American Heritage Education

American heritage education is a curriculum-reform initiative that supports the teaching of fundamentals that have made America a strong and prosperous nation. Especially since the 9/11 Tragedy, many U.S. education reformists have petitioned curriculum reform that would use facts about America's history to teach citizenship, democracy, and patriotism to the next generation. Some groups, such as the American Heritage Education Foundation, have packaged educational programs for K-12 teachers that include content related to historical events, symbols, documents and biographies. Critics of this approach favor a curriculum that focuses on the development of critical thinking that can prepare a citizenry to embrace democratic principles and enable them to evolve a democratic future. Both groups agree that the reformed curriculum should teach students what being an American means, but what the curriculum should be and how "American" is defined continues to be deliberated.

Keywords American Heritage Education; Alternative Education; Diversity; Heritage Education; No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB); Public Education; Revisionist History; School Board; Separation of Church and State; Traditional History; We the People Grant

Overview

Heritage education, a curriculum-reform initiative that supports the teaching of fundamentals that have made America a strong and prosperous nation, is among many interest areas of education reform groups who are concerned with the status of public education. From the time that public education in the U.S. began in the mid-nineteenth century, primary authority over the education of children was assumed by local communities and administered by school boards of locally-elected individuals. Over time, local citizens shared the cost of schooling for their community's children, most children attended public schools, and most Americans felt a patriotic attachment to their schools. The early public schools were vital community institutions and reflected the mores of parents and churches. Along with the 3 R's-reading, 'riting, 'rithmetic-values (such as honesty, industry, patriotism and tolerance for differences) were also emphasized (Ravitch, 2000).

Under the public education model, education is provided for all children, is compulsory (until a certain age) and government has direction over the curriculum, certification of teachers and testing standards. Even though the focus of public education has been to prepare a citizenry that advances a unified collective, it has always been accepted that parents and families have ultimate decision-making rights and responsibilities for their children. From the earliest times, some families turned to home education, and other alternative education approaches, as substitutes for the learning environments provided in public schools. Motivations to choose alternatives have ranged from religious reasons (due to the separation of church and state) to general dissatisfaction with government control over curriculum and teaching methods.

As the United States has developed beyond an agrarian society, beyond an industrial society and into a society that is a major influence in the global collective, state and federal governments have contributed more tax support to educating the nation's next generation. Associated with greater financial support, state and federal governments also have assumed more power in defining the curriculum in order to maintain a competitive workforce for the global economy.

The No Child Left behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is federal legislation that currently directs U.S. public education. The act follows the idea that setting goals and having higher expectations for students will ensure that they will be successful and the country will be continually prosperous. Critics claim that NCLB promotes teaching aimed at increasing test scores. They also have concern that some subjects-such as art, history, and music-have become minimized (or eliminated) in the public school curriculum.

Gaining much national attention, especially since the 9/11 Tragedy, several education reformist groups have advocated a return to the education of America's factual and philosophical heritage to further constructive citizenship among the next generation. While there is debate amongst educators about how to best accomplish this, much focus by all groups is on reform of the social studies curriculum (Puaca, 2004).

New Heritage Programs

A September 2002 Rose Garden speech by President George Bush, unleashed funding support for curriculum reform and heritage education. Three initiatives were introduced to encourage History and Civic Engagement education into the public school curriculum.

The first initiative was the "We the People" grant, administered by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), to provide federal funds to:

• Develop curricula;

• Hold training seminars for classroom teachers and university faculty;

• Sponsor a series of lectures where scholars present the tales of American history and the famous people involved; and

• Sign high school students up for essay contests that involve the knowledge of American history, laws, and ideals.

The second initiative, "Our Documents" implemented by the National Archives, would use the Internet to:

• Make available America's most important documents,

• Provide lesson plans, and

• Promote discussions about important moments in U.S. history.

Thirdly, a White House forum on American history was scheduled to discuss public school curriculum modifications that would promote national treasures and make them more relevant to the lives of students (President Introduces History & Civic Education Initiatives, 2002).

