DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 373 010 SO 024 326

AUTHOR Kiernan, Henry, Ed.; Pyne, John, Ed.TITLE Measuring Student Performance: Assessment in the

Social Studies. Theme Issue.INSTITUTION New Jersey Council for the Social Studies.PUB DATE 93

NOTE 28p.

AVAILABLE FROM The Docket, New Jersey Council for the SocialStudies, P.O. Bos 4155, River Edge, NJ 07661.

PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Collected WorksSerials (022)

JOURNAL CIT The Docket: Journal of the New Jersey Council for theSocial Studies; Win 1993

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Concept Formation; Decision Making; *Educational

Assessment; *Educational Practices; EducationalPrinciples; Elementary Secondary Education;Evaluation Methods; *Outcomes of Education;*Performance; *Social Studies; Standardized Tests

IDENTIFIERS *Authentic Assessment

ABSTRACTThe four articles in this theme issue provide an

overview of assessment in the social studies and the rationale behindthe movement for a more authentic assessment of learning outcomes. Inthe first article, "Thinking as an Unnatural Act," William T. Dalyoffers a clear rationale for social studies teachers to re-examinethe methods of assessing student performance. In the second article,"Authentic Assessment in Social Studies," Jack L. Nelson conveys why.. tandardized testing does not measure effectively skills taught insocial studies and presents a strong case for social studies teachersto demand more authentic assessment approaches aimed at developingstudents' critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and therefinement of conceptual ideas. Pat Nickell in the third article,"Performance Assessment in Principle and Practice," offers guidancefor developing performance tasks for classroom use and gives severalexamples. In the final article, "Performance Assessment in SocialStudies: What CRESST Research Tells Us," Pam Aschbacher and DavidNiemi review present initiatives to emphasize deepeningunderstanding, higher order thinking skills, and more authenticassessments of student outcomes in the social studies. They explorethe research-based premises about developing performance assessmentsand provide examples of how to employ assessment tasks to improveinstruction, (CK)

**********************************t************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

from the original document.***********************************************************************

00c)ti

0Journal of the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

bleatiot_RigegatAgel

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER IERICI

wH' ler

Winter 1993 U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOthre 01 ElitiCalrollf1FitiSeaich and ImprOwernelll

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC!

dOCu1110/11 nas been reproduced asocolved Iron die canon or organizationoriginating ri

(1 Minor cnanges nave been made lo Improvereproduchon quaidy

Porno PI we* oroon.Onssleled nuselocvment do nol oecessinly represent officialOERI posazon or mazy

THEME ISSUE:MEASURING STUDENT PERFORMANCE:ASSESSMENT IN THE SOCIAL STUDIES

2BEM COPY AVAILABLE

CRITERIA FOR SUBMISSIONS TO THE DOCKET

EDITORIAL POLICY

The Docket is the official journal of the New Jersey Councilfor the Social Studies and reaches more than one thousandNJCSS members who work within social studies education from

nursery school through graduate education. In an effort to act asa voice through which its members can share and express theirideas, thoughts, experiences, and research, The Docket publish-es four types of articles.

1. Practical articles with ideas for teaching such as units,lesson plans, and reports of innovative practices.

2. Scholarly articles which cite current theory andresearch as a basis for making recommendations forpractice.

3. Reviews of educational materials: hooks, textbooks,computer software, CD-ROM titles, laser discs, andothers.

4. Informational articles about the efforts and activities ofNJCSS and its members.

PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPTS

Manuscripts should be between 750 and 1,500 words inlength (3 to 7 manuscript pages), though the editors may con-sider longer manuscripts in exceptional cases.

Manuscripts should be typewritten and double-spaced, onsingle-sided, 8.5 X 11 inch white bond paper with margins of atleast one inch all around. Authors should submit one originaland two clear photocopies of their,manuscript. A computer diskin either DOS or Macintosh format is welcomed. Illegible copieswill be returned to the author. A letter of transmittal with yourname and address should he included with your manuscriptspecifying that the article has not been submitted or publishedelsewhere. Do not include your name on the manuscript itself so

that your identity can be concealed from the manuscript review-

ers and thus insure impartial review. Please write in a concise,readable style free of jargon, stereotyping, and use of sexist lan-guage. Quoted material and references should be double-spacedand fully documented, using guidelines explained in A Manua!of Style (13th ed., University of Chicago, 1982).

Receipt of your manuscript is acknowledged with a letter.Each manuscript is subject to impartial review by The Docket'seditorial committee. The committee reserves the right to editLianuscripts for style, while changes in content are made withthe consent of the author. The editors retain final responsibility

for determining a manuscript's suitability for publication and

their decision is final. Materials shall be returned to authorsonly if a return envelope with adequate postage is included.

TITLE PAGE

Name(s), titles and professional affiliations(s) shouldappear only on the title page so manuscript evaluators will notknow the identity of the author(s). The title page must, includethe title of the paper, the name(s), complete mailing address(es),and telephone number(s) of the author(s).

QUOTATIONS

Quotations that are three lines or more in length should heindented four spaces and double'spaced.

PERMISSIONS

The author(s) should obtain permission in writing frompublishers for any copyrighted materials to be used in the man-uscript, including any text, pictures, illustrations, and cartoons.

COMPLIMENTARY COPIES

Six complimentary copies of The Docket will be sent toauthors when their articles or reviews appear.

MANUSCRIPTS AND CORRESPONDENCE

All manuscripts and correspondence should be sent toeither of the co-editors:

Dr. Henry KiernanHumanities Supervisor

Southern Regional High School600 North Main StreetMat ahawkirt, NJ 08050

or

Dr. John PyneSocial Studies Supervisor

West Milford Township Public S-bools46 Highlander Drive

West Milford, NJ 07480

tTHE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

An Introductionand an Appreciation

Measuring Student Performance: Assessment inthe Socit5nthes, is the inaugural issue forHenry Kiernan and John Pyne, who succeed

William Fernekes and David Pierfy as the new co-editorsof The Docket. Henry serves as the humanities supervisorat the Southern Regional High School District inManahawkin, while John supervises the K-12 social stud-ies program for the West Milford Township SchoolDistrict.

We would like to extend our appreciation to BillFernekes and Dave Pierfy for their devoted service tosocial studies educators and professionals around thestate over the years, and particularly for making TheDocket into the quality publication it has become. Inaddition, both Bill and Dave have eased our transition aseditors by generously offering assistance and advice aswe assumed operation of the journal and began prepara-tions for our first issue. We extend to them our mostheartfelt thanks for their help and our very best wishesfor the future.

Bill was awarded the 1992 SIRS Academic FreedomAward at the 23rd Northeast Regional Social StudiesConference in Hartford. In the ceremony marking theoccasion on March 13, 1992, Ed Reynolds, a past presi-

dent of the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies,spoke in testimony to Bill's long devotion to the cause ofhuman :fights and his well-known efforts on behalf ofsocial studies education, stating:

"IBillI is the author of countless articles on individualrights, the Bill of Rights, human rights, the Holocaust,genocide, nuclear issues, global education as well associal studies education, scope and sequence, curriculatrends, oral history .... etc.

He has served as a director of the New Jersey Councilfor the Social Studies and as editor of The Docket, thejournal of that professional organization. He has beenin a very real sense our conscience and a person whokeeps us in touch with what we in social studies shouldand MUST be all about."

Finally, the editors welcome letters from our readersas well as suggestions for future issues. We are especiallyinterested in articles dealing with Asian Studies, withnew directions for social studies education at the elemen-tary level, with the reaction of our readers to the recentlymandated core proficiencies in U.S. and World History,and with innovative approaches to teaching and evaluat-ing social studies instruction in the classroom.

4

THE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

In This Issue:Measuring Student Performance

in the Social Studies

Henry Kiernan and John Pyne, editors

Concerns about our students' academic achieve-ment vis-a-vis students in other industrializedcountries and our country's competitive position

in the world economy have led to an increasingly VOCALand widespread movement to develop "world-class"standards in all academic areas. Currently national stan-dards have been developed (i.e. mathematics), or arebeing developed in all academic disciplines, includingcivics government, economics, geography, history, andsocial studies. In addition, educators have argued thenecessity for amending the "two-tier" tracking system,which places too many of our students, especially minori-ties, in lower tracks where they pursue a no-win curriculathat leaves them educationally disadvantaged and thusunable to compete successfully in the marketplace. Talkof national standards and heterogeneous grouping invari-ably raise the specter of some form of national standard-ized test in the minds of many educators and parents andarouses deep-seated suspicions concerning both the via -bility and desirability of another "paper and pencil" eval-uation instrument.

Though evaluation has been a traditional part oflearning and will continue to be in the future, it remains acontroversial and often traumatic experience for studentsand teachers alike. While few would deny the importanceand necessity for evaluation, the traditional reliance onpaper and pencil tests raises questions of objectivity,understanding, equity, and usefulness.

Recognizing the necessity for assessment and evalua-tion, educators throughout the country have been busilyat work developing new assessment instruments andstrategies designed to measure learning objectives and

what students actually know more appropriately than ;nthe past. Though teachers are often apprehensive aboutthe inadequacies of standardized testing, they nonethe-less rely overwhelmingly on short answer tests andquizzes to evaluate their own students' performance.

Yet, many educators criticize such assessment proce-dures and methodologies for an overemphasis on discretefacts, the trivialization of important knowledge and skills,and the emphasis on one right answer. Students oftenlearn "facts" without the corresponding conceptualframework and experience difficulty applying what theyhave learned to real life situations. As they race throughthe curriculum, they seldom have adequate time toprocess and internalize the information they are expectedto know.

