social studies preservice teachers' citizenship knowledge and perceptions of the u.s....

15
This article was downloaded by: [Colorado College] On: 30 October 2014, At: 17:25 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Action in Teacher Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20 Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test Frans H. Doppen a , Joseph R. Feinberg b , Carolyn O'Mahony c , Ashley G. Lucas d , Chara Haeussler Bohan b , George Lipscomb e & Masato Ogawa f a Ohio University b Georgia State University c Oakland University d Towson University e Furman University f Indiana University – Kokomo Published online: 31 Mar 2011. To cite this article: Frans H. Doppen , Joseph R. Feinberg , Carolyn O'Mahony , Ashley G. Lucas , Chara Haeussler Bohan , George Lipscomb & Masato Ogawa (2011) Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test, Action in Teacher Education, 33:1, 81-93, DOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.559445 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2011.559445 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Upload: masato

Post on 06-Mar-2017

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

This article was downloaded by: [Colorado College]On: 30 October 2014, At: 17:25Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Action in Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20

Social Studies Preservice Teachers'Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptionsof the U.S. Naturalization TestFrans H. Doppen a , Joseph R. Feinberg b , Carolyn O'Mahony c ,Ashley G. Lucas d , Chara Haeussler Bohan b , George Lipscomb e &Masato Ogawa fa Ohio Universityb Georgia State Universityc Oakland Universityd Towson Universitye Furman Universityf Indiana University – KokomoPublished online: 31 Mar 2011.

To cite this article: Frans H. Doppen , Joseph R. Feinberg , Carolyn O'Mahony , Ashley G. Lucas ,Chara Haeussler Bohan , George Lipscomb & Masato Ogawa (2011) Social Studies Preservice Teachers'Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test, Action in Teacher Education,33:1, 81-93, DOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.559445

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2011.559445

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Page 2: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 3: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

Action in Teacher Education, 33:81–93, 2011Copyright © Association of Teacher EducatorsISSN: 0162-6620 print/2158-6098 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.559445

Social Studies Preservice Teachers’ Citizenship Knowledgeand Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

Frans H. DoppenOhio University

Joseph R. FeinbergGeorgia State University

Carolyn O’MahonyOakland University

Ashley G. LucasTowson University

Chara Haeussler BohanGeorgia State University

George LipscombFurman University

Masato OgawaIndiana University – Kokomo

Teacher educators from six states invited their social studies methodology students to complete anabbreviated version of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Naturalization Test.The preservice teachers were also asked to share their conceptions of citizenship and evaluate the nat-uralization test. The findings from this study indicate that although this sample of preservice teachershad limited conceptions of citizenship, most were able to get a satisfactory score on the test. Theauthors discuss the implications of these results and suggest ways to broaden citizenship educationin teacher preparation programs.

The U.S. citizenship test is much more controversial than the average citizen and educator mayrealize. Implicit assumptions that are embodied in the citizenship test are seldom examined

Correspondence should be addressed to Frans H. Doppen, Ohio University, College of Education, 210 B McCrackenHall, Athens, OH 45701. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 4: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

82 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

or researched. For example, much controversy surrounded the revisions of the United StatesCitizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Naturalization Study Guide (Preston, 2007).Applicants began taking the revised test on October 1, 2008, after the current study wascompleted. In redesigning the exam, at a cost of $6.5 million, USCIS received assistancefrom test development contractors, U.S. history and government scholars, and English as aSecond Language experts (Preston, 2007; USCIS, 2006). USCIS also sought input from a vari-ety of stakeholders, including immigrant advocacy groups, citizenship instructors, and DistrictAdjudications Officers. The director of the USCIS believed the test “talks about what makes anAmerican citizen” and conservative groups believe the changes are an improvement (Preston,2007). However, some of the groups that were consulted for the new exam, such as the IllinoisCoalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, denounced the test as being irrelevant (Preston,2007). A recent historical analysis of the citizenship test or “memory test” consistently showspreference for efficiency and standardization with little regard for the relevance of citizenshipeducation (Schneider, 2010). Although the current study concluded prior to the new version beingreleased, the prior USCIS Naturalization Test was used as a pedagogical and evaluation tool toanalyze preservice teachers’ civic knowledge and perceptions.

Using the USCIS Naturalization Test as a simulation complements the curricular approachadvocated by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement(CIRCLE; 2003). Thus, preservice teachers assumed the role of immigrants and took an abbre-viated version of the USCIS Naturalization Test to explore their knowledge and notions ofcitizenship. The participants reviewed the test items and suggested question revisions in antic-ipation of the newly revised test. As a result, they provided insights into their knowledge andbeliefs about citizenship. In other words, the USCIS Naturalization Test functioned as a valuablepedagogical tool for introducing notions of citizenship and citizenship education to preserviceteachers.

