Education, Social Studies, History, Civics, Current Issues

Lights, Camera . . . Survey! Americans Give History a Screen Test

Lights, Camera . . . Survey! Americans Give History a Screen Test

Pete Burkholder

(Reprinted with permission from History News Network, https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/180008)

The results are in and it’s official: we are a nation of watchers. As Americans retreated to the security of their own homes amid the ravages of COVID-19, their love affair with screens only increased. According to the website Eyesafe and the Nielsen television ratings company, adults spent an average of thirteen hours, twenty-eight minutes per day watching a screen in March 2020. That represents a daily increase of three hours, twenty minutes, relative to the third quarter of the previous year. Of those, live television viewing went up by over two hours each day for five-and-a-half hours total, while time-shifted watching increased by nearly twenty minutes. Streaming video-on-demand viewings likewise spiked eighty-five percent over comparable three-week periods in 2019 and 2020. What seems clear is that what we know about the world around us is increasingly dependent on electronic boxes of various sizes and dimensions, and on the content providers who fill them.

As a historian, I’m always intrigued by how the public learns about the past, which is why my colleagues and I recently ran a national poll to find out where people get their historical information. The results of that survey, a collaboration between the American Historical Association and Fairleigh Dickinson University, and funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities, indicate that historical consumption is a microcosm of the trends outlined above. Yet those same results, which will be published in full this summer, expose some fascinating incongruities as well.

First, the trends. Asked where they’ve gotten their information about the past since January 2019 (that is, pre-COVID to present), respondents showed an overwhelming preference for screens. Out of a range of nineteen possible sources, the top three choices – documentary film and TV, fictional film and TV, and TV news – were all video. More traditional forms of historical information simply weren’t competitive: museum visits (tenth place), non-fiction history texts (twelfth) and college courses (dead last) trailed television and film by significant margins. That said, the great bugaboo of recent disinformation, social media, likewise assumed back-of-the-pack status, coming in at fourteenth place. Although use of social media has remained robust during the pandemic, most respondents to our survey didn’t seem to view such platforms as having much to do with history, per se.

The incongruities emerged when we asked survey-takers to rank the perceived trustworthiness of those same sources above. Only documentary film and TV stayed in the top three, though it now trailed both museums and historic sites. While TV news ranked third as a go-to source for history, it fared miserably in terms of reliability, coming in fifteenth. Fictional films and TV did even worse at seventeenth. Few respondents had taken a college history course since January 2019, but history professors were still highly trusted, garnering fourth position. The same was true for non-fiction books, which moved up the scale to sixth, despite being sparsely utilized. A bit of a disjuncture thus emerges. Whereas the public reports largely turning to video for its historical information, those same viewers are skeptical of much of what they see on their screens.

Our survey couldn’t determine exactly what people were watching, a topic that awaits further investigation. But respondents’ high utilization of, and obvious trust placed in, documentaries – and their corresponding distrust in news and dramatizations – begs a certain amount of cynicism. Although one can find quality programming in the current state of “docu-mania,” there’s a proliferation of disinformation as well. Such nonsense as Mikki Willis’s Plandemic, or the all-day conspiratorial marathons on the History Channel (Ancient Aliens, anyone?), are wrapped in a patina of documentary that lends them unmerited credibility.

Meanwhile, news programs that may strive for factuality, and that are avidly consumed by history-minded viewers, were largely dismissed by our respondents as unreliable. Here, our survey reflects broader distrust in news services that have been assaulted by several years’ worth of “fake news” accusations. In a national survey from the 1990s similar to ours, people likewise looked askance at dramatized history on film and TV, but they have consistently devoured it nonetheless, if Academy and Emmy Awards are any indication. And just as documentaries can deceive, fictionalized video renditions of the past can be quite edifying if one bears in mind how to read historical films as cultural artifacts.

The increasingly simple ease of access to video media may explain a lot about current consumption habits of historical information. But if so, it bodes ominously for sources of the past deemed more trustworthy, yet which take more effort (reading books) or intentionality (visiting museums) to engage. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised by such disjuncture. After all, the nation’s alcohol consumption has surged during the pandemic despite the drug’s well-known detrimental health effects. People knowingly acting against their own self-interests in where they turn to for historical information is thus not an isolated phenomenon.

If there’s a glimmer of hope, it’s that Americans – no matter their age, race, gender or political affiliation – are often in agreement when it comes to their history consumption habits and views on the reliability of sources. Sixty-seven percent of our respondents in the 18-29 age bracket reported watching dramatic films and TV to learn about the past, a statistic that barely moved for the 65+ age cohort (66%). Meanwhile, 87% of those identifying as Democrats said they trusted documentaries somewhat or a great deal, compared with 84% of Republicans.

They may be watching very different historical programming, but the public’s preferences and attitudes toward it align more often than not. In a country as deeply divided as ours, that’s no small matter.

Global Citizenship Education and Liberal Democracy

Global Citizenship Education and Liberal Democracy

Evan Saperstein and Daniel Saperstein

In recent decades, a growing number of organizations, scholars, educators, and practitioners have advanced the idea of “global citizenship” (Carter, 2001; Diaz et al., 1999; Noddings, 2005; Oxfam, 2015; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013; UNICEF, 2013; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2015). The premise behind this concept is simple—there are, or at least should be, a set of universally recognized values and priorities that bind peoples and nations in common cause (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2015). It is through such unity of purpose that countries (and their citizens) can come together to solve problems which transcend the nation-state and require a sustained, international response (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2014). This includes addressing poverty, education, climate change, equality, peace, and several other pressing prerogatives recently articulated by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (2015) in its 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs).

The UN, and a number of other governmental and nongovernmental institutions, have taken steps to address these SDGs and promote the goals of global-minded citizens (detailed further below). As the notion of global citizenship has gained interest and acceptance in institutional and scholarly circles alike, it has spurred a nascent discipline aptly known as global citizenship education (Brigham, 2011; Fernekes, 2016). Through this emergent area of study, a small, but growing, number of countries have sought to develop and incorporate global citizenship education into school curricula (Bickmore, 2014; Brown et al., 2009; Chong, 2015; Davies et al., 2005; Evans et al., 2009; Motani, 2007; Myers, 2020).

How the term global citizenship is defined will affect how global citizenship-related course content develops. Several leading organizations (including UNESCO, UNICEF, and Oxfam), as well as a number of scholars, have defined and (through such definitions) helped to set the priorities of global citizenship (Carter, 2001; Diaz et al., 1999; Noddings, 2005; Oxfam, 2015; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013; UNICEF, 2013; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2015). While these definitions have varied, they generally highlight commitment to diversity, the environment, conflict resolution, social justice, and the responsibility to act. These are indeed critical global issues that require ongoing focus and action. At the same time, there is a notable omission from too many definitions of global citizenship—the commitment to liberal democratic values. Indeed, too often, there has been too little focus on key freedoms and rights that undergird liberal democratic society—from due process, to equality, to the freedom of speech, religion, and the press.

This is at a time when democracy is under acute strain around the world (Repucci & Slipowitz, 2021). Earlier this year, the world saw the shocking revolt against the citadel of American democracy, the U.S. Capitol, by thousands of insurrectionists seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election (Mascaro et al., 2021). Additionally, there have been several challenges to democracies across Asia (e.g., Hong Kong, Myanmar, Taiwan, Thailand) this past year, resulting in a wave of pro-democracy protests and the formation of an online solidarity movement (Milk Tea Alliance) (Frayer & Suliman, 2021). Over the last few years, the world also has witnessed democracy in retreat in growing parts of Europe, ranging from Austria to Hungary to Poland (Repucci, 2020). At the same time, authoritarian states have actively sought to undermine democracy around the world by intervening in elections and spreading disinformation (Repucci, 2020).

Recent studies and surveys are further evidence of these troubling anti-democratic trends. In the most recent report from The Economist Intelligence Unit’s (2021) Democracy Index, only 23 of 167 countries were deemed “full democracies.” In fact, a Freedom House report issued this year indicated that political rights and civil liberties have been on the decline for the past decade and a half (Repucci & Slipowitz, 2021). Other studies have shown democracy losing favor with popular opinion. A 2016 study published in the Journal of Democracy found that the next generation of leaders (millennials) have less faith in democracy and are more open to non-democratic ideas (Foa & Mounk, 2016). In a 2019 Pew Research Center survey of 27 countries, a majority of the individuals surveyed were dissatisfied with the workings of their democracy (Wike et al., 2019). And, in a Democracy Perception Index (DPI) study conducted by the Alliance of Democracies (2021) and Latana, thousands of survey respondents across 53 nations considered economic inequality and Big Tech companies (e.g., Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft) as grave threats to democracy.

These trends have not been lost on leading international figures. In former U.S. President Barack Obama’s (2016) final address to the UN General Assembly, he urged the need for democratic leaders to “make the case for democracy.” In 2018, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres (2018) cautioned that “[d]emocratic principles are under siege, and the rule of law is being undermined.” That year, French President Emmanuel Macron (2018) also bemoaned the “attacks on democracies through the rise of illiberalism.” Earlier this year, President Joe Biden (2021a) forewarned that “your children or grandchildren are going to be doing their doctoral thesis on the issue of who succeeded: autocracy or democracy.” And during his address to a joint session of Congress, Biden (2021b) elaborated: “We have to prove democracy still works — that our government still works and we can deliver for our people. . . . If we do that, we will meet the center challenge of the age by proving that democracy is durable.”

Yet, the purpose of global citizenship is to forge common bonds and identities (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2014; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2015). Given that most countries are not liberal democracies, the exclusion of non- or anti-democratic countries could (or would) serve to divide the global community and impede work on important issues such as climate change and trade. It is indeed true that, since the turn of the 21st century, democratic and undemocratic countries alike have worked together to achieve notable global agreements and breakthroughs. For example, in 2001, many members of the international community signed the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Halewood, 2013). Additionally, in 2015, nearly two hundred nations representing the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change entered into the Paris Agreement (Streck et al., 2016).

It is also true that liberal democratic governance has its flaws, and can and should be subject to criticism. Too often such societies fail to live up to their promise, and too often minorities do not enjoy the same privileges as the majority. From socio-economic disadvantage to discrimination, there is much to be done to right the wrongs that still exist in liberal democratic countries. But this is a debate that democracy allows. There is only so much that can be improved or achieved under autocratic governments which, by their very nature, stifle dissent and deny basic rights and freedoms.

Those who define the agenda of global citizenship should examine, if not recognize, the importance of liberal democratic governance and principles to achieve the goals of global citizenship. According to a 2018 report from The Economist, the growing tide of semi- or anti-democratic governments has led to: “declining popular participation in elections and politics”; “weaknesses in the functioning of government”; “declining trust in institutions”; “dwindling appeal of mainstream representative parties”; “growing influence of unelected, unaccountable institutions and expert bodies”; “widening gap between political elites and electorates”; “decline in media freedoms”; and “erosion of civil liberties, including curbs on free speech” (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2018, p. 3). Whatever one’s views on liberal democracy, such governance does more than any other form of government to advance the agenda of human and civil rights (Strege, 1994).

When global citizenship is taught in the classroom and elsewhere, such instruction should explore the role of liberal democracy in promoting global citizenship. We cannot lose sight of the effects of systemic, cross-national deprivation of human and civil rights. It is hard to see how we can achieve all of the aspirations of global citizenship—including diversity, non-discrimination, and social justice (to name a few)—without the success and acceptance of core liberal democratic values for generations to come.

References

Alliance of Democracies (2021). Democracy Perception Index 2021. Retrieved from https://www.allianceofdemocracies.org/initiatives/the-copenhagen-democracy-summit/dpi-2021/

Bickmore, K. (2014). Citizenship education in Canada: ‘Democratic’ engagement with

differences, conflicts and equity issues? Citizenship Teaching & Learning, 9(3), 257-278.

