Jill M. Gradwell

When Increasing Stakes Need Not Mean Increasing Standards: The Case of the New York State Global History and Geography Exam.

Abstract In New York, state-level policymakers have invested considerable political and economic capital in new tests as both a measure of accountability and as a vehicle for increased educational standards. In this study, we look at how 9th and 10th grade global history teachers are making sense of the first administration of a new 10th grade global history exam. Building on prior work, we question the relationship between new tests and higher standards. We argue that the teachers in our sample believe the new exam is a poor measure of learning, that they have made few changes in their teaching beyond adding on a layer of test preparation, and that they see a disconnect between the new tests and higher standards. We conclude that, while state policymakers may have raised the stakes, they have failed to raise educational standards.

The Sources Are Many: Exploring History Teachers' Selection of Classroom Texts

Abstract In this paper, we address the issue of how teachers select primary and secondary texts for classroom use by focusing on two New York state middle school history teachers. Our field studies show that, although they teach diverse groups of students, each teacher chooses a wide variety of sources to develop classroom units and test preparation activities. The high–stakes testing environment both teachers work under influences their decisions, but so, too, do their subject matter knowledge and their views of their students. We know from previous research what is typical in social studies classrooms. By cataloging these teachers text selections, we offer a glimpse into what is possible.

The Lower-Order Expectations of High-Stakes Tests: A Four-State Analysis of Social Studies Standards and Test Alignment

Abstract This study indicates that the state-mandated high-stakes social studies assessments in four states do not require students to demonstrate that they have met the cognitive demands articulated in the state-mandated learning standards. Further, the assessments do not allow students to demonstrate the critical thinking skills required by the standards. In this study, researchers from four states with high-stakes social studies tests questioned how well their states tests measured and aligned with expressed expectations for students related to this objective. They analyzed the nature of four states high school social studies standards and high-stakes tests for higher or lower cognitive demands and the alignment between them. The analysis showed that the primary expectation for student learning in the standards is for higher cognitive activity than that represented in the tests, which are dominated by low cognitive level items.

To Simulate or Not To Simulate? Investigating Myths about Social Studies Simulations

While some educators assert that classroom simulations assist students in learning history, others posit that simulations can trivialize the past for students. In this article the authors argue there are many myths about simulations and that simulations are a defensible teaching activity if teachers enact them to encourage students’ interest in historical topics and challenge them to think critically and develop empathy for people who lived in the past. The authors draw on their research in two middle level teachers’ classes and the research of others to explore six myths about simulations. They also offer recommendations for teachers interested in creating educative simulations.

Using Simulations to Teach Middle Grades U.S. History in an Age of Accountability.

Abstract In this year-long qualitative study we explore the case of two eighth grade U.S. History teachers who use simulations on a regular basis to teach heterogeneously-grouped students in a high-stakes testing environment. We describe the purposes the teachers espoused for implementing simulations and provide detailed portraits of three types of simulations used: role-play, game, and trial. We argue that because the ambitious teachers know their discipline well, see the potential of all their students, and feel that learning rather than testing should drive instructional decision-making, they are able to engage and challenge their students with historical simulations. This study adds to the sparse field of simulation research and to the emerging literature on ambitious history teaching. It also shows educators what is pedagogically possible in teaching history.