UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

INTRODUCTION

Unit I provides its readers relevant information on the nature, evolution and goals
of Social Studies as an essential program/ learning area in the curriculum. It traced back the
roots of the discipline and how it evolved through time taking into account the socio-political
dynamics as its background. Moreover, the unit underscores the discipline's distinct nature as
it examines Social Studies' integrative feature putting much premium on its
interdisciplinarity.
Likewise, it explores Social Studies in the context of the K to 12 Philippine Basic Education
focusing on the elementary curriculum. Finally, constructivism, as an educational philosophy
was re-examined in light of Social Studies' goals and processes as they both facilitate in the
development of a holistic Filipino learner with 21st Century skills.
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

Lesson 1: What is Social Studies?

Learning Objectives
At the end of the lesson, you will be able to:
 Analyze the concept of social studies
 Distinguish the features of the Philippine social studies
 Trace the development of social studies
 Examine the challenges of the Philippine social studies

Introduction

Have you ever noticed the rapid changes around you? It might probably be in
aggregate forms such as technological breakthroughs, institutional reformation, modification
or even in vital details of everyday experiences for instance, an abrupt decision made by one
of your family members of living overseas or even by you shifting college courses due to
some circumstances. These things could indeed be overwhelming. How do you then deal with
these experiences?
As a future Social Studies educator, it is a must for you to thoroughly understand how
institutional changes affect the minute details of individual lives. This is vital as you
effectively educate learners the dynamism of social interactions, an essential nomenclature in
Social Studies curriculum.

Think
As societies around the world struggle to keep pace with the progress of technology
and globalization, increasing individualization and diversity, expanding economic and
cultural uniformity, degradation of ecosystem services, and greater vulnerability and
exposure to natural and technological hazards (UNESCO, 2017), education as a mechanism
of support should likewise evolve if it is to sustain its relevance.

The K to 12 Basic Education Program implemented in 2012 is a response to the

aforementioned global trends through the passage of Republic Act 10533 or the Enhanced
Basic Education Act of 2013. It expands and improves the delivery of basic education by
producing Filipino learners who are equipped with the necessary skills and competence, and
are at par with their international counterparts. The law clearly stipulated this in Section II
which states that:

......every graduate of basic education shall be an empowered individual who has learned,
through a program that is rooted on sound educational principles and geared towards
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

excellence, the foundations for learning throughout life, the competence to engage in work
and be productive, the ability to coexist in fruitful harmony with local and global
communities, the capability to engage in autonomous, creative, and critical thinking, and the
capacity and willingness to transform others and one's self (Section II par.2)

In order to actualize this, the State shall:

(a) Give every student an opportunity to receive quality education that is globally competitive
based on a pedagogically sound curriculum that is at par with international standards;

(b) Broaden the goals of high school education for college preparation, vocational and
technical career opportunities as well as creative arts, sports and entrepreneurial employment
in a rapidly changing and increasingly globalized environment; and

c) Make education learner-oriented and responsive to the needs, cognitive and cultural
capacity, the circumstances and diversity of learners, schools and communities through the
appropriate languages of teaching and learning, including mother tongue as a learning
resource. (Section II)

As gleaned from the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum Framework below, every

learner who completes the K to12 basic education program will have been nurtured and
developed to become a Filipino with 21st century skills. This objective is founded on the
recognition of the nature, contexts, and needs of learners. The graduates of the K to 12
Program will have the necessary physical, cognitive, socio-emotional, and moral preparation
so they can determine their own purposes for learning in consideration of present and
emerging needs of their immediate, local, national, and global communities.