Biden, J. (2021a). Remarks by President Biden in press conference [Transcript]. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/03/25/remarks-by-president-biden-in-press-conferenc e/

Biden, J. (2021b). Remarks by President Biden in Address to a Joint Session of Congress [Transcript]. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/04/29/remarks-by-president-biden-in-address-to-a-joint-session-of-congress/

Brigham, M. (2011). Creating a global citizen and assessing outcomes. Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education, 1(1), 15-43.

Brown, E. J., Morgan, W. J., & McGrath, S. (2009). Education, citizenship and new public diplomacy in the UK: What is their relationship? Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 8(2), 73-83.

Carter, A. (2001). The political theory of global citizenship. Routledge.

Chong, E. K. M. (2015). Global citizenship education and Hong Kong’s secondary school curriculum guidelines. Asian Education and Development Studies, 4(2), 221-247.

Davies, I., Evans, M., & Reid, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique of ‘global education’ and ‘citizenship education’. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(1), 66-89.

Diaz, C., Massialas, B., & Xanthopoulos, J. (1999). Global perspectives for educators. Allyn & Bacon.

Evans, M., Ingram, L., MacDonald, A., & Weber, N. (2009). Mapping the ‘global dimension’ of citizenship education in Canada: The complex interplay between theory, practice and context. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 16-34.

Fernekes, W. R. (2016). Global citizenship education and human rights education: Are they compatible with U.S. civic education? Journal of International Social Studies, 6(2), 34-57.

Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2016). The danger of deconsolidation: The democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 5-17.

Frayer, J. M., & Suliman, A. (2021, April 7). ‘Milk Tea Alliance’ brews democracy online among young activists across Asia. Retrieved from

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/milk-tea-alliance-brews-democracy-online-among-young-activists-across-n1262253

Guterres, A. (2018). Address to the General Assembly [Transcript]. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2018-09-25/address-73rd-generalassembly

Halewood, M. (2013). What kind of goods are plant genetic resources for food and agriculture? Towards the identification and development of a new global commons. International Journal of the Commons, 7(2), 278-312.

Macron, E. (2018). Transcription du discours du Président de la République, Emmanuel Macron, devant le congrés des États-Unis d’Amérique [Transcript]. Retrieved from http://www.elysee.fr/declarations/article/transcription-du-discours-du-president-de-larepublique-emmanuel-macron-devant-le-congres-des-etats-unis-d-amerique/

Mascaro, L., Tucker, E., Jalonick, M. C., & Taylor, A. (2021, January 6). Pro-Trump mob storms US Capitol in bid to overturn election. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/78104aea082995bbd7412a6e6cd13818

Motani, Y. (2007). The emergence of global citizenship education in Japan. In E. D. Stevick & B. Levinson (Eds.), Reimagining civic education: How diverse societies form democratic citizens (pp. 271-291). Rowman & Littlefield.

Myers, J. P. (Ed.). (2020). Research on teaching global issues: Pedagogy for global citizenship education. Information Age Publishing.

Noddings, N. (2005). Educating citizens for global awareness. Teachers College Press.

Obama, B. (2016). Address by President Obama to the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly [Transcript]. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/20/address-president-obama-71st-session-united-nations-general-assembly

Oxfam. (2015). Education for global citizenship: A guide for schools. Retrieved from https://www.oxfam.org.uk/education/resources/education-for-global-citizenship-a-guide-for-schools

Repucci, S. (2020). Freedom in the world 2020: A leaderless struggle for democracy. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2020/leaderless-struggle-democracy

Repucci, S., & Slipowitz, A. (2021). Freedom in the world 2021: Democracy under siege. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2021/democracy-under-siege

Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Psychology, 48(5), 858-870.

Streck, C., Keenlyside, P., & von Unger, M. (2016). The Paris Agreement: A new beginning. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 13, 3-29.

Strege, M. (1994). Universal human rights and declaration. disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory, 3(2), 1-14.

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2018). Democracy index 2017: Free speech under attack. Retrieved from https:/www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx?campaignid=DemocracyIndex2017

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2021). Democracy index 2020: In sickness and in health? Retrieved from https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2020/

UNICEF. (2013). Global citizenship: A high school educator’s guide (Grades 9-12). Retrieved from https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/Global%20citizenship_1.pdf

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2014). Global citizenship education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000227729

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2015). Global citizenship education: Topics and learning objectives. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232993

United Nations General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf

Wike, R., Silver, L., & Castillo, A. (2019). Many across the globe are dissatisfied with how democracy is working. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/04/Pew-Research-Center_Global-Views-of-Democracy-Report_2019-04-29_Updated-2019-04-30.pdf

Does China Make the World Flat? Using Compelling Questions and Creating C3 Inquiries for the Social Studies Classroom

Does China Make the World Flat? Using Compelling Questions and Creating C3 Inquiries for the Social Studies Classroom

Starlynn Nance

Tension engulfs the room and faces begin to crinkle into frowns as a collective look of confusion crosses thirty seventh grader’s faces as they read the slide “Does China make the world flat?” Students look at each other and then back at the slide. Several verbal exclamations of “what?’ and “the world is round!” bellows across the room. Smiling sweetly, the teacher only states, “write it in your journal” before the bell rings and the bewildered seventh graders are dismissed from world history class. This exchange is the end of dimension one from the C3 unit titled Ancient China.

National Council for the Social Studies: C3 Inquiry Framework

In How We Think (1910), Dewey discusses how important inquiry is to children. He stressed that children need to learn by doing and trying different things not just memorizing and repeating the information to the teacher.

Inquiry is simply, investigating. In social studies, teachers should set up lessons of inquiry to include diverse historical content and let students ask questions, then investigate to find the answers. Once a student has a firm foundation of the content, they can then begin to start connecting the past to the present. They may start to ask questions about their own community after learning about civil rights concerning injustice, voting rights in the community, or lack of representation on city council. Once that connection is made, students need guidance to develop skills to research, answer questions, and learn how, for example, to start a grassroots campaign for change.

An inquiry framework to teach these skill sets is called the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) from the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). The framework (2017) uses concepts, facts, tools, disciplinary and content literacies to successfully complete an inquiry in a social studies classroom (p. 17). It consists of four dimensions that build an inquiry arc and move the students through questioning, content, evaluation of sources, and eventual action to make change. Studying social studies, especially the four content areas highlighted in dimension two (history, civics, economics, geography), show students that the precepts of democracy have not applied to all people in their history book. This connection is key to inquiry. For students to learn to speak out against bullying, discrimination, systemic racism and other abuses against themselves or democracy, teachers need to use inquiry so students can learn skills to “take action”.

That’s All Well and Good, But HOW Do I Create One?

This article will feature a thorough explanation of creating C3’s in the social studies classroom. Most teachers fit the C3 around a premade unit, such as the Ancient China unit in the introduction or create a C3 that is a stand-alone multiple day lesson plan like “Why Vote?” (This C3 can be found in Teaching the College, Career, and Civic Life Framework: Exploring Inquiry-based Instruction in Social Studies published by NCSS.) The “Why Vote” C3 has been taught in a social studies methods course, tenth grade civics, ninth and tenth grade government, eighth grade United States history and other courses by teachers in the past several years in a midwestern state following their graduation from the social studies program.

The C3 contains an inquiry arc and consists of four dimensions and subsections of those dimensions. The first dimension develops two types of questions, compelling and supporting. Questioning is a main component of inquiry and allows students to develop both styles of questions to increase critical thinking and knowledge of content. Dimension two is the mainstay of the framework and encourages multidisciplinary (history, civics, geography, and economics) content literacy to emerge. Students use relevant sources, in dimension three, to develop claims and counterclaims while dimension four supports inquiry and disciplinary literacy by retrieving and analyzing data, answering student developed questions, communicating conclusions, and taking informed action. Moving the students through these four dimensions can teach democratic skills and hopefully develop a more skilled, active, and responsible citizen.

Dimension One

This dimension is instructing students to answer and develop questions that are compelling and supporting. A compelling question consists of a long-lasting issue, such as war, civil rights, or privacy while supporting questions include extracting answers from a source, finding definitions, or establishing a series of steps. An example of a compelling question would be “is the Revolutionary War really revolutionary?” Supporting questions deal with the content directly and help students analyze documents or any other sources. Supporting questions could be “is there bias in the document?”, “who wrote the document?”, or “how long did it take the Native Americans to move from X to Y in the removal process?” Supporting questions from all documents or sources help answer the compelling question by extracting evidence from all sources retrieved.

Step 1: Selection of content. As the title suggests, content is the first step to beginning dimension one. Gather the curriculum map, state standards, objectives, and premade unit or specific stand-alone topic to begin the C3 and develop dimension one. Using the objectives, begin to create a compelling question and supporting questions for the unit. Both are used throughout the C3 to develop students thinking and give substance to the essay written after dimension four.

Step 2: The compelling question and supporting questions. From experience, creating a compelling question that has an element of good confusion gets the students to think. As suggested by the C3 text, “is the Revolutionary War really revolutionary?” is a question that needs research to answer. Just from presenting the compelling question, supporting questions begin to emerge from the students, like, “what is a revolution?” “have there been any other revolutions in history?” “when was the revolution?”, etc. Students will use their textbooks, appropriate internet sources, etc. to find the answers to their questions. The teachers will facilitate this activity and fill in gaps of content when necessary.

Concerning compelling questions, the goal is not to have a textbook cookie cutter answer that all the students cut and paste from their notes or from an internet section of content. The goal is for students to be able to answer yes or no and then develop their argument using sources that are given or gathered throughout the C3. There is no correct answer, only evidenced based answers. Compelling questions are asked after every dimension as a formative assessment to gather information about the students learning of the content and sources. At the end of dimension four, the compelling question essay is the summative or the authentic assessment.

Step 3: The hook. After the compelling question is designed, the teacher needs a hook to get the students interested in the unit topic. Hooks can look different depending on the topic or content objectives pulled from the curriculum map. Hooks can be a song, a poem, a picture, a painting, an excerpt of a primary source, a game, a simulation, or part of a movie/documentary. Usually, the hook relates to the compelling question in some aspect. The goal is to spark interest in a topic and connect it to the compelling question. For example, to start a Cold War C3, one teacher used gamification to begin the unit where students became CIA agents trying to catch a Soviet sleeper agent in the United States. The goal was to get the students to feel stress and tension while going through the gamification CIA missions. The teacher asked the students about their feelings and one student exclaimed, “I was stressed!” This led to a whole class grand discussion about tension between the two nations and eventually at the end of the class, the teacher displayed the compelling question, “How hot was the Cold War?”

Dimension Two

Dimension Two is applying disciplinary concepts and tools using the four disciplines of history, geography, civics, and economics. In the framework (2017), teachers work with conceptual concepts, such as “explain the powers and limits of the three branches of government, public officials and bureaucracies at different levels in the US and other countries” rather than curricular content that would state, “identify every form of government” (p. 29). The curricular content will be found in the state standards and/or local curriculum maps.

Step 1: Gather curricular and conceptual content. Since each state and district is different, gather what you need for your unit. This could include, pre-made units, state standards, district curriculum maps, lesson objectives and/or unit goals. If you need to take the state standards and develop goals, objectives, etc. please do that during this step.

Step 2: Disciplines. Once you have what you need, make sure that the unit covers the four main disciplines of history, geography, civics, and economics inside the unit. The C3 text has standards to help focus your unit and is found at https://www.socialstudies.org/standards/c3.

Step 3: Create dimension two unit and lessons. Dimension Two is designed for the teacher to use content literacy to teach the facts, generalizations, concepts, etc. of the content required by the district and/or the state. Teachers can use pre-made units containing different instructional strategies and activities for students to accomplish the objectives. Display the compelling question before starting dimension two, so the students have a lens to “look” through as they learn about content and accomplish the objectives. Remember to include all disciplines in the content.

Step 4 Assessment. At this time in the C3, give the students a content assessment. This could be your own test from the pre-made unit or the common assessment used by your data team.

