Thursday, January 14, 2016

TESTS INSTEAD OF TERM PAPERS

The Dark Side of Standardized Tests

Arthur Chang


[one of his papers was published in The Concord Review, Summer 2015 Issue; Chicago Laboratory High School, and Haverford College Class of 2019]

January 14, 2016


When Luke Skywalker asks Yoda whether the dark side is stronger, Yoda’s response is “No, no, no. Quicker, easier, more seductive.” This difference exists between assigning papers and giving tests. Tests, especially standardized, multiple-choice ones, are easier to administer and grade, but not necessarily a better indicator of academic competence. And unless they include open-ended questions that ask for explanation, tests only encourage and reward rote memorization, where essays and papers require a deeper understanding of the hidden subtleties of any given subject. But perhaps more importantly, papers and essays ensure that students learn to form arguments and support them with evidence based on solid research. 


The process of planning and writing an essay is essential for developing critical thinking skills, which, more so than memorization and test-taking skills, are vital to succeeding in college and beyond. Forget about the SAT, ACT, and AP’s. Forget about test scores and grades. Just find a course description for any college class. I challenge you to find any class that emphasizes test taking over learning; I guarantee you that most college classes are not like that.


As a freshman in college, I can personally attest that college classes are about understanding the concepts rather than memorizing the facts. For one thing, it is quite easy to derive most facts if you know the concepts. The converse is not true. It is true many courses have mid-terms and final exams. However, I have only encountered one exam with multiple choice questions—and then it still required understanding, not memorization. All other questions have been open-ended, asking not only for a response but also an explanation. Furthermore, most of my humanities courses have papers in lieu of exams.


These papers are not the personal, five-paragraph essays that appear on the SAT or the ACT. Rather, they are analytical essays that favor critical analysis of one or more source(s), depending on the essay topic in question.  For example, my first paper in my writing seminar class was a “close reading” assignment: analyze, using evidence from the text, how a particular author defined “belonging.” Note that the assignment does not ask for my opinion at all; it only ask that I analyze (critically) what the author is saying. While undoubtedly my own experiences and opinions influence my interpretation of the author’s argument, the key point of the assignment is to assess how well I can make a point (in this case, the author’s definition of “belonging”) and support it with evidence (the author’s words).


Unfortunately, papers are disappearing from high school curriculums; fewer and fewer high school graduates have written papers of any substantial length before they graduate from high school. Coming from a high school where all papers (except the “get-to-know-you letters at the beginning of each year) were analytical, this surprised me. Even though I had read about it in Mr. Fitzhugh’s writings, it did not fully sink in until my freshman writing seminar told my class “Most high school students have never written an analytical essay. If you had written one in high school, thank your teachers.”


There are a number of reasons why papers are slowly disappearing from high school. Perhaps the most common complaint is time, on both the students’ and teachers’ parts. While there are always those students willing to take on a challenge, many more cringe at the mere idea of doing serious research and then writing a lengthy essay. But perhaps the strongest opposition comes from teachers who, for their part, complain that with their current teaching load, they don’t have time to spend grading each student’s essay.


A contributing factor to the increased complaints about time is standardized tests. Most public schools and teachers are evaluated on how well their students do on standardized tests, administered annually. To cap it all off, high school juniors and seniors have additional pressure to do well on either the SAT or ACT, a prominent part of the college application process. 


These pressures to do well on standardized tests create an incentive for schools and teachers to focus more on preparing for the tests and how to do specific types of problems rather than focusing on developing essential skills needed in a particular field. 

In the humanities, this is especially detrimental when the core of the field is building and supporting a conclusion based on evidence and critical thinking skills. There simply is no way to “standardize” a test for writing skills; not only could there be more than two sides for a given issue, there are multiple ways to argue for any given side. Unfortunately, facing increased pressure by local, state and federal governments to do well on standardized tests in the form of grants, public schools and teachers are prioritizing test-taking skills over critical-thinking skills.

Giving in to these and other pressures is a short-sighted decision. As demonstrated above, the practical skills acquired in completing a research paper are highly valuable in college. Even for those not attending college, critical thinking skills are essential in today’s ever-changing job market, where the ability to learn and adapt is equally, if not more, important than knowledge alone.


