E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American ... -...

Running head: AMERICANISM IN CONTEXT 1

Americanism in Context

E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American Heritage?

Paula J. Baumgardner

Shawnee State University

Department of Teacher Education

Advisor- Dr. Patric Leedom

March 22, 2010

Candidate for Masters of Education, Curriculum & Instruction

AMERICANISM IN CONTEXT 2

Abstract

This paper explores the alarming concern that many who graduate from schools in Scioto

County Ohio, are not adequately familiar with United States history prior to 1877 and the

United States Constitution. A three-pronged approach was conducted in order to garner

this information. One approach utilized two surveys; the second explored the Ohio

Department of Education (ODE) website. The ODE website was examined for social

studies requirement and content. Furthermore, an analysis of the Ohio Graduation Test

(OGT) was conducted. In addition to the OGT results, an Americanism test was given

by the American Legion to students in participating schools. This third approach

compared the questions and the results from this test to that of the OGT. Through these

venues, ran the common theme of change in Ohio social studies requirements.

The changes in the Ohio social studies requirements could have a tremendous

impact on the future of America. Will we, as a nation, lose our American Heritage over

time? Will we no longer have a common understanding of how this country came to be,

and why we are governed the way we are? By not exposing the next generation to the

Founders’ plan for our country, it could happen (Neal, Martin, & Moses, 2000).

According to Thomas Jefferson, “by apprising [citizens] of the past will enable them to

judge of the future; it will avail them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will

enable them to know ambition under very disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to

defeat its views” (Spalding, 2002, p. 159).

Keywords: American History, American Government, Ohio Department of Education,

Ohio Gradation Test, social studies standards, American Legion, United States

Constitution, founders, Americanism Test


Table of Contents

Abstract..............................................................................................................................2

E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American Heritage?...........................................4

Overview...........................................................................................................................5

Research Questions...........................................................................................................6

Literature Review..............................................................................................................7

Why Study our National Past?..........................................................................................7

Why Has our Educational System Changed the Teaching of our Nation’s History and

Government?...................................................................................................................11

What Impact Can/Will These Changes Likely Have on the Future of our Nation?........15

Methodology and Research Design.................................................................................21

Data Analysis and Interpretation.....................................................................................28

Analysis of Ohio Department of Education Social Studies Standards............................28

Analysis of the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT).................................................................31

OGT results per school district from various years.........................................................32

Selected questions from the OGT pertaining to this study..............................................34

Analysis of the Americanism and Government Program................................................35

Interpretation of standards applicability from the teachers’ view...................................41

Summary, Discussion, and Application..........................................................................44

Index to Appendices........................................................................................................48


E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American Heritage?

This nation is in a crisis. This consequence of this crisis could be at the expense

of every citizen of the United States of America. Each year, schools in the United States

graduate a class ignorant of American History and Government. This can have

tremendous consequences for the United States. For instance, America’s heritage could

be lost forever if students are not educated in the principles for which our forefathers

fought. Heritage, as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary (2010), is characterized by

or pertaining to the preservation or exploitation of local and national features of historical

or cultural interest. Furthermore, the rights of Americans could be usurped if Americans

are not indoctrinated in the rights and responsibilities enumerated in the Constitution.

It is imperative that this generation and subsequent generations are taught about

the development of this country and the sacrifices that were made to make it the country

that it was designed to be. Our youth need to be educated in the fundamentals of

American History and Government, particularly the Colonial and Revolutionary periods.

Moreover, students need to be taught about the great accomplishments and the failures of

this nation’s history. Without knowledge, people perish—in this case our nation will not

continue to be a free nation if our present and future generations do not have a firm

foundational understanding of the founding fathers’ principles of the United States.

James Madison, Father of the Constitution, stated the following:

A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it,

is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will

forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors,


must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives (Spalding, 2002, p.

150).

Furthermore, students need to understand the relevance of holding onto America’s

founding principles so that this country can remain as one—United States of America. It

is to this end, that all educators need to mold the children into citizens who know from

where they came, to where they are going, and the possible implications if they are not

secure in their national heritage.

Overview

The initial purpose of this project was to analyze the possible causes attributing to

students lack of knowledge in the area of American History and Government. Upon

conducting an examination of the Ohio Department of Education’s requirements for

students’ to graduate, a few issues were brought to the forefront. On the surface, it would

appear that students, for the most part, are achieving the required benchmarks according

to the results from the 2009 & 2010 Ohio Graduation Test. However, upon further

investigation, the results are misleading as far as students’ knowledge of American

History and Government.

Additional examination was conducted in regards to students participating in the

Americanism test provided by the local American Legion. The results that were collected

do not correspond with that of the OGT. It appears that there is a vast discrepancy

between the OGT results and that of the Americanism test. Additionally, a web survey

was given to teachers from the schools that participated in the Americanism test and to a

few that did not to garner more information in regards to the curricula that is taught to

Scioto County High School students (Survey Monkey). It was also conducted to analyze


students’ preparation for the Americanism test. Teachers, according to the survey, did

not prepare the students prior to taking the Americanism exam.

Through a review of the literature, this paper will reveal the importance of

teaching and learning American History and Government. In addition, a more

comprehensive investigation and analysis of the Ohio Graduation Test, the Ohio

Department of Education requirements, the Americanism test, and the survey from local

Scioto County teachers will be discussed.

Research Questions

Are Scioto County students meeting the social studies standards set by the Ohio

Department of Education?

Do the questions on the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) support these standards?

Are the questions on the OGT applicable to the founding of America and the

Constitution?

Are Scioto County students learning about the United States Constitution and

American History pertaining to the founding of the United States?


Literature Review

Articles have been written that expose the lack of education students are receiving

in American History and Government and the effects of this lack of knowledge. In a

study conducted by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, it was discovered that

many college students graduate without knowing their American heritage (Neal, Martin,

& Moses, 2000). Hess (2009) describes in his article that, “too many young Americans

do not possess the kind of basic knowledge they need. When asked fundamental

questions about U.S. history and culture, they scored a D and exhibited stunning

knowledge gaps” (p. 5).

This literature review will address some of the underlying issues in hopes of

gaining a perspective on this increasing trend.

Why study our national past?

Why has our educational system changed the teaching of our nation’s history and

government?

What impact can/will these changes in education likely have on the future of our

nation?

Why Study our National Past?

Carpenter (2004) points out that Thomas Jefferson, writer of the Declaration of

Independence and third president of the United States, “believed that the main purpose of

an educated citizenry is to serve as the basic line of defense against any encroachment on

their lives by a government” (p. 144). He continues by saying that Jefferson “thought it

important to read such political works as the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist

Papers, and the Constitution of the United States” (p. 145). Nash (2009) concurs by


stating that, “[Thomas] Jefferson, [Benjamin] Rush, and [Noah] Webster represent the

desire to use schooling to create the ‘uniform America’ and ‘to create a new unity, a

common citizenship and culture’ . . . and to create citizens who would be loyal to the new

country” (p. 419).

