<%BANNER%>

Practicing Teachers as Elementary Social Studies Methods Instructors: Their Beliefs about the Issues They Encounter in P...

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101220_AAAAAK INGEST_TIME 2010-12-20T08:48:30Z PACKAGE UFE0015440_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 21899 DFID F20101220_AAAOIW ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH lanahan_b_Page_108.QC.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
f11d1b289eb7ab575287be9bbb8107df
SHA-1
d3d600ef5e3e54c0fb43787472779085cf3e1842
51613 F20101220_AAAMBY lanahan_b_Page_121.pro
db95a9db68924950901be0401d5a1149
3a6bedefc5eaa30a3b09c772c00aeb5800c7c0ca
6461 F20101220_AAAMUC lanahan_b_Page_146thm.jpg
77ee22705197ac1591b950075e5de8e9
9b699f64c02e9f4f01c825a278a690e5a8bb534f
26950 F20101220_AAAOIX lanahan_b_Page_109.QC.jpg
50233cd8c6b8c78841751abcd5edd618
53b6da4b3a37d0f6f242e82a8baa2de1a81d37fc
2083 F20101220_AAAMBZ lanahan_b_Page_170.txt
1b3033f12d4dff44130cfcf971077224
88908f6356d8d247f9e107041e4d7a0f4ff07ad2
47088 F20101220_AAAMUD lanahan_b_Page_145.pro
cd40232496796825f37b8ff58279efa5
e0aa9c2586a86b7d63081c9db295bb9154ce0249
23220 F20101220_AAAOIY lanahan_b_Page_110.QC.jpg
f3324a8975474554a615f5094fe190f7
2db3e534ff3473b59439f850614805859b308d91
4061 F20101220_AAAMUE lanahan_b_Page_005thm.jpg
6259946522222223ba3081d0a7606d73
9e52b50415e5d7f83ac970baddca2a817b3f224c
26526 F20101220_AAAOIZ lanahan_b_Page_112.QC.jpg
6e41378056e04b96cf90734ad3d4d149
0b1cfbac3d38443a9e8fa0f329425d904bb091d4
108264 F20101220_AAAMUF lanahan_b_Page_056.jp2
d60ec5e515481ae923a2f06822ef7d6a
a835f57599587e950aca3e445a4eefd21daeb48e
2123 F20101220_AAAMUG lanahan_b_Page_068.txt
6a35275430d495b53661a65914901665
a921b2972e2a2a0ca9c361b98e1c4c12d65536dd
111529 F20101220_AAAMUH lanahan_b_Page_073.jp2
ea3b9e4e36bea2cd797bb64fad1a04e2
fca56c534c487eefbfcb139801a9b7d522ff53c0
1053954 F20101220_AAANRA lanahan_b_Page_159.tif
62851cb22bbe0e0de54e8e2c19f80397
4be2197020bb60b984bf4c25d4b0b08361508877
6236 F20101220_AAAMUI lanahan_b_Page_033thm.jpg
7bfad59ff60d611f627ed2f2a5ca91a5
8a54d17ec36e24b8e78081e87280201c4970f322
25271604 F20101220_AAANRB lanahan_b_Page_161.tif
409352eb5d08ab6b45e4a19d606e0fd9
33007772f84c75ac4eb535674b51e7d25ff9b7d8
52670 F20101220_AAAMUJ lanahan_b_Page_055.pro
724670761f00f6a1f51a9bd08df4f572
2594ae964bef1847cb36086ebe58780b3194b8c1
F20101220_AAANRC lanahan_b_Page_163.tif
6a1fbef14e9e6bb0d6388e35f4514f75
b3e0a5d2a0171a256439aac01fd496f3655faec0
5994 F20101220_AAAMUK lanahan_b_Page_019thm.jpg
1edbe786185f903144daefc50a00f917
26b1e47891e6cef79f7d5a766df672e7eca6f7b9
F20101220_AAANRD lanahan_b_Page_164.tif
b9dceb5d712b3fda2bc7468b7c570ef7
e7cae4b64162118fcbda53806f25349a71f53e20
F20101220_AAANRE lanahan_b_Page_165.tif
07ccc696925f8da3c3ea0aee297a377d
3bb1846acd70900fc7eef8392d8cc2ee551c7f0e
2024 F20101220_AAAMHA lanahan_b_Page_036.txt
e83b135df5da2857b5e4e284e236e99c
c0e11a8a5862e8303359db7374bd3deacbdc9892
2031 F20101220_AAAMUL lanahan_b_Page_138.txt
9ee2cb5f73d87a6a5bbdfb030b5fdc5a
d0bb224a401a68912de1b3ba8c22e8a0c450a36b
F20101220_AAANRF lanahan_b_Page_167.tif
694271af48230ca163d27648b38ffd42
dee66194b168ca1115e46216407c895ae3a0f419
2242 F20101220_AAAMHB lanahan_b_Page_238.txt
02035225b5080ab605725306ab0682a5
e215983c97d403de83e785a9a39c6c69db4d5bdb
1997 F20101220_AAAMUM lanahan_b_Page_095.txt
98ecdd062bc71eb52351bbdc969140bc
2350c0bdd3f6f80d9fab4d2ea9e1b29ce1d290bb
F20101220_AAANRG lanahan_b_Page_170.tif
24f5adc820dd3c678662932e4324a928
b0b3b0f7d30eb1b1c93ae8deeab1ffeb259c3b01
F20101220_AAAMHC lanahan_b_Page_109.tif
6d15173bdcc8950a20793366f5dadaa0
ed4321d6edbb2424619240d4835285b8518ae427
16639 F20101220_AAAMUN lanahan_b_Page_241.QC.jpg
5db2a28b024bb185c1d28a371c1334f5
13aabbf3d7b0da173ff3268b7095470ec4605311
8423998 F20101220_AAAMHD lanahan_b_Page_219.tif
791ad57e6ee80c78325020ca4fdd1ba8
26b82f768e467995a72f8028f323e0562784d17e
52826 F20101220_AAAMUO lanahan_b_Page_207.pro
3cd85ebe7db38f28e1fc61d6de1c6e7d
e4b27009b213eb2efbda8e07601985276512daa1
F20101220_AAANRH lanahan_b_Page_171.tif
a9745489a46f35ad2a1397807fa7e834
6aa89a636667a6a49c5c4d1b44b233958103e7d0
F20101220_AAAMHE lanahan_b_Page_160.tif
1e00866c3aee58c242e5c5f43c06aecd
54300f98828763cc3927b4ceaacdd769e2c46849
F20101220_AAAMUP lanahan_b_Page_047.tif
a11e36379ac63ae1ee42f647e7812775
666749a7d221a8f19f489b2ac1ab0a412f4794a3
F20101220_AAANRI lanahan_b_Page_173.tif
4943ea01c4d65b3d5ff728da1fc72b5e
a0d1cfe980b15799b10d650717c3655b46933cdf
21633 F20101220_AAAMHF lanahan_b_Page_231.QC.jpg
6ef85d61ac9e61ad26fcf4e2ec18a82e
334d9f50f7c9dbd9beff5c8485d90741b8c21652
1728 F20101220_AAAMUQ lanahan_b_Page_108.txt
e122122a167c5d8fc604c6e01cc1bb62
a5ba83dc1d4f601e24d5799157cb193e69567fbf
F20101220_AAANRJ lanahan_b_Page_174.tif
9baad70fea4e3560e7db25edff9ce5a2
05736ad816853be4a451485fcd8058678a17b323
81337 F20101220_AAAMHG lanahan_b_Page_124.jpg
dd2d4bcd84ec388bc7376fb3dcc98b26
827b8f9270ab7c8fc29d84113d0d7ef3f348b285
47931 F20101220_AAAMUR lanahan_b_Page_150.pro
18403e1152e34bb37238f1c70a80f010
71c2205cc09d7c11dca995f08bb3f92207a41262
F20101220_AAANRK lanahan_b_Page_175.tif
8ef256e37401e3bd00d0ae6720790871
4b4a2187eff12715e7f4268ac989dddf564479df
25039 F20101220_AAAMHH lanahan_b_Page_043.QC.jpg
956885cbf11bf0d51046eeeebbff8abd
7b86fd81fa207562580f6e5bcd1a953f6125a016
82254 F20101220_AAANEA lanahan_b_Page_078.jpg
f488845b2ff65b25586dd9606201a44c
ebddc5aab0715a3635153c7ec132d3d571c9d3d8
1931 F20101220_AAAMUS lanahan_b_Page_195.txt
78d3852da9198ada802236f0c2a7246a
9806ef00e7bba04fd4506c32eabcef7002e95d45
F20101220_AAANRL lanahan_b_Page_177.tif
32f2b7c0c56004980ddf659f02b70312
c283d192558343ecfc75f9b4afba21ba675fb08b
34801 F20101220_AAAMHI lanahan_b_Page_161.pro
93750079e9c5e0df405a6d9f1b8a57a7
7b32dd0c8e7f3954b9314f871985996e46d1bf57
80643 F20101220_AAANEB lanahan_b_Page_080.jpg
6f70f344ceb7385ce7272a96436057fb
0f782cbdf4215443f7dd93aebb8358f9da8b322d
80755 F20101220_AAAMUT lanahan_b_Page_102.jpg
ec4333863243d9cd35cb238711ac32bf
96325005e2e0d019e7296754d83413ec59c57b87
F20101220_AAANRM lanahan_b_Page_180.tif
53cf731d66f75691d8f21a905b23e8e8
1177cc4cedea4d555a76d3c2f5602e3c91054dfe
6058 F20101220_AAAMHJ lanahan_b_Page_090thm.jpg
0ab5037d9029725f27eabc8fb07842a2
c7ae8760e2b91b3ec6e3d334968251038d4bde7f
75468 F20101220_AAANEC lanahan_b_Page_083.jpg
fbc2090c7fee3e3701e597819330c4c6
2ba9bed183354a7afe38d9cdf7c2d3c7c9c0caf5
F20101220_AAAMUU lanahan_b_Page_092.tif
8c14c37292c5c3f143e49ccc48e05c9d
94ec39ad05f97d21cdb85dac19c3da8a0a94468a
F20101220_AAANRN lanahan_b_Page_181.tif
2ba4e4a8fa89ef1c6e85742bd390e3cf
45571e8fb544a99dce90d93e0d7052a69648615f
F20101220_AAAMHK lanahan_b_Page_203.tif
be75e201861ec73b4f146401e40809f8
812d762bc15f33c039027b11425564068ebc7c05
77518 F20101220_AAANED lanahan_b_Page_084.jpg
49d136ead99d21991189b38b9d6decae
91100eb73bf76db0e22bf99fb24e20aaaae13224
43571 F20101220_AAAMUV lanahan_b_Page_132.pro
449c0dee44c5f5494288281579fb3034
6ff666ddd74043bd3b20a9f2bc6d68f326a65687
F20101220_AAANRO lanahan_b_Page_184.tif
c0163407af130a3a6af4775566fc50ba
587b3a459a904b9fb1cceb62b3585b6c2fd552f6
15342 F20101220_AAAMHL lanahan_b_Page_218.QC.jpg
97f85a62f1c99819a4d5b5b57d0dd1ca
26f4fcf80efa9945a555f2c7fa55e2f6dce8260d
61652 F20101220_AAANEE lanahan_b_Page_087.jpg
1c55535a06de25c3547c03fc0882c616
93f341d1df655d57423cf6156f6f9b5dd6bd7bb7
85951 F20101220_AAAMUW lanahan_b_Page_162.jpg
9f1574b63a749dc344ca86e370306284
a61b993658230bcbbfe571359ad920732fca1e2a
F20101220_AAANRP lanahan_b_Page_186.tif
90c9dbad232a8a846d8e93cefcf7359f
63d9baf0a0551e6a49732fdf18145894018d6993
25810 F20101220_AAAMHM lanahan_b_Page_204.QC.jpg
72cf7b8db4cfc317d09b6bbb363bcad7
4926994a79e72490d6126b454dac89793001586d
88125 F20101220_AAANEF lanahan_b_Page_090.jpg
5c669acd9a43968fb8bd4d020b0a29e2
93c98e378c7145377e15f645d6af9451c8db8797
53369 F20101220_AAAMUX lanahan_b_Page_141.pro
25b2afa956d92dcdd1d1fc8c1664a308
bf76396402b4f8ec2e518281aa4ff95ada9910e5
F20101220_AAANRQ lanahan_b_Page_189.tif
81fd8e8943cf353b2f63e8e4ce6e22e1
e12c575934f44355ad157fd3fa52b49e1ffe292d