Some Disappointing Statistics

In a promotional speech to launch the NEH "We the People" Grant, Chairperson Bruce Cole (2002) asserted that the survival of participatory democracy requires an informed and educated citizenry. He contended that “polls, tests, and studies have shown that Americans do not know their history, cannot remember even the most significant events of the 20th century, and are in danger of having a view of the future obscured by ignorance of the past” (Cole, 2002, ¶ 3). In his speech, he cites a study of students that found

• Over a third were unable to identify the Constitution as establishing the division of governmental powers,

• Only 29% could identify the term Reconstruction,

• 40% could not place the Civil War in the correct half-century, and

• Over half could not state who fought in World War II.

In closing, Cole purports that citizens who don't know why their nation exists, or what it stands for, cannot be expected to maintain its strength (Cole, 2002, ¶ 6).

The American Heritage Education Foundation

An active national group that is focused on creating a curriculum to promote a unified citizenry is the American Heritage Education Foundation (AHEF). The Texas-based organization collaborates nationally with school districts, government, businesses, churches, and non-profit and professional organizations to advance American heritage education. At the core of AHEF's belief is that Freedom, Unity, Progress, and Responsibility are cornerstones of the country's strength and can be objectively studied so that students will understand, appreciate, and carry on the republic "of the people, by the people, and for the people." The organization's premise is that students who understand the philosophical principles on which the U.S. was established will become more patriotic, informed, and responsible citizens able to perpetuate the values and strengths necessary for the country to continue to prosper (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007a).

A study by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (2006) supports the AHEF's advocacy for an American heritage curriculum:

• “The average college senior knows very little about America's history, government, international relations, and market economy; scores on the civic literacy test averaged 53.2 percent” (p. 7).

• “Prestige doesn't pay off; there is no relationship between the cost of attending college and the mastery of America's history, politics, and economy.

• Students do not learn what colleges do not teach; schools where students were required to take more courses related to America's history outperformed those schools where fewer courses were completed” (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007a, “Irving Kristol”).

• “Greater civic learning goes hand-in-hand with more active citizenship; students who demonstrated greater learning of America's history and its institutions were more engaged in citizenship activities such as voting, volunteer community service, and political campaigns” (Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2006, p. 7).

Further Insights

By the end of the nineteenth century, the newly gained freedom that Americans fought so hard for was starting to result in a high standard of living for U.S. citizens. With just a small percent of the earth's population, Americans had been able to create the majority of their goods and services for the entire world. While preparing a mission statement for the organization, the three founders of the American Heritage Education Foundation desired to define a "formula" to explain America's success. They believed it would be worthwhile to teach the formula for the advancement and success of America. After several hours of conversation and contemplation, the three settled on an arrangement of general national character traits that became the basis for creating an American heritage curriculum. They identified four central themes to make up America's formula for success-freedom, unity, progress, and responsibility (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007b).

• FREEDOM

AHEF founders suggested that the first and most important characteristic was freedom, supported by the fact that the nation's founders were common people without class distinctions or nobility. The colonists “believed that a Creator endowed all men, including commoners, with the equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Given a philosophical belief that their freedom was a gift from God, and not a privilege granted by a monarch, America's founders committed to achieve ultimate freedom from England. Freedom in the United States has always been viewed as a gift from God because it affirms the idea that freedom for all is unalienable and cannot be taken away by another human being” (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007b, “Jack Kamrath”).

• UNITY

Unity is considered to be the second most significant characteristic of the country. After a long and difficult war to achieve freedom from England, the country was challenged to find a way to govern themselves that everyone would agree with despite the differences of nationalites and characteristics among the colonies and colonists. With all their differences, the original thirteen colonies knew they must join together for their own continuation and success. The first words of the Constitution, "We the people" express national unity as does the first national motto "E Pluribus Unum" (the Latin phrase for "From Many, One"). Americans have the right to reveal individual beliefs but also the opportunity and responsibility to listen to their fellow Americans.