Figure 1. K to 12 Basic Education Framework

Vital in this educational reform is a clear articulation of curricular content relative to the
promise of developing Filipinos with the "ability to coexist in fruitful harmony with local and
global communities." Thus, Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies) as a learning area/program is
an essential component of the Philippine K to 12 Curriculum.
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

Social Studies: Meanings, Concepts, and Purpose

Social studies is an integrative learning program intended to develop civic competence

among students. Civic competence is defined as the ability to engage effectively with others
in the public domain, and to display solidarity and interest in solving problems affecting the
local and wider community. This involves critical and creative reflection and constructive
participation in community activities as well as decision-making at all levels, from local to
national and even in international arena. It includes demonstrating a sense of responsibility,
as well as showing understanding of and respect for the shared values that are necessary to
ensure community cohesion, such as respect for democratic principles (European Parliament
and of the
Council, 2006).

The National Council for Social Studies (NCSS) defines social studies as:

"the integrated study of the social sciences and humanities to promote civic competence. It
provides coordinated, systematic study drawing upon such disciplines as anthropology,
archaeology, economics, geography, history, law, philosophy, political science, psychology,
religion, and sociology, as well as appropriate content from the humanities, mathematics, and
natural sciences. The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people make
informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse,
democratic society in an interdependent world."

Though civic competence is not exclusive in this field, it is more central to social studies than
any other subject area in the schools. The NCSS has long advocated civic competence as the
primary goal of social studies. It recognized the significance of developing among learners
the ideals and values of a democratic republic.

Literally, Social Studies is composed of two words, social and studies. According to Arthur
Dunn as articulated by David Saxe,

"…...the purpose of social studies was in the term's meaning as a verb-as in, good citizenship-
not in its meaning as a noun-as in, studying the content of particular social science or history
subjects." Meaning, social studies was conceived as something one does-studying or
examining social science topics which include civic competence, history, governance,
society, and culture, among other things.

As one of the learning areas in the Philippine K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum, Araling
Panlipunan (Social Studies) intends to develop among learners critical understanding on
historical, geographical, socio-political, and economic issues of the Philippines, taking into
account the international and global contexts, allowing them to become productive citizens of
the country and of the world. It likewise seeks to engender among Filipino learners historical
mindedness, critical thinking, civic competence, cultural tolerance, and respect for diversity.
This contributes to the overarching intention of the K to 12 Program, which is to develop a
holistic citizen with 21st century skills.
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

Figure 2. Araling Panlipunan Conceptual Framework

Primarily, K to 12 Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies) intends to develop critical, reflective,

responsible, productive, nature-loving, nationalist, and humane citizens rooted in his/her
identity as Filipino yet manifests the values and skills of a global citizen.

The said overarching goal is expected to be achieved by employing sound learning theories,
which include constructivism (which will be further discussed in the subsequent lessons)
collaborative learning, experiential, and contextual learning. Alongside this is the use of
relevant approach and strategies such as thematic-chronological and conceptual approach,
discovery approach, integrative, interdisciplinary, and multidisciplinary approach.

The lessons and topics from Grade 1 to 12 are anchored in the seven themes that include:
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

People, Environment and Society

Time, Continuity and Change

Clture, Responsibility and Nationhood

Rights, Responsibilities and Citizenship

Power, Authority and Governance

Production, Distribution and Consumption

Regional and Global Connections

Moreover, the disciplinal skills in social studies such as critical thinking, creativity, sound
decision-making, investigative and research skills, and historical thinking are likewise
developed using an expanding approach.

Conceptualizing Social Studies: A Brief History of Social Studies

in School Curricula

It is essential to examine as early as now how social studies as a subject evolved. Subsequent
paragraphs were heavily borrowed from the paper written by David Warren Saxe titled
Framing a Theory for Social Studies Foundations published in 1992. Though it's almost three
decades old, it provides valuable insights on how social studies as a learning area/subject
emerged.

The author argued that many social studies educators, practitioners, and specialists have little
knowledge or background on the identity of social studies. Thus, they fell short in the
delivery of a comprehensive and relevant social studies curriculum. He explicitly stated this
when he said that,

"I argue that practitioners and theorists are prevented from articulating viable perceptions of
social studies purpose, theory, and practice because they lack basic understandings of the
original historical underpinnings of social studies."

