Ferretti, Ralph P., Charles D. MacArthur, and Cynthia M. Okolo. “Teaching for Historical Understanding in Inclusive Classrooms.” Learning Disability Quarterly 24.1 (2001): 59-71.

Teaching for Historical Understanding in Inclusive Classrooms

Ferretti, MacArthur, and Okolo, motivated by recent research that indicates most students are lacking in their understanding of social studies content and concepts, studied the impact of a project-based curriculum unit on the content knowledge and levels of historical understanding of students with and without learning disabilities. The authors note that the skills involved with historical understanding—“gather[ing] and consider[ing] available evidence… to evaluate the plausibility of arguments offered to support alternative positions” (60)—are essential for active and engaged civic participation and thus represent desirable outcomes for all students.

The study was conducted in three inclusive fifth-grade classrooms in Delaware; the sample included a total of 59 general education students and 28 special education students, most of whom were identified as learning disabled (LD). Teachers in these classrooms implemented a researcher-developed unit on the westward expansion of the United States in the 19th century. Students were placed in mixed-ability cooperative learning groups in which they used explored whether one of three groups—miners, farmers, or Mormons—should have emigrated west; upon reaching conclusions based on evidence provided to them, the groups developed multimedia presentations that presented the results of their inquiries. Through multiple-choice tests and interviews, the researchers measured students’ content knowledge and “understanding of the process of historical inquiry” (64) both before and after implementation of the unit. Ferretti, MacArthur, and Okolo found that “students without disabilities generally understood more about historical inquiry than their [disabled] peers, but both groups showed substantial and roughly comparable improvement in their understanding from pretest to posttest” (66). Both groups also showed improvement in their sense of self-efficacy. However, although both groups performed comparably on the content knowledge pretest made “significant gains from pretest to posttest,” general education students scored “significantly higher” on the posttest than special education students (65). The authors submit that this unusual result may be reversed if students with disabilities are given “more explicit strategic support for learning and understanding historical content” (69). Overall, their results indicate that students of varying ability levels can engage in and benefit from the process of historical inquiry.