When Students Meet the Past: Making Primary Sources Accessible for all Students Doing

History

In order to think historically, teachers must expose students of all ages to historical

evidence, as well as opportunities to engage in interpreting assigned texts. This means that

exposure must include diaries, letters, artwork, government works, artifacts, and various sources

that are grade appropriate. This is an important aspect of allowing students to draw conclusions

about historical events, as examining the pasts residua is a necessary component of

understanding how historians develop accounts of people, places, and events. Despite widening

the array of voices heard in a history classroom, simply exposing students to more primary

source texts is insufficient. Children and adolescents must experience historical interpretation

with the use of appropriate modifications and scaffolds (Barton, 2011).

Correlating with his study over historical thinking, Sam Wineburg and the Stanford

History Education Group (SHEG) offer a curriculum that engages students in the historical

inquiry process. Reading Like a Historian offers a framework where students explore historical

accounts that surround a central historical question. Students use the assigned sources that

represent multiple perspectives, and employ the historical thinking skills through reading

strategies such as sourcing, corroborating, contextualizing, and close reading. The ultimate goal

is to have students move from memorizing facts and a singular narrative to considering the

reliability of assigned documents, while creating historical claims that are supported with textual

evidence from the provided documents (Wineburg, Martin, and Monte-Sano, 2013 pp. ix- xii).

The strategies created by SHEG offer teachers an opportunity to assist students in developing an

ability to contextualize choices, while moving away from accepting an authors view point at

face value, a commonalty often discovered by researchers (Epstein, 2012).

According to Wineburg, historians simply approach texts differently as they ask questions

that relate to the author, date, and place of a particular documentbeginning with questions

rather than conclusions. Therefore, in order to assist students in developing these habits of mind,
1
one of the lessons that included in the curriculum asks students: Were African Americans Free

During Reconstruction? The use of the central historical questionwhich is often open-

endedimmediately provides students with the opportunity to seek evidence and draw

conclusions. As for the sources, students examine excerpts of the 13th, 14th, and 15th

Amendments, Black codes from Ospelousa, LA, a statement from Henry Adams, a former slave,

to the Senate in 1880, photographs of African American elected officials, and a report from a

northern white man on the progress of the Freedmans Bureau, in regards to providing education

(Stanford History Education Group, 2012).

If students were only granted the opportunity to examine the Amendments, they may

assume that African Americans were, in fact, free. However, the corresponding documents add a

dynamic tension as students are presented with evidence of freedom and oppression,

opportunities to define those terms, and, overall, they have to question the reliability of each

source by sourcing, contextualizing, and corroborating evidence. The sources, and the process of

answering the question, are complimented by the lessons guiding questions that assist students

in determining the meaning of the source information, the context of the source, and close

reading to aid overall comprehension. Much like a historian would ask, the guiding questions

prompt students to consider, who wrote this document, why was it written, and why do you

think education was important to African Americans during this time period (Stanford History

Education Group, 2012)? Engaging students in studying multiple primary sources, while

scaffolding their experience with questions rooted in historical thinking, provides students the

opportunity to authentically encounter the process of creating their own historical accounts that

are grounded in evidence.

Ultimately, if classrooms lack multiple perspectives and the emphasis of practicing

historical thinking skills, conducting research, and constructing narratives will remain difficult,

allowing the heritage to prevail as a means to teach history (Waring and Robinson, 2010). To

foster these skills, as showcased by Scott Waring and Kirk Robinson, a teacher may begin a
2
course by simply writing the words historian and primary source on the white board. Students

then discussed novice suggestions of who a historian issomeone who knows about history

and what primary sources aresources we use. To move beyond these misconceptions, the

teacher takes the students through a mind walk to have them retell what they did during the

pervious 24 hours, as well as sources of evidence from others involved or artifacts that they left

behind. To conclude with the preliminary discussions of primary sourceswithout getting into

the gritty details of the processes of thinking students further examine primary sources from

World War II (i.e. rations, letters, diaries, and more), and concluded that primary sources are

tools that historians use to unveil the past (Waring and Robinson, 2012). This particular scaffold

allows students to attach a new skillhistorical thinkingto their existing schema.

Attention is brought to this idea of tools, as students then have to use the historical

thinking skills, as previously discussed, to determine which ones are reliable. In other words, if

the teacher does not move beyond showing students the primary sources and fails to have

students explore their reliability within the context of answering an essential question, he or she

runs the risk of depriving students the chance to construct narratives from the chosen sources.

