Download Cognitive Learning- and the Social Studies

RESEARCH IN REVIEW
Edited by the ASCD Research Council
James Raths, Chairman
Cognitive Learning- and the Social Studies
THEODORE KALTSOUNIS
V^OGNITIVE learning in the so
cial studies refers to those objectives that are
related to knowledge and knowing and to the
ways these objectives are attained. Cognitive
learning includes concepts and generaliza
tions as well as intellectual skills and abilities
needed to implement independently the
process of conceptualization.
The literature does not give precise and
clear-cut definitions of the various specific
cognitive components. Especially there is
confusion in distinguishing between what is
a concept and what is a generalization. Myles
Platt (28), for example, reviewed several
sources and discovered that a number of
terms, including "generalization" and "prin
ciple," are used as substitutes for the term
"concept." This is not to say, however, that
there is no consensus as far as the definitions
of these terms are concerned. A concept is
usually a word or a phrase identifying a
group of objects or ideas with common char
acteristics. A generalization is a declarative
statement of a relationship between two or
more concepts that has broad applicability in
time and space.
A number of studies have been con
ducted to determine the various intellectual
skills and abilities needed by children to func
tion successfully as members and students of
society. The Indiana experiments (20) ar
rived at a model of reflective thinking that
included the following skills and abilities:
orientation, hypothesis, definition, explora
March 1969
tion, evidencing, and generalization. In other
words, students and teacher become sensitive
to an existing problem situation, they propose
a solution to it, and they attempt to arrive
at a consensus of definitions of related ter
minology. Deductively, then, they proceed to
test the hypothesis in terms of the validity of
its implications and in the ligllt of empirical
data. Finally, based on the evKJence avail
able, students and teacher reach a conclusion
that represents the best solution/o the prob
lem at hand.
/
Hilda Taba (34) studied the thinking
process in the context of'social studies and
categorized the cognitive skills in three major
clusters that she called "cognitive tasks."
Cognitive Task I deals with concept forma
tion and includes the skills of differentiation,
identification of common properties, and de
termination of the hierarchical order of
items. Cognitive Task II includes the abilities
to interpret, infer, and generalize. Cognitive
Task III deals with the application of "known
principles and facts to explain unfamiliar
phenomena or to predict consequences from
known conditions" (34, p. 108).
Basic Questions
One would be safe to state that in the last
several years cognitive learning has been that
aspect of the social studies program receiving
most of the attention of the researchers. In
addition to the studies designed to define the
613
nature of intellectual skills and abilities, re
searchers have attempted to answer the fol
lowing general questions:
1. What arc the most appropriate concepts
and generalizations to be used as the basis for
the social studies program''
2. Do children informally achieve more
cognitive learnings now than they did several
years ago?
3. How effectively can children deal with
cognitive learnings and how early'.'
4. What is the best method to develop
cognitive learnings?
In regard to the first question, research
ers consulted the social scientists in order to
determine the basic structural elements of
each discipline. Several studies conducted at
Stanford University (13) were among the
first ones of this type. The literature of the
social sciences was thoroughly searched for
significant generalizations that were related
to basic social functions such as government,
conservation, education, production and dis
tribution, transportation, recreation, and re
ligious and aesthetic expression. Thousands
of generalizations were identified through
these studies.
Two social scientists (3) made an in
ventory of findings in the behavioral and
social sciences and published an extensive
source of concepts and generalizations along
with the evidence supporting them. In this
source a social studies teacher can find a
number of sound concepts and generaliza
tions on which to build a successful instruc
tional program relevant to any significant
unit topic.
As a first step, most of the national cur
riculum projects in social studies education
of the past decade attempted to define the
cognitive learnings to be used as the skeleton
of the program. Social scientists were in
vited to present the basic structure of their
disciplines and discuss the methods used by
social scientists to find evidence, examine it,
and reach conclusions. A publication by the
Syracuse Project (31) provides a good ex
ample of the cognitive learnings selected to
serve as the key elements in a K-12 social
studies program.
March 1969
It is interesting to note that so many
studies and practically all major social stud
ies projects have proposed to identify the
"fundamental" concepts and generalizations
from the social sciences. As a result, one
would expect that the various lists developed
by the projects would be quite similar. While
there appears to be some agreement, there is
not as much agreement as is needed to give
teachers the necessary confidence in the new
programs.
