Teaching American History Steering Committee Minutes
Wednesday, 30 August 2006
SC Department of Archives and History
Minutes Prepared by Mary Anne Hamblen, Assistant Project Director
Present at Meeting
Mary Paige Boyce, Richland School District 2
Mary Bostick, Richland School District 1
Ashley Chapman, SC State Park Service, Colonial Dorchester
Robin Copp, South Caroliniana Library
Krissy Dunn, Historic Columbia Foundation
Jane Eason, Richland School District 1
Mary Anne Hamblen, SC Department of Archives and History
Fritz Hamer, SC State Museum
Gayle Hinton, Lexington School District 2
Lewis Huffman, SC Department of Education
Isa Mandell, TAHSC Independent Evaluator
George McDaniel, Drayton Hall
Connie Schulz, University of South Carolina, Public History Program
Don Stewart, SC Department of Archives and History
Joel Walker, SC Department of Archives and History
Welcome and Call to Order
Don Stewart called the meeting to order at 10:10 A.M.
Introductions were made around the table, and all reviewed the minutes of the last meeting. Connie Schulz corrected an author’s name to Joyce Appleby, and pointed out that a spelling error on the second page should be “bases.” A motion was made by George McDaniel to approve the minutes, seconded by Krissy Dunn. Robin Copp moved to approve the August agenda, seconded by Gayle Hinton.
Summer Institutes
Don reported that the summer institutes went well. He directed attention to statistics on participants; half of the teachers came from elementary grades, and half from high school. The institutes fell a little short of the 60 participant goal with a total of 52 teachers. There is never a lack of interest, but people often drop out after applying. Don has noticed that the online application appears to be an “application of interest.”
George suggested that we poll teachers who drop out after applying to find out the reasons, and wondered if the three week cancellation deadline for applicants to receive a deposit refund was sufficient. He suggested that we set an earlier deadline, and stagger the amount refunded as the date approaches. Don reported that with the current deadline only four teachers canceled too late to get their deposits back. Also, Don stated that we have never told prospective applicants that an institute was full.
Jane Eason wondered if increasing the stipend would draw more participation, perhaps from $500 to $1,000. Fritz Hamer wondered if we were low compared to similar workshops. Mary Paige Boyce stated that we are on the low end compared to science and math, and that administrators push math development more than social studies. Gayle felt that $1,000 would get teachers’ attention, and that requiring a supervisor’s signature for the participants might help. Krissy suggested that some change could be made on the web application as well.
Lewis Huffman commented on the great number of elementary teachers that participated, when high school teachers are the content specialists. He wondered if this had to do with the topics covered in the institutes. Don stated that the average high school teacher needs less help, and it is clear from the institutes that the high school teachers have a different level of knowledge. Lewis wondered if the elementary school teachers were intimidated by the content knowledge of the high school teachers.
Isa Mandell reported that elementary teachers are very happy to receive information, and are thrilled with the resources the institutes offer. She commented that Marty Matthews was too didactic during the last institute. Master Scholar Paul Anderson was more engaging to the classes, especially for the high school teachers. In the past, some of the high school teachers were grumpy, but the audience range makes it quite difficult to please all.
Jane stated that districts now have more responsibility than in the past to provide help for teacher recertification. The requirement is no longer simply two courses every five years, and more options are being offered for professional development. She suspects this might come into play in the recruitment of participants. Special Education teachers are responsible for content instruction, and are a good population to approach. Isa commented that she sat in on special ed classes in Marion and Lexington Two. The teachers were thrilled with the information received during the institute, and the students were fascinated by the primary sources utilized in their lessons.
Connie believes the appeal of this year’s institute will be to high school teachers, as it is an advanced, upper-level course. What we have done in past institutes may not be a good model for what will happen this year. Jane agreed that the draw this summer will be the 11th grade end-of-course test, which will count 20% of a student’s final grade next year.
Ashley Chapman asked if recruitment is simply about getting the word out. Don replied that the challenge is in retaining applicants. Ashley suggested travel trunks, and going into the schools as a way to pique interest. Don agreed that travel trunks are a good idea, and mentioned the model cotton gins that are offered to attendees as another example of public relations.
Krissy asked if there is anything cultural institutions can do to generate interest and get the word out. George suggested giving the teachers materials, including fliers. Don said a new brochure is in the works, and the existing brochure may be simplified. George inquired about the website, and Don responded that links already exist to all the cultural institutions represented at the table, and he is open to ideas.
