[00:00:46] Kirsten: Welcome to the 100th episode of the Social Studies Teacher podcast. I cannot believe that this podcast has made it to a hundred episodes. I am super excited to share this special episode for you. We are going to be talking about a hundred years of social studies and thinking about what's changed since 1925

[00:01:09] and what hasn't. So this special episode is specifically for upper elementary educators. We are taking a fun time traveling journey through the last century of the United States and the social studies education surrounding it. Imagine that you're in a classroom a hundred years ago, the maps are paper, the textbooks are black and white,

[00:01:37] and social studies as a subject is just being born. And I'll share more about why that was in just a bit. Now, think about your classroom today. You've got colorful texts and interactive globes and maps and a host of videos or Google Earth. So much has changed, but some things might surprise you by how much they've stayed the same.

[00:02:01] So in this special 100th episode, we're gonna take a little history lesson and compare what textbooks looked like in the 1920s versus now, we're gonna talk about how geography and world history was taught then and now, and also discuss what has improved and what still needs to change in our field.

[00:02:21] Along the way, because it's a special episode, we are going to sprinkle in some historical fun facts and I'll even give you a few then versus now quiz questions to test your knowledge and keep things in this episode lively. So let's get ready to reflect and learn and maybe even laugh a little bit about how far we've come or may be, not how far we've come in a hundred years of social studies education.

[00:02:45] So to set the stage, we are going to go back to the 1910s. In the 1910s, specifically 1913, the National Education Association, NEA, formed a committee on social studies to address issues in social studies education. It wasn't really called that in the sense as we know it today, but they were specifically influenced by national and international issues, including the threat of war in Europe, as well as the rise of industrialization, urbanization, and immigration. And over the course of the few years, they culminated with a report in 1916 that recommended a senior capstone class or problems of democracy to address pressing social issues. And back when they first combined together to form this committee, the curriculum was aimed for what they called social efficiency. Basically, they were wanting to prepare students to be good members of society. And I'm going to share with you a quote

[00:03:59] from the Seminole 1916 Committee on social studies, which introduced the field to American educators. So as quoted, the social studies differ from other studies by reason of their social content rather than in social aim, for the keynote of modern education is social efficiency and instruction in all subjects should contribute to this end.

[00:04:24] From the nature of their content, the social studies afford peculiar opportunities for the training of the individual as a member of society. Society may be interpreted to include the human race. The social studies should cultivate a sense of membership in the world community with all the sympathies and sense of justice that this involves as among the different divisions of human society.

[00:04:49] This report called The Social Studies in Secondary Education was super influential in shaping social studies education in American secondary schools and the National Education Association's 1916 Committee on Social Studies. They officially defined social studies as the subjects that are related to human society and social relationships.

[00:05:16] This was a big shift because previously a lot of schools taught history, civics, and geography as separate and very fact focused subjects. Also, you may have heard of this association, the National Council for the Social Studies or NCSS. This was founded in 1921 and this further solidified this field in also standardizing the term social studies as we know it

[00:05:46] and is now the largest association in the country that is devoted solely to social studies education. So the National Council for the Social Studies tended to standardize the use of the term social studies, and the Constitution now states that the term social studies is used to include history,

[00:06:07] economics, sociology, civics, geography, and all modifications or combinations of subjects whose content, as well as aim is predominantly social. So there's a lot of subjects or domains under the umbrella of social studies. And a little bit more recently, in 1994, the National Council for the Social Studies published the first National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies.

[00:06:38] And while not all states specifically use the national curriculum, it is something that many states adhere to or align to, but there might be states such as Texas that has its own standards that they have created, such as the TEKS. All right. Got a little quiz question for you. The term social studies was first officially used in what year?

[00:07:03] A 1892 B, 1916 or C 1921. The answer to that would be B 1916. It surprised me and it might surprise you, but social studies, as we know it, is just over a century old. That was when educators decided to group history, civics, geography, and more into one umbrella term. Before that, nobody would've referred to teaching social studies.