The current study provides a unique approach for considering what preservice social studiesteachers should know and be able to teach about citizenship-content knowledge and naturaliza-tion issues that immigrants face. The use of the citizenship test in this context raises questionsabout the extent to which future educators should understand the citizenship test and the require-ments to become an American citizen. Thornton (2003) pointed out that it is useful for socialstudies methods classes to discuss and distinguish between what to teach and how to teach. Thisdistinction breaks down in practice. In social studies methodology classes, it seems imperative tofind topics and devices that enable teacher educators to address important contemporary issues.In addition, such an examination may help preservice teachers think about what they will need toknow if they truly desire to engage their future students in democratic practices.

Fewer than 25% of the more than 21 million people who have immigrated to the United Statessince 1980 have become naturalized citizens (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). Schools are the onlyinstitutions with the mandate and the capacity to provide young people with opportunities to learnhow to be citizens (CIRCLE, 2007). Unfortunately, efforts at teaching participatory democracymay be thwarted not only by the structures and hidden curricula of schools (Kubow, 1997), butalso by the linguistic and sociocultural differences between K–12 students and their teachers.This “demographic imperative” is often used as a rationale for multicultural teacher preparationprograms (Lowenstein, 2009). Thus, modeling a real-world simulation of the citizenship test withpreservice teachers provides a strong rationale for future teachers to enhance their citizenshipknowledge and pedagogical practice. However, the task of educating future citizens becomes

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 5: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 83

increasingly problematic when teachers themselves lack deeper levels of civic knowledge andperceptions. This research project utilized the citizenship test as a litmus assessment of the civicknowledge and perceptions of good citizenship displayed by a multistate convenience sample ofpreservice teachers.

The USCIS Naturalization Test is a clear indication of what the U.S. government expects citi-zens to know. Yet defining what citizens should know and how to assess what they actually knoware challenges for policy makers and teachers in their respective roles. According to Ladson-Billings (2005), citizenship can be conceptualized as membership in three communities: the legal,the political, and the social. Policies and practices at the federal, state, and local level, such asimmigration laws, restrict admission to these communities. Although this simulation of the testprovided an opportunity for discussion and debate about citizenship, future educators must under-stand that new immigrants are neither given a choice as to how to become legal citizens of theUnited States nor the opportunity to reflect on conceptions of good citizenship.1

A variety of conceptions of good citizenship have been identified throughout the citizenshipliterature. Many educational researchers agree there is a spectrum of different types of citizens(e.g., Allen, 1996; Clark & Case, 1997; Westheimer & Kahne, 2004). For example, Westheimerand Kahne (2004) contrasted and detailed three broad conceptions (personally responsible, par-ticipatory, and justice oriented) for citizenship education that were surmised from the variousprogram strategies and approaches to democratic education. They cautioned, however, that “obe-dience and patriotism” are not necessarily democratic goals and would also be rather desirablecivic traits in a totalitarian regime. Indeed, some of the current citizenship education concep-tions are “narrow and often ideologically conservative,” and reflect “political choices that havepolitical consequences” (Westheimer & Kahne, 2004, p. 237). Thus, the good intentions of edu-cators to facilitate citizenship education are not always realized and may not promote democraticprinciples.

BACKGROUND

The majority of today’s preservice teachers are members of the generation of young peopledescribed in the CIRCLE reports of 2003 to 2007. As the civic engagement of young peopleappears to decline, so has school-based citizenship education. Many factors contribute to thedecline, such as the movement toward high-stakes testing, teachers’ fear of criticism when dis-cussing controversial issues, and the impact of budget cutbacks on civic education (CIRCLE,2003; Miller, 2007). According to CIRCLE (2007), civic attitudes among youth have degen-erated and young people are less interested in public affairs. In 2006, Lopez et al. found thatnearly 20% of young people, ages 15 to 25, were completely disengaged. Even though nearly75% of the participants in their study indicated that they followed what was going on in govern-ment and public affairs at least some of the time, many had lost confidence in government, andtheir political knowledge was generally poor. In contrast, a comprehensive study of civic knowl-edge, attitudes, and experiences of ninth graders in the United States showed that the mean scoreon civic knowledge of U.S. students was significantly above the international mean (Hahn, 2001;

1The new test includes one question that asks immigrants to list two ways in which they can participate in ourdemocracy (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2009).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 6: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

84 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Oswald, & Schulz, 2001). Given these somewhat contradictory findings,the U.S. citizenship test can be used as an additional tool to broaden knowledge and perceptionsof citizenship.