Dimension Three

This dimension is skill based by evaluating sources and using evidence. Students use the questions from dimension one to gather and evaluate sources that help answer those questions. After this is complete, students will develop claims (arguments) and counterclaims (arguments) using the evidence to support those claims. Students develop their own supporting questions and begin to gather evidence asking those questions along the way. This allows them to progress through the inquiry and begin to develop solutions to a problem they see in the community. Dimension three and four are student centered where the teacher becomes a facilitator.

Step 1: The primary sources and skill sets. Prior to evaluating the primary sources, teachers need to start with historical thinking skills of sourcing, close read, annotation, contextualization, and corroboration. (Teacher tip: teach these skills at the beginning of the school year for students to use in every C3. More skills for historical thinking skills can be found at https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teaching-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/the-history-of-the-americas/the-conquest-of-mexico/for-teachers/setting-up-the-project/historical-thinking-skills)

Step 2: Evidence. After students have mastered the historical thinking skills, the teacher will transition to dimension three by gathering resources for a balanced set of evidence or have a list of appropriate texts and websites for research. This dimension is for students to take control over their learning to develop claims/arguments for compelling questions students create in addition to the compelling question from the beginning of the unit. Focusing on the content from dimension two and the new sources presented or collected, the teacher will take a facilitator role asking students questions when students get in a bind, rather than giving any answers.

Step 3: Writing an essay or other type of authentic assessment. After completion of dimensions one through three, students are ready to write an essay (authentic assessment) about what their claim is to the compelling question and use evidence found and connect content from dimension two. Many different methods can be found to help the students complete the essay but one, has been efficient in working with the C3 framework and is called the P.E.E.L. One example from online can be found at, https://www.virtuallibrary.info/peel-paragraph-writing.html.

Dimension Four

Civic engagement is a very important part for students to encounter as a developing citizen. Dimension four is the authentic assessment for students to communicate conclusions and take informed action. In dimension four, the students usually show the connections from dimension two, curricular and conceptual concepts, to today and their own lives. Then they develop a plan and act on that plan to solve a problem they found with the school or local community. The teacher continues to facilitate during this dimension as the students gain agency and sophistication to solve problems in a democracy.

Step 1: The essay and then the issue. Using the essay as a jumping off point, ask the students to connect claims made in the essay to today’s current events. Have the students discuss this in small groups, like Think, Pair, Share, four-to-five-member small groups, or as a whole class discussion. The teacher, only a facilitator, lists the issues on the board, and all are considered equal. Students discuss and narrow down the list of issues to one that works within school policy, time frames, COVID-policies, etc. The students narrow the issue and then create a plan to implement to solve the issue/problem that has arisen from understanding the content in dimensions two and three. For example, the seventh-grade class studying Ancient China decided that the world was flat because of globalization and trade as far back as the Silk Roads. Students began to learn about economics and sweat shops in China. After doing research, they wanted to bring the issues of unfair wages, bad working conditions, and child labor of sweatshops in China to their community.

Step 2 Research, creating a plan, communicating conclusions, and implementing action. After the students have decided on an issue, they need to research the issue. Using dimensions two and three as a format, the students need to create a compelling and supporting questions concerning their issue. Student research, answering their questions, and then create a plan to combat the problem/issue they chose. This needs to be written in another P.E.E.L because it will be shared to groups or individuals that are stakeholders. Then the students need to implement the action.

For example, the seventh graders found what fair trade meant, how to find fair trade businesses and then began to list clothing they wore, stores they shopped at, and business in the town. They then researched to see if these were fair trade or not. After finding the answers, the class wrote a P.E.E.L and presented it to the teacher and principal. The P.E.E.L described their compelling question and gave evidence of why they needed to create a public service announcement (PSA) for the community concerning fair trade. Due to restrictions, the students decided to communicate through social media and tagged all the fair-trade companies for consumers to consider.

Why Vote?: A C3 Example Lesson Plan for Teachers

NCSS has published two bulletins titled Teaching: The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework: Exploring Inquiry-Based Instruction in Social Studies I and II. In the first bulletin, number 114, it states, “teachers will need to be intentional about making space in the curriculum, selecting sources, building in scaffolding, and incorporating related assessments in order to support students in this process…teachers will need to provide experiences that allow students to practice gathering information from sources and making claims supported with evidence” (p. 5). This bulletin is the perfect guide to assist teachers in making the space to practice inquiry and for students to develop an action plan and follow through to make change. These C3 topics can be implemented in pre-made units or as stand-alone C3s to enhance a topic taught in the social studies classroom.

A course taught at a midwestern university incorporates a chapter from this text to teach future social studies teachers how to implement the C3 Framework into units and practice the inquiry during a mid-level teaching observation and student teaching requirement. Student and first year teachers (from the program) have adapted this framework and taught it from middle school through high school. The chapter is titled Why Vote? Understanding Elections, The Candidates, and Why Any of This Matters and was created by the Mikva Challenge. The chapter moves the students through the four dimensions of the C3 Framework to answer the compelling question: Why Vote? The next few paragraphs will take the reader through the C3 as it was taught in the methods course and then in seventh through twelfth grade classrooms by graduates of the program.

Dimension One

Dimension One begins with a bell ringer on the first day of the unit titled Civil Rights. On the screen, a picture of two young men is shown to the students. The picture is black and white and shows one with his face painted white with VOTE on his forehead with the other standing behind him, holding an American flag. The students are asked to fill in a graphic organizer about the photograph. Then the students are asked to source the photograph. After finding the answer using a search engine, a grand conversation begins to discuss key questions about the photograph and the compelling question is displayed at the end of the class. The teacher facilitates another grand conversation, instructing the students to develop another graphic organizer to help map out the compelling question: Why Vote?

Dimension Two

Dimension Two consists of learning stations and curricular content. Teachers teach the local and state standards regarding the Civil Rights unit. This content is connected to examples from today about civil rights and voting through learning stations. The teacher uses primary sources to connect the past to the present. Different categories, such as, “I vote…because I care about issues,” are introduced in the stations. Students work in groups using the sources connecting the curricular content to the contextual content from both state/local and national standards.

Dimension Three

Dimension Three is more student centered. Students begin to ask other questions in addition to Why Vote? One of the most popular questions is: why do people not vote? This requires students to search for the answer to this question using data from different governmental sources. Then to check this data, the students create their own data set from the community they live in. From the data set, other supporting and compelling questions arise, and the students begin to find problems about voting in their community. The students write an essay answering the compelling question.

Dimension Four

Students develop an action plan and carry it out after completing dimension four communicating the conclusions found through their inquiry. The students then carry out their plan that answered the question: Why Vote?

Although the paragraphs seem to make the inquiry simple and quick, it is not. Inquiry is messy and sometimes very frustrating. Some questions that arise are hard to answer or cannot be answered. Students must have the space and time to follow the inquiry to the end. This does take many days but with the right amount of planning it will fit with pre-made units already in the curriculum.

As a side note, from the many classrooms I have observed, including my own, when this framework is presented, the middle or high school students love it. They get very excited to see their plan take root and feel pride in their accomplishments as developing citizens. They also learn to compromise and evaluate their own thinking and work with others. It is a truly a collaborative process. A hard process, a learning process, but a very rewarding process.

Conclusion

C3 is an inquiry framework from NCSS that takes the students through a hook of interest to implementation of action in four dimensions. Through the process, students learn a variety of historical thinking skills, collaboration, resilience, evaluation, writing, and how to develop questions and research answers. Having the students move through this process is what Dewey may have envisioned in How We Think. Getting the students attention, teaching content, facilitating student learning, and watching students complete a plan of action to implement it can be the spark students need to develop as a citizen and start to make change in home town communities.

References

Dewey, J.(1910). How We Think. Boston: D.C. Heath & Co.

Herczog, M. (2013) Social Studies for the Next Generation: Purposes, Practices, and Implications of the College, Career, and Civic Life Framework for Social Studies State Standards. Bulletin 113, National Council for the Social Studies, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://www.socialstudies.org/standards/c3

Historical Thinking Skills. Retrieved from https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teaching-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/the-history-of-the-americas/the-conquest-of-mexico/for-teachers/setting-up-the-project/historical-thinking-skills

P.E.E.L paragraph. Retrieved from https://www.virtuallibrary.info/peel-paragraph-writing.html

Swan, K and Lee, John (2014). Teaching the College, Career, and Civic Life Framework:

Exploring Inquiry-based Instruction in Social Studies, Bulletin 114. National Council for the Social Studies.

The Return of Civics

New Jersey’s Path to a Required Course in Civics for Students

Arlene Gardner, New Jersey Center for Civic Education

“An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.“ “…if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is…to inform their discretion by education” – Thomas Jefferson, 1820

Background: Short History of Civic Education

Public schools were established with the goal of creating informed citizens. Civic literacy was seen as essential to maintaining a representative democracy and the schools were viewed as the place for young people to learn about their government. In a multiethnic, multi-religious country based on the shared secular ideas of liberty and justice rather than the “blood and soil” nationalism of European countries, a common understanding and appreciation of these fundamental American values was seen as critical.

Until the 1960s, it was common for schools to have civics courses in upper elementary and middle school classes, as well as a separate, required course in civics and government in high school.[1] This pattern broke down in the 1960’s and 1970’s, when social unrest over civil rights, the war in Vietnam and other issues weakened the agreement about core values and put democratic institutions on the defensive, leading to multicultural and other approaches to teaching history and the elimination of civics course in many states, including New Jersey.[2]

By the 1980s, the civic mission of schools was basically abandoned in favor of preparing a new generation of skilled workers. The focus was shifted towards “core” testable subjects like math and reading. The No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 accelerated this push with the hope that test scores in reading and math would predict and improve college and workplace performance.[3] Time spent on social studies was reduced in many schools.[4] In 2011, all federal funding for civics and social studies was eliminated.[5]

Meanwhile, national assessments have shown how little our young people know about government or the role of a citizen in a democracy. While math and reading skills have improved since 1998, less than a quarter of students demonstrated proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in Civics in 1998, 2006, 2010, 2014 or 2018.[6] The questions are basic and include multiple choice responses. Yet, for example, in 2018, only 50 percent of eighth grade students understood that the U.S. Congress has the primary legislative power to pass bills.[7] African American and Hispanic students were twice as likely as white students to score below proficient on national assessments.[8] The level of proficiency is related to the amount of instructional time allocated to civics. While only 24% of eighth grade students demonstrated proficiency in civics on the most recent assessment in 2018, eighth graders whose social studies teachers spent at least three hours per week on the subject significantly outperformed their peers who had less instructional time in civics.[9]

With funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, a nationwide coalition to study and reinvigorate the civic mission of schools was formed in 2003.[10] The Carnegie Corporation follow-up study in 2010 conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, the National Conference on Citizenship, the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University, and the American Bar Association Division for Public Education, found that students who receive effective education in social studies are more likely to vote, four times more likely to volunteer and work on community issues, and are generally more confident in their ability to communicate ideas with their elected representatives.[11] “Effective education” included explicit instruction regarding government, law and democracy; discussions of current events and controversial issues; participation in simulated democratic processes and service learning. [12]

The NJ Coalition to Support the Civic Mission of Schools

By 2004, thirty states had a required civics course. But, there was no requirement for civics at any grade level in New Jersey. It was left to local discretion. With funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Fund for New Jersey, a New Jersey Coalition to Support the Civic Mission of Schools (the Coalition)–a statewide partnership of educators, parents, school administrators, business leaders, legislators and others interested in the future of our civic education and our democracy–was created. Several statewide conferences were held resulting in the recommendation that all New Jersey public school districts be required to have a course of study in civics.

