Stories as Learning Resources in Social Studies
WRITTEN ACCOUNTS
Consider the use of short stories, memoirs, passages from books or other recollections (primary or secondary), biographies, ethnographies, and so on as learning objects. These can and should compete with textbooks.
AUDIO ACCOUNTS
Consider the use of recorded (or even live) interviews, podcasts, audio stories, archived radio shows, and so on as learning objects. Although use of transcriptions can be useful, they joy of an audio account is simply to hear a personable account or story and use these to inform judgements, offer perspective, or provoke questions and discussion.
VIDEO ACCOUNTS
Consider the use of video accounts, e.g. recorded testimony or interviews, portions of documentaries, vlogs, and so on as learning objects. Look for storytelling from expert witnesses – informed perspectives that shed light on topics under study.
GRAPHIC NOVELS
Many graphic novels deals with events and phenomenon relevant to Social Studies. Maus by Art Spiegelman comes to mind immediately. However, search for others well in advance of your unit of study that fit a theme or topic your students will be exploring. A great example of a work that uses graphics, and no words, to tell stories of immigration, is The Arrival by Shaun Tan. Use these often enough, and students will want to tell their stories and express their learning using this format.
Consider the use of short stories, memoirs, passages from books or other recollections (primary or secondary), biographies, ethnographies, and so on as learning objects. These can and should compete with textbooks.
AUDIO ACCOUNTS
Consider the use of recorded (or even live) interviews, podcasts, audio stories, archived radio shows, and so on as learning objects. Although use of transcriptions can be useful, they joy of an audio account is simply to hear a personable account or story and use these to inform judgements, offer perspective, or provoke questions and discussion.
VIDEO ACCOUNTS
Consider the use of video accounts, e.g. recorded testimony or interviews, portions of documentaries, vlogs, and so on as learning objects. Look for storytelling from expert witnesses – informed perspectives that shed light on topics under study.
GRAPHIC NOVELS
Many graphic novels deals with events and phenomenon relevant to Social Studies. Maus by Art Spiegelman comes to mind immediately. However, search for others well in advance of your unit of study that fit a theme or topic your students will be exploring. A great example of a work that uses graphics, and no words, to tell stories of immigration, is The Arrival by Shaun Tan. Use these often enough, and students will want to tell their stories and express their learning using this format.
Assessment using oral accounts and/or story formats
STUDENT INTERVIEWS
One of the simplest ways to conduct assessment in Social Studies is to provide students with opportunities to share an oral account of what they have learned. Similar to the kinds of inquiry described in Trevor Mackenzie's graphic (illustrated by Rebecca Bushby), student interviews could take a variety of forms. Some suggestions:
These examples above all involve preparation and a formal interview. Regardless of the necessity of including facts, addressing prompts, and so on, they use of storytelling techniques is what makes this format creative and critical. As the student builds narrative account, a story of what they know, they are committing their identity to their learning, owning perspectives, defending choices, relate personal experience, and showing personal responsibility (not to mention personality) for learning intentions -- an authentic perspective rooted in learned material, but not simply regurgitating what they have read or absorbed. The possibilities of story are only realized if the interviewer (i.e. the teacher) uses questioning techniques (e.g. use of the prompts, clarifying questions, etc.) to motivate the interviewee to expand on what they are saying, to fill in gaps, to discuss forks in their story, or simply ensure that the student knows what they are talking about. The other factor that will liberate this approach is limited use of notes and props. The whole point of the preparation and format is that students are able to talk about what they know, answer questions, discuss, fill in the details, or make appropriate connections to other aspects of study or learning intentions. An interview is not a recitation of a prepared script, it is a story unfolding in real time, with some give and take between the interviewer and interviewed, and always the possibility that it will choose its own direction. The interview is also a marvellous opportunity for the teacher to offer appreciative and/or critical feedback, and to differentiate assessment based on the identity and learning trajectory of the student.
Interviews do not need to be formal. With an agreed-upon amount of time to prepare (e.g. could be zero – impromptu, or could be fifteen minutes to gather thoughts and review notes, students can simply be asked to talk about what know about a particular topic, question, event, phenomenon, or lived experience. The teacher will learn a great deal about what students know and understand by this means, and is particularly useful in cases where the written work of students does not suggest originality or critical thought. Informal interviews might not be used in the same way as a formal interview to generate marks or place student progress on scale, but they can inform, confirm, challenge, or possibly replace other assessment measures. For example, a student completes an in-class assessment on the causes of WWI. In reviewing the student's work, the teacher notices that the information provided is inadequate, has gaps, does not show understanding, or looks like something copied or made up. it would not receive a passing grade, or provide evidence of progress towards meeting expectations. Rather than ask this student to re-do the assessment again, an alternative might be to show the student where their work had gaps, suggest what they should review in order to establish a base understanding. After an agree-upon length of time, the student is interviewed about the content or questions that were the focus of the original assessment. If the teacher is satisfied with the student's understanding, the student could receive a passing grade for the assessment, or be scaled as meeting expectations, and so on. This may actually save time and may respect the integrity of an assessment (e.g. repeating a bespoke assessment may defeat the purpose). The interview also makes it very clear whether the student's understanding is emerging, developing, proficient, etc. – often (bit not always) much clearer than a written response.