Unfortunately, many teachers appear ill prepared to effectively deliver citizenship education.Two studies in the 1980s found that elementary preservice teachers were unprepared to explainto children how the American government works (Gilmore, 1988; Larkins, 1984). In a morerecent study of an elementary education methods course, which focused on the intersectionbetween patriotism and citizenship, Nash (2005) found that her preservice teachers faced factualas well conceptual challenges. Mistakes included being unable to consider perspectives beyond atwo-sided polemic mode; equating patriotism with feeling love, respect, and loyalty; and demon-strating those emotions by saluting the flag. The preservice teachers had a limited understandingof tolerance, diversity, and multiculturalism. In addition, they failed to suggest that question-ing governmental policies or actions could ever be considered an act of good citizenship (Nash,2005).

Two decades ago, Giroux (1985) wrote about the disempowerment of teachers in the debatesabout educational quality and the nature of schooling. He argued that teacher educators fre-quently neglect the important need to have preservice teachers examine the causes of fundamentalschool problems. His study was not designed to determine the problems of civic education, butrather to explore how individual teachers can affect the quality of civic instruction. Similarly,the researchers for the current study sought to identify a starting point for exploring how teachereducators might develop approaches or activities that will empower their graduates to createclassroom environments focused on civic education. Thus the current research questions were asfollows:

• How well do preservice teachers perform on the USCIS Naturalization Test?• What do preservice teachers’ know about the USCIS Naturalization Test?• How effectively does the USCIS Naturalization Test provide an instructional approach to

examine preservice teachers’ knowledge and perceptions of citizenship and civic education?

DESIGN

Nonsimulated versions of the naturalization test involve oral examinations with USCIS officersrandomly selecting 10 questions from a master list of 100 questions to examine a prospective cit-izen’s civic knowledge. The seven researchers in the current study administered an abbreviatedversion of 50 questions (see appendix) from the USCIS Naturalization Test to a conveniencesample of preservice teachers in their respective social studies methods courses. The conve-nience sample was selected as a result of the seven researchers’ willingness to participate indata collection.

After completing the naturalization test, the preservice teachers were asked to write a responseto the following open-ended survey items:

1. Explain whether you think the questions on the citizenship test represent what everyimmigrant applying for citizenship should know.

2. Explain whether you think the citizenship test represents what every American citizenborn in this country should know.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 7: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 85

3. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is currently revising the citizenship test.Explain, if you were revising this version of the citizenship test, which questions, if any,would you delete and/or change.

4. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is currently revising the citizenship test.Explain, if you were revising this version of the citizenship test, which questions, if any,would you add?

These open-ended question responses were coded according to emerging patterns observed bythe researchers.

The 211 participants included 116 elementary, 32 middle, and 63 high school social stud-ies preservice teachers. One hundred sixty-nine participants (80%) were undergraduate students,42 participants (20%) were graduate students. One hundred and fifty participants (74%) wereyounger than age 24, and 55 participants (26%) were age 24 and older. Of the 156 partici-pants younger than age 24, 140 were undergraduate students whereas 16 were graduate students.Despite their different geographical locations, the participants’ ethnic backgrounds were over-whelmingly White (96.7%) though the remaining seven participants (3.3%) included five AfricanAmerican students, one Hispanic student, and one “other” student. With the exception of twoparticipants, all elementary-level preservice teachers were female. Thus, comparisons were notmade based gender. Participants were categorized according to the major focus of each method-ology course. Due to differences in grade level and certification across the six states, the threecategories of elementary, middle school, and high school included some minor grade-leveloverlaps.

As emphasized in the research questions, a central focus of the study was to get a sense ofsocial studies preservice teachers’ performance on and response to the citizenship test. Giventhe differing numbers of participants in each category across the universities, differing coursetrajectories in each institution prior to the methods course, and noncentralized scoring of thetests, the data did not lend itself to comparison across states. However, several patterns emergedfrom the data after analysis across graduate level, age, and grade-level groups.

The total mean score (see Table 1) of all 211 preservice teachers in the current study was 35.88(SD = 8.85). An ANOVA test confirmed there was a statistically significant difference in themean scores of the elementary, middle, and high school preservice teachers, F(2, 208) = 102.852,p = .000.

