One thing about the #abed curriculum that is not being discussed enough is that the Knowledge-Understanding-Procedures categories don't make sense and there's a total absence of concepts. Image
For example, it differentiates between knowledge and understanding, but I have yet to hear a coherent explanation of the difference between the two, or a justifiable reason for separating them.
As discussed by @ArthurJChapman in his new book, history educators typically organize historical knowledge and understanding into first-order (substantive knowledge i.e. know that) and second-order (procedural, disciplinary or metahistorical knowledge i.e. know how). Image
The #abed curriculum includes many factual propositions, but very little focus on substantive social studies concepts that are important for students to deepen their understanding of throughout their K-12 education (e.g. democracy, rights, imperialism, technology).
The #abed social studies curriculum doesn't include any focus on second-order concepts in history (time, continuity & change, cause & consequence, significance, evidence, interpretations, perspectives).

First-order concepts don't make sense without second-order concepts.
The skills and procedures that are included are generic and isolated (e.g. create a map, recognize and explain the origin of, describe some encounters between) that don't build on each other within each grade or from grade to grade.
The skills and procedures are explicitly connected to content and are not designed to be applied to different content/concepts throughout and across curriculum. Image
The descriptions in the Knowledge and Understanding categories are incoherent & interchangeable. They include topics (migrations of people to Britain), factual propositions (Largest land empire in human history), & generic statements (people migrate for different reasons). Image
The Knowledge category includes topics and propositions, and the Understanding category includes topics, propositions, and general statements.

The wording between the different categories is inconsistent, as is the capitalization (a minor concern).
Not only is the #abed social studies curriculum problematic for all the reasons highlighted by @cpeck3 & many others over the past few days, it is built on a deeply flawed and conceptually confused foundation.
Like everything the @UCPCaucus and @jkenney do, the #abed social studies curriculum is ideological and incompetent.

It's pretty clear that whoever wrote the curriculum had no idea what they were doing.

Who would've guessed that hiring ideologues with little to no experience writing curriculum or in K-12 education would've produced curriculum like this?

It's deeply ironic that a government focused on creating a knowledge-rich curriculum hired consultants with no knowledge.
There's one thing I'd like to mention that may not be popular.

The conceptual confusion of knowledge-understanding-procedures in the #abed curriculum dates back to the @abndpcaucus curriculum revision.
I discussed this #abed ministry officials numerous times in my work as a member of the SS curriculum working group. It ended up being one of several reasons why I resigned from the group.
I apologize to @colettemondor @GWozny @DanScratch03 @findog99 @Haroldnuk @beerdman
& others for dredging up some of the same arguments from the glory days of the SS Working group.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Lindsay Gibson

Lindsay Gibson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ls_gibson

30 Nov 20
Given the proliferation of articles about #socialstudies teachers using racist learning resources and assignments I thought I’d write a tweet thread about selecting learning resources for teaching #socialstudies and #history……

Studies provide many e.g.'s of omissions, falsehoods, mistruths, generalizations, and stereotypes in textbooks.

Increasingly, teachers are buying & selling classroom resources on for-profit educational sites that do not adequately vet their materials.…

Most #Canadian Ministries of Education no longer authorize learning resources and there is no process or system in place to vet and review learning resources for teaching #socialstudies and #history

Basically, it's up to the teacher to select learning resources

Read 19 tweets
1 Sep 20
My response to @jdmstewart1's op-ed in the @globeandmail today about the toppling of the statue of JAM.

For context, JDM is a history teacher at a private girls boarding school and has written a book "Being Prime Minister. Also, we disagree about almost everything.
The idea that without JAM the very existence of Canada "may be questioned" is counter-factual logic.

We don't know if Canada would've existed without JAM. Surely he played a key role in initiating Confederation, but there were many causal factors that also contributed.
What JDM fails to recognize is that the statue of JAM symbolizes the systemic racism towards Indigenous people and other groups. Making Canadians more aware of this history by tearing down a symbolic statue may in fact advance these causes.
Read 23 tweets
14 Aug 20
Want to know what C.P. Champion, the newly-appointed advisor for #abed social studies curriculum thinks about the #abed social studies curriculum?

Here's a few nuggets from C.P. Champion's Spring/Summer 2019 article in the @DorchesterRev about "Alberta's Little History War." ImageImage
He seems to really like @jkenney and approves of his attacks on the NDP's social studies curriculum as "social engineering and pedagogical fads." Image
He despises "issues-based interdisciplinary social studies," which he incorrectly assumes is beloved by my colleague @cpeck3 and I. Image
Read 26 tweets
6 Jun 20
Since 2016 I've been part of @projectDOHR, a community-based partnership that, “examines the experience of the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children as part of the history and legacy of systemic and institutionalized racism” (Province of NS, 2015a: 4)

The opportunity to work with former residents of the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children (NSHCC), the NSHCC Restorative Inquiry, Victims of Institutional Child Exploitation Society (VOICES), educators, historians, and legal experts on this project has been transformative.
Being immersed in African Nova Scotian and African Canadian history has been a tremendous learning experience and opened my eyes to events and issues in #cdnhist that I might not have known about otherwise.

Read 52 tweets
25 May 20
I am a great admirer of @samwineburg’s research and the contributions that he and @SHEG_Stanford have made to #historyed in the US and internationally cannot be understated, but there are a few conceptual issues with the #historicalthinking chart below.

HT is defined in terms of analyzing primary sources, but does not include other important 2nd order HT concepts including historical empathy, cause and consequence, continuity & change, progress & decline, historical significance, and the ethical dimension (amongst others).
The chart doesn’t differentiate between written sources and visual sources such as maps, photographs, paintings, oral history that utilize many of the same questions, but also requires different questions, contextual knowledge, and methods of analysis.

Read 19 tweets
6 May 20
A few thoughts about the recent article "Teaching History Is Hard: How to invite students to think for themselves" by Edward Ayers… that was also featured in the @washingtonpost…

As pointed out by @samwineburg in the opening chapter of Why Learn History… anxiety in the US over students' lack of knowledge of US history (as revealed by national tests like the NAEP and its predecessors) has been ongoing for more than a century.

The NAEP history test has been criticized by history educators for many reasons.

Shuttleworth and Patterson (2019) criticized the NAEP for using misleading achievement level terms, which led to negative cross-partisan media reports…
Read 35 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!