Most educators have moved towards no-zero grading policies. These decisions are in line with a larger goal of asset-based learning. After all, students never bring NOTHING to the table. Their thoughts, emotions, and backgrounds can all potentially become the basis of long-term growth in the courses’ knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA).
Nevertheless, where it gets less clear is what is the minimum grade a student should be able to receive. For example, a student might make a few basic factual comments during a simulation yet otherwise remain silent for the remainder of the summative – not engaging in discussions, not responding to points made by others, and not designing a final resolution document with classmates. If I go by a standards-based rubric, do I interpret the speaking skill as basic or does it fall off the standards as below basic? In the 2016 meta-analysis of 100 years of grading policy research, the authors, Brookhart et al., argued that, “Grades, therefore, must be considered multidimensional measures that reflect mostly achievement of classroom learning intentions and also, to a lesser degree, students’ efforts at getting there.” Baring specific special needs to count this as passing and “basic” would do an injustice to the student’s potential to grow and learn. A basic level would refer to a more participatory student throughout.
The issue arises in that many schools have standards-based grades glued onto standard A-F grades. Under these policies assuming a basic standard at 65%, 50% seems a reasonable minimum. It emphasizes the student has not reached basic abilities to conduct the standard with sufficient efforts. At the same time, it is a grade that can be overcome either through future projects or reassessment opportunities. With sufficient feedback, educators can set their students up to reach higher levels and create a virtuous circle of KSA gains that will hopefully lead them to higher grades and their class and beyond.
You may have heard in the news about a relatively new generative AI software out of China known as DeepSeek. Even if you haven’t, the stock market sure did yesterday. So, what’s the big deal? In short, DeepSeek’s quick rise occurred with less advanced hardware and far less investment. Whether or not this is an incremental change in the industry, or a “Sputnik” moment remains to be seen. Regardless, as a fan of trying new EdTech, I decided to see what DeepSeek could do compared to my standard way at work: Google Gemini.
I decided on a topic for which there is a lot of information and on which I know a fair amount: The causes of the Great Depression. I asked both AI models to answer that prompt. I also followed up with each one by asking them to add citations.
Fascinatingly, before I could even type in my prompt, my phone overheard my conversation with my family about what I was about to do, it wrote:
Okay, I’m ready for your comparison and contrast! I’m excited to see what you come up with. To help me understand your perspective better, could you tell me: * What are you comparing and contrasting? (e.g., two different books, two different movies, two different approaches to a problem) * What are the key aspects you’ll be focusing on? (e.g., plot, characters, themes, effectiveness, efficiency) I’m eager to learn from your analysis!
After that slightly scary but very illuminating accidental exchange. I then wrote in my prompts. For the main response, Gemini wrote:
You’re right, adding specifics and citations would make this analysis more robust. Here’s an attempt to do so: 1. Stock Market Crash of 1929: * Speculative Bubble: The stock market in the late 1920s experienced a speculative bubble, fueled by margin buying (borrowing money to buy stocks) and widespread optimism. * Source: “The Great Depression” by Robert McElvaine (p. 37) * Crash: On October 29, 1929 (“Black Tuesday”), the stock market crashed, wiping out billions of dollars in investor wealth. * Source: “The Crash of 1929” by John Kenneth Galbraith (p. 19) 2. Banking Panics and Failures: * Bank Runs: The stock market crash triggered widespread bank runs as panicked depositors withdrew their funds. * Source: “America’s Great Depression” by Christina Romer (p. 42) * Bank Failures: Thousands of banks failed, leading to a sharp contraction in credit availability. * Source: “The Federal Reserve and the Great Depression” by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz (p. 301) 3. Dust Bowl: * Environmental Disaster: The Dust Bowl, a period of severe dust storms in the 1930s, devastated agriculture in the Great Plains. * Source: “The Grapes of Wrath” by John Steinbeck (depicts the Dust Bowl’s impact) * Economic Impact: Crop failures led to widespread farm foreclosures and rural