An Inventory of Civic Education in New Jersey conducted in the fall of 2004 disclosed that only 39% of New Jersey school districts required all of their students to take a civics course in any grade.While those students taking an American government elective (10 to 20% of the student body of any given high school) might have the opportunity to participate in a class that requires an understanding of American constitutional democracy and the responsibilities and role of the citizen, students in most New Jersey school districts were exposed to one week to one month of civic content knowledge as part of U.S. history, with little emphasis on the importance of citizen action. The inventory also revealed that less than 35% of school districts had offered a professional development program in civics or government over the prior five years, and the vast majority of school districts indicated that up-to-date, inexpensive classroom materials and professional development would be an effective way to improve civic education.^[13]

Following the financial crisis and recession in 2008, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine sought to have financial literacy taught in New Jersey’s schools. Only three states (Utah, Missouri and Tennessee) required a semester of financial literacy at the time, while 18 other states required that personal finance be incorporated into other subjects.[14] While the issue was being discussed by the New Jersey State Board of Education, the New Jersey Center for Civic Education at Rutgers University (the Center) testified on behalf of the Coalition that a semester of financial literacy should be accompanied by a required semester of civics. The New Jersey School Boards Association, the New Jersey Principals and Supervisors Association, and others protested that there were already too many high school requirements. The State Board of Education added a semester of financial literacy to the high school requirements but did not include a semester of civics.[15]

The Quest for a Civics Requirement in Middle School

After further discussion, the Coalition concluded that perhaps the better place for a required civics course was in middle school. Current New Jersey law required a course in New Jersey history, geography and community civics in an upper elementary grade (NJSA 18A:35-3) and two years of United States history in high school (NJSA 18A:35-1) but nothing was required in middle school. By age 11 or 12 (sixth or seventh grade), students have the ability to do the higher order thinking necessary for a rigorous, relevant, reflective course in civics, and students at this age are more open to attitudinal changes than at older ages.[16] A required civics course in middle school would help to ensure that all New Jersey students (even those who may drop out of school at age 16) have the opportunity to gain the knowledge and skills for informed, active citizenship.

By 2012, forty other states had a required course in civics.[17] The Center drafted a bill requiring civics in middle school, which was introduced in the New Jersey Legislature with bipartisan support. Unfortunately, Governor Chris Christie, following the advice of his Education Commissioner Chris Cerf, believed that the New Jersey Student Learning Standards for Social Studies were sufficient and a civics requirement was not necessary. The Center argued that the social studies standards were written within a chronology, and that many basic civic concepts (such as the purpose of government, the basis of authority and its abuse, privacy, judicial review, the common good, and enlightened self-interest) were not included within the historical framework of standard 6.1 and were not being taught.[18] Although standard 6.3 outlined specific activities that students should take at various grade levels, it failed to offer a broad understanding of how our constitutional democracy functions and the role of the citizen.[19] The Center, with support from the League of Women Voters of New Jersey, stressed that only a fully articulated civics course, along with professional development and resources for teachers, could ensure that every New Jersey student would participate in an engaging, critical thinking and content-rich course of study in civics. However, once it was clear that Governor Christie did not support the idea, the bill was no longer pursued by its legislative sponsors.

Meanwhile, as the center in American politics seemed to split into two warring factions and faith in government plummeted, the momentum to promote and reinvigorate the civic mission of schools as a response was building both nationally and in New Jersey, with numerous articles in newspapers and law and policy reviews.[20] For a better understanding of what a robust civic education can do, in 2019 the Center invited several legislators, as well as Governor Phil Murphy’s Attorney General, Gurbir Singh Grewal, and Secretary of State, Tahesha Way, to the statewide simulated legislative hearings for We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution so thatthey could see first-hand how well-informed, quick thinking and articulate students can be when they participate in an engaging civic education program.

In 2019, Senator Shirley Turner introduced a bill to require a course of study in civics in middle schools. Other legislators were concerned that civic education should not end in middle school. Senator Troy Singleton had introduced a bill to require that civics be taught in high school. The Center noted that N.J.S.A. 18A:35-2 already mandated that civics, economics and New Jersey history and government be taught as part of the required two years of U.S. history in high school, although many social studies supervisors and teachers indicated that this was not happening. To address both the middle and high school concerns, the two bills were merged into a substitute bill, S-854, sponsored by Senators Turner, Singleton and numerous other cosponsors, to require a course in civics in middle school beginning with the 2022 school year and directing the Center to provide professional development and resources for middle AND high school teachers. Titled “Laura Wooten’s Law” after a Mercer County African American woman who served as a poll worker for 79 years, S-854 was unanimously passed by the New Jersey Senate on January 28, 2021, and an identical bill, A-3394 was unanimously passed by the New Jersey Assembly on May 20, 2021.[21]

By directing the New Jersey Center for Civic Education at Rutgers, The State University, to provide the necessary professional development and resources, the legislation recognized that the Center works with national civic organizations as well as the New Jersey Social Studies Supervisors Association and the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies; has been providing professional development and resources for New Jersey’s teachers for 30 years; and has the expertise and experience to offer professional development to teachers from all over the state efficiently and effectively.[22]

Civics must be more than how government functions

Civic education is seen by Americans of all political stripes as the most positive and impactful lever to strengthen national identity.[23] High quality, school-based civics for all learners is foundational to our shared civic strength. However, while 42 states (New Jersey will make it 43) require at least one civics course, few incorporate proven pedagogical principles like classroom-based deliberation and decision-making, critical discussion of current events, simulations of democratic processes, guided debates and deliberations, project-based learning, service learning or media literacy.[24]

S-854 requires the middle school civics course to broadly include “the principles and ideals underlying the American system of constitutional democracy, the function and limitations of government, and the role of a citizen in a democratic society”.[25] Following the legislation, the course should provide explicit and coherent knowledge about how the American system of constitutional democracy functions. The goal, however, is not simply content knowledge about how government works, but also an understanding of the values and ideals that underlie our system of government, and, probably most importantly, the role of the citizen in a democratic society. The focus is on developing critical thinking skills and civic dispositions in addition to civic knowledge, consistent with many of the student performance expectations in the New Jersey Student Learning Standards, which are also to go into effect starting in September 2022.[26]

One of the primary reasons our nation’s founders envisioned a substantial system of public education system was to prepare youth to be active participants in our system of self-government. The responsibilities of each citizen were assumed to go far beyond casting a vote: protecting the common good would require developing students’ critical thinking and communication skills, along with civic virtues. If the goal is for our young people to become informed, active citizens, they need instruction about how government functions and about the role of the citizen, political participation and deliberation, democratic principles, and civic mindedness. Our young people need to develop critical thinking skills so that they know how to examine and evaluate evidence to determine what supports fact-based truth. They need to develop communication skills so that they are able to civilly discuss controversial issues and to influence public policy. Our future citizens need to develop civic dispositions so that they appreciate WHY they should be involved in influencing public policy for the common good.

To achieve this goal, the Center has prepared an Inquiry Framework of questions to guide the development of a middle school civics curriculum. Links to suggested lessons, classrooms activities and resources are being added over the summer, with professional development to begin in August 2021 and continue through 2022 and into the future. Developing a suggested curriculum guide integrating civics, economics, and New Jersey history and government into the required U.S. History course in high school will begin in the fall of 2021. A robust civics education program that provides the skills for every student to be able to negotiate life, work and government offers the best promise for equality and justice for all. New Jersey can be at the forefront of reimagining civic learning for the 21^st century. Join us in this endeavor!

[1]Forgotten Purpose: Civic Education in Public Schools, NEA News (2017) at https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/forgotten-purpose-civics-education-public-schools

[2]Edward B. Fiske, The New York Times, June 7, 1987 at https://www.nytimes.com/1987/06/07/us/with-old-values-and-new-titles-civics-courses-make-a-comeback.html

[3]No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 at h ttps://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/1

[4]“Bring Back Social Studies,” The Atlantic, Sept. 23, 2013, at https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/bring-back-social-studies/279891/

[5] Congressional Record, 112^th Congress, at https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/112th-congress/senate-report/84/1

[6] National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/civics/

[7] NAEP at https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/civics/results/scores/

[8] NAEP at https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/civics/results/groups/

[9] Heafner, Tina. 2020. “The Sky Is Not Falling, But We Need to Take Action.” Social Education 84 (4), pp 250–260) at https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/view-article-2020-08/se-840420250.pdf

[10] The Civic Mission of Schools, 2003, at h ttps://www.carnegie.org/publications/the-civic-mission-of-schools/

[11] Guardians of Democracy, 2011, at https://www.csuchico.edu/iege/_assets/documents/susi-guardian-of-democracy-the-civic-mission-of-schools.pdf

[12] Ibid.

[13] Inventory of Civic Education in New Jersey, 2004, at http://civiced.rutgers.edu/ADVOCACY/Inventory_Report_11-04.pdf

[14] President’s Advisory Council on Financial Literacy, 2008 at https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Domestic-Finance/Documents/PACFL_Draft-AR-0109.pdf

[15] N.J.A.C. 6A:8-5.1(a)1v r: Graduation Requirement for Financial, Economic, Business and Entrepreneurial Literacy, NJ State Board of Education at https://www.state.nj.us/education/aps/cccs/career/FLClarification.pdf.

[16]Piaget, “Four Stages of Cognitive Development” at https://www.verywellmind.com/piagets-stages-of-cognitive-development-2795457

[17] Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/state-laws-standards-and-requirements-k-12-civics

[18] New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Social Studies, 2009 at https://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2009/6.pdf

[19] Ibid.

[20] See, E.g., Fred Islam and Ed Crego, “Why are Parkland Students So Articulate? Because They Were Taught Civics in Middle School,” Washington Monthly, Mar. 5, 2018 at https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/03/05/the-civic-education-program-that-trained-the-parkland-student-activists /; Timothy Egan, “Actually, You can Fix Stupid,” The New York Times, Mar. 30, 2018, at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/30/opinion/protests-democracy-teens.htm l; Thomas Friedman, “The Two Codes Your Kids Need to Know,” The New York Times, Feb. 12, 2019 at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/opinion/college-board-sat-ap.html; Sarah Shapiro and Catherine Brown, The State of Civics Education, The Center for American Progress (Feb. 21, 2018) at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2018/02/21/446857/state-civics-education/; Adam Terragnoli. “The Crisis of Civics Education: A Case for Mandated Civics Assessments,” Cornell Policy Review, January 18, 2019 at h ttp://www.cornellpolicyreview.com/crisis-of-civics-education/

[21] S854 at https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillView.asp

[22] See, e.g., the Center’s online-lessons about New Jersey history and government at http://civiced.rutgers.edu/njlessons.html.

[23] Guardians of Democracy; CivXNow. 2020. “Civic Education Has Massive Cross-Partisan Appeal as a Solution to What Ails Our Democracy.” at https://www.civxnow.org/ sites/default/files/resources/CivXNow%20infographic%20-%20Luntz%20polling%20-%20FINAL.pdf

[24] Hansen, Michael, Mann Levesque, Elizabeth, Valant, John, and Diana Quintero. 2018 Brown Center Report on Civic Education: An inventory of state civics requirements. (2018) at https://www.brookings.edu/research/2018-brown-center-report-on-american-education-an-inventory-of-state-civicsrequirements/

[25] S-854/A-3394

[26] NJ Student Learning Standards for Social Studies 2020 at https://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2020/2020%2 0NJSLS-SS.pdf

World War II’s Technological Advancements in Aerial Warfare

World War II’s Technological Advancements in Aerial Warfare

Brianna Hatzold

A significant battle that played an enormous role in World War II that incorporated air crafts was the Allied invasion of mainland Europe at Normandy Beach in France, Operation Overload. This epic invasion was a very crucial climatic battle of World War II. The invasion of Normandy which is commonly referred to as D-Day consisted of a series of complex operations that dealt over several of days. This operation’s goal was to defend the beaches of Normandy heavily and to establish a foothold on the European continent. The first step of the operation was the landing which would prove a grueling march to the city of Berlin to attack the Nazi regime. It is an understating to even try and describe the gigantic role the Allied air forces played in the invasion. Without the assistance provided from the Allied air force the operation could not have happened. The Allied air force, with the contribution of Allied fighter planes, transports, bombers, reconnaissance planes and troop carriers made the events on D-Day possible. In the D-Day operation approximately 13,000 Allied aircrafts participated. D-Day marks one of the largest aerial operations in history. This precedent action was a learning experience that further developed the understanding of how aircrafts can operate as well as how they would interact. Operation D-Day was a very critical and complex mission that commanders understood and accepted the fact that there will be great losses in order to have a control over a beachhead. During this there was a low pressure weather system in England and the coast of France. With the low weather in these areas it then resulted in much confusion when airplanes departed from their bases in England. On top of that, the ceilings forced drop planes to fly at much lower altitudes then what was planned. Then there was also a troubling overcast layer that made it difficult for bombers to targets. Some airplanes even crashed into one another or went missing.