ANOVA tests confirmed a statistically significant difference in the mean scores betweenthe elementary and middle-school preservice teachers, F(1, 146) = 34.553, p = .000, betweenthe elementary and high school preservice teachers, F(1, 177) = 204.048, p = .000, as well as

TABLE 1Scores by Teacher Preparation Program

Grade Level Prep N M SD

Elementary 116 30.47 7.21Middle 32 38.84 6.87High school 63 44.33 3.67Total 211 35.88 8.85

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 8: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

86 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

between the middle and high school preservice teachers, F(1, 93) = 25.856, p = .000. Thesestatistics reveal an important variation in the scores between the three groups and suggest thatmiddle-school preservice teachers have more knowledge of citizenship than elementary preser-vice teachers whereas high school preservice teachers have more knowledge than elementary andmiddle-school preservice teachers.

An additional ANOVA test, F(1, 209) = 29.624, p = .000, revealed that there was a statisti-cally significant difference as well in the mean scores between the 169 undergraduate preserviceteachers (M = 34.33, SD = 8.85) and 42 graduate preservice teachers (M = 42.11, SD = 5.54). Asecond additional ANOVA test, F(1, 209) = 11.107, p = .001, likewise found a statistically signif-icant difference between the 156 preservice teachers younger than age 24 (M = 34.70, SD = 9.05)and the 55 preservice teachers, age 24 and older (M = 39.21, SD = 7.38). As a result of more edu-cation, the graduate students’ higher scores were not surprising. Similarly, these findings suggestthat age does matter when it comes to preservice teachers’ knowledge of citizenship.

PASSING THE TEST

Assessing an individual’s potential for being a knowledgeable citizen is challenging.Nevertheless, thousands of immigrants every year are expected to correctly answer the USCISNaturalization Test questions. Not surprisingly, undergraduate preservice teachers preparing toteach social sciences in high schools scored the highest on the test (91% correct) followed bymiddle school (77% correct). Future elementary schoolteachers scored the lowest (62% correct).

Three questions were especially challenging for all preservice teachers as 50% or more of anyof the three participant groups were not able to answer these questions correctly. The questionsasked them to identify their state Senators, the total number of representatives in the U.S. Houseof Representatives, and the year in which the U.S. Constitution was adopted. Two questionsthat posed a challenge for more than 50% of the elementary and middle, but not high, schoolpreservice teachers asked for the length of a U.S. Senator’s term and the name of the currentChief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Less than one fourth or 23% (n = 27) of the elemen-tary and 48% (n = 15) of the middle-school preservice teachers knew the length of a Senator’sterm. Furthermore, a mere 3% (n = 4) of the elementary and 23% (n = 7) of the middle schoolpreservice teachers knew that John Roberts is the current Chief Justice.

Identifying the two U.S. Senators from their state was the only one of all 50 questions forwhich there was a noticeable change in the general response pattern as more than 28% (n = 33) ofthe elementary preservice teachers answered the question correctly compared to fewer than 19%(n = 6) of the middle-school preservice teachers. A possible reason for this anomaly could be theexpanding horizons scope and sequence of the elementary social studies curriculum. Regardlessof their home state, preservice teachers in elementary field placements with fourth graders oryounger are more likely to be talking about local and state politicians than about national ones.

The majority (n = 59) of the elementary preservice teachers were unable to correctly answermore than 17 of the 50 questions. In addition to the five questions described above, the elementarypreservice teachers in the current study struggled with 12 additional questions about: the purposeof the U.S. Constitution; the length of a U.S. Representative’s term; the purpose of the executiveand judiciary branch; defining the Bill of Rights; the line of succession should the president andvice-president die; the number of justices on the Supreme Court; the basic belief underlying the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 9: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 87

U.S. Declaration of Independence; the role of the Cabinet; the name of the building where theU.S. Congress meets; and how often a member of the U.S. Congress can be reelected.

REFLECTING ON THE TEST

The participants’ perceptions of good citizenship were assessed by analyzing their responsesto four questions, presented above, regarding the content of the citizenship test. Thus, the 211participants were asked to explain whether the citizenship test represents what every immigrantapplying for citizenship should know, whether the test represents what every American citizenborn in the United States should know, and which questions on the citizenship test they wouldchange or add.

Given the uneven demonstration of citizenship knowledge on the test as a whole or on somespecific items, one might expect the preservice teachers in the current study, especially thosein the elementary group, to perceive the nature of the questions that were asked of prospectivefellow citizens as being narrow and irrelevant to full participation. For instance, the test did notask immigrants to determine what types of discrimination are illegal in the United States, yet legaland social equality are fundamental constitutional principles that historically differentiate theUnited States from many other countries. Similarly, as an assessment issue, one might reasonablyhave expected the preservice teachers in the current study to suggest that questions on such a testshould elicit evidence of the attributes of a good citizen. Yet, when asked whether they thought thequestions on this test represent what every immigrant applying for citizenship should know, theygenerally agreed with 59% (n = 125) responding yes, 39% (n = 82) no, and 2% (n = 4) offeringno response. However, this result is not as simple to evaluate as the numbers might suggest.When asked about changing questions for a revised naturalization test, only 34% (n = 72) ofrespondents agreed unconditionally with the statement that the questions represent what everyimmigrant applying for U.S. citizenship should know. Conditional responses tended to focus onissues of fairness contending that most Americans by birth would not be able to answer many ofthe questions.

Many of the preservice teachers who rejected the test as an effective assessment of what immi-grants should know when applying for citizenship (i.e., the no responses) also claimed that it wasunfair to expect immigrants to know more than native citizens. Individuals suggested that it wasmore important to know the laws, be able to speak English, or to be patriotic and loyal to theUnited States. One preservice teacher concluded:

Why does a new citizen need to know all this stuff? [Is the USCIS] testing for ambition? Ambitiouspeople will study, practice, do well; lazy people will not study, not do well. Literacy? Ability to followsocietal norms – follow directions etc.? They are testing for something besides people’s knowledgeof these ideas.

When the preservice teachers were asked whether the naturalization test was a good assess-ment of what citizens born in the United States should know, an overwhelming 81% (n = 171)of the preservice teachers agreed, yet only 49% (n = 103) did so unconditionally. Conditionalyes responses were frequently colored by an individual’s performance on the test. For example,a number of participants wrote apologetic comments about and explanations of how one learnsfacts in school and then forgets them, or how the majority of Americans do not know these facts.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 10: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

88 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

Others said it is more important to know political structures instead of the exact dates of histori-cal events. A number of students who disagreed with the content of the test were vehement abouthow poorly the test questions assessed one’s potential for being a good citizen.

When asked what questions they would eliminate from the test and what they would add,the preservice teachers had surprisingly few suggestions. However, the questionnaire was givenduring a class session so there was limited class time for highly reflective written responses.Some students were concerned about questions that could elicit a number of ostensibly correctresponses, for example, the purpose of the Constitution.

When students reflected on the questions that were most commonly missed or answered incor-rectly, there were individuals who suggested eliminating questions about the number of Senatorsor Representatives and the nature of terms and term limits. In most groups, individuals sug-gested eliminating questions they perceived as too specific, pertaining to trivial details about theflag, holidays, and history, and suggested, for instance, that it is more important for citizens tounderstand the purpose of the Declaration of Independence than to know who wrote it. Otherssuggested that the questions were culturally biased. One participant responded, “It seems likehistory should not be limited to Jefferson’s writing the Declaration or Lincoln’s EmancipationProclamation. [It is a] very white, Anglo-Saxon exam.” Yet other preservice teachers challengedthe need for any questions about U.S. history. They proposed that it is more important for citizensto know how the government works than requiring them to know when documents were signedand what holidays the colonists celebrated.

As stated earlier, when asked how they would revise the citizenship test, 34% (n = 72) ofthe preservice teachers had no suggestions for change at all. Suggestions from the other 66%(n = 139) included the idea that immigrants should know about their rights, state-level issues,and current events in the country. A number of them stated that there should be more of a focuson exploring why applicants wish to become citizens. They would have liked to add questionsthat assess whether an applicant is “cognitively able” (including being able to speak English) andintent on becoming a good, patriotic citizen (see Chebium, 2000). One preservice teacher wrote,“I would add some questions that make you tell how you really feel about the U.S. to me andhow you would be loyal.” Some suggested adding questions that spoke to an immigrant’s abilityto assimilate. They would prefer to ask questions that measure an applicant’s grasp of Americanideals, beliefs, and culture. Another preservice teacher stated, “I might ask some questions aboutcultural dynamics of the melting pot theory that is supposed to be America.” One more respondentsuggested adding questions that would assess “a person’s ability to thrive in the U.S., e.g., laws,the tax system etc.”

Perhaps because of the nature of the question, few individuals commented on the validity ofthe test in assessing a person’s potential value as a citizen of the United States of America. Onlytwo individuals spoke to this issue, suggesting that instead of taking a test, applicants should berequired to undertake a service project that demonstrates their desire to become a citizen.

IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

Summarizing the results based on the research questions shows some promising results and somefrustrating findings for teacher educators. Although the secondary and middle-level participantsscored reasonably well on the citizenship test, the elementary preservice teachers’ poor results

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 11: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 89

reaffirm some of the previously summarized research findings (Gilmore, 1988; Larkins, 1984;Nash, 2005). In particular, Nash (2005) highlighted the narrow conceptions of preservice teach-ers. The preservice teachers in the current study did not question the content validity of thetest, even when faced with their own failing scores, and subscribed to the limited conception ofpersonally responsible citizenship (Doppen, Misco, & Patterson, 2008; Westheimer & Kahne,2004).

For many teacher educators, the preservice teachers’ scores on the U.S. Naturalization Testand their responses to the follow-up questions will be expected and disconcerting because, apartfrom being unable to recall so-called citizenship knowledge (especially the respondents preparingto be elementary schoolteachers), these future teachers most likely regard themselves and eachother as good citizens. Despite the poor performance of some of these participants on the test,they nonetheless may fit with the kind of citizens we would want as our neighbors and colleagues.Yet the current study’s preservice teachers did not demonstrate broad conceptions of citizenship.The preponderance of nonparticipatory responses to open-ended questions reveals rather lim-ited citizenship expectations for these preservice teachers, who also noticeably failed to providejustice oriented perspectives (Abowitz & Harnish, 2006; Banks et al., 2005; Ladson-Billings,2005; Lynch, 1992).

The majority of the responses and suggestions for change failed to capture the impor-tance of action in the world’s oldest participatory democracy. Their statements suggest USCISNaturalization Test fails to encourage prospective citizens to participate in the public decision-making process (Allen, 1996; Clark & Case, 1997; Westheimer & Kahne, 2004). Nonetheless,it seems important that preservice teachers, who will soon be entrusted with educating childrenabout how to participate in a democratic system, be aware that willing and informed partici-pation in real-world problem solving and policy making is essential for maintaining a healthydemocracy.

Few of the preservice teachers in the current study demonstrated some cognition of the value ofcivic participation and leadership. In their study of rural school-age students, Martin and Chiodo(2007) argued that students function as citizens within environmental and age-appropriate limita-tions. School settings provide K–12 students many opportunities to participate in curricular andextracurricular activities that directly and indirectly serve to prepare them as citizens. Yet thismay well not be accomplished despite good intentions by teachers to prepare tomorrow’s citizensimbued with participatory democratic principles.

Social studies teachers and teacher educators should consider asking their students to explorethe concept of good citizenship. The current USCIS Naturalization Test provides a powerfulpedagogical approach to explore issues related to conceptions of good citizenship. Such aninstructional approach would engage preservice teachers and their future students in synthesizingthe various conceptions of citizenship. Ideally, educators would also encourage a rethinking ofcitizenship to include participatory and/or justice oriented approaches. Although revisions to thenew citizenship test enabled a healthy discussion, historically, it has received little attention fromCongress because few have protested the focus on efficiency, standardization, and memorizationat the expense of more relevant measures of citizenship (Schneider, 2010). Although only a fewof the participants in the current study recognized the need to revise the citizenship test to includea broader conception of what it means to be a good citizen, most preferred the assimilation focusof the test that supports a personally responsible citizen (Westheimer & Kahne, 2004).

Thornton (2001, 2003) argued that liberal arts professors, who often teach the bulk of teacherpreparation course work, seldom think of themselves as teacher educators, whereas education

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 12: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

90 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

school professors tend to define their task as limited to pedagogy. Furthermore, he suggested thatthe solution for improving the knowledge base of teachers does not lie in increasing the numberof content courses preservice teachers take, but rather in blurring the lines between subject matterand professional education. Preservice teachers should be required to take courses based on whatthey will be expected to teach. Such an approach would allow teacher preparation programs tobetter prepare their candidates to teach about and for citizenship.

The findings in the current study with regard to social studies preservice elementary and mid-dle teachers point to the potential of and need for conversations across subject areas in teachereducation programs regarding the qualities and knowledge base for teaching citizenship K–8.Being able to construct a persuasive argument is a crucial tool for participating in civic discourse.Compared to such aptitudes, knowing the year when the U.S. Constitution was ratified may seemunimportant, even trivial. What is not trivial is the type of change that might happen if system-wide efforts were made to increase and improve the quality of young people’s civic engagement,starting with teacher preparation programs.

Future studies should center on broader conceptions of citizenship focused on diverse popula-tions, socioeconomic status, and justice-oriented perspectives through interviews, observations,and surveys. In addition, further research on how to broaden preservice teachers’ knowledgeand notions of citizenship beyond traditional curricular approaches and personally responsiblenotions of citizenship is necessary to enhance the findings from the current study.