poverty. * Source: “Hard Times in America: The Great Depression” by Irving Bernstein (p. 125) 4. Overproduction and Underconsumption: * Agricultural Overproduction: The agricultural sector experienced overproduction, leading to falling farm prices and declining incomes. * Source: “The American Economy in Perspective” by Robert J. Gordon (p. 215) * Consumer Demand: Consumer demand failed to keep pace with the increased supply of goods, creating a significant imbalance in the economy. * Source: “The Economics of the Great Depression” by Ben S. Bernanke (p. 35) 5. Smoot-Hawley Tariff: * Protectionism: The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 significantly increased tariffs on imported goods. * Source: “The Tariff and American Politics: A Documentary History” by William R. Tyler (p. 357) * Impact on Trade: This protectionist measure triggered retaliatory tariffs from other countries, severely restricting international trade. * Source: “The Great Depression and the New Deal” by Eric Hobsbawm (p. 102) 6. Contractionary Monetary Policy: * Federal Reserve Actions: The Federal Reserve pursued a tight monetary policy, raising interest rates and reducing the money supply. * Source: “Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960” by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz (p. 598) * Impact on Credit: This policy made borrowing more expensive, hindering economic growth and investment. 7. Government Inaction: * Laissez-Faire Policies: In the early years of the Depression, government intervention was limited, reflecting the prevailing belief in laissez-faire economics. * Source: “The New Deal: A History” by Jonathan Alter (p. 12) Disclaimer: This is a simplified overview, and the causes of the Great Depression are still debated by economists and historians. I hope this more detailed analysis is helpful!
In the case of Gemini, my attempt to make a works cited page was met with a request to change access. When I logged with a different account, my prompts had been erased.
As for DeepSeek’s R1 model, its first response was a bit vague, so I asked it to add more details. Here is what it came up with:
### **Causes of the Great Depression**
The Great Depression (1929–1939) emerged from interconnected structural flaws, policy failures, and global imbalances. Below are the primary causes, supported by specific data and academic references:
—
#### **1. Stock Market Crash of 1929**
– **Speculative Bubble**: By 1929, stocks were overvalued by 30–40% relative to earnings (Galbraith, *The Great Crash 1929*). Margin buying—where investors borrowed up to 90% of stock prices—fueled speculation.
– **Crash and Collapse**: The Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked at 381.17 in September 1929 before collapsing to 198.69 by November (Black Thursday/Tuesday, October 24–29). By July 1932, it bottomed at 41.22, erasing 89% of its value (Federal Reserve History).
– **Wealth Destruction**: Household net worth fell by 40% ($206B to $137B) between 1929 and 1933 (Mishkin, *Journal of Economic History*, 1978).
—
#### **2. Banking System Collapse**
– **Bank Runs and Failures**: Over 9,000 banks failed by 1933, wiping out $7B in deposits (FDIC). The 1930 collapse of *Bank of the United States* (with 400,000 depositors) epitomized the crisis.
– **Federal Reserve Inaction**: The Fed raised rates in 1931 to defend the gold standard, worsening deflation. Money supply contracted by 33% (Friedman & Schwartz, *A Monetary History*).
—
#### **3. Overproduction and Underconsumption**
– **Industrial Overcapacity**: Automobile production outpaced demand by 50% by 1929 (GM Annual Report, 1929). Consumer goods piled up as 60% of families lived below the poverty line (Brookings Institution, 1929).
– **Wage Stagnation**: From 1923–1929, productivity rose 43% but wages only 8% (Bernstein, *The Lean Years*). Top 1% income share grew from 12% to 19% (Piketty & Saez, *QJE*, 2003).
—
#### **4. Agricultural Crisis**
– **Price Collapse**: Farm incomes fell 60% ($12B to $5B) from 1929–1932 (USDA). The *Dust Bowl* (1930–1936) displaced 2.5 million people in Oklahoma/Texas (Worster, *Dust Bowl*).
– **Debt Spiral**: Farm foreclosures hit 20% by 1933 (FDIC). The *Agricultural Marketing Act* (1929) failed to stabilize prices.
—
#### **5. Income Inequality**
– **Wealth Concentration**: The top 0.1% held 20% of wealth in 1929 (Saez & Zucman, *AER*, 2016). Middle-class reliance on credit (e.g., 75% of cars bought on installment plans) exacerbated fragility (Olney, *Buy Now, Pay Later*).
—
#### **6. International Trade and Debt**
– **Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1930)**: Raised U.S. tariffs on 20,000 imports, triggering global retaliation. World trade volume fell 66% (1929–1934, League of Nations).
– **War Debts and Reparations**: Germany owed $33B in Versailles reparations, paid via U.S. loans. When U.S. lending halted in 1928, Europe’s economies destabilized (Keynes, *The Economic Consequences of the Peace*).
—
#### **7. Gold Standard Constraints**
– **Deflationary Pressure**: Nations clung to gold convertibility, limiting money printing. The U.S. gold hoard rose from 35% to 45% of global reserves (1929–1933), starving other economies (Eichengreen, *Golden Fetters*).
– **Competitive Devaluations**: Britain abandoned the gold standard in 1931, while the U.S. held until 1933, deepening its crisis.
—
#### **8. Policy Failures**
– **Federal Reserve Errors**: The Fed kept rates high (5% in 1929) to curb speculation, then failed to bail out banks (Bernanke, *Essays on the Great Depression*).
– **Hoover’s Austerity**: The 1932 *Revenue Act
As you can see, both generative AI’s do a good job reviewing the main causes of the Great Depression. They are largely similar in output. They discuss the stock market crash, bank runs, farming difficulties, and financial blunders that made matters worse. Note that as this was just an initial glance at capabilities, I did not fact-check their sources. Hypothetically some of these sources for either or both programs could be hallucinations.
Where there was a big difference between Gemini and DeepSeek was in their rationales. Gemini was like a black box creating an output immediately. This is what I am used to and have seen with CoPilot (which uses ChatGPT) too. In other words, I do not know why the program choose certain facts, a certain tone, a certain paragraph structure, etc. On the other hand, DeepSeek explicitly explained its rationales thoroughly before responding.
For example, here is its thought process. As you can see, it “thought” through its response for over 30 seconds before producing an output.
This level of detailed ‘self’-reflection is impressive. As a user, it allows me to see the critical-thinking that the system is undergoing. I can do not need to guess on why the program had certain elements in its final output. As an educator, there might be great potential in this feature as a tool to help guide students on how to thinking critically. To conclude, while an output related to a major historical event were similar, it’s explicit ‘thinking’ may make DeepSeek a valid program if you are particularly interested in the thought process behind the outputs. While I used the phone app, the fact that DeepSeek can be done locally (without sending information to servers) could also be a plus for student security.
Author’s Note: This year I took the plunge into the final frontier of education, a doctorate at Northern Illinois University. This post is for a final presentation on a groundbreaking theorist in Curriculum and Instructional Design. I was assigned Dr. Jerome Bruner. The more I researched, the more I saw how extraordinary Bruner was. His insights fuel our modern education system today. Given my 6-8 minute presentation limit, my blog post is far more limited than it could have been. Despite the short length, I hope I convey his brilliance on education.
(AP, as cited by Greenfield, 2016)
The Flaws of Behaviorism: Blindness as an asset
Jerome Seymour Bruner was born in New York City in 1915. Until cataracts were repaired, he was blind. Those years of without sight would shape his research years later. Like Vygotsky in Russia, Bruner’s research at Harvard in the 40s and 50s turned on its head the standard theory of the time that perception was based on responses to external stimuli. Bruner found this theory inadequate as he himself had had personally experienced development without any visual external stimuli. Bruner wondered if it was actually the brain that played the more central role in perception instead through a social lens. The “New Look in Perception” approach (Greenfield, 2016) was confirmed Bruner and Cecile C. Goodman coin experiment in 1947 .
(Bruner and Goodman, 1947, p. 40)
10-year-old children (N=30) were asked to estimate the size of various coins. As seen the chart above, regardless of socioeconomic class, children overestimated the size of all coin denominations. Nevertheless, there was a statistically significant difference between poor and rich students with poor children having a significantly larger positive deviation from the actual coin sizes. The study suggests, “the greater the subjective need for a socially valued object, the greater will be the role of behavioral determinants of perception” (p. 39).
This is relevant to contemporary educational practices because it indicates a level of rationality behind the varied effort levels of students. If class participation in activities is defined as the object, then students will perceive the relative importance of an activity differently. A child from a rich family may have seen wealth as a direct consequence of educational achievements such as college graduation. Thus, they will participate more than children who have no role models that show the importance of academic success as a way towards prosperity. Though it might be seen as brash or untenable, this situation could be ameliorated if good grades were rewarded with cash payments to students. The upside here is that it would more directly address the “subjective need” of poorer students, and the payments would not have to be large since poorer students would accentuate even small payments.
Over sixty years later at 95 years old, Bruner would still be talking about inequality in American society and its detrimental effects on education:
“If I were to write another book tomorrow about education, I would be more concerned with these endemic, principally domestic cultural matters that impose such unspeakable inequalities on our presumably democratic society. It’s a society in which a smaller and smaller proportion of the population each year owns a larger and larger proportion of the wealth. How do you expect a country of this sort to begin to develop a sense of possibility among its population?… We’ve got to stop thinking about education as if it stopped at the schoolhouse door.” -Jerome Bruner
His message remains relevant in post-COVID America – just as it was in 2010 at the tail end of the Great Recession. Unfortunately, he passed away in 2016 before publishing what would have been a sobering read.
The Process of Education
Bruner’s trajectory changed along with the country’s following the launch of Sputnik by the Soviet Union.
While the satellite exhibited nothing more offensive than an annoying radio beep, it led to a deep fear that the two-time World War champions were falling behind. Bruner led a team of academics in an effort to address the perceived failures of the American education system. The result was his book, The Process of Education, in 1960 and updated in 1977 (New York University, 2010). In it he addresses this very issue:
The Soviet Union’s conquests in space, its capability of producing not only powerful weapons but also an effective industrial society, have shaken American complacency to a degree that, looking back, would have seemed inconceivable a decade ago – Jerome Bruner (Bruner, 1977, p. 75)
One of the central hypotheses of the book was “that any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development” (Bruner, 1977, p. 33). The author even admits that this is “bold” (33). After all, other theorists such as Jean Piaget argue that children can learn different depths of knowledge at different stages of development. Bruner contends that these developmental stages can be adjusted for through a “spiraling curriclum”: a series of scaffolds that adjust the depth of knowledge and supports around the concept (p. 52-53). For example, Bruner notes that a child does not need to wait until tenth grade to take biology. Instead, children can be exposed to “major biological ideas earlier, in a spirit perhaps less exact and more intuitive” (p. 54). That approach is very different from what we see today. The spiraling curriculum can be seen throughout my field of political science. Take a look at the Illinois Social Science Standards for Civics for Middle School:
No student who graduated from an American high school will enter my college classroom without a good familiarization with civics. Students in my US Government class studied the topic in elementary, middle, and high school levels. With each ‘spiral’ the importance of civics was expanded and explained further.
At least as of 2007, the pedagogy of spiraling was not universal. Science was often taught in America as “layered” method: one subject per year. On the other hand, the Chinese science curriculum used spiraling curriculum:
(Herr, 2007)
The application of spiraling to Chinese education led to twice as much instructional time spent on chemistry than American students. Chinese students spent almost 3 times as much time studying physics than their American counterpart (Herr, 2007). Might this account for Americans scoring lower than Chinese students on the OECD’s PISA 2022 Science Literacy Test (U.S. Department of Education, 2023)? While this is possible, further details of the pedagogies would be necessary to prove this. After all, American students may have underachieved versus the Chinese and four other countries, but they also did significantly better than 16 other countries and scored the OECD average.
What today we might classify as a type of scaffolding, Bruner discussed through the importance of “intuitive thinking”, which refers to learning techniques that use heuristics (for example, analogies) rather than algorithms to solve problems (Chp 4). No historian would learn EVERY single fact about a focus period, Bruner explains, rather they would use intuitive thinking to determine the most important, relevant sources for their research (65-66). He also mentioned the aid to teaching of “automatizing devices, teaching machines” these devices were essentially rudimentary calculators (83). In today’s world, generative AI programs such as Curipod and Englightenme can provide similar personalization of learning. For example, one could do an exit ticket on topics learned in the class. Upon submission, AI could with the proper prep from the instructor provide immediate personalized feedback to each students so that they leave the room with a better conception than before.