26811 F20101220_AAAMHN lanahan_b_Page_205.QC.jpg
0314fdf675f449f4431cd00889041205
de500987d95bdd1fd7c8e25d5c8238df8577b7c4
88084 F20101220_AAANEG lanahan_b_Page_091.jpg
22cfece7d140d066c1c32dc51f7ba0e9
0837732bdc2b812e855bd7bb0f385dd5f466531a
11971 F20101220_AAAMUY lanahan_b_Page_199.QC.jpg
549dd2951cf2a148453a03324a751d48
3d4b7883ecb161265ff67425ad2cac123c38e4aa
F20101220_AAANRR lanahan_b_Page_190.tif
cb0a6a4c9b09b55f33cf37e8172faecc
ba07be8fc640f13155672c4b4d8dff1ff3fb9984
49771 F20101220_AAAMHO lanahan_b_Page_112.pro
82779c8e92fdb2dbdd4a73ad21378278
425978be29595abe81b60c2377dd65d9ca19b5f7
80706 F20101220_AAANEH lanahan_b_Page_092.jpg
7e9c554b7f1a5d9a86c46b11a2f52b89
4035acd0e2ab7bfe0a10d6bf3beaa3fb67b7cdeb
20946 F20101220_AAAMUZ lanahan_b_Page_065.QC.jpg
8afc9ff3dcf6cd7921dc18900b2a532f
a3e10ddb43b6d7ed05b370464bc9943f0959849e
1918 F20101220_AAAOBA lanahan_b_Page_189.txt
f3df9f571c1e590c1ae471668a0c6bb1
937e1006afef5d742ab1452ee404fe8488856876
F20101220_AAANRS lanahan_b_Page_192.tif
e72de6f251074077cd18127869d8ca03
4f850398af8eaf09bba4da36cfbff477b26e51fb
110734 F20101220_AAAMHP lanahan_b_Page_177.jp2
8fb700c88272f9794c073702850dbfd9
8f1965db0b75ee5e517271b924b8ade27eb40055
80501 F20101220_AAANEI lanahan_b_Page_094.jpg
06c8f8dcfbcd7d8d6deff71900853c17
53290e377511e20c673a827a0938204f44e3a7db
1063 F20101220_AAAOBB lanahan_b_Page_191.txt
1e4679b2849a061198ae607d7b7035be
c36ec60e898b290e713e5c7e8842872bf4f428d8
F20101220_AAANRT lanahan_b_Page_193.tif
c4a72db87d4ed24525653a87984028b9
5b39a131ddcca7f1a59462f1d7880b6d5d8740ea
108784 F20101220_AAAMHQ lanahan_b_Page_036.jp2
177ca447b5a0a1f56c15d83226ceb687
546bc5a77afcacf38eb82cc3f90f8d533ddf6500
86401 F20101220_AAANEJ lanahan_b_Page_096.jpg
02f16b4ce7982896a94d5445942215b3
9d492451a82892acb860aa5309fec8879af947a6
2062 F20101220_AAAOBC lanahan_b_Page_193.txt
da8c2e5f39651721412ddd90bbff2562
77217ef7e36a7f6002551de86e44b25bd643e4c8
F20101220_AAANRU lanahan_b_Page_194.tif
3aa1543d632c18107d3951323892249c
23bc80ef1e5f7da4e98ae6e3b3ee6d86d2c07a5a
73136 F20101220_AAAMHR lanahan_b_Page_005.pro
a7f9736f7bdee907e56f96fd28b24524
90dc4fb293731ebb79d9495bedd7f73a712a7bcd
81064 F20101220_AAANEK lanahan_b_Page_097.jpg
9c6f34b45e2f4af286be830384d57214
256604cbb41b8f1cbd66a90690a81a4e9278206d
F20101220_AAAOBD lanahan_b_Page_194.txt
6889424c39a475a1f884ced2e4ade675
e0bd9f0e21c0433705a38314d412a5a4a9c98178
F20101220_AAANRV lanahan_b_Page_195.tif
32eefcf2fc75c45679769711c0bd13fe
308a65c59b31fa3f777d9d1a95b52fe7f99c7c03
6182 F20101220_AAAMHS lanahan_b_Page_071thm.jpg
ec8817e909c7fad7785731a457122ab6
b34bea386a5a0d8f5859b5b51b2a95d39f530943
85088 F20101220_AAANEL lanahan_b_Page_098.jpg
30dc662f368ac33d2cd395736b008999
bf0005e6b83f6e75770db8a004d10ea4e3b42a3e
2108 F20101220_AAAOBE lanahan_b_Page_196.txt
b43a1e6b335703c29ea6dcb00725fe60
b1d3c0e97cd74823d5f2c3ead70031153f579f82
F20101220_AAANRW lanahan_b_Page_198.tif
7b13f7a6e2eee11a10a6f0450443050d
0908b1c1ce9d203d588c33c1015dda83db4b1028
6517 F20101220_AAAMHT lanahan_b_Page_221thm.jpg
69ac5d6f5cf1196cca4ab1aa7f5e6a3e
69d983100527fc06183ba2f906ca3434c1d30b95
85003 F20101220_AAANEM lanahan_b_Page_099.jpg
1ea6e6e8f5bccd14aac79ef9c88b6c1b
946dbebfeaf1ccf0921fa2f056a3a641b8002b8d
2344 F20101220_AAAOBF lanahan_b_Page_197.txt
ff6a1b1a3c10b67adedb1e75c60a9488
2714d600f5c1110d2cab8b7d7f9ddfe505d0ca5e
F20101220_AAANRX lanahan_b_Page_199.tif
f1c98c61cbe2ed7ab4af45dda317478b
3b45e3506506bb10aee539d2dd88e57daa39b635
91980 F20101220_AAAMHU lanahan_b_Page_236.jpg
f00c10710a0ab9129c43eec7a313fabb
3719f65a920d6dbf2c34f1ae191ae77ccc6fdc23
82926 F20101220_AAANEN lanahan_b_Page_100.jpg
6d4529668f2f733c135d51671bc2469f
72dadbd7ffbd6eadd886620b42526e68f8960a43
1731 F20101220_AAAOBG lanahan_b_Page_202.txt
e4e458e01e8a4240cf7c71c4d38f1007
4bcd8c01736166f2a5f74bda915c6f0c8d468a77
F20101220_AAANRY lanahan_b_Page_201.tif
55f24b02fd2ba72a7e0ffeaa1264d9a4
c6c3975aff04cf1ee5fe0a0079804287dde6ad89
107490 F20101220_AAAMHV lanahan_b_Page_204.jp2
dc95631a3c3b1f86876d50959b33dc11
ea65a5f95ccb705255f33aaf974e245f42968f79
85136 F20101220_AAANEO lanahan_b_Page_101.jpg
1cb6d32bff0bfd5369dc3be004d2b13c
25ecaef2baee5c1344f6f09b94a85aad2a878f3b
1852 F20101220_AAAOBH lanahan_b_Page_203.txt
f308eff8f5d73a3eabe90d119c74fe74
57b8d1617c8017eb6d6449f81a8d7e5cfd7f061c
F20101220_AAANRZ lanahan_b_Page_208.tif
b7578884a62ee34a953b90fa4e65fad0
09a2af11f42681a98896a2ee68f9d0059247724d
49364 F20101220_AAAMHW lanahan_b_Page_028.pro
7872f110243d8dc5594c832bab1d544a
e44507ff57324ee49ac0e45b4c0fd0650d7e41fc
81082 F20101220_AAANEP lanahan_b_Page_103.jpg
a6b75b0aee18eccbed57d899d6850831
86dc6ae6bbbd64db3bf1073a1132242010af1740
F20101220_AAAOBI lanahan_b_Page_205.txt
336c621b3cffb3812a4b4c355ae81424
252811185d881a8f041811968edb5528ef3088b9
126065 F20101220_AAAMHX lanahan_b_Page_232.jp2
98b72ea14a2bff5c5810f36c57f3d42c
8c56423af21d137d871be068042d476acdab80d0
85296 F20101220_AAANEQ lanahan_b_Page_106.jpg
8a6edce75f5af0e2f24606deec8036d2
9f182a7f0d7eb22665f58353649a0850b3a6f912
1957 F20101220_AAAOBJ lanahan_b_Page_206.txt
52175bd8f115436134caa8c7c4bbc690
04fea4d7adaa4ab0a51fa278aefd2d8f61d2a215
84834 F20101220_AAAMHY lanahan_b_Page_138.jpg
6486ce90b00f130c45c7dd19c50c9fd6
50457cf3bc3e20e1a82c29bc0b175a826be2ed04
78718 F20101220_AAANER lanahan_b_Page_107.jpg
1a3e5061b3cb8b3a28277036864aac04
352cb5fd9968c9febac3bf4ba7f51c915beb2e94
2093 F20101220_AAAOBK lanahan_b_Page_207.txt
fd1bddb7206cfe88248caffbd4131c82
1c46aaaa12b91fe4dbc027f93f5570e7ff829732
80320 F20101220_AAAMHZ lanahan_b_Page_057.jpg
5db17321c9b4854d7fcfa06f67eb0c02
a4497a6c5fd1ae74c5030fece5364dbe1cb0e8aa
74444 F20101220_AAANES lanahan_b_Page_110.jpg
cea91a8768aef4913f43c5aa8358c680
79c4ea1000c0be78baab89609fdbe8b855f5aa12
1877 F20101220_AAAOBL lanahan_b_Page_208.txt
e1b2af66c2c8ad6824e3ce2fdad9fc85
d56bb045d9772985aa3ae84fce13374a6f8ff6a8
62994 F20101220_AAANET lanahan_b_Page_111.jpg
8847eb7b38ad1d398234e9eab2427ad6
97e8fc68bda62671bad1391536e2b155d62a3c37
2113 F20101220_AAAOBM lanahan_b_Page_212.txt
9ebbdcff193890dd07ea70fcb429df23
2311ce4157271bd1cb6f04ff26eeefc474af9353
87258 F20101220_AAANEU lanahan_b_Page_114.jpg
9b1ec6019c617ae84dc6bfbe0fd1f2a7
ad86ce00c6fb6a2ccc89c9a8dedecf701e87c149
2713 F20101220_AAAOBN lanahan_b_Page_213.txt
e448b4fbe4f0a7a6e106d7507a1a84cc
f13a0a68b0187f555e2b9750b59ef421b7be4be4
91286 F20101220_AAANEV lanahan_b_Page_117.jpg
ac64b208f5bcce03755ef172475307db
7a39a63c7460d1a5e0db47783d1377930ba75662
2687 F20101220_AAAOBO lanahan_b_Page_217.txt
e50e2984c4fc6f0f6005c20a2515fe7b
cd0c2850cc7045fb03d9e52b8d41d5f10d94e5d8
91449 F20101220_AAANEW lanahan_b_Page_118.jpg
2e590decc353e7428b186d8ce43d3152
2a60b706d8ae5072aad6b19fa77c839a58b512c8
1431 F20101220_AAAOBP lanahan_b_Page_218.txt
cb3bf8186f34c572961391a6183fb355
b223dfe2bd961dbc7978aa4e03b6ec6a3786bc20
95507 F20101220_AAANEX lanahan_b_Page_119.jpg
26f68c61dcbbf0426a2c49c381b5ddc0
d241455c283797449ee8044e6d22024575402d76
1626 F20101220_AAANXA lanahan_b_Page_004.txt
50e5438e142a75206c8cbb45a88552d6
a14fd8ac12f80710b380659cf868015f4fd80319
3297 F20101220_AAAOBQ lanahan_b_Page_221.txt
331b9fb45c0cd0ebbc2271696bf0fdca
362d987ea0fe2310f463ff4bbcad35f83466fa97
69232 F20101220_AAANEY lanahan_b_Page_120.jpg
e0497f0d6d4c630d90aca2ab6e419a7c
f8dd5a60518c0062414ae06dfe39c5d1b3132315
3074 F20101220_AAANXB lanahan_b_Page_005.txt
b06abc9dfff1da97263696f857f3f020
dba5a1d7ce0762045f6442abf9de66cdc7cb465e
1590 F20101220_AAAOBR lanahan_b_Page_222.txt
d0f3cdc4a9320d381e093fe89a638757
fb8e49cfe6fa6814c90f4b9f5bb8f2e4275a7dbe
86487 F20101220_AAANEZ lanahan_b_Page_121.jpg
92fdafdb2c3ba5047a5ccf603bd3cc5d
64fb46887b2064d418060d4e7e2b2c74ef1872bf
4173 F20101220_AAANXC lanahan_b_Page_006.txt
205eb8d968ab07c6d8808fa88c8bef1e
f3616193e78b8477b1cacaed36d4282f445a4897
2413 F20101220_AAAOBS lanahan_b_Page_223.txt
e80f9d1476e4f4de2119a7a50dd9d472
87f86eb85fe476051a6011432287c7a215635bc6
4220 F20101220_AAANXD lanahan_b_Page_008.txt
5241e08054307b6bbc4068aaed8ebb8c
1eb3070a217abbbdba8c9ca710cf4aeb408efb91
2171 F20101220_AAAOBT lanahan_b_Page_225.txt
4b39d3c23df643a43846aeaa119ccbaf
a213ef072b63a19dc98741e8e1bba8f9e48ae5dd