This "scarcity of theoretical" foundations can be rooted in the myths (as used by Saxe) on the
origin of social studies which widely spread among educators and practitioners. He clearly
pointed this out when he said that,

"Where teachers, administrators, and even social studies theorists continued the litany and
rituals of the field, there was little understanding of its original purpose and even less
understanding of a continuing dialogue for examining collective aims. Simply put, social
studies became entrenched in schools as a tradition of habit. With its original experimental
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

nature detached from practice, it is little wonder that educational leaders since the 1940s have
either given up on social studies or- perhaps more simply, in not understanding the purpose
for social studies-decided to try something else. A case in point is the much publicized
America 2000 (U.S. Dept. of Education, 1991), which has dropped social studies as a core
curricular area in favor of an undefined application of history and geography, as if social
studies has nothing to do with history and geography."

As Saxe suggested, one of the reasons behind the absence of historical information on social
studies might be rooted in the dearth of resources. Upon reviewing well- regarded educational
histories by Cremin (1961, 1988), Meyer (1957), Spring (1990), Welter (1962), Karier
(1986), Krug (1964), Tyack and Hansot (1982), Tanner and Tanner (1990), Peterson (1985),
Ravitch (1983), and Kliebard (1986), he argued that only Krug and Kliebard treated seriously
the beginnings of social studies. He explained that,

"Krug (1964) presents a fair accounting of the role of the 1916 Committee on the Social
Studies of the National Education Association as the first major organization to advocate
social studies, but he presents little of the actions or thinking that precipitated the
Committee's work. Kliebard (1986) briefly mentions the 1916 Committee on the
Social Studies."

Myths on the Origin of Social Studies

Based on the literature survey conducted by Saxe, he was able to identify three myths
surrounding the emergence of social studies. These include Continuous Existence Theory,
Big Bang Theory of 1916, and History Foundation Theory.

 Continuous Spontaneous Existence (CSE) Theory

According to this theory, social studies exists without any antecedents. It holds the idea that
social studies' past is not relevant. Various writers and scholars did not include a
comprehensive study on how social studies became part of the subjects being taught in basic
education. For many, the subject arose simultaneously with other learning programs/areas.

As Saxe summarized,

"In brief, although these texts focus on the teaching of social studies, the 18 texts did not
offer any explanation as to why or how social studies came to be part of school curricula (see
Armstrong, 1980; Banks, 1990; Chapin & Messick, 1989; Dobkin, Fisher, Ludwig, &
Koblinger, 1985; Elis, 1991; Evans & Brueckner, 1990; Fraenkel, 1985; Hennings, Hennings,
& Banich, 1989; Jarolimek, 1990; Kaltsounis, 1987; Michaelis, 1988; Michaelis &
Rushdoony, 1987; Naylor & Diem, 1987; Savage & Armstrong, 1992; Schuncke, 1988; Van
Cleaf, 1991; Welton & Mallan, 1987; Zevin, 1992). For whatever reasons, the authors
decided to ignore the notion of origins or historical orientation altogether. To the presentist
authors-using an inventive ahistorical mentality-each preservice social studies teacher is
charged to activate social studies in his or her own image without historical antecedents to
bother with or ponder"

 Big Bang Theory of 1916

As the title suggests, this is centered on the idea that social studies suddenly appeared in the
year 1916, thanks to the Committee on the Social Studies under the sponsorship of the
National Education Association (NEA; Dunn, 1916). There are literature that espoused this
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

idea. One of the classic examples of this theory is found in the International Journal of
Social Education in a special issue titled "Social Studies as a Discipline" As Saxe
emphatically puts it,