[00:07:34] You wouldn't be a social studies teacher. You might be just teaching history or geography separately. All right. Let's go into the comparison between textbooks and curriculum then versus now in 2025. One of the easiest ways to see change or even lack of change in social studies is to crack open a textbook

[00:07:55] from then and now. If you were to flip through a 1920s social studies textbook, it was a very modest hardcover with mostly text, some black and white illustrations, and maps that showed a very different world. Think large colonial empires and only 48 US states. You'd also find a very formal tone and a very Eurocentric or America centric perspective.

[00:08:26] Early 20th century US history books glorified national heroes like George Washington, but might have often left out the stories of many groups. So, for example, until quite recently, the contributions and histories of Native Americans, African Americans, Asians, and women were largely invisible in mainstream textbooks.

[00:08:50] A 1920s text might have a chapter on George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, but likely not much if anything on Harriet Tubman or the Navajo Code Talkers, which really wasn't even public knowledge yet at that time and world history if taught

[00:09:09] focused mostly on European history with maybe a nod to ancient civilizations like Ancient Egypt or ancient Rome. Geography books from that era showed maps with big blank spaces for regions considered the unknown and tended to emphasize physical geography over cultural understanding. So now we fast forward to today's curriculum and what textbooks might have, digital or print.

[00:09:37] You'll see a much more inclusive approach, at least in theory. Modern social studies textbooks have a lot of colorful images and charts and diverse voices, and you're far more likely than a hundred years ago to find sections highlighting contributions of women and minorities alongside the traditional political topics.

[00:09:59] One example is that newer history books for US history have chapters on the civil Rights movement and profiles of Native American leaders, as well as discussions of immigration from all over the world. This is a pretty clear improvement from the content you might have seen in the 1920s. But some aspects haven't changed as much as we might have liked

[00:10:25] and a lot of critics have talked about how even contemporary textbooks sometimes present a simplified single narrative of history, and they might gloss over more difficult and ongoing issues such as segregation ending in the 1960s, but not really going in too deep into how racism or sexism still might affect society today.

[00:10:48] And believe it or not, textbooks are still hefty. This was a funny quote here from James Lowen. He's a historian who joked that US History textbooks are, quote, the longest, heaviest books ever inflicted on K through 12 students. So not much has changed in that aspect. While that made sense back when the textbook was the only resource,

[00:11:11] today we've got the internet and so many other materials, so that's maybe one thing that could be improved upon. Now I've got another quiz question for you. Let's see if you were paying attention. Which of these would you not find in a social studies textbook from a hundred years ago? Would it be A, a detailed account of World War I?

[00:11:31] B, Maps of the 13 original colonies, or C, a chapter on the civil rights movement. So the answer to this, if you're thinking it c, a chapter on the Civil Rights movement. Early 20th century textbooks wouldn't have covered events that hadn't happened yet, of course, because the civil rights movement of the fifties and sixties was in the future.

[00:11:56] Even World War II in the 1920s wouldn't appear because it hadn't occurred yet, but something that would've happened would be World War I, which people in the 1920s called the Great War. And of course, they didn't know a second World War was coming so that's why the term World War I wasn't used in the old books.

[00:12:18] On the other hand, there would be maps of the 13 original colonies or stories of the American Revolution, since those are classic history topics, both then and now. All right, now let's talk about comparison, in a hundred years of teaching geography. In a 1925 classroom, geography might have been a standalone subject as we talked about, or a part of history and geography as the term social studies was in its infancy.

[00:12:45] So even though I might say like social studies textbook or social studies curriculum, and referring to a hundred years ago, it may or may not have been called that, but just kind of like an FYI. But let's talk about how it might have been taught. Usually geography was taught through memorization and map drills.

[00:13:04] Students would memorize state capitals and major rivers and maybe even recite exports of various countries. Another popular activity was to color in maps or draw maps by hand to learn where things were. Globes and pull down wall maps were very important classroom tools.