3565 F20101220_AAANXE lanahan_b_Page_010.txt
016784f9126d92e5cf95d44035bed1d9
57606b433c90fd537cf56b2b9146aff11b726566
1636 F20101220_AAAOBU lanahan_b_Page_226.txt
abc05c6555c55123e942c4dd75d62803
ef9b7ceb2285ab5a3d745fdb5108038dafb0f9b0
85180 F20101220_AAAMNA lanahan_b_Page_128.jpg
da33915594ac9ad727f2a774891df6d2
c1736d88dffcd0d085a375d30411e6f3659002c5
1595 F20101220_AAANXF lanahan_b_Page_011.txt
9dab21817bca627d4ef9e14d5d252e7e
a734493ccd1f67fa7ad7c49b90fbfca2d1825119
1258 F20101220_AAAOBV lanahan_b_Page_227.txt
fa9f2f6db7019aa77f5f87e0f90cbcfc
55b32f57bc9c2d6ae665588dee3610aa7ff9f18d
2324 F20101220_AAAMNB lanahan_b_Page_003.QC.jpg
d36eed436d4fdc848d432d767d7b2b32
cfe0b2af1cb2448da77d382747b0e16c331a2b9b
1641 F20101220_AAANXG lanahan_b_Page_012.txt
b44a15d7772ceab559fe39e9ebb71059
684a6148bece3843bd8d1f971c0d01aff0234849
110252 F20101220_AAAMNC lanahan_b_Page_212.jp2
6240b972ec1f7f557013f1714cd075e4
4cf0573f6e8e2f20ca00f286e2ae68261c87ecf6
1423 F20101220_AAANXH lanahan_b_Page_013.txt
dd00ca95eeaa0b97630b90d8007f8566
20c6d881cd90def070a82a873c4c50dec2ed9de8
1977 F20101220_AAAOBW lanahan_b_Page_228.txt
18767ce9a809670ba1b7a884aeeb3d1b
3bcb12a6e10886adaec77eb7024a5b83361b5e9e
33388 F20101220_AAAMND lanahan_b_Page_155.pro
b5e27a56a14b61364d73537a5241b8a7
1584c5708bf86bbd44ef96ffcd018c7f14ee156f
2118 F20101220_AAANXI lanahan_b_Page_015.txt
121403f30eb4dfe1f3dbbab09445eb26
01b521988333280e28277cc354ca5d43ca526357
1904 F20101220_AAAOBX lanahan_b_Page_229.txt
4ca0be2f3ed439668d5c3b092d432a61
afdbefa7f0faf0e4ec79aad8fbca44c92ed7e2bd
2009 F20101220_AAANXJ lanahan_b_Page_016.txt
acd5ca1861f241f41496f20908474891
53887aad84f9fe6fc94441a7fdaa17c01be5be63
1992 F20101220_AAAOBY lanahan_b_Page_231.txt
814313a2672dbf975139f16e8e5f2c4a
d33e33d9b147ac0e2ea4d6cbb44895edbb73dffa
7793 F20101220_AAAMNE lanahan_b_Page_003.jpg
8d0a1496ed2ffb2b0e6af65abf982256
68df0c98685f27699b69083ef832bfee3c8a4732
F20101220_AAANXK lanahan_b_Page_018.txt
719094a0fcf35eaacacaa872090b30b5
626e99739c206ef74efde662be0744adbddac95b
2287 F20101220_AAAOBZ lanahan_b_Page_232.txt
43790021470078f124ab2d1cb655eaa7
e2882c4411322f2081e955df49176cb3c85406a0
36915 F20101220_AAAMNF lanahan_b_Page_219.pro
54869a24fa8a5f0f70f7a32d9ed811de
d65470d4fd7ce6e61ede87bebe743c7fe0fd6d67
2008 F20101220_AAANXL lanahan_b_Page_019.txt
b986c369fcd3e90ff7501f3d1a5c7f09
9bcb91fb52706aab2cb4459bd980586d0aeb363a
26103 F20101220_AAAMNG lanahan_b_Page_111.pro
ed2640b499d4659a3c51daf3216d23b4
058a2261318efa917754fce1c242a24294d0e672
105216 F20101220_AAANKA lanahan_b_Page_102.jp2
777d77d43f00c1ceaca5788ef3fbee41
d026d481ef5f4573df7f7c46a33ef778ea63117e
1961 F20101220_AAANXM lanahan_b_Page_022.txt
88631d34c4b4a88ee034fdd8b0377149
1e3706fa0f1f2fc1f76ad8d57937179d91ac06d6
59263 F20101220_AAAMNH lanahan_b_Page_119.pro
fc7a772d277c57455012105db69cc4dc
cda521f699c12df27ddecb15a4b95b6c33e1f1ba
115697 F20101220_AAANKB lanahan_b_Page_105.jp2
56e371a35971095df4bcb8cfb297838a
48dafe84c2199a1a912df77eced447b955bd3926
115788 F20101220_AAAMNI lanahan_b_Page_117.jp2
5c3bab96099449ce6a0f248a6b7a5549
f42e0524d9716c68ca4cc6402cbe53d1d00c545b
104535 F20101220_AAANKC lanahan_b_Page_107.jp2
f2acb8a7805347a9c4ee1f310a9aebc0
88a2e87ea679403e03585284472f38be9dc5da1b
1971 F20101220_AAANXN lanahan_b_Page_023.txt
8ae74ee392b5dc0e25c8669e5fa7abd7
df151141b90f0337cb4dd95512651d20f757ce78
F20101220_AAAMNJ lanahan_b_Page_020.tif
04b34a12085ad362ec470072496650bb
3c46d367cfd0729948974dee4e82b3aac8f56c82
90501 F20101220_AAANKD lanahan_b_Page_108.jp2
b4adb03e5d9c6df6cc6743a0a5e211c9
b9d61bdede3f11236f0876a6141d4231cd1e0c3a
942 F20101220_AAANXO lanahan_b_Page_026.txt
7e3d89f51b7ba7004a6073179c1a572b
9bcc19cd7d76753be03818f8c127ee41099d308f
6640 F20101220_AAAMNK lanahan_b_Page_213thm.jpg
40d6f570b95ba053d6904ee98609ed16
db0cdb4fa0bd5ebff42256341386a03122edb5ea
115315 F20101220_AAANKE lanahan_b_Page_109.jp2
72cc457def9c1d91786aebf178bb4972
6a03196c1365b33e9ef55806e87089a6613c08ee
1972 F20101220_AAAMAA lanahan_b_Page_042.txt
1e87cb120bbae7f1bc591f1d0d835f0b
a11b290d64032eea94f535bddc9c08aafd6c2d9b
1866 F20101220_AAANXP lanahan_b_Page_027.txt
fa0753075dc1fe72acf2547807013841
365b2ca95bc754c255e846611663e0bf3ab24b94
85148 F20101220_AAAMNL lanahan_b_Page_081.jpg
4055c3c7e5a172690cfbad81018aa364
10170446b0c2d803c01a81242aecba8e18dd360e
97211 F20101220_AAANKF lanahan_b_Page_110.jp2
5c07b652dbe4abc59754e224d93601b6
b2b15ef3d8c61d5978666b6247c9291b9e6ce962
F20101220_AAAMAB lanahan_b_Page_188.tif
3c96e1d25d48aa23014823599c132fe1
8e5bbb79a58b0062dd98f42c37b052d8d82444f0
2057 F20101220_AAANXQ lanahan_b_Page_029.txt
c7af3206387081b938264d409b957ea1
310a4220236cadd1e658ec7d85a5c6579c11d18c
42822 F20101220_AAAMNM lanahan_b_Page_171.pro
ca8446c40ca95fbba47e55a77f622be4
4a75bc646157bbde6fbeb5489e5da46b5fbab5d1
782961 F20101220_AAANKG lanahan_b_Page_111.jp2
3bcde97099e6da1fc88e2229f027d834
f9dc9b6f4025ec2a2daf46101b769953ff4be2f9
F20101220_AAAMAC lanahan_b_Page_006.tif
a50978293a868f3e8384c8a852ec48c0
cb7686bf9a78fa5ea8d8067a3ddad38b801e169b
2036 F20101220_AAANXR lanahan_b_Page_030.txt
5289eb3ccbabe2ce9d6a5e749bd0de24
3f9569e0018ead1e339a2fda105cc28185a4c3cc
50771 F20101220_AAAMNN lanahan_b_Page_078.pro
54d03c90644c0ee2ea84d72a05c9eec1
cdfdf0dbd13b3a0d8b8ef6b2f2d2b42b8eba3f04
125416 F20101220_AAANKH lanahan_b_Page_113.jp2
61db83c3d50df6c6eb3591c851801b71
1c32cc48d9f3f6da8e4667df852a4d01162f1c0f
27700 F20101220_AAAOHA lanahan_b_Page_047.QC.jpg
6a40e9c9a104460fa73bc24c8378a97a
e37be51b2ceeb23f25c667acef99960d178ee106
51427 F20101220_AAAMAD lanahan_b_Page_100.pro
d0e2dfef839dfffe819992afb92fe1b2
e396cb451b29a75d1bcfdaf6c289e34409f604f6
2088 F20101220_AAANXS lanahan_b_Page_033.txt
3d8dbfc1b613d2ce81946ae6346088f8
e75765c19c1fda064c212162e98d5bdd188f73ee
82611 F20101220_AAAMNO lanahan_b_Page_019.jpg
dde82a60cf8610b0e43418acc56240e0
c875afb9a23ecc8fe34044c8dc7a0093658883de
113399 F20101220_AAANKI lanahan_b_Page_114.jp2
f64fd977fb25f3bef451df1a4710119d
5ff5f60e00975b266b9c3a1bc85fef9bd640f6cc
25231 F20101220_AAAOHB lanahan_b_Page_048.QC.jpg
a6a1d40d9a9921348d4686a48a9c32f5
b94eff509636f512a777ab209529cd8ae725efe1
49038 F20101220_AAAMAE lanahan_b_Page_195.pro
7c9fcfff7cfe9e27c973b12b0c2a4f89
5db2d9046720cf266f9a80ab2aaccd032e9e6674
2020 F20101220_AAANXT lanahan_b_Page_034.txt
47ac15ebf8990fbafe8971aa49582321
204e97e1ce2ab97dbd258827565e5dc798a65568
85470 F20101220_AAAMNP lanahan_b_Page_046.jpg
047c98dac4c0acd9b295ddc43593fea6
1482ecef72b9d01008c41341182307830f83dbdd
104476 F20101220_AAANKJ lanahan_b_Page_115.jp2
592b0c061afebe87a2754cc5a5f77739
2151d69ea738c33290ecf89ac5c6d0f48530453e
6233 F20101220_AAAOHC lanahan_b_Page_048thm.jpg
f44a60c81a3cd6612ecd4961f5785100
6a2af837a045d53564e224e2310ed066af6335ed
26543 F20101220_AAAMAF lanahan_b_Page_096.QC.jpg
1f2b9d5be5036ce4a38500ebccce8f86
d23409e85a6b9855a97bc62c05e51650e81e4569
1936 F20101220_AAANXU lanahan_b_Page_035.txt
7cf55c4b307069a59f2fc4acf977b69a
9f03b900c750c84b35e5792fa5a5d5e2d2f4cf3f
50527 F20101220_AAAMNQ lanahan_b_Page_185.pro
cb08bbba93d09060d07721ca3d646b27
f2fc1ac54e0c0832ebdc290892043f332cd57b5c
108553 F20101220_AAANKK lanahan_b_Page_116.jp2
240486208570f11c354fe1faedcb35b4
2ee047281786a400e7723b2dbeff460a585a3b36
6321 F20101220_AAAOHD lanahan_b_Page_049thm.jpg
eb80afab89f2ec2a02a4ddfee39bd209
ddc7996742a5140ac0a4f26d4ea30dc4094c55c2
50901 F20101220_AAAMAG lanahan_b_Page_095.pro
2bd787760f017b89ffa66778ac026b6c
2cd6f51c81b051c18dda30f405e08dd05c549aa6
2013 F20101220_AAANXV lanahan_b_Page_038.txt
5bee116fd6d60f61a0db406d14c48009
160a3525be4ea91cc157bb9cc3dc28d97731439e
79967 F20101220_AAAMNR lanahan_b_Page_151.jpg
ecf5cdf1784d34b85e15b917efe37b27
cf1652165d3738c4b87272b886da5de93358faed
122701 F20101220_AAANKL lanahan_b_Page_119.jp2
399f952964de08420abe88f3eef0ea93
5d918f3ffabd0ab80c1ae9af25ab4e17c1c2ef74
6452 F20101220_AAAOHE lanahan_b_Page_050thm.jpg
69eeee08fab1d899eaaf8fbe4ee94858
e797e586ac5c0bf79d04fab513fe73e807ae14f6
6332 F20101220_AAAMAH lanahan_b_Page_045thm.jpg
db5d2395a829fc64b86b6e2dfdcdd463
15e74e32eaba9ca8e9a3c23264aa75ba1edb1a0e