• PROGRESS

Progress is identified as the third most important characteristic which is supported by the nation's social, economic, transportation, communication, health, and living advances. They discussed four ingredients-freedom, capital investment, energy, and education-as vital for each generation to increase the output of goods and services. To add perspective regarding the importance of progress, they cited lifestyle data from 1902: “the average life expectancy was 47 years; only 14% of homes had a bathtub; only 8% of homes had a telephone; there were only 8,000 cars and 144 miles of paved roads; the average worker earned between $200 and $400 per year; the airplane, insulin, penicillin, antibiotics, radio, television, and washing machines were some key American inventions that had not yet been discovered” (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007b, “Jack Kamrath”).

• RESPONSIBILITY

The AHEF founders identified responsibility as the fourth most important characteristic of America's success formula, pointing out that Americans contribute time and resources to help others. In addition to philanthropists, nearly half of the adult population contributes volunteer hours each week in the fields of education, health and human services, youth development, and religion. They suggest that the country's free market economy has proven itself to be successful in allowing wealth to help those that are less fortunate (AHEF, 2007b).

Based on these principles, AHEF has created a packaged educational program, "America's Heritage: An Adventure in Liberty," a resource for K-12 teachers of social studies, U. S. history, U. S. government, political science, and economics. The program includes age-appropriate and alterations lesson objectives that aim to present chances for students to examine and learn about the factual and philosophical meaning behind events relating to the early history of America. The elementary school version, for example, “includes lessons about the colonists' experience under monarchy; the context for the writing of the Declaration of Independence; the creation of important American symbols, songs, and holidays; and the character traits modeled by great national leaders and presidents” (American Heritage Educational Foundation, 2007a, ¶ 2).

Viewpoints

Traditional vs. Revisionist History

The controversy about utilizing history as a tool in teaching citizenship, democracy, and patriotism is appearing all over the country, especially where special consideration is being given to social studies and history requirements. The national debate regarding history: “pits what is being called "traditional history" against "revisionism" (the continual exploration and reinterpretation of the past). Revisionist history is often blamed for being critical of the United States and for not conveying the singularity of the American experience and the significance of the nation's values” (Organization of American Historians, 2004, ¶ 5).

Those who support traditional history maintain “that in the aftermath of 9/11, it is more important than ever for students to learn the history of the nation, the principles on which it was founded, the workings of its government, the origins of its freedom” (Puaca, 2004, ¶ 1). They purport that history also educates students on how to be good citizens, to have knowledge about their own nation as well as its relation to other countries. Puaca (2004) reports that in 2003, reports from the Fordham Institute ("Where did Social Studies go Wrong") and the Albert Shanker Institute ("Education for Democracy") supported curriculum reform that would define a common core of history that binds citizens and would create a common civic identity based on a patriotism of principles that are part of the nation's past but also necessary for the nation's future (Puaca, 2004).

These reports stimulated much discourse among progressive educators who favored a revisionist curriculum that focused on the development of critical thinking that would enable citizens to not only appreciate democracy but also to improve upon it for future generations. In one of several articles responding to the Fordham and Shanker Institute reports, Ross & Marker (2005) claimed that the reports endorsed a "citizenship transmission" model of social studies which promotes the teaching and learning of discrete facts believed to lead to the practice of good citizenship. They described an alternative approach to social studies which they called "informed social criticism aimed at providing students opportunities for an examination, critique, and revision of past traditions, existing social practices, and modes of problem solving” (Ross & Marker, 2005, p. 250). The suggested this approach fosters "citizenship education in which students are involved in the examination of social problems, taught independent thinking and responsible social criticism, introduced to diverse and multiple perspectives, and encouraged to participate actively in the improvement of society” (Ross & Marker, 2005, p. 250).

Kornfeld (2005) criticizes the reports and advocates a curriculum that presents a new way of looking at patriotism and citizenship. He suggests that love of country also involves protecting its environment, safeguarding its citizens by protecting the Bill of Rights, and continuing to seek understanding and appreciation of the diversity that has contributed to the nation since its inception (Kornfeld, 2005).