[00:13:24] A century ago, a very well equipped classroom had a globe on the teacher's desk and a rollup map of the world, or some type of map where the United States was hanging by the blackboard. And of course those maps looked very different because.

[00:13:41] Africa and Asia were largely under European colonial rule and new countries in Europe had just been formed after World War I or the Great War, as well as even in the United States. There were only 48 states in the 1920s. There was, um, everything in the contiguous United States and then Alaska and Hawaii were not yet states.

[00:14:05] So in a US map or flag had 48 stars, not 50, but in today's classrooms, geography has evolved in a variety of formats and the focus, while we do still teach maps and capitals, you might have a state capital's quiz where you have to find where countries are, depending on what you're teaching, we have expanded beyond pure memorization.

[00:14:34] There's more of an emphasis on geographic thinking, so we're understanding why cities are where they are, how they formed, how human systems interact or societies interact. And we also might compare different regions of the world or regions of the United States. And modern geography lessons are more likely to include discussions of culture, climate change, or globalization.

[00:14:59] As well as just talking about the differences between countries and cities and all that stuff, tools have changed or at least improved. Instead of just paper maps, we have digital maps and interactive globes, and many teachers can use Google Maps or Google Earth for free to take students on virtual field trips around the world and see places that they might otherwise not have seen other than in pictures.

[00:15:25] Of course, atlases and physical maps still have their place. It's definitely important to teach them how to navigate around a map. But technology has made geography way more hands on. And today's students learn geography through projects like travel brochures. One of my favorite activities, like you have a country, you create a travel brochure for it, or even tracking weather in different parts of the world, comparing, contrasting climates rather than just writing down facts.

[00:15:56] All right. Another quiz for you. In the 1920s, which tool was most commonly used by students to study world geography? Was it A, virtual reality headsets? B, pull down wall maps and globes, or was it C, interactive online atlases? So obvious answer would be B, pull down wall maps and globes. A hundred years ago, classrooms obviously did not have computers or vr, so geography relied on good old paper and canvas.

[00:16:30] Teachers might have pulled down large maps of the world, or a country from a roller, which was usually mounted above the blackboard or chalkboard to show students where places were. And globes were often common for giving students a 3D perspective of Earth. And while these are definitely still useful today and are still taught, they have been complimented by those digital tools that even the 1920 teachers couldn't have imagined.

[00:16:57] Now let's go into world history comparing how we might have taught world history in 1925 versus today. Back in the 1920s, world history wasn't always taught at the elementary level at all. If younger students learned history beyond the United States, it might be in the form of the explorers like Columbus or Magellan or even ancient history myths and legends.

[00:17:22] They might have learned about, you know, Zeus and Hara and Aphrodite, all those great people. More formal world history courses were usually for high schoolers or students in secondary grades, and even those were very Europe focused. In the early 20th century, world history often meant western civilization, starting from ancient Greece and Rome, and then Europe in the Middle Ages, and are usually culminating in the growth of American and European power.

[00:17:55] There was very little coverage of Asian, African, or Latin American history in most schools at that time. And one reason was that many curricula were designed with a notion that history should foster national pride and moral lessons. So they emphasized the lineage of American democracy from European roots.

[00:18:16] Also, remember that communication and scholarship were different then. Many educators in the US simply knew less about non-Western histories. They couldn't really teach about it 'cause they didn't really know much about it. So unfortunately, ethnocentric attitudes were more common. But today in the 2020s, world history and global studies looks very different, at least in

[00:18:40] standards and intentions. Most state standards and the National Council for the Social Studies encourage a more broad, global perspective. By upper elementary students might learn about early civilizations in places like China, India, Africa, and the Americas, not just Europe.

[00:19:01] Textbooks will include chapters on things like the kingdoms of West Africa or the dynasties of China, and civilizations of pre-Columbian Americas, offering a much more balanced view of world history than a hundred years ago. And there's also an effort to connect the past to the present. So for example, when you're

[00:19:22] possibly learning about ancient Egypt or teaching about ancient Egypt, and also discussing modern Egypt, you're comparing past ancient Egypt to what modern Egypt looks like. And of course implementation can vary depending on the grade level. Some schools do a great job with integrating world history.