Performance assessment or authentic assessment hasbecome the focus of new assessment strategies andmethodologies, designed to promote outcome-based edu-cation and more appropriately parallel real situations stu-dents will experience in their daily lives. Our first issue ofThe Docket provides an overview of assessment in thesocial studios and the rationale behind the movement fora more authentic assessment of learning outcomes.

William Daly, a professor of political science atStockton State College, offers a clear rationale for socialstudies teachers to re-examine the methods of assessingstudent performance. Bill is the former chairperson of theNew Jersey Department of Higher Education's Task Forceon Thinking Skills. He is the recipient of the Academ) foeEducational Development's national prize for educationalinnovation for his work in adapting thinking skillsinstruction to the needs of disadvantaged children and

fTHE DOCKET Winter 1993

served as a Visiting Fellow at Princeton linive,sity, wherehe studied the implications of recent cognitive scienceresearch for classroom teaching.

Jack Nelson, professor in the Graduate School ofEducation at Rutgers University, conveys why standard-ized testing, or at least the form that characterizes muchof the testing we see today, does not effectively measureskills taught in social studies. Jack presents a strong casefor social studies teachers to demand more authenticassessment approaches aimed at developing students'critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and the refine-ment of conceptual ideas.

Pat Nickell is tl.e Director of Instructional SupportServices for the Fayette County Public Schools inLexington, Kentucky. She recently edited the section onStudent Assessment in the Social Studies for SocialEducation (February 1992), the journal of the NationalCouncil for the Social Studies. Having served on theNCSS Board of Directors and Task Forces for MiddleSchool, Teaching and Learning, and CurriculumStandards, Pat is currently the editor of the NCSS'Classroom Teacher's Notebook. In her article, she providesguidance for developing performance tasks for classroomuse and offers several examples of ways in which thismay be done.

Pam Aschbacher is the Project Director and DavidNiemi is a Senior Research Associate at the NationalCenter for Research on Evaluation, Standards, andStudent Testing (CRESST) at the Graduate School ofEducation, University of California, Los Angeles. In theirarticle, they review present initiatives to emphasize deep-er understanding, higher order thinking skills, and moreauthentic assessments of student outcomes in the socialstudies. They review the research-based premises aboutdeveloping performance assessments and provide exam-ples of how history teachers and others have employedtheir assessment tasks to improve instruction.

Along with the authors whose articles are featured inthis issue, we believe real assessment and evaluationshould reflect more accurately the outcome of classroominstruction and provide evidence of the success or failureof that instruction. Not only will our students benefitfrom a more honest and humane assessment and evalua-tive procedure, but teachers will begin to reclaim the con-trol and choice of assessment in our schools. Real assess-ment and evaluation means knowing our students an Iknowing how best to support their social studies learningby providing excellence, equity and success for stu-dents.

Your maps and globes areout of date...the budget istight but you'vereally got to havenew materials.Let Rand McNally show you how to save 30.63% whenyou update your classroom maps and globes with ourexclusive VALUE PRICED CLASSROOMPACKAGES!

Each package includes completely revised andaccurate 'naps of the Post-Cokt War World, UnitedStates. and Alaska ( in true proportions) - plus amastic non- breakable

VALUE PRICED CLASSROOM PACKAGES areavailable al each of our five Developmental Map awlGlohr Program levels, suiting all of your educationalI eeds.

Its a whirl(' new world (nu there, and your shutoutsrani learn about It from yesterday's maps and Alobes.

Representatives Servicingthe State of New Jersey:

Northwest & Central New JerseyDeborah RfiegyP.O. Box 29Mi. Bethel, PA 18141(81111 662.89611

Southern New JerseySam FeliciaP.O. Box 249Medford, NJ 08055(8OO) 521.0174

Eastern New JcrwyJack Itergenstock2100 Glenwood DrivePoint Pleasant, NJ 08742(908) 872.31311

0 RAND MCNALLYPO Box 1111)6 Skokie. IL (10076(800) 6781263

Ciii6

L±L

Thinking As An Unnatural Act

William T. DalyProfessor, Political Science

Sto4kton State College, Pomona, NJ 08240

The human foot was not built for ballet. Only withdiscipline, training, and pain can it endure thestrain and produce beauty. The human mind was

not built for independent thinking. Only with discipline,training, and pain can it endure the strain and produceknowledge. Such at least is the conclusion which seems tobe emerging from oar unfolding knowledge of how thehuman mind actually works.

An understanding of the implication of this unset-tling conclusion for educators requires, first, an under-standing of the kind of thinking skills now beingdemanded not only by educators but also by businessand political leaders. It requires, secondly, an under-standing of the growing evidence that much of this kindof thinking runs against the grain of that marvelous pieceof mental equipment which our students, as members ofthe human species, bring from the primeval plain intiour classrooms.

The Demand for Independent Thinking

The kind of thinking which is increasingly demand-ed of our students, both inside and outside of the acade-my, is independent thinking thinking which will per-mit them to go beyond remembering the ideas of othersto generate new ideas f their own.

This is not, of course, a new goal for those inside theacademy. Since the time of Socrates, it has been the cher-ished hope of most teachers that they might develop atleast some students who could one day add something tothe store of human knowledge themselves. And it hasalways been the collective responsibility of teachers in ademocracy to help develop a thinking citizenry, capableof Independently evaluating the pronouncements andperformance of public officials.

Most of the push behind the current emphasis onthinking skills, however, is not coming from these tradi-

bona' academic concerns:It is coming from members ofthe national business and political communities who areconcerned about the international competitiveness of theAmerican economy and hence about the education of thenational workforce. Their public statements on educationreflect their widely shared belief that Americans, in thefuture, will not make their collective living primarily asmass producers of standardized industrial products.Instead they will have to make it as a source of continu-ing innovation in technology and services. In such aneconomy, they suggest, we will have to pursue the initialprofits and jobs associated with each innovation, watchmost of the economic benefits from its long term produc-tion gradually migrate overseas where labor and materi-als are cheaper, and hence confront the need for an end-less series of such innovations.

The educational requirements of this kind of econo-my will be fundamentally chi .,?rent from those of theassembly-line industrial economy which has sustainedAmerican prosperity in the past. The success of this rewkind of economy, they argue, will require the educationof a larger professional level workforce and one with asubstantial capacity for independent and innovativethinking. [1]

The Components of Independent Thinking

The practical meaning, for the classroom teacher, ofthis academic-economic convergence of opinion on theimportance of independent thinking can best be under-stood by reviewing the kinds of instructional programswhich have sprung up in response to it. In spite of varia-tions in phraseology, most of those programs use a basicinput-process-output model of thinking. That is to say,that they focus on the way in which students take ininformation when they read and listen, what they do withit between their ears, and how they put it back out again

THE DOCKET

in response to the demands of their teachers. Differentprograms focus on different parts of that threepartprocess but, viewed collectively, these instructional pro-grams reflect considerable underlying consensus on thekinds of intake, process, and output skills which studentsmust learn if they are to become independent thinkers. [2]

t. Abstract ThinkingThis refers to the intake part of the process, and

focuses on what students need to do when they read andlisten in order to build the basis for independent thinking.Abstract thinking has been highlighted as a component ofindependent thinking primarily by "Piagetian" instruc-tional programs, i.e., those based on Jean Piaget's famousdistinction between "concrete" and "formal" thinking.What students most need, according to these theorists, isto move up a level of generality or abstraction from theirinstinctive tendency to memorize concrete bits and piecesof factual material in precisely the form in which they areinitially presented.

Instead, students need to learn to abstract generalconcepts or principles from the welter of concrete detailand then ti, use those intellectual categories both todecide which specifics are worth keeping and recording,and to summarize and organize what is kept. In thisway, the construction and use of abstract concepts canreduce the formless tidal wave of new information whichschool seems to offer to intellectually manipulable chunksof raw material, relevant to the thinking about the ques-tion at hand.

Beyond simply helping students to manage informa-tion, this capacity to build and use general concepts andprinciples is also a direct prerequisite to the first limitedform of independent thinking the capacity of studentsto independently apply what they have learned in onecontext to related materials which they encounter later.Only if they can abstract general ideas and principlesfrom the concrete materials learned in one context, willthey be able to carry those general principles forward andapply them to an understanding of related materialswhich (hey encounter subsequently in a later portionof the same class, in later classes, or in the world of workafter they graduate. [3]

For both these reasons abstract thinking is viewed asa crucial prerequisite to the next, more ambitious taskgoing beyond the management and application of others'ideas to create ideas of one's own. This is, of course, themost mysterious and prized component of independentthinking, and the second step of the input-process-outputmodel used by most instructional programs in thinkingskills.

2. Creative Thinking.This refers to the "process" component of the three-

Winter 1993

step model, and focuses on what students need to doonce they have extracted the information essential to theirpurpose and organized it under general concepts or prin-ciples.

This central component of independent thinking hasbeen highlighted primarily by an explosion of self-helpbooks and instructional programs on "creativity" and"problem solving." What students most need to do,according to these theorists, is to overcome their instinc-tive tendency toward immediate closure around the sim-plest or most familiar approach to a question. They need,instead, to wait, to consider a variety of approaches, toarrange the chunks of relevant information developed inthe first stage in a variety of configurations to givethemselves, in short, the opportunity to see a new pat-tern, divine a new approach, generate a new idea.