One study in particular (161 reported
that when 14 social scientists were asked to
list the five most basic principles, or generali
zations, in the social sciences, they produced
14 lists practically all different from one an
other. While this is understandable from the
point of view of those who have a good grasp
of the social sciences, it presents a problem
for many teachers who are seeking specific
guidance in planning for teaching the social
studies.
The second question relates to whether
or not present-day children informally ac
quire more cognitive learnings than did chil
dren of previous generations. One should
realize that this question was raised as a re
sult of observations that social studies con
tent appeared to be oversimplified and below
the children's capacity to learn. A number
of studies (22. 19. 17. 27) did substantiate
these observations by establishing that chil
dren knew much of the content included in
their programs prior to instruction.
These studies should not be interpreted
to mean, however, that children did have an
in-depth understanding of the concepts and
phenomena included in their programs. In
the first place, the superficial nature of the
traditional programs themselves did not re
quire an in-depth understanding. On the
other hand, a number of investigations (35,
12. 10. 18) do show that children left unguided have difficulty applying higher levels
of thinking when confronted with social
situations.
The third question consists of two rather
important parts. One part deals with the
capability of school-age children to use intel
lectual skills and abilities effectively in order
to develop concepts and generalizations; the
615
second part relates to the now famous state
ment by Bruner that "any subject can be
taught effectively in some intellectually hon
est form to any child at any stage of develop
ment" (4, p. 33). This point of view has
stimulated a considerable amount of research
relating to the process of conceptualization in
young children. The work of Piaget has pro
vided a basis for much of this research in
education and psychology.
There is no doubt that youngsters at the
secondary level are capable of applying
higher levels of thinking in order to arrive
at basic understandings. Massialas and
Zevin (21 ), for example, reflecting findings
of their own experimentation, speak with a
considerable amount of confidence on this
matter.
It appears that success in the applica
tion of higher levels of thinking requires a
classroom atmosphere that stimulates the de
velopment of certain qualities in the person
ality of students. Reporting on the findings
of a related pilot study, Oliver and Shaver
point out "that the student who might be
characterized as a tough-minded extrovert
responded well to perhaps even enjoyed
the Socratic discussions, while less outgoing
and less aggressive students were more in
clined to pursue a subject if exposed to it
in the less threatening recitation situation"
(25, pp. 309-10).
As far as the elementary school children
are concerned, it is again abundantly clear
that they can be taught to analyze their social
environment thoughtfully and to discover re
lationships. A cluster of related studies (2,
7, 11, 14, 30) shows that this is especially
true in the upper grades of the elementary
school. Some investigations show that chil
dren at the primary grade level can deal with
cognitive learnings (5, 33); although another
study (32) cautions that limitations in chil
dren should be recognized and taken into con
sideration. These limitations consist of (a)
reading difficulties, (b) inability to deal with
complex situations, (c) the need for short
attention span activities, and (d) the need
for very close guidance from the teacher.
The fourth area of concern to current
researchers has to do with finding the best
method for developing cognitive learnings.
March 1969
Numerous research efforts have tried to re
place the conventional textbook-lecture-dis
cussion method of teaching with a variety of
reflective methods inspired by the modes of
inquiry of the social science disciplines (15,
29, 6, 8). Those studies support the thesis
that reflective teaching and learning methods
are more successful in terms of knowledge
gained by the children and in the develop
ment of their critical thinking abilities than
the traditional method of teaching social
studies. Common terms identifying the new
methods are "case study," "in-depth study."
"themes approach." "problem solving," "in
quiry," and others. Included among the new
approaches are those made possible through
technology, such as simulation and pro
grammed instruction (23. 9, 1).
The term "model" as applied to instruc
tional theory is prominent in today's profes
sional literature. A variety of inquiry models
have been developed to facilitate social stud
ies learning. Parsons and Shaftel (26) have
classified these models into "categorical" and
"strategic" in terms of the degree of openendcdness that characterized them. Strategic
models, placing more emphasis on the
process and requiring the child to reach his
own conclusions, are more open-ended than
the categorical ones that demand that the
children search for predetermined conclu
sions. According to Parsons and Shaftel. how
ever, both types can work to the disadvantage
of the development of thinking skills by re
stricting children to a rigid method of think
ing rather than allowing them to exercise
divergent thought processes.