[00:19:39] Others give world history a little shorter shift compared to US history. It could depend on the state. I know in Texas world history isn't really emphasized as much until they get into middle school, sixth grade world cultures are gonna be talking all about the different world societies. So that could also vary.

[00:20:00] Alright, I've got a true or false question for you this time. A world history lesson in 1925 was more likely to cover Europe's kings and queens than the histories of China or Africa. True or false? The answer would be true. A typical 1920s world history curriculum in the United States mostly emphasized European history, and students might learn about English kings, the French Revolution, but probably very little about Asian empires or African kingdoms. And this imbalance in content has been a longstanding issue. It's not a hundred percent perfect even today. But the good news is that modern curricula are much more inclusive of non-Western history than before.

[00:20:47] And we now, as educators recognize it is important to understand the world and that students should learn about a variety of cultures and a variety of regions. So definitely a big improvement. Thinking of improvements, we are onto the next segment of this fun episode. What has improved in a hundred years.

[00:21:06] You could probably have some ideas based on what I've been talking about and sharing with you so far. But just thinking about it, it is very clear. Social studies education has seen some significant improvements. So here are some bright spots. Number one, broader content and inclusion. So this is really great.

[00:21:25] There's an inclusion of diverse perspectives. Today's textbooks or lesson plans will include more historically marginalized groups to a much greater extent than older textbooks did. Students get to learn about the contributions of women, minorities, and indigenous peoples, or Native American peoples in the United States, whereas a hundred years ago, those stories were mostly absent.

[00:21:49] For example, modern US history units will cover not just the presidents and the major wars, but also about the Harlem Renaissance, women's suffrage, and civil rights activism. Another thing that has improved are the teaching methods. The way we teach has shifted from rote memorization for history and geography and where all the states are and what the states are in the capitals, to a more focus on critical thinking and inquiry.

[00:22:17] Early 20th century learning was a lot about reciting dates and facts, and now we're encouraging students to analyze primary sources or debate issues, connect historical events to current events, and a lot of teachers use project-based learning, such as making a mock newspaper from 1776 or, you know, pretend there are certain historical figures and debate on a certain concept or topic.

[00:22:43] This makes social studies much more engaging and meaningful. And thanks to technology on all those wonderful apps that are created out there and sharing different resources, students can even work like historians and examine real documents and artifacts rather than just reading summaries. This type of learning simply just was not existent or feasible, or even thought of in 1925.

[00:23:09] Another thing that's improved are the materials and technology used. There are so many materials for educators and beyond the glossy textbooks with all of the illustrations, we've got online libraries and educational videos, interactive websites. You could even pull up a photo archive to show your class what child labor looked like in 1910.

[00:23:33] You could use an interactive map to track Magellan's voyage, so we're not limited to what's in a textbook that's given to us.

[00:23:41] Now, almost every student has the internet with its hundreds of thousands of primary sources. This abundance of resources let's teachers diversify their teaching, and students can learn in different ways based on how they learn best. Technology also gives a more personalized learning experience and students can research topics and take virtual field trips.

[00:24:09] Another thing that has changed for the better is the focus on skills for citizenship. So the core mission of social studies has definitely lasted. You want to teach social studies to prepare young people to be informed and active citizens, but I think we've gotten a lot better at articulating that and making sure those skills are embedded in standards.

[00:24:32] There are modern standards like those from the National Council of the Social Studies that emphasize civic competence, such as analyzing sources, understanding different points of view, knowing how government and economics work. And nowadays there's even more emphasis on the discussion of current events and connecting the past to the present,

[00:24:54] whereas a hundred years ago, civil civic education might have been drilling the facts of the Constitution. Like what are the different aspects of each amendment? Now we might, you know, talk about the constitution and what's inside, but we also ask things like, how does this affect your life today? So that's a really great improvement into making social studies relevant and engaging.