2061 F20101220_AAANXW lanahan_b_Page_040.txt
41f7da8fab042fe464bb0b68e9c3788e
de950d2f4d192df2575270b3e7687a89e619adb3
1051976 F20101220_AAAMNS lanahan_b_Page_006.jp2
22bd04e96ff736ca6a793e24a8583751
a41a3fa5475bddc36a3782233156950ef791f4b7
111159 F20101220_AAANKM lanahan_b_Page_122.jp2
4381aa2d82a329302ef039e8bc1f7265
aee9e34220ae0f0ff8ec847020885b5d91ec73c9
6390 F20101220_AAAOHF lanahan_b_Page_051thm.jpg
932cf11a0ab90c69a501b397776b20c1
a388d9dff9edf13c93b2102658ae995575a5b8a6
27965 F20101220_AAAMAI lanahan_b_Page_089.QC.jpg
09c30be2112ef32ce88e17976316307a
c8d261c340719c102827cd688f7dfa5e9eb1ed48
1916 F20101220_AAANXX lanahan_b_Page_043.txt
25c952e1121ddbffd80bc025d8015d4e
2aaf6e440f07ce392ee7b5ae233f758a7c1dac68
6146 F20101220_AAAMNT lanahan_b_Page_077thm.jpg
17a496dc24d860ed93e041b9db0b246e
2045afad80c3f8a28eb783c6e7d22a56acce0811
108389 F20101220_AAANKN lanahan_b_Page_125.jp2
4695631ff9785885d93eb086c3813147
cd2185ff99d778d126bd8937773b313506af2720
F20101220_AAAOHG lanahan_b_Page_052.QC.jpg
9f7ad3c7d015cc62fdfd5cdd0db6d6c8
c56bd05e4426226afdd01c2dc2a5cff6b6992f59
F20101220_AAAMAJ lanahan_b_Page_230.tif
ab54e6d4bc77ddff463de8805fcfa201
1122281d463cb6153ffc2c3d02aed5c74864b9e3
F20101220_AAANXY lanahan_b_Page_045.txt
5d17509dc366def1e593772ca601bc28
77878251f6f78be29555dc77c997b11fb9b13bd5
27616 F20101220_AAAMNU lanahan_b_Page_091.QC.jpg
bf9b7f1de238daec919fac5b22b5989d
61ced10d5763aba34d844337139d78c3c6b988f5
112285 F20101220_AAANKO lanahan_b_Page_128.jp2
714e9e6497f12024d99d12ba33975473
6d570d9c6d4fdaa493710e118ee88fda5fef7311
28021 F20101220_AAAOHH lanahan_b_Page_053.QC.jpg
c1e54d498a4f5f85b24cfad1b0a3ced2
78656c14306a7ae45721d284c4535445167c000c
23477 F20101220_AAAMAK lanahan_b_Page_164.QC.jpg
60778717da74ad7f13ef1f490a423f58
02f045b6f78514251df9397ae707ee2687c00409
2038 F20101220_AAANXZ lanahan_b_Page_046.txt
9d6baa6df19a75189e6b641c558b65c6
071eee274a89494accd8a64bc353774b3ac50582
85562 F20101220_AAAMNV lanahan_b_Page_207.jpg
b45b4cb9579ce352833675bdd7bcdced
0cf7c69a8a11586478961777958d40fe2ce0b356
114447 F20101220_AAANKP lanahan_b_Page_129.jp2
da319ad175c77f7919739ee0a3b8375d
d8bef577462db0fde6a20a7a9c86b2ff8aec754c
6409 F20101220_AAAOHI lanahan_b_Page_056thm.jpg
be43e634071807566230048cd637c927
2f91416b65d7ed62020148beab35149e712476b3
F20101220_AAAMAL lanahan_b_Page_028.tif
b6333cbbc4d520b4467c7f3005ccf6d8
4ee6d305153530ba9b8dd7a3b244494d5714968c
5538 F20101220_AAAMNW lanahan_b_Page_110thm.jpg
a2c99a03dafab8d75148b8eb9afe9974
76810856e2b6a0b9236a67668ebcd3df022bb1d6
110933 F20101220_AAANKQ lanahan_b_Page_130.jp2
2d0d951b53ea618605b8e271bea2adb1
9dd6d4f6e854d38f1ab176aae818e3b621b3ceea
26842 F20101220_AAAOHJ lanahan_b_Page_058.QC.jpg
c75c56b7f62e69e0184c42209ea9f6ed
b2a83c242dbbe51f5cb20e5d4122f9c5c746534f
2348 F20101220_AAAMAM lanahan_b_Page_119.txt
f1c82e1268bcaed8429400ca37770cce
5a637789627fd3c8d85a10491095dc3b5ce6d5ab
111058 F20101220_AAAMNX lanahan_b_Page_034.jp2
aa1432bcf0c0b3574229628b566bd291
63e2f9175c8c0e34234c2ca3757627722165657c
40764 F20101220_AAANKR lanahan_b_Page_131.jp2
f2ce0ba009e66c9e7a4a893bf7c0e9a6
8ca139639d5754e36918fb261dd85ef53114be91
6492 F20101220_AAAOHK lanahan_b_Page_058thm.jpg
441e9dcbd228d78f5d9ea35a9711e660
8f6fa01607d5b14f2d2f85eb950ae6b0876da589
86021 F20101220_AAAMAN lanahan_b_Page_239.jpg
91da24ca7fd2ed981397513331b2686b
091ec456c3226fc7b6aa00e870629cf2fcd26bf4
51246 F20101220_AAAMNY lanahan_b_Page_044.pro
958bec46ed342a9f4eb51e5b39325534
e2c2400a445723ec56cea63b82d23b3d3c31b316
95092 F20101220_AAANKS lanahan_b_Page_132.jp2
2097d69b8071b3b6b67de3117c053fa4
dd899f09582e9e692a3259d7f956deed70cb86dc
25570 F20101220_AAAOHL lanahan_b_Page_059.QC.jpg
7971180837fc62d9e417f1e6b7f5193d
912e3a5e34354b92064ea996bd62ad679265cecc
F20101220_AAAMAO lanahan_b_Page_038.tif
31f3a1e8871a33db60e16daae152a54f
78729915ffbc35e5936652f2f495d083bd7ef977
25694 F20101220_AAAMNZ lanahan_b_Page_039.QC.jpg
d64c14e5ff774320e4d844764373d47f
4682f5032b293b5caa2207aab5be613b7f3cf8dc
808375 F20101220_AAANKT lanahan_b_Page_134.jp2
e835ea3052d949b12caade6b62076a12
2581c688b1abbfa4d3e078c76091a0541203eabf
25112 F20101220_AAAOHM lanahan_b_Page_061.QC.jpg
f00713eae17c1d839394a1c574e9d35b
c56080b62820ca1cc17166ac6dd25a8399b85ed2
1945 F20101220_AAAMAP lanahan_b_Page_061.txt
9ffaaeaa731b1713ce364bfea8719904
7b1837d60287df9239d6aa124b544e2908d4cd3e
112523 F20101220_AAANKU lanahan_b_Page_135.jp2
618e39441635fb1e3a10cdc13dd50c4c
e51e95ff800805aef766ecc87de7dafc65438bff
6110 F20101220_AAAOHN lanahan_b_Page_061thm.jpg
0ccb07b50e5d134dd060f32387d68ea2
77dcb6cf5ebcf15d00e7d1fe429957626c6d6e82
1907 F20101220_AAAMAQ lanahan_b_Page_150.txt
2fbe5f982901a66d463bba23f853e7ba
4a5a1ea4dbe86c8c2d60d02cee477049e36acaa5
113664 F20101220_AAANKV lanahan_b_Page_137.jp2
aa9e5edf5ad7c12868a48898f676afda
9e4d605c62212d66728ff2b720494fc8c362fd77
25366 F20101220_AAAOHO lanahan_b_Page_062.QC.jpg
923c7018f9c488c930a8e4d7d2368daa
78c3d828bfa1e5d1bd1551ad8cafbde217c7645f
F20101220_AAAMAR lanahan_b_Page_176.tif
2f705461bfbd1e7eeecce63876c84478
85093e51215f4a51bc85fee448483dd6f1f30ba2
108407 F20101220_AAANKW lanahan_b_Page_138.jp2
ab7fe620a5361bb2fa3fde36663fb2da
60d687f05a088847dd2a8a551390f3e0828e93d7
6027 F20101220_AAAOHP lanahan_b_Page_063thm.jpg
5e93bdace70f57d18713c340094a0915
53804560f222973241f295cf68da2cae335990bb
2471 F20101220_AAAMAS lanahan_b_Page_131thm.jpg
200deeaa3377a37566caf5df2ba88a8a
9330dcfea5288746de3289cf35f2548bc1fa5869
95020 F20101220_AAANKX lanahan_b_Page_139.jp2
77027883c33c340321714bd16d502a05
93c8bcc65e52ef494ee5a94277061e0d8e2c8b30
4851 F20101220_AAAOHQ lanahan_b_Page_064thm.jpg
a2c9acb68cd1dec23be9b7987427261d
16239bf780ef56ef83bb7ca7bba315c592da408d
82990 F20101220_AAAMAT lanahan_b_Page_116.jpg
f33152b8d1434fdb7cd365beda4db243
49666897781198fb519eb9b4426d772ecb07be16
114112 F20101220_AAANKY lanahan_b_Page_140.jp2
cb1266d301e0e3541589d5f9561bee96
4a0b9d59ea73a3a4297d65f21ffb05f9ef8c0a1f
24801 F20101220_AAAOHR lanahan_b_Page_066.QC.jpg
adba4319d40d043e61dafcb2d2f72b25
5c7c9fb5bc132e1edc41b54a3e89f89d9cbd6570
27574 F20101220_AAAMAU lanahan_b_Page_068.QC.jpg
a8b88b07799ce0a75ce5b2d5e10c2660
e61805c10118efe90362916f7acc95c7a0a518f2
112104 F20101220_AAANKZ lanahan_b_Page_141.jp2
77d92110e3978ee3a6f3f99ab94e23c0
bd14a5577432f1e5253925ea86a73f4c337903d4
5911 F20101220_AAAOHS lanahan_b_Page_066thm.jpg
974da5145ea2df8887b0993abb8bd9b0
d333f71f921d3797176778a9260c9a171749e7a1
65855 F20101220_AAAMAV lanahan_b_Page_134.jpg
0559f296134b63e4df9f2bce1b7ce2b4
df72058289f3a9e61fb903581cb77c4a2302adab
6307 F20101220_AAAOHT lanahan_b_Page_068thm.jpg
15eccd094dee849e363e66b3ef8a0feb
728963cc8a4e338b9a7530a91da1afd0fc6bab84
83109 F20101220_AAAMAW lanahan_b_Page_039.jpg
280fee3c68cf04f9ac21cbd0b3522435
b5d47e66eb41ac26c6561540a1337dae4db4e367
26784 F20101220_AAAOHU lanahan_b_Page_069.QC.jpg
874e80506f098a67d5c9c0acfab46dd4
77bc81b763f57063c37d81c1e13f450050adc0ca
4037 F20101220_AAAMTA lanahan_b_Page_007.txt
7cdb9c0541b4654cfbb3012ca827c93d
60006333a6fa3a863679f0a6ae0a087629c44d83
6076 F20101220_AAAOHV lanahan_b_Page_072thm.jpg
9cb00fd454d551edeb36882a84a817b5
5de52e06bad77319124a644574c0fd7cae7ec7dc
77483 F20101220_AAAMAX lanahan_b_Page_133.jpg
c4adf0eee23d575a8912a1ebc3db69dd
541a67fccfa988f4a23c6ae29a15964b557aa84e
26912 F20101220_AAAMTB lanahan_b_Page_050.QC.jpg
142970ee5fe0c11f71acb6bb69888844
88ddfad63baa961b106c3b9932ae1a37ce785d83
25950 F20101220_AAAOHW lanahan_b_Page_074.QC.jpg
4fc6fe60beef41f43841cd94875bea44
241a382eacb97e41d58a0ddf27b394c25934dbed
6720 F20101220_AAAMAY lanahan_b_Page_119thm.jpg
a881849b107884197d07c494fbafca8d
3d56a59aea089a27306d72f6cfb69d197353bf21
104525 F20101220_AAAMTC lanahan_b_Page_189.jp2
113b8914588ba3ed3fd04a71ace11de2
a598b970ffd440c87952b35fc24f582915610bed
6318 F20101220_AAAOHX lanahan_b_Page_074thm.jpg
fb7fd70726c08cd1c389e5c9a94b0751
a63fad1937190b8c07cc2699a085cca438a220c4
111989 F20101220_AAAMAZ lanahan_b_Page_163.jp2
fe5492fecf8ad3ed1f7ae4d7f94b6c62
274718d78aa1464fe11e4669a7e407a6065fda97
F20101220_AAAMTD lanahan_b_Page_220.tif
365d8f5d1a00ea0c62c9244069497615
