EVALUATING THE CONTENT OF THE MICHIGAN HISTORY STANDARDS

The class will be divided into five groups. Each of the first four groups will evaluate one Michigan Framework history standard and benchmarks by comparing it with criteria set forth in the Bradley Commission's Building a History Curriculum, p. 19 (hereafter BHC) and the four curricular patterns outlined in BHC, pp. 20-21. The fifth group will evaluate the Michigan history standards as a whole by comparing them with the "Topics for the Study of American History, Western Civilization, and World History" (BHC, pp. 12-15).

Groups focusing on individual standards (Group 1 on Standard 1.1, Group 2 on Standard 1.2, etc.) will prepare a report to the rest of the class that addresses the following issues:

1. Compare the standard and benchmarks assigned to you with the criteria set forth in BHC, p. 19, column 2. Which criteria does your standard and its benchmarks best address? Which criteria are inadequately addressed?
2. Compare your standard and its benchmarks to the curriculum patterns in BHC, pp. 20-21. What similarities exist? What differences? How would you account for the differences: by philosophical differences between the documents; by restricted space in the social studies curriculum; by some other factor? Explain.
3. Consider how you as a teacher might compensate for those areas that are inadequately addressed in your history standard. Are they included in one of the other three history standards? Could you address some deficiencies through non-history content standards? What advantages might attend attempts to teach, say, world history content through a geography-based course in contemporary global studies? What drawbacks? How else might you achieve better student preparation in history?

Group 5 will prepare a report to the rest of the class that addresses the following issues:

1. Briefly survey the Michigan history standards and benchmarks (1.1.1 through 1.4.12). Compare the standards with "Topics for the Study of American History, Western Civilization, and World History" (BHC, 12-15). What topics in each area are adequately addressed within the history standards? What topics are inadequately addressed?
   
2. Consider how you as a teacher might compensate for topics not well covered in the Michigan history standards. Could you address some deficiencies through non-history content standards? What advantages might attend attempts to teach, say, world history topics through a geography-based course in contemporary global studies? What drawbacks? How else might you teach topics left out of the Michigan Framework?
   
3. Based on a fair estimate of the percentage of history content prescribed by the Michigan Framework for History education, what letter-grade would you assign the Framework, where 90-100% = A, 80-89% = B, 70-79% = C, 60-69% = D, 59% and below = E? What might you do to improve the history grade in your own classroom?