June 6, 1944 the operation commenced in the dark early-morning. This complex mission was a surprise to Germany. German commanders believed that the weather was poor conditions for the Allied powers to initiate an attack. The aerial operation had several phases in which immensely contributed to the success of the invasion. The first phase consisted of an aerial bombardment on the German emplacements, artillery and supply lines, that were on the beach of Normandy. In this first phase, it used heavy bombers and attack planes. Aircrafts such as the British Lancaster, American B-17 Flying Fortress and the Hawker Typhoons were in action to breakdown the enemy’s defenses. Allied commanders were hopeful that the bombings would neutralize the enemy’s defenses. However, it did not. German forces seemed to be still intact and feared of.

Hundreds of American C-47s were also at this scene. Acting as a supply plane the C-47 was capable to hold up to 6,000 pounds of cargo on their journey bearing a fully assembled vehicle or even a 37-mm cannon. When acting as a troop transporter it can hold 28 soldiers that are fully geared. If it was acting as a medical airlift it had the capacity to hold up to 14 stretcher patients as well as three nurses. According to Allied Supreme Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower, the C-47 was the most important piece of equipment. These aircrafts took off from a base that was located in central England which was approximately two hours flying time away from Normandy. Joe Crouch and his pathfinders were the first Americans to reach the outskirts of France in the early hours on the day of June 6, 1944. Him and his men took off it the darkness around 9:50 p.m. on June 5^th. Joe Crouch’s small fleet of armless C-47s began to depart, leaving England in five-minute intervals. His fleets C-47s carried up to 200 paratroopers from the 101^st Airborne, the first pathfinders that played a role in the invasion. The pathfinders’ duties were to mark drop zones behind the beaches of Normandy by placing lights and radar beacons.

Once in the air, the American C-47s then congregated into several V-formations. Each plane held more than a dozen paratroopers. In the morning of D-Day there were hundreds of planes that transported more than 13,000 paratroopers beyond the beach, encroaching on occupied France. The paratroopers were airborne fighters that would leap from these aircrafts into occupied France to cut off the Germans from behind. With the low weather in England and in France in the early morning, it made the airborne operation impossible to run swiftly like planned. About two-thirds of the courageous paratroopers landed way off of the ideal jump zone destinations. With the paratroopers being displaced all over France in incorrect areas it led to great chaos. As Allied soldiers desperately tried to regroup their troops, they encountered the Germans then resulting in a series of guerilla skirmishes.

During the invasion of Normandy, the Waco-CG Hadrian played an enormous role in the war effort. This aircraft did a fantastic job moving in troops and supplies onto the beaches. the Waco-CG Hadrian landed thousands of allied soldiers behind enemy lines with guns and equipment. It even was capable of carrying a Jeep or Howitzer into the war scene. This aircraft was easy to make and not costly to construct. Another wave of support came to troops hours later in gliders. The gliders arrived pre-dawn hours due to when the airborne troops. They went during that time because the airborne men could not wait incredibly long to resupply its troops with equipment as well as fighting off the Germans. This brought a mass amount of difficulty though due to landing at night. There were numerous variables that fliers could have faced. For instance: landing in an occupied territory, landing into fields that held defensive features, other problematic geography landscapes, anti-glider poles, ditches, and so on. Pilots reported that it was extremely difficult to see and that often times they were not able to see until their craft had touched ground. Many of the gliders crashed with fatalities. Despite the problematic situations these soldiers faced, the glider invasion was highly successful. The gliders were able to hold around 15 troops or to transport heavy equipment. Horsa gliders were larger than the Waco Gliders and could carry up to 30 troops.

The great contribution from C-47s as well as the Waco-CG Hadrian allowed the Allied forces to come out on top and to have a gateway into the European theater. D-Day is one of the most famous and the most significant battles that occurred in World War II. Without the reinforcement from aircrafts by supplying soldiers and equipment, then D-Day would not have been possible. Air crafts did far more for the war effort than one may think. Through air crafts, especially in this battle, they totally transformed the war and open the door to “how” to incorporate air crafts.

How Do We Teach Politics in a Society Where Political Affiliations Have Become Toxic?

How Do We Teach Politics in a Society Where Political Affiliations Have Become Toxic?

Nick Zolkiwsky

Throughout my time as a student from kindergarten up until the eighth grade, politics and government were never taught in my classes. To which I was not at all surprised, after all how do you teach a second grader the difference between a conservative and a liberal when they should be learning how to construct paragraphs and learn how to use a keyboard? Let alone how do you get them interested in such a topic? Even more importantly, how do we get them interested in the topic and teach them to respect others who may hold different political views?

The first time I can vividly recall politics being taught in my class was when I was in fourth grade and we were fastly approaching the 2008 Presidential election. During those short and brief lessons, my teachers did not tell us where Senators McCain or Obama sided on certain issues or even a basic background of the parties they were affiliated with. Instead, we were all taught to like Obama because he was younger and was the more “favorable” candidate among teachers at my elementary school. The same situation occurred four years later when I was in eighth grade and the 2012 election was approaching. To which I was genuinely surprised because at this point we were all teenagers and had a better understanding of how the world works compared to when we were still in grade school, at least I thought I did. However, it wasn’t until the 2016 election that my teachers actually began talking about the issues that Americans would be voting for and where Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stood. While for the first time we were having open discussions about beliefs and the two major parties it was undoubtedly one of the most toxic environments one could have ever imagined. Instead of listening to each other oftentimes I would find classmates getting into heated arguments, which were then followed by one person attacking the personal character of the other. Even as a 17 year old I knew this was no way to hold political discussions. Where was the respect? Where were the listening skills? And most importantly, where was the maturity? The answer, nowhere to be found. So the question is, how do we, as teachers, teach and create a healthy environment where students can learn and discuss politics when we live in a society that becomes toxic when these discussions arise?

To say 2020 has been one of the most unpredictable years in recent memory would be an understatement. It’s been a 12 month period where every 30 days or so we are met with another apocalyptic type event: first it was wildfires, then a pandemic, then heightened racial issues, and to make it all the more fun we threw in a Presidential election into the mix. According to an article from “weareteachers.com” there are easy steps to teaching politics within the classroom in the current climate that we live in. The first step that the article suggests is to discuss biases and “fake news” within the American mainstream media. This is a perfect starting point as understanding biases will better help all students fully understand the concepts of politics and how different media outlets portray a candidate/policy than a rivaling network. This also opens up the door to teach students the importance of fact-checking and doing their own research, which in the past few years has become so much more important than ever. Unfortunately, due to the easy access to media and the increasing influence of social media, individuals will typically see a picture or a meme on Twitter or Instagram and assume it to be true. Not only will they outright believe it but they won’t even go through the effort of reading up on the issue or using that additional information to form their own opinion.

The next three steps that the article discusses are more so related to notifying parents that you are about to discuss politics within the class. As many social studies teachers know, politics is a very touchy subject to teach about, and as many teachers in general know, parents sometimes are not afraid to tell you how they really feel about you teaching a particular subject. What this step aims to do is to notify the parents before the lesson is taught and lay out for them how the subject will be delivered to the students. By doing so, not only will the parents be as caught up as their students are but, it better prepares them to answer those difficult questions that their children may ask at the dinner table or in some cases, provide clarification and context to when a student tells their parents what they did in school that day. In addition to notifying parents about the upcoming lessons on politics and how you intend on delivering the information, it is a good idea to also encourage parents to talk about politics with their students at home. This is done so not only will the students have a better understanding of what they are getting into and about to learn, but it will also help them start to relate to certain focal points and issues that personally matter to them and their family.

Lastly, once the day has arrived to start teaching about politics in your classroom there are a few ground rules that you should establish right off the bat. The first rule, and quite possibly the most important rule, is to ensure that your students will show respect and remain respectful during the lesson. The way I like to think of it is, respectful ears are ears that are open to hearing the voices of others without judgment. The next rule is more geared towards you as the teacher and that is to remain neutral on the subject matter. While it is oftentimes difficult to remain neutral on certain topics, you have to understand that some of your students might have little to no understanding of the issues that you are about to discuss. Rather than giving them a biased opinion, which they have learned about at this point, you are giving them a non-partisan view and allowing them to make their own opinions on the topic. The third and final rule is to make sure that the students know that their opinions are their own opinions and they have the right to have them. This can be very empowering for students, especially those in High School who now find themselves in the “young adult” category. By having their own free-formed opinions this helps them establish a sense of identity as to who they are and where their morals lie and if you think about it you’re killing two birds with one stone.

How you want to present the information is totally up to you, just as long as you feel that you can provide the necessary information and that the information provided will be retained by the students in the classroom. Some suggest that PowerPoints and lectures may be the best option because this allows students to ask questions throughout the lesson and does provide room for a short class discussion. The more you allow students to voice their opinions and ask questions shows that they are engaging in the topic and that they are getting curious about why things are the way that they are. Other ways could include holding a mini-election within your own classroom, however, this activity may take a few class periods to run its full course, but on the flip side is it keeps them engaged longer and it allows them to go home after class and do their own research to further their own side of the topic. The last way you could do it is a much more laissez-faire approach and that is an open class discussion where you go around and have students speak up on what they know about politics. In doing so, the students are teaching one another and it gives you the teacher the opportunity to expand on talking points, correct any misconceptions brought up and even guide them to areas of further discussion. However, the one drawback that this approach comes with is that you will have biased opinions from students, so be sure to neutralize any bias that could be presented and most importantly, if a student holds similar views as you do, do not promote those as the “correct” way of thinking.

In conclusion, it is safe to say that we live in a time like no other. Our political climate in our nation today has never been as divisive as it has been over the past few years. But we as educators and even future parents must realize that if we want to change the toxic climate that is our political spheres, then we must lead the charge. Show our students it’s okay to disagree with others and that you can still be friends just because one person voted for one candidate and the other voted for the opposite candidate. The sooner we implement respect in our classrooms and when discussing politics with younger generations the more likely they will pass those traits down to their children.

Art in an Area of Conflict: Kosovo

Art in an Area of Conflict: Kosovo

Susan Goetz Zwirn

UNICEF, during a discussion organized by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) reported in June, 2018, that children living in conflict areas has increased by 74% (UNICEF, 2018, June 26). This site notes that in 2020 fifty-nine million children will require humanitarian assistance, the largest number since UNICEF began record keeping, with conflict the major driver (UNICEF, 2020, Jan. 25) . Basic services like water, health and education are all impacted. Even when actual conflict has abated, children are impacted by the toll caused by missing and dead relatives, physical destruction, and economic deprivation. The cultural genocide (a term to be explored) that often occurs prior to actual genocidal conflict is devastating. A report by Save the Children in 2019 provided even more staggering statistics. The organization reports that 1 in 5, almost 420 million children, were in conflict affected areas in 2017, constituting a rise of 30 million from 2016 (Chen, 2019).

The uprooted and traumatized children referred to in these statistics have contributed to what is, undoubtedly, the worst refugee crisis in modern history. The refugee ‘issue’ impacts most of the world and is an engine driving national and international policy by nations in turmoil, inflicting increased suffering of these children. Although attention is focused on a few global hotspots where journalists are permitted, these tragedies are escalating and developing in dozens of places, for a myriad of reasons. Aggression promoted by intolerance is internalized in children and adolescents who have lived with insecurity born of a history of violence, often separated from loved ones, and grown up in exile or in displacement camps. This ongoing tragedy is unfolding in the United States as well. As of September 2018, the New York Times reported that there are 12,800 children in federally contracted shelters and 1,500 unaccounted for. The current administration is canceling English classes and recreational activities (Romo, 2019). According to a joint investigation by The Associated Press and the PBS series, Frontline: “The nearly-70,000 migrant children who were held in government custody this year—up 42 percent in the fiscal year 2018-2019—spent more time in shelters and away from their families than in prior years (Aljazeera,2019). Can activist art educators provide consequential results for children impacted by such conflict?