The College Board and the Atlantic are not helping to improve the college-readiness of students. As Fitzhugh noted in an article, The College Board recently announced a competition with a word limit of, was it 2,000? When any student will write such short essays in their college career is beyond me, and it may explain why, despite ranking among the highest of all countries in money spent per student on education, with students spending more time in class compared to other countries, and with smaller classes, the U.S. ranks low in its education system. It seems that part of the fix is simple: bring back term papers. Yes, there are many challenges. But are we really going to compromise the future of the U.S. just because it was “hard” to teach how to write research papers?

Monday, December 21, 2015

DIANE RAVITCH /FITZHUGH ON HISTORY

Diane Ravitch's blog
A site to discuss better education for all

Will Fitzhugh: 

Why Students Should Read a Work of History in High School

By dianeravitch    December 20, 2015 //12

Will Fitzhugh is the tireless publisher and editor of The Concord Review. He taught history in a public high school for many years, then stepped away from teaching to found The Concord Review. (1987) TCR publishes student work in history, original research papers that are well-written and reflect deep study. It has subscribers all over the world and submissions from students from many countries (41). It is a fine publication that recognizes the value of excellent historical studies in high school. But Fitzhugh has struggled throughout the life of TCR to keep it alive. He has applied to and been rejected by every foundation and government agency that he could think of. The journal gets plaudits from all who see it, but Will Fitzhugh has exhausted his savings keeping it alive. He is a man with a mission. Please consider subscribing to TCR and make sure that your history students are aware that they can submit essays for possible publication. If you happen to have a foundation, please consider subsidizing this wonderful publication so it will survive. TCR “is the only quarterly journal in the world to publish the academic research papers of secondary students.” It should be in every high school.


Will Fitzhugh wrote a guest post for this blog in December 2015:


“When teachers say they have to spend so much time preparing for math and reading tests that they cannot give any attention to history, I always want to suggest that if they give their students history to read, they will not only get practice in reading, they will learn some history, too.


“When some argue that only in literature can one find good stories of human fears, troubles, relationships, hopes, competition, and accomplishments, I have to believe that reading history was not a big part of their education.


“I was a literature major in college, and only came to read history seriously afterwards. No one emphasized the benefits of history when I was in school. And I realize that the appreciation of history is a bit cumulative. That is, when a student first reads history she doesn’t know who these people are or what they are doing or why that might be important to know.


“Teachers have to assume some responsibility for expressing their assurance that history is not only interesting but also essential—that is, if they are aware of that themselves. Things go slow in learning any new language. Students can’t love French poetry or Chinese philosophy right away. They have to work to learn the language basics first.


“That goes for history as well. But after reading history for a few years, people and events come to be more familiar, and the chronology turns out to be no more difficult and perhaps even more interesting than irregular verbs.


“People rightly defend the stories in literature. But history is nothing but stories, too, with the difference that they are true stories, about actual people, who faced and coped with real problems of very great difficulty, with varying degrees of wisdom and success.


“These are the people and the stories who form the basis of the civilization the students have inherited, and neglecting them does indeed rob students of an important part of their birthright.


“I believe high school students in particular, with whom I am most familiar, having taught in high school for ten years, should read at least one complete history book a year. After all, many of these students are reading Shakespeare plays, studying calculus, and perhaps Chinese and chemistry, so a good history book should be easy, and perhaps a bit of a break for them as well. And not only would they learn some history in the process, but they would experience some exemplary nonfiction writing at the same time. All our students deserve such opportunities. And most are now denied them.”



The Concord Review
www.tcr.org
fitzhugh@tcr.org

Friday, December 11, 2015

HS HISTORY ESSAYS IN CHINA

Choosing a Topic for The Concord Review
The Beyond English Approach

by David Scott Lewis, Qingdao, CHINA


Much has changed at Beyond English since I wrote my last piece for the The Concord Review blog two years ago. These days, our program tends to be far more focused on issues related to public international law, international relations, ethics, and moral philosophy. We now also place greater emphasis on our three core Advanced Placement courses (aligned to match the "redesigned'' SAT), as well as the over twenty other AP courses that we offer. While the essays that my students generate through our Beyond English Capstone project—like all those essays published in TCR—all exceed a high school performance level, they vary broadly in topic and complexity level.

TCR has published several superb essays on court cases, such as Loving v. Virginia and Tape v. Hurley. I encourage my students to follow in the footsteps of these laudable authors by crafting theses related to court cases, yet I diverge in one essential way: my students must consider cases pertaining particularly to international law. No Roe v. Wade or Plessy v. Ferguson for my students, only international cases, such as the trial of Charles Taylor or the Tokyo Tribunals.

