CRITICAL CURRICULUM INQUIRY AND THE TEACHING OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN U.S. SECONDARY SCHOOLS (SOCIAL SCIENCES, UNITED STATES)

This study examines two perspectives in critical curriculum inquiry and the relationship of these approaches to a secondary school American history teaching.;Dominant curricular rationales and instructional strategies evident in the professional literature on American history teaching are compared with aesthetic and radical left curricular models. Dominant curricular rationales found include: (1) nationalistic loyalty, (2) three variations of citizenship education, and (3) three variations of intellectual inquiry. Predominant instructional strategies found include: (1) lecture, (2) textbook usage, and (3) recitation and discussion.;Analysis of potential compatibility between the two curriculum models and American history teaching yields these findings: (1) limited compatibility of aesthetic curriculum inquiry with American history rationales; (2) very limited compatibility of radical left curriculum inquiry with American history rationales; and (3) very limited compatibility of aesthetic and radical left curriculum inquiry with predominant instructional strategies.;Two sets of conclusions emerge. Concerning curriculum critics and American history teaching: (1) little evidence of either critical curricular model exists in American history teaching; (2) value claims and educational aims of these critics are rarely advocated in the American history professional literature; (3) the processes of criticism advocated by aesthetic and radical left critics are rarely employed in American history teaching; and (4) traditional instructional strategies are pervasive in American history teaching and incompatible with aesthetic and radical left models.;Critical curriculum inquiry has emerged in the curriculum reform literature since 1965. Two perspectives are examined: the aesthetic, exemplified by the work of Elliot W. Eisner and Elizabeth Vallance, and the radical left exemplified by that of Michael W. Apple and Henry Giroux. A historical/philosophical analysis of the knowledge sources, value claims, and ultimate educational aims of each perspective is presented.;Concerning curriculum reform appropriate conclusions are: (1) aesthetic and radical left scholars reject the legacy of positivism substituting an eclectic set of knowlege sources; (2) radical left scholarship lacks a broad social reform program and evidence validating their curricular and pedagogical reform proposals; and (3) aesthetic and radical left scholars ignore the continuing bureaucratizaton of schooling, which undermines their reform arguments.