[00:25:15] And lastly, I don't want to end this without mentioning the professional community and the standards. So there is a very strong community of social studies educators, and standards out there. We've got the National Council for the Social Studies that was founded in 1921, and for many decades they provided a lot of resource and guidance and a forum for teachers to share their best practices. State and national standards have

[00:25:43] been developed and also been revised continually to improve what we teach at each grade. It's not perfect. I know that there's some states out there that haven't updated their social studies curriculum in a while, maybe 20 years, 15 years, but there are some things that might spark debate, but they do ensure that we are not leaving out any key ideas and that we're aiming for higher order thinking for students, not just memorizing different dates. Kind of going into the next and last section is what still needs to change because despite the many improvements and the resources available for us, there are still some challenges and enduring issues in social studies. So,

[00:26:28] maybe things that haven't changed enough or some new problems that have been rising. So as educators, it's so important that we recognize this, so we keep pushing our field forward and I actively, with my business, try to make this a priority as well. One of this is the allocation of time and emphasis. It One ironic consequence of education and the different policies that have been put into place is that sometimes social studies is getting sidelined, such as, you know, thinking about high stakes testing, schools are putting huge emphasis on tested subjects in elementary, especially like reading and math, and usually social studies is gonna be the first to get cut from the schedule to make room.

[00:27:15] A lot of elementary schools today, social studies gets a very small amount of time compared to literacy and math, and teachers might even be told to integrate social studies into language arts rather than just teaching it separately. While integration is definitely not bad, I definitely think it's really great, really great tool to use,

[00:27:34] it just means that kids are getting isolated facts or stories without the full context. So a student might read a passage about Martin Luther King Jr. during reading class, but without the broader civil rights unit and having that context, they don't really understand or explore the why and how of that history.

[00:27:55] So this lack of dedicated time for social studies, I think is a little bit of a step backwards in some ways, and a century ago, teaching civics and history was definitely a fundamental part of school, and it still should be that way. So I think it's important to advocate for restoring social studies to a more prominent place in the curriculum.

[00:28:19] As somebody who creates primarily social studies resources, I would definitely be for that so that students can build the knowledge and skills in this area from an early age. Another thing I think that still needs to change, could be better, is the quality and depth of content. While textbooks and curricula are now more inclusive, they could possibly still be shallow.

[00:28:42] I mentioned a little bit earlier about how some current materials might skim the surface of historical issues without engaging students in a deeper look or deeper exploration. And while it might, you know, be because they're just simply too young to really go in depth, it even happens at the secondary level.

[00:29:03] Another thing to think about is that some topics remain contentious and sometimes just get really watered down or avoided completely due to political pressure. And I know the feeling, I know it is very, very contentious right now, especially in this day and age. We see debates even today about how to teach certain subjects such as the history of racism or even experiences of LGBTQ plus people in America.

[00:29:29] So it's an ongoing thing that I think we need to look at and improve in the future. All right. Another thing that I think needs to be improved is teacher prep and support. Especially at the elementary level, teachers may not feel confident at teaching social studies. Usually teacher prep programs and professional development may not have emphasized social studies.

[00:29:55] I know specifically in my master's degree studies for elementary education, I had one course that I took that was related to social studies, and I don't even think it was, it was like an elective. It was like one of the ones I could have chosen from, so I could have completely skipped it and not had a specific course on teaching social studies at all, which is crazy to think.

[00:30:15] There is a statistic that a significant number of history teachers in secondary schools, neither majored nor certified in history. And in elementary, most teachers are generalists, sometimes are more comfortable at teaching reading and math. So without that strong background knowledge or training, in effective social studies methods, teachers just might strictly stick to the textbook or whatever they're given

[00:30:43] and avoid any inquiry based activities. And this isn't necessarily the teacher's fault, definitely not. It is just an issue of training and support. We need more professional development opportunities focused on social studies, more mentoring, and more sharing of best practices to help teachers feel equipped and knowledgeable to teach those complex historical and civic topics.