No one pretends to know where creative insightcomes from. But all of the instructional programs whichpursue it seem to share the assumption that the appetitefor immediate closure is its greatest enemy. And most ofthe instructional techniques they have devised are bestunderstood as attempts to hold the mind open, andmarch students through the consideration of a number ofalternatives, before permitting closure. [4]

3. Systematic Thinking.This refers to the output stage of the thinking

process, and focuses on what students need to do orderto elaborate on and validate any ideas generated by thefirst two stages.

Systematic thinking is the central concern of theinstructional programs which focus on formal or informal"logic." According to these theorists, students need to beable to determine what follows logically from their ideasand from the available evidence whether they are writ-ing an essay for an English class or exploring a scientifichypothesis.

This third component of the capacity for indepen-dent thought implies the ability and the willingness tosubject all ideas, even the most fervently held ones, to thetests of logical coherence and, where appropriate, empiri-cal evidence. It is important to the more general capacityfor independent thought for two reasons. First, it permitsstudents to extend their knowledge into new areas bydetermining what follows logitally from things theyalready know. Secondly, it permits them to validate theirdeveloping knowledge by constantly checking it for logi-cal consistenc-, and factual support. [5]

4. Precise Communication of Thought.This final component of independent thinking refers

to the ability to communicate the products of one's think-ing to others, and is the central concern of the instruction-al programs which focus on the relationships between

2

TEEN DOCKET Winter 1993

language and thought. According to these theorists, stu-dents need to be able to communicate their thoughts notonly orally but in writing. And they need to write withsufficient precision to be intelligible and persuasive notonly to friends and teachers but also to audiences whichare more distant, diverse, and skeptical.

Writing is emphasized in many thinking-orientedinstructional programs both because of the belief that thewriting process itself clarifies thought and because it isessential to the process by which knowledge is sharedand becomes cumulative. (5)

Teaching Independent Thinking

To teach independent thinking effectively, we mayhave to seriously consider some approaches to instructionwhich are both more directive with respect to studentsand more demanding of teacher time and effort than wemay like. A review of the abstract, creative, systematic,and precise thinking, delineated above as the essentialunderpinnings of the capacity for independent thought,produces the following list of pedagogical implications.

We may have to rey.ire constant practice in the con-struction and use of abstract concepts. And this shouldprobably include not only more practice in the selection,organization, and manipulation of data generally, butalso more work in the discipline most centrally concernedwith the manipulation of abstract concepts mathemat-ics. State and national test scores have consistently con-firmed what students have been saying for generationsthat math, for most of them, is "harder" than other sub-jects. If the human brain evolved as a device whichderives abstractions or generalizations primarily from aseries of direct personal experiences, it is not surprisingthat most of us have considerable difficulty in construct-ing and manipulating abstract concepts which are moredistant from such concrete experiences or which, in thecase of mathematics, may rave no concrete referentswhatever. To help r,ur students rise above their naturaltendency to think only in concrete terms, we may have toaccept the resource costs, and the teacher and student tra-vail, which will be involved in an attempt to make all ourstudents at least competent in basic quantitative reason-ing.

We may have to construct our courses in s"rh a waythat students who wish to pass them have no choice butto create at least some ideas of their own rather thansimply demonstrating an understanding of the ideas wegive them. If the human brain evolved primarily as amechanism for providing i -Istantaneous responses to adangerous environment, it is not surprising that our stu-dents instinctively "br immediate closure around themost readily available approach or answer any givenquestion. They seize upon any idea offered by the teacher

or text rather than undergo the protracted uncertaintyand the painstaking consideration of alternativeapproaches which would give them their best chance forcreating a novel idea of their own.

To overcome this natural appetite for immediate clo-sure, we may have to turn to those admittedly difficultand time-consuming pedagogies which are designed toinitially deny students ar y authorized "right" answerand hence force them to fashion ideas of their own.Examples of this kind of approach include Socratic ques-tioning, in which the teacher offers questions rather thananswers, and "discovery" learning, in w hich the teacherprovides a series of concrete experiences or experimentsfrom which the students must derive gereral principlesfor themselves. Students who require more structure thansuch open-ended pedagogies provide might benefit froma "multiple perspective' approach, in which the teacherpresents a range of conflicting approaches or interpreta-tions on each topic and requires the students to evaluatethe relative merits of those approaches on route to con-structing and defending views of their own.

We may have to insist that our students practice sys-tematic thinking, by consisten !y requiring them toexplain and justify their work logically and in terms ofthe available evidence. We have already discussed theargument that the human brain did not evolve as thekind of "logic machine" represented most clearly by digi-tal computers, but as an organ which responds instantlyto perpetually incomplete information from the environ-ment by simply "filling in the blanks" based on pastexperience. If that is so, it is not surprising that our stu-dents are disciplined to subject their ideas to the painstak-ing and potentially corrosive tests of logic and evidence.

If we want them to develop this important but unnat-ural habit of mind, we may have to balance our legitimateefforts to b /Id student "self esteem" (by trying to findsomething of value in all of their efforts) with a consis-tent demand that their ideas must ultimately stand thetests of logic and evidence. Even in areas (most of them)where there are a number of legitimate interpretations,we may have to impose some outside limits on our com-passionate inclination to say "that's an interesting idea."instead, we may have to join more often with a crusty oldEnglish teacher of my acquaintance in saying, "It is true,Mr. Daly, that there are a number of reasonable interpre-tations of this poem. Unfortunately, yours is not one ofthem."

If we want students to he able to express their ideaswith sufficient precision to be intelligible and persuasiveto a variety of audiences, we may have to require them todo a good deal more writing, and, in particular, a gooddeal more expositoty/argumentative writing than mostof them currently do.

L 3

I THE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

While the exact nature of the process is still verymuch in doubt, it is clear that the enormously complicat-ed task of acquiring spoken language seems to come easi-ly and naturally to most humans. In addition, our stu-dents are aided in face-to-face spoken communication bysuch factors as inflection, facial and physical gestures, theopportunity for mid-course corrections and elaborations,and the frequent familiarity of the listener with the think-ing of the speaker even before he speaks. Perhaps the cen-tral reason why spoken communication seems to come sonaturally and easily to our students is that the above fac-tors create in the listener a considerable capacity to "fill inthe blanks" even in this inevitably incomplete andambiguous mode of communication.

As an experienced classroom teacher can attest, how-ever, written communication is not nearly so natural formost students. There, the message must be much morecomplete and precise in the text, because the audiencemay not be personally familiar with the thinking of thewriter, may lack any of the interactive aids available inface-to-face communication, and therefore may have amuch more limited capacity to fill in the blanks.

The problem is compounded when students movefrom descriptive or narrative writing based on personalexperience to the kind of expository writing which is cen-tral to success in school and in professional level work.Expository writing and argumentation often require themanipulation of information distant from the writer'sdirect personal experience. They also require skill in theuse of logic and evidence. And both those sets of skills, asalready noted, may come naturally to neither the writernor the reader.

As a result, if we are to overcome our students' nat-ural preference for oral communication and help them todevelop the much more difficult skill of effective exposi-tory writing, we will have to require them to do lots of it.And we will have to be willing not only to grade theirefforts but also to comment on the specific strengths andweaknesses of their work quickly, repeatedly, and indetail.

Finally, the development of our students as indepen-dent thinkers will probably require us to substantiallyreduce our reliance on multiple-choice testing, and theinstructional practices keyed to it, in favor of assessmentmethods which evaluate and reward the full range of thethinking activities necessary to independent thinking.The central problem with multiple-choice testing, as away of measuring and rewarding independent thinking,is that it can effectively measure only one of the four ele-ments discussed in this essay.

The time limitations on most multiple-choice testspreclude any assessment of abstract thinking the con-struction of abstract concepts and their use to cull, orga-nize, and manipulate large amounts of information.

Similarly, the need for a single, predetermined rightanswer precludes any assessment of the capacity for cre-ative or novel thinking which, by definition, might pro-duce an answer unanticipated by the test makers. Finally,the use of prepackaged answers and machine-scorableanswer sheets precludes any assessment of the capacityfor the precise written expression of thought.

The multiple-choice format is, of course, well adapt-ed to measure the recall of specific information. But, withrespect to the elements of independent thinking, it is welladapted to measure only the third element of such think-ing systematic or logical thinking because it is theonly element which produces something approaching thesingle right answer which the multiple-choice formatrequires.

The same tendency to truncate the thinking processat both ends is characteristic of teaching methods used toprepare students for multiple-choice tests. Drill in stan-dard math problems asks students only to recognize andapply the appropriate logically deductive steps to solveproblems which have already been selected and set up forthem. They are not required to select the critical elementsof a real-world situation, and translate them into a mathe-matical representation of the problem, before carrying outthe mathematical procedures on which they are beingdrilled. Nor are they normally required to reapply theiranswer back to the real-world problem, check it for rea-sonableness and usefulness, and explain it verbally toothers.

Similarly, in the verbal area, standard courses inlogic frequently focus on evaluating the logical coherenceof an argument or series of statements constructed bysomeone else. As a result, students receive no training inthe identification of questions worthy of investigation, inselecting and organizing relevant information, or in ini-tially formulating a viewpoint which can then be subject-ed to the rules of logic and evidence. Nor, at theother endof the thinking process, do they receive any training inpresenting and defending that view to others.

