Teaching Rigorous and Meaningful High School History

Guest post by Bruce Wendt

 Martha Kohl’s recent column that linked to Michael Yell’s post on teaching history led to reflecting on my own evolution in teaching history on the high school level.  Very few students “get” history or understand why they are required to enroll in what is to many a numbingly boring class.  How do we tackle this? Here are some suggestions.

The ability for teenagers to think historically begins on the first day of class with a challenge for them to understand that the discipline is more than a stolid march of dates and folks.  I believe we start the year knowing where we want to be on the last day.  We study past events not as an antiquarian exercise but to begin putting together the puzzle to know where we are in the present and what the future holds.

Two specific suggestions to begin the year: First, work with the students to help them understand that reading history is different than enjoying a novel or studying a biology textbook. I assign the textbook, articles and academic books in the first week. Students need to look for the thesis/argument in the source they are examining. Throughout the course of the year, we continue to focus on the thesis. History centers on core themes or the threads that link the past with the present. Years ago, Carleton College’s history department published years ago a succinct essay on how reading leads to thinking.  I think we all want lucid discussions in the classroom and the ability to recognize ideas over time is crucial—early lessons help guide students to developing these skills.

Second, history is built on interpreting primary documents and making reasoned arguments both in verbal discussions and in writing. For years the first documents we examined in American history were the operating instructions for the Virginia Company and the Mayflower Compact. When we do this, we are moving on two fronts.  We practice interpretation, but we are also setting the stage for events later in American history.  These two documents also demonstrate stark differences in the Massachusetts and Virginia values of the early colonial period and then during the Revolutionary and Civil War.  As teachers who know where we are headed, we can push students to think for themselves about these threads.

 Multiple resources have published worksheets on interpretation including the National Archives. I would suggest reducing the questions to a simple 5 or 6 that still capture the essence of the document. After using them the first week, students are expected to use the process for the rest of the year in their analysis. I was more interested in weaving the source into the march of history than reading worksheet questions every time we used a document. The goal with these questions is not to achieve the “right” answer but to begin a process of critical examination and knowing/practicing the skills needed to build arguments.  

Be warned, however: students will be frustrated and annoyed (especially those who have scored well in earlier classes by putting on paper what the teacher wants) for the first several weeks. One must be patient and encouraging until students understand that they can be successful by articulating what they believe based on their interpretation. 

I’m always happy to answer questions or discuss ideas. For an extended view of establishing sophisticated student thinking, I would suggest Stanford’s Sam Wineburg’s Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past. Also useful is the guide the National Council for the Social Studies published in 2010 that organizes the curriculum around ten themes with multiple classroom examples.

Bruce H. Wendt, Billings West High School (retired)