a534584f5da93d5088ce60d2c59f544a3e27bf00
26498 F20101220_AAAOHY lanahan_b_Page_075.QC.jpg
4edbd9eea9dc7d7277e683432ec68d71
1ebe87d1ce99bb200f9b7c302193477ac4073aa9
1991 F20101220_AAAMTE lanahan_b_Page_185.txt
b5869ab8d329f3918a1c2b4e455ba351
6d470f6d7817874d0fc9897b8e63b69de971b7dc
25771 F20101220_AAAOHZ lanahan_b_Page_076.QC.jpg
b0599cea397ce99f4390defaa745d305
3c396d967beeb669e762ad50cf15004d3cf5be54
26631 F20101220_AAAMTF lanahan_b_Page_045.QC.jpg
895e17913d10a0a06b2da119fe0e85bd
6b93bdffc8a91e40e65e7dc30634833d49e1997a
541 F20101220_AAAMTG lanahan_b_Page_002thm.jpg
832b9e983a120d799e8d786881af8bb4
b9b9aff9c7fc8718d6e90899932cef6123ba1c59
24789 F20101220_AAAMTH lanahan_b_Page_015.QC.jpg
8ba26b98ffd8b40912713b6aefb74deb
640faa488164ac429e600a615e14a76070975a1e
F20101220_AAANQA lanahan_b_Page_114.tif
4243aaa63fb14e025118e9922dc341f8
6bcbf1c775c1f33f4ab4c005bc41786d2c290b06
2369 F20101220_AAAMTI lanahan_b_Page_216.txt
6d87fbea73dd7e0950747d441fba8211
bf8fe7c6ba32383c381f0f3d3bb11b1ff5e74501
F20101220_AAANQB lanahan_b_Page_116.tif
75e80349c910732454e40920ad686237
5fc6c8aeae1e7f6232a540b78f5c18c88bc2ed4a
1713 F20101220_AAAMTJ lanahan_b_Page_220.txt
16960f7c3a2ce72156b96f2f774a1149
b07ab09f6aed0de9fab61d1aeb60bb783fd21192
F20101220_AAANQC lanahan_b_Page_117.tif
8f0a1ee5e345aef24ac68d6eff80a736
efcfe4e2a4e8b1274afddcf8ef920c9bbaa51095
F20101220_AAANQD lanahan_b_Page_118.tif
e976426f73a9c2f45b766c6b3573bade
5dde7fac52fd66ab699bf79cf4fd7bf111047ae7
108132 F20101220_AAAMTK lanahan_b_Page_015.jp2
9bc2b6eff9b76a938155d2630ecddbbb
6f05350ed7ce48b344397a06f15c68df8e51a71a
F20101220_AAANQE lanahan_b_Page_119.tif
cd13bc8ce22b12d940b8928fa3f77dc7
9e6795a48fe27e6ab65a7043657ab295871b522f
52431 F20101220_AAAMGA lanahan_b_Page_144.pro
636eeec5a7ecd20e75ae793e26049a52
ee2b1b5722b954340da36d6cf3cf0fcdb1c32b4a
F20101220_AAAMTL lanahan_b_Page_197.tif
0d8363da5feeefd16e1bd1bcf0299dc5
d1906d2fdf67ecad5e2c70280a7bd33e30765b3b
F20101220_AAANQF lanahan_b_Page_121.tif
47bcacc8aba633448adf03be2a6441e9
7ae5590603448fc4d60a4a1261b827c17722433d
5929 F20101220_AAAMGB lanahan_b_Page_021thm.jpg
cc9171b293407e66759bc332f33d9661
b4b2e3921b43efe5513b024a3f2cf7389558ff2f
100406 F20101220_AAAMTM lanahan_b_Page_008.pro
a1ad0e6ca8c2bdc062b3004152cb6109
177a47b8aa4a3f5eba44bb420c6cee54ec16a9ff
3692 F20101220_AAAMGC lanahan_b_Page_017.txt
378d5f5a82b75e937d4cdcb4b4128e35
b699a151f8facac9565262434141b256fa8b9d3a
6456 F20101220_AAAMTN lanahan_b_Page_141thm.jpg
2f2af5f76539da6a64e4b748255a00ea
6c5a5cdd310458b4cd4be1472728cf2d40c34b42
F20101220_AAANQG lanahan_b_Page_122.tif
ac121db6d8b8205e9db8a645332fe660
670bb0b92d55fba1628b1cdc4ffbe27173b04cc2
F20101220_AAAMGD lanahan_b_Page_014.tif
d474428d9db2fcce9732f753dde374f8
1eec7f7b68f32df4066e4c3fe6e77d26fd133cc8
95888 F20101220_AAAMTO lanahan_b_Page_007.pro
e4aeb9980f373a17d0e7eaf3194d1fbe
1d5135763d545d773ea57bbada29fed50021170e
F20101220_AAANQH lanahan_b_Page_125.tif
01b47877d11c34a6c3eda9ec40ce3930
2590b0fea6f3f26bd2dc9a8ece517b87eaca9bfe
53300 F20101220_AAAMGE lanahan_b_Page_068.pro
6de1ddd099e1fa815bc2313b9e48fd5b
c95987c640aac7f977f5651641f974cdd8f68b93
34665 F20101220_AAAMTP lanahan_b_Page_210.pro
97b3d8750391fc3002c27a93f671266f
3fa44a3add2d7c11e2e72a2231b5680d6972fdc5
F20101220_AAANQI lanahan_b_Page_126.tif
46359908161fc557a5c3081dd8a9ab5b
0c431a449fe69961b9c8c9c5c1bfd57e2073a603
81619 F20101220_AAAMGF lanahan_b_Page_079.jpg
2f7622d24d30236f85b604d40e7b39b5
9659f71b75bf1d1b97865125660822024f417e88
74915 F20101220_AAAMTQ lanahan_b_Page_082.jpg
b58efc8ef526f57f48bc9e0b10d1611d
65575b15b8f314911f072fdd8a93c3e0f09efb3d
F20101220_AAANQJ lanahan_b_Page_128.tif
371c592818610c0c239aeaf93e8c7714
77cdf0a70a653bc93c228e5c0e23ec0811772fa7
6398 F20101220_AAAMGG lanahan_b_Page_197thm.jpg
c7ef7b3f201db6b20639fb404349cc4b
b4521ff2b63f636c2edd11548236361a5673c251
F20101220_AAAMTR lanahan_b_Page_127.tif
1f1ded2512aa6c544e778e1b88d5a4c1
90e7fcc367a671ba140f28db771d505bc0a25c8f
F20101220_AAANQK lanahan_b_Page_129.tif
a1bf930a7bf3a7b3048718cc4c80a540
2c43c3f90d4434ad761ce45ed594ceb1ced9bbac
6474 F20101220_AAAMGH lanahan_b_Page_089thm.jpg
4df7783bd26f4084de24c5bbed529d6c
d586728689a73eefb233dcf35ac2290112bca022
83315 F20101220_AAANDA lanahan_b_Page_030.jpg
92c4092c30fd6ca37a896f157e3135c5
403ca673ddf143a702d691ab56013889fd969b75
25262 F20101220_AAAMTS lanahan_b_Page_228.QC.jpg
0d40aa8ade9171a2c4856b982151f2f5
305d87a45927dddcc98ce4bfe4c863017206f6ef
F20101220_AAANQL lanahan_b_Page_135.tif
e351d15eb06789dd9deab96fa9c8b1e8
ddfef9f9ecb041db92c13efc23a6d71da621b7aa
47142 F20101220_AAAMGI lanahan_b_Page_152.jpg
ed110a19bae9000f3bc10f8cbd970f66
a7df92d66d37ecf8debf7725d2b7c5a80279ac15
90473 F20101220_AAANDB lanahan_b_Page_032.jpg
195175b8173ab9152fd54008721438ea
9212dc16ad50c0896abaf6f31c7a1ea1764bdbb2
86847 F20101220_AAAMTT lanahan_b_Page_174.jpg
efb475c8b2ff9037308ee5b86e031ae6
b3e6a39f7892eebc0b8d566d92b0a292461ccd06
F20101220_AAANQM lanahan_b_Page_136.tif
1ac65c15e0c575c0e99266daccb6570e
e64a9de2d0dce1d09211795631cfe5e17b4e9b33
5266 F20101220_AAAMGJ lanahan_b_Page_161thm.jpg
bc30ab1291c18a57554cfe45bb5c7c83
0c63b6749b4f297203ad822d8c129edb7e9d1f60
85254 F20101220_AAANDC lanahan_b_Page_033.jpg
fd4e4f857bebc3bf7546f462f085748e
4ff40c68b97bad6fb2190774ca468bca7828ad28
90073 F20101220_AAAMTU lanahan_b_Page_153.jp2
30c5c22b1e4ed4c98627ac75c3e0d833
a54bf1c450c51e22368dba509ce91860a56ea445
F20101220_AAANQN lanahan_b_Page_137.tif
db30ac95a7931ec70329e943d4492a7a
239d591ae5a888c33af103b510722adb6166ed02
F20101220_AAAMGK lanahan_b_Page_130.tif
5d29ed1258cd93847bd084e1a38abb81
c2c36bb19a7eae71bcebcbca9a2527701dbe8e10
82644 F20101220_AAANDD lanahan_b_Page_036.jpg
8a1b62c75b701cf5f34ecea024e1f3b8
4da0d82ca29cd8fc5ab7a627b6839dce80c6d45d
50612 F20101220_AAAMTV lanahan_b_Page_039.pro
38848194b9ef3a246e420d9f8e04a65f
809f1c4ba58189827a778c92eb9492a67f896897
F20101220_AAANQO lanahan_b_Page_138.tif
864cc3087c224265f62d2416edebda7e
644635427924f1dde056e0bde63ae7f9444c97d6
25553 F20101220_AAAMGL lanahan_b_Page_085.QC.jpg
792953fdfe7aae5d6771181399891a87
8173c725da65eea373b3200be226833cbc7e54d9
74909 F20101220_AAANDE lanahan_b_Page_037.jpg
44b87385be6fa876cfc757479ab490d8
65740f0a9e700c4de24fc1d4f21736ba972c8f66
2138 F20101220_AAAMTW lanahan_b_Page_162.txt
0a5a325587575885d079ba2fd1cfcbc0
5dab0e0efe1cd8d8a16c18d08be6fa8d51ab7bed
F20101220_AAANQP lanahan_b_Page_141.tif
280fc0b203ef524370bc744194aa5c00
f1c446c174a432d136e3f1715a993e6fec9fc041
83393 F20101220_AAAMGM lanahan_b_Page_072.jpg
edcd37a790c50edc53743c85aad0b732
421727a6ef8f9e4fe8847fd85259a0b0583d1a57
86949 F20101220_AAANDF lanahan_b_Page_040.jpg
1d10a00a3399631ac0a4934388e2ceda
affd3bb4ac8ab7884d0fa72e181aa388ca8881ed
F20101220_AAAMTX lanahan_b_Page_195thm.jpg
9967c31f48d70353daf90c150b2becdd
9498d9c35e12cd75ddceace165fd67f3c8f1b463
F20101220_AAANQQ lanahan_b_Page_143.tif
02017ba9a407d58a605d9a4fd9a08794
451b5b4db04eebca6137ac4107305821e015b6d6
F20101220_AAAMGN lanahan_b_Page_111.tif
2d0a7a53343017bbc9e124de2a0d1424
54f96f188a8bbfc9d808c4d2c5219dfbcc0dc951
82788 F20101220_AAANDG lanahan_b_Page_042.jpg
33dd12c14abc7943744e21a01b9dfff4
5f1cfd0695c9911a5d1c0326954618bb8d49c21e
6134 F20101220_AAAMTY lanahan_b_Page_170thm.jpg
ca3d8fbeed8ebda9aa18f33f58faa8ba
c734a77beaac6afdeac3962b09d55b0cc7f27965
F20101220_AAANQR lanahan_b_Page_144.tif
b8abf9c86333c52f3e36df17a9c932bb
9a0efdeb6e6438ffb57b67ed751d00e422b833e4
74749 F20101220_AAAMGO lanahan_b_Page_231.jpg
2435c723b94377cfc9c6e5a3355d8297
09824266629977b914ac685d2dd092b13255142c
80635 F20101220_AAANDH lanahan_b_Page_043.jpg
a71bcc9b6415caa381a930687f08a118
345155369e9c551b5c0d59ff85182d5605e68954
25270 F20101220_AAAMTZ lanahan_b_Page_195.QC.jpg
3f538310b7eaec751ab9571fad214710
876e3ec347ad9febad676287829888a28304b1be
1872 F20101220_AAAOAA lanahan_b_Page_142.txt
65fe381d620eb4e583907ce1c3be85d1
d5aed4c8644826aee5aad880c4ec2e95dc7e820e
F20101220_AAANQS lanahan_b_Page_145.tif
48513d8792e4455918beb2de7c3a3c68
405d2982ba320e12f0054294bd39193735f631e4
F20101220_AAAMGP lanahan_b_Page_202.tif
32bf4185d6a0f58750fe31b5d648624d
30a692f1d21f53331db12d1ede9c10b9864b811c