New Approaches Needed
The studies cited in this paper represent
just a few of many that concern themselves
with cognitive learning in the social studies.
In fact, it appears that concern with the cog
nitive domain has dominated the entire thrust
of social studies curriculum revision in recent
years. A great deal of research attention has
been given to the content drawn from the
social science disciplines and to methods of
instruction growing out of methods of inquiry
of the disciplines.
There are those who argue that this
trend has gone too far. For example, "The
617
monopoly of academic disciplines presently
embedded in the curriculum . . ." says Fred
Newmann, "tends to preclude from formal
education a large number of exciting, though
nondisciplined, experiences." He goes on to
list fantasy, love, hate, humor, and day
dreaming as examples of nondisciplined
experiences.
Generally speaking, research in social
studies education is a rather recent phe
nomenon. As has already been implied in
this paper, the cognitive aspects of social
studies education have attracted most of the
researchers' attention. This does not mean,
however, that cognitive learning as it relates
to social studies has been adequately investi
gated or that the studies conducted represent
a coordinated research effort. A great num
ber of the studies are doctoral dissertations
concerned with rather small and isolated
problems.
There is a need for longitudinal studies
to investigate the lasting effects of the reflec
tive methods of teaching and learning. New
instruments must be developed. It is neither
enough nor correct to judge the quality of the
new programs and methods on the basis of
standards and instruments designed to suit
the old programs. Also, there is a need to
study the effect that affective variables have
on cognitive learnings. It is difficult to study
any of the domains of the individual in isola
tion. This could even be considered to be
inappropriate for the social studies educator
who is primarily concerned with the indi
vidual as a decision maker in his role as a
member of the society in which he lives.
References
1. Eugene
H.
Baker.
"A
Comparative
Study of Textbook and Simulation Approaches in
Teaching Junior High School American History."
Dissertation Abstracts 24: 3353; April 1967.
2. Edward W Beaubier. "Capacity of SixthGrade Children to Understand Social Science Gen
eralizations." D issertation Abstracts 23: 2439;
January 1963.
3. Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner.
Human Behavior: Inventory of Scientific Findings.
New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1964.
4. Jerome S. Bruner. The Process of Edu
cation. New York: Vintage Books, 1960.
5. G. Cammarota. "New Emphasis in Social
March 1969
Studies for the Primary Grades." Sofia? Education
17: 77-80; February 1963.
6. Charlotte Crabtree. "Effects of Structuring
on the Productiveness of Children's Thinking."
The Journal of Experimental Education 36: 1-13;
Fall 1967.
7. O. L. Davis. "Learning About Time Zones
in Grades Four, Five, and Six." Journal of Experi
mental Education 3 1: 507-12; Summer 1963.
8. Orville N. Dodge. "Generalization and
Concept Development as an Instructional Method
for 8th Grade History." D issertation Abstracts 2 7:
1632; December 1966.
9. Irvin J. Farber. "A Study of the Use of
Programmed Instruction in a Group Situation."
Dissertation Abstracts 26; 1509-10; September 1965.
10 Phineas Goldstein. "Concepts of Landforms and Waterforms of Children Beginning First
Grade." D issertation Abstracts 2 7: 1199-1212; No
vember 1960.
11. Edward L. Greenblatt. "An Exploratory
Study of the Development of Selected Generaliza
tions in Social Studies." D issertation Abstracts 24:
3640; March 1964.
12. Fred I. Greenstein. C hildren and Politics.
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965.
13. Paul R. Hanna and John R. Lee. "Con
tent in the Social Studies." Social Studies in Ele
mentary Schools. Thirty-Second Yearbook of the
National Council for the Social Studies. Washing
ton, D.C.: NCSS. 1962. pp. 1162-89.
14. Bruce
Joyce
and
Elizabeth
Joyce.
"Searching for Strategies for Social Education."
The Elementary School Journal 66: 272-83; Febru
ary 1968.
15. Bruce Joyce and Carl Weinberg. "Using
the Strategies of Sociology in Social Education."
