UNIT 1

LESSON 1: WHAT IS SOCIAL STUDIES?

Learning outcome
a. Analyze the concept of social studies;
b. Distinguish the features of the Philippine social studies;
c. Trace the development of social studies; and
d. 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, process 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 on the dynamism of social interactions, an essential nomenclature in the 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 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 Il 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)

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

 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.

Please watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O81d58xNf8

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 Panhipunan (Social Studies) as a learning area/program is an essential
component of the Philippine K to 12 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).

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

 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.

Please watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tACt0X9McXY

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

 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:

People, Environment and Society

Time, Continuity, and Change

Culture, Responsibility, Nationhood

Rights Responsibilities and Citizenship

Power, Authority, Governance

Production, Distribution, and Consumption

Regional and Global Connection

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.”

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

 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 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 Kllebard 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; Ellis, 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.”

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

 • 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 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

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

titles. The said books were related to the social 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 two major

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

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 Panhipunan’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.

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades

Name:
Section:
Assessment
Exercise I: The Muddiest Point

• 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.

Exercise II: Five-Minute Paper

• What was the most useful or the most meaningful thing you learned in Lesson 1? Expound on
your answer.

Exercise III: Challenge

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

Teaching Social Studies in the Primary Grades