In spite of these weaknesses, the use of multiple-choice testing continues to expand rapidly, not only in theclassroom but also in the state and national testing pro-grams born of demands for greater educational "account-ability." This popularity is based, of course, on the time,effort, and cost efficiency of multiple-choice tests as amethod for evaluating large numbers of students. It isalso based on the capacity of such tests to generate"objective" scores which are convenient for ranking theperformance of individual students or groups of students.

But if independent thinking is as difficult and fright-ening for most students as this essay argues, we mayhave to employ a full set of rewards and punishments toinduce students to make the requisite effort. And that willalmost certainly require some movement away from the

4

I 0

F THE DOCKET Whiter 1993)

convenience of multiple-choice testing toward evaluationand grading systems which actually measure and rewardthe difficult skills we want our students to develop.

Such are some of the classroom implications of theargumtot that independent thinking is an unnatural act.There are also major implications for those, a little higherup, who plan curricula, select instructional materials, andallocate the efforts of teachers.

Effective institutional efforts to develop the capacityfor independent thought will probably have to involvethinking-oriented instruction across content areas. If inde-pendent thinking does run against the grain of our stu-dents' natural inclinations, they are likely to develop skillin this special way of thinking only if they confront thedemand for it, and help in meeting that demand, in all ormost of the classes they take.

This implies that instructional programs cannot relyon the creation of a few special classes in thinking skills.We will need to change the way we teach all or at leastmany of our content courses so that students practicethinking skills at the same time as they develop contentmastery. Such a thinking-across- the-curriculumapproach would ideally require students, for each majortopic which the course covers, to: use general concepts tocull and organize the available information, constructideas of their own, support those ideas logically and wittiavailable evidence, and exp:ess the results of this thoughtprocess effectively in writing.

Effective instructional efforts to develop the capacityfor independent thinking will probably have to involvethinking-oriented instruction across grade levels. The dif-ficulty of changing established ways of thinking has longbeen noted in folk wisdom and documented by psycho-logical experiments. More recently, the "connectionist"theory of the brain has raised the possibility that thestrength of such predispositions derives from the fact thatthey become rooted, by experience and practice, in thephysiology of the brain itself. All of this would seem tosuggest that attempts to develop the capacity for inde-pendent thought will have a much better chance of suc-cess if they are undertaken as early in a student's devel-opment as possible.

If success in the effort to develop a capacity for inde-pendent thought requires thinking-oriented instructionacross content areas and across grade levels, then it willalso require a major in-service and pre-service teachertraining effort. Independent thinking is a difficult,acquired ability not only for students but for all of us.Many teachers will have to he trained, first, to do it andthen to teach it.

Also, much more attention will have to he given toproviding teachers with continuous content updating inthe exploding knowledge areas in which they teach. Onlysuch an effort to build and maintain their status as gen-

uine up-to-date experts in the areas in which they teachwill give them the classroom authority and self confi-dence necessary to free them from a desperate depen-dence on the textbook and teacher's guide, and toembolden them to use some of the more exploratoryteaching methods necessary to thinking-oriented instruc-tion.

A closing caveat. A model of independent thinkingwhich emphasizes using abstract concepts to order infor-mation, subjecting ideas to the tests of logic and evidence,and communicating ideas by means of expository writingis probably more appropriate to the natural sciences andsome of the social sciences than it is to the arts and someof the humanities. It is important to note explicitly theresultant limitations of this definition and to say thatdeveloping the capacity to think in this way is certainlynot the only thing that American educators need to do fortheir students.

But both tradition-oriented and market-oriented aca-demics should be able to agree that this is one of the mostimportant capacities which we should help our studentsto develop. This way of thinking has been, after all, a cen-tral element of the Western intellectual tradition sinceclassical Greece. And, as noted at the beginning of thisessay, it is now sought with a growing sense of urgencyby many of the potential employers of our students.

The central argument of this essay is simply thatthose of us who choose to pursue this important goalmust adapt our teaching methods to the emerging evi-dence that we will have to overcome something no lessfundamental than the way in which the unschooledhuman mind normally functions. The classic line from thePogo comic strip should shape both our expectations andour instructional strategies: "We have met the enemy,and they are us."

NOTES

1. For representative and influential examples of the largeand growing bodies of critical literature on schools, col-leges, and workforce training, respectively, see: TheNational Commission on Excellence in Education, ANation at Risk ( Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department ofEducation, 1983); F. Newman Higher Education and theAmerican Resurgence (Princeton: Carnegie Endowmentfor the Advancement of Teaching, 1985); and W. Johnstonand A. Packer Workforce 2000 (Indianapolis: HudsonInstitute, 1987).

2. The best overview of thinking-oriented instructionalprograms, and one to which this essay is heavily indebt-ed, is R. Nickerson, et.al. , 112:TeffishingafSkssg,(Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1985). Seealso P. Chance, Thinking in the Classroom: A Survey of

5

I THE DOCKET Winter 1993

Programs (New York: Teachers College Press, 1986); andJ. Baron and R. Stemberg, Teaching Thinking Skills (NewYork: Freeman, 1987).

3. For a manageable introduction to Piaget's highly influ-ential work, see J. Flavell, cognittiepgielap.menl(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971). A good sam-pling of Piagetian instructional programs is provided inIt Fuller, et al., Liagetian Programs in Higher Education(Lincoln, Ne.: ADAPT Program, 1980).

4. The apparent model for much of the large body of cre-ativity /problem solving literature is G. Polya, How ToSolve It (New York: Doubleday, 1957). Other influentialtexts are: J. Adams Conceptual Block (Reading,Ma: Addison-Wesley, 1986); and J. Hayes, me_CampiateProblem Solver (Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press,1981).

5. Text on formal and informal logic are legion. An earlyand influential example is M. Beardsly, Thinking Straight(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975). See also J.Cederblom and D. Paulsen, Critical (Belmont,Ca.: Wadsworth, 1982); and D. Walton, PracticalReasoning (Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1990).6. For overview of the literature which relates languageand thought, see: L. Gregg and E. Steinberg (eds.),

(Hillsdale, N.J.: LawrenceErlbaum Associates, 1980); and E. Maimon, et. al.,Thinking Reasoning, and Writing (New York: Longman,1988).

r111 I

'This is a history book my high school kids will read . . ."

I TheUnited States

4 Addison-Wesley

and Its People ©1993US HISTORY

Moth. Tonal, Multicultural, Modern

(WORLD HISTORY)US HISTORY

CIVICS

ECONOMICS

Seeds of ChangeCultural Exchange

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT YOUR ADDISON-WESLEY SALES REPRESENTATIVE:

Lisa Goduti (215) 258-2758 Northern New Jersey Susan Matthews (215) 356-3045 Southern New Jersey

I-800-521.0011Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, One Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01857

6

12

Authentic Assessmentin Social Studies

Jack L. NelsonProfessor, Graduate School of Education

Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NI 08903

Social studies is among the more complicated andsophisticated subjects taught in the schools. It relieson students having acquired a basic understanding

of symbols such as written and spoken words and rela-tive numbers. However, social studies is essentially aninterpretive subject, one which expects students to gobeyond rote recitation and the demonstration of perfor-mance skills to exhibit comprehension of concepts andideas, understanding of ethical dimensions of humanexperience, and critical thinking. Conceptual ideas, ethi-cal decision-making, and critical thinking are the founda-tions of significant social education knowledge.Individual and social improvement, twin goals of socialeducation, depends upon these fundamental social stud-ies concerns. Authentic assessment addresses these con-elm; ilialahl'Ilik g.sessment does not.

Ellis soclal studies knowledge is interpretive in thesome that there may he no specific right answers to themost linportant topics, but there are many divergentviews which should be examined in the process ofbecoming educated. Social studies knowledge is, then,always rilenlially controversial even though there may1w general agreement on some information at certainpoints In time in In curtain ItIcatIons. For example, con-ceptual it I vas like justice, equality, freedom, and responsi.bit lly are among the most important social studies knowl-edge, but well educated social studies students recognizethat the defining qualities of these ideas vary in time,spare, and situation. A test consisting of a vocabulary listof significant social studies concepts with single correctanswers does not adequately judge social studies learningof these as interpretive knowledge.

Similarly, an adequate understanding of ethicaldimensions of human experience requires that studentsinterpret Individual and social behaviors, using valuebases which may vary by conditions. The test of what isright or wrong, good or had, or proper and improper

necesitates moral reasoning to explain positions andarguments. That essential test is missing in multiple-choice or short answer evaluations. Further, the standardform of essay tests which seeks conformist responses in apreset format may not provide for ethical reasoningopportunities and, thus, is likely to misrepresent the stu-dent's actual social knowledge of ethical issues.

Critical thinking, among the most valuable of socialstudies objectives, is a third area where typical assess-ment techniques are unsuited to the purpose. Sound criti-cal thinking includes divergent views, contrasting evi-dence, and opportunity to present views which dissentfrom conclusions drawn by the majority. That does not fitwell with instant assessment devices. As Banesh Hoffmanin The Tyranny of Testing showed years ago, there issome evidence that students who engage in critical think-ing on exam items actually suffer penalties and obtainlower scores.

It is on these and other grounds that social studiesshould demand more authentic assessment approaches.The ones currently in vogue in the United States are inau-thentic in that they exempt, ignore, or demean the mostimportant of social studies knowledge.

