to engage with questions such as: “In what ways do these sources support or refute the arguments put forth by the likes of Breen and Nash? How do the interpretations reflect their own historical time period and point of view?” This is historical thinking at its finest.

Introducing historiography to high school students conforms with the inquiry based C3 Framework for social studies, particularly Dimension 3: “Evaluating Sources and Using Evidence.” Much like
primary source analysis, we would expect students to question a historical interpretation being presented through a secondary source. Questions might include:
Who developed/promoted this narrative?

Why? What/who was included/excluded from the narrative?

How does this narrative’s interpretation promote a certain perspective?

What is the effect of this narrative on identity?

In the words of Michael J. Swogger, D.Ed, writing for the National Council of the Social Studies blog “Pardon the Interruption!” in 2017: “Where historiography takes the study of history further is by asking the students to examine the evolution of how a particular history has been told over time. . . . . [S]tudying a historical topic through a historiographical lens helps students to better understand the elasticity of history itself” (Swogger, 2017). While it seems reasonable to believe that advanced high school students should be able and expected to do this type of work, there are those who advocate for the fostering of historiographical thinking skills among much younger students. In Teaching What Really Happened, James Loewen argues that social studies teachers can make historiography approachable for children as young as 10 years old, noting that “if they can learn supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, they can handle historiography.” In theory and practice, this may be as simple as having students critically analyze the narrative put forward in their history textbook, with an eye towards the flaws of a text: “Students find it intriguing to think about what topics textbooks handle especially badly” (Loewen, 76). While it may be common knowledge to history educators that the course textbook and supplemental materials often present a singular narrative with the aim of simplicity and consensus building, challenging students to question and challenge what their textbook delivers as the “correct” understanding of the past can be a powerful approach. The realization that not everything they read in a textbook is “agreed upon” may be one of the more empowering lessons that emerges from a social studies education. Together, we may take Loewen,
Hofferle, and Swogger, and Zucker to conclude the following:

1. Historiography is an essential historical thinking skill because it enables students to see beyond history as the mere act of fact collection.
2. Historiographical thinking may be leveled to be age and ability appropriate.
3. Teaching historiography may make the study of history more interesting to students, taking them from passive recipients of information to active researchers for the truth.
4. History textbooks can be an accessible and approachable vehicle for introducing students to historiographical thinking.

These conclusions led us to develop a program, using the American History Textbook Project at Ramapo College of New Jersey, to introduce historiographical thinking to a cohort of high school students. Several characteristics of the American History Textbook Project make it an ideal
vehicle for such an undertaking.

The American History Textbook Project

The American History Textbook Project (AHTP) at Ramapo College began as a student-led project, under the supervision of an American Studies professor. Students researched materials to purchase before offering them to the college’s library as a special collection (Connor and Rice, 2012).
The majority of the collection consists of high school-level materials, but there are also some intended for elementary and middle school-age, as well as special editions for religious schools and state editions. Since 2009, the collection has grown to over 300 volumes, spanning almost 200 years (1825 to 2016); the collection continues to grow through grants and donations. In Spring 2020, when the college moved to remote operations due to COVID-19, a digital edition of the collection was created in order to meet the high demand of use while the physical collection was inaccessible
(https://libguides.ramapo.edu/digitalAHTP).

For a special collection, AHTP materials have a high level of use. At Ramapo, historiography is a key learning outcome not only in the History and American Studies programs, but also within the College’s General Education (GE) Program. As a result, undergraduates, often in their first year, who are enrolled in courses associated with this student learning outcome are exposed to historiographical
concepts, even if they are not history majors. This inclusion came as a result of a major recent revision to the GE Program that required professors develop courses that asked students to learn not only historical content (events, processes, trends, people) but also to place that learning in historical
context and to think critically about causation, connections to the present, and cultural bias. Students use the collection not as the books were intended – as tertiary sources – but rather as primary sources or artifacts to a time period. Professors found using the AHTP collection beneficial because students commented that using textbooks to understand complex historiographical concepts was more
manageable because information was presented in a less intimidating structure. In addition, professors appreciated that the textbooks covered so many topics – activism, industrialization, social issues, etc. – that using them allowed for maximum flexibility for courses.