Noah Webster, Father of American Scholarship and Education, had the same

philosophy as the other founders in that he believed “It is an object of vast magnitude that

systems of education should be adopted and pursued which may not only diffuse a

knowledge of the sciences but may implant in the minds of the American youth the

principles of virtue and of liberty and inspire them with just and liberal ideas of

government and with an inviolable attachment to their own country” (Spalding, 2002,

pp. 149-150). James Madison believed that “The best service that can be rendered to a

Country, next to that of giving it liberty, is in diffusing the mental improvement equally

essential to the preservation, and the enjoyment of the blessing” (Spalding, 2002, p. 149).

Neal, et al. (2000) concurs by explaining, “The nation’s past unifies a people and ensures

a common civic identity (p. 4). She continues that “the importance of a shared memory

appears to have lost its foothold in higher education” and “what happens in higher

education relates directly to what happens in K-12” (2009).

Neal (2000) further advocates that, “other than our schools, no institutions bear

greater responsibility for the transmission of our heritage than colleges and universities”

(p. 7). Finally, Neal explains that, “citizens who fail to know basic landmarks of history

and civics are unlikely to be able to reflect on their meaning” and therefore, “fail to

recognize . . . the importance of preserving it” (p. 7). Spalding (2002) discusses that

founding father Benjamin Franklin had reservations if the new republic would be


preserved. After the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind

of government was created. He was quoted, “A republic, if you can keep it” (p. XIV).

Hess’s (2009) study seems to articulate the same philosophy as Neal’s. Hess

stated that, “it is vital that schools familiarize students with the history and culture that

form the shared bonds of their national community” (p. 7). Hess continues to address the

issue that our forefathers regarded comprehensive education as the schools purpose. This

is the schools’ primary mission, to “equip every young person for the responsibilities and

privileges of citizenship” (p. 7). In order to achieve this goal one must be taught “with the

historical narrative and cultural touchstones that mark our national experience, schools

provide the vocabulary for a common conversation that can render e pluribus unum” (p.

7). Spalding (2002) agrees by quoting John Adams, “. . . the longest liver of you all will

find no principles, institutions or systems of education more fit in general to be

transmitted to your posterity than those you have received from your ancestors” (p. 159).

Hess stated that, “Absent shared reference points, it may be more difficult for young

Americans . . . to find their common identity as citizens” (p. 7).

Spalding (2002) acknowledged that Thomas Jefferson believed all children should

be provided “with the skills--reading, writing, arithmetic, geography, and history—

necessary to live free and independently as adults” (p. 91). He further states that Jefferson

believed all children “must be given a civic education that instructs them in ‘their rights,

interests and duties, as men and citizens’” (p. 91). Moreover, Noah Webster believed

that, “Every child in America should be acquainted with his own country. He should

read books that furnish him with ideas that will be useful to him in life and practice. As

soon as he opens his lips, he should rehearse the history of his own country” (Spalding,


2002, p. 159). Additionally, Spalding quoted Thomas Jefferson saying, “It is the duty of

every good citizen to use all the opportunities which occur to him, for preserving

documents relating to the history of our country” (p. 159). Gutierrez (2003) emphasized,

In order for people to appreciate the legitimate claim of the polity and the society

from which the government came, they must be knowledgeable about the origins

of its professed values and beliefs. Therefore, as part of a government, civics, and

even history curriculum, the content should include historical study of the origins

of those ideals, especially in order to avoid an inaccurate or distorted

understanding of those origins” (p. 221).

Carpenter quotes Jefferson saying:

For this purpose the reading in the first stage, where they will receive their whole

education, is proposed . . . to be chiefly historical. History, by apprising them of

the past will enable them to judge the future; it will avail them of the experience

of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and

designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may

assume, and knowing it, to defeat its views (p. 141).

Carpenter (2004) continues to say, “The ultimate goal of Jefferson’s educational

plan was, of course, effective citizenship education” (p. 142). In addition, “. . . all citizen

s regardless of educational background, would be effective defenders of the new republic

against threats to their personal liberty” (p. 142).

President George Washington summed the Americanism ideology during his

farewell address:


. . . you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to

your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial,

habitual and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and

speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching

for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest

even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned, and indignantly frowning

upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our Country

from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various

parts (Spalding, 2002, p. 302).

Why Has our Educational System Changed the Teaching of our Nation’s History

and Government?

According to Neal, et al. (2000), “The abandonment of history requirements is

part of a national trend” (p. 6). She supports her statement by including a 1988 study

completed by the National Endowment for Humanities. This study indicated “that more

than 80 percent of colleges and universities permitted students to graduate without taking

a course in American history while 37 percent of those institutions allowed students to

avoid history altogether” (p. 6). Neal further explains that thirteen years later, the

percentage increased to “One hundred percent do not require American history and 78

percent require no history at all” (p. 6).

Even though Neal’s primary focus was the college level, she stated that few

students who leave high school have adequate knowledge of American history and that

“colleges and universities do nothing to close the ‘knowledge gap’” (p. 6). Robelen

(2010) concurs with Neal in that “efforts to rewrite social studies standards come as


concerns persist . . . getting squeezed out of the classroom because of the federal No

Child Left Behind Act’s emphasis on reading and math” (p. 18). In his study, Levine

(2007) found that by “ . . .limiting and sometimes eliminating civic education in schools

and concentrating primarily on marketable and measurable skills in reading, math, and

science, US educators are failing to ‘prepare the next generation of citizens with

appropriate knowledge, skills, and values’” (Bole & Gordon, 2009).

On the other hand, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), as

of 2006, claims “America’s twelfth, eighth, and especially fourth-graders know more

U.S. history now than in the past” (US Dept of Education, 2007, p. 1). This appears to be

contradictory to the Ohio Department of Education assessment results analyzed from

various years (ODE, 2010). Furthermore, the analysis reported from the NAEP does not

appear accurate when students will only need “. . . a half unit of credit in American

History and a half unit of credit in American Government” (p. 1) in order to graduate

high school. The requirement from ODE states that the “course examines the history of

the United States of America from 1877 to the present” (p. 3).

Lynne Munson, President and Executive Director of Common Core said, “Scaling

back the breadth of American history coverage in high school is a bad idea” (p. 19). Ms.

Munson continues, saying, “I do think once you’re in high school and your intellectual

development and background knowledge [have expanded], . . . you can restudy the

American past in a way that will bring more meaning than you might have been able to

glean at earlier grades” (Robelen, 2010).

In addition, the ODE, as other “proponents of the spiral curriculum, suggested

that the fifth grade go from 1492 to the War of 1812 . . .” (Stotsky, 2004, p. 27). Stotsky


continues to imply that “the average fifth grader is incapable of bringing much depth of

understanding to our basic political principles” (p. 27). Stotsky’s reasoning is supported

by the fourth component of psychologist Jean Piaget’s theory. Piaget’s fourth stage,

formal operational level of thinking, begins when children are ten or eleven. The formal

operational stage is when children have the ability to think abstractly (Byrnes, 2008,

p. 21).