APPENDIX A

U.S. Naturalization Test Questions Used for the Current Study

1. How many stars are there on our flag?2. What do the stars on the flag mean?3. How many stripes are there on the flag?4. What do the stripes on the flag mean?5. Why do we celebrate the 4th of July?6. What country did we fight during the Revolutionary War?7. Who is the President of the United States today?8. Who is the Vice President of the United States today?9. Which body elects the President after the people have voted in the elections?

10. Who becomes the President of the United States if the President should die?11. For how long do we elect our President?12. What is the purpose of our Constitution?13. What do we call a change to the Constitution?14. What is the purpose of the legislative branch of our government?15. How many Senators are there in Congress?16. What is your home state, and who are its two (2) Senators?17. For how long do we elect each Senator?18. How many Representatives are there in Congress?19. For how long do we elect a Representative?20. What is the purpose of the executive branch of our government?21. What is the purpose of the judiciary branch of our government?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 13: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 91

22. What is the Bill of Rights?23. What is your home state, and who is its current governor?24. Who becomes President of the United States if the President and Vice President should

die?25. Who is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?26. How many terms can a President serve?27. According to the Constitution, a person must meet certain requirements in order to be

eligible to become President. Name one (1) of these requirements.28. Why are there 100 Senators in the Senate?29. How many Supreme Court Justices are there?30. What is the head executive of a state government called?31. What holiday was celebrated for the first time by the American colonists?32. Who was the main writer of the Declaration of Independence?33. What was the basic belief of the Declaration of Independence?34. What is the name of the national anthem of the United States?35. Which amendment guarantees freedom of speech?36. What is the minimum voting age in the United States?37. Who signs bills into law?38. Who was the President during the Civil War?39. What did the Emancipation Proclamation do?40. What is the Cabinet?41. Name three (3) rights or freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.42. Who has the power to declare war?43. In what year was the Constitution adopted?44. In what building does Congress meet?45. What is the introduction to the Constitution called?46. Who is the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military?47. In what month do we vote for the President?48. In what month is the new President inaugurated?49. How many times can a Senator be reelected?50. How many times can a Representative be reelected?

REFERENCES

Abowitz, K. K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary discourses of citizenship. Review of Educational Research, 76(4),653–690.

Allen, R. F. (1996). Introduction: What should we teach in social studies? And why? In B. G. Massialas & R. F. Allen(Eds.), Crucial issues in teaching social studies K-12 (pp. 1–23). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Banks, J. A., McGee Banks, C. A., Cortes, C. E., Hahn, C. L., Merryfield, M. M., Moodley, K. A., . . . Parker, W. C.(2005). Democracy and diversity: Principles and concepts for educating citizens in a global age. Seattle, WA: Centerfor Multicultural Education.

Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. (2003). The civic mission of schools. New York,NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. (2007). The civic mission of schools: 2003–2007. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 14: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

92 FRANS H. DOPPEN ET AL.

Chebium, J. (2000, July 18). Disabled woman’s family says INS denial of citizenship is discriminatory. CNN.com.Retrieved from http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/07/18/citizenship.ins.suit/index.html

Clark, P., & Case, R. (1997). Four purposes of citizenship education. In R. Case & P. Clark (Eds.), The Canadian anthol-ogy of social studies: Issues and strategies for teachers (pp. 17–27). Burnaby, Canada: Simon Fraser University FieldRelations.

Doppen, F., Misco, T., & Patterson, N. (2008). The state of K-12 social studies instruction in Ohio. Social StudiesResearch and Practice, 3(3), 1–25.

Gilmore, A. C. (1988). Preservice elementary education majors knowledge of American government (Report No. SO 019805). Atlanta, GA: Mercer University Press.

Giroux, H. A. (1985). Teachers as transformative intellectuals. Social Education, 49, 376–379.Hahn, C. (2001). Civic knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of ninth graders in the United States. Results of the IEA

civic education study. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/2002-2/civic.htmKubow, P. K. (1997, April). Citizenship education for the 21st century: Insights from social studies teacher preparation

students in three countries. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association,Chicago, IL.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). Differing concepts of citizenship: Schools and communities as sites of civic development. InN. Noddings (Ed.), Educating citizens for global awareness (pp. 69–80). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Larkins, A. C. (1984, November). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of social studies content in primary grades. Paperpresented at the annual meeting of National Council for the Social Studies, Washington, DC.

