From
the
President
A New Agenda: History Education in Ohio
K. Austin Kerr, Ph.D.
Our Webmaster, Martin Wainwright, has graciously made my remarks of last spring available (www2.uakron.edu/oah/President’s%20Address.htm) for those persons unable to attend the meeting in Canton. In brief, I explained that however fragmented we may be in our particular scholarly interests spread across the many fields of history, matters of teacher education and school curriculum are our common interest. The curriculum and teacher education are matters of state policy, and as a state-based organization we properly assume a responsibility for guiding public officials in Ohio. Many of us are unhappy with the state of these affairs in Ohio. I am suggesting that the Academy take a more active approach in influencing state policy. The time for a more active approach seems right because there is a national reform movement in history education that expresses many values that we, as members of the Academy, tend to share.
First, I propose that we set a standard in teacher education in Ohio: for a person to receive a license to teach history or “global studies” (the latter is in fact a form of world history) in grades 7–12 a history major or its equivalent is required. This standard conforms to the national educational reform movement agenda for improved teacher preparation in the content taught in the schools. Some colleges and universities in Ohio currently conform to this standard. Regrettably, some, including my own university, do not. I am asking our Standards Committee and the Executive Committee to consider my proposal, with a view toward making it a part of our Constitution and thus of our regular business. I will draft a working statement for both committees to scrutinize and consider.
Second, I am asking the Program Committee to develop one or more sessions in the Spring meeting on the status of Ohio’s history curriculum. This is a subject that is of interest to all of us. The requirement that students pass the Ohio Graduation Test to receive high school diplomas has had important effects on what transpires in the schools in history instruction. We must all understand clearly what is happening.
Third, and related to my first two agenda items, is to use part of the program of the Spring meeting to bring together people in the state who are already working on practical methods to improve the delivery of historical content in the state’s schools. The federal government is providing substantial funding for the improvement of the teaching of the content of American history in the schools. Some of us have already benefited from grants awarded. We should use our organization to help share approaches and results in this regard.
These important matters are of course interrelated. It is ironic that at the very time that the federal government is providing new funding sources for teaching American history, state policy in Ohio is pushing mandated history instruction into earlier grades. If we set clear expectations for teacher licensure and if we better inform ourselves of the ways in which state policy affects the history curriculum in the schools, we can have a greater chance of influencing public policy for the better.
Finally, I will welcome comments from you about how we might advance along these lines.
K. Austin Kerr is Professor of American and Business History at The Ohio State University.