In their studies, Brophy & VanSledright, 1997; Hallden, 1986; McKeown &

Beck, 1990, have found, “the essence of a comprehensive historical perspective is being

able to understanding why certain events took place and how these events affected the

course of history” (Byrnes, p. 340). Furthermore, “Given the abstract and sophisticated

nature of these principles, its should not be surprising to learn that, despite the best efforts

of teachers, students often simplify the causes of events . . .” In addition, “students

historical knowledge is often characterized by simple associations and unconnected

structures” (p. 340).

Hess’ (2009) article indicated that the change to students’ knowledge of American

history is three-fold. First, he stated, “The nation is in thrall [sic] with testing and basic

skills. We think this is a mistake” (p. 6). Hess’s concern with the Title I legislation was

that, “Congress required all states to create standards and testing, but only in reading and

mathematics” (p. 6). This new policy meant an increase in instructional time to those

areas of testing and a decrease in instructional time for history (p. 8). The second issue is

that “some children grow up in homes . . . in which parents are not conversant in

questions of history and culture . . . and that schools are especially crucial” (p. 7). Lastly,


Hess emphasizes the change in our youth’s culture. He stated, “American youth have

more schooling, money, leisure time, and information than any previous generation, yet

they devote enormous quantities of time to social networking websites, television, and

video games” (p. 7).

Waters (2005), on the other hand, believes the changes are not only due to what

students are taught, but their perception of American history is different depending on the

grade level (p. 11-12). Secondly, Waters stated that curriculum changes occur in the K-

12 level because of political correctness and that this correctness changes over time (p.

13-14). Waters concludes by stating, “Today’s textbooks will be criticized for having

omitted issues which do not seem important today” (p. 13). DeRose (2009) concurs with

Waters, stating there are “some factors affecting historical interpretation” (p. 233). For

example, “emotion and feeling can influence our perceptions of current individuals and

events” (p. 233). However, with some distance, our memories of the past will change (p.

233). However, Spalding (2002) reiterates Washington’s Farewell address stating,

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens by birth or

choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your

affections. The name AMERICAN, which belongs to you, in your national

capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation

derived from local discriminations (p. 303).

Lastly, DeRose recognized that, “As society places greater or less emphasis on certain

issues or becomes more accepting or even less tolerant of various groups or conditions,

we might reinterpret the past to conform to these new social standards” (p. 233).


On the other hand, Stotsky (2004) presented that, “The history of Western

political thought is diminishing because of the comparative sociocultural approach now

frequently used for the study of history” (p. 28). She continues, saying, “In effect,

sociocultural approaches tend to obliterate the origins and development of our civic

culture, to devalue the groups that advanced individual rights and to create sympathy for

cultures, extinct or not, that don’t value individual rights” (p. 28).

Another concern Stotsky (2004) addresses is that teachers are not adequately

trained. She states that:

In an application for a Teaching American History (TAH) grant from one of the

wealthiest counties in the country, school officials provided a chart showing that

52 percent of its eighth grade U.S. history teachers have neither a history nor a

social studies license, that 38 percent of its ninth grade U.S. history teachers have

neither a history nor a social studies license, and that a whopping 86 percent of

the English as a Second Language teachers who teach U.S. history classes for

ESL students at eight county high schools have not had a single course in U.S.

history (p. 21).

What Impact Can/Will These Changes Likely Have on the Future of our Nation?

Neal, et al. (2000) addresses three issues that these changes can have. First, “As

we move forward into the 21st century, our future leaders are graduating with an alarming

ignorance of their heritage—a kind of collective amnesia—and a profound historical

illiteracy which bodes ill for the future of the republic” (p. 4). Secondly, if these

“graduates leave school without knowing the foundations of American society, children

they teach will certainly do no better” (p. 7). Lastly, Neal quotes novelist Milan Kundera


stating, “If you want to destroy a country, destroy its memory. If a hostile power wanted

to erase America’s civic heritage, it could hardly do a better job—short of actually

prohibiting the study of American history” (p. 6). Samuel Adams, Founding Father,

projected a similar thought. He stated:

No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued,

when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when

People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink

under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders. (Spalding, 2002, p.

150)

Novak (2002) supports Neal by stating, “People are willing to kill us just for

being Americans. So we ought at least to know what being American is. Yet many of

our students have been taught painfully little about our nation’s history, purposes, or

achievements” (p. 32).

Hess (2009) made an interesting discovery. He conducted a telephone survey

asking simple multiple-choice questions of 1,200 17-year-olds about United States

history. Hess discovered that, “teens on the cusp of adulthood earned a D overall” (p.

16). He further states, “A deep lack of knowledge is neither humorous nor trivial . . . also

affects our contribution as a democratic citizen” (p. 6). He continues by saying, “Any

reform idea that diminished the ability of schools and teacher to provide students with

such an education is narrowing children’s futures, not expanding them” (p. 6).

Alabama Senator Jeff Sessons agrees by saying, “At the root of this despicable

failure to grasp the ‘unique . . . blessings we experience as Americans,’ is mass ignorance

about the American Constitution and the Founding Fathers, encouraged by insufficiently


patriotic educators” (Street, 2003, p. 282). Sessons supports this claim by citing the

Department of Education’s report , “sixty percent of U.S. high school students lack ‘basic

knowledge of American history’ and ‘two thirds don’t even know that the first ten

amendments to the U.S. Constitution are called the Bill of Rights’” (Street, 2003, p. 283).

Kovacs (2009) wrote about a survey conducted by the John S. and James L. Knight

Foundation. “The project surveyed more than 100,000 high school students, nearly 8,000

teachers and more than 500 administrators and principals” (p. 14). The results were

astounding. “Given that the First Amendment is one of the bedrocks of U.S. democracy,

their report is not encouraging: 49% of students believed that the government should

regulate newspapers; 35% of students believed that the First Amendment goes too far in

the rights it guarantees; an additional 21% did not know enough about the First

Amendment to state an opinion” (p. 14).

Shenkman (2008) states that, “Polls over the past three decades measuring

Americans’ knowledge of history show . . . dismal results” (p. 20). He gave a few

staggering numbers that emphasized the grave reality of this increasing trend. For

example, “In 1991, Americans were asked how long the term of U.S. senator is. Just 25

percent correctly answered six years” (p. 20). He furthers this point by emphasizing that

“only 20 percent know that there are 100 senators” (p. 20). Amazingly, only 40 percent

of “Americans . . . can correctly identify and name the three branches of government” (p.

20).

Shenkman indicated, “What is needed is specifically an emphasis on civics.