This study was completed in Kosovo with the nonprofit arts organization ArtsAction Group (AAG). AAG is an international community-based collective with over a decade of commitment to socially engaged arts initiatives with youth in conflict-affected environments. Informing this study is a week-long participatory observation experience in Kosovo with AAG as well as oral history interview data and research prior to the trip.

Their multifaceted mission statement is elaborated on their website: https://www.artsaction.org. AAG is focused on both the individual child and the group: developing capacity for empathy, aesthetic awareness, creativity, problem solving, curiosity, engagement with community, the development of self-esteem, and encouraging empowerment to participate in a democratic society. Of equal significance to AAG is the role of the arts to connect young people to the knowledge and skills required for the 21^st century. A keen focus on teaching contemporary art and design, particularly STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Math) via an inquiry-based approach further aides individual and group survival in today’s economy. An emphasis on contemporary art not only connects young people to global movements, it also encourages personal connection and individual mean making.

Kosovo: Historical context in the struggle for independence

In 1999, after a prolonged conflict, the United States and NATO allies acted to end ‘ethnic cleansing,’ a euphemism for genocide, perpetrated by Milosevic’s forces, and characterized by murder, looting and intimidation orchestrated against Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian population. Milosevic directed his forces inside Kosovo to drive the bulk of Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian population out of the territory or annihilate them. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008 and obtained diplomatic recognition as a sovereign state by 113 UN members. Many countries, notably Russia, China, India and Serbia, do not recognize Kosovo’s independence and it is not a part of the UN. Due to the lack of universal acceptance of Kosovo’s statehood and ongoing tension with Serbia, NATO troops maintains a presence in the region.

The violence in Kosovo is not unique. In the 20^th century, self-determination inspired peoples on several continents to overthrow oppressive rule. Once gaining independence, newly seated leaders in many of these nations, however, often denied the same freedoms for ethnic and religious minorities within their borders– perpetuating oppression and civil unrest. As of 2013, Sambanis writes that there were at least 125 civil wars in progress (as cited in Welhengama, 2013).

Kosovo province succeeded from Serbia in 2008. Gurr notes that except for Central and West Africa and South and Southeast Asia, most secessionist movements have subsided. Despite this reduction, current initiatives to justify secession have focused on the idea that self-determination is a human right (Welhengama, 2013). What happens to the cultural, religious, and/or political groups that are engaged in these conflicts?

Cultural Genocide

In 1948, the United Nations defined genocide at the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article II, as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group (United Nations Human Rights, 2018). The idea that genocide starts, but is not confined to killing, was elaborated on by Raphael Lemkin who first conceptualized ‘cultural genocide’ (as cited in Novic, 2015). Although Article II limited the legal definition of genocide to the physical and excluded the destruction of tangible cultural heritage and the prohibition of the use of the language of a group in their definition of genocide, the debate has continued. For Lemkin and others, cultural genocide came to be a form of genocide per se because the destruction of a culture could engender the destruction of the group over time. Anthropologists Jaulins and Clastres used the term ‘ethnocide’, which they claim is the systematic destruction of the modes of life and thought of people who are different. Clastres added that, genocide kills their bodies, “…while ethnocide kills their spirit” (as cited in Novic, 2015, p. 64).

The cultural dimension of genocide broadens a definition of genocide from a sole focus on the action of physical genocide to intention. Coined ‘ethnic cleansing,’ physical and cultural acts of genocide constituted mass attacks against people as well as their cultural heritage (United Nations Security Council, 1992). Whether the intention was to destroy or replace ethnic Albanians, the results impacted thousands of people in what is today called Kosovo. Since 1999, the region has been in a state of flux, beginning after the war with the presence of a military-humanitarian apparatus (Pandolfi, 2003) in which governmental and non-governmental relief agencies exist in a prolonged state of emergency and temporary relief.

Twenty years after the war, Kosovo is the economically poorest nation in Europe; the median family income is under 10K. Rebuilding from a war and genocide that impacted every community, the traumatic effects are still very much a part of Kosovar citizens’ lives and the rebuilding process is fraught with tension (Shtuni, 2015). Recent statements made by the US Ambassador to Pristina indicate a possible shift in US policy towards Kosovo which contradicts the stance taken in 1999 to end the war. Discussions against the partition of Kosovo from Serbia indicates that the sovereignty of Kosovo is perhaps now more fragile than before (2018, August 13, Mujanovic). According to Serbia’s foreign minister, as of August, 2019, 15 countries have revoked their recognition of Kosovo who stated it falls below 100 countries. However, Kosovo claims to have 114 recognize it (Palickova, 2019). Kosovo is not a member of the UN and Russia and Serbia’s opposition is a cloud hanging over Kosovo’s efforts to join the EU.

Working towards self-determination, Kosovars work to rebuild the economy. Kosovars are re-envisioning their culture and spirit as they choose to identify– through processes of becoming, mapping their own future– not wholly as victims, survivors, soldiers, or descendants (Biehl & Locke, 2010)..

Fellbach Haus Centre for Creative Education

Fellbach Haus is a community cultural center in the town of Suhareka, directed by a team from the community which includes artist and educator, Refki Gollopeni. Gollopeni experienced the war firsthand, when the Serbian government shut down the schools and the Albanian language was disallowed. After the war, Gollopeni focused on active involvement with the youth in the community for healing and rebuilding through art. He saw the need for art projects aimed at meaning making and creative expression, as well as innovative, entrepreneurial knowledge, and skills.

Gollopeni’s ten years of collaboration with AAG began with a meeting at a peace education conference. Wariness of non-governmental organizations and UN groups that aren’t grounded in community resulted in a two-year vetting process before AAG met Gollopeni. This relationship, over time, has been enhanced by local and international arts partners, local businesses, as well as the families of the young people who participate in the art programs. Gollopeni wanted to bring contemporary art education practices to Fellbach Haus. He describes the relationship with AAG: “Together we are working to establish a better future for humanity, while simultaneously maintaining human identity through peace, love, and art” (R. Gollopeni, interview, March 2018).

In Suhareka’s schools, art education focuses on traditional media and skills. Through collaboration, AAG designs projects that honor the local leaders’ expertise, and introduces new methods and materials at Gollopeni’s request. Each site is specific. Starting in 2008, with the request from Gollopeni to bring contemporary art practices to the center, AAG introduced installation art and artists which helped model teaching and the production of art that was collaborative and ephemeral vs the individual artist making a permanent object. Materials were locally sourced or transported on site by AAG.

In following years, AAG introduced stop motion animation stimulated by the work of contemporary artists. The content of the work was grounded in community, identity, and history, particularly documenting war stories from the community. Expanding upon the animation workshops, Gollopeni organized an international animation festival the following year which highlighted student work alongside work by international artists. Gollopeni continues to develop curriculum, building on the yearly experiences with AAG in ways that are meaningful for student expression and the future goals of the community.

Gollopeni’s interest in introducing contemporary art practice and collaboration for Kosovar youth corresponds to a recent research shift in scholarly and pedagogical activity regarding creativity. A new generation of research has begun to examine creativity as an outcome of collaborative activity rather than as a phenomenon that occurs entirely within the individual. Glaveanu’s culturally based definition of creativity refers to it as “a complex socio-cultural-psychological process. (Zwirn & VandeZande, 2015, p. 11). This understanding of creativity has salience for our discussion. Creativity is understood as a “generative process; it is connected to previous knowledge and cultural repertoires and in a dialogical relationship with the old or the already-there” (p. 11). In this conception, “tradition and previous knowledge are part and parcel of the creative process,” and “creativity and tradition are interpenetrated” (p. 13).

Week at the Fellbach Haus

Children’s projects focused on the theme of identity in an imaginative way, exploring the question: If you could have a secret super power, what would it be? The teens project, titled Utopia/Dystopia was developed in collaboration with Gollopeni and his discussions with his students during the planning stage before the visit. The theme asked students to explore the questions: What does ‘utopia’ mean to you? What does dystopia mean to you? Where do they overlap? Students viewed images by contemporary artists who have explored the themes of utopia and dystopia to generate dialogue around societal and personal issues. The students discussed what they considered characteristics of utopian and dystopian society.

The discussion was facilitated with Gollopeni and students fluent in English translating. The inspiration to tackle these subjects evolved from discussions with Kosovar teens via skype prior to our arrival. The youngest nation in Europe, Kosovo has a youth unemployment rate of around 57%. Young people are keenly aware of the disparity in access to opportunities and experiences that most other European youth enjoy (McCarthy & Wagoneer, December 14, 2017). Discussing utopia as a form of empowerment in envisioning a brighter future for the country and dystopia as a critical analysis of their daily experience hit close to home.

STEAM approach through contemporary art

Both the children’s workshops and the teen workshops focused on integrating technology into the art making as a means for creative expression. Kosovar youth come from a long artistic and cultural tradition. Their appreciation for art, along with their motivation to learn about new technologies was quite evident in what they accomplished in the space of the week with AAG.

The children created artworks working with circuitry for lights and sound recordings of their voice, describing their desired superpower. The elementary students also used circuit boards. The teens similarly worked with conductive materials as well as how to make an image into a 3D print file. They learned about Bare Conductive Touch Boards for adding sound to a symbol that they had created to identify their idea. The Touch Board makes projects interactive through a microcontroller based platform that allows one to turn almost any material or surface into a sensor. Thick graphite sticks served as both conductive material for sound and for ’drawing utopia and dystopia themed murals. Students chose a symbol on their work for emphasis and created the symbol into a 3D printed object.

Community Focused Alliances

Strategies employed by AAG bolster the impact of SEAE. Analysis of documentation, interviews, video, photos, observations and experiences highlight key curricular concepts: a valuing of alliances, empowerment through self-determination, curriculum co-created and based on participants stated requests that meets individual and group goals (such as current design and STEAM projects for 21^st century skills, and a pedagogy focused on hope and personal and community meaning making. The arts foster dialogue towards individual and community development.

Building alliances with local groups through long-term cooperation lay the groundwork for AAG’s success in Kosovo. AAG forms community alliances through student-led engagement in the form of interactive and participatory exhibition design, which culminates their workshops. The public exhibitions extend their focus on engaging community with young people, artists and art educators, by networking with family and community members. Collaboration is fundamental as students decide how to showcase their art to the community. The turnout of several hundred parents, youth and municipal personnel at the workshops’ end confirmed the value of the workshops to community members.

Transformational, socially engaged education via the arts gains vitality when it is youth focused with a recognition that the future of Kosovo and its sovereignty is linked to the voices of generations to come. As Dukagjin Lipa, father of Kosovar’s first international pop star, Dua Lipa, explained in August 2018, regarding his creation of the first major music festival in Kosovo, “We have our troubles, but we have one of the most wonderful youths in this part of the world. They are intelligent, they’re creative. They have something to say.” (Marshall, A., 2018)

References

ArtsAction Group (2018, August). Retrieved from: https://www.artsaction.org/

Aljazeera, (Nov. 19. 2019). “US held record 69,550 migrant children in custody in 2019: Report.”

Biehl, J. & Locke, P. (2010). “Deleuze and the anthropology of becoming.” Current Anthropology, 51(3), 317-351.

Chen, M. (2019, February 26). “1 in 5 children live in a war zone.” The Nation.

Palickova, A. (Aug. 27, 2019). “15 countries, and counting, revoke recognition of Kosovo, Serbia says. . 15 countries, and counting, revoke recognition of Kosovo, Serbia says.” Euractive.

