Response to the Foreword & Introduction of "Where Did Social Studies Go Wrong?" by Finn, Lemming & Ellington

In Chester Finn’s Foreword, he argues that social studies education became a conduit for apologist indoctrination following the 911 attacks. As a result, overt patriotism became tantamount to prejudice and the biggest threat to American diversity. Social studies education avoided specifying why the American way of life should be preserved and rather, encouraged examining where we’ve gone wrong in the eyes of a global community.

Finn argues that a second path to decline came in the form of NCLB. Social studies was removed from any form of accountability in order to focus on proficiency in core subjects like math and science. In doing so, the standards have been left to the professionals in the field, the very people Finn blames for the subjects all too sudden decline.

In my view, Finn is clearly a hawkish conservative. A jingoist, to use a term he referred to when characterizing the implications of social studies education following 911. His views are absolutely the opposite of my own. Finn, like many others who share in the pounding of chests over American exceptionalism, believe being a true American patriot and being honest with ourselves and accepting the axiom that America’s foreign policy and Intelligence adventures played a role in the attacks on 911 are mutually exclusive. Those who raise points about the CIA-coined “blowback” concept justify the attacks. Those who tell a crowd of Tea Partiers that Osama Bin Laden was explicit when explaining why America was attacked and that it clearly had nothing to do with the superficial idea that radical Muslims hate “our freedom” are booed and ridiculed (read: Ron Paul at the CNN Republican Debate, Sept 12, 2011). I vehemently disagree with Finn’s position.

While I largely disagree with the implication introduced by Lemming and Ellington that social justice and environmental concerns are contrary to the societal priorities of most Americans, I do sense how the perceived agenda of SS professionals could be undermining a more objective purpose: effective practice. What is effective practice? Research skills, higher order thinking development (e.g. analysis, interpretation) and public speaking are a few of my educated guesses.

However, my observations in a number of social studies classrooms place me in opposition to the position of the contrarian professionals who describe the state of social studies education as “moribund.” In the classroom, I see a focus on substantive content trumping all other approaches. That being said, I cannot speak for the grand scheme of things. Numbers talk, and there is a legitimate argument to be made on the side of the experienced professionals who sense a dramatic decline and a radical change in not only the education of students, but also the educators themselves.