Assessment of students continues to be a knottyproblem in education. And the further one gets frommemorization or simplistic physical manipulation, themore problematic tne assessment becomes. It is much easier to find an adequate assessment instrument to judgewhether or not a child can recall the exact alphabeticalorder of a list of letters than to judge that child's reason-ing talents. It is also far easier to measure the number oflimes a child puts a square block into a square hole thanto measure what the child is thinking about that process.It is obvious that the most significant education taskinvolves the development of thinking talents, the primaryjob for social studies, despite the fact that assessment ofthat area is the most difficult.

13

TEE DOCKET Winter 1993

Does the problematic nature of such assessment leadto a decision to (1) continue the significant social educa-tion work of intellectual development regardless ofassessment quality, (2) experiment to seek Improvedassessment techniques before requiring their use, or (3)tailor the social studies to meet currently available mea-sures? Unfortunately, the tailoring of social studies tomeet current and seriously deficient assessment pro-grams seems to be winning. New Jersey and other statesseem extra eager to provide single test scores which aresupposed to represent student knowledge despite theextensive evidence that such devices are insufficient andmisleading. Social studies and other subjects are bent tothe measure, no matter its deficiencies. At loss is the con-tinuation of social education aimed at developing criticalthinking, ethical decision-nuking, and the refinement ofconceptual ideas.

In the grand and convol.sted scheme of things educa-tional in the United States, although one would expect themore sophisticated mental processes to be those most val-ued and important for schools, the easily measuredthings have become the touchstones for judging schools,students, and teachers. This intellectual turn-around maysuggest some very unpleasant things about the quality ofeducation provided to those who are now demandingmore testing and then using test score^ to bash schoolsand teachers. Somehow, for this group, we have not beenvery good at social education that should have madethem knowledgeable and, thus, skeptical of the quality oftesting available. We have not given them sufficient edu-cation to make them critical thinkers about the politicaland ideological setting of the testing movement.

The current craze for standardized test scores contin-ues a nearly century-long quest to find some measures ofhjuman mental ability (Wolf, et al. 1991). Relatively scien-tific efforts by psychologists in the early 20th century toascertain differences in mental capabilities among people,often on racist or sexist grounds, were not a blinding suc-cess. We have some rough measures and approximationsof base Intellect, but little that provides sound education-al reasons for precise separations among individuals. Thebest universities recognize that SAT or ACT test scoresare not as good as predictors of student achievement incollege as are previous high school grades. And motiva-tion for comparable students, which may be a better pre-dictor, is not assessed by standardized tests. For those notgoing on to highrr education, we have virtually no validassessment Indicators that will help them in employmentor life. We have some adequate measures of recall of spe-cific information or select skills, but no adequate mea-sures of critical thinking or reasoning about social or indi-vidual problems (Nelson, Carlson, Palonsky, 1993).

The scientific ethos under which early testing beganhas been replaced by the more powerful political and ide-

ological effort to reduce educational accountability to asingle test score. The politics of this testing phenomenoninclude appeals to taxpayer groups to keep down publicspending on schools, attempts to bee, ;.:... s.ne "education-president" or "education governor" by sie.. doe kJ- I badschools were under previous administration ...1 stem-ming the political power of teacher unions. Ideologicalinterests underlying the testing movement include essen-ttialism in preserving the traditional cultural heritageagainst more contemporary multiculturalism or innova-tive conceptions of knowledge, a traditional anti-intellec-tualism in the society, positivism with its behavioristicand mechanical conception of humankind, and an effortto de-professionalize teachers (Apple, 1985; Nelson, 1983;Shwartz and Viator, 1990; Wolf, et al, 1991).

The underlying simple-minded concept that singlescore data show either the quality of the students, thequality of teaching, or the broad quality of education hasbeen generally accepted in the public and the media. Theconcept has been challenged in esoteric and self-servingeducational publications, such as The Docket, but it isvery difficult to get the mass media to express such viewsbecause test scores are so clear and simple. And the pub-lic has been misled to believe that the test scores are validand easily comparable; how do your children and yourschools and your teachers compare on a single set ofnumbers?

The widely reported decline in average SAT scoresover the past two decades hides the more complex factorswhich lie behind the scores, e.g., proportion and kinds ofstudents taking the tests, social conditions which mitigateagainst the kinds of information tested, cultural bias, testvalidity in regard to real life, decline in real dollar educa-tional support, long-term neglect of schools and short-term expectations. Similarly, the widely reported anduncritically accepted data that United States studentsrank near the bottom of average scores from some 19industrial democracies on comparative tests of math, sci-ence, and basic information did not include the data thatthe U.S. proportional spending of Gross DomesticProduct was even further down in rank among thoseindustrial democracies. In those terms, we got more forour money than did the other nations, but that commentassumes the tests were valid, that the scores representsomething more than instantaneous responses at a specif-ic time, and it is educationally important to compare suchscores. These assumptions are not well grounded.

In regard to social studies assessment using standard-ized instruments, one should be even more skeptical ofcurrently available tests for several reasons: (I) as socialstudies is among the most complex of subjects because ofits focus on human endeavors, it should be among themost difficult to properly assess; (2) social studies has aprimary responsibility to educate for critical thinking and

Li THE DOCKET Winter 1993

ethical social action, two areas where tests are most weak;(3) social studies content is necessarily controversial withdivergent views, making singular right-answer testinginappropriate; and (4) social studies is a long-term devel-opmental activity designed to provide contributing mem-bers of a democracy, a purpose not easily subject to shortresponse snapshot-like assessment. Currently availabletests in social studies have many debilitating defects.Examine the several editions of the Mental MeasurementsYearbook, the single best source of expert reviews of stan-dardized ,ests, and you will find that standardized socialstudies tests generally lack suitable validity and havetechnical deficiencies well beyond those found in tests ofmath and reading skills. Even if a decent standardizedtest of social studies information could be found,the edu-cational expectations for social studies rioted aboveshould give great worry to anyone who argued that thosetest scores adequately covered the nature of social stud-ies.

The previous material is to make the case that wehave a long tradition of inauthentic assessment ineducation, and that social studies is a field which has notlent itself well to the simplistic form of standardizedtesting that characterizes much of educational assessmenttoday. There may be some approaches to more authenticassessement that could be more suited to social studies.They may be more complicated and more difficult thanstandardized tests, but they are probably worth it if weare to pursue social studies purposes. As argued at thestart, social studies is a complicated and sophisticatedsubject, if taught properly. If taught improperly, it ismechanistic, jingoistic, silly, and useless.

Authentic assessment in social studies requires effortdirected at its basic interests, operations, and purposes:conceptual ideas, ethical decision-making, and criticalthinking about controversial topics related to individualsand society. That approach to assessment demands muchmore than multiple-choice or short answer tests of recall.Instead, such assessment must he multidimensional toattempt the measurement of how well a studentunderstands and can use complex information to addressa variety of individual and social issues in a criticallyreasoned and ethically grounded manner. The furthersocial studies purpose of active participation in societyalso must not be lost in the rush to measure students. Thisapproach to assessment is not properly made on a one-time or even once-a-year shot.

Some possible approaches to more authenticassessment:

I. Use long-term student activity as a basis for assess-ment; for temple, Model United Nations, Mock court, stu-dent government. Thls would mean that, in order to givean appropriate assessment for all social studies students,these activities would become available for all students,not just an elite group who are intended to satisfy the egoof the school principal. The intent is to provide active set-

tings for students to try out ideas and thinking aboutsocial issues.

S. Ethical decision-making discussion sessions. Thesewould offer students in small groups the chance toexplore and explain the values they use in consideringethical questions. Teacher doinination needs to be avoid-ed, but debates over the reasoning would be appropriate.The assessment may be progressive, indicating the quali-ty of changes as students rethink their positions.

3. Portfolio of social experiences. This could includeevidence of student participation in social lila, communi-ty affairs, personal development, helping others, etc.

4. Sampling thought over time. This considers thequality of thinking shown by students on a number oftopics at different times over the year to measure growthin thinking and evidence use. Comparisons are to judgeprogress, not singular right answers.

5. Episodic observation. Students are put into socialstudies issue situations (using such techniques as role-playing, simulation, media use, interactive video). Usingjournals, diaries, direct observation, and interaction,teachers and students assess qualitative aspects of the;earning.

6. Case studies of multi-year development. Usinggroups of teachers, counselors, librarians, parents, otherstudents, and others in a position to contribute insights,students are assessed individually over several years interms of their development of social studies ideas, ethicaldecision-making, and critical thinking. Students them-selves are asked for self-assessment and expected to dis-sent from or agree voluntarily to the views of others.Schools need to be cautious to protect individual studentsin their private views and to avoid oppressive conformityto peer or teacher views. This is meant to examine thequality of process, not the conclusions drawn.

7. Other forms of qualitative asseement. The ideassuggested, I believe, are closer to authentic assessmentconsistent with the most important social studies purpos-es and the long-term nature of adequate education.

References

Apple, M. and Teitlebaum K. (1985). "Ar Teachers LosingControl of Their Jobs?" SYS:UT:duration. 49:372-375.

Nelson, J., Carlson, K., and Palonsky, S. (1993). Micaissues in Echication New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schwartz, J. and Viator, K., eds., (1990). Ihe Prices oiScoff.- ,v_11_33e Social, Intellectual. and Psychological costsaf Current Assessment Practices. Cambridge, MA:Educational Technology Center, Harvard.

Wolf, D. Bixby, J., Glenn, J., and Gardner, H. (1991) "ToUse Their Minds Well: Investigating New FormsofStudent Assessment" In Review of Research inEducation - 17., G. Grant, ed., Washington, DC:American Educational Research Association.