Marshall, A. (2018, August 21). “Trying to Make Kosovo Cool.” The New York Times, pp. C1, C5.

McCarthy, P. & Wagonner, L. (2017, December 14). “IRI Experts in the American Interest: Is Kosovo the Next Recruiting Ground for ISIS?” https://www.iri.org/resource/iri-experts-american-interest-kosovo-next-recruiting-ground-isis.

Mujanovic, J. (2018, August 13). “The Republican Party Must Rein in its Mercenaries in the Balkans.” Democracy Post.

Novic, E. (2014). “Physical-biological or socio-cultural ‘destruction’ in genocide? Unravelling the legal underpinnings of conflicting interpretations.” Journal of Genocide Research,17(1), 63-82.

Romo, V. (2019). “Administration Cuts Education And Legal Services For Unaccompanied Minors.” NPR.

Pandolfi, M. (2003). “Contract of mutual (in)difference: Governance and the humanitarian apparatus in contemporary Albania and Kosovo.” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 10(1), 369-381.

Shtuni, A. (2015). “Ethnic Albanian foreign fighters in Iraq and Syria,” CTC Sentinel, 8(4), 11-14.

UNICEF (2018, June 26). “Fighting for the rights of children in armed conflict.”

https://www.unicef.org/stories/fighting-rights-children-armed-conflict

United Nations Human Rights Office of High Commissioner (2018). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crimeofgenocide.aspx

United Nations Security Council (27 May 1994). Final report of the commission of experts established pursuant to Security Council Resolution (S/1994/674) United Nations.

Welhengama, G. & Pilay, N., (2013). Minorities claim to secession by virtue of the right to self-determination: Asian perspectives with special reference to Kosovo and Sri Lanka. Nordic Journal of International Law, 82, 249-282.

Zwirn, S. G., & VandeZande, R. V. (2015). Differences between Art and Design Education-or Differences in Conceptions of Creativity? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(3), 193-203.

The Cholera Epidemic of 1832 in New York State

The Cholera Pandemic of 1832 in New York State

Richard L. Williams

Reprinted with permission from https://newyorkalmanack.com/2020/05/cholera-pandemic-of-1832/

History shows that several pandemics have struck in New York State – one of the less remembered is known as the Second Cholera Pandemic of 1832. New York was among the most thoroughly scourged among the states.

A person may get cholera by drinking water or eating food contaminated with the Vibrio cholerae bacterium. Although cholera can be acquired from under-cooked marine life, in an epidemic, the source of the contamination is usually the feces of an infected person. The disease can spread rapidly in areas with inadequate treatment of sewage and drinking water and New York City, Buffalo, and Utica were all hit particularly hard due to the bacterium‘s water borne mobility.

Virtually every city along the Hudson and St. Lawrence Rivers, Lakes Ontario, Erie, and Champlain, and the Erie Canal suffered despite the imposition of quarantines and frantic local efforts to “purify” and eliminate public health nuisances. In June 1832 cholera appeared in Quebec and Montreal and then in Prescott, Kingston, and York in Canada. Thriving towns along the Erie Canal suffered as well as small villages and even isolated farms. The appearance of cholera was the signal for the general exodus of inhabitants of larger communities, who, in their headlong flight, spread the disease throughout the surrounding countryside. The disease was terrifying. Like the current coronavirus pandemic, it had to be faced alone, often without friend, minister, or physician.

The pandemic was compounded by miasmatics, an obsolete medical theory that held that diseases — such as cholera, chlamydia, or the plague — were caused by noxious “bad air” (sometimes called night air).

Personal habits were also thought to be a major cause and public health officials sought to protect people they called “poor and vicious” from themselves. Cleanliness helped, but also New York City banned “green and unripe fruits of every kind.” Leaders of the Temperance Movemen t charged whiskey as the culprit. “Strict Sabbatarians” thought the disease was due to improper regard for the holiness of Sundays.

Many people traveled then on the Erie Canal or on stagecoaches on turnpikes passing through communities like Utica, where the Common Council established a Board of Health on June 16, 1832 to make regulations to “prevent the introduction and spread of the disease in the city.” Property owners were directed to purify and cleanse their house or business and to remove unwholesome substances or water. Lime or chloride of lime was to be used by all to purify residences and other buildings.

A temporary hospital was erected on Broad Street and 50 bushels of lime was bought “for the use of the poor.” Canal boats were directed to a quarantine where they could be “cleansed and purified.” By August 13th Utica had four fatal cases, and the alarm had spread across the city. It was estimated that 3,000 people left Utica “in search of a securer refuge from the mysterious disease.” All told, Utica had about 200 cases of cholera and about 65 deaths. A writer in The Utica Daily Gazette 15 years after the episode said that “the bolts of death fell thick and fast. The dead were hurried to their graves as soon as the breath left the body, unaccompanied by friends and without the usual ceremony.”

By September 11, 1832 the Board of Health announced that there was no danger to people returning to Utica. On September 25th no new cases were reported. As abruptly as the 1832 cholera pandemic had appeared in New York, it dissipated and was largely gone from the State by December of the same year.

A similar epidemic, the Third Cholera Pandem ic, returned to the United States in 1849. It is believed that over 150,000 Americans died during the two pandemics.

Historic New Jersey: Long Pond Ironworks

Historic New Jersey: Long Pond Ironworks

Long Pond Ironworks in Hewitt takes its name from the nearby “Long Pond,” a translation of the Native American name for Greenwood Lake. Set alongside the swiftly flowing Wanaque, or “Long Pond,” River, the only natural drainage from Greenwood Lake, the site offered a perfect combination of natural resources for making iron. Long Pond Ironworks was founded by the German ironmaster Peter Hasenclever.

Reprinted with Permission from the Long Pond Ironworks Museum www.longpondironworks.org/pdf/brochure.pdf

With financial backing from English investors, Hasenclever purchased the existing Ringwood Ironworks in 1765, along with huge parcels of land, including the 55,000 acre Long Pond Tract. He then imported more than 500 European workers and their families to build iron-making plantations at Ringwood, Long Pond, and Charlottenburg in New Jersey, and at Cortland in New York.

From the wilderness they carved roads; built forges, furnaces, and homes; and created supporting farms. At Long Pond, they dammed the river to provide water power to operate the air blast for a furnace and a large forge. Robert Erskine, the ironmaster at Long Pond and Ringwood during the 1770s, took up the American cause during the Revolutionary War, supplying iron products to the Continental Army and serving as George Washington’s chief mapmaker until his death in 1780.

In 1807, Long Pond Ironworks was acquired by Martin J. Ryerson, owner of the Pompton Ironworks. The Ryerson family retained ownership until 1853, when they sold the properties to the industrialists Peter Cooper, Edward Cooper, and Abram S. Hewitt. The Cooper-Hewitt enterprise operated Long Pond Ironworks as part of the larger Trenton Iron Company. During the Civil War, two new blast furnaces, new waterwheels, and workers’ housing were built at Long Pond. The iron made here was found to be especially well suited to making guns for the Union Army.

Civil War era Water Wheel

The 1870s brought major changes in the American iron industry—notably, the rise of cheap steel manufacturing and the discovery of new coalfields in Pennsylvania and ore beds in the Midwest. Although Hewitt planned cost-saving improvements to keep his northern New Jersey ironworks in operation, on April 30, 1882, the last fires were blown out at Long Pond, ending more than 120 years of iron-making history at the site.

Although iron was no longer made at Long Pond after 1882, mining continued as a major industry. Through the turn of the twentieth century, residents of Hewitt, the village that had grown up around the ironworks, adapted to changing times. They built a new school and church between 1895 and 1905 and a new sawmill in 1913. Ice cutting on Greenwood Lake and recreation also became key industries. By the 1930s and the onset of the Great Depression, however, these industries were in decline. Residents of historic Hewitt began to move away, seeking opportunity elsewhere.

In 1957, the Ringwood Company donated the Long Pond Ironworks property to the State of New Jersey. In 1987, Long Pond Ironworks was dedicated as a State Park. Administered by the NJ Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Parks and Forestry, and maintained by the Friends of Long Pond Ironworks, Inc., the Long Pond Ironworks Historic District stands as a testament to the vital role our region has played in our local, state, and national history.

Long Pond Today

Long Pond Ironworks is a microcosm of our industrial and cultural heritage. Its history tells a fascinating tale of the ironmasters who developed the iron industry in northern New Jersey. Their contributions to history in times of peace and times of war reach far beyond the local economy. These nearly forgotten chapters of history deserve to be retold and remembered.

Within the 175-acre Long Pond Ironworks Historic District lie the ruins of three iron blast furnaces, including the original Colonial-era furnace built in 1766 and two larger furnaces built for Civil War production. Also visible are remains of iron forges, waterpower systems, and a variety of workers’ homes and commercial buildings that were critical parts of the iron-working village.

Long Pond also illustrates the evolution of iron-making technology in the remains of the three successive blast furnaces, the ore roaster, and the hydropower systems. The continual search for more efficient operations and materials is a story of industrial ingenuity at its best.

The workers’ story at Long Pond Ironworks is a saga of immigration, hard work, and adaptation to changing times. The company town of Hewitt grew, thrived and declined along with the fortunes of the iron industry in the Northeast. The personal and community struggle to adapt to an evolving economy is a theme in our cultural heritage from which we can still learn.

The historical value of Long Pond Ironworks is paralleled only by its natural beauty. The forests that were once cut down to make charcoal for the furnaces have returned, and the river that was once diverted into the hydropower systems again cascades over ancient rock formations. The Friends of Long Pond Ironworks are working to ensure that the Historical District is preserved and remembered for its contributions to our past, present, and future.

All Have the Right to Question: Inquiry in the Incarcerated Environment

All Have the Right to Question: Inquiry in the Incarcerated Environment

Aubrey Brammar Southall and James Pawola

The bombing of Pearl Harbor is the current content for discussion in Mr. Peet’s (a pseudonym) United States History class. Mr. Peet has decided on the topic based on student written inquiry questions. Most students in the class were interested in studying why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Mr. Peet asks, “According to the sources, FDR makes it seem the Pearl Harbor attack was unprovoked. Tojo makes the case that the attack was provoked. What do you think? Support your answer with evidence from the sources provided.” The students fervently write out their responses after fumbling through their provided primary sources. As students recount the letters Hideki Tojo wrote during his time in prison, there is a general consensus, “Why would he lie when he is locked up for life?” and “Of course, Tojo was provoked.” The students speak of Tojo as if he is someone they know. Mr. Peet’s pupils bring an interesting perspective to the class discussion as they are all incarcerated. Mr. Peet teaches United States History at Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center (a pseudonym). He is a certified teacher by the Midwestern state in secondary social studies. Mr. Peet has taught at Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center for more than five years.

The purpose of this article is to examine the teaching of social studies in an incarcerated secondary classroom environment. The article will answer the following questions: (1) How is inquiry- based instruction implemented in an incarcerated classroom environment? And (2) How does the teacher interpret their classroom engagement level when inquiry- based instruction is employed?

Methodology

The researchers are on the “inside” for observations. This term is used by students in Mr. Peet’s classroom. The researchers know their position as an outsider in this unique classroom environment. They are aware their position in society will shape perceptions and field notes. The researchers acknowledge the differences between the students and themselves, though they are greater than they could ever perceive. A sequence of events has partnered the researchers with Mr. Peet. What first started as a mentoring project by the local regional office of education has transformed and the researchers are now the mentees instead of mentors.

The purpose of this longitudinal case study is to evaluate the use of the inquiry based instruction in an incarcerated secondary classroom environment. The study will answer the following questions: (1) how is inquiry-based instruction implemented in an incarcerated classroom environment? (2) How does the teacher interpret their classroom engagement level when inquiry-based instruction is employed? The researchers use a case study qualitative research method. The research questions are best suited to be answered by employing a qualitative method. Yin (2013) believes “doing case study research would be the preferred method, compared to the others, in situations when (1) the main research questions are ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions; (2) the researchers have little or no control over behavioral events; and (3) the focus of study is a contemporary (as opposed to entirely historical)” (loc. 639). The use of quantitative research methods would not answer the research questions in an appropriate manner. Data collection included observations, teacher interviews, and field notes. Additionally, in this research study, the participant is one teacher in a juvenile justice center. Field notes and observation were necessary for data collection. The case study approach allowed for a holistic answer to the research questions.