Interest in the collection has grown outside of the College, especially among high school educators. When teachers contact the Library for a tour of collections, AHTP is often a featured discussion for
visiting groups. In the summer of 2023, a senior high school student volunteered to work with the collection and noted that working with the books, especially when seeing doodles and notes written by past students, brought a human element to his work research. Interacting with the AHTP collection allows students, even at the secondary level, to see these materials beyond static, neutral vessels of information, but as time capsules for both those who wrote the materials and those who used them. This adds an important new dimension of engagement with historical concepts.

In October, 2022, sixteen students from Ramsey High School participated in the program. The group of students consisted of five sophomores, nine juniors, and two seniors. All students had volunteered to participate and were not pre selected based upon any academic or personal criteria. Three quarters of the students had been or were currently enrolled in an honors or Advanced Placement history course. In a pre-assessment survey sent to the group, fifty percent of the students claimed that they frequently or regularly used a textbook in their history class, while more than forty percent said sometimes, rarely, or never. This was asked to gauge students’ familiarity with the components
and use of a history textbook. Among those who had utilized a history textbook recently, ten of the students indicated that they had read the book to answer specific questions or to study for a written assessment.

The session

For convenient access to the textbooks, the two-hour session was conducted in the special collections reading room of the George T. Potter Library at Ramapo College. Students were placed into groups of four based upon expressed interest in and general familiarity with one of four topics: the women’s suffrage movement, slavery and the American Civil War, U.S. immigration and immigrant groups, and the history of Native Americans during the Jacksonian Era. Students were seated with their groups at large tables. The session was run by Christina Connor, Ramapo College Assessment and Instruction Librarian and curator of the AHTP collection, and Daniel Willever, social studies teacher at Ramsey High School. To begin the session, brief introductory remarks were delivered by
Stephen Rice, Professor of American Studies at Ramapo College. Professor Rice originated the AHTP collection before it was donated to the library and taken over by Ms. Connor.

The work session was organized into four major activities followed by time for a post-assessment survey. In addition, students were given free time to interact with a small subset of textbooks that Ms. Connor selected for display due to their unique characteristics. As an activating strategy, each student was given one textbook from the collection to freely explore. During this time, many students made note of the cover art, the title, and the year of publication (which ranged as far back as the 1890s, though nearly all books were from the mid twentieth century). A few students turned to
the table of contents to see how the book was structured, and others took note of markings which indicated where the book had been used or by whom. Students were then asked to answer the question: “How does this text begin the story of American history?” The intention behind this question was twofold: first, for students to orient themselves to how the narrative of American
history was going to be told in the book they selected; second, for them to notice significant differences between the four books in their group regarding how the authors chose to begin the story. Answers varied, with some books beginning with the Columbian exchange, some with the
populating of the Americas during the last ice age, and others going back to the foundations of ancient civilizations.

Students then shared out to the whole group their perspective on why the starting point of their book may have been chosen by the authors and what its significance was. They were also free to ask questions or make general observations about the textbook they had selected. Some students use their phones to look up information about the author(s) of the book.

Following this orientation, students were distributed a copy of the session handout, designed to serve as a note catcher. This one page document, an adaptation of the resource used with undergraduate students at the college, was designed with ease-of-use in mind, for students to distillate core
understandings about the text into a simple framework which could be used for later thinking. At the top, students indicated basic identifying characteristics, such as title, author, and publication date of their book.

Below this, a matrix posed four essential questions for students to think about and answer using their book:

1. How much detail is given to your topic [e.g. women’s suffrage]? In what context is the topic mentioned?
2. What words or phrases are used to describe your topic in this book?
3. What aspects of this history are emphasized or deemphasized by this book?
4. How could this textbook excerpt influence a reader’s perspective on your topic?
   

In the second activity, students conducted topical research using their textbook. At any time during the session, students were welcome to read together or to exchange books, although they were to
primarily focus their attention on the one book they selected at the start of the activity.

Following this independent reading and writing time — about twenty minutes, in total — students came together for a group collaboration session. This time was reserved for them to converse about their observations and annotations. Within each topic group, students were to begin the process of comparing and contrasting how each textbook approached, organized, conveyed and conveyed the subject matter.