[00:31:07] But the good news is that there are communities out there online. There's conferences you can join, webinars, online groups, listening to podcasts such as this, or my blog, reading all that information, finding really great articles related to social studies. So there's more to do, but there is a way to prioritize social studies in teacher prep and teacher education.

[00:31:32] Another one I have here is keeping content up to date and relevant. The world is always changing and sometimes the education system struggles to keep up. So like major historical events that are happening in our students' lifetimes, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or the even the 9 11 attacks 25 years ago, 20 years ago.

[00:31:55] These are sensitive and complex topics. They're just also really important to address as part of social studies because they can shape the world students are inheriting and going to have for themselves in the future. But the problem is some curriculum can lag behind. You have many current textbooks that haven't fully integrated the story of the 21st century. And it can be also tough and a lot of money to update those materials frequently due to the cost or even just the bureaucracy.

[00:32:29] Maybe textbooks in a district might only be replaced every five to 10 years, so it means that it falls to the teachers to bring in the current events and recent history so that students can see the history of up to today. So it's important to be resourceful and proactive to make sure your teaching is relevant and not stuck in the past.

[00:32:48] And the last one I wanted to mention is just engaging students who think history is quote boring because let's face it, one thing that has not changed in a hundred years is that a certain percentage of students will say history or social studies is boring. Or they might ask, why do I need to learn this?

[00:33:08] This eternal struggle will require a constant stream of creativity from teachers. But the upside is that we've got better tools, we've got better approaches to bringing history to life, rather than the droning lectures that we might have listened to in elementary school or high school or wherever you might have done that. But you can do stories and games and there's all kinds of books that you could use to capture students' imaginations.

[00:33:36] But student engagement, it's a thing. So just thinking about like having a different approach to that same challenge, to making students care about learning from the past and about society and how they can help shape our future. So just to summarize that up, we've come such a long way from the 1920s. There is always room for growth and social studies is about people.

[00:34:00] And neither people nor societies ever stop changing, it always constantly happening. So our teaching of it must also keep evolving. Now, looking back to this century of social studies education, I do find that it is very inspiring as I was researching this episode. I know it's a really long one, but it has been really interesting to see how we've moved from

[00:34:27] just a very textbook driven, wrote memorization instruction to things that, you know, involve multiple sources and real world connections and critical thinking and diverse perspectives. And you can see just in this episode, some things have changed pretty dramatically. While some core goals are remaining constant, you're fostering informed citizenship,

[00:34:51] curiosity about the world, sparking interest about what happened in history. And as upper elementary teachers, understanding this isn't just a history lesson for its own sake. It helps us appreciate why we teach the way we do today and might even help our approach kind of be reinvigorated in a sense.

[00:35:14] We can borrow some of the best things from the past, such as the storytelling aspect that made kids of a hundred years ago love the tales of explorers and pioneers and blend them in with the best of the present, such as technology and inquiry to deepen understanding and learning. Remember, every time you have your students discuss a historical issue or examine a map

[00:35:36] you are part of this 100 year and counting continuum of social studies educators shaping the next generation. It is a legacy of which we should be proud of, but also be mindful. There's a saying that says those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it. And by teaching history and social studies in general and all its complexity

[00:36:01] we can help our students not only learn history, but make history in the future as thoughtful, empathetic citizens. So I hope you enjoyed this episode on a hundred years of social studies. Maybe next time you open a nice modern textbook or get a history video up on your screen, you might think of that 1925 teacher with a chalkboard and think about how far we've come.

[00:36:30] When you encounter a challenge in teaching social studies such as just a really dry topic or limited time, remember that improving social studies is an ongoing story, one in which you as an educator can be key player in moving things forward. Thank you so much for listening to a hundred years of Social studies.

[00:36:54] Thank you also for a hundred episodes of the Social Studies Teacher podcast. Here's to a hundred more. Let's keep this conversation going with your students and your colleagues because I think it's important that reflecting on the past is the best way to inform the future. Thanks for listening, and I will talk to you next week