Studies show that people who know civics are less easily manipulated by politicians”


(p. 177). He further emphasizes that “The time has arrived when we need to restore

civics to school curricula.” He continues saying, “This is an argument in favor of doing

more civics, not less” (p. 178). Bole & Gordon (2009) concur by “Calling for renewed

attention to civics in public education and informed access to the democratic practice of

deliberative democracy, a case is made for developing the kind of democratic minds

capable and confident in engaged citizenship” (p. 274). Levine (2007) believes that “at

the core of civil society is the art and practice of participation” (p. 21). Bole & Gordon

agree “The kind of participation that nurtures a sense and vision of shared purpose”

(p. 274).

“In the country that gave birth to Jefferson’s conception of an educated citizenry,

[schools], colleges and universities are failing to provide the kind of general education

that is needed for graduates to be involved and educated citizens” (Neal, et al. 2000, p. 6).

Thomas Jefferson’s quote, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of

civilization, it expects what never was and never will be” (Shenkman, 2008, p. 13) is very

profound considering the future of America.

Conclusion

The articles’ common theme in regards to American History and Government is

the fact that many Americans are not firmly grounded in their American heritage and

governmental foundations. Several factors contribute to these deficiencies in the

educational system. However, two things are certain, America had an influential past and

American history is always changing. Every day historical events occur. The challenge

arises when we have to decide what is significant enough to place in American history

curriculum, what is to be removed, and what is to be tested. We are made up of a diverse


people, ideologies, and preexisting beliefs of our American history. It will always be a

battle among those in charge of our curriculum and who presents the material as to how

our children will learn and to what extent the material will influence them. According to

Neal (2000), “The most direct solution is a strong curriculum, with a broad-based

rigorous course on American history required of all students. The course should include

the breadth of American history, from the colonial period to the present” (p. 8). This will

not only give the students a “sense of where the country has been, but what it has meant”

(p. 8).

“Our first task is to return to teaching Americans about America and teaching

immigrants how to become Americans. Until we re-establish a legitimate moral and

cultural standard, our civilization is at risk” (Nash, 2001, p. 42). Stotsky (2004) concurs

by stating, “No student should graduate from an American high school without an upper-

high-school level understanding of such basic political principles as limited government,

consent of the people, checks and balances, and an independent judiciary” (p. 30).

Gutierrez (2003) also agrees that it is important to “teach the constitutional foundations

of the American people as defined by the founding generation” (p. 236). In addition,

Gutierrez believes, “. . . a theoretical foundation that is part of our political and cultural

heritage seems to be worthwhile place to start in building a renewed commitment to our

commonwealth” (p. 240). Levine (2007) said that “. . . the most viable potential

approaches for maintaining unity in diversity in the US are crystallized in the call for

reawakening civic engagement and the return to teaching the responsibilities of

citizenship in democracy” (p. 21).


Spalding (2002) quoted Joseph Story’s urgency of passing the American legacy to

the next generation:

Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought

by the toils, and sufferings, and blood on their ancestors; and capable, if wisely

improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the

substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion

and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate

skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful, as well

as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are

impregnable from without. It has been reared for immorality, if the work of man

may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the

folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE (p. 231).


Methodology and Research Design

The purpose of this research was to garner evidence of students’ knowledge of

America’s foundation. This research was conducted from diversity of venues. This paper

is designed to analyze data collected from the Ohio Department of Education website,

data collected and analyzed from the Americanism and Government Test Program and an

analysis of a survey from local Scioto County social studies educators.

Many facets of the Ohio Department of Education’s website were explored. First,

a search was conducted by analyzing the social studies standards for high school students.

As is written in the Social Studies Model Curriculum Development (ODE, 2010), the

social studies standards were organized into seven strands as of 2002. These seven

strands consisted of History, People in Societies, Geography, Economics, Government,

Citizenship Rights and Responsibilities, and Social Studies Skills and Methods (2010).

The focus of this study will be confined to American History and Government that

intertwine amidst the seven strands.

Next, an analysis of the Academic Content Standards Revision of High School

Social Studies Course Syllabi (ODE, 2010) was conducted. The American History and

American Government syllabi were thoroughly analyzed for content and for the historical

timeframe that was applicable to this study. It was relevant to this research to determine

the grade levels when high school students are required to take American History and

Government. Moreover, it was pertinent to this study as to what type of history and what

time era’s students learn this information.


A further examination consisted of determining the number of credits students

need for American History and Government to graduate high school. First, one must

understand what a ‘credit’ measures. The Carnegie Unit

was developed in 1906 as a measure of the amount of time a student has studied a

subject. For example, a total of 120 hours in one subject—meeting 4 or 5 times a

week for 40 to 60 minutes, for 36 to 40 weeks each year—earns the student one

"unit" of high school credit (Carnegie Institute, 2010).

Additionally, the social studies portion of the Ohio Graduation Test was collected

and analyzed from the years 2005 through 2010. The focus was on schools located

within Scioto County Ohio. These schools included: Bloom-Vernon, Clay, East

(Sciotoville Community), Green, Minford, New Boston (Glenwood), Northwest,

Portsmouth, Valley, West (Portsmouth West) and Wheelersburg. The researcher

analyzed the average scores taken from the item analysis portion pertaining to social

studies for each year from 2005-2010. Percentages of passage rates are located in table

3.1 for reference. Individual school charts are available in Appendix B.


Table 3.1


A detailed analysis was conducted within the OGT results. Questions significant

to this study were collected and analyzed from the OGT from the years 2005-2010. The

Ohio Department of Education publishes the OGT questions and its results on a yearly

basis. It is important to note that this portion of the analysis pertains to all students

tested in the state of Ohio. ODE did not conduct an item analysis per question for each

school district. Each question relevant to American History and Government was

evaluated, though under the OGT, the categories were listed as Citizenship, Government,

and History. After the questions were analyzed for significance to this study, the percent

responding correctly per question was documented for further evaluation. See table 3.2

for reference.


Table 3.2

After the initial investigation into the Ohio Department of Education website,

further queries were raised. An extensive email was sent in mid-January to all social

studies coordinators for clarification about the OGT and American History/Government

requirements.


Another approach to finding students’ knowledge of American History and

Government was an analysis of the 2010 Americanism and Government Test. The

Americanism and Government Test is provided by local American Legion Post

representatives every year. It is given to over 90,000 students in Ohio. The American

Legion provides “an opportunity for the high school student to evaluate himself, or

herself, in American government and history” (American Legion, 2010). The purpose

of the National Americanism Commission of the American Legion is to “realize in the

United States the basic ideal of this Legion of 100 per cent Americanism through the

planning, establishment and conduct of a continuous, constructive educational system

designed to:

(1) Combat all anti-American tendencies, activities and propaganda;

(2) Work for the education of immigrants, prospective American citizens and

alien residents in the principles of Americanism;

(3) Inculcate the ideal of Americanism in the citizen population, particularly the

basic American principle that the interests of all the people are above those of

any special interest or any so-called class or section of the people;

(4) Spread throughout the people of the nation the information as to the real

nature and principles of American government;

(5) Foster the teachings of Americanism in all schools (American Legion,

1997).”