"In this issue, one writer confidently asserts that social studies 'was born in 1916 (Larrabee,
1991, p. 51). In true big bang form, this writer cites a secondary source as proof positive of
the 1916 assertion. When the secondary source (Atwood, 1982) is checked, however, more
errors are found. In a special issue of Journal of Thought, ironically devoted to social studies
foundations, Editor Virginia Atwood claims, 'With Earle Rugg serving as midwife, social
studies was 'born' in 1916' (1982, p. 8). Not only did Atwood use the big bang date of 1916
but she also erroneously cited Earle Rugg as the originator of the field. Earle Rugg was not
connected to the 1916 social studies report in any fashion. However, he and his brother
Harold Rugg later did agitate for and help organize the National Council for the Social
Studies in 1921 ("National Council')"

But if there's one research work that influenced educators and other scholars to take this
view, it's Lybarger's historiography of social studies in the Handbook of Research on Social
Studies Teaching and Learning that could be considered as the main culprit. It is here that
Lybarger highlights 1916 as a birth date of social studies. As Saxe puts it,

"More than any other contemporary researcher, ironically, it is Lybarger that has added depth
to the pre-1916 history of social studies. For instance, Lybarger's 1981 dissertation has been a
landmark for historical research in social studies foundations. Arguably, most, if not all, of
the springboards for investigating the early years of social studies can be found within this
dissertation. Despite this early promise, for whatever reason, the origins of social studies
were badly muddled in the Handbook chapter" (Shaver, 1991).

 History Foundation Theory

The history foundation theory is an extension or deeper interpretation of the big bang theory.
Here, conventional wisdom holds that, since history education existed before 1916, obviously
history was the seedbed or promulgator of social studies. There are many scholars who
believed in this idea like Oliver Keels (1988), Alberta Dougan (1988), Hazel Hertzberg
(1981, 1989), Rolla Tryon (1935), Edgar Bruce Wesley (1937), N. Ray Hiner (1972,1973),
James Barth (Barr et al., 1977), and Samuel Shermis (Barr et al., 1977).

Among these intellectuals, it was Keels who "captures the essence of the history foundation
origin of social studies by connecting the domination of historians and history curricula pre-
1916 to the production of the 1916 social studies report. Hertzberg (1981), too, reaches a
similar conclusion by highlighting connections between the 1916 social studies report and
earlier reports issued between 1893 and 1911 by various history organizations."

Demystifying the Myths: Origin of Social Studies Explained

The myths as enumerated in previous pages are considered as such, for these could not
provide data and relevant facts that would substantiate its claim. This brings us to the
question, "What really is the origin of social studies?"

Even before the deliberation of the 1916 Social Studies Committee, the term social studies
was widely used in research literature, and its meaning was common to many. In fact, data
revealed that as early as 1883, the term social studies was already in circulation among social
welfare advocates. Sarah Bolton (1883), Heber Newton (1886), and Lady Wilde (1893)
already used social studies in their book titles. The said books were related to the social
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

welfare movement that underscored the use of social science data. It was Carroll D. Wright,
the first US Commissioner of Labor and a member of Allied Social Sciences Association (a
member of American Social Science Association (ASSA), who emphasized the link between
Social Science instruction and good citizenship.

Saxe further explained that, "As social science moved from an area of study to discrete fields
of research in the 1880s, the term social education was introduced as the means to activate
social welfare in public schools. In this context, social education was used as a generic term
for socially centered school curricula."

At the turn of the 20th century, social education was redefined and narrowed to identify a
special area of school curricula to be devoted expressly to social science and citizenship
concerns. This important shift-from the generic and all-encompassing term of social
education for all school curricula to a specific course of social education among other
educational programs-marks a symbolic beginning for social studies in schools.

Edmund James, president of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, was the
first to use social studies as an element of school curricula in 1897. He defined it as a general
term for sociologically-based citizenship education. He then suggested to pull together the
social science for use in the lower schools under the umbrella of "social study."

