K-5 social studies content standards: investigating critical thinking for informed action

O. M. Odebiyi
{"title":"K-5 social studies content standards: investigating critical thinking for informed action","authors":"O. M. Odebiyi","doi":"10.1108/ssrp-05-2021-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the dynamics of critical thinking for informed action within the frame of six sample US states’ Kindergarten-5 social studies content standards.Design/methodology/approachThis study used quantitative content analysis. In addition to describing how the states’ standards present critical thinking for informed action, four variables were included: the enrollment weight of the states, textbook adoption status to advance standards, summative test status for social studies and grade levels.FindingsThe results indicate complex variations in context-based critical thinking levels are required by the sample states’ content standards with an extensive orientation toward superficial contextual thinking.Originality/valueThe study provides a new lens with which to make sense of students’ context-based critical thinking, as it relates to the expectations found in standards. It discusses the implications of the states’ K-5 standards on engaging students in critical thinking.","PeriodicalId":447901,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies Research and Practice","volume":"37 9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ssrp-05-2021-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the dynamics of critical thinking for informed action within the frame of six sample US states’ Kindergarten-5 social studies content standards.Design/methodology/approachThis study used quantitative content analysis. In addition to describing how the states’ standards present critical thinking for informed action, four variables were included: the enrollment weight of the states, textbook adoption status to advance standards, summative test status for social studies and grade levels.FindingsThe results indicate complex variations in context-based critical thinking levels are required by the sample states’ content standards with an extensive orientation toward superficial contextual thinking.Originality/valueThe study provides a new lens with which to make sense of students’ context-based critical thinking, as it relates to the expectations found in standards. It discusses the implications of the states’ K-5 standards on engaging students in critical thinking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
K-5社会研究内容标准:为知情行动调查批判性思维
本研究的目的是在美国六个样本州的幼儿园-五年级社会研究内容标准的框架内探索批判性思维对知情行动的动态影响。设计/方法/方法本研究采用定量内容分析。除了描述各州的标准如何为知情行动提供批判性思维外,还包括四个变量:各州的入学人数、教科书的采用情况、社会研究的总结性考试状况和年级水平。结果表明,样本国家的内容标准要求基于情境的批判性思维水平发生复杂的变化,并广泛倾向于肤浅的情境思维。原创性/价值这项研究提供了一个新的视角来理解学生基于情境的批判性思维,因为它与标准中的期望有关。它讨论了各州K-5标准对培养学生批判性思维的影响。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Where we are: reflecting on our use of critical mapping practices for spatial justice in teacher education “Is it a civics lesson?”: centering the local to encourage political engagement On teaching Holocaust geographies: supporting inquiry into space, persecution and civic action Learning about place from Indigenous Elders: self-study in social studies education Themed editorial: Social studies research and practice special issue: effective use of films in the social studies classroom
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1