The American Legion publishes a Manual that defines Americanism as: “[the]

love of America; loyalty to her institutions as the best yet devised [by] man to secure life,


liberty, individual dignity, and happiness; and the willingness to defend our country and

Flag against all enemies, foreign and domestic” (1997).

In the fall of 2010, an interview was conducted with Susan Frasher. Ms. Frasher

is the Scioto County district representative of the American Legion. She explained the

process of how the Americanism and Government Test is distributed and collected. She

further explained the purpose of the exam and the benefits of student participation. In

November 2010, she distributed the Americanism and Government Test to the following

schools: East (Sciotoville Community), Green, New Boston (Glenwood), Northwest,

Notre Dame, Portsmouth, Valley, West (Portsmouth West), and Wheelersburg.

Minford, Bloom-Vernon, and Clay had chosen not to participate. There were a total of

523 participants. The students represented 79 ninth graders, 80 tenth graders, 81 eleventh

graders, and 283 twelfth graders.

In December 2010, the Americanism and Government Tests were collected and

analyzed. The first factor was to examine the test for content. Each question was

analyzed for relevance to this project. Fifteen of the 50 questions were collected for data

analysis. The second factor was to establish categories for review and comparison. A

document was created for recording the students’ school district, grade level, gender, and

response to each question. Tally marks were placed in the correct or incorrect column

per question. These tally marks were then converted to percentages per question.


Data Analysis and Interpretation

Analysis of Ohio Department of Education Social Studies Standards

The primary element of the analysis was to determine the content standards for

American History and American Government. In addition to the content standards, an

inquiry was made into how many credits of social studies one needed for graduation and

when the students take American History and American Government. This review

incorporated the assets on the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) website and was

conducted between the months of June 2010 to January 2011.

At the time of this research, the ODE was in the process of revising the standards

for social studies requirements. It is important to define and interpret these changes for

the benefit of this study. The 2002 standards will be discussed in this part of the analysis.

The 2010 Academic Content Standards Revision will be discussed in the Summary,

Discussion, and Application section of this paper. See Appendix A for the 2002

Academic Content Standards for socials studies grades 9-12.

According to the 2002 Academic Content Standards, the content for grades 9-12

was organized into grade bands. Grades 9-10 were a band and grades 11-12 were a band.

Within each band, these academic content standards direct the overarching goals and

themes. The seven standards include: History, People in Societies, Geography,

Economics, Government, Citizens Rights and Responsibilities, and Social Studies Skills

and Methods. Under each was a list of benchmarks students needed to achieve. These

benchmarks were to monitor progress toward the academic content standard. Lastly,

indicators were included within each benchmark. The indicators determined what


students should know and be able to do at each grade level. History and Government

benchmarks were analyzed in this study. See table 4.1 for reference.

Table 4.1


(ODE, 2002)

It is interesting to note that neither grades 9-10 benchmarks nor grades 11-12

benchmarks discuss American History prior to 1877. Nowhere do the benchmarks

discuss the discovery of the United States, the Revolutionary War, the Founding Fathers,

or the struggles of implementing the United States Constitution. It appears students are

taught American History beginning with the Industrial Revolution. A Center on

Educational Policy (CEP) collected surveys from all fifty states which showed that,

“Thirty-three percent of the districts . . . reported reducing social studies in response to

high-stakes testing” (Au, 2009, p. 47). It is probable that this reduction in American

History content in the classroom is directly attributable to OGT standards and constraints.

After collecting the data from ODE in regards to the social studies content, further

clarification was needed. An extensive email was sent to all social studies coordinators

in mid-January 2011. The social studies coordinators were asked to clarify information

in regards to the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) and more specifically American History

prior to 1877 and The United States Constitution. The first inquiry was why high school

students learn American History beginning with 1877. According to one of the

coordinators:

While Ohio’s 2002 social studies academic content standards include the study of

American history from 1877 to the present, local districts are not obligated to

have their local curricula conform to this time period. However, local districts

should be cognizant of the requirements for passing the OGT when designing

local curricula and be satisfied that their instructional programs will prepare

students for success on the state assessments. It behooves districts to provide


instruction about American History from 1877 to the present since the OGT is

based upon that time period. (Muthig, 2011)

Further inquiry persisted about the required social studies credits students need

for graduation. Mr. Muthig (2011) replied, “The decision as to the length of instruction

beyond what is necessary to earn the state-mandated credits in social studies is left up to

the local districts. Districts must offer at least one-half credit of American history and

one-half credit of American government for students to graduate.” Mr. Muthig did say

that local districts could offer more credit if more instruction is provided.

Another area of needed clarification was to determine when students learn about

the foundation of America. Mr. Muthig (2011) responded by stating:

The decision about when to teach students about the foundation of America is left

up to local districts. In the 2002 social studies academic content standards this

topic is addressed in grades five and eight. Once again, school districts need to be

cognizant of the state’s assessment program, which includes assessments

addressing this topic at grades five and eight.

When asked about students learning the U.S. Constitution, he explained, “In the

2002 social studies academic content standards, this topic is addressed in grades five and

eight” (2011). Lastly, Mr. Muthig clarified when most high school students take

American History and Government as being “. . .tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grades

depending on local district programs” (2011).

Analysis of the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT)

The Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) was analyzed for results from the years 2005

through 2010. The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) website provides the test


questions and the results. The focus of this study was isolated to the social studies

component. Three elements of the exam were specifically analyzed. First, the scores for

each school district in Scioto County were extracted. Second, questions pertaining to the

U.S. Constitution and questions specifically designed toward American History prior to

1877 were culled for evaluation. Third, student responses to those specific questions

were collected for study. The ODE provides an item analysis that reports how students

score on each question. This item analysis is not broken apart for each school district. It

is a collection of scores from all students tested in Ohio.

Scioto County has eleven school districts that partake in the Ohio Graduation Test

(OGT). It is important to reiterate that the social studies portion of the Ohio Graduation

Test is comprised of various questions that pertain to the different courses of social

studies. For example, students were tested on material relevant to history, government,

economics, geography, people in societies, citizenship rights and responsibilities, and

social studies skills and methods. A comparison of the OGT results from Scioto County

schools from various years will be discussed. See Appendix B for OGT by school, year,

and passage rates.

OGT results per school district from various years.

Bloom-Vernon school district, located in South Webster, Ohio, averaged 78.2%

between the years 2005-2010. In 2006, they averaged 74.7%. However, the school

district scored better on the March 2010 test; they scored 82.9%, this is a slight increase

from the year before which was 81.7%.


Clay school district, which is located in Portsmouth, Ohio, averaged 82.4%

between the years 2005-2010. In 2007, the OGT score was 75.4%. However, in 2009

Clay rebounded to 88.9%. On the March 2010 test, Clay dropped ten percent to 78.9%.