9

it

Performance Assessmentin Principle and Practice

by

Pat Nickell

Director of Instructional Support Services

Fayette County Public Schools, 701 E. Main St Lexington, Kentucky 40505

By now, most teachers are familiar with the term"performance assessment." Grant Wiggins (Nickell, 1992)has defined it as "students performing with knowledge...turn the stuff of content into some product orperformance." It is a form of student evaluation whichrequires more than recall of facts or information orreplication of a skill; it asks students to apply knowledgeand skill for a purpose. "Authenticity" of performanceassessment requires further that the purpose closelyimitate something the student might be required to do inthe real world.

In a number of states, performance assessment iseither recently adopted or currently under considerationas a possible replacement for traditional forms of large-scale standardized testing. Rather than becoming part ofthat debate, however, this author has chosen to giveemphasis to classroom-level assessment, with the ideasset forth to guide classroom teachers as they go about thebusiness of developing appropriate means of assessingstudent learning in particular classes about specificmaterial.

Four principles will be offered which have emergedfrom the literature on performance assessment, andexamples will be provided to enable teachers to recognizehow these principles might guide the development ofperformance events or tasks for use in the classroom.Helpful 'ips are also included to assist teachers inevaluating student products and responses.

1. Performance events or tasks are virtuallyIndistinguishable from authentic, activity-basedinstruction.

For years, we have treated instruction and assessmentas separate entities. We teach and then we test; or wepretest, then tench, then posttest. The test has long been adiscrete component of classroom activity. Performanceassessment, for classroom purposes, virtually erases thedistinct line between Instruction and assessment. In

practice, a good performance task for assessment willlook just like what has long been recognized as a goodactivity designed to help students take what is beinglearned and apply it to the real world.

Ms. Martino has been teaching her seventh gradesocial studies class to interpret data from a variety ofsources maps, charts, graphs, etc. She incorporates theactivity shown in Figure 1 for assessment purposes. Onlythe students know that this is their "test." An outsidermight wonder why she is remaining mysteriously alooffrom the students as they are completing the task, butotherwise assume that this is a regular classroom activity.

(Figure 1)Global Grocery

In our nation's capital, Washington, D.C., the averageprice of a dozen eggs is ninety-nine cents. In Tokyo, thoseeggs would cost $1.95 and in Paris you would pay $2.75.A quart of milk in Washington averages fifty-eight cents,in Paris, eighty-seven cents and in Tokyo, $1.31. Onewould think that rice would be cheaper in Japan than inFrance or the U.S., but surprisingly, Washingtonians payonly $.49 per kilogram, while Parisians pay $.59 andthose in Tokyo pay the most at $1.20! The most expensiveitem in anyone's grocery cart, however, is steak. A poundof boneless sirloin in the D.C. area averages $5.28. In Parisit runs $6.68, but in Tokyo? TWENTY-THREE DOLLARSAND NINETY-SEVEN CENTS! Now ihni's nn expensivepiece of cow!

You work for USA Today. Your editor wants you Inpresent this information In a visual way AO readers canunderstand it more easily and quickly than by reading text asshown above. Use the spare below to shore how yen origin do

lust in ease your editor doesn't like the one you developed

10

16

ME DOCKET Winter 1993

above, think of another way to present the information if youcan. It should still be quicker and easier to read and understandthan the original paragraph, but somewhat different from yourfirst idea.

A concern with this form of assessment is the degreeto which teacher evaluation can be objective and fair.Thus, Ms. Martino has designed a scoring rubric (Figure2) to enable her to grade student responses and reportoutcomes both to students and parents. She haspreviously discussed her expectations with students andthus they are not at all surprised at the grades theyreceive.

(Figure 2)Scoring Rubric - Global Grocery

Provides two distinctly different ways to presentinformationBoth presentations include all information accuratelyBoth present information in unique and effectiveVISUAL ways (charts, diagrams, graphs, pictorials,etc.)Presentations are carefully and effectively rendered

Provides two distinct'. different ways to presentinformationBoth incorporate information accurately andcompletelyPresentations are predictable, less creative, but clearand visual in formatPresentation may be creative, but not absolutelycomplete (indicating lack of time to developthoroughly)

Provides two similar presentationsInformation presented accurately, but may not hecompleteAt least one presentation is visual, both more concisethan textMay summarize text in one presentation, but does soin a clear, concise, accurate manner

May explain how task would be accomplishedwithout doing soPresentations are incomplete, Inaccurate, or unclearMay only Include one attemptMay simply summarize or rephrase text, withoutvisuals, for both presentations

1" No attempt or single statement lacking meaning or

unintelligibleResponse indicates no understanding of task

2. Performance assessment is a better gauge ofwhether students know and can do what is important.

This principle arises from all the arguments againsttraa:tional fixed-response testing. Central among these isthat simply the accumulation of knowledge may lead toastuteness in trivia games, but cannot guaranteeastuteness in solving problems, making wise choices anddecisions, figuring out the best means to an end, orevaluating information and occurrences.

Mr. Avery teaches eighth grade history. It bothershim that so few people are able to use historicalinformation to analyze current situations. Thus, hefocuses his instruction on applications of historicalknowledge. He uses a performance task (Figure 3) at thebeginning of the year to pretest his students' ability torecognize inaccuracy based on lack of historicalknowledge. He :.lso uses it to get a sense of whether hisstudents are able to take a position and defend it. Later,he will use the same assessment to reassess these abilities.He will then return both papers to let students see howthey have progressed.

(Figure 3)Rewriting History

A state Attorney General is interviewed on atelevision talk show. In the interview, he is asked todiscuss what he thinks are the most serious problemsstate governments are having to deal with today that theydid NOT have to deal with in the past. In his response, henames alcohol abuse as a serious problem governmentshave only recently had to address. He states that all sortsof criminal and irresponsible acts can be traced to thisrecent trend toward overconsumption of alcohol.

Use the information on the attached sheet to help youwrite a one-paragraph letter of response to the AttorneyGeneral. In your letter, you should do three things:

1. respond to the historic accuracy of his statement2. state your position on the issue of alcohol abuse3. suggest a solution to the problem

(figure 3 continued on next page)

li

4 Ms

THE DOCKET Winter 1993

tlpf

William Shakespeare was born in 1564and died in 1616. He wrote many playsand poems. In one of these he includedthe following line: "Oh God, that menshould put an enemy in their mouths tosteal away their brains!"

A 1939 American Government textbookcarried this editorial cartoon.

Abraham Lincoln (1809 1865) said:"Liquor might have defenders, but nodefense. Whether or not the world wouldbe vastly benefitted by a total and finalbanishment from it of all intoxicatingdrinks, seems to me not an open Going Up Togetherquestion." What should we do about it?

In 1988, a drunken driver entered 1-71 near Carrolltontravelling north in the southbound lanes, drove head-oninto a church bus carrying 67 adults and childrencoining home from an excursion to King's Island, killing27. The news of this accident was carried nationwideover all major TV networks and news organizations.

((igure 3 continued)

IFIN.I1 iroif risij,qc

12

18

THE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

Fixed-response test types -- multiple-choice,matching, fill-in-the-blanks -- rarely tell us whetherstudents are able to sort through and interpretinformation for important purposes, and simply cannotgauge whether students are able to generateappropriately constructed responses, express in writingtheir evaluation of actions and situation, and justifyopinions. Yet, these are some of the things we must all beable to do in order to function well in our everyday lives.

Like Ms. Martino, Mr. Avery has developed a scoringrubric (Figure 4) which he provides to his students whenhe returns their papers. From it, they are able to recognizethat what he expected of them matched what heemphasized during instruction.

(Figure 4)Scoring Rubric - Rewriting History

Response is well-organized and presented in letterfoamUses effective language and presentation styleUses historical information accurately, taking issuewith the Attorney General's statement on this pointStates and develops a clear positionStates and develops one or more suggestions

Response is clear and uses language and mechanicsacceptablyAddresses historic accuracy using supportive dataStates a position, with some explanation or supportStates one or more possible solutions with someexplanation

Response is readable but may include severallanguage and mechanics errorsAddresses historic accuracy, but supportiveinformation may include inaccuraciesStates a position, but explanation is weak or absentStates one or more possible solutions, weakly or notdeveloped or explained

Response Is poorly organized, using ineffectivestructure, wording, and detailHistoric accuracy of Attorney General's statement isnot addressed or treated inaccuratelyStates no position or a poorly developed oneOffers no solution or a poorly developed one

No attempt

Response is unintelligible or unrelated to taskrequirementsOnly provides a single simplistic position or solution

3. Performance assessment is a better maich withreal-world tasks.

This principle is highly related to Principle 2, above,yet deserves special consideration as teachers attempt todesign assessment tasks. Simply stated, no task is worthdesigning if it isn't worth doing. The test of a good task iswhether it calls upon students to do somethingworthwhile and similar to something that, if done well,would make their lives easier in the real world. Ms.Martino's task is reflective of what we face wheninformation is given to us out of order or in some formatthat is difficult for us to understand. We may reorganizeit on paper or mentally, but only through this processdoes the information take on meaning for us. Mr. Avery'sstudents will inevitably be required to develop positionsand opinions and defend them. They must be able toevaluate opinions and statements of others in light of1-1-.ir own beliefs and values. Finally, it is important forstudents to recognize and use accurate historical data.

In the process of task design, it is most important tobe sure that what has been taught has real-worldapplication and that those applications are what guidethe design process.