84429 F20101220_AAANDI lanahan_b_Page_045.jpg
f9254e3bcda9c4192c5467be7ed4c255
2da3af5dbfbbc62bbd76f6a8e952f2d4e65faf6f
1864 F20101220_AAAOAB lanahan_b_Page_145.txt
5e0414a1e4583146399b718fc2298f61
a3e00e69c71505a522becba6371cf3b06a6312c9
F20101220_AAANQT lanahan_b_Page_147.tif
555f12c80af6aefdd58c16a83bf941b5
5b7c70d195c78a6aee265c33d2ad12cc65bf84e1
F20101220_AAAMGQ lanahan_b_Page_096.tif
ef77772bc71d21d80b35b067f6a6763a
6fb0f73ee572d34fc02ffd2b509f39c1e3577611
82740 F20101220_AAANDJ lanahan_b_Page_048.jpg
8f29145563a1492e1d21cc7266efaf12
3c515426ade711354a967b47260f84b0e2f6e177
2012 F20101220_AAAOAC lanahan_b_Page_147.txt
be426a573540aa0ed0b5854da67fe661
5a9d923c6481c143ab0197ff1c84439ea33bf294
F20101220_AAANQU lanahan_b_Page_148.tif
382462a94fa453b2296cbdf00ebb3f94
eb31cf789808cbab170659a9369758b2d3c456df
124150 F20101220_AAAMGR lanahan_b_Page_235.jp2
854315b355d5313e31505146ee39eafd
ecbd62c5f61271cf7d39a901c78a7420708b38e9
85945 F20101220_AAANDK lanahan_b_Page_049.jpg
02fc58c24a2d39a32ce2ae5b105db6a7
921117721df5460a668c347debb2814a6d97b0b2
1853 F20101220_AAAOAD lanahan_b_Page_148.txt
d2fa87876ffb6f9f5206273e688501dd
0e6be0f15d31f8bec1667b8725f6e991187d3c10
F20101220_AAANQV lanahan_b_Page_150.tif
7d9cde31a3fe2592880d99c1774308c9
1c8bdb69f8181ade5d22af548810ec7eae0c39e3
85157 F20101220_AAAMGS lanahan_b_Page_075.jpg
fbe4c1807b7600a87ff7a1ae8a4cd2f8
746ff115b3ca74f6a81d584353d33c9545473345
88746 F20101220_AAANDL lanahan_b_Page_053.jpg
2dd10bdc50353e08186ce7bf04e97b4d
b295fcf6181e57f0f6466a129c1891efb951e448
1941 F20101220_AAAOAE lanahan_b_Page_151.txt
546cc2d067791b9a0e4b05d60751db4d
68d9c9136d9de0cfe24c3b3568f7bd81406decdf
F20101220_AAANQW lanahan_b_Page_154.tif
29b3bb166a10b90e81532baf79962e02
c2d9c4604291f9dbe09884fbb0552ee347d70d83
53672 F20101220_AAAMGT lanahan_b_Page_127.pro
e458b00ecb8778f6a38bbce7ec5cfcc5
09d214daf10c12ae0a8fd21346872b7e80be1463
84035 F20101220_AAANDM lanahan_b_Page_054.jpg
1821f782a3f7bd4b559ee49e893a6bca
197b74b303b6dcb781f49e02b3d128ecb2d1e59c
1753 F20101220_AAAOAF lanahan_b_Page_153.txt
f249399ea00232d495873a8b22ab3378
acd4d63d6da5efa7b3673d99fd05abd9d50bb195
F20101220_AAANQX lanahan_b_Page_156.tif
f0055f8445cdda4397082875f8b85b48
67824a070682bccb7ed61b86d66ba84295cbbdb3
2125 F20101220_AAAMGU lanahan_b_Page_128.txt
b014be707a13862527d2511152adbee4
650b6c0109a389df0d817d002abf343ddfa1a707
F20101220_AAANDN lanahan_b_Page_056.jpg
8c0fafea4f6e30274527ae06d83cff0c
771604369abd6804b33ed90542db1b95352d23e5
1256 F20101220_AAAOAG lanahan_b_Page_154.txt
29f766bb4dec2a32c100fc622f63c8b2
b415a769ac6e8d42e0c09bccedd450d948f84133
F20101220_AAANQY lanahan_b_Page_157.tif
a764a7a52bda644ece1c72d074052995
e00f6a60587fdd703b91f6978209f7ba5b737dfe
119400 F20101220_AAAMGV lanahan_b_Page_238.jp2
cd0c7272188a8da40ca21185ea2584bd
f895520729850b3e1b3f71d2cbd36b5130d9a508
86886 F20101220_AAANDO lanahan_b_Page_058.jpg
de7e9d5c94e67fad22c40209c54b2d75
34f6803fc040863458f6504b565e5fc6e68eca4c
1814 F20101220_AAAOAH lanahan_b_Page_155.txt
74b8ca7ae318095e60b04c4c9d54f235
2e51d2e24a0bdd3d572226cbf6a9dc0d3219e2a4
F20101220_AAANQZ lanahan_b_Page_158.tif
91cc485d04c5d3e5c53d100128798811
509e64d3bf428feafea51d28e02db410f331c84c
85645 F20101220_AAAMGW lanahan_b_Page_193.jpg
a9cb16a5c779d068c839169142d53217
b820a85647f09802060b6bb5d8de3bfdd6509c74
79063 F20101220_AAANDP lanahan_b_Page_060.jpg
8f58b1e0719500801b1372f1d777a8b0
782497230e7a33bab88b33d5eac1bc1ad843d180
2092 F20101220_AAAOAI lanahan_b_Page_156.txt
65b9a6d63d6ddfe9e99092c79866efaa
f8cd49316aa65947cdf60bef6c06e59afd985f49
5599 F20101220_AAAMGX lanahan_b_Page_010thm.jpg
acd6519ae7612a2a96dae99161976193
25a5e1cdc55ded84ed7f609c58405aae67d2ba44
F20101220_AAAMZA lanahan_b_Page_066.tif
d81fbf9903bbc2c939d2dd970f4380b1
59b07ca67a7cfe9e468af3cfa4ff9bce77fe2530
81453 F20101220_AAANDQ lanahan_b_Page_061.jpg
b773f2d8b634801b646ce0a5ae505a69
56651058900c263564c00f232bd75b3772517529
1919 F20101220_AAAOAJ lanahan_b_Page_158.txt
81c182cf15784dc46b5b62615a4031ac
4d423e1c1be43546385a4c9db90ff03c79ef2e7e
1910 F20101220_AAAMGY lanahan_b_Page_085.txt
9fc6d72e2d856bfe5e8fcff5ee8f6b49
1c63f8572ad9be8b946229f249b2bf5360e253fb
2164 F20101220_AAAMZB lanahan_b_Page_176.txt
d3922af38aea100ba7ff634e552c819c
e36145da4c5734973f399c55f5c5e7f9da97516c
82414 F20101220_AAANDR lanahan_b_Page_062.jpg
0abca3efca6fc807ce08396327cefe95
f0fba5d3d3589a9b99d0549df4d157d6a96957c9
2183 F20101220_AAAOAK lanahan_b_Page_159.txt
d7a8fb2562e8c2097d0bbc68a566dd07
eb02f69289bd3e952b6319b4728c3298c98c4bc7
111636 F20101220_AAAMGZ lanahan_b_Page_127.jp2
020afa664ee6bdb287fc50d2aa87464b
c908525010547028559acf38b7f0013828392b15
53359 F20101220_AAAMZC lanahan_b_Page_067.pro
92868df1aebe6b63b44c7ee055e1eb46
1600b0dd8ea6b3c94e8f902b46df4a5af7e01617
67918 F20101220_AAANDS lanahan_b_Page_065.jpg
08be30f0efa93c4897796f279778c492
9c38559e6f235bb43404fa7c1dccd3f76231c3d7
F20101220_AAAOAL lanahan_b_Page_160.txt
b3330405f40e44b11c126548d4d09d42
417ad3081b6b54fa1a734032a483b524f9fb2e31
52423 F20101220_AAAMZD lanahan_b_Page_050.pro
bf31f223ce339f3f6706c2cb35de8b5c
2c1d32fd8ccbc4ea6e2a8748c0a46e9c5c471b72
81170 F20101220_AAANDT lanahan_b_Page_066.jpg
4e898b60fef32619c85402bd118a280d
e1cc26282124fb4cfc1fb6693bb66a476bce65ae
2073 F20101220_AAAOAM lanahan_b_Page_165.txt
f1006e4a04509c937166ab4c0f1f123c
962b1cd74bcc7825e19cc9bc35e18e1584206551
F20101220_AAAMZE lanahan_b_Page_155.tif
969582e278495696e173f2fdfb60f4c6
7bbcc75885809d8cf650e512b6d9e1365d36e6fd
88577 F20101220_AAANDU lanahan_b_Page_068.jpg
df1ef10691513ec97ecbeaffd25fbe25
c85aa2c770c3b4716ae63393bab912686990e275
1937 F20101220_AAAOAN lanahan_b_Page_166.txt
7a1c1231b961fa98d323e9e04719abae
4c3a649a93c07078b012dce4dc936843bda4cdb9
100562 F20101220_AAAMZF lanahan_b_Page_234.jpg
c4cbee318cee39825dac79803fac1e32
33e1d01fcf5f6643c7ea3e2c2794d1e0d83fb308
84623 F20101220_AAANDV lanahan_b_Page_070.jpg
44c2ff94c009bb55a5a3c3c268b403a2
331c2f042acefc28893fbad45387974602946079
1953 F20101220_AAAOAO lanahan_b_Page_168.txt
5ff326dc42c82effd93435d1a1ab5083
bf199d404fbd99ed1d3d8d1d52b683b506cdb15d
88120 F20101220_AAAMZG lanahan_b_Page_196.jpg
0fd7464498df57acdc42515318c0328a
bb31893caca6aa0b9c7e3f89ce34004f22f2c2a8
80291 F20101220_AAANDW lanahan_b_Page_071.jpg
eafa605881894dba3b9415f4ac333eaf
ebf40b2ef4eecfddbc114f8ee83b48862e1fb44e
F20101220_AAAOAP lanahan_b_Page_172.txt
31040c2059882fad0c427ca8fd8b83ad
1d11dac9678ad9be8ebedb9e28f23301f1b85957
27035 F20101220_AAAMZH lanahan_b_Page_147.QC.jpg
33025f48d8b4eec79f3beb35adec55e6
e246755eeb0dbf8df7c52dfc98a495731d487461
83874 F20101220_AAANDX lanahan_b_Page_073.jpg
41290386f233dbf0fe4841f45a2c157f
23f36dfde41026eefb4dcf2c7fd582e1f97871c8
44970 F20101220_AAANWA lanahan_b_Page_200.pro
8f7c52e190eb49196cba6da5778fe23e
6f7837cf8ae58b893ccb6fc27c3add09ae071baf
2314 F20101220_AAAOAQ lanahan_b_Page_173.txt
28f1e0cbfa5445cb377f24205ab9200f
10846300c24d5c8031b07d97cfe3593027d906b8
6449 F20101220_AAAMZI lanahan_b_Page_106thm.jpg
ba70db13377372f4ba7ec1de2501e138
9185e829fc8dd18f91971adbb7ba6b518402b360
83460 F20101220_AAANDY lanahan_b_Page_074.jpg
8b5dd1af8d3fa2e1affa87fa7505655c
9439389465ead6766effba61f49ef48340dd8959
46243 F20101220_AAANWB lanahan_b_Page_203.pro
f2c56b780e74d1420c37413e79eca590
e20763b9ee0b8ff1c02436e44b62629569f59cb8
2165 F20101220_AAAOAR lanahan_b_Page_174.txt
1e9dcd04339e47fb6fd7baae63e9b7cd
e38c25ef0b4c677f5528ba43dace8e0d87475184
F20101220_AAAMZJ lanahan_b_Page_153.tif
d1960c97fb91fd176292db5e976ce9da
77a7ed133cedc95c44a9a07b4d72eb125c9940c4
49602 F20101220_AAANWC lanahan_b_Page_204.pro
b0db7f9bcb78080e5aedadeccc01f0e3
ad2b9c6a346efae2fadfc0ff48351a98d9535547
2573 F20101220_AAAOAS lanahan_b_Page_178.txt
9594f1d5bf081b6745945879cd764556
7530302150b938458e1acfa018abb9aac53b709a
975 F20101220_AAAMZK lanahan_b_Page_157.txt
7ee175c02ff2df7588a12fb81da6abb0
ec9f684f0e90456281394e21e4e34f68b7b1211f
83352 F20101220_AAANDZ lanahan_b_Page_077.jpg
0314eb7e48e9b49aa036fabde2a71bef
b3c24c8ab1a93398228c9d448a115bcbdabdee81
52276 F20101220_AAANWD lanahan_b_Page_205.pro
cf4b7988c1abab8f6f0bd21bbea62dd0