I advise my best students to address cases that are familiar to practitioners within specific areas of international law like international humanitarian law, but that are not necessarily notable in the broader field of international law. Thus, cases such as those involving executive powers, refugees, and asylum seekers—certainly a relevant topic these days—prove suitable. The critical thinking required is akin to the scholarly work produced by a Master of Laws (LLM). These students write and think at such an advanced level that they might easily skip undergraduate coursework altogether and go directly into law school; after all, an LLM program follows a JD (United States) or LLB (United Kingdom). Such students would excel in undergraduate law studies at Oxbridge, for example.

Some students will choose to address topics that require a slightly lower level of research and writing ability; after all, not every high school student is ready for direct entrance into an elite law school. Such students consider cases that have broader applicability and are well known to the majority of international lawyers. Yet, the typical attorney working in a local or national context would likely remain unfamiliar with such cases. A case at this level might include an International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecution. Such cases often have wide-ranging impacts and much broader relevance than the aforementioned specialized cases. In general, I tend to recommend these cases to my more advanced students instead of the aforementioned specialized cases since those cases might require an exceedingly high level of background knowledge. This type of international law essay is similar to the work required of second- or third-year law school students (2Ls or 3Ls), and comprises major writing projects only differentiated from those of law students by their shorter length. Accordingly, Beyond English has adopted a process for selecting substantial writing topics that was originally developed at NYU Law.

At the next level down, one finds topical essays related to public international law. Fitting examples of subjects at this level include a biography of Hugo Grotius or an essay on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The problem with these more general topics is that their popularity often makes it difficult for students to develop novel ideas and innovative theses. The complexity of these essays makes them comparable to those developed at an advanced undergraduate level, such as senior theses.

The papers that require the least amount of effort and thought for my students are those that relate to extremely broad topics in public international law. In such cases, students are generally not attempting to present innovative ideas but to instead raise awareness about topics that have never previously been addressed in The Concord Review. Some examples of this type of paper include essays on the history of the ICC or the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. A fine line exists, however, between papers of this type and the slightly more difficult papers discussed in the preceding paragraph. The complexity of this type of essay may be evaluated at a senior high school or freshman undergraduate level. Furthermore, these papers tend to be shorter, generally fewer than 6,000 words, and yet still exceed the AP Capstone and IB Diploma extended essay requirements. While shorter, these topics often provide an essential advantage over the standard fare of many IB Diploma extended essays by demonstrating a higher level of maturity. Take, for example, an essay on the Special Tribunal for Cambodia (officially the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia) that investigated the mass atrocities and crimes against humanity committed by the Khmer Rouge in their infamous ''Killing Fields.'' In my opinion, such a topic should be considered more mature than most of those addressed in IB Diploma or AP Capstone extended essays.

To date, the majority of my students have chosen to write topical essays; the highest-level papers this year were written on international law in the Qing dynasty (Zihang Liu), the history of Amnesty International (Yingying He), and, my favorite, the territorial history of the South China Sea (Yuren Pang). The final topic is particularly relevant given current disputes over sovereignty in the South China Sea. (Spoiler alert: The claims made by Beijing are not supported by history.) In my opinion, if a student is not referencing at least fifteen books and a few dozen peer-reviewed journal articles, they have not done their homework.

There are two key reasons for requiring that my students engage with legal texts, whether case law or law review articles. First, such engagement develops a student’s critical thinking skills. Second, such a level of study greatly enhances a student’s vocabulary. In an age when global education is so highly regarded, it is essential that students exceed the standard fare of typical cases covered in AP U.S. Government & Politics (a Beyond English core AP) and develop topics with a greater international focus. Abortion, civil rights, and same-sex marriage are important topics; however, in this author's opinion, the issues addressed in such cases pale in comparison to cases regarding genocide, crimes against humanity, and state-sponsored rape. Think The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir. Mature topics related to international law provide far richer areas for research that enable students to demonstrate the highest level of critical thinking.