To put this principle into practice, readers may wishto try the following:

1. Think of what it is you are currently doing withyour students. What is your topic? What are yourobjectives?

2. Why is this important? When have you used thisinformation in the past year, outside the classroom andbeyond you personal reading? (If you naven't, are youable to justify its importance?) What did you use it for?

3. How will students use it and for what purpose(other than within your classroom)?

You are now ready to design an assessment task.4. Create a situation which calls for your students to

use the material you are presenting. Write it up in aninteresting and authentic fashion. Be specific about "hatis expected of their response or product. This is aperformance task.

5. You need to be fair about grading their work andyou want to be able to do it quickly. Therefore, decidewhat criteria are Important for evaluating their success.What do you think they should demonstrate for you? IsIt clear what you expect In the way the task Is presented?If not, either edit the task or change your criteria.Describe what you think an outstanding response wouldlook like; a good response; an average response; abarely acceptable response; and an unacceptableresponse. You now have a scoring rubric.

19

THE DOCKET

While this is a simplified and sketchy model, itshould allow the teacher to recognize some of the criticaldifferences between performance task and fixed-responsetest types, and to begin the process of task design.

4. Performance assessment should driveinstructional as well as testing changes even forlower performing students.

It is now considered a given that teachers "teach tothe test." Shepard (1989), Wiggins (1989) and others claimthat the trick is not to get teachers to quit doing so, but tomake the test worth teaching. Performance assessment,these theorists claim, is a more worthwhile instrumenttoward which to gear instruction. It requires high-orderthinking, generative responses, and can be formatted forassessii;g students independently or in groups. Wecannot, however, reserve this type of instruction only foradvanced learners. All students must learn to solveproblems, make decisions, and discern the mostappropriate ways to achieve an end. Critics of traditionaltesting argue that typical multiple-choice approachesserve to "dumb down" curriculum and instruction."Conceiving instruction in the format of multiple-choiceitems...leads to endless drill and practice ondecontextualized skills" (Shepard, 1989, p.5). This, it isargued, is especially true of instruction for lower-functioning students where test-taking preparationraising scores has been given central attention in theschooling process.

Mr. Spooner teachers a heterogeneous group of sixthgraders. His most recent geography unit on LatinAmerica also involved the development of an improvedgeographic vocabulary. Ongoing efforts have includedassisting students in developing a mental map of theUnited States and providing multiple opportunities forstudents to make independent judgments and providelogical explanations for them in writing. All of theseefforts appear in the assessment task he uses to evaluatetheir progress and the scoring rubric he has developed toassist him in grading student responses (Figure 5).

(Figure 5)Landlocked

The Random House Dictionary of the EnglishLanguage defines "landlocked" as "shut in completely, oralmost completely by land; not having access to the sea."Look at the attached map of South America. Using yourInterpretation of the definition of "landlocked," wouldyou say there are any landlocked countries in SouthAmerica? If so, name them. Explain your answer.

Picture a map of the United States in your mind. IsKentucky landlocked? Some people would say "yes,"

Winter 1993

others "no." State YOUR opinion and support it withwhy you think as you do.

If a country is landlocked, what are several things itmight do to gain access to the sea? Explain yourresponse.

CI ThAt. AMU CS SOUTH AMERICA

WRINAM

/MINCH GUIANA

ECUADOR

Phone OCEAN

aruerrc ceIn.

ARDIN1INA WM.:tap"

5

Scoring Rubric - Landlocked

Responses are clear, accurate, and well-structuredResponses supported by related and reasonedinformationParts 1&2 consistent or differences fully justified

* Part 3 reasonable and fully explained, demonstratingunderstanding of political implications of sea access

Responses are clear, accurate, and readableResponses are supported by related informationParts 1&2 are consistent or differences justifiedPart 3 offers one or more suggestions, explained, butmay not exhibit understanding of politicalimportance of sea access

14

20

a

2

THE DOCKET Winter 1993

Responses readable and acceptably structured, butmay include minor inaccuraciesResponses to parts 1&2 may be inconsistent, but bothare supportedResponse to part 3 provides one or moreunderdeveloped or weak idea, perhaps unreasonablePart 3 indicates little understanding of theimportance of sea access, other than for saltwaterresources or recreation

Responses to parts 1&2 inaccurate and/orunsupported by related informationResponses are poorly structuredParts 1&2 are inconsistent; one or both unsupportedPart 3 poorly developed, unrelated, or shows nounderstanding of the need for sea access

1* No attempt or responses irrational or unrelated to the

task

Student responses to this task may look very differentdepending upon the students' educational backgroundand prior knowledge. However, the skills required areones that all students should have in order to read andunderstand a newspaper, participate in normalconversations referencing places in the U.S., posit an ideaand provide an explanation, and communicate in writing.

If all our students are "raised on" challenging tasks fromearly childhood, then by the time they are in middleschool, even our "at risk" populations of normalintelligence will have little difficulty addressing taskssuch as those offered here.

Conclusion

The principles presented here are designed toprovide rationale and guidance for the development ofperformance tasks for classroom use. It is hoped thatteachers will give these ideas seriaus thought, especiallyin terms of what we know is best for children. that theydeserve not only interesting and high-quality instruction,but equally interesting and high-quality evaluationinstruments; that they deserve to have us care aboutwhat they really know and can do; that they deservepractice in dealing with real-world challenges; and thatall students deserve these things...not just those thoughtto have special gifts and promise.

Bibliography

Nickell, P. (1992). Doing the stuff of social studies; Aconversation with Grant Wiggins. Social Education. 56(2).91-94.

Shepard. L. A. (1989). Why we need better assessments.Educational Leadership. 46(7). 4-9.

Wiggins, G. (1989). Teaching to the (authentic) test.Educational Leadership. 46(7). 4147.

15

21

Performance Assessmentin Social Studies:

What CRESST Research Tells Usby

Pam Aschbacher and David NiemiNational Center for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student TeachingUCLA Graduate. School of Education, 405 Hilgard Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90024

New Goals, New Assessments

Over the past decade there has been a significantreexamination of the outcomes for which schools are tobe held accountable. We have moved away from astrong, narrow focus on minimum competency in thebasic skills of reading, writing, and math to talk ofmeeting world class standards across the full curriculum,including social studies. The importance of studentachievement in social studies was underscored by theGovernors' National Education Goals Panel and thePresident's America 2000 Education Strategy, both ofwhich specifically mentioned history and geography astwo of five subjects representing the core content that allstudents need to master in school.

Increasing Interest In Social Studies Assessment

Many states are now interested in expanding theirstatewide testing programs to include social studiescontent (Aschbacher, 1991) Currently, 19 states haverepresentatives in the National Social Studies AssessmentConsortium (NSSAC) and/or the State Collaborative forAssessment and Student Standards (SCASS), twoorganizations established by the Council of Chief StateSchool Officers to collaboratively develop newperformance assessments. To guide these collaborativeefforts to develop new assessments, the staff of theNational Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards,and Students Testing are currently compiling a consensusmap of the NAEP and state curriculum and assessmentframeworks In social studies (including history,geography, and civics), which should be available by

early 1993.Local education agencies have also generated a lot of

interest and activity around performance assessment.Part of this interest stems from the growing belief thatinstruction across the curriculum should emphasize"deep understanding," "higher order thinking skills,"and more "authentic," meaningful activitynot just roteacquisition of information and procedures. These newgoals in turn require new forms of assessment thatcapture what we would like students to be able to do andunderstand.

A number of states, such as New jersey, areencouraging districts to move ahead with development oftheir own performance assessments because the currenteconomic situation hinders development at the statelevel. In states with new statewide performanceassessment programs, like California, many districts areworking to develop their own parallel classroom, school,and district level assessments. But developing goodassessments requires expertise, time, and resources, all ofwhich tend to be scarce. Thus it is important for thosewho have been working in the field of performanceassessments for the past several years to share whatworks. Since we at CRESST have been researchingperformance assessments in social studies for the past sixyears, we have three kinds of information that may beuseful. First, we describe some of our basic premisesabout developing performance assessments. Second, wepresent A specific example of one type of performanceassessment we have developed in history and othercontent areas. Third, we describe how history teachershave used our assessment task as the basis for designingauthentic instruction.

16

22

THE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

Some Basic Premises in Developing PerformanceAssessments

Although performance assessment implies newmethods for looking at educational outcomes, the processfor developing these assessments is based on decades ofmeasurement research and involves the following tasks:

specifying the nature of the skills andaccomplishments students are to develop;

specifying the kind of tasks that would requirestudents to demonstrate these skills andaccomplishments;

specifying the criteria and standards for judgingstudent performance on the task;

developing a reliable rating process;

gathering evidence of validity to show whatkinds of inferences can be made from theassessment; and

using the results to refine the assessment,improve curriculum and instruction; and providefeedback to students, parents, and thecommunity (Herman, Aschbacher, and Winters,ASCD, 1992).

One of the major purposes of performanceassessments is to help teachers make instructionaldecisions. This means that the assessment tasks andcriteria for judging student performance should bealigned with our desired goals for student achievement.What do we want students to be able to accomplish in aunit, a course, a discipline, or across disciplines? Theanswers define our classroom priorities for bothinstruction and assessment.

A common procedure for developing performanceassessments is simply to assemble interesting activitiespreferably designed by teachers and other contentexpertsand expect that they will tell us what we wantto know about students. Chances are, they won't,because of the hit-or-miss quality of the design process.Without deciding in advance what the tasks are supposedto assess, and without some preliminary thinking abouthow student responses will be scored, we may not findout what we want to know from the assessment.

The criteria we use to judge students' performance onan assessment task should help teachers know what to donext with students. For example, the scoring scheme forrating essays In history should not just label student workas "unacceptable," "adequate," or "advanced." Its

dimensions and examples of scored work should give,both teachers and students information that might helpstudents elaborate and expand their understanding inhistory.

Our approach to assessment is based on aconstructivist model of learning. In this model, studentsbuild personal understanding of a subject by relating newinformation to what they already know. Theydemonstrate this understanding by using theirknowledge in a variety of contexts and ways.

Students do not come to understand history, forexample, by memorizing or learning to paraphrase whatteachers tell them or what they read in textbooks. Insteadthey need opportunities to reflect on and organize whatthey know, to talk and write about what they know, andto compare perspectives with other students and adults.(See Resnick and Klopfer, ASCD, 1989, for moreinformation on this approach to learning andassessment.)

We know from many studies of cognition, includingour own comparative research on essays written byhistory experts and novices, that students' understandingof history will develop in a certain way. As they movetoward expertise, students will not only acquire morefactual information, but they will begin to organize thatknowledge around historical concepts or principles, suchas "states rights" or "constitutionality." They will be ableto integrate knowledge about many different historicalperiods and to relate that knowledge to their ownpersonal experience, and to knowledge about othersubject areas.

Research on expertise and how it develops, lies at theheart of our performance assessment model. At CRESST,we have been working for several years to construct amodel for designing assessments of deep understandingin s.,cial studies, and both the model and tasks designedin accord with it have been validated in several large-scale research studies (e.g, Baker, Freeman, & Clayton,1991).

The tasks we describe are the result of six years ofresearch intended to develop and test alternativeassessments in history, and are documented in our recenthandbook (Baker, Aschbacher, Niemi, & Sato, 1992).Historians and high school teachers have helped usthroughout the study as designers, reviewers, andscorers. So far, six complete sets of history assessmentshave been developed: two on the Revolutionary period;one on the Civil War; two on 20th century immigration;and one on the Depression Period. All of these topicsconnect to the California History-Social Science Framework(1988). Our work to date has involved students fromgrades 8 through 12, but we are expanding it this year toinclude 5th grade students.

Our assessment tasks require students to: 1) recall

17

23

THE DOCKET Winter 19-9E

prior knowledge in a particular area of history, sued asthe Civil War era or the Great Depression; 2) readprimary source documents containing new information;and 3) write an explanation of important issues thatintegrates new and prior information. This three-stepsequence takes one-and-one-half to two hours per topic.

In the first step, students take a 20-item, short-answertest (see example below) that measures conceptual andfactual knowledge. Students are directed to write downwhatever they know about terms like "sectionalism" or"bleeding Kansas." This is prior knowledge, orknowledge that students have before reading the texts wewill give them. One of the purposes of this test is toactivate knowledge that students might use later in theiressays.

Next students read two primary source texts,typically speeches by historical figures, that expresscontrasting points of view. Finally, students are asked towrite an essay that explains the positions of the authorsor speakers of the texts, and to use what they know aboutU.S. history in their explanation.

An example of the writing assignment we have usedfor immigration is shown below. Prior to receiving thisprompt, students will have read the two speechesreferred to in the prompt.

Writing AssignmentImagine that it is 1876 and you are an educated

citizen living in California. Because you are interested inimmigration, you make a special trip to hear the debateabout Chinese immigration between Frank Pixley, theattorney representing the city of San Francisco, and B. S.Brooks, the attorney on behalf of the Chinese. When youreturn home, your cousin asks you about some of theconcerns about Asian immigration in the country.

Write an essay in which you explain the mostimportant ideas and issues your cousin shouldunderstand. Your essay should be based on two majorsources: (1) the general concepts and specific facts youknow about American History, and especially what youknow about Asian immigration to this country; and (2)what you have learned from the readings.

Be sure to show the relationships among your ideasand facts.

Scoring Performance AssessmentsOur scheme for scoring student responses to this

assignment is based on a comparison of the writing ofexpert historians (high school history teachers, universityprofessors, and graduate students) with that of novices(average high school students). It judges studentunderstanding on the basis of six scales:

General Impression of Content Quality (focused onthe overall quality of historical understanding);

Prior Knowledge (facts, information, and eventsthat did not come from the primary source texts);

Number of Principles or Concepts (the number anddepth of description of principles);

Argumentation (the quality of the argument, itslogic and integration of elements);

Text (the use of information from the text forelaboration);

Misconceptions (the number and scope ofmisunderstandings in interpretation of the textand historical period).

Each of these dimensions is scored on a 0-c pointscale.

What CRESST Has Learned About the Uses ofPerformance Assessment

In the process of testing our explanation tasks withstudents, one of the first things we discovered is thatmany students were having trouble with them. Asurprising number of students reported that they did notknow what to do because they had never written ahistory essay before. Others seemed to have little or nounderstanding of the historical period we were askingthem to write about. We decided that we had to try to dosomething about this. Our solution was to share what weknew about performance assessment with high schoolhistory teachers and to discuss with them how instructionmight improve students' historical explanations. Allteachers agreed that they would like their students to ableto write well-reasoned, well-supported explanations.

To investigate ways that our assessment researchmight support instructional improvement, we haveintroduced eleventh grade history teachers in threeschool districts to our performance assessment model.With the teachers we designed two-day instructionalsequences based on our assessment model and principlesof cognitive learning. Even though we believe that ourassessment tasks would also make good learningactivities, we decided that we did not want to focusinstruction on essay-writing, since we thought thatteachers and students might concentrate on writing skillsrather than historical concepts and information,

The instructional activities we designed included,among other things, concept-mapping (for a goodintroduction to this technique, see Novak and Cowin,1984), small-group discussions of historical issues, role-

L 1B

24

I TH11 DOCKET Winter 1993

playing, and family history research. These activitieswere intended to help students access, organize, andelaborate on what they knew about the topic in a waythat would lead to better performance on our explanationtasks. (More detailed lesson plans are available fromCRESST.)

During the 1991-92 school year, eight teachers testedthe experimental instruction and assessment tasks in twotopic areas: the Civil War era and Immigration. Prior toassessment in each topic, half the students in the studyparticipated in the experimental Instruction activities wedesigned. The other half studied In a conventionaltextbook-based manner; this was our control group.After instruction, all students wrote 45-minute essays.Our analyses of these essays suggest that as little as twodays of instruction based on principles of cognitivelearning can measurably improve students' performanceon explanation tasks. This is an extremely promisingfinding. It demonstrates not only that a performanceassessment model can be a useful tool for teachers indesigning instruction, but also that the model can helpstudents to develop a more principled, more organizedunderstanding of history, and to demonstrate thatunderstanding in writing.

References

Aschbacher, P. R. (1991). Performance assissment: Stateactivity, interest, and concerns. Applied Measurement inEducation, 4(4), 275-288.

Baker, E. L., Aschbacher, P. R., Niemi, D. & Sato, E.(1992). CRESST performance assessment models: Assessingcontent area explanations. Los Angeles: University ofCalifornia, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards,and Student Testing (CRESST).

Baker, E. L., Freeman, M., & Clayton, S. (1990). Cognitiveassessment of subject matter: Understanding the marriage ofpsychological theory and educational policy in achievementtesting (Tech Rep. No. 317). Los Angeles: University ofCalifornia, Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards,and Student Testing (CRESST).

California Department of Education. ;1488). History-socialscience framework for California Public Schools, kindergartenthrough grade twelve. Sacramento, CA: Author.

Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). Apractical guide to alternative atitietitiltlettiti. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.

Novak, J. D., & Cowin, D. B. (1W) burning how to learn.New York: Cambridge University Press.

Resnick, L. B., & Klopfer, L. E. (1984). Toward the think-ing curriculum: An overview. In L. B. Resnick & L. E.Klopfer (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Anoverview (1989 yearbook of the Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development) (pp. 1-18).Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

19

9

THE DOCKET Winter 1993 I

NEW FROM PRENTICE HALL!

Roth titles includeupto-date maps

and content on theformer Soviet Union.

Updated Edition!A new direction for rediscovering the world. Give Your Students a Global Perspective!

Prentice Hall, America's leading Social Studies publisher, offers the very best programs available, includingMagruder's American Government Civics: Government and Citizenship The American Nation

American journey: The Quest for Liberty Boorstin & Kelley's A History of the United StatesWorld History: Patterns of Civilization The Pageant of World History and morel

For more information, call 1-800-848-9500 or :

Bergen, Essex, Hudson,Somerset, Union Cos.Kevin Duffy(201) 955-1217

Hunterdon, Middlesex, Monmouth,Morris, Passaic, Sussex & Warren Cos.Roger Fary(201) 786-6897

0.0001106500.0 fata

South IAJames McGovern(609) 848-1291

20

"lu

rs w

ishi

ng to

con

trib

Ute

to T

he P

ocke

t sho

uld

sulim

it m

anus

crip

ts, t

o: T

helto

cize

t. P

.O. B

ox .4

05

fiver

Edg

e.1

0766

I . 1

1110

0110

w S

itiir

C

TH

E D

OC

KE

TN

l Cou

ncil

for

the

Soci

al S

tudi

es

P.O

. Box

415

5R

iver

Edg

e, N

J 07

661

2728