a7ff5f78a56003889db893c4aa75c16aa766f1cd
F20101220_AAAOAT lanahan_b_Page_179.txt
09985e240577f2a0eefb8eb56b275400
6c52bd84e884ba15c73b06212cd6f8f3167e0515
F20101220_AAAMZL lanahan_b_Page_005.tif
2f38516c44d59d93eaba398ab60fac00
fc0cc45c63027550941bdac098f090849a2e95e2
49531 F20101220_AAANWE lanahan_b_Page_206.pro
080cc4401b85329874ec2de7774cd0cb
59db4d15436eafd751848b1adff9a2fe7e8ecff6
1772 F20101220_AAAOAU lanahan_b_Page_180.txt
ed85e7a260189fb1bfa6a0fc38865022
a70862973d812ad248938803d130470318389337
26188 F20101220_AAAMMA lanahan_b_Page_232.QC.jpg
a19b0baa6102395186eeb81152685592
a75b75aa30e959381f61e9661faff4f6424fff12
F20101220_AAAMZM lanahan_b_Page_234.tif
ebba6d8748c9932575a84beca3305782
398733561d79177a28356a32c4846397d6a2cd50
47530 F20101220_AAANWF lanahan_b_Page_208.pro
5082f8aadfbd4d2b0829705dae6998e6
c12578ba86371c0ca5a9181799261551a6ed8690
121648 F20101220_AAAMMB lanahan_b_Page_239.jp2
a1bf80bb9d0b817995250fff6ea0790b
9378a89bd0c1410f035eb4cf8f538f2dfdc4d3c7
F20101220_AAAMZN lanahan_b_Page_032.tif
3fcb086672f97a465692017cab6436fb
1cb4ce72257910101263aecf0af4da1d32e1ebda
4390 F20101220_AAANWG lanahan_b_Page_209.pro
30af25be80567756a36dfa296b5ca6b2
3c55188906121a8c8b0ce53c9c6b189f6a9c9d53
2026 F20101220_AAAOAV lanahan_b_Page_181.txt
da9fdcd3fed8f55647f23b4572d37a62
34fcb15538cc1da7922b38959b2dcba977df170d
26864 F20101220_AAAMMC lanahan_b_Page_187.QC.jpg
8c3bc72d4b3f7ba30099eb7e7be86f86
879e03a6439ed58d235076db8f562ddd0697a6de
97031 F20101220_AAAMZO lanahan_b_Page_200.jp2
215aa8d57a14887fd5cd4420a92c87b2
b2dbf0a76696ec928f94c017feb265f98930f913
51515 F20101220_AAANWH lanahan_b_Page_212.pro
09ec8423222540fcbcc99e379a29cd4e
4e3ac98f658fae76d13fa0f467ea7305baf0eadb
2054 F20101220_AAAOAW lanahan_b_Page_182.txt
5344ef72056dbeeac14e12962d051ed2
d0fbbd6f28b04e32818bd745d36844be0b09743c
26834 F20101220_AAAMZP lanahan_b_Page_149.QC.jpg
2c6af33a584f8aa03184d7dec87fa824
3674e8453a9ebb1afc81370ab681cfcf6d15cedd
66966 F20101220_AAANWI lanahan_b_Page_213.pro
df13ded5f44e56b1d2f9bb4b11cc8545
d3d1587481fa05288b5a66b930dad59232d20b02
1979 F20101220_AAAOAX lanahan_b_Page_184.txt
9c7af92bb3a8026212c2246e40ec3525
f0c59aa9f7e389e82c4698205785bd09787546a7
1502 F20101220_AAAMMD lanahan_b_Page_210.txt
000b5dffc2eb01d36633f9d7a5037435
b3df299a71840abccae60930b8c9e6ac2567dff4
68779 F20101220_AAANWJ lanahan_b_Page_215.pro
7a47c7316e7ebb7a3e5dd789c650364b
7c8c4a8625a0bb7e59be973d1f9c9738185c31d5
1261 F20101220_AAAOAY lanahan_b_Page_186.txt
c1d235070defdeef69f12ec6c2b991bb
db00eef592fdfa96a52ee66ff33dac3e22bbde83
118047 F20101220_AAAMME lanahan_b_Page_173.jp2
84c8f8fa58c3b3acbf32c4abb369b9d8
12a578c00b35068a5ece03a5d42f98f56bdf8005
6601 F20101220_AAAMZQ lanahan_b_Page_140thm.jpg
b30fa9b07a37369fd041f756abfa1077
7866729df900a78eff614a7b889f2cc3ce13f965
84406 F20101220_AAANWK lanahan_b_Page_221.pro
ccbb015f418c24dbbce0c17c2d6375a4
5cd0d3769f6d1e67a1e743db14c3dd27f8cc0ed4
2068 F20101220_AAAOAZ lanahan_b_Page_188.txt
63e3ba73753f18e27988ed8136712083
e029a80df1437383ac748638b50f572e6bd6c15d
F20101220_AAAMMF lanahan_b_Page_036.tif
db5bc9f146b695a89668eb27527cf782
d691ac2b73cb73eb30af4acf8f51df3bede083ca
25923 F20101220_AAAMZR lanahan_b_Page_007.QC.jpg
53555d09e348dabb4a04d95edb3772b9
bba9b5539a00aeebd6614f4f0a0e307ace7553de
32749 F20101220_AAANWL lanahan_b_Page_222.pro
01642439f29f7648fe8cfaa72c6d0659
f1d05e4c69f0aff101c27fd237ede44a596be7a1
77887 F20101220_AAAMMG lanahan_b_Page_023.jpg
bf782ff74d497f6bcd93c19d55d09a0f
dded9c6399409c12fd64e30eca01a579f5f2978e
107936 F20101220_AAANJA lanahan_b_Page_059.jp2
e46683e20a8ca79b34ada302059fb290
dbf28af5019ffba053bf4aec680435510d91fec4
26238 F20101220_AAAMZS lanahan_b_Page_125.QC.jpg
c8d39708e850e453a4b125a9269cbdc7
de4359adf769eff48cb4774803f5b8127f08dba1
6256 F20101220_AAAMMH lanahan_b_Page_059thm.jpg
b87bc2d29f0e4166c158862e00b1097a
0a4986afcc39c23d1ffc20784bd61641227522a9
103569 F20101220_AAANJB lanahan_b_Page_060.jp2
33d400c5fe0c2337fa2f9b382525bc78
1f2d695187c8b9187f2e28612337b18c4fefc5b4
5466 F20101220_AAAMZT lanahan_b_Page_108thm.jpg
d98b03a979edd092bb1165619293b5f7
36c5ffbfe7849b4ca2df8676d124fdb0be23db34
34615 F20101220_AAANWM lanahan_b_Page_223.pro
07d410daae37f8a519b7e8403d62f904
0e73ea15c8d9f3061a4303ab2a6bb3f7a33e63bd
2278 F20101220_AAAMMI lanahan_b_Page_237.txt
4e4bff54bd1154b0de0d8a6a6167f585
ec2dde830aeb560abaa91f1bae87d46a31fac549
109142 F20101220_AAANJC lanahan_b_Page_062.jp2
a173a9f58b0255ecc98595b887bb1d49
73f8479bbcd259f63153c2da34293cd63e26e637
105730 F20101220_AAAMZU lanahan_b_Page_103.jp2
74b1435ec61ff6e0fcb04692bfe3fa27
f0e26d9054f35ee5d7e2549efdf0cf1b584490ac
38572 F20101220_AAANWN lanahan_b_Page_226.pro
94a6aec0245e72a1db3b7d435d539a19
de60ad943743a568e1862bf4b413252db50e7978
119401 F20101220_AAAMMJ lanahan_b_Page_007.jpg
7b1958ca6354366a902fb35c85bad7fe
dbb3b9eb1175cd04cc40a7faa03c35d3f2608cd4
108319 F20101220_AAANJD lanahan_b_Page_063.jp2
4141e46023400a98f2c1e8067722bcfe
043d77dba2477212ff39fc22a6a79d597810fd8d
1774 F20101220_AAAMZV lanahan_b_Page_037.txt
c422ea1e821d1eb64c9646ee1d05b0cb
0e4407269bfda64d48c356f9bd1256dcc5d85285
43464 F20101220_AAANWO lanahan_b_Page_229.pro
17c64bc6550e9485c2207d7cd7d4480c
9144e81cb8ade6b242e274787fe043aa922086e7
6216 F20101220_AAAMMK lanahan_b_Page_142thm.jpg
9bcc713e437319bd5a8cacb51f85aeb3
bbbd50c14d5f7abee43d7aefceb7919776ff92fd
83961 F20101220_AAANJE lanahan_b_Page_064.jp2
fcac213c73f516aad768d8519271715a
f6134214a7de6948578210c34dc2b2c5e46b5bda
22080 F20101220_AAAMZW lanahan_b_Page_132.QC.jpg
7c853cfd1471d6ea4ca35f8e32708a93
fbe1affb9c81a2c03889605f1efb5742457d1e50
16347 F20101220_AAANWP lanahan_b_Page_230.pro
bb78dcce7ad5c2e1551533978a628cc3
3eabcffad5705cd1b31b8762dc8f533afbc55d9c
114923 F20101220_AAAMML lanahan_b_Page_050.jp2
732a74ae6abb1b0e819949cf01a90d06
26c186b6fb239a45b2833add33626ddffbb64f5d
89809 F20101220_AAANJF lanahan_b_Page_065.jp2
7777147ec46f21aec002ec35b5b51142
9898db894830b2baf0a3ce0c3adaf5a3821094d1
2021 F20101220_AAAMZX lanahan_b_Page_198.txt
7cdbfcd3abd0412479aaad1b39eb5ce5
f42be7dbe80623ddaf1b7af90607efeb6bdd2393
55568 F20101220_AAANWQ lanahan_b_Page_232.pro
532b8678dcefc313ad99b40bde2e1773
bdf03b269360bd8d0cf036b45ed80f884e91ad52
1051985 F20101220_AAAMMM lanahan_b_Page_007.jp2
12335c1a028d809a3d5604dabd8b2a5b
ede6f585010c3e019bcdbe668618b43694659af1
113703 F20101220_AAANJG lanahan_b_Page_067.jp2
25d947e5e2f87cba90124434e3577d3f
fcd4c03e41585cb36d4f5ae7cb420ba4083d5e26
81163 F20101220_AAAMZY lanahan_b_Page_136.jpg
c0835050a3934d64d7a930d67c5fa73f
4aae7bbf7b68706c523e36626f62c19120162634
56623 F20101220_AAANWR lanahan_b_Page_235.pro
5ed44d29acdb44a855e5e8c2e5468547
91c91b33222979ad8c32f3ba1ecbc18d4b9cc453
6634 F20101220_AAAMMN lanahan_b_Page_017thm.jpg
a95de4347741db25c4250ea972cca629
e32b617f82ebc7ed89e1c8418efea4e26f8e1b70
110096 F20101220_AAANJH lanahan_b_Page_070.jp2
f7090dccaa912aeb83517790b09bea2d
382591f73b10d5a64102cfbef57936dfbf2d6a70
5843 F20101220_AAAMZZ lanahan_b_Page_208thm.jpg
c3ec565bb42d7fb82a13db848efb9e91
2d0c8e0744020eb7788503b4171a7c0697a52ef6
6013 F20101220_AAAOGA lanahan_b_Page_007thm.jpg
49262650192b92266d1033c84ed998d7
bbc8fd3eb56aa2e54d8b8e7ee4b2a46244d3f733
55383 F20101220_AAANWS lanahan_b_Page_237.pro
c35e863f5e3afe345da8e83f5af50191
4e3891aca24738564678ec2d5503fec242554f10
50643 F20101220_AAAMMO lanahan_b_Page_098.pro
9d38ace977db3c35efa572b49a900e84
01bf564f2cfeffbe1666b2c779ed77a74ab2c6da
105832 F20101220_AAANJI lanahan_b_Page_071.jp2
45e862ecf99eaf2a186502619173330c
bf77aeb32c3b864ccdfed644f9ad3f9e9403d49d
28895 F20101220_AAAOGB lanahan_b_Page_008.QC.jpg
7d3fda9b964ed86e1bf139bd63cbb594
617fabbd5ca32d19f3bfe8ea89ec8f4a2291769e
54183 F20101220_AAANWT lanahan_b_Page_238.pro
bb50d42c5d38aa0692960b93bb9f30ff
cca8f89aa400023a6bdf4b792a6ff1f0ceecf9d9
26814 F20101220_AAAMMP lanahan_b_Page_067.QC.jpg
861300d193ad513cc5cd22a2cf27d89e
0b8a0bf0eade7b3cfa6fcd937ae11551fcfc2c26
109759 F20101220_AAANJJ lanahan_b_Page_072.jp2
d81361131b1516c6f15a66b6df9fbc23
76552b00624bcd70e1667a8581b264b38b2fd0b6
6264 F20101220_AAAOGC lanahan_b_Page_008thm.jpg
09b2db6529aa56577c2f6371a3b51a28