Each group received a large sheet of poster paper and markers to produce a graphic organizer which expressed how the telling of their historical topic had changed over time, as noted through comparison of the four textbooks. The two hour session concluded with the final activity, in which time was allotted for presentations to the whole cohort, with additional general discussion of key takeaways and questions.

Observations and data

During the session, students were observed to be highly engaged and in regular conversation, sharing the information they were finding both for the activity sheets as well as other observations made while analyzing the textbooks. Rarely did the instructors need to intervene without students first asking a question. It was often noticed that if students were using their phones, it was to look something up for the activity, not as a distraction from the session. For two hours students were
actively participating and did not need to be reminded to focus on the lesson and discussion.

The conversation was extraordinarily organic within each group, as students huddled looking from book to book, comparing text, and making notations. Most students provided a great deal of detail in their worksheets, citing a variety of examples for each question. When asked to provide words or phrases used to describe their topics, students took the time to quote excerpts from books, not just produce a simple vocabulary list. When describing how much space is devoted to their subject,
students often provided significant detail, describing both the specific space allocated for topics (e.g., sentences, paragraphs, pages), but also reflecting if the language used was simple as well as if the topic was discussed in passing or within the context of another topic.

Reading through comments on the last two questions (to describe what is emphasized/deemphasized and how the narrative could influence a reader), it was observed that students were making the
connection that how a narrative was framed could impact perspectives on a topic. For example, if a book praised the Jacksonian policy of Native American relocation because it led to expanding U.S. territories, yet minimized or failed to mention the struggles felt by native populations, students noted how a reader could come to believe Native Americans were treated fairly and the U.S. acted justly.

In other cases, students included knowledge from their own classroom lessons to assist in their analysis of materials. For example, a student reviewing women’s suffrage noted passages in her book that downplayed the struggle, and did not discuss how long and hard a process suffrage was for women as well as the violence experienced by many suffragettes. She also noted that her book failed to mention public opposition to women’s suffrage. Since this information was absent from her materials, it was clear she was pulling in outside information in order to discuss what aspects of suffrage were under represented. The amount of detail provided by students in their observations showcased how engaged they were with the materials and that their reflections developed from a
close reading.

In addition to individual worksheets, groups were also asked to create a timeline poster with all the books, which they would use when presenting out at the end of the session. This was an important piece to the discussion because it allowed students to see that while some topics improved in coverage over time, others surprisingly were more biased in later years. It gave the students the opportunity to consider if possible outside societal or political influences may have led to how a topic evolved over time.

One group used their poster session to make interesting observations regarding how the topic of slavery was treated in chapters on the American Civil War. Student K.H., for example, observed that in A History of the United States by William A. Mowry and Arthur May Mowry, published 1896, the issue of slavery was deemphasized as a cause of the war. His peer, student G.P. noted similar language in a 1950s textbook, which did not address the harsh treatment of enslaved people and downplayed slavery as a cause of the war. Another member of this group noted that a 1979 textbook by John Garrity went into greater detail of slavery as an economic and social institution with severely harmful consequences for enslaved people. The last member of the group, in assessing the 2005 textbook The Americans by McDougal Littell, observed that this textbook explicitly described the southern states’ desire to protect slavery as what caused the war. Four students utilized four texts spanning nearly 110 years of history to arrive at the conclusion that the narratives surrounding American slavery evolved significantly over time, were reflective of issues and events contemporary to the authors, and had a significant impact on how Americans viewed the past and present of their country. The group reflected on these observations in their timeline poster and presentation to the rest of the cohort.

The post-survey completed at the end of the session yielded interesting remarks from participants. Thirteen of 14 students who completed the exit survey said that the activity somewhat (8) or significantly (5) changed their understanding of how history is written and understood. In elaborating upon how the experience reformed their understanding of history as a discipline and how narratives of history evolve over time, students often revisited the topic of their textbook exploration. Said one
student: “While I understood that history textbooks change throughout history, I’ve
never looked at examples of this or investigated what this means. I learned about Jackson and Native Americans and the connotations and views of these events in multiple times [sic] periods, but specifically during the 1920s. During this time many people wanted to hide America’s past flaws
and promote nationalism after World War I and in case there was another war in the future.” This student demonstrated the importance of contextualizing a source as a
product of the time period in which it was published.

