Bridge or byway? Teaching historical reading and civic online reasoning in a U.S. history class

IF 2.5 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sarah McGrew
{"title":"Bridge or byway? Teaching historical reading and civic online reasoning in a U.S. history class","authors":"Sarah McGrew","doi":"10.1080/00933104.2021.1997844","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study investigated an approach to teaching students to evaluate online information in the context of a high school history class. Over the course of a semester, I collaborated with a teacher to teach and refine a series of eight lessons focused on civic online reasoning. We aimed to use students’ historical reading as a bridge to help them learn to evaluate online sources; however, tensions also arose between historical reading and civic online reasoning. We negotiated the content focus of the lessons. We asked students to investigate historical questions with contemporary ramifications instead of strictly civic questions, but we still balanced a need for students to build civics content knowledge to effectively evaluate online information. We also negotiated the degree to which we presented online evaluations as requiring different strategies than print historical sources. We emphasized similarities in the evaluative approaches but also learned to be explicit about differences. As teachers consider how to help students learn to evaluate online information, the question of how such lessons might be incorporated into existing disciplinary goals is a critical one. This study presents an in-depth analysis of design efforts in one such case.","PeriodicalId":46808,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Social Education","volume":"50 1","pages":"196 - 225"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Social Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2021.1997844","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study investigated an approach to teaching students to evaluate online information in the context of a high school history class. Over the course of a semester, I collaborated with a teacher to teach and refine a series of eight lessons focused on civic online reasoning. We aimed to use students’ historical reading as a bridge to help them learn to evaluate online sources; however, tensions also arose between historical reading and civic online reasoning. We negotiated the content focus of the lessons. We asked students to investigate historical questions with contemporary ramifications instead of strictly civic questions, but we still balanced a need for students to build civics content knowledge to effectively evaluate online information. We also negotiated the degree to which we presented online evaluations as requiring different strategies than print historical sources. We emphasized similarities in the evaluative approaches but also learned to be explicit about differences. As teachers consider how to help students learn to evaluate online information, the question of how such lessons might be incorporated into existing disciplinary goals is a critical one. This study presents an in-depth analysis of design efforts in one such case.
桥还是小路?在美国历史课上教授历史阅读和公民在线推理
摘要本研究调查了一种在高中历史课上教学生评估在线信息的方法。在一个学期的时间里,我与一位老师合作,教授并完善了一系列八节课,重点是公民在线推理。我们旨在利用学生的历史阅读作为桥梁,帮助他们学习评估在线资源;然而,历史阅读和公民网络推理之间也出现了紧张关系。我们协商了课程的内容重点。我们要求学生调查具有当代影响的历史问题,而不是严格意义上的公民问题,但我们仍然平衡了学生建立公民内容知识以有效评估在线信息的需求。我们还就在线评估的程度进行了协商,认为在线评估需要与印刷历史来源不同的策略。我们强调了评估方法的相似性,但也学会了明确对待差异。当老师们考虑如何帮助学生学习评估在线信息时,如何将这些课程纳入现有的学科目标是一个关键问题。本研究对一个此类案例中的设计工作进行了深入分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theory and Research in Social Education
Theory and Research in Social Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
30.80%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信