Need for Improvement

As the debate over how to construct a social studies curriculum to prepare good citizens for the future of the nation continues, fortunately “there are some points of agreement between the traditionalists and their critics. Perhaps the most important point of agreement is the need for better training of future history teachers in the subject of history itself. Secondary school teachers should have a major, or at least a minor, in history at the college level. Both sides also acknowledge that the study of the past should give students a sense of historical consciousness. In feeling the presence of the past in their lives, students see that there is a path that has been made ready for them, one on which they find their place and have an opportunity to leave their footprint” (Organization of American Historians, 2004, “Some Points of Agreement”). In general, there is agreement that the curriculum should teach students what being an American means, but how that transpires and how "American" is defined continues to be deliberated (Puaca, 2004).

Terms & Concepts

American Heritage Education: This term describes a curriculum-reform initiative that supports the teaching of fundamentals that have made America a strong and prosperous nation.

Alternative Education: This term, also referred to as non-traditional education, describes approaches to teaching and learning that differ from those supported by mainstream public education.

Diversity: This term refers to the political and social policy of encouraging tolerance of, and participation by, all people of different backgrounds.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): A 2001 law that reenacted several federal programs responsible for the improvement and performance of American schools and school districts by advancing the standards of accountability for schools.

Public Education: This term refers to education that is mandated by the government for all children of the general public; in the U.S., K-12 public education is paid for, in whole or part by local, state and federal taxes and is commonly overseen by an elected school board of the local community.

Revisionist History: Within the academic field of history, this term refers to the reexamining of history and the facts involved by interpreting new information or redefine previously interpreted facts.

School Board: This describes the group that is made up of locally-elected members who make decisions for the schooling of children in their community.

Separation of Church and State: This term refers to a portion of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Traditional History: This term is used to describe a social studies curriculum reform movement to use America's history to teach citizenship, democracy, and patriotism to the next generation.

We the People Grant: Federal legislation that provides funding to promote and enhance the education and understanding of United States history by supporting the programs that involve importance historical events that connect to the country’s history and that are capable of continuing the knowledge of American principles.

Bibliography

American Heritage Educational Foundation, (2007a). Our mission and philosophy. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.americanheritage.org/about_ahef.html

American Heritage Educational Foundation, (2007b). Our four themes: A formula for America. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.americanheritage.org/themes.html

Cole, B., (2002). Our American amnesia. [Electronic version]. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.wethepeople.gov/newsroom/wsjarticle.html

Fea, J. (2013). Using the past to “save” our nation: The debate over Christian America. OAH Magazine of History, 27, 7-11. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=84669733&site=ehost-live

Gaither, M. (2012). The revisionists revived: The libertarian historiography of education. History of Education Quarterly, 52, 488-505. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=82764428&site=ehost-live

Intercollegiate Studies Institute. (2006). The coming crisis in citizenship. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/report/old/2006/summary.html

Kornfeld, J., (2005). Framing the conversation: Social studies education and the neoconservative agenda. Social Studies, 96 . Retrieved October 25, 2007 from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18487302&site=ehost-live

Organization of American Historians, (2004). History, democracy and citizenship: The debate over history's role in teaching citizenship and patriotism. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.oah.org/reports/tradhist.html

President Introduces History & Civic Education Initiatives. (2002). Text of speech delivered at the Rose Garden, September 2002. [Electronic version]. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020917-1.html

Puaca, L., (2004). Traditional history vs. revisionist history: A summary of the debate over history's role in teaching citizenship and patriotism. Retrieved October 25, 2007 from http://www.oah.org/reports/tradhist.html

Ross, E. & Marker, P., (2005). A critical response to the Fordham Institute's where did social studies go wrong? Social Studies, 96 . Retrieved October 25, 2007 from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18487301&site=ehost-live

Thompson, F.T., & Austin, W.P. (2011). The impact of revisionist history on pre-service and in-service teacher worldviews. Education, 132, 39-53. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=66538789&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Albert Shanker Institute, (2003). Education for Democracy. Available from http://www.ashankerinst.org/Downloads/EfD%20final.pdf

Ravitch, D., (2000). Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms NY: Simon and Schuster.

Thomas B. Fordham Institute, (2003.) Where Did Social Studies Go Wrong? Available from http://www.edexcellence.net/foundation/publication/publication.cfm?id=317