Wednesday, December 2, 2015

MATH AND READING

Math and Reading:
A Lament for High School History and Writing


Historically Speaking, Winter 2006, The Historical Society


Will Fitzhugh, The Concord Review

    Many of the educators, especially at the elementary level, who are subject to the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act, complain that because they are forced to spend all that time on math and reading, they have no chance to display their creativity or to teach the social studies, including history. No one seems to have entertained the possibility that by having students read history, as they used to do in the McGuffey’s Readers, they could not only improve their ability to read, they could also improve their knowledge of history at the same time. Joy Hakim’s History of US is very good reading for younger students of history.


    Later on in high school students are assigned chapters in history textbooks, mostly written by committees, and in some cases selected readings, but it seems very likely that the majority of U.S. high school students are never asked to read one complete history book during their four years. In many cases the history they do read is social history sprinkled with a few historical figures, facts and dates, but the history that is omitted often includes military, diplomatic, political, legal, and economic history.


    The way to learn and to enjoy history is to read it, and that is not allowed in most of our schools. An additional way to learn and to enjoy history is to write it, that is, at the school level, to do research on a historical topic and to write about it as well as possible. Most public high schools, even including some elite exam schools such as Boston Latin School, no longer assign the “traditional history term paper.” In fact, in most public schools, writing is under the control of the English department.


    The English department, for a variety of reasons, has chosen personal and creative writing as its favorite kinds, along with the occasional five-paragraph essay. While the English department does assign complete books, of course they are fiction. Fiction, indeed, is all that many high school students have heard of. Some even think that history books are correctly referred to as novels, because they haven’t heard anyone speak about nonfiction books. Some infamous historians have introduced fiction into their history books, but that news is not really current at the high school level. I recently heard a high school teacher, in a Teaching American History seminar, ask an eminent historian what made him write his “novels.”


    College professors almost universally bemoan the poor preparation of their students in reading and writing. A recent Chronicle of Higher Education survey found that nearly 90% of college professors interviewed thought their students were not well prepared in research, reading or writing. And what have they done about it? They complain. It is interesting to me that students can pass their state high school graduation tests, for example the MCAS in Massachusetts, and then find that they must take remedial courses when they get to college. The Boston Globe reported last year that of those students who graduate from Massachusetts high schools and go on to community college, 65% are in remedial courses, and of those who go on to the state colleges and universities, 34% are in remedial courses. Am I the only one who thinks the college assessment people and the high school assessment people may not be talking to each other?


    But while college professors of history take zero interest in the academic work of high school students of history, unlike the serious interest their coaching colleagues take in the athletic achievement of high school student prospects, there is not too much they can do about high school instruction in history and in academic writing. Of greater concern is the fact that the majority of high school history teachers did not major in history and 12% of them majored in physical education. This may have more to do with 57% of high school students scoring “below basic” on the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress U.S. History test. For those who do not know, “below basic” means the student may have entered their name, but they probably misspelled it.


    One of the reasons coaches are given history teaching assignments is that they can’t teach physics, Russian, or math, and another is that it really isn’t history that they are teaching. Too often it is social studies, and too often that means, as I like to call it, after Flip Wilson, “The History of What’s Happening Now.” For those social studies teachers who are left over from the 1960s, “Now” includes Vietnam, Watergate, and Woodstock, and not much else. Even the ones who know that there were French student riots in the late 1960s as well as American student riots, most do not know, and do not want to know, that much more barbarous “student uprisings” were going on at the very same time in Mao’s Great Cultural Revolution in China.


    Nevertheless, even high school “tenured radicals” could ask their students to read history books and write history research papers, but most do not. For some of them time stopped in 1970 or so. I remember, ten years ago, I heard a woman who had been a nurse in the Vietnam War saying she had been a guest speaker in an elementary classroom, and one of the students said: “The Vietnam War! My grandfather fought in that!” Clearly the historical time warp almost caused her to faint away. 


    People who are not familiar with what students are not doing academically in school ask me why students are not writing term papers, because they know students will have to do it in college and may very well have to write something at their jobs later. It is hard to explain how full the school day can be and still have no time for real academic work, at least in history. Teachers assign reading in the textbook, and the students don’t do it, so the teacher spends the class time going over the reading, and the same pattern is repeated again and again. 


    Teachers used to assign book reports, but the students didn’t do them, so the teachers stopped assigning them. Some teachers are given 150 students. If they assign them a 20-page paper, then when the papers come in they will have to read and comment on 3,000 pages on their time outside the classroom. This is unrealistic. When I was teaching at the high school in Concord, Massachusetts, I didn’t have that many students and the papers were not that long, and I still called in sick for a couple of days, so I could read them at home. 