Sciotoville Community School (East), located in Sciotoville, Ohio, averaged, 74%

on the OGT between the years 2005-2010. March 2005 was the highest scoring year,

which was 79%. However, in March 2006, the average score for East was 68%.

Green Local school district, located in Franklin Furnace, Ohio, averaged 78%

between the years 2005-2010. The highest scoring year was March 2006 in which the

OGT score was 86%. The OGT result from 2005 was much lower. Green scored 71.7%.

Minford Local school district, located in Minford, Ohio, averaged 78% between

the years 2005-2010. Minford’s highest scoring year was March 2010; the score was

80.6%. On the other hand, they scored 69.4% in March 2008.

New Boston school district, located in New Boston, Ohio, averaged 77.9%

between the years 2005-2010. New Boston scored 88.5% March 2009 and 65.6% March

2007.

Northwest school district, located in McDermott, Ohio, averaged 70.1% between

the years 2005-2010. Northwest scored 84.8% in March 2009; however, dropped almost

ten percent the following year. March 2005 was their lowest scoring year, which was

60.2%.

Portsmouth school district, located in Portsmouth, Ohio, averaged 60% between

the years 2005-2010. The highest scoring year for Portsmouth was 2006, which was

73.9%. Portsmouth’s lowest scoring year was 2008 in which the OGT score was 54.8%.


Valley local school district, located in Lucasville, Ohio, averaged 80.1% between

the years 2005-2010. Their highest scoring year was March 2006 with a 91.2% average.

In March 2005, Valley scored 69.4%.

Portsmouth West, located in West Portsmouth Ohio, averaged 71.8% between the

years 2005-2010. West scored their highest (81.7%) in March 2009 and their lowest

(63.3%) in March 2005.

Wheelersburg local school district, located in Wheelersburg, Ohio, averaged 86%

on the OGT between the years 2005-2010. Wheelersburg scored its highest, 90.7%, for

the year 2008 and 76.9% for its lowest in 2007.

Selected questions from the OGT pertaining to this study.

There are approximately 135,000 students who take the Ohio Graduation Test

(OGT) in the state of Ohio on a yearly basis. This exam is given to all sophomores and to

those who did not pass certain portions of the test on prior attempt(s). The social studies

portion of the exam consists of 44 questions. “Of these items, 38 are counted as part of a

student’s test score and six are included for field testing purposes. Of the scored items,

there are 32 multiple-choice items, four short-answer items, and two extended-response

items” (Muthig, 2011).

Questions relevant to American History prior to 1877 and American Government,

specifically the United States Constitution between the years of 2005-2009 were

analyzed. The 2010 OGT questions were not published at the time of this research.

The March 2005 OGT had four questions applicable to this study. Students were

asked questions about restrictions against free speech, authority in government, voting

rights, and Rousseau’s Social Contract in which he examined ideas about majority will


and the common good. In the 2006 OGT, students were asked about the branches of

government and their relationships, another question about Locke and Rousseau, voting

rights, and freedom of the press. On the March 2007 OGT, there were only two

questions pertinent to this study. These questions related specifically to the 1st, 19th, and

26th amendments. The March 2008 OGT had five questions relevant to this study.

These questions dealt with the 18th and 19th amendments and ratification, as well as the

court decision, Brown v. Board of Education, and different forms of government --

theocracy, democracy, constitutional monarchy, and a dictatorship. Students also needed

know how citizens could achieve governmental change.

The March 2009 OGT had six questions applicable to this study. Freedom of the

press, governmental change, and forms of government were queried. Further, Plessy v.

Ferguson and the 14th Amendment, the Enlightenment thinkers and the leaders of the

American Revolution and, again, students were asked about the 19th Amendment.

As is common with any standardized test, the student response varied greatly

year-to-year and question-by-question. Probably some of the more significant concerns

raised from the evaluation include the dominance of the 19th amendment, student

ignorance on rights enumerated in the 1st amendment, and the focus on court cases and

the enlightenment thinkers. One must wonder where students are supposed to learn the

details of the Enlightenment if American History is not taught prior to the Industrial

period.

Analysis of the Americanism and Government Program

The Americanism test is a product of the American Legion. It was created in

Ohio in 1963 as an expansion of the American Legion Essay Contest (American Legion,


2010). The Americanism and Government Test is given to participating public, private,

and parochial high schools during the first week of November. The test is given to

grades 9, 10, 11, & 12; however, grade 9 is excluded from winning the contest (American

Legion, 2010). There are six state winners, one boy and one girl each in grades 10, 11, &

12. The winners have the opportunity to take an all expense paid, five-day trip to

Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C. Furthermore, students who score a

100% will receive a United States Savings Bond. Once a student has been selected as a

winner, he/she will be ineligible to take the test in the future (American Legion, 2010).

Each student participating in the Americanism and Government Program takes the

same test. Students are given one hour to complete the exam. The test is comprised of

five true or false questions and 45 multiple choice questions pertaining to the United

States Flag, United States Constitution, Declaration of Independence, federal

government, state government, county government, city government, township

government and school government. In addition, there is a 300-word essay that is used in

case of a tie (American Legion, 2010).

For this paper, questions pertaining to the United States Constitution, Declaration

of Independence, and the federal government will be discussed. There were fifteen

questions that were analyzed for this study. For simplification, these questions were

categorized into three areas. There were three questions pertaining to the amendments,

four questions about the founding documents and historical trivia, and eight questions

concerning the three branches of the federal government.

The schools and number of participants from Scioto County, Ohio were: East-19

(Sciotoville Community School), Glenwood-16 (New Boston), Green-31, Northwest-4,


Notre Dame-21 (parochial school), Portsmouth-80, Portsmouth West-15, Valley-13,

Wheelersburg-84. It is important to note that Minford Local Schools, Clay Local

Schools, and South Webster School (Bloom-Vernon) chose not to participate in the test.

There were 79 freshmen, 80 sophomores, 81 juniors, and 283 seniors that participated in

the 2010 Americanism Test. The responses from the seniors will be the focus of this

paper. Refer to Appendix C for Americanism elements.

The first category of questions was relevant to the amendments of the United

States Constitution. Students were asked, “Through what amendment do 18 year olds

have the right to vote?” Surprisingly, only 45% of the students knew it was the 26th

Amendment. Northwest was the only school that had a perfect score. Valley was the

second highest, at 77%. The other schools scored 55% and below. The next amendment

question pertained to minorities right to vote that is protected by the 15th Amendment.

Only thirty-five percent of the students answered correctly. The school scoring the

highest was Valley; they scored 77%. Northwest came in a close second at 75%. All

other schools scored 43% and below.

The last question relevant to the amendments was a true or false question. The

question was: The amendment of the United States Constitution, which covers elections

and voting, has created provisions to vote through the Internet. Seventy-six percent

answered false. Valley was the only school that scored perfectly. The other schools

scored in between the 70%-80%. However, East and Glenwood had a 66% average and

Portsmouth West scored 53%.