This advice is necessary but not sufficient today. Bruner did not need to address the Internet as it was not even invented until 1969 and widely used until 1994. The conception of intuitive thinking is still relevant but must be put into a larger framework: Lateral Reading. That is to say, students should not “go down a rabbit hole” on one site, but rather review “articles on the same topic by other writers” and question these texts for credibility (News Literacy Project, 2024). By going to multiple sites, students can start to develop that intuitive feeling by internalizing the skepticism necessary to find objective truth. By extension their personal social media use could definitely use this varietal of intuitive thinking.
Conclusion: Motivation
Finally, Bruner understood that a full education cannot be distilled into high-stakes testing. Faced with the rise of the Soviet Union, Bruner addressed three fears: an over reliance on meritocracy where those that do not immediately rise to the top are abandoned by the system, an over emphasis on STEM, and a underemphasis of the humanistic learning. All three actions would reduce “motives for learning” amongst many of the student and thus have a deleterious effect (Bruner, 1977, p. 80.). These still seem to be major challenges for the education system. The first was exacerbated by No Child Left Behind as it forced testing that did turn the system into a direct competition for funds. I doubt we need to revisit the other two as they are almost universally a concern in the educational system. Bruner was ahead of his time and a groundbreaker in psychological applications to education.
U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). PISA 2022 U.S. Results – Science Literacy – International Comparisons of Student Achievement. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved May 6, 2024, from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2022/science/international-comparisons/
As Spring semester begins in the next few weeks, it may be time to address the growing use of AI in the classroom. Like many of you, my first taste of consumer-facing generative Artificial Intelligence was after the release of ChatGPT in late 2022. In just the past year, the technology has grown in prominence filling in more areas relevant to education. While I have up to now simply used the college-wide Academic Dishonesty Policy as the basis of my approach to AI usage, it’s time for me to reframe AI usage in my class away from a blanket ban.
I am considering this change for two reasons. First, interacting with AI using prompts is a skill that requires practice. If we don’t let our students make those mistakes and grow from them in college, then they will make them later in jobs. Second, some students are using AI already. It’s best to harness their usage into an effective manner that will lead to student success. It is with this in mind that I am considering the following language for my AI Policy:
Artificial Intelligence: In this course the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) follows the same guidelines as the plagiarism policy. That is to say that it cannot be used to write any substantial part of your writings, including Discussion Posts, Essays, Memorandum, and any other work. While AI technology is NOT required for this course, it is allowed in the following ways and under the following conditions:
AI software can be used to Brainstorm Ideas, Refine Ideas, and Organize Thoughts. It can also be for Spelling and Grammar Checks.
Whenever AI is used, it should be given “accurate acknowledgement” via a footnote that explains in at least one complete sentence the specific software used and the specific uses in your work.
While I am not 100% sure as to my final version, it is definitely my starting point for establishing a new relationship with this technology and seeing it as potential tool for education. What are your thoughts? Does this achieve my goals? Does it achieve YOUR goals?
Few technological innovations have redefined education as quickly as OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Within weeks of release, cheating had taken on a whole new meaning. Within months AI had developed a more nuanced role creating opportunities for instructors to be more efficient and for students to think in new ways or isolate specific skills. While I knew that technology companies had long valued our data, I had not realized exactly how such data was helpful: machine learning for AI. As such I am playing catch up – learning all about how this up-and-coming technology will change education. How can we harness it for the greatest good and the least negative externalities?
After much thought, this Fall I began a doctorate in educational leadership at Northern Illinois University. The program connected with me because it emphasizes minimizing equity gaps so that instructors can maximize student success for all. This program is teaching pedagogical theories, and then I am applying them to AI technology. While it is still early in the program, there is so much potential for research in the interconnections of AI and education that I am planning on writing my dissertation on the subject. In the meantime, I will be researching as much as I can about the field and building it into every classroom assignment I can. It is like a dream come true to study something that only a few years ago was a science fiction.
Last summer, I rose from VP to President to the Illinois Council for the Social Studies. As part of this exciting role, I was an introductory speaker at the Fall Conference for the wonderful, Mary Ellen Daneels. Mary Ellen explained about all of the efforts to promote civics education. For more information, check out the Illinois Civics Hub. Also, consider attending our spring conference on March 31st at Eastern Illinois.
This weekend, I am off to Madison for the Wisconsin Council for the Social Studies Spring Conference. This time around I’ll be leading a group session on how to use Globally Competent Teaching to achieve student success. I think this is such an important topic as our classrooms grow more diverse and students are anxious to fit in. Its important we embrace these backgrounds as assets to bring our instruction, extracurriculars, and school culture forward.
Ironically, even as sociology is being eliminated at college campuses, the subject is more relevant than ever as a tool for understanding our changing times. So when the World History Digital Educaiton Foundation announced its Spring 2020 Lesson Plan Contest, I made sure to submit my lesson on the impact of culture on early responses to COVID-19…and it won!
Like most every other educator in America, the COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally changed our method of teaching. Practically overnight, we have been forced to become tech-savvy gurus. Having received training from Harper College and taught online classes there, I was in a bit of a better position when it came time for distance learning with my high school students. After reflecting on the first two weeks, I have made a short set of slides of my best practices. I hope this will help you all.
Along with thousands of other social studies educators and professionals, I went to the 2018 National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) Annual Conference in Chicago. Like ICSS Conferences, NCSS brought together experts in the social studies and history to lead sessions for educators. The big difference is the size and, as a result, the number of options.
“Even Clarence agreed with me.”
– Anthony Ray Hinton, discussing the unanimous decision of the US Supreme Court to overturn his wrongful conviction for murder.
After arriving bright and early on Friday morning, I headed to a discussion by Anthony Ray Hinton. For those of you unfamiliar with Hinton, he was falsely imprisoned and sentences to death row. Only after a successful appeal to the Supreme Court were his charges dropped. Obviously, the speech addressed the many wrongs by society that left him sentenced to death for a crime that he had nothing to do with. However, even more thought provoking were his efforts to humanize his fellow inmates in a most inhumane setting – a book club which gave death row inmates far more exposure to literature than many had received in school where most dropped out by the 8th grade. Speaking of book clubs, Hinton’s autobiography recently hit the jackpot when it was selected by Oprah as a must read. That evening I read the copy of his autobiography that I got signed, “The Sun Does Shine” and found that I agreed with Oprah. It was inspiring and Hinton’s humor brought an unexpected amount of joy into a tale that seems at first to be simply a downer. Make sure to find it your local library or buy it using this link.
Later on, I joined other educators interested in US-Canadian History at “Pathways of Change: Natives and French in the Great Lakes” by Professor José António Brandão of Western Michigan University. He addressed the French influence and domination of eastern Illinois and other parts of the “pays d’en haut” into the mid-1700s. Through the use of maps both from the time and contemporary, we witnessed the growth of New France from a few thousand Europeans around Montreal to a fur trading empire that stretched far west through the largely (but not always) friendly trades with Native Americans for their furs. He emphasized the experiences of these Native Americans through much of the lecture which was great since it showed that France’s century of success was largely a result of the agency of these indigenous nations. I had never known so much about this history, but it inspired to research it further and found some great information on local history associated with this period on the Evanston History Center website.
Finally, I attended a series of other amazing lectures both later that afternoon and the next day. From NPR host Peter Sagal‘s discussion of what he felt is a very dark time in presidential history and his core beliefs
This I Believe:
Conversations Convert
Power does not listen
Fart Jokes Heal
Democracy is a Religion
Everything is Evitable
-Peter Sagal
to a data analysis heavy explanation of where the economy is 10 years after the Great Recession by Federal Reserve analysts. Along the way, I was given ten tools to help promote literacy in the classroom by an organizer of National History Day and shown methods to engage all learned including those with disabilities.
My experience here was amazing, and I encourage other social studies educator to look out for future opportunities to attend NCSS conference. In the meantime, consider attending ICSS’s local conference this spring. It will feature many great resources to build your teaching skills and it is practically free in comparison to NCSS!
Sorry for the radio silence. Since I last wrote, I have moved to Wisconsin and now teach at Starbuck Middle School in Racine. Here I teach geography and world cultures. My job is exceptionally important as I am the first social teacher that most of these students have ever had. What hasn’t changed are my efforts to promote student engagement. Whether its Breakout Boxes or social studies museums, it is all about making students lead their own learning by giving them a “voice and choice”.
This weekend I’ll presenting an updated presentation on social science museums. The skills: project-based learning, ‘voice and choice’, and research and analysis remain the same. If you happen to be in Madison try to stop by or at least visit my website next week for a look at my presentation.
Andrew Levin 