    Those who say students should learn to write academic papers in high school, and not many do, do not allow teachers time to assign the papers, and guide students through the research process, or to do a decent job of assessing them when they are turned in. Some private school teachers have more time, and some of those spend more than most. A history teacher I know, with a Ph.D. in history, teaching at a private school across the street from CalTech, checks every endnote of every paper that comes in. Not many do that.


    Lots of public high school teachers who are assigned social studies classes never read a history book themselves and never had to write a serious academic research paper themselves, certainly not if they went through the usual Social Studies Educator degree program. It is hard to convey either the excitement of history books or the satisfactions of work on a long serious academic paper if you have never read the one or written the other.


    Time to bring out the silver lining. International Baccalaureate students have to write a 4,000-word Extended Essay for the Diploma. Some high school students read nonfiction books on their own, for some reason. David McCullough reported that Harry Truman read scores and scores of history books not assigned in class, and almost unthinkably in this politically correct day and age, Truman said (and found that):


“...‘Reading history, to me, was far more than a romantic adventure. It was solid instruction and wise teaching which I somehow felt I wanted and needed.’ 


He decided, he said, that men make history, otherwise there would be no history. History did not make the man, he was quite certain. His list of heroes advanced. To Andrew Jackson, Hannibal, and Robert E. Lee were added Cincinnatus, Scipio, Cyrus the Great and Gustavus Adolphus, the seventeenth-century Swedish king. No Jeffersons or Lincolns or Leonardos were part of his pantheon as yet. Whatever it was that made other boys of turn-of-the-century America venerate Andrew Carnegie or Thomas Edison, he had none of it. The Great Men by his lights were still the great generals...”  

                               —David McCullough, Truman, 1992, p. 58

    When I was on sabbatical from teaching history at the high school in Concord, Massachusetts in 1986/1987, I considered that a few of my students had written much longer and better history papers than they had to for my classes. It seemed reasonable to assume that in the 25,000 U.S. high schools, 3,500 Canadian high schools and in other high schools in the English-speaking world, there would be more diligent students of history. I thought that if I offered a quarterly journal of essays to these students they might send me their best work. So, in June of 1987, I incorporated The Concord Review, Inc., and that summer sent out a brochure calling for papers to all the high schools in the United States and Canada and 1,500 overseas.


    By the time I had finished paying back for my sabbatical by teaching another year, I had papers from many schools and even subscribers from 14 states and 4 other countries. I donated my last $100,000 to get started, assuming that (1) many more good research papers would come in and (2) enough schools would subscribe to meet expenses. 


Assumption one was spot on. We have now published 748 [1,176] exemplary history research papers by high school students from 44 states and 33 [40] other countries. Assumption two was way off. Schools which could see the benefit of having students published could not see the benefits of having their students read the essays written by their peers. There are exceptions. Santa Catalina School in Monterey, California has had class sets of the journal since the first issue in Fall 1988, and this year, Singapore American School signed up for 50 subscriptions. One of the teachers there said:

“I passed out The Concord Review at the beginning of class. I didn’t say anything except: ‘Take a look at this.’ Here it is 10 minutes later, as I type this, and everyone is reading it and not saying a word. Amazing! What a powerful tool...”

 
    But so few schools did subscribe that I worked for 14 years without a salary or benefits, and in the process of seeking support, I was turned down by more than a hundred foundations, and the Department of Education and the National Endowment for the Humanities (several times). I had to suspend publication twice for lack of funds, in 1991 and 1995. Enough support did come in to resume after that, and I am now working on the 68th [107th] issue. We publish eleven essays in each issue and we accept about 5% of the ones we get.


    Still and all, the major organizations concerned with writing in the schools, such as the College Board, the National Commission on Writing in the Schools and numerous Literacy Initiatives have such low and nonacademic standards for writing that they really do more harm than good. Much has been written about the superficiality of the SAT Writing Test, on which facts are not considered important, and for which tens of thousands of students pay services to help them prepare essays in advance. 


    Even though some high school students, for whatever personal reasons, continue to read history books and write serious history research papers (we get a lot of independent study research papers, some inspired by our journal), the Educators hold almost all students down to reading fiction and writing personal stuff and the five-paragraph essay. I suppose if Educators were limiting all students of math to fractions before college there would be an uproar, but similar astonishingly low expectations for reading and writing are in place, with nary a murmur from the general public or from nearly all of the Edupundits.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

TERM PAPER WARNING 2002

"The State of the Term Paper"  
January 16, 2002, pp. 35, 37

Education Week (Commentary)

by Will Fitzhugh, 

Editor, The Concord Review

It seems likely that the history research paper at the high school level is now an endangered species. A focus on creative writing, fear of plagiarism, fascination with PowerPoint presentations, and too little time to meet with students to plan papers and to read them carefully when they are turned in, along with the absence of a concern with term papers in virtually all the work on state standards, means that too many students in high school in the United States do not get to do the reading or the writing that a serious history paper requires. As a result, students come to college with no experience in writing papers, to the continual frustration of their professors, and employers of college graduates, for instance at Ford Motor Company, have now had to institute writing classes for them before they can produce readable reports, memos, and the like. 

A few years ago, the Fordham Foundation did a study of the state English and social studies standards across the country, and term papers were not included in any of them. The Pew Charitable Trusts have funded the Standards for Success program, which is working on high school/college articulation of standards and expectations and term papers are not included. The American Diploma Project in Washington, DC, now working to define academic expectations among high schools, colleges and employers, has also not found a place for history research papers yet in its deliberations. One problem, of course, is that serious term papers cannot be assessed in a one-hour objective test.

In the early 1980s, when I was teaching United States History to Sophomores at the public high school in Concord, Massachusetts, each student had to write a biographical paper on one of the presidents. One boy managed to get JFK, and I loaned him a copy of Arthur Schlesinger’s One Thousand Days. He took a look at that large book and told me, “I can’t read this.” I said, “Yes, you can,” and for some reason he did it. Five or six years later, out of the blue, he called me when he was a Junior at Yale. He said he wanted to thank me for “making him” read that book, as it was the first serious nonfiction book he had ever read and it did something for his confidence that he was able to do it. Of course he had made himself read it, but it points up one of the advantages of the history term paper. Such an assignment is often the first time a high school student finds out she/he can read a nonfiction book on something important.

I used to be an alumni interviewer for Harvard College, and once I was asked to talk to a boy at one of the local suburban high schools. I interviewed him and asked him, among other things, what he thought he might major in. He said history. He did not know anything about me other than that I was an alum, and I had said nothing about my own interest in history. But when he said this, I asked him what was his favorite history book. It became clear that while he had good grades, AP scores and the like, he had not read anything but the textbooks as he went along in history, and no one had ever handed him a history book and encouraged him to read it. It seems likely that he never had to do a serious history paper either, or he would have had to read a history book or two.

Victor Henningsen, head of the history department at Phillips Academy at Andover, said (quote from Education Week article “Respected Journal Rates Student History Papers” 3/14/2001)...“There’s no substitute for the thrill that comes from choosing a topic of your own, and wrestling with a mass of evidence to answer a question that you’ve posed to craft your own narrative and your own analysis. We’ve been teaching kids to write research papers here for a long time. Kids don’t remember the Advanced Placement exam, but they do remember the papers that they’ve written, and so do I.”

Since 1987, I have been the editor of The Concord Review, a quarterly journal of history research papers by high school students. We have published 528 [1,176 in 2015] papers (average 5,000 words with endnotes and bibliography) [2015 averaging 7,400 words] by students from 42 [44] states and 33 [40] other countries. During that time, out of some 22,000 public and private high schools in the United States we are sent about 600 essays a year from which we publish eleven in each of four quarterly issues. That means that more than 21,000 high schools do not send even one history essay for consideration. While this does not prove that good long history essays are not being written at those schools, which may not know about The Concord Review, it is not an encouraging sign, in my view.

 I have only anecdotal evidence for what teachers are expecting in their high school history classes instead of research papers. I met once with the head of a history department at a public high school in New Jersey, who is very active in the National Council for History Education, and I asked him why he never sent in papers from his best students. His reply was that he didn’t have his students do history research papers any more. He had them do PowerPoint presentations and write historical fiction instead. I asked the now retired head of history at Scarsdale High School in New York why, when he had three subscriptions to The Concord Review, he still never sent any papers to be considered. He said that he didn’t assign history research papers any more, but after the AP History exam he held the Trial of James Buchanan for his part in the coming of the U.S. Civil War, and then had the students write their responses to that instead. A valedictorian (first in her class) at a high school on Long Island wrote me, when I published her essay on the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, to say that she felt weak in expository writing, because, in her words, “I attend a school where students are given few opportunities to develop their talents in this field (it is assumed students will learn how to write in college).”

I feel quite confident in saying that on the college side there is the expectation that students will learn at least the rudiments of a research paper while they are still in high school, and college humanities professors are routinely surprised (slow learners) when they find that this has not happened for their students.

Creative writing now rules at the high school (and earlier) levels in many cases. The director of the Expository Writing Program at Harvard College has said she thinks in fact that high school students do not get enough chances to write about their feelings, relationships, anxieties, hopes and dreams and that they really shouldn’t be pushed to work on history research papers until college. The National Writing Project at Berkeley, which teaches hundreds of teachers how to write about themselves each year, teaches a postmodern approach to what they call “literatures” (their quotes) and never comes within a mile of considering that students could use some work on their research skills or their nonfiction expository writing.

I have actually seen what high school students can do, and it is more like the following excerpt from an essay published in the journal (more examples are at http://www.tcr.org) (2015 current average length 7,400 words):

This passage concluded an essay written by a Junior in a public high school. She went on to major in civil engineering at Princeton, got a Ph.D. in earthquake engineering at Stanford and is now an assistant professor of engineering at Cornell:

                 “As is usually the case in extended, deeply-held disagreements, no one person or group was the cause of the split in the woman suffrage movement. On both sides, a stubborn eagerness to enfranchise women hindered the effort to do so. Abolitionists and Republicans refused to unite equally with woman suffragists. Stanton and Anthony, blinded for a while by their desperation to succeed, turned to racism, pitting blacks and women against each other at a time when each needed the other’s support most. The one thing that remains clear is that, while in some ways it helped women discover their own power, the division of forces weakened the overall strength of the movement. As a result of the disagreements within the woman suffrage movement, the 1860s turned out to be a missed opportunity for woman suffragists, just as Stanton had predicted. After the passage of the 15th Amendment, they were forced to wait another 50 years for the fulfillment of their dream.”

 The final point is that high school kids are fully capable of writing long serious history papers and they will get a lot out of doing so, both in reading nonfiction and in learning to write nonfiction. These days too many students are not being given the chance, and colleges continue to have to do what they see as remedial work in nonfiction expository writing.

Varsity Academics® is a registered trademark of The Concord Review, Inc.

 
———————--------
“Teach with Examples”
Will Fitzhugh [founder]
The Concord Review [1987]
Ralph Waldo Emerson Prizes [1995]
National Writing Board [1998]
TCR Academic Coaches [2014]
730 Boston Post Road, Suite 24
Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776-3371 USA
978-443-0022
www.tcr.org; fitzhugh@tcr.org
Varsity Academics®
tcr.org/bookstore
www.tcr.org/blog

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

HOMESCHOOLING IN CALIFORNIA

 
Studying History through the lens of The Concord Review research papers

I homeschool my son in California.  Our family has been reading and enjoying The Concord Review (TCR) History research papers for nearly two years now. This year, my son (who is a History buff) asked if he could use TCR for his History studies.  I was surprised at first but quickly realized that this would help him customize his study.

The Concord Review has published more than 1,000 serious History research papers, on a very wide variety of topics, by high school students from 44 states and 40 other countries since it started in 1987.

During the summer of 2015, I started looking at the myriad History study choices we had in the form of TCR research papers from various time periods of History. My son picked his top ten favorite research papers from the truly amazing TCR list and we were ready to roll.

Instead of learning History by Empire or Nation or even time period, my son wanted to conduct a comprehensive study by reviewing TCR articles in addition to reading the primary sources mentioned within the TCR research papers.

For my part, I chose to support his love for History by pairing his beloved TCR papers with podcasts, documentaries, museum visits etc.

I do not know how this experiment will play out but I do know that it is entirely kid-driven and we’re both excited to dive into it wholeheartedly. If you would like to contact me about this exciting TCR-focused course of study, please feel free to email me at arvinderoswal@gmail.com

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Will Fitzhugh for his enthusiastic support and commitment to TCR. [www.tcr.org; Fitzhugh@tcr.org]

Arvinder Oswal
arvinderoswal@gmail.com

Wednesday, September 9, 2015

COLLEGE BOARD LOWERS STANDARDS

THE COLLEGE BOARD LOWERS STANDARDS

Will Fitzhugh
The Concord Review
9 September 2015

The College Board and Atlantic Magazine, recently joined their forces to lower standards for academic expository writing in the English-speaking world. Although their efforts did not match in scope and daring those of groups like InBloom, Amplify, and others, they persuaded 3,000 secondary students to meet their contest guidelines. They asked for papers of less than 2,000 words, on a single document, and published the “winner,” a piece from a student in New Zealand on the benefits of Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream speech for better relations with the Maori.

High School students interested in being published in The Concord Review—the only journal in the world for the history papers of secondary students—must understand that their serious academic history research papers could not meet the guidelines for The College Board and Atlantic Magazine. Essays in the Fall 2015 issue, for example, (#106), averaged 7,400 words in length, with endnotes and bibliography, not on one speech, but on dozens of sources—books, articles, and others. Their topics included the Tape v. Hurley case in California, Abraham Lincoln’s changing attitudes about Christianity, Margaret Sanger’s fights with feminist groups of her day, Augustus’ imperial cult in Rome, varying identities among the Manchus in the Qing Dynasty, the records of women in combat in ancient Greece and China, relations among Nietzsche, Wagner and Mahler, the influence of Friedrich Hegel, Footbinding in China, the denial about AIDS in the South African government, and the development of the Socialist Parties in France.

Clearly, they were not limited to a single document or prevented from writing a paper longer than 2,000 words, as The College Board and Atlantic Magazine demanded for their submissions. Some years ago one of The Concord Review’s authors wrote:

"I am extremely honored in having my paper on Chinese Communism published in the The Concord Review. I truly thank you for providing the wonderful opportunity and motivation for students like me passionately to pursue research and history.


"I wrote this paper independently, during my own time out of school. My motives for doing so were both academic and personal. Although history has always been my favorite subject, I had never written a paper with this extensive research before. After reading the high quality of essays in The Concord Review, I was very inspired to try to write one myself. I thought it was a significant opportunity to challenge and expand my academic horizons. Thus during the summer before my Senior year, I began doing the research for my own paper.]


"Choosing the topic of Chinese Communism was not difficult. As I briefly mentioned in my biographical information, my own Chinese heritage greatly influenced me to study this subject. My own family past has been touched by the often scarring effects of Communism. For instance, my paternal great-grandmother—the wife of a landlord—was a victim of the Communists’ “authorized” land redistribution. Like many members of China’s property classes, she and my grandmother were thrown off their land and survived the next few years by begging on the streets. From the chaotic Cultural Revolution to the outrageous Tiananmen Massacre in 1989, I have often been told firsthand of the devastating effects of Communism. From all of these background experiences, a singular and upsetting question emerged in my mind: if Communism has had so many damaging effects on the Chinese people, why and how did it succeed in taking over the country in the first place? As in many cases, only the past provided the answers. It was the determination to find them that empowered me to write this paper.


"Furthermore, by choosing a topic so intimate to my own family background, I was able to experience history on a new and more exciting level. Exploring places and events which once had involved my own ancestors gave history an almost magical sense of life and vivacity. All in all, writing this paper has definitely been a rewarding experience in every way. By exploring China during the 1930s and 1940s, I am now better able to understand and bond with my grandparents (who have been constantly impressed—and a bit surprised—that their American granddaughter can tell them the exact route of the Long March).


"Next year, I will be attending Columbia University as a John Jay National Scholar—an honor given to incoming students who demonstrate a variety of achievements and independence in thinking. I plan to major in Economics-Political Science and/or East Asian Studies. Given Columbia’s excellent humanities departments, I cannot imagine a better choice for me. Needless to say, I am very excited about starting my college career, one that will no doubt be happily filled with many history classes and continued research."

Fortunately, this young lady was better prepared for college because she did not have to shrink her research and her academic expository writing in history to the dumbed-down requirements of The College Board and Atlantic Magazine. Nevertheless, by asking for and publishing the short paper they made their “winner,” these two organizations have only limited the academic horizons of the many secondary students they have been able to reach with their “contest.” Other students have been able to read, see, or hear of The Concord Review, and they know there is a place with the high academic standards that more than 1,000 of their peers from 41 countries have met since 1987, and quite a few of them still decide that they would like to meet those standards for themselves.


Will Fitzhugh
fitzhugh@tcr.org
www.tcr.org