For the purpose of this research project, the following definition for inquiry is employed: “Inquiry-based learning is an approach to teaching and learning that places students’ questions, ideas and observations at the center of the learning experience. Educators play an active role throughout the process by establishing a culture where ideas are respectfully challenged, tested, redefined and viewed as improvable, moving children from a position of wondering to a position of enacted understanding and further questioning” (Student Achievement Division, 2013, p.2).

Mr. Peet’s Classroom

Mr. Peet’s classroom at Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center mimics national averages for jailed populations. The classroom where the researchers observed is made up of mostly Black and Brown young men. Most of Mr. Peet’s students report they have attended an alternative public school before entering his classroom. Over 50 percent of the students reported receiving special education services at their home public school. Kendi (2019) states Black students are four times more likely than white students to be suspended from public schools. Additionally, 56 percent of the prison population is made up of Black and Latinx people (Kendi, 2019). A recent Midwestern newspaper article stated “Youth who are detained are more likely to drop out of school, which in turn increases their likelihood of being rearrested and returning to jail” (Klonsky, 2019). The researchers noted that many practices at Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center appear to be restorative. Education is a top priority of administrators and educators. Students are offered the opportunity to participate in the following elective courses: yoga, music, graphic design, physical education, dual credit program with local community college, book club, garden club, art, and art therapy. Student artwork and murals adorn the walls of the school. The most notable student created murals state, “One day or day one, you decide”, “Renew”, and, “Begin.” Mr. Peet employs abolitionist teaching principles as his classroom “is built on the creativity, imagination, boldness, ingenuity, and rebellious spirit and methods of abolitionists to demand and fight for an educational system where all students are thriving, not simply surviving” (Love, 2019, p. 11).

Review of the Literature

Quality educational programing during incarceration can have a positive impact on students and help prevent involvement in future criminal behavior (Lochner & Moretti, 2003). The time youth spend in local short-term juvenile justice facilities should be used to address educational challenges, and to re-engage students in education or alternative programs (Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service, 2017). Additionally, high quality education during incarceration is important for helping students become productive members of their communities (U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, 2014).

Incarcerated classrooms provide unique opportunities for secondary teachers. Scott (2013) reports there are two types of teachers in incarcerated settings. The first type of teacher sees prison as an important place for higher education and the other looks critically at the prison classroom. The researcher believes teachers looking critically at the prison classroom are more likely to advocate for incarcerated students (Scott, 2013). The researchers argue the teacher in this study, Mr. Peet, looks at his incarcerated secondary classroom critically. The researchers see Mr. Peet as an abolitionist teacher. Love (2019) states that:

Abolitionist teaching is built on the cultural wealth of students’ communities and creating classrooms in parallel with those communities aimed at facilitating interactions where people matter to each other, fight together in the pursuit of creating a home place that represents their hopes and dreams, and resist oppression all while building a new future (p. 68).

The teacher is willing to advocate for students and provide resources for inquiry. This image of the teacher shapes the narrative of the research.

The educational opportunities afforded to those in incarcerated environments impacts our societal landscape (Castro & Brawn, 2017). The classroom should be a place of thinking, discussing, and dialoguing. Additionally, the researchers and teacher highlight the importance of humanizing language when discussing people in incarcerated environments (Stern, 2014). Therefore, the researchers refer to the youth discussed in this study as students instead of inmates. Furthermore, Mr. Peet has made community in a place that is less than desirable.

For dark folx, thriving cannot happen without a community that is deeply invested in racial uplift, human and workers’ rights, affordable housing, food and environmental justice, land rights, free or affordable healthcare, healing, joy, cooperative economic strategies, and high political participation that is free of heteropatriarchy, homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia, sexism, ageism, and the politics of respectability (Love, 2019, p. 65).

Mr. Peet’s classroom is a place where students and their backgrounds are valued and respected.

Furthermore, teaching in incarcerated environments should be seen as complex and unpredictable (Castro & Brawn, 2017). Teachers typically are the only teacher of their subject in the building, which is true for Mr. Peet. Additionally, students do not have normal distractions like Wifi/internet, cell phones, parties, and school extracurricular activities (Scott, 2013). Furthermore, incarcerated students are not typically considered candidates for post-secondary education (Castro, Brawn, Graves, Mayorga, Page, & Slater, 2015). Mr. Peet does work in an environment promoting college readiness. He co-teaches community college courses for his incarcerated students. However, student perception of incarcerated classrooms draws from teacher and environmental stereotypes. “Analysis reveals how even well-intended practices in prison spaces pose obstacles to seeing incarcerated individuals as potential postsecondary students and degree completers” (Castro et al., 2015, p. 13). The presenters believe incarcerated environments with thoughtfully designed education programs “can create communities committed to personal growth, social responsibility, and engaged citizenship” (Ginsburg, 2014, p.33). Moreover, education in incarcerated environments that helps students with strong written and oral communication skills, such as inquiry based instruction, empowers them. Empowered students have the ability to represent and advocate for themselves in public spaces outside of incarceration (Lewen, 2014).

Classroom Practices

Mr. Peet instructs United States History chronologically. Each unit the teacher has the students write inquiry questions while reading an overview of the upcoming material. The teacher believes this allows the students to preview and/or review material and allows all students to start the unit with a base of prior knowledge. Students have stated writing inquiry questions as the teacher believes this gives them ownership in the lesson. “Hey, that’s my question!” is a resounding sound in Mr. Peet’s classroom. The teacher has reported, and researchers have recorded in field notes students are more engaged when student inquiry questions are used. The teacher provides research sources from multiple perspectives to students based on student-written inquiry questions. Bias is often discussed in the classroom. The teacher reported different levels of inquiry questions are written and answered based on student reading levels. Most of the students read below grade level. Resources provided by the teacher include photographs, art, music, speeches, news articles, and news’ broadcasts relating to the students’ interests. The nature of the provided resources and student written questions allows the teacher to differentiate for the variety of students present in the classroom. The teacher collects work daily and uses the feedback as a formative assessment. Due to the nature of Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center, summative assessments are not used.

Students report they often have not participated in their former social studies classrooms. Student feedback of Mr. Peet’s classroom is extremely positive. The teacher sets high expectations for all students. The researchers had Mr. Peet, affectionately known as “Mr. P” by his students, ask the students to write out why they enjoyed his class and participated in discussions and assignments. One student stated, “Mr. P teaches history in a very unbiased way. He never states opinions without refuting and clarifying both sides.” Another stated, “Mr. P is very knowledgeable of the subject. He makes it where I actually enjoy coming to school again.” Other comments were, “I like history the way you (Mr. P) teach” and “It’s (class) fun and I enjoy the fact that Mr. P actually makes it fun and makes it easy to understand.” Based on field notes and teacher reflection, many of the students have previously felt school was not the place for them.

Results

As this study is longitudinal in nature, we will discuss the results from data collected thus far. We should note that due to the nature of incarcerated secondary classrooms, the teacher’s student population changes daily. The average time in a classroom is 14 days. Some students are members of the classroom for over a year. Additionally, some students rejoin the classroom throughout the school year. Furthermore, the researchers see youth who are incarcerated as a protected group. This study focuses on the teacher’s interpretation of classroom practices and student engagement.

Findings indicate inquiry-based learning in an incarcerated secondary social studies classroom environment is structured and teacher- dependent. Mr. Peet’s United States History classroom ranges from seventh- twelfth graders. Students in this setting are not allowed to use the internet and have limited access to research materials. The teacher is responsible for providing needed materials for student inquiry. The teacher states the following as key components to structuring his classroom: “I usually use primary source pictures from the era or topic to spark interest and meaningful discussion” and “I find materials that I know are interesting and then tailor lessons to meet standards.” Additionally, he comments, “I do vocabulary exercises, and focus on the reading and analyzing primary and secondary sources.” Due to school policies, students are issued writing materials at the start of each class. Homework is not assigned as hardback textbooks and pencils are not allowed in student bedrooms due to safety concerns.

The teacher reported an increase in student engagement when inquiry based teaching practices are employed. Researchers recorded the following as key components of student engagement: a safe space for classroom discussion, the constant posing of “why?” to students, the posting of inquiry questions related to the topic everyday (student generated when applicable), and the modeling of good inquiry questions, sources of information, and identifying bias.

Additionally, the teacher noted increased engagement from students on release days from incarceration when inquiry based learning was used. The researchers recorded this in field notes as well. The teacher noted in previous experiences, students were understandably disengaged on release days. The students appeared to make the most use of their time in Mr. Peet’s class. Mr. Peet often states he hopes the students carry their often new found love of United States history back to their home public school.

Furthermore, an increase in individual student engagement is observed when the student’s own inquiry question is used during the lesson. Increased engagement is measured by student participation in classroom discussion and student answers to inquiry based questions. All inquiry question responses are required to use textual evidence. Textual evidence comes from teacher-provided resources.

The researchers observed empowerment, questioning, and relationships are the key components of inquiry-based learning in an incarcerated classroom environment and teacher-reported student engagement. The teacher reported relationships with the students being of the utmost importance for inquiry based instruction. The student centered approach to instruction empowers students daily. Finally, challenging students to question the history they are taught increases engagement and inquiry-based learning. Researchers used field notes, teacher interviews, and student work samples to determine key components.

Conclusion

The researchers understand the complex nature of Midwestern Juvenile Justice Center and acknowledge the troubling rates of incarceration for Black and Brown young men. The researchers believe the abolitionist teaching style of Mr. Peet should be replicated and employed in the teaching of youth who find themselves incarcerated or in alternative school settings. Mr. Peet models how to successfully teach inquiry in a space where individuals voices are often kept quiet. The researchers feel strongly about the use of student-centered practices and inquiry-based instruction in environments where rights have been diminished.

References

Castro, E. L., Brawn, M., Graves, D., Mayorga, O., & Page, J. (2015). Higher education in an era of mass incarceration: Possibility under constraint. Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs, 1 (2), 13-31.

Castro, E.L. & Brawn, M. (2017). Critiquing critical pedagogies inside the prison classroom: A dialogue between a teacher and a student. Harvard Education Review, 87 (1), 99-121.

Ginsburg, R. (2014). Knowing that we are making a difference: A case for critical prison programming. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 64 (1), 33-47.

Kendi, I. (2019). How to be an anti-racist. Penguin Random House.

Klonsky, A (2019, November 7). The lifelong damage we do in Cook County when we jail kids as young as 10. Chicago Sun Times. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/11/7/20953943/cook-county-juvenile-temporary-detention-center-jtdc-child-offenders-audy-home-amanda-klonsky?fbclid=IwAR30eR5LSOHgqYlAnc4OLAzNPc0HzYsdnHV5bOG1mhRRWlmC-DsfI7zyguY

Lewen, J. (2014). Prison higher education and social transformation. Saint Louis University School of Law Review, 33 (1) 353-362.

Lochner, L. & Moretti, E. (2003). The effect of education on crime: evidence from prison inmates, arrests, and self-reports. American Economic Review, (94)1, 155-189.

Love, B. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.

Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service. (2017). Strengthening education in short-term juvenile detention centers: final technical report. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/251118.pdf

Scott, R. (2013). Distinguishing radical teaching from merely having intense experiences while teaching in prison. Radical Teacher, 95 (1), 22-32.

Stern, K. (2014). Prison education and our will to punish. Saint Louis University School of Law Review, 33 (1), 443-459.

Student Achievement Division (2013). Capacity building series. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/CBS_InquiryBased.pdf

U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. (2014). Guiding principles for providing high quality education in juvenile justice secure care settings. Washington, D.C.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: design and methods (5th edition.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications,