What We Talk about When We Talk about Social Studies: A Reply to Schug and Western's Article on the Homeless Social Studies Teacher
ax accountants. Comparing apples T and oranges. Muzak. Professors Mark c‘. Schug and Richard D. Western of the t!niversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee create amusing analogies in their critique of the current state of social studies teaching (“The Homeless Social Studies ‘Teacher: How Muzak Progressivism Has Harmed Social Studies Education,” 2002, v. 93, n. 6. pp. 251-56). The authors make salient points that expose some of the problems in our schools. And some of their ideas about the problems in social studies classmoms are o n point and perceptive. When the authors connect these problems to a lackadaisical approach to education using a flawed form of Progressivism. -;I teaching that replaces studententered pedagogy, which helps students inake sense of themselves and their society, with one of laissez-faire, feel good. “anything goes” approachhowever, they miss their chance to open a dialogue on the more deeply rooted concerns of education. Their attack on Progressivism in any form exposes their more ingrained intention: a return to an education. especially social studies edu-