The social studies conceptualization as argued by Saxe,

"was rooted in the efforts of the American Social Science Association (ASSA) as a means to
further the cause of social improvement (social welfare). The ASSA explicitly chose to apply
a collective social science as the basis of social welfare activities, not the discrete subject
matters of sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, history, or geography. To
the social welfare activists, social science was conceived of as a general area of inquiry
drawn from these discrete subjects to help solve societal problems. This general or holistic
approach to treating social issues and problems surfaced in educational circles, first under the
rubric social education and then, finally, as social studies. What is critical to identify here is
that no single methodology or field of study was to dominate and that every social science
(including history and geography) could be used to facilitate social improvement through
citizenship education."
Though there were calls at that time to make this generalist approach be replaced by
specialist approach, public school leaders opted to continue with the notion of a general field
approach toward citizenship education. At the height of this, Clarence D. Kingsley (1913)
launched his Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary School Subjects. He presented
his idea of education reform in a modern social light to the National Education Association in
1910 and was eventually formalized as the Committee on the Articulation of High School and
College (NEA, 1911, 1912). In the first report of this organization, Kingsley suggested six
major areas of study that included:
 English
 Social Science
 Natural Science
 Physical Training
 Mathematics
 Foreign Language

The Committee title shifted from social science to social studies and thus became Committee
on Social Studies. This committee advocated a program of active participation that included
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

two major interdisciplinary courses (Community Civics and Problems of American

Democracy). It rejected the traditional history program as grossly unsuitable and
inappropriate for American students at that period.

The social studies that we have at present is a product of an evolution. The dynamic
transformation of its meaning could be summarized into three things. These include:
 a meaningful integration of history, geography, civics, and the various social sciences
used to promote the learning/practice of civic competence;
 a program that emphasized direct/active student participation; and
 a representation of two interdisciplinary courses, “Community Civics” and “Problems
of American Democracy”.

Experience

It is safe to assume that social studies as a learning area/program is always considered as the
culmination of all academic programs in basic education curriculum.
Interestingly, highly developed countries (e.g., Singapore, South Korea, the USA, Germany, and
others) put much premium on history, civics, and culture by placing it at the fore of its curriculum
while continuously adjusting the language, mathematics, science, and technical-vocational programs
in support of the latter.

In the Philippines, however, there is a continuous marginalization of this discipline in the form of
insufficient budget, shorter time allocation, and scarcity of teacher training development compared to
other programs such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) where funding
and support like scholarships, international training events, and the like are numerous.

This is not to mention the dwindling number of pre-service teachers taking up social studies/science
specialization. This is a perennial dilemma of the Department of Education where a significant
number of elementary teachers handling social studies subjects are non-majors. Consequently, this
would impact the quality of instruction delivered to Filipino learners relative to the achievement of
necessary knowledge, skills, and attitude as articulated in the curriculum standards.

Araling Panlipunan's relegation to the border of instructional priorities poses long-term fatal effects
on the national identity and consciousness. This is evident as historical revisionism, production and
propagation of fake news, rise of authoritarianism, cultural bigotry, and weakening democratic
institutions dominate the current landscape of Philippine politics.

Things to Ponder:
 What do you think are the reasons for such dismal state of Social Studies education in the
country?
 How can the Commission on Higher Education (CHED assist the Department of Education
(DepEd in solving the identified challenges?
 Suggest three interventions or programs that would address the challenges enumerated above.
 UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM

Assess

Exercise:

1. In this particular lesson, what was not clear to you? What do you think are the reasons for
such? Write your answer in the space provided.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

2. What was the most useful or the most meaningful thing you learned in Lesson 1? Expound
your answer.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_ ___________________________________________________________________
_______

Challenge

Compose an essay on the experiences that you had in your social studies class during your
elementary and high school days.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

Reference
Andres, Brenson et. al.,(2020) Teaching Social Studies in the Elementary Grades
(Phil.History and Gov’t).First Edition.Rex Book store, Inc.
UNIT I: THE ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUM