“Inquiry-based Lessons in U.S. History : Decoding the Past” is the second middle school history plan I requested to review the book through LibraryThing’s Early Reviewer program. I have to repeat that I am not a teacher, never have been and, at the grade level this book is for I never want to be. I do have a degree in history, I have been studying American history for a long time, and have grandchildren, children, and personal experience in middle school. I will do my best to evaluate only the parts of the book that I can.

I was really impressed with the first book but this one is a disappointment. First, and this is not a problem with just this book, trying to covering over 500 years worth of history in one class, less than 160 contact hours, is silly. Packing that much content into one course guarantees information overload, nothing will be learned. This is how they taught history when I was in school, I don't even remember the class. Each chapter in this book could, and have, filled hundreds volumes of scholarly history. Why not narrow the range, of focus on a topic that can be covered in a year and allow the students to learn some skills that will serve them in whatever they study? But that is an issue with the system, the book is not at fault it is merely trying to achieve the impossible goal regulators have set.

That is not to say this book does not have problems. Many of the lessons ask the students to draw a picture to illustrate their understanding. Seriously? This is not second grade. These students have basic communication skills. They need practice writing. One or two “art” assignments that connect well to the subject matter would be acceptable, but as someone who can not even trace a straight line, by middle school I was ready to put away childish things. One of my favorite authors when I was these students age. Robert Heinlein, explained that when he wrote his “juveniles” he never talked down to the readers. It is my feeling that this lesson plan, most of the time, does talk down to the students.

One of the book’s strong points is its use of the Library of Congress’ Teacher's Guides and Analysis Tool for investigating contemporary engravings and political cartoons. “Reading” pictures was not something I was introduced to until college and it is an important skill for developing critical thinking skills and your attention to detail. Unfortunately early in the book, lesson one of chapter two, the url leading to the sources did not work. I was able to find them but any teacher using this book needs to be forewarned. Two of the questions the students were asked to answer from the engravings were about gender roles. Is that an idea we want to promote in middle school in the 21st century? Instead of asking them to identify men’s work and women’s work how about just identifying the work being done? Instead of separating the work into male / female roles why not ask about the technology, the tools being used?

Slavery is the most divisive subject in U.S. history and I was ready to blast the authors for this untrue, illogical, statement, “For Whites in the slave states, the election of Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, to the presidency, signaled and immediate threat. Compromise, an essential feature of American politics, proved impossible and several Southern states immediately drew up declarations of secession modeled after the Declaration of Independence.” That sounds like an attempt at compromise was made which is untrue. Southern states were attacking U.S. military installations and issuing declarations of secession before Lincoln even reached Washington City. Just how did compromise prove impossible? At first I thought this was the author's bias coming through but it is more an indication of how completely the South’s “Lost Cause” revision of history has sunk into our culture. When I read the assignment for that lesson I realized that Southern mythology could not survive this textbook. Students are given the Secession Declarations from South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas, all name slavery as the primary reason for attempting to leave the Union.

The original texts used in the book are important documents and are sure to challenge readers at this grade level. I suspect that there will be pushback on some of the choices from both the left and right, they strike a good balance sure to offend many. They only used two pages from Paine’s “Common Sense”. The book is only 46 pages long, I would have liked to have seen more if not the entire text, but, like I said many people will be second guessing some of the author's choices. Only in the lesson covering Jackson and the removal of the Eastern Indian Nations did I feel the sources were lacking. There were excerpts from Jackson and Chief John Ross of the Cherokee Nation as well as excerpts of pro and con speeches to Congress. Why repeat Jackson and Ross’ arguments and leave out the Supreme Court’s decision?

As I said, covering the entire history of the United States in one class is a silly, irresponsible requirement that schools, and texts like this, must follow. It guarantees information overload, unless you choose to edit out a lot of information. The closest the text comes to mentioning the labor movement is in one sentence, “One group, the Lowell Mill Girls, became world famous for their independence and culture.” What does that even mean and how does it deserve mention when the “Bread and Roses” Strike is overlooked? Later in the text the Civil Rights Movement follows the Great Depression which followed World War One propaganda. Where are Prohibition, the Great Depression, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam?

As a history text this book does the best it can with the unreasonable expectations that one class cover over 400 years of North American / US history. However, the lessons are uneven. Some seemed so simple and childish that I can’t imagine a middle schooler not being bored with them. Others were exceptional, I can see the discussion on Washington’s Farewell Address working in an adult class. Maybe a second edition will improve the weaker lessons and correct the bad links. Only legislatures can fix the unreasonable requirement to squeeze everything in U.S. history into one school year. ( )

I have always loved history. This book was your typical U.S history book. All the lessons were layed out in a nice organized manner. I'm not a teacher, and really this book isn't too relevant for my life, but it was still an informative book- i am glad i received it for a review! ( )

This is another typical Prufrock publication, so if you like them in general, you will like this one, too. Each unit is complete with material and lesson plans - easy to adapt, as one can expect from this particular publisher. That's what I gave stars for.

In terms of content, U.S. American history is presented in 13 lessons, and almost exclusively from the viewpoint of the underprivileged/ minorities of the given area. This shows a significant lack of objectivism, hence no stars for the content. History lessons who focus solely on one side of the story are inferior history lessons, no matter how inquiry-based they are. ( )

I have been using Decoding the Past: Inquiry Based Lessons in U.S. History for home schooling, and am very pleased. One of the main advantages of home schooling is the extra time that one is able to spend with the student, and this books approach, which emphasizes research by the student, specifically using a primary or secondary document. The lesson plans were clearly written, easy to follow, and quite varied and interesting in the way that they approached different situations. Most text books just bury the student under a mountain of facts, while this book demands and encourages active participation. In using primary documents to teach lessons really imparts a sense of the time and situation and served like a trip to the museum. ( )

Inquiry-based Lessons in US History

This book is loaded with so many pluses. In the intro, it states the lessons are targeted on middle school students but that “the lessons can easily be adapted for high school students as well.” Also, its main focus is on using a “C3 Framework” of College, Career, and Civic Life. Worthy goals. But what I think makes this book such a workable teaching aid, is its structure, and how each chapter has three organizing inquiry lessons that can be used either separately or in succession. After the intro (Chapter 1) each chapter, in chronological order, gives a date with an overriding theme for that time period. Examples: LIFE BEFORE 1600 - COLLISION OF CULTURES, 1607-1650 - SETTLING IN, 1650-1750 - COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT, and so on. At every chapter’s beginning an historical background is provided to help the teacher, followed by three organizing questions/lessons, their strategies, materials needed (many online sources listed), lesson hooks, student handouts (included in the book to be copied), and how to help the students form a hypothesis.

I can just visualize engaged sixth-graders in the assigned “talk and turn” session of Chapter 7, WESTWARD EXPANSION, as they’re given the task to make a list with a partner of needed supplies for an exploratory journey of the Louisiana Purchase territory that they’ll be embarking on, as did Lewis and Clark. Don’t all middle school kids like the idea of a travel adventure? Imagine youngsters trying to plan for a trip lasting for a year or more, and without video games or cell phones.

Or, being in a seventh-grade classroom with a brainstorming session as the students answer the organizing Chapter 8, SECTIONALISM AND CIVIL WAR’s question, "Which side was better prepared to fight the civil war?" They must first come up with resources needed for a country to fight a modern-day war. And afterwards a second list-- using an 1860 map and the 1860 census-- to come up with strategies for a war fought in the mid-1800s.

I’d love to be a fly on the wall in a room of eight-graders as they study Chapter 11, INDUSTRIALIZATION AND IMMIGRATION. It’s an easily interchangeable social studies/history chapter, focusing its lessons on cities at the turn of the 20th century, the exploitation of immigrants, and child labor. Using in-the-book handouts, numerous online resources of photos, sketches, personal letters, and political cartoons,, students are challenged to play the role of history detectives by examining their resource clues as they answer the three organizing questions. They learn about the Lowell Mill Girls, brainstorm about teenage jobs both then and now, see photos of young boys working at glasswork factories, and observe some 19th century newspaper’s political cartoons on immigration. Then the students are asked to share and challenge each other, using all their found-resources as evidence.

Throughout, the arts are utilized with online resource samples such as works of the Hudson River School artists and Dorothea Lange’s awe-inspiring 1930s Depression-era photos. On the whole, students are urged to “think like an historian.” as they analyze evidence and create an hypothesis.

However, there is one minus that I can’t fail to mention. In the chapter titled THE NEW NATION, lesson #1 is on the Preamble of the United States Constitution, with lesson #2 being on the Bill of Rights. Yet lesson # 3, in my opinion, is a missed opportunity because of its use of an included handout of extractions from President Washington’s Farewell Address. The language in the extracts seems archaic and wordy. Furthermore, I could only find within the whole chapter, one cursory mention of brilliant, James Madison (considered father of the US Constitution), and as for the balance of powers--a fundamental to our system of government--it is suggested to the teacher to integrate those vital parts into lesson #1. If the goal is to prepare for civic life, and if the lessons are to be adapted for high school students, perhaps teacher and students alike would be better served if the concept of the balance of powers was a complete lesson on its own.

All the plus factors do outweigh a single minus though, and I think this is an extremely worthwhile tool for any Social Studies Dept., or even better, for every Social Studies/History teacher to have on hand.