ERIC Number: ED049145
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1971-Feb
Reference Count: 0
Pre-Service, Secondary School Teacher Educators and the "New" Social Studies.
Tucker, Jan L.
Purposes of this research were to: 1) identify major characteristics of the "new" social studies (NSS) as perceived by methods teachers; 2) compare are-being emphasized perceptions with what methods teachers think ought-to-be emphasized; and, 3) discover relationships between what methods teachers think should be happening and other variables. A 21 page questionnaire was administered to a sampling of pre-service, secondary level instructors from National Council for Social Studies membership, 1969. Data returns and detailed analysis are presented. Some general findings were that methods teachers 1) tend to equate the NSS with major curriculum projects; 2) were dissatisfied with the strong developmental role played by the projects; 3) saw the NSS as overly academic, cerebral, and teacher centered; and, 4) wanted more emphasis on student interests, community activities, social action, and affective domain. Also, methods teachers who held appointments in schools of education tended to be more dissatisfied with the NSS than those in academic departments. Complete research results and their implications are thoroughly discussed with three explanatory hypotheses offered for the unfavorable perceptions. Of the three (obsolescence, role-conflict, and value-conflict) the researcher speculates that the value-conflict hypothesis is the most explanatory yet most difficult to deal with. Related documents are SO 000 922 and SO 000 764. (Author/JSB)
Descriptors: College Faculty, Curriculum Development, Curriculum Evaluation, Curriculum Research, Education Courses, Educational Objectives, Educational Research, Methods Teachers, Preservice Teacher Education, Projects, Social Studies, Teacher Attitudes, Teacher Background, Teacher Education, Teacher Educators
Publication Type: N/A
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers: New Social Studies; Stanford University CA
Note: Revision of a paper presented at the Annual Convention, American Educational Research Association, New York, New York February 1971