Objectives

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.

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 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 tne

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 lI 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 lI 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.

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.

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

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 learhers 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.

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, integrauVE

interdisciplinary, and multidisciplinary approach.

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.

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 socíal studies.

Thus, they fell short in the delivery of a comprehensive and relevant social studies

curriculum. He explicitly stated this when he said that,

" 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 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 Studiees

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 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 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 Secondaryy

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 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