Annual Performance Report
Don reported that the deadline has changed for the Annual Performance Report; it is now October 31st. He said the original idea was to keep the objectives the same each year, but this year two new ones have been added that reflect the Department of Education's direction toward more information gathering on the projects' impact. (Project objectives are printed on the back of the meeting agenda.)
Isa attended a two-day session in Washington, D.C. for project evaluators, run by national consultants. She noticed some confusion at the national level, in part due to the exponential growth of the grant. Department of Education staff requested that grant evaluators add more criteria to evaluate quantitative data, but backed down after attendees complained, because it is too late to add such criteria. Isa said we are already including this type of criteria in our evaluations, and are showing a definite increase in content.
Connie believes this speaks to the project’s design. Many such projects are much narrower in their conceptualization, driven by education professionals who see an opportunity to make money. She feels our project answers a real need for teachers.
Isa agrees that other projects do not seem to offer the same quality. Many do not reach as many teachers, offer the level of content, collaboration, or the number of partnerships.
Evaluation Plan
Fritz wondered if we have had much luck evaluating how students’ history knowledge is improving.
Isa stated that we show a statistically significant difference in teacher scores from pretest to posttest. While the mean difference is slight, the midyear retreat showed a higher difference. Robin commented that this comes from teachers actually working with the primary source materials. Don said this was the first time these particular scores increased, which, while unexpected, was very encouraging. Robin pointed out that the teacher always learns more than the students. Don adds that he has observed some teachers’ interest really spark, which demonstrates success.
Isa passed out copies of a bar graph showing scores, and pointed out that we have not used a nationally evaluated test. Don said he has investigated the possibility of purchasing one, and may do so this year.
Connie questioned whether the progress shown on questions 2b and 2c of the project objectives is measured within each year, or year-by-year. Don replied that it is an increase within the particular year.
Isa brought up an ongoing issue, that PACT scores have not come out, and we have not had an opportunity to discuss teacher’s content knowledge with teachers. She commented on how difficult measurement is among such a small sample of teachers, and with no causal relationship. Also, those taking the course are already more invested in the project, more interested in history.
Fritz stated that with the Department of Education’s increased emphasis on statistics, the project might not be funded again. Don heard one rumor that funding may be cut by 50%; the TAH Director’s meeting in October will offer more information.
Isa stated that the most difficult part of evaluation will be measuring students’ achievement. Don said although we are far ahead, proving this is almost impossible. Connie pointed out that the guidelines do not require us to prove that our institute created the difference, just that there is a difference. Ashley asked if there is a comparison group, and Isa replied that PACT supplies this.
Jane mentioned that we are not included in NCLB, but the state requires social studies testing. Gayle added that as long as social studies remains on the report card, the only way to make a change is through the legislature.
Isa wrapped up her update by highlighting new information:
Teachers’ increase in content is excellent. Posttests showed averages from 82-83%, and while not dramatic, we have reached the criteria.
The new self-efficacy and interest survey will look at tests as a whole, which is less rigorous. In the past, about five topics showed significant differences, but did not show improving interest in the topic. Don explained that 2 curriculum topics were selected, and teachers identified their difference in interest on a scale of 1-10. Isa stated that some did show a difference, and if knowledge and comfort level have increased this is significant. Also, many teachers identified slavery as a significant topic, which is good for an increase in self-efficacy.
Fritz inquired about question 3d. Isa said this question is a nebulous one, and an ongoing issue, especially in regard to field trips. Schools do not have the money to fund field trips: If money were there, cultural institutions would be inundated. Connie inquired as to the cost of field trips, and Gayle said at least 50 cents per mile, along with the cost of the bus driver. Charter buses are $60 per student. Additionally, bus schedule time constraints complicate plans.
Isa said interviews with teachers would continue through the fall and winter. She invited those at the meeting to attend onsite evaluations, but no more than two people at a time so as not to intimidate the teachers. Don said 15 or so teachers have volunteered to be part of the evaluation, and emails will go out to them next week. The teachers participating will be visited twice, and will receive resources, as well as an extra $100 on their stipend. Isa added that there is no intimidation factor for them, and that Don forwards a feedback letter to teachers interviewed. George McDaniel noted that teacher evaluations are a good chance to promote the next institute, and meet principals and introduce ourselves.
Public Relations and Sustainability
Don said PR and sustainability are in good shape. We had several articles in local newspapers over the summer, and continue to have a spot in newsletters and publications such as Palmetto Focus.
An electronic newsletter will go out next week, continuing nearly once a month, whenever there is news. The newsletter will be simple, with links to specific pages on the website. It will also include a section on upcoming events, and all are invited to let us know what is happening.