Elementary School Journal 64: 265-72; February
1964.
16. Theodore Kaltsounis.
"Current Basic
Principles in Social Sciences." Education 84:
275-79; January 1964.
17. Theodore Kaltsounis. "A Study Concern
ing Third Graders' Knowledge of Social Studies
Content Prior to Instruction." J ournal of Educa
tional Research 5 7: 345-49; March 1964.
18. Bernard G. Kirsch. "An Evaluation of
Levels of Cognitive Learning in a Unit of Fifth
Grade Social Studies." D issertation Abstracts 28:
541; August 1967.
19. Betty L. Lowry. "A Survey of the Knowl
edge of Social Studies Concepts Possessed by Sec
ond Grade Children Previous to the Time These
Concepts Are Taught in the Social Studies Lessons."
Dissertation Abstracts 24: 2324; December 1963.
20. Byron G. Massialas and C. Benjamin Cox.
Inquiry in Social Studies. N ew York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company, Inc., 1966. pp. 115-21.
21. Byron G. Massialas and Jack Zevin.
619
"Teaching Social Studies Through Discovery." So
cial Education 28: 384-87; November 1964.
22. John D. McAulay. "Social Studies in the
Primary Grades" S ocial Education 1 9: 357-58;
December 1954.
23. Jerry R. Moore. "An Experiment in Pro
grammed Instruction Voting in Iowa, Ninth Grade
Civics." D issertation Abstracts 2 5: 5156-57; March
1965.
24. Fred M. Newmann. "Questioning the
Place of Social Science Disciplines in Education."
Social Education 3 1 (7): 593-96; November 1967.
25. Donald W. Oliver and James P. Shaver.
Teaching Public Issues in the High School. B oston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966.
26. Theodore W. Parsons and Fannie R.
Shaftel. "Thinking and Inquiry: Some Critical Is
sues." In: Jean Fair and Fannie R. Shaftel, editors.
Effective Thinking in the Social Studies. 37th Year
book of the National Council for the Social Studies.
Washington, D.C.: NCSS, 1967. pp. 141-47.
27. Orville K. Penner. "A Study of Fourth
Grade Children's Knowledge of Selected Social
Studies Concepts Prior to Instruction." D issertation
Abstracts 28: 403; August 1967.
28. Myles M. Platt. "Concepts and the Cur
riculum." Social Education 2 7: 21; January 1963.
29. Wilma M. Possien. "A Comparison of
the Effect of Three Teaching Methodologies on the
Development of the Problem Solving Skills of Sixth
Grade Children." D issertation Abstracts 25: 4003;
January 1965.
30. James E. Potterfield. "An Analysis of
Elementary School Children's Ability to Learn An
thropological Content at Grades Four, Five, and
Six." Journal of Educational Research 6 1: 297-99;
March 1968.
31. Roy A. Price, Warren Hickman, and
Gerald Smith. M ajor Concepts for Social Studies.
Syracuse: Social Studies Curriculum Center at
Syracuse University, 1965.
32. Mary Rusnak. "Introducing Social Stud
ies in the First Grade." Social Education 25: 29192; October 1961.
33. Bernard Spodek. "Developing Social Sci
ence Concepts in Kindergarten." Social Education
27: 253-57; May 1963.
34. Hilda Taba. Teachers' H andbook for Ele
mentary Social Studies. Palo Alto, California: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1967. pp. 87-127.
35. Carroll E. Weber. "A Study of SixthGrade Children's Ability to Infer the Influence
of the Natural Environment Upon Man." Disserta
tion A bstracts 25: 4012; January 1965.
THEODORE KALTSOUNIS, Associate
Professor of Education, University of Wash
ington, Seattle.
THE CADMUS CURRICULUM CHART
Relates
CADMUS BOOKS
to Popular
BASIC READERS
and Provides
Easy Reference to
Find Appropriate
Material For
Reading Beyond
the Textbook and
Individualized
Reading
Subject Area Correlation
Personal Values Correlation
Are Inclvded in Separate
Sections of Ike Chart
<S. M. Uolt cud
1201 South Hastings Way
Eau Claire, Wiscor-in 54701
March 1969
621
Copyright © 1969 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development. All rights reserved.