One of the simplest ways to conduct assessment in Social Studies is to provide students with opportunities to share an oral account of what they have learned. Similar to the kinds of inquiry described in Trevor Mackenzie's graphic (illustrated by Rebecca Bushby), student interviews could take a variety of forms. Some suggestions:
- Structured interview: the teacher and students work through one or more topics together, establishing big ideas, themes, evidence, exemplars, application of competencies, and so on. This could be done as a summary activity after a period of study such as a lecture or slideshow with notes, a documentary study, an inquiry project, even worksheets and textbook questions. Prompts should relate to an equivalent outcome or learning intention that would normally be assessed on a test, paper, or assignment: Why should Canadians care about what is happening in the Ukraine? What caused WWI? Why are some statues of historical figures being removed in Canada? Once there is a "case" that the students understand (e.g. they can adequately summarize the key notions of a learning intention), the teacher and students co-construct an account that satisfies the teachers' criteria (e.g. establishes historical or geographical significance, involves use of diverse primary sources, etc.) and includes key points to mention in an interview. The students are then given opportunities to interview each other to assess (self or otherwise) their ability to express what they have learned in an oral format.
- Controlled Interview: the students are provided with specific prompts related to defined (already learned) class topics that they should respond to in their oral account, as well as a list of key indicators, evidence, or criteria that students should address. Each prompt could come with criteria; for example, 5 Ws, explanation of cause & effect, two or more perspectives, and so on. The students are also given a template or guide for preparing an oral account, or a story of learning, and some time to prepare their notes or organize their account. Interviews could take place in group circle with the interview (this works well if there is some variety in the prompts), or one on one as they are ready (this works well if the class is working on something else that does not require direct instruction or involvement of the teacher). The interviews could also be conducted with a different teacher. The prompts are used to drive the interview – to move it along as needed.
- Guided Interview: the students are reminded of the general topics from a period of study, and given some time to consider some possible prompts provided by the teacher. The students settle on an appropriate prompt and design an oral account or story of learning and highlights what they understand about the topic. The teacher may also provide specific criteria for responses (e.g. 5 Ws, considerations of continuity and change or ethical dimensions, etc.) or the students may negotiate with the teacher about what kinds of things they wish to include in their oral account. Interviews could take place in groups or one-on-one, and could also be conducted with a different teacher. The prompts can be used to move the interview along, or may be changed up to provide clarity for the interviewer and opportunities to express understanding by the interviewee.
- Free Interview: the students may select both the topics from a course of study and develop appropriate prompts and criteria that probe the topics as they design an oral account. Free does not mean ad-lib, so there should be some check-in with the teacher and expectation of prepared material. Interviews could take place in groups or one-on-one, and could also be conducted with a different teacher. The student or the teacher can pause during an interview to make sure the other is satisfied in terms or clarity, depth, and so on.
These examples above all involve preparation and a formal interview. Regardless of the necessity of including facts, addressing prompts, and so on, they use of storytelling techniques is what makes this format creative and critical. As the student builds narrative account, a story of what they know, they are committing their identity to their learning, owning perspectives, defending choices, relate personal experience, and showing personal responsibility (not to mention personality) for learning intentions -- an authentic perspective rooted in learned material, but not simply regurgitating what they have read or absorbed. The possibilities of story are only realized if the interviewer (i.e. the teacher) uses questioning techniques (e.g. use of the prompts, clarifying questions, etc.) to motivate the interviewee to expand on what they are saying, to fill in gaps, to discuss forks in their story, or simply ensure that the student knows what they are talking about. The other factor that will liberate this approach is limited use of notes and props. The whole point of the preparation and format is that students are able to talk about what they know, answer questions, discuss, fill in the details, or make appropriate connections to other aspects of study or learning intentions. An interview is not a recitation of a prepared script, it is a story unfolding in real time, with some give and take between the interviewer and interviewed, and always the possibility that it will choose its own direction. The interview is also a marvellous opportunity for the teacher to offer appreciative and/or critical feedback, and to differentiate assessment based on the identity and learning trajectory of the student.
Interviews do not need to be formal. With an agreed-upon amount of time to prepare (e.g. could be zero – impromptu, or could be fifteen minutes to gather thoughts and review notes, students can simply be asked to talk about what know about a particular topic, question, event, phenomenon, or lived experience. The teacher will learn a great deal about what students know and understand by this means, and is particularly useful in cases where the written work of students does not suggest originality or critical thought. Informal interviews might not be used in the same way as a formal interview to generate marks or place student progress on scale, but they can inform, confirm, challenge, or possibly replace other assessment measures. For example, a student completes an in-class assessment on the causes of WWI. In reviewing the student's work, the teacher notices that the information provided is inadequate, has gaps, does not show understanding, or looks like something copied or made up. it would not receive a passing grade, or provide evidence of progress towards meeting expectations. Rather than ask this student to re-do the assessment again, an alternative might be to show the student where their work had gaps, suggest what they should review in order to establish a base understanding. After an agree-upon length of time, the student is interviewed about the content or questions that were the focus of the original assessment. If the teacher is satisfied with the student's understanding, the student could receive a passing grade for the assessment, or be scaled as meeting expectations, and so on. This may actually save time and may respect the integrity of an assessment (e.g. repeating a bespoke assessment may defeat the purpose). The interview also makes it very clear whether the student's understanding is emerging, developing, proficient, etc. – often (bit not always) much clearer than a written response.