Teaching About the Capitol Insurrection

Above: Images from January 6, 2021, when a group of people participated in an organized insurrection of the U.S. Capitol with the goal of overturning the free and fair 2020 Presidential Election and ensure that Donald Trump remain in power.

I often use this blog to write about ways that social studies teachers can help their students connect past and present events in their classrooms. However, it has taken me over six months to write about teaching the Capitol Insurrection. While we all had to teach about the event in the days after it happened, I needed more time to reflect on the events of that day and have waited for more information to come out before writing about it. 

With the hearings of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol recently beginning, it seems like the right time to suggest approaches to teaching about it with students. With the start of the next school year quickly approaching, many teachers will need to address questions about the hearings from students.

Above: Trump speaks to a rally to "Stop the Steal" just before encouraging attendees to "fight like hell." After forcing their way into the building, insurrectionists walk throughout the Capitol Building searching for members of Congress.

For most Americans, the Capitol Insurrection was deeply troubling. It was the first time in the United State's history that a mob attempted to stop a peaceful transition of power after a free and fair presidential election (What is a free and fair election?). Even before the nation's Civil War in 1860, those who opposed Lincoln's election accepted the outcome (granted, many states would later secede from the Union). In fact, a record number of Americans voted in the 2020 Election with Joe Biden receiving 7 million more votes and 72 more electors in the Electoral College, and while there have been numerous investigations, there have been no legitimate examples of wide-scale voter fraud (however, Donald Trump had searched for ways to delay the election, pressured state election officials to change results, demanded the vice president to stop its certification, asked the Justice Department to intervene, considered plans to seize election materials or evoke martial law, and would eventually refuse to concede or attend the inauguration; simultaneously, there was a coalition working to prevent these attempts to thwart democracy).

Moreover, the lack of response by the federal government to pro-Trump insurrectionists in comparison to the excessive response faced by largely peaceful Black Lives Matter protesters in the prior summer was concerning. Many students will likely point out that we have just experienced both a global pandemic that disrupted our way of life and collective uprisings for racial justice over the past year, which seem to partially explain why Donald Trump lost re-election (especially since he had the lowest polling numbers of any president in modern times).

Difficult History and Avoiding False Balance

In teaching the Capitol Insurrection, social studies teachers may fall into the trap of "bothsidesism," also known as false balance. Especially in light of numerous speech silencing laws in conservative states aimed at teachers, and social studies teachers in particular, which include prohibiting the teaching of race or racism, sexual orientation and gender, or bringing any political topics into the classroom, they may be rightfully worried. Teachers may feel compelled to present the Capitol Insurrection as a two-sides debate to avoid upsetting students or parents (maybe even asking, "Were the insurrectionists justified in their riot?", as if they were the Patriots during the American Revolution). I strongly recommend against this for several reasons. It is important that students learn an honest examination of the events and what it means for the nation.

In fact, this is not a two-sides issue. Instead, a relatively small minority of Americans supported the Capitol Insurrection. The vast majority of Americans think it was a riot or insurrection and that the insurrectionists need to be prosecuted. While this is certainly a political issue, it should not be a partisan one (even if some politicians want to use it to mobilize voters). If teachers are to present this through a "false balance," then they will leave students with the impression that Americans are evenly split on the event (granted, in the months since, conservative media has downplayed the event, we have seen a disturbing increase of support for the insurrectionists among Republican voters, and right wing groups are planning a September D.C. rally in support of the insurrection and portraying the insurrectionists as "political prisoners"). 

We do not present a false balance with other events in the past. For example, we should not ask students: "Were the Confederates justified in rebelling during the Civil War?" or "How could white supremacists have kept segregation laws?" I would argue that the Capitol Insurrection is no different. As the words in the Constitution state, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty." The Capitol Insurrection directly contradicted the purpose of the United States (It is also important to note that a good number of those who breached the Capitol were white supremacists, antisemites, neo-Confederates, neo-Nazis, and right-wing extremists; similar groups were also involved in the "Unite the Right" rally a few years earlier).

Instead, I would suggest that teachers approach the Capitol Insurrection as "difficult history" or "hard history" in the present (or now, near past). Gross and Terra have argued that difficult histories "present and surface fundamental disagreements over who we are and what values we hold." They involve events that students (and everyone) may find troubling, because they conflict with the common freedom-quest narrative template often portrayed in U.S. history and illuminate dark and troubling aspects of human behavior. However, left unexamined, they also may contribute to future events that are equally troubling; citizens need to understand difficult or hard history, so they can prevent similar events in the future.   

Here are some helpful resources on teaching hard history in the past (similar advice would apply to current events or "developing" history).

What Makes History Difficult? (Phi Delta Kappan) 

Tips for Teaching Difficult History (Canadian Museum of History/Musée canadien de l'histoire)

Teaching Hard History (Southern Poverty Law Center) 

Teaching Hard History Podcast (Learning for Justice)

Tackling Tough Topics (Teachinghistory.org)  

Here are some helpful resources for teachers on teaching the Capitol Insurrection:

Using History to Teach the Insurrection with Yohuru Williams (Public Broadcasting Service's News Hour)

How to Teach About the Capitol Riots (EdWeek) 

Leading Conversations About the Capitol Insurrection (Learning for Justice)

Resources for Teaching the Capitol Insurrection (Facing History and Ourselves)

Teaching About the Capitol Riots (iCivics)

Above: Members of Congress hide under desks and chairs in the Senate Chamber and law enforcement engages in a standoff with insurrectionists at the door of the House of Representatives Chamber.

Inquiry Questions for the Capitol Insurrection

To help students understand the complexity of what occurred during the Capitol Insurrection and what it means within the larger context of U.S. history, I would suggest asking the following inquiry questions: Why did a group of thousands of Americans refuse to accept the outcome of a free and fair election and engage in an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol? What does this event mean for our future as a nation?

Below I have compiled several overview sources followed by several supporting sources grouped around four main concepts: increasing support for authoritarianism, the media and political propaganda, failures of federal security agencies, and the aftermath. Students could use these sources in their explanation for how this event could have happened and model ways that historians might explain these events to citizens in the future.

Overview

Here are some resources for introducing the event to students. They include timelines of events, histories of insurrections in the United States, and primary sources from the "Stop the Steal" rally beforehand and the Capitol Insurrection itself.

NOTE: Some of the sources shows acts of violence and hate, and involve disturbing language, and may not be appropriate for younger students.

Timeline of the January 6 Attack (National Public Radio)

Timeline of the Capitol Insurrection (New York Times)

Timeline of Donald Trump During Capitol Insurrection (USA Today)

Capitol Insurrection Terminology (Associated Press)

Capitol Insurrection Terminology (Washington Post)

A History of American Insurrections (Public Broadcasting Service's News Hour)

Differences Between Historical Black Resistance and Capitol Insurrection (The New Republic)

Speeches at the "Stop the Steal" Rally (Politico)

Transcript of Donald Trump's Speech at the "Stop the Steal" Rally (National Public Radio)

Sources from the Capitol Insurrection Part 1; Part 2; Part 3 (George Washington University's National Security Archive)

Sources from the Capitol Insurrection (Public Broadcasting Service's News Hour) 

Sources and Lesson Plans for the Capitol Insurrection (New York Times) 

Testimony of Capitol Police Officers at House Hearings (National Public Radio) 

Interviews with Insurrectionists (CNN)

Tracking Threats to a Free and Fair 2020 Election (Politico)

Timeline of Trump's Second Impeachment (New York Times)

Historians Perspectives on the Capitol Insurrection (National Geographic Magazine)

Concept 1: Growing Support for Authoritarianism

Above: A graph from Matthew MacWilliams's dissertation at UMass Amherst showing the correlation between support for Donald Trump and authoritarianism within South Carolina voters.

Perhaps a product of increasing partisanship (what some political scientists and sociologists call tribalism), Americans, and especially those with conservative political views, have a declining trust of democratic institutions (which threatens the Constitution itself). This decline has been occurring for sometime, the candidacy of Donald Trump may have played into those shifting views, and those changes share commonalities with other nations that have experienced failed democracies. Political scientists have been documenting this decline for sometime and below are several reports on these studies (for a good analysis of this, see "How Democracies Die" by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt). Some political scientists, including Matthew MacWilliams at University of Massachusetts Amherst (see graph above), have argued that Donald Trump offered for these Americans a "strong man" who would go against conventional democratic norms to achieve the policies that they demand. This increasing authoritarian view has been particularly strong in a demographic that some political scientists and sociologist label as Christian nationalists.

Authoritarian Populism in the United States (Center for American Progress)

Social Science Research on Support for Authoritarianism (Washington Post)

Trump Supporters and Authoritarianism (Politico)

Authoritarianism and a Threat to U.S. Government (WBUR) 

How to Live with Authoritarians (Foreign Policy)

Concept 2: The Media and Political Propaganda

Above: Trust in the 2020 Election results was much lower for Republicans compared to Democrats well before election day. Rhetoric from Donald Trump and commentators on conservative news networks may have influenced this.

Over the past 50 years, the U.S. media has become more partisan in how it presents information (others have described it as less objective). There is strong evidence that the commercial success of Fox News and other partisan outlets has exacerbated this phenomenon. We also know that the news media has a major impact on people's psychology and how they understand their world and make sense of current events. Many Americans are now able to choose news media that only conforms with their preexisting political beliefs and ideologies. This leads to essentially a news "echo chamber" with little exposure to conflicting political opinions. Additionally, with more Americans getting their news from social media posts (that often include misinformation), these media echo chambers are becoming more evident (albeit in some subtle ways). Moreover, Donald Trump's media behaviors (along with local-level Republican leaders), including his ability to control news cycles and his use of social media, helped to spread not only encouragement for the insurrectionists, but misinformation that fueled their actions.

Cable News and Partisan Thinking (MIT News)

Impact of Media on Partisan Thinking (Harvard Gazette)

Social Media Influence on Capitol Insurrection (Just Security)

Online Chatter Before January 6th (New York Times) 

How the Capitol Insurrection Was Planned Through Social Media (Vox)

Social Media's Role in the Capitol Insurrection (WBUR)

Misinformation, Trump, and the Capitol Insurrection (Vox)

Misinformation and the Capitol Insurrection (Politico)

Concept 3: Failure of Federal Security Agencies 

Above: U.S. soldiers stationed at the Capitol Building after the insurrection and before the Inauguration of Joseph Biden.

There was a substantial amount of planning and public chatter on social media that were clear warning signs of what was to occur at the Capitol. Yet, the leadership of the Capitol Police, Secret Service, and other federal security agencies were not prepared for what was to come and officers were directed to not use more aggressive defense tactics. Journalists and historians are still trying to understand why this security failure occurred, and we will learn more as investigations continue. However, there was an important bipartisan report released in June 2021, which helps explains numerous bad decisions on the part of federal security agencies.   

Capitol Security Response (National Public Radio)

Summary of the Bipartisan Capitol Security Report (New York Times)

Security Lessons from the Capitol Insurrection (Brookings)

Visual Guide to the Insurrection (British Broadcasting Corporation)

Report on Capitol Security (U.S. Senate)

Concept 4: The Aftermath

Above: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy appoints Rep. Jim Jordan and Rep. Jim Banks to the House Select Committee on the Attack on the Capitol on July 21, 2021. Both voted against certifying the 2020 Election results in the hours after the siege and both committee appointees were later rejected by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

As with many historical events, it is as important to study what happened after the Capitol Insurrection, as what happened during the Capitol Insurrection. In the immediate aftermath, Republican politicians (with the stark exception of Donald Trump) generally had a somber tone and blamed the president for the Capitol Insurrection. However, over the past six months, there has been an intentional downplaying of the events and stonewalling Congressional investigations (there has also been a slight decrease in registered Republican voters, as well as people describing themselves as Republicans). The result of the Republican Party continuing to repeat "the big lie" that Donald Trump actually won the 2020 Election has had damaging effects in the months after the Capitol Insurrection, as it continues to divide Americans and prevents the nation from reckoning with the events of January 6th. Moreover, Republican state legislatures and governors have used "the big lie" to curtain people's voting rights (in an attempt to give themselves unfair advantages in key states), which will not only impact future elections, but may lead to many voters, and especially voters of color and low income voters, being disenfranchised.

Trump's Big Lie Was Bigger Than the Election (Washington Post) 

Statement on the Capitol Insurrection (American Political Science Association)

Five Years of Lies Led to the Capitol Insurrection (USA Today) 

Political Donors and the Capitol Insurrection (Brennan Center)

The Big Lie and Voting Rights (The Guardian) 

The Big Lie and Future Republican Candidates (Washington Post)

Voting Rights After the 2020 Election (The Guardian)

Voting Laws Roundup (The Brennan Center)

Did Trump Damage Democracy (No)? (Brookings)

Sick of Legislators Banning Critical Race Theory? Here's How to Fight Back! Teach Critical Race Theory.

 

Are you a history/social studies teacher (or teach any other subject area)? 

Did your state legislature just ban you from teaching Critical Race Theory (or anti-racism, 1619 Project, etc.)?

Are you tired of legislators telling you what and how to teach (especially when it comes to race and racism)?

Here is how you fight back!

Start teaching Critical Race Theory.

You are probably asking: How do I do that? Isn't it a theory that is primarily used in academic scholarship and research? What would that look like in my classroom?

Well, it is actually easier than you think (and you might even already be doing it to some degree)! 

Here is a brief primer on teaching with a Critical Race Theory (CRT) perspective for K-12 teachers.

Wait, First Where Did This "Controversy" Come From? 

At the height of Black Live Matter Movement protests last summer, Christopher Rufo, a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, began writing and making media appearances where he attacked Critical Race Theory by misrepresenting what it is and how it is used. This eventually led Donald Trump to ban diversity seminars in the federal government (rescinded later by Joe Biden). Next, conservative state legislators were coached by American Legislative Exchange Council or ALEC (see this video from December 2020) to pass laws that would ban Critical Race Theory, the New York Times' 1619 Project, and educational initiatives focused on race and racism, which has led to a widespread debate in the press and social media (primed by conservative media and conservative activists).

Here are the states where laws have been passed or proposed in 2021 (here is an interactive map): Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. In Florida, the Board of Education has approved new standards that officials say would ban Critical Race Theory.

This is both unconstitutional (and hopefully will be dismissed by the courts-like it was in New Hampshire) and an attempt to silence lessons on racism. In fact, we are already seeing a chilling effect with examples of courses on race and racism being canceled or educators being fired or forced out of districts (see here, here, and here). It has also lead to protests by teachers across the country and numerous education scholars have spoken out against it (see here from Gloria Ladson-Billings, here from Christine Sleeter, here from the Editors of Rethinking Schools). It is also an attempt to mobilize voters in upcoming elections (issues framed as "culture wars" have long been a tool used in this way by conservative politicians).

What Is Critical Race Theory?

Critical Race Theory was first developed in the 1970s and 1980s by legal scholars who were searching for a way to understand how race and oppression operated in the legal system. One of the first books to capture Critical Race Theory was Derrick Bell's "Faces at the Bottom of the Well" in 1992. It was followed by Kimberlé Crenshaw, ‎Neil Gotanda, and ‎Gary Peller's book in 1995 and other books since, including the 2001 book by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic. CRT was then brought from legal studies to many other academic areas, including education, social work, nursing, etc. The American Bar Association has a website explaining what Critical Race Theory is here.

What Are the Main Tenets of Critical Race Theory?

Gloria Ladson-Billings and William Tate are generally credited with applying Critical Race Theory to education. In their work, they argued that CRT has three main assertions:

1. Race continues to be a significant factor in determining inequity in the United States.

2. U.S. society is based on property rights, rather than human rights.

3. The intersection of race and property creates an analytic tool through which we can understand social and school inequity. 

In its most basic sense, Critical Race Theory explains how racism was systematically built into U.S. society and that structural racism can be a lens for understanding issues of inequity in the past and present. To many people, especially those who have experienced racism, these tenets do not sound radical at all, but help explain many aspects of inequity in American life (in fact, the term "Critical Race Theory" is not widely mentioned at the K-12 level; so you could easily work against racism and teach about its tenets without ever using the term).

Solórzano and Delgado Bernal in their 2001 article elaborated on Critical Race Theory in education, describing it as including:

1. Centrality of race and racism—All CRT research within education must centralize race and racism, including intersections with other forms of subordination such as gender, class, and citizenship.

2. Challenging the dominant perspective—CRT research works to challenge dominant narratives and re-center marginalized perspectives.

3. Commitment to social justice—CRT research must always be motivated by a social justice agenda.

4. Valuing experiential knowledge—CRT builds on the oral traditions of many indigenous communities of color around the world. CRT research centers the narratives of people of color when attempting to understand social inequality.

5. Being interdisciplinary—CRT scholars believe that the world is multidimensional, and similarly, research about the world should reflect multiple perspectives 

Essentially, Critical Race Theory asks people to consider how racism has created a system that benefits some at the expense of others, which may be why certain people who benefit from this historical and enduring arrangement do not want students learning about it (then they might begin supporting policies that make the country more fair). 

How Can a Social Studies Classroom Have a Critical Race Theory Perspective?

Social studies studies teachers can teach Critical Race Theory by ensuring their lessons do the following (even if you chose not to name the theory, because you worry about losing your job due to some recently passed state law):

1. Teach about race and racism regularly; ideally, in every unit and most lessons (and be sure to not only present people of color through incidences of oppression; teaching about race must emphasize agency, resistance, survival/survivance, and accomplishment). The key here is to teach about racism regularly (a core tenet of CRT is that racism has played a role in most past and present events; it is not a problem of the past; it did not only occur in the past in isolated places or times). A CRT-oriented teacher will not only teach about racism when it seems most convenient in the curriculum (for instance, when a unit addresses slavery or Jim Crow laws). Instead, they will teach about the role that race and racism played in events that we often do not think about through racial lenses (i.e. American Revolution, the Roaring 20s, World War II).

2. Center the narratives of Black, Indigenous, People of Color, and other non-dominant groups in your lessons. They key is to not allow white narratives to tell the only story of the past or present. This may take time, as many teachers have been primarily exposed to white narratives of the past and present, and may need to dedicate time to finding counter-narratives. I often suggest to teachers to start by challenging themselves to include at least one source (i.e. document, image, oral tradition, audio) from indigenous people and people of color to every lesson. Next, challenge themselves to include multiple sources from indigenous people or people of color to every lesson. Then, challenge themselves to include multiple sources from the same group of indigenous people or people of color showing differing opinions, ideas, or experiences (what Santiago and Castro call anti-essentializing inquiries).

3. Make sure most of the questions that you ask students, and encourage students to ask, are about justice and fairness. Justice is a core American principle; it was explicitly included in the first sentence of the Constitution, even if we do not always uphold it. We often ask students all sorts of questions about the past and present in social studies. Those questions that help us better understand how we can make this a "more perfect Union" are the most important. For example, instead of asking "Were the Patriots justified in rebelling during the American Revolution?", ask "Who benefited and who did not benefit from outcomes of the American Revolution?"

By learning about the past and the present in a way that illuminates the role that racism has had in shaping society, students are able to better understand ways to make society more just. They can understand more about why some people have different lived experiences and opportunities than others. They can then start to imagine ways that society can be reshaped to make the United States live up to the words found in its founding documents. Is not that ultimately the goal of history/social studies education, and education more broadly?

Further Reading

If you want to know more about Critical Race Theory, here are some books that I recommend:

Critical Race Theory Perspectives on the Social Studies by Gloria Ladson-Billings

Doing Race in Social Studies: Critical Perspectives by Prentice Chandler

Race Lessons Using Inquiry to Teach About Race in Social Studies by Prentice Chandler and Todd Hawley

Perspectives of Black Histories in Schools by LaGarrett King

Black Lives Matter at School by Denisha Jones and Jesse Hagopian

Marking the Invisible: Articulating Whiteness in Social Studies Education by Sarah Shear and Andrea Hawkman

Teaching History for Justice by Christopher Martell and Kaylene Stevens

Teaching About COVID-19 and Justice

 

 

Above: People walk the streets of New York City in summer 2020.

In 2020, the world experienced the beginning of its worst pandemic since the 1918 Influenza Pandemic, which a WHO panel would later find was generally preventable. Many people experienced massive changes in their lives as a result. While COVID-19 is likely to be with us for the foreseeable future, at some point in the future, teachers will begin to discuss it as a historical event. At the writing of this, about 2.7 million people have died from the virus worldwide and that number will likely continue to rise for some time (especially with more variants of the virus emerging recently). [Update: As of October 2022, over 15 million have died of COVID-19 globally and over 1 million in the United States.] Things are looking brighter, as several effective COVID-19 vaccines are now being administered globally. However, most countries have only just begun to grapple with the social and economic impacts of the virus.

So what should we teach students about COVID-19? How can we learn from this historical moment? And, possibly the most important question, what was the role of injustice in people's experiences during the pandemic? These are questions that many social studies teachers are asking. This post is my take on how we should teach the pandemic.

Above: Data from the United States on daily change in COVID-19 cases (UPDATED 3/13/22 to include March 2020-March 2022 data).

As a history educator, I worry that there will be too much focus on the reactions of politicians to the virus (as history is often framed around the decisions of powerful individuals), rather than the experience of everyday people, and how people from different groups and geographies experienced the pandemic in dramatically different ways. COVID-19 is really a global lesson about collective action and community care, and many people survived it despite, rather than because, leaders' choices. 

It would be helpful if teachers asked students three broad inquiry questions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. I will pose each of these questions and offer some sources (some for U.S. history and some from world history) to help in students in their investigations. In some ways, I hope this post can serve as a "mix tape" of sources for teaching COVID-19.

Also, here are some general resources to help students understand the enormity of COVID-19...

New York Times Domestic and Global COVID-19 Tracker

New York Times "How the Virus Spread" Map

National Geographic COVID-19 Global Spread Maps 

NPR's Shifts in COVID-19 Over Time 

RAND Air Traffic Visualization Before the Global Pandemic

Above: An image of the COVID-19 virus.

Question 1:  How could the response to COVID-19 have been different?

Above: The distribution of COVID-19 cases by region. Most of the cases have been concentrated in Europe and the Americas. Examining various nation's reactions can help explain why.

As the COVID-19 pandemic begins to enter into a historical view, like many events, we may forget to ask if things could have been different. Often our positions from the future prevent us from seeing alternatives. However, the work of the historian is analysis, and we need to have our students analyze not only if the right decisions were made, but compare nation's responses, which can offer not only an understanding of what happened and why, but what we might do in the future when another pandemic occurs.

Group A Sources: A History of Past Pandemics

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/history-of-pandemics-deadliest/

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200325-covid-19-the-history-of-pandemics 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/local/retropolis/coronavirus-deadliest-pandemics/

Group B Sources: International Comparisons of Government Responses to COVID-19

https://time.com/5851633/best-global-responses-covid-19/

https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf-and-covid19/Policy-Responses-to-COVID-19

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/08/27/most-approve-of-national-response-to-covid-19-in-14-advanced-economies/ 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03605-6

Group C Sources: U.S. and European Reactions to COVID-19

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/25/trump-coronavirus-national-security-council-149285

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22176191/covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic-democrats-republicans-trump

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/09/coronavirus-american-failure/614191/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/10/us-coronavirus-response-donald-trump-health-policy

https://time.com/5861697/us-uk-failed-coronavirus-response/ 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/08/why-britain-failed-coronavirus-pandemic/615166/

https://www.ft.com/content/efdadd97-aef5-47f1-91de-fe02c41a470a

 

What did COVID-19 expose about modern society?

Above: An anti-shutdown/anti-mask rally during the COVID-19 pandemic in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

There have been many pandemics in human history, with some being worse than others. In our modern times, we have seen three pandemics reach global proportions (i.e., 1918 Influenza, HIV/AIDS, and COVID-19), while others tended to be localized, albeit with serious impact (e.g., late 1950s avian flu in Asia, SARS, 2009 H1N1 pandemic, mid-2010s Ebola pandemic in West Africa). Why were some pandemics better controlled? Are there aspects to modern life that make it more difficult to control pandemics? What was the role in misinformation in the spread of the virus? Five key issues in understanding the role of modern life relate to individualism versus collectivism, capitalism and free markets, the de-funding of social services and health care, wealth inequality, and the spread of misinformation.

Group D Sources: Individualism vs. Collectivism

https://theconversation.com/are-individualistic-societies-worse-at-responding-to-pandemics-147386 

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22179222/covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic-individualism-collectivism

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/08/31/american-individualism-is-an-obstacle-to-wider-mask-wearing-in-the-us/ 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/video/is-american-individualism-why-we-failed-to-contain-covid-19-91108421727

Group E Sources: Capitalism and Free Markets

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/14/upshot/coronavirus-capitalism-vaccine.html 

https://time.com/5922494/capitalism-covid-19/ 

https://www.ft.com/content/9e7b2630-2f67-4923-aa76-0f240a80a9b3 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-crisis-capitalism-disaster 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/randalllane/2020/05/26/greater-capitalism-how-the-pandemic-is-permanently-reshaping-our-economic-system-for-the-better/?sh=32fd597e71c1

Group F Sources: De-Funding Social Services and Privatized Health Care

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/23/the-social-safety-net-the-gaps-that-covid-19-spotlights/

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/comparing-six-health-care-systems-pandemic 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/11/14/universal-healthcare-critical-covid-19-pandemic 

https://newrepublic.com/article/157287/case-for-single-payer-coronavirus

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/medicare-for-all-coronavirus/2020/03/14/a41a9990-6273-11ea-8a8e-5c5336b32760_story.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-17/coronavirus-italy-shows-medicare-for-all-is-no-cure

Group G Sources: Wealth Inequality

https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/business-daily/20210125-covid-19-crisis-is-worsening-economic-inequality-at-unprecedented-rate-oxfam-says

https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/what-covid-19-can-mean-long-term-inequality-developing-countries

https://www.npr.org/2020/08/16/902977077/how-the-covid-19-pandemic-is-deepening-economic-inequality-in-the-u-s

https://fortune.com/2021/01/26/covid-income-inequality-global-economy-coronavirus-pandemic/

Group H Sources: Misinformation About COVID-19

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-misinformation-is-killing-people1/

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/guide-to-overcoming-coronavirus-misinformation-infodemic 

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/02/09/963973675/who-is-fighting-false-covid-info-on-social-media-hows-that-going

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-debunk-misinformation-about-covid-vaccines-and-masks/

What was the role of white supremacy in the COVID-19 pandemic? 

Above: Two maps of Boston, Massachusetts, showing higher percentages of people of color and higher infection rates based on neighborhoods. Predominately Black and Latinx neighborhoods, such as Dorchester (my neighborhood), Roxbury, Mattapan, and Hyde Park had higher rates of COVID-19. Examining how race, class, and other factors impacted the spread and response of the virus can help students understand how not everyone had the same privilege to avoid exposure to the virus.

This is the question that I fear will be least likely to be asked by teachers and students (yet it is most important), especially over time. The further we get away from this pandemic, the more the dominant white narratives of what happened will be told in the media, in textbooks, and elsewhere. Yet, the racial and geographic disparities that occurred during COVID-19 should not only be remember, but be centered the historical study of it. Four main ideas should help students understand the role of racism and white supremacy in the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) How have communities of color had a larger social burden during the pandemic? People of color in the United States, Canada, and Europe were often at higher-risk to exposure to COVID-19 through their employment and housing disparities. (2) How did white privilege help protect white people from the pandemic (and frame their pandemic experience)? White workers, especially white white-collar workers were much more likely to have the flexibility to work from home. Many white people live in suburban or rural areas and were more isolated from the initial spread of the virus. Further complicating this, white people were more likely to report not wearing masks, while also receiving better health care responses when they did get the virus and more access to vaccines. (3) How did anti-Asian and anti-Asian American racism and violence spread during the pandemic? Many politicians used hateful terms targeting Chinese and Asian people. There were many documented acts of individual or group violence endangering Asian and American lives. COVID-19 brought back a long history of anti-Asian racism in the U.S. and globally. (4) What was the role of COVID-19 in fostering racial justice movements and activism in the summer of 2020 and afterward? How did activists organize against hate and racism?

Group I Sources: Impacts on Communities of Color

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/health-equity/race-ethnicity.html

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/how-policymakers-can-ensure-covid-19-pandemic-doesnt-widen-racial-wealth-gap 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/12/pandemic-black-death-toll-racism/617460/

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2020/04/23/483846/frontlines-work-home/

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/how-covid-19-affecting-black-and-latino-families-employment-and-financial-well-being

Group J Sources: White Privilege and the Pandemic

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/07/16/new-poll-suggests-white-residents-less-worried-about-covid-19-white-privilege-may-be-a-factor/

https://www.axios.com/racial-divide-reopening-schools-coronavirus-a8c98eb3-bb4b-4d5f-a9c1-c2b5297782c2.html 

https://www.vox.com/first-person/2020/4/25/21234774/coronavirus-covid-19-protest-anti-lockdown

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/06/got-covid-19-trump-wants-bleach-for-others-and-the-best-treatment-for-himself

https://www.kcet.org/shows/power-health/the-privilege-gap-and-our-response-to-the-covid-pandemic

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/01/covid-vaccines-access-poor-rich-countries/ 

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/04/07/1091398423/u-s-life-expectancy-falls-for-2nd-year-in-a-row

Group K Sources: Anti-Asian/Asian American Racism and Violence During COVID-19

https://www.today.com/news/anti-asian-violence-history-anti-asian-racism-us-t210645

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/10/975722882/the-rise-of-anti-asian-attacks-during-the-covid-19-pandemic 

https://www.vox.com/22274325/asians-racism-coronavirus-oakland-san-francisco 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/asian-american-community-battles-surge-in-hate-crimes-stirred-from-covid-19

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/12/covid-19-fueling-anti-asian-racism-and-xenophobia-worldwide 

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/will-travel-after-covid-still-be-fraught-for-asians

https://time.com/5797836/coronavirus-racism-stereotypes-attacks/

Group L Sources: Racial Justice Movements, Black Lives Matter Protests, Asian American Solidarity, and COVID-19 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/05/how-coronavirus-pandemic-helped-floyd-protests-become-biggest-us-history/ 

http://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/syndicated/new-study-details-black-lives-matter-protests-not-contribute-surge-covid-19-cases/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/we-have-been-through-this-before-why-anti-asian-hate-crimes-are-rising-amid-coronavirus

https://time.com/5851792/asian-americans-black-solidarity-history/

 

All of these questions would lead to a deeper inquiry into re-imagining national and global systems. Students will be in the driver seat of thinking of ways to build a more caring, collective, and anti-racist society that will prepare us for future domestic and global pandemics.

Humanities Classes Are Not a Substitute for Social Studies

 

Above: Students debate during an inquiry-based social studies class. 

A few weeks ago, a fellow Boston Public Schools parent wrote me worried that her child's middle school principal was replacing social studies with humanities. I replied: 

<<<

I am concerned about any school moving to a "humanities model" or any other combination of English language arts and social studies. This is usually only done at the middle school level (although here in Boston, we see it at the high school level, as well). It is part of a misguided "back to the basics" view of school, or a belief that students just need literacy development and social studies content is just the vehicle for teaching reading and writing-when in fact it has different disciplinary structures and thinking skills that are developed. I would, however, want to better know the administrator's intentions. It is one thing to have English teachers and history teachers coordinate their courses to provide a better humanities experience. That could actually be a great thing (when I was a classroom teacher, I worked with English teachers to do just that). However, what usually happens with these models is that it becomes one teacher trying to teach one of those two subjects with limited expertise (it is often an ELA teacher teaching social studies poorly). It can be a way for the principal to get rid of social studies positions or make room in students schedules for more literacy time. 

>>>

This is not a post against the idea of humanities courses. In theory, there is great value in courses that emphasize the interdisciplinary nature of school subjects, which are too often content silos. All schools should approach subject matter this way.

Rather, this post is an attempt to articulate how humanities courses have been co-opted by a group of educational leaders who overemphasize literacy as a discrete skill (and devoid of subject matter) and misunderstand the ways that literacy functions within the disciplines of history and the social sciences.

If you are a teacher or student (or parent of a student) required to teach or take a humanities course, I offer three questions (with explanations at the end of this post) that you should be asking about the course:

1. Is my humanities course a substitute for social studies courses (i.e. history, civics/political science, geography, economics)?

2. Is my humanities course taught by someone without a background in both history and language arts (or is not co-taught by a social studies teacher with a colleague who has a background in teaching English or another subject in the humanities)?

3. Is my humanities course not taught in an interdisciplinary way, where we use different disciplinary lenses on the world (it is just an English course about history-related texts)?

What is Humanities and How Is STEM Involved?

First, we should start with the question: “What are the humanities?” The humanities, much like STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), is an overarching term to describe a group of related disciplines that can be taught in interdisciplinary ways. Humanities usually includes the study of literature, philosophy, world languages, history, law, politics, geography, economics, archaeology, anthropology, religion, art, and music.

For some time, our national (and perhaps global) educational conversation focused on the need for more STEM education. Rightfully, there was a concern about our teaching of math and science (and those subject areas have seen important instructional improvements over the past decade because of this increased attention). 

However, in this conversation, we have diminished the importance of learning the humanities (beyond literacy being a workforce skill). However, of the “big four” school subjects, social studies (i.e. history, civics, geography, economics) has clearly been the biggest victim of this shift (in fairness, art, music, world languages, and other humanities subjects have been wrongly marginalized for much longer-it explains why art educators pushed for their subject to be added to STEM in the form of STEAM; who could blame them? I'd make it STEAMSS, with social studies at the end, if I could). In fact, many people I speak with do not even list social studies as a main school subject anymore (they think of school as primarily reading, writing, math, and science). It is clear that the marginalization of social studies is a national trend, which is worse at the elementary and middle levels, as well as in urban schools (see here, here, and here).

Ancillary Literacy and Reducing Social Studies Positions

Part of this national decline in social studies is a push for humanities as a replacement for it in schools (especially for children at the elementary and middle levels, and in urban districts, with Boston and New York City being the largest examples; see here, here, and here). This push is not coming from social studies educators (see here), or even literacy specialists, but rather school and district leaders. They think it as a chance to maximize literacy instruction (this group often advocates for a "back to the basics" approach, where basic literacy and math drive everything). They think it is a way to increase test scores (especially in places where social studies is not tested, they can add additional literacy blocks or courses; and more about that later!). This know it is a way to reduce faculty, especially when budgets are tight (no need to hire social studies teachers, when you have English teachers covering it in humanities classes). 

Above: A mural at my daughters' elementary school in the Boston Public Schools, which describes what they learn there. Notice that "social studies" (and writing) is missing, while math, science, reading, art, and music are all included (since that mural was created, I have worked with the current principal to implement a new social studies curriculum-our work can change this trend!)

Yet, this push to maximize literacy instruction and increase test scores actually has negative impacts on literacy instruction and test scores (See this explanation from Nell Duke). It means students are not learning social studies well, which we know actually has a negative impact on their literacy (I suspect this is why few wealthy districts approach it this way; social studies usually exists in those places, separate from language arts). STEM education should be (but is rarely) an interdisciplinary use of those school subjects (should not be simply teaching science as ancillary math instruction). Similarly, humanities should be, but is rarely, an interdisciplinary subject (it is usually teaching social studies as ancillary literacy instruction; see here). And, in no school situation is reducing social studies faculty a smart idea (there are so many other ways to close budget gaps; or better, increase funding to urban schools).

White Supremacy?

Finally, one other point to consider is the history of humanities as a tool for White supremacy. I engaged in research for my new book with Kaylene Stevens, and uncovered that in the late 1800s there was an increased push for the teaching of humanities in school. However, this view of humanities was clearly rooted in a Western Civilizations view of the subject. In fact, Herbert Spencer, perhaps the founder of scientific racism, pushed for the teaching of humanities as a way to justify European superiority (by teaching the great works of White men). That view influenced the content of courses and textbooks from the elementary to the college levels. Then again, in the 1980s and 90s, in reaction to an increasing emphasis on multicultural education, conservative scholars again pushed for humanities courses from that same Western Civilization perspective (especially as a replacement for social studies, which they long thought was leftist and anti-patriotic; see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here; and a more recent example here). These courses became most popular in urban schools, where there were large concentrations of Black, Brown, Asian American, and immigrant students. It was part of a plan to assimilate students of color to White culture (a very similar purpose as Herbert Spencer had argued a century earlier). 

Despite this, I have seen humanities done right. However, it has always included an ethnic studies lens and de-centered Whiteness and Eurocentracism. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of observing Ling-Se Chesnakas at Boston's Urban Science Academy (the school was sadly closed by the Boston Public Schools and she is now a teacher at Boston Arts Academy). Her class had all the qualities of a good humanities course (to be honest, it is one of the few that I have ever experienced). She taught the course balancing literacy skill development and literary analysis with historical thinking. It truly felt like I was in an English and history course simultaneously. The students had just finished reading a chapter from The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, but were now engaging in a primary source analysis related to Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo. She had a background in both English and history (while having never earned a degree in history, she continuously enrolled herself in social studies-oriented professional development). She organized her units around the chronology of history (covering a broad scope), while also featuring literature prominently. She moved back and forth from having students construct historical arguments and historical interpretations like a historian, and then used what I would consider to be "English time" to have students engage in creative writing about their own personal experiences (I have experienced other humanities teachers in Boston teach this same unit, and frankly they were simply an ELA unit based on some history content).

What Can Be Done?

Let's return to those initial questions about humanities courses. If we are to have humanities courses, how should they be taught?

1. Is my humanities course a substitute for social studies courses (i.e. history, civics/political science, geography, economics)?

Make sure that all students receive social studies every year. If your school combines ELA with history or the social sciences, it is a sign they likely do not care much about students receiving social studies. Humanities should be in addition to social studies, or be separate ELA and social studies courses combined into two blocks that allow for teacher collaboration. When I was a teacher at Boston College High School years ago, my English teacher colleague Alison Piazza (now Alison MacDonald) and I created a two-block course called American studies, where we coordinated the curriculum, so students would be using their ELA time to leverage social studies content and we would draw connections between American literature and the inquiries that we were doing in U.S. history (we could also have coordinated themes of social justice across both courses). That is how you teach humanities.

2. Is my humanities course taught by someone without a background in both history and language arts (or is not co-taught by a social studies teacher with a colleague who has a background in teaching English or another subject in the humanities)?

If the answer is yes, see above about your school not caring about social studies. Also, see above about how it can be done right.

3. Is my humanities course not taught in an interdisciplinary way, where we use different disciplinary lenses on the world (it is just an English course about history-related texts)?

If the answer is yes, see above about your school not caring about social studies. Also, see above about how it can be done right.

To conclude, I would like to suggest an alternative to replacing social studies courses. I argue that we should instead add ethnic studies courses and approach social studies using ethnic studies lenses (think about teaching a U.S. history course through different ethnic groups' experiences; you could cycle through the course chronologically several times through the Indigenous, Black, Latinx, Asian American, and immigrant experiences). There is strong evidence that ethnic studies have positive impacts on students' social and academic outcomes, including increases in their literacy skills and social studies knowledge (see here). Ethnic studies, like humanities, is an interdisciplinary subject. Good ethnic studies courses involve all of the same qualities of good humanities courses (especially when included in addition to traditional social studies courses, co-taught by teachers with history/social science and English backgrounds, and using of different disciplinary lenses simultaneously; ethnic studies should also not simply be a literature class that reads multicultural texts). However, there is one key difference. Ethnic studies has a far greater focus on social justice and equity than humanities (minus all the White supremacy).

This is an opportune moment for us to not only increase social studies for students in urban elementary and middle schools (and some high schools). It is also a time to use that content to help students make the world more just.