Question Detail

Does establishing a "pacing guide" for history/social studies, as well as the pressure to prepare students "for the test", lead to a danger of omitting important, in-depth studies of people and events in history. Also, do you feel that there has been a revision of much of the information once provided in our schools; does any revision create a bias in another direction?

Oct 14, 2013 2:25pm

  • Social Studies
  • 6-12
  • Common Core


  • You must sign in before we can post your answer.
    Don't have an account? Sign up only takes a few seconds.

    • Oct 14, 2013 8:09pm

      There is a great deal of "meat" in that question, but no matter what class I teach, I have never taught "to any test" and I have no idea what a pacing guide is, even after 30 years of teaching. When I taught AP World History I used Stanford's award winning curriculum, Thinking Like a Historian" and using it made me feel like there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

      If you realize that you only have os much time to study anything, and you plan your course wisely, things will tun smoothly.

      I have heard so many times on History Chat Boards that even when teachers study things in depth, that is still no guarantee that students will be able to remember, analyze, comprehend, synthesize, and connect what they learned in the class to the real world around them.

      • Oct 15, 2013 5:46am


        It's important to map out a scope and sequence for your course, but there needs to be a great deal of flexibility in this work to allow time for reteaching, depth of study and/or extension work. If you outline the most important information in this scope and sequence, students will learn essential content. If students have learned the content, they will be prepared for any test without having to specifically prepare for it. I created Essential Courses of Study (ECOS) in ELA in my district with a group of teachers and it's worked out great. You can see an example here:

        Hope this helps,