The second category was pertinent to the founding documents and historical

trivia. Astonishingly, only 74% of the students knew that Thomas Jefferson was the


author of the Declaration of Independence. Northwest and Valley were the only schools

that scored 100%. Wheelersburg, Green, and Portsmouth West scored an average of

83%. Glenwood and Portsmouth averaged 66%. East and Notre Dame scored a

staggering 50.5% average. Even more surprising is that only 61% of the students knew

that Preamble to the Constitution. Northwest, East, and Wheelersburg were the highest

scoring schools. Their combined score was 73%. Portsmouth West and Glenwood had a

combined average of 61%. The other scores were in the 50-percentile range.

For the historical trivia portion of the test, students scored an over-all average of

78% when asked what the official National Anthem of the United States is. Three

schools scored perfectly; they were Glenwood, Northwest, and Valley. East, Portsmouth

West, and Wheelersburg had a combined average of 86%. Portsmouth and Notre Dame

averaged 72.5%. Green is the only school that scored below average; they scored 54%.

The last question for this category asked what father and son have served as President

(other than the Bush’s). Astoundingly, only 53% knew it was John Adams & John

Quincy Adams. Again, Northwest and Valley scored perfectly. Portsmouth West was

the second highest at 67%. All other schools scored 58% and below.

The third category pertained to first three articles of the United States Constitution

—the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. Three questions

pertained to the legislative branch. On the first question, seventy-three percent of the

students knew that the U.S. House of Representatives could change as a result of the

2010 U.S. Census. Northwest, again, scored 100%. Portsmouth West, Valley, and

Wheelersburg averaged 86%. East, Glenwood, Green, and Portsmouth averaged 67%.

Notre Dame scored 38%.


The next question pertained to how many senators Ohio has. Seventy-three

percent answered correctly. Once again, Northwest had a perfect score. Notre Dame,

Portsmouth West, Valley, and Wheelersburg averaged 86%. Portsmouth scored 66%.

Glenwood, Green, and East scored below 56%. When the students where asked what

branch the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives forms, amazingly, only

76% knew that it is the legislative branch of the government. Northwest, once again,

answered perfectly. Valley and Wheelersburg had an 85% average. East, Green and

Notre Dame averaged 75%. Glenwood, Portsmouth, and Portsmouth West scored 68%.

There were three questions relevant to the executive branch. The first questions

implied that the first lady had some prescribed duties that are outlined in the Constitution.

, 56% of the students believe she has responsibilities in the executive branch. Northwest

and Valley scored 100%. Portsmouth West had a score of 87%. Surprisingly, all other

schools scored 65% and below.

On the second question relevant to the executive branch, students did not score

well. The questioned asked: By virtue of the office, the vice president of the United

States also serves as . . . . Disappointingly, only 38% knew that the vice president also

serves as the president of the senate. Northwest school district was the only school to

score 100%. East, Portsmouth West, and Valley averaged 64%. Portsmouth and

Wheelersburg averaged 35%. Glenwood, Green, and Notre Dame averaged 22.9%. On

the last question, students had a better score. The students were asked how many years a

president can serve in a term. Eighty-four percent of the students were able to correctly

answer four years. Three schools had a perfect score—East, Northwest, and Portsmouth

West. Green and Valley had the lowest score, which was an average of 77%.


Students were then asked two questions pertinent to the judicial branch. The first

questioned asked how long justices serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Surprisingly, only

60% knew it is for life. Northwest scored perfectly. Portsmouth West and Valley scored

an average of 92.5%. East scored 84%. The other schools scored 61% and below. The

last question asked: The final authority to determine the constitutionality of the laws of

the United States is vested in the . . . Troubling, only 62% of the students knew that the

U.S. Supreme Court is the final authority. Portsmouth West and Valley scored the

highest at an average of 82.5%. Northwest and Wheelersburg averaged 74%. East,

Glenwood, and Notre Dame had the lowest average score of 45%.

Table 4.2 below shows the comparison of the Americanism test to that of the

OGT. The over-all average of the Americanism test is 67% and the over-all average of

the OGT is 78%. It is interesting that Northwest and Valley did substantially better on

the Americanism test than the OGT. On the other hand, Glenwood, Green, Portsmouth,

and Wheelersburg did better on the OGT than the Americanism test. One must wonder

why some schools scored better on one test and not the other and vice-versa.

Furthermore, one must wonder about the underlying cause(s) that can explain these

alarming scores.


Table 4.2

Interpretation of standards applicability from the teachers’ view

An informal survey of Scioto County Social Studies teachers was conducted via

Survey Monkey, as variance in program by school became apparent. Teachers were asked

when most of their students take American History and/or Government. Seventy-three

percent of the students in Scioto County take American History during their sophomore

year. As for Government, 82% of the students take the class during their senior year.

I furthered my investigation by asking when do their students learn about the

founding of our nation. The responses varied. Thirty-four percent responded that


learning about the foundation begins from 1800-present. Another 33% responded that

learning begins from the time period of 1492-1620. It is interesting to point out that 17%

of the teachers were not sure when their schools taught about the founding of our nation.

The second question was to find out how many credits each school offered for

American History and Government. The participants of the survey said that their schools

offer one credit for American History and one credit for Government. It was interesting

to discover that 80% of those who responded said that their students take American

History and Government for a full year. The other 20% said their students take the two

courses for half a year each.

When the teachers were asked if the changes that ODE has made in regards to

teaching students American History from 1877-present, would have an impact on future

generations, surprisingly, only 67% said that yes, it would have an impact. The response

to the next question was just as intriguing. Participants were asked how many questions

were on the OGT in regards to the United States Constitution and American history prior

to 1800. Five teachers said there are between 0-5 questions pertaining to the Constitution

and the other five teachers said there are 6-10 questions about the Constitution.

According to Mr. Muthig (ODE), the kinds of Constitutional questions vary from year to

year. Eight teachers said there are between 0-5 questions pertaining to American history

prior to 1800 and two teachers said there are 6-10 questions on the 2010 test. According

to Muthig, there are no questions on the OGT pertaining to American history prior to

1800 (2010).

The next question was in regards to how much time is dedicated to the study of

the United States Constitution. Forty-five percent said they devote 3-4 weeks. Thirty-


three percent said they spend 1-2 weeks and twenty-two percent said that 5+ weeks were

devoted to the study of the constitution.

Teachers were then asked if their students participated in the Americanism test. If

so, did their students have prior knowledge to the questions. One teacher said, “The

students were given study questions, which are provided by the American Legion. The

studying that they were to do was completed on their own time. Therefore, I do not know

how long students studied.” It is important to point out that this teacher is from

Northwest school district. A teacher from Portsmouth responded by saying, “No, the

students did not have prior knowledge of the types of questions on the test. The students

did not study or review for the test.”

Questions from the survey with the responses are located in Appendix D.

Furthermore, the study guide to the Americanism test is located in Appendix C. The

study guide is from the website of the American Legion in Indiana. A study guide from

the American Legion in Ohio could not be found via website. However, the questions on

the Ohio Americanism test are similar to those asked on the study guide from the Indiana

American Legion.


Summary, Discussion, and Application


References

American Legion. (2010). “Americanism and Government test.” In The Chronicles of the

American Legion.

American Legion. (1997). “Americanism Manual.” The National Americanism

Commission. The American Legion. Indianapolis, IN.

Au, W. (2009). Social Studies, Social Justice: W(h)ither the Social Studies in High-

Stakes Testing? Teacher Education Quarterly.

Bole, B. & Gordon, M. (2009). E Pluribus Unum: fostering a new era of citizenship by

teaching civic engagement and healthy civic discourse. Journal of Public Affairs,

9, 273-287. doi: 10.1002

Byrnes, J. P. (2008). Cognitive Development and Learning in Instructional Contexts.

Boston, MA. Pearson Education, Inc.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2010). Retrieved from

http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/faqs

Carpenter, J. J. (2004). Jefferson’s Views on Education: Implications for Today’s Social

Studies. The Social Studies, 140-146.

DeRose, J. J. (2009). Back to the Future with Textbooks: Using Textbook Passages

from the Past to Help Teach Historiography. The History Teacher, 42(2), 229-

237.

Gutierrez, R. (2003). Our Federalist Roots: A Neglected Past? National Council for the

Social Studies, 31(2), 218-242.


Heritage, Second edition, 1989; online version November 2010.

<http://www.oed.com:80/Entry/86230>; accessed 15 February 2011. Earlier

version first published in New English Dictionary, 1898.

Hess, F. M. (2009). Still At Risk: What Students Don’t Know, Even Now. Arts

Education Policy Review, 110(2), 5-20.

Kovacs, P. (2009). Education for Democracy: it is Not an Issue of Dare; It Is an Issue of

Can. Teachers Education Quarterly, 36(1), 9-23.

Levine, P. (2007). The Future of Democracy: Developing the Next Generation of

American Citizens. Tufts University Press: Lebanon, NH.

Muthig, W. (2011). Personal communication. January 18, 2011.

Nash, G. B. (2001). The History Standards Controversy and Social History. Journal of

Social History, 29(1), 41-49.

Nash, M. A. (2009). Contested Identities: Nationalism, Regionalism, and Patriotism in

Early American Textbooks. History of Education Quarterly, 49(4), 417-441.

Neal, A. D., Martin, J. L., Moses, M. (2000). Losing America’s Memory: Historical

Illiteracy in the 21st Century. American Council of Trustees and Alumni, 4-32.

Novak, M. (2002). A Reckoning. Academic Questions, 16(1), 32-38.

Ohio Department of Education. (2010). Academic Content Standards Revision High

School Social Studies Course Syllabi, 1-21.

Ohio Department of Education. (2010). OGT Results 2005-2010. Retrieved October 14,

2010 and January 21, 2011 from

http://webapp1.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency_reports/ogt/csvtoasp.


Robelen, E. W. (2010). Rewriting of States’ Standards on Social Studies Stirs Debate.

Education Week, 29(27), 18-19.

Savage, T. V. (2003). Assessment and quality social studies. The Social Studies, 94(5),

201-206.

Shenkman, R. (2008). Just How Stupid Are We? New York, NY: Basic Books.

Spalding, M. (2002). The Founders’ Almanac. Washington, D.C. The Heritage

Foundation.

Street, P. (2003). By All Means, Study the Founders: Notes from the Democratic Left.

The Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 25, 281-301. doi:

10.1080/10714410390251093

Stotsky, S. (2004). When History Teacher Forget the Founding. Academic Questions,

17(3), 21-31.

SurveyMonkey. Retrieved data January 2011 from

http://www.surveymonkey.com/MySurveys.aspx.

U.S. Department of Education. (2007) The Nation’s Report Card. U.S. History. National

Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). 2006. 1-32.

Waters, T. (2005). Why students think there are two kinds of American history.

The History Teacher, 39(1), 11-21.


Index to Appendices

Appendix A – ODE social studies content standards ...........................................48

Appendix B – OGT by school, year, and passage rates.........................................60

Appendix C – Americanism elements...................................................................66

Appendix D – Survey information and results......................................................76

Index to Tables

Table 3.1 – Six years of OGT scores.....................................................................23

Table 3.2 – OGT Item Analysis.............................................................................25

Table 4.1 – Academic Content Standards Benchmarks.........................................29

Table 4.2 –Americanism Test compared to OGT………………………………..41


Appendix A – OGT social studies content standards – A1


Appendix B – OGT by school, year, and passage rates – B1


Appendix C –

Americanism participation – C1


Appendix C – Americanism participation – C2



4. The official National Anthem of the United States is “America the Beautiful”.

Right78%

Wrong22%

Q4

6. Any Ohio High School student, who is 18 years old, is allowed the right to vote in the 2010 November general election through the ____ amendment of the United States Constitution.

Right45%

Wrong

55%

Q6

7. The right of minorities to vote in the 2010 November general election in Ohio is protected by the _____ amendment to the United States Constitution.

Right

35%

Wrong

65%

Q7



8. The amendment of the United States Constitution, which covers elections and voting, has created provisions to vote through the Internet.

Right76%

Wrong

24%

Q8

9. The individual credited with being the chief author of the Declaration of Independence:

Right74%

Wrong

26%

Q9



10. “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union...” is the opening statement from the:

Right61%

Wrong

39%

Q10

11. The State of Ohio may gain or lose a _____in the Legislative branch of the United States government based on the 2010 U.S. Census:

Right73%

Wrong

27%

Q11



12. The voters of Ohio will elect a new United States Senator in the 2010 November general election. How many United States Senators does the State of Ohio have?

Right73%

Wrong

27%

Q12

13. The U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives form the ___ branch of the United States government.

Right76%

Wrong24%

Q13



16. The most recent Associate Justice confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 may serve on the bench for:

Right60%

Wrong

40%

Q16

19. The final authority to determine the constitutionality of the laws of the United States is vested in the _____.

Right

62%

Wrong

38%

Q19



20. In January 2009, by the Constitution, President Barack Obama began a ____ year term as President of the United States.

Right84%

Wrong16%

Q20

21. First Lady Michelle Obama, the President’s wife, is, by law:

Right56%

Wrong

44%

Q21



24. By virtue of the office, the vice president of the United States also serves as the:

Right38%

Wrong

62%

Q24

25. George W. Bush and George H.W. both served as President of the United States. What other father and son have served as President? Right

53%

Wrong

47%

Q25


Appendix D – Survey Information and Results – D1

This survey was submitted to social studies teachers/coordinators throughout the schools.

After the state tests had been evaluated, a desire to consult with these teachers led to

these questions.

E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American ... -...

Documents

Transcript of E Pluribus Unum: Are We Losing Our American ... -...