Post Institute Support
Jan Levinson, our new graduate assistant, started last Monday. A museum studies major, Jan has had several impressive internships, including one with Historic Columbia. She will work will Kate O’Donnell, making regular contacts with teachers.
Don reminded everyone to mark his/her calendar for the Midyear Retreat, 9 February 2007. All are welcome, and all involved in the project are invited.
Website
The primary source timeline has 85 web pages, and we have 45 lesson plans posted to the site.
Connie shared information about a new website called “Rotunda” from the University of Virginia Press that contains a lot of resources of interest to teachers. One page has material on Dolly Madison, for example, and a digital addition of Eliza Lucas Pinckney material is in the works. The Rotunda site is not free, however. Robin suggested that DISCUS could purchase the site.
Robin Copp and Gayle Hinton left the meeting at 11:30 A.M.
Plans for 2007
The 2007 summer institute will have special topics in the form of three very different classes, as opposed to a general survey.
Don said the Midlands Institute is the most formulated. It will cover the 1880s through 1920; the Gilded Age through the Progressive Era. Don requested ideas for a catchy title, and Fritz suggested “Seeds of Change.”
Mary Paige stated that fifth grade teachers really need content on this middle period. Fritz said that ten teachers indicated on an informal survey that they wanted more information on WWI. Mary Paige said that WWI is not in the standards or indicators. Don said we can tie this time period to standards, and will rely on the new Master Scholar for much of our syllabus.
For the Pee Dee region, Don has discussed a variety of topics with our partners. The theme will probably be an agricultural one, addressing standards that touch on economics, the New Deal, and the Great Depression, among others.
Don said there will be some time period overlap in the institutes. Connie said the issue of overlap could be decided by the time periods. George suggested that the overall concept could be agricultural history, broken into different periods. Gayle wondered if teachers would be able to participate in all three institutes, or be able to go from one to another. Don responded yes, but pointed out that we do not pay for lodging, which could present a problem. Mary Paige wondered if the grant could pay for a hotel for the out-of-town people, and Don said he would look into that.
Mary stated that the Pee Dee is the most South Carolina-oriented institute. Jane noted that the Midlands would exclude the fourth grade. However, Mary Paige said that teachers do frequently move around. For instance, Charleston receives a new influx of teachers every year.
Don said the Lowcountry would focus on the colonial period, from roughly 1670 – 1767, beginning with Charles Towne Landing. Robin said that rice and indigo would take the timeline through 1865. George mentioned that rice would also include a connection to Africa.
Three separate topics will require three Master Scholars. Connie stated that recruitment would be easier for two weeks, as opposed to six.
Connie asked if women’s history is a focus in high school, noting that traditionally women’s history is covered superficially, if at all. It is a broad topic that interests lots of teachers. Mary Paige felt that there is probably as much interest in this area as any other, but that it would not serve the students on the PACT. She noted that the course should be standards-driven, and not lean toward content with too much special interest. George pointed out that African American history is one topic that generates incredible interest.
Jane said the teachers strongest in content are in the third and eighth grades, although this could be for a variety of reasons, including the oral method of testing in the third grade.
Don suggested initiating a listserv discussion to come to a consensus on institute topics.
2007 Institute Dates
Jane stated that the whole state would be on a different calendar next year; all schools will start on the third Monday in August. Also, the Fourth of July falls mid-week this year.
Dates for the 2007 institutes will be June 18-29, July 23-August 3, and July 9-20. Mary Paige chose July 23-August 3rd for the Midlands Institute.
Selection of Master Scholars and Master Teachers
Don said the Midlands people could choose a Master Teacher among themselves. He likes the idea of Master Teachers that are former participants in the institute. Either one or two Master Teachers is fine. Don requested that names be chosen and submitted by the end of October.
George suggested Sheryl Blackford as a Master Teacher for the Lowcountry.
Funding Opportunities
Don stated that he would apply for the grant extension, which will continue until June 2008. He will be researching other funding opportunities through the fall and winter, such as the Watson Brown Foundation. Ideas are welcome.
Isa offered a two-page brief with talking points about the TAH project, including quotes and program results, to anyone wishing to present the project for possible funding.
George suggested contacting senators and representatives, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, and other Representatives.
Schedule for Next Meeting
The date for the next meeting is 9 February 2007 at 2:00 P.M. in Springmaid Beach.
George wondered if we should meet in November as well to discuss the new grant. Isa said the problem could be that we will not know the new guidelines by that time. Joel said the new grant would be announced before November.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 P.M.