Another common insight shared by students was the search for objectivity and validity in historical writing. While some students saw the older textbooks as “more biased” or “misleading,” still others
wondered the degree to which they needed to think critically about the narratives in their own history textbooks: The ability for students to make connections between these historical texts and what they are being taught today was a significant development, as is exemplified in one reflection: “It was very interesting to see what was being taught to Americans based on what was going on at the time, and if this information they were getting was accurate. I wonder if the same thing is happening to the textbooks we are learning from today.” Similarly, another student commented that “Getting a
sense of what previous generations were taught was intriguing, especially when placed into historical context. Seeing how the textbooks develop into a more accurate depiction was pretty cool.” A third student sought to juxtapose their critical thinking vis a vis the textbook with the narratives of history delivered by their history teacher in class: “I have always thought that a textbook is more reliable than a teacher because teachers can be opinionated and books can’t.

After today I am left thinking If my previous thought is true. A book can have so many
biases that I have never considered.” The significant impact of the exercise was perhaps best expressed by another student: “. . .for someone who has never thought about how the telling of history has evolved this would be really eye opening.”

Conclusion

This project provided the authors with insight as to how secondary and tertiary sources, such as textbooks, may be used to expose high school students to a basic understanding of historiography.
Furthermore, such a strategy can lead to significant development of students’ historical thinking skills and their understanding of “history” as a discipline, as opposed to just a timeline of people, dates, and events. History professionals understand that history “wars” are nothing new;
conflicts over how the story of the past is told have been ongoing for some time and
will continue, because, as George Orwell rightly noted, “who controls the past controls the future.” However, the consequences of these debates and the motivations behind them are most likely
foreign to high school students. While school-age children may see media coverage over the removal of Confederate monuments or criticism over a “liberal” influence in the classroom, seeing the evolution of curricular materials may help provide insight as to why history debates are often heated.

All-in-all, it was clear that students valued the time spent working with the textbooks and many of them said they would enjoy doing so again in the future with different topics of exploration. It was
rewarding to see students use prior classroom knowledge and make connections to their current or former history courses. Seeing these observations helps underscore the point that high school-level students are capable of engaging with historiographical concepts and their reactions further highlight why it is necessary to do so. The moments of epiphany to which we bore witness during the textbook session were heartening and motivating.

Further exploration of this strategy for teaching historiography may focus on the degree to which students bring their new historiographical thinking skills back to their history classroom for use in an academic setting. Overall, it was encouraging to see that students were thoroughly engaged for
nearly two hours of work time and were observed to be consistently thinking out loud, organically collaborating, analytically reading texts, and utilizing advanced historical thinking skills. If additional endeavors to promote an understanding of historiography among pre-college learners prove to be as fulfilling and successful, the future of history is a promising one.

References

Connor C. & Rice S. (2012). The American History Textbook Project: The Making of a Student-Centered Special Collection at a Public Liberal Arts College. In E. Mitchell, P.A. Seiden, & S. Taraba (Eds.), Past or Portal? Enhancing Undergraduate Learning through Special Collections and Archives (pp. 271-278). Association of College and Research Libraries.

Hoefferle, C. (2007). Teaching Historiography to High School and Undergraduate Students. OAH Magazine of History, 21(2), 40–44. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25162115

Loewen, J.W. (2009). Teaching What Really Happened: How to Avoid the Tyranny of Textbooks and Get Students Excited About Doing History (Multicultural Education Series edition). Teachers College Press.

Swogger, M. (2017, March 29). Embracing Historiography in the Classroom. Pardon the Interruption! from the National Council of the Social Studies. http://connected.socialstudies.org/blogs/michael-swogger/2017/03/29/embracinghistoriography-in-the-classroom.

Zucker J. (2016, January 13). Teaching Historiography to High School Students. Process: a blog for American history. https://www.processhistory.org/jameszucker-teaching-historiography-in-highschool/.