Lopez, M. H., Levine, P., Both, D., Keisa, A., Kirby, E., & Marcelo, K. (2006). The 2006 civic and political healthof the nation: A detailed look at how youth participate in politics and communities. College Park, MD: Center forInformation and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.

Lowenstein, K. L. (2009). The work of multicultural teacher education: Reconceptualizing white teacher candidates aslearners. Review of Educational Research 79, 163–196.

Lynch, J. (1992). Education for citizenship in a multicultural society. New York, NY: Cassel.Martin, L. A., & Chiodo, J. J. (2007). Good citizenship: What students in rural schools have to say about it. Theory and

Research in Social Education, 35(1), 112–134.Miller, J. J. (2007, April). Can political participation be taught? Education Week, 26, 36.Nash, M. A. (2005). How to be thankful for being free: Searching for a convergence of discourses on teaching patriotism,

citizenship, and United States history. Teachers College Record, 107, 214–240.Preston, J. (2007, September 28). New test asks: What does ‘American’ mean? The New York Times. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/28/washington/28citizen.htmlSchneider, J. (2010). Memory test: A history of U.S. citizenship education and examination. Teachers College Record,

112(9), 2379–2404.Thornton, S. (2001, November). Subject matter in social studies teacher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting

of the National Council for the Social Studies, Washington, DC.Thornton, S. (2003, April). What counts as subject matter knowledge for teaching? Paper presented at the annual meeting

of the American Education Research Association, Chicago, IL.Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., & Schulz, W. (2001). Citizenship and education in twenty-eight countries:

Civic knowledge and engagement at age fourteen. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for theEvaluation of Educational Achievement.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Foreign born profiles by citizenship status. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/foreign/STP-159-2000tl.html

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2006). Press release: USCIS issues, questions and answers for the new pilotnaturalization exam. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2009). The U.S. Naturalization Practice Test. Retrieved from http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.010cab8025677e19631ef89b843f6d1a/?vgnextoid=9ff98424f8304110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=9ff98424f8304110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen: The politics of educating for democracy. American EducationalResearch Journal, 41(2), 237–269.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 15: Social Studies Preservice Teachers' Citizenship Knowledge and Perceptions of the U.S. Naturalization Test

SOCIAL STUDIES PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ CITIZENSHIP KNOWLEDGE 93

Frans H. Doppen is an Associate Professor of Social Studies Education at Ohio University inAthens, OH. His research interests include global education, civic education, issues of nationalidentity, service learning, and the state of social studies education. Dr. Doppen is an active mem-ber of the College and University Faculty Assembly and International Assembly of the NationalCouncil for the Social Studies as well as the Ohio Council for the Social Studies.

Joseph R. Feinberg is an Assistant Professor of social studies education at Georgia StateUniversity. Formerly an Assistant Professor at UNC Wilmington, he also taught social studiesat Campbell High School in Smyrna, Georgia. His research interests include simulation games,civic education and service-learning.

Carolyn O’Mahony is an Associate Professor at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan,where she directs the International Baccalaureate Faculty Development programs. She teachesundergraduate social studies methods courses and graduate classes in global and comparativeeducation. Her scholarship focuses on issues in teaching and learning elementary social studies.

Ashley G. Lucas is an Assistant Professor of elementary education at Towson University inTowson, Maryland. Her research interests include multicultural and global education. She pri-marily teaches undergraduate and graduate social studies methods courses at Towson University.

Chara Haeussler Bohan is an Associate Professor in the School of Education at Georgia StateUniversity. She is an Executive Editor of The Social Studies. She has published in several jour-nals, including Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, Theory and Research in Social Educationand Social Studies and the Young Learner. She has authored a book titled, Go to the Sources:Lucy Maynard Salmon and the Teaching of History (Lang, 2004) and edited several books, includ-ing American Educational Thought: 1640-1940 (IAP, 2010), and Clinical Teacher Education:Reflections from an Urban Professional Development School Network (IAP, 2011).

George Lipscomb is an Associate Professor in the Education Department at Furman Universityin Greenville, SC. A former middle and high school teacher in North Carolina and Florida, hecurrently instructs elementary and secondary social studies methods, curriculum and technology,and geography among other courses at Furman. He is active in social studies education at thelocal, state, and national level and recently served as chair of the Notable Trade Books Committeeof NCSS.

Masato Ogawa is an Assistant Professor of Education at Indiana University Kokomo in Kokomo,IN. His research interests include learning and teaching of history, historical perspective-taking,comparative textbook analyses, multicultural education, international education, and Japaneseeducation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Col

orad

o C

olle

ge]

at 1

7:25

30

Oct

ober

201

4