Primary sources alone do not provide the alternative narrative; rather they are the historians

tools for learning from the past (Epstein, 2012). Overall, the practices of historical thinking that

allow students to question the reliability of sources, while considering an alternative to a specific

narrative, are necessary skills for encountering a confusing society that is bombarded by one-

sided cable news, confusing imagery, and a growing abundance of information (Wineburg,

Martin, and Monte-Sano, 2013 p. ix- xii).

When looking at the Common Core (CCSS) and the Kansas History, Government, and

Social Studies (HGSS) standards, the mention of Primary sources decorates the literacy

requirements within social studies. For example, the Kansas HGSS standards for history indicate

that students must analyze and interpret a variety of primary sources in traditional and digital

formats for the purpose of directly touch[ing] the lives of people in the past (KSDE, 2013). In
3
his review of the use of primary source, Keith Barton responded to a series of myths made about

the use of primary sources in the classroomone being using primary sources engages students

in authentic historical inquiry. This myth perpetuates the misunderstanding of how historians

engage in historical inquiry. Simply put, the use of primary sources is not the act of authentic

inquiry; rather, historians use them as tools to work with and make sense of evidence. Likewise,

another myth is that students can build up an understanding of the past through primary

sources. Barton challenges this myth by arguing that engaging students with explanations of the

topics related to the sources, while building their schema on what else is occurring at the time, is

imperative (Barton, 2005).

It is impossible for students to utilize primary sources if they do not understand them or

their place in history. Therefore, one way to make primary sources accessible to all learners is

not only through executing sound instructional practices, but modifying selected documents, and

implementing them within the context of prior learning experiences (Reardon, C. and Freville,

B., 2009; Barton, 2005). As outlined below, these adaptations not only deal with altering the

language, but they also require that the teacher provide headnotes and source information to

situate the document. Reason being, students must understand that this information is a part of

the historical inquiry process (Wineburg, S. and Martin, D., 2009). This article outlines a

rationale for modifying primary sources, as well as a set of criteria developed by Sam Wineburg

and Daisy Martin to modify documents, and a sample student activity with modified documents.

The exciting opportunities that the use of primary sources lends to the history classroom are

plentiful; however, these sources present significant challenges to all students, especially for

struggling readers. Despite the amount of research on how to teach historical thinking, however,

there is a significant lack of exploration on the effects of modifying these documents.

Regardless, the reality is that if we want students diving deeply into authentic historical inquiry,

a reflection on how some of these sources create learning barriers is necessary.

4
 Why Modify?

For a variety of reasons, students may find that reading primary source documents is

significantly challenging, even to the extent that they may give up. However, many students will

become overwhelmed with the language, vocabulary, and sentence structure of the documents.

This leaves teachers in a difficult position, as many may choose to leave primary sources out of

the toolbox of historical inquiry. Thus, the failure to include primary sources leads students to

relying on their textbooks and teachers to explain the past, while leaving out an important

aspectvoices of the past. Sam Wineburg and Daisy Martin propose the suggestion that teachers

must tamper with these documents, meaning they may even have to physically alter the

sources. Reason being, students are students, not historians, and if teachers want to guide

students towards successfully meeting the rigorous demands of the CCSS, they will have to

make modifications. Modifying documents does not mean that students never see the originals;

in fact, it is dishonest for teachers to fail at disclosing to their students that modifications were

made. Instead, presenting students with the originals, while allowing them to engage with the

modified versions, makes authentic historical inquiry possible. Therefore, it is the responsibility

of the teacher to meet the needs of his or her students by making these tools readily accessible to

all learners (Wineburg, S. and Martin, D. 2009).

How to Modify

The process for modifying documents is derived from Sam Wineburg and Daisy Martins

suggestions in their article Tampering with History: Adapting Primary Sources for Struggling

Readers.

Focus on Relevance:

This includes the following processes:

5
 Excerpting important passages in the document.
The use of ellipses
Limiting the length to 200-300 words.
Provide source information and headnotes.

Ultimately, the longer the document, the less likely students will be able to focus on the
important aspects of the document.

Simplify Language:

Modify complex sentences through:

Conventionalization of spelling, sentence structure, and punctuation.
Changing difficult vocabulary, or making complex words apparent, while defining them below
the document.

Clean Presentation:

Make the text more aesthetically accessible by:

Using large font (at least 16 pt. font).
Leave sufficient white space around the document.

When students are initially presented with a document, a dense presentation where the text takes
up an entire page may deter them from even reading it.

Description of Sample Assignment

The particular student writing activity showcased in this document demonstrates how to

apply the modification criteria developed by Wineburg and Martin. Furthermore, this formative writing

assessment was embedded within a unit where students in 8th grade U.S. history researched a specific

Abolitionist to participate in a role-play, and learned about the dynamic nature of the Abolitionist

Movement through a variety of perspectives. Thus, students did not engage in these primary sources in

an isolated manner, allowing them to pull from a variety of sources from previous lessons. This was an

on-demand writing assignment where students were given one class period to analyze and collect

evidence, and the following class period to write. You will see that students used the primary sources as

tools to draw evidence-based conclusions from 3 highly complex documents that were excerpted,

simplified in terms of sentence structure, difficult vocabulary is easily recognized and defined below the

document, and the formatting was adjusted to make the documents less intimidating. Therefore, these

6
modifications allowed students to focus on employing their historical thinking skillscontextualizing,

sourcing, and corroborationin order to formulate evidence-based claims. Following the documents, I

have included a student work sample that demonstrates how this individuala student who receives

services for English Language Learners worked through the historical thinking process.

Conclusion

When completing the writing assignment, modifying the documents allowed students

like the one showcased in the writing sampleto focus on the necessary evidence for supporting

their claims. It is also important to note that this assignment, along with the document analysis,

did not occur in isolation; it was a culmination of about two weeks of research and evaluation of

the Abolitionist Movement. Furthermore, these 8th grade students spent the previous five months

of school working with primary source documents, and their progress leads to increasing

complexity (or less modification). Overall, in order for students to successfully engage in

authentic historical inquiry, modifications and scaffolds that meet their specific needs are

necessary.

7
 Sample Writing Assignment with Modified Documents

Writing Assessment
Unit: Glory in the Name: Abolishing slavery in pre-Civil War America
History Standard 2: Individuals have rights and responsibilities
Common Core: R.1;W.2

Writing Prompt: Using evidence from the documents, as well as the notes from your
research over your notable abolitionist, write an essay stating your response to the
following question:

What responsibility did abolitionist believe the American people had in eliminating slavery?
Another way to think about this is, how did abolitionists show that they wanted other Americans
to take part in the fight against slavery?

Make sure to:

State a CLEAR thesis that is SPECIFIC and has 3 supporting points. But remember, you will
only explain ONE of those points (turns into your topic sentence) in the body paragraph of your
essay.
Use evidence from your research over the Abolitionist movement.
Use evidence from at least one of the primary sources documents. This evidence must sense and
help support your thesis.
You must place these primary sources into historical context.
You must explain your evidence to link it back to your thesis.
Use evidence-based terms (PINK SHEET!).
You want your intro to begin with some description of the abolitionist movement.

Tips:
1. Follow the essay frame.
2. The introduction should illustrate the abolitionist movement to the reader.
3. Use your notes (Abolitionist movement and government laws and compromises). You wrote
summaries for both of these!
4. Use the timeline of events during the abolitionist movement (in your table folders)
5. Use your abolitionist research notes, and the notes from the Meet-N-Greet.
6. Use the compare/contrast and document context charts.
7. Use the evidence based terms (pink sheet) to guide writing with those.

Document A
Source: Henry Highland Garnet, Call to Rebellion speech, 1843 [1843]

8
Head note: In 1843, Henry Garnet gave the following speech in front of the National Negro
Convention. This speech shocked many, and was not supported by Abolitionists like
Frederick Douglass.

Brethren, arise, arise! Strike for your lives and liberties. Now is the
day and the hour. Let every slave throughout the land do this and the
days of slavery are numbered. You cannot be more oppressed than
you have been -- you cannot suffer greater cruelties than you have
already. Rather die freemen than live to be slaves. Remember that you
are FOUR MILLIONS!...Let your motto be resistance! resistance!
RESISTANCE! No oppressed people have ever secured their liberty
without resistance.

Brethren: Brother
Liberties: To be free; have a sense of freedom
Oppressed:Using power to treat someone badly
Resistance: The act of refusing to accept

Document B
Source: Angelina Grimkes Speech at Pennsylvania Hall in 1838 [Modified]

Headnote: Angelina Grimke was a Southern woman who believed in using her eyewitness
accounts to share about the cruelty of slavery. She gave her speech at Pennsylvania Hall
while an angry group of slave supporters were outside.

9
 This opposition shows that slavery has done its deadliest work
in the hearts of our citizens. Do you ask, then, "what has the
North to do?" I answer, cast out first the spirit of slavery from
your own hearts, and then lend your aid to convert the South.
Each one present has a work to do, be his or her situation what
it may, however limited their means, or insignificant their
supposed influence. The great men of this country will not do
this work; the church will never do it. A desire to please the
world, to keep the favor of all parties and of all conditions,
makes them dumb on this and every other unpopular subject.

Opposition: A group that is in disagreement; the opposite

Citizens: The people living in a nation
Convert: To change

Document C

Source: Frederick Douglass What to the Slave is the Fourth of July? 1852 [modified]

Headnote: Frederick Douglass was known for giving excellent speeches. He gave his What
to the Slave is the Fourth of July in front of a large crown in Rochester, New Yorks
Corinthian Hall, where they were remembering the Declaration of Independence.

10
 What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a
day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year,
the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant
victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted
liberty...your sound of rejoicing are empty and heartless...your
shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers
and hymns, your sermons and thanks-givings, with all your
religious parade and solemnity, are to
him...hypocrisy...There is not a nation on the earth guilty of
practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of
the United States, at this very hour.

Vocab:

Injustice: Lack of fairness

Cruelty:Behavior that causes pain or suffering
Sham:Something that is false; not what it is supposed to be
Mockery: To represent something in the wrong way
Solemnity:A ceremony or ritual
Hypocrisy: To act in a way that does not match up with what you believe.

Student Work Sample

Before the Civil War there was a group of people names Abolitionists who worked
together in a variety of ways to end slavery. There was Garrisonians who believed in all rights
including women, secret six used violence, Liberty Party worked in a political way, and finally
the colonization Society freed and sent slaves back to Liberia. Overall, Abolitionists believed it
was up to the people of America to end slavery. They didnt all believe the same way to end it,
but there was three main ways they took action: educating about slavery, physically rebelling and
trying to change their beliefs and way of life. These actions were all used to encourage
Americans to end slavery.
Specifically, Henry Garnets Call to Rebellion speech in 1843, Angelina Grimkes
speech in 1838, and Frederick Douglass 4th of July Speech in 1852 all were ways to
convincing people in America to fight slavery. In 1843, Henry Garnet spoke in front of the
National Negro Convention. It was his famous call to rebellion speech. Henry Garnet was
11
unlike Frederick Douglass because he was for violence and encouraged it to slaves. For example,
Henry Garnet calls on the slaves to fight for your lives and liberty. This quote shows that
Henry Garnet is calling on slaves to fight for their freedom. Physically rebelling was one of the
three major ways Abolitionists used to end slavery. Although Henry was a part of the Liberty
Party, where many did not believe in the use of violence, like the Secret Six, however, his Call
to Rebellion speech shows that he did. Secondly, in 1838, Angelina Grimke spoke at
Pennsylvania Hall to those who were unhappy about the anti-slavery movement, as they threw
rocks at the window. She spoke about her beliefs and how the north could help encourage the
south to end slavery by calling on the people to cast out first the spirit of slavery from your own
hearts and help to convince the South. Angelina was one of those who believe the way to end
slavery was to change someones way of life. She also believed that neither the leaders of the
country or the church would end slavery, despite her religious. Lastly, educating people about
slavery was the method that Frederick Douglass chose, especially since he was a former slave. In
1852, Frederick Douglass gave his famous 4th of July speech where he expressed what to the
American slave is the 4th of July? I answer a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in
the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is constant victim. This quote shows that
Frederick Douglass believed that the best way to end slavery was to educate Americans about its
reality. Although he believed America could use the Constitution to help end slavery, much like
the Liberty Party, the evidence collected shows that Frederick Douglass was against the use of
violence, as well.
The Abolitionist Movement shows that abolitionists believed it was up to the people of
America to end slavery, but not all abolitionists approached this belief in the same way. First,
Henry Garnet, as evidenced by his Call to Rebellion speech, believed in the use of violence.
Secondly, Angelina Grimke wanted to change the way of life of the north, and encourage
Americans to take a stand against slavery. Finally, Frederick Douglass wanted to educate people
on slavery by discussing its realities and how it doesnt fit in with our celebration of freedom. In
conclusion, Abolitionists through that Americans were the way to end slavery because it was
their way of life that had to change.

12
 Citations

Barton, K (2011). From Learning Narratives to Thinking Historically. In William Benedict

Russell III Contemporary Social Studies: An Essential Reader (pp. 119-136). Charlotte,
NC: Information Age Publishing.
Barton, K. (2005). Primary Sources in History: Breaking through the Myths. The Phi Delta
Kappan, 86(10) (Jun., 2005), pp. 745-753.
Douglass, Frederick (1852). What to the Slave is the Fourth of July. Africans in America. Public
Broadcasting Channel. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2927t.html.
Garnett, Henry (1843). Call to Rebellion Speech. Africans in America.Public Broadcasting
Channel.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2937t.html.
Grimke, Angelina (1838). Speech at Pennsylvania Hall. Africans in America. Public
Broadcasting Channel. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2939t.html.
Reardon, C. and Freville, B. (2009). DESCRIBE: A Strategy for Making Text-Based Primary
Sources more Accessible. Teaching with Primary Sources Quarterly 2(4).
http://www.loc.gov/teachers/tps/quarterly/accessibility/pdf/accessibility.pdf
Wineburg, S. and Martin, D. (2009). Tampering with History: Adapting Primary Sources for
Struggling Readers. Social Education 73(5), pp 212216.National Council for the
Social Studies, 2009.
https://historytech.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/tampering-with-history.pdf.
Greenwalk, K. and Leahy, P. (2011). Situating the Nation: History Pedagogy for the 21st
Century. In William Benedict Russell III Contemporary Social Studies: An Essential Reader
(pp. 335- 356). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Griffin, S. (2013). The Development of the C3 Framework. National Council for the Social studies,
2013. Social Education 77(4), pp 220221.
http://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/se/7704/7704220.pdf.
Herczog, M. (n.d.) Good history teaching . . . provid[es] students with the skills they need to be
competent and engaged citizens. National History Education Clearinghouse.
http://teachinghistory.org/issues-and-research/roundtable-response/24062.
Herczog, M. (2014). Implementing the C3 Framework: Monitoring the Instructional Shifts.
Social Education, 78(4), 165-169.
Hubbard, R. (2014). Oklahoma May Scrap AP History for Focusing on Americas Bad Parts.
National Public Radio.
http://www.npr.org/2015/02/18/387302710/oklahoma-may-scrap-ap-history-for-focusing-on-
americas-bad-parts
Martin, D., & Wineburg, S. (2008). Seeing historical thinking. The History Teacher, 41(3), 1-15.
National Center for Education Statistics (2011). The Nation's Report Card: U.S. History 2010.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/main2010/2011468.aspx.
National Center for Education Statistics (2015). New Results Show Eighth-Graders' Knowledge of U.S.
History, Geography, and Civics. http://www.nationsreportcard.gov/hgc_2014/.
National Council for the Social Studies (2013). Scholarly Rationale for the C3 Framework.
The C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards, 82-91.
http://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/c3/C3-Framework-for-Social-Studies.pdf
National Council for the Social Studies. Social Studies in the Era of No Child Left Behind.
http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/nclbera.

13
Partnership for 21st Century Learning. Our History. http://www.p21.org/about-us/our-history.
PBS. Lyrics of the Freedom Songs: Soundtrack for a Revolution. American Experience.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/soundtrack-lyrics/.
Reisman, A., & Wineburg, S. (2008). Teaching the skill of contextualizing in history. The Social Studies,
99(5), 202-207. Reardon, C. and Freville, B. (2009). DESCRIBE: A Strategy for Making Text-
Based Primary
Sources more Accessible. Teaching with Primary Sources Quarterly 2(4).
http://www.loc.gov/teachers/tps/quarterly/accessibility/pdf/accessibility.pdf
Stanford History Education Group (2012). Reconstruction SAC. Reading Like a Historian.
https://sheg.stanford.edu/reconstruction.
Swan, Kathy (2013). The Importance of the C3 Framework. National Council for the Social
Studies. Social Education 77(4), pp 222224.
http://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/se/7704/7704222.pdf
Waring S. and Robinson K (2010). Developing Critical and Historical Thinking Skills in Middle
Grades Social Studies. Middle School Journal, Vol. 42, No. 1 (September 2010), pp. 22-
28 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23047653.
Wineburg, S., Reisman, A., & Fogo, B. (2007). Historical evidence and evidence of learning.
The International Journal of Social Education, 22(1), 146-154.
Wineburg, S. (1999). Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts. The Phi Delta Kappan
Vol. 80, No. 7 (Mar., 1999), pp. 488-499. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20439490?
seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Wineburg, S. (2008). Historical thinking is unnatural -- and immensely important. In Recent
Themes in Historical Thinking: Historians in Conversation, (Ed.) Donald A. Yerxa.
Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 35-43.
Wineburg, S, Martin, D., and Monte-Sano, C (2013). Reading Like a Historian: Teaching
Literacy in Middle and High School History Classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press, pp ix-xii.
Wineburg, S. and Martin, D. (2009). Tampering with History: Adapting Primary Sources for
Struggling Readers. Social Education 73(5), pp 212216.National Council for the
Social Studies, 2009.

Wineburg, S. (2010). Thinking Like a Historian. Teaching with Primary Sources Quarterly. Vol. 3,
No. 1, Winter 2010. http://www.loc.gov/teachers/tps/quarterly/historical_thinking/article.htm

14