12984cac2cb5867e1703231cbbef152cc2475ff7
63557 F20101220_AAANWU lanahan_b_Page_240.pro
16d1c144e97a3a0f30d151b1419276cf
a0952fa7a75a00ac5e76b640e83eeae0457e4270
87123 F20101220_AAAMMQ lanahan_b_Page_067.jpg
3f103229c9f35419d4dc7cc474aa9e98
6e6a68ffb82ca661f3283839a5bfd3adb08b7f2a
108771 F20101220_AAANJK lanahan_b_Page_078.jp2
d890a70246cbd375704680470c5deabe
5491f7952606dcc11d684362ef366ca58357637e
3375 F20101220_AAAOGD lanahan_b_Page_011thm.jpg
27787ab6ae9a0d71ac6186b7641bfe6a
a45c5f8e50b0a27f26cbc92eb39335c5b9b56e4e
35346 F20101220_AAANWV lanahan_b_Page_241.pro
37865cfcfa0bf6a2f2de585bb01fd23b
7671ee600946c9700637dd28423a974bcb5b1219
77348 F20101220_AAAMMR lanahan_b_Page_142.jpg
b666a5b37eae708adfdc45b48c20bf3d
55f370fb848f0029530e8fcad42d31b3f62e5793
108551 F20101220_AAANJL lanahan_b_Page_079.jp2
7afafe39526eb805f118794c67e6275d
dcfa796ebb91981f8fdee3fd61915d1eed23c4d3
19038 F20101220_AAAOGE lanahan_b_Page_012.QC.jpg
17ff84bcafdcc788f613a85001f32867
ec11608fc889eab0c31416164d88d767ae876ccc
21236 F20101220_AAANWW lanahan_b_Page_242.pro
1c07e2f3f6a629e9e835cb87c71b66a5
7315fcbca6dfc143c18e19f859830d79aebc9a18
117041 F20101220_AAAMMS lanahan_b_Page_088.jp2
b3990d69440888b26e758b649b96f885
423f6866d9c40f04122ade2504d4b798352dcc09
103658 F20101220_AAANJM lanahan_b_Page_080.jp2
1d1b5a8212919a206847647bca088035
b12afd238bbfe4e5c4698af6f65c5d16334797cf
4517 F20101220_AAAOGF lanahan_b_Page_013thm.jpg
2c939fc78a4ea57e3294e36e0fbd9fbb
886f8c0b75f5fcc4b08ed01b2756c7078c601206
543 F20101220_AAANWX lanahan_b_Page_001.txt
1de4c933599e4d631af931c22b0ae53a
ee606a06939ba27822d0942d16438564e93f85a6
49802 F20101220_AAAMMT lanahan_b_Page_143.pro
649cdea8a505b5d80431fb6eefb8e2a1
af268fd7564c01538346c22944b552ee5a8875eb
111564 F20101220_AAANJN lanahan_b_Page_081.jp2
abda19a1f8ffaf59c72a16a6777a2027
da0ba57b27631cabece7335ca7ef00847aef0cad
23616 F20101220_AAAOGG lanahan_b_Page_016.QC.jpg
6b3236afa96ebf92be6651108384f064
64e70d3799635b38704bf0bd29a7af85368f463f
113 F20101220_AAANWY lanahan_b_Page_002.txt
fb2a5e8ebc7f2570e333093d93d08fdb
024baa3530edb63a84ecb9f7e864be7f0363e91e
24734 F20101220_AAAMMU lanahan_b_Page_201.QC.jpg
4c0e576d47bd524062e82bec037436bb
d9a6e04c8fbb98965c6443c1ac99b11e0526a090
99566 F20101220_AAANJO lanahan_b_Page_082.jp2
ba90420fec48c824b713df353ef53ff7
e6de0ef8f2097e7460332a20f00b5225c4980671
6074 F20101220_AAAOGH lanahan_b_Page_018thm.jpg
5d743cb902f7e160e1810b4b8a6d3845
ab216b9209a1cb607d2b32933b0f55e6b51a667b
207 F20101220_AAANWZ lanahan_b_Page_003.txt
0b0f348a837f4e3a6ee3ee0bb992dd8d
7e0cc207fd96059afd60d4ecfb05474f8222eedd
52387 F20101220_AAAMMV lanahan_b_Page_170.pro
756a567e5b5fbf3aad7b2330b9341b79
f236fc33da127e6763cb6dc7cc521e4be4ac9132
98906 F20101220_AAANJP lanahan_b_Page_083.jp2
345dfe8477dc0e0b38c6d6bffe4259c3
53df744b61317f31f494030220fb1b6d520bf5cd
25573 F20101220_AAAOGI lanahan_b_Page_019.QC.jpg
949e7a49832370a24a3647bbcb0cfda8
da4fcf7867680b092548567a6acd8a15659e9069
27989 F20101220_AAAMMW lanahan_b_Page_105.QC.jpg
c7b22cae1874ea204bc579e39f18bd48
f58dc3586c6c81dc5f5baf89d6ee2362048cb786
103068 F20101220_AAANJQ lanahan_b_Page_084.jp2
165adaabf5b9bc6a6f0dfdedd41a685e
8b9c772c05e2b3cc054e53b9d89f369be89d3c86
24875 F20101220_AAAOGJ lanahan_b_Page_020.QC.jpg
5ba15f0606d007e8c81cfd5c91ee5d68
41dbd0d7bcfea2001dcbe85729d94476d0df3088
F20101220_AAAMMX lanahan_b_Page_100.txt
6bc9fee2cbf1557a3741b32f125f6b4d
784c19dabfca9ffab1b0c068fb9021153784dcc9
105318 F20101220_AAANJR lanahan_b_Page_085.jp2
09c1d675c4febbf485da5c091008f019
5127ba05e0e3215382a973933bc17c00987605be
25074 F20101220_AAAOGK lanahan_b_Page_021.QC.jpg
f5e9da204917d3413937160845c53d3c
c1b48ff26019226debde9701bf29ed8cbbe2e4ac
5915 F20101220_AAAMMY lanahan_b_Page_203thm.jpg
8f223f36adcd99a5a728b873fcb2aafd
b041db4c2c09fff974d5f0a2cb00b3238c218907
115530 F20101220_AAANJS lanahan_b_Page_090.jp2
e9ef97dedf2295f9e4aef9d8a064cf33
0ddd934c5632336ab4ebfffe5e1e72cfdb7b0f1f
24518 F20101220_AAAOGL lanahan_b_Page_022.QC.jpg
bded679c29fb8ef2bea78800186e30ed
f7bd0b1ab67a4200313f44b83f6cc8a82711e97a
77614 F20101220_AAAMMZ lanahan_b_Page_210.jp2
5be19621752f8f8a126549404861c651
eda05add94bae6fe1fddfe41b279877116858905
108299 F20101220_AAANJT lanahan_b_Page_093.jp2
188dc9cfd348b895b70e171074a1b2ff
822d3698c2154514f97dc02d1f6219fdca68209a
24202 F20101220_AAAOGM lanahan_b_Page_023.QC.jpg
4c8551cd2f3a1e0ecc71c2a8b9cc8b2a
8f3e32798c2b267cff23b9aaaf50402bd974f43d
103387 F20101220_AAANJU lanahan_b_Page_094.jp2
728f16ef619f58a79c0c24fe87fe72cc
f4e8b2df6e6b92f409b1066db593b925fd5ae034
25629 F20101220_AAAOGN lanahan_b_Page_024.QC.jpg
27ccc6e1dcb19a6ecf38a09e2ae25fdd
4785a2cbc59cd4f6d01e8d694e020132c9da7c91
109903 F20101220_AAANJV lanahan_b_Page_095.jp2
b41bc97c45884dc6abf7909e5ffb0ced
82b94b6016c3697fcd7d4d03144ac03920449d04
22122 F20101220_AAAOGO lanahan_b_Page_027.QC.jpg
4b036f86c3a076f652e07ec958f99a96
55ba88b3ee4bffa60f6a2ea2972fe78fc304b72d
113024 F20101220_AAANJW lanahan_b_Page_096.jp2
3a66f016561b21e79dd1bb8ff80b06de
ffcaf7f0a2bb262ad7e82c02053b710b04ff29e9
26649 F20101220_AAAOGP lanahan_b_Page_029.QC.jpg
2ec23f6d1760e62499dd84f016d2be3b
7d8b3c212675e9ec00b30f1a51911e4b4a4ed88f
107857 F20101220_AAANJX lanahan_b_Page_097.jp2
b921d2458f1ef5ef1a0c665c1f58a880
9b7a6c255f59121eee10e66f1691bfaef240a969
26886 F20101220_AAAOGQ lanahan_b_Page_033.QC.jpg
4549ac1bcba163864f2f117affe5b4f2
3e916ea99c932026e8b2fc90b6a6c19a79868de0
111887 F20101220_AAANJY lanahan_b_Page_099.jp2
8604547906d72737a28379591312a39a
666afed8c0a93f1a26df1c6ea851fbfaa2886c8b
23498 F20101220_AAAOGR lanahan_b_Page_037.QC.jpg
c3484c570703c37ae397c0bc37abd688
b97b88dae47200e1759891f12d2ca74b2b49bce5
113546 F20101220_AAANJZ lanahan_b_Page_101.jp2
81d83d9aa202dadf2fc79420d61c8b0c
6184bed366ad43b40e19d80817b838b94ab7958f
5674 F20101220_AAAOGS lanahan_b_Page_037thm.jpg
ba55a0b23cf7090b6a1d7eb3d1e81715
f7f386a9d969c544b9fa4a29d9d9932c059872d7
5905 F20101220_AAAOGT lanahan_b_Page_039thm.jpg
2881f65a6a335faa60fb9e67d53f2dbb
de57c431a5c564a7b106ede2cccded13744dc3be
6316 F20101220_AAAOGU lanahan_b_Page_041thm.jpg
24fb7582f953cae8d1fed2aaa01da729
d2e997614960b235335075f16918817e4c55b7c9
82672 F20101220_AAAMSA lanahan_b_Page_095.jpg
8878c5d90e087bd9363cd2adf33925ec
3d55e29c6dd8d8eae7800a9756f67e518053ea12
25569 F20101220_AAAOGV lanahan_b_Page_042.QC.jpg
4d9b09be16158ce30f44fec8f4febc2b
6ebabdd19fb7b4466104f83c418974bf08ffb02d
2081 F20101220_AAAMSB lanahan_b_Page_047.txt
b86906715bdb8b8d99e78c7af5717e37
ecee94d7e9949851d001140a0ff6c8b83b3e2c5f
6125 F20101220_AAAOGW lanahan_b_Page_042thm.jpg
e87981cbfa466df42c5f3acf20fdd36b
02b0016bfb5fa54aed998dec44bce4b1c3dab0be
24114 F20101220_AAAMSC lanahan_b_Page_148.QC.jpg
a5b14556c5a97b63f291b0431055ed0f
0cebdfdc684e62333718c1fbcfa2e768c5852f91
5814 F20101220_AAAOGX lanahan_b_Page_043thm.jpg
a9ffc7aa783ca4a9f3cd2c1e2c26ea99
8b4203a11b7ae2aadb95e35d0a071d95222fbf86
26220 F20101220_AAAMSD lanahan_b_Page_185.QC.jpg
a11f9fe46914793dab6254c673911397
911d62e922f676ada9ea252b737c92e54f95806a
26994 F20101220_AAAOGY lanahan_b_Page_044.QC.jpg
25ae6deae25cb14cc114fcf740a3a52c
389b05acc9cf5f1fd9176a0f64b20f75e576d82e
28684 F20101220_AAAMSE lanahan_b_Page_119.QC.jpg
71b7098e62c5ed57b2b1f31fdd5ef3f6
faae9d596bc131e6bdd7d62a9a32897293c7d8fc
26751 F20101220_AAAOGZ lanahan_b_Page_046.QC.jpg
956b66c690d580a3e75eb9cd45cc8f27
b6bbb74c6b2dc432b7a311baf7a133999c826141
6217 F20101220_AAAMSF lanahan_b_Page_030thm.jpg
5b300d887a062b25bd880c7da0602417
549931ee146af84b608921bb6efcc5bc9f5a8f57
65569 F20101220_AAAMSG lanahan_b_Page_217.pro
57f7e5030a5b59c4f731cfa08ff28f0b
d137c26c7285697c1d75f4f2543632c049ec16fd
F20101220_AAANPA lanahan_b_Page_075.tif
7cd7e465853b5b0e82e849ec6ffa8e8f
19a662e288ad6ce2309eeef01b7839523486e4c3
27929 F20101220_AAAMSH lanahan_b_Page_001.jpg
862f0d75205ee57d5ab2cd4a885f468e
e451b681165b8ee36d14fbf9ff9c968aa603de26
F20101220_AAANPB lanahan_b_Page_076.tif
19c31dbdea97d55f3fd832a81e0f6120
a1def1df549afda4630c310f3f022fe1ca73c9de
27625 F20101220_AAAMSI lanahan_b_Page_117.QC.jpg
f52c63aeb48d1c6b701c8a002f7da378
01034884e4efcc13aa7e1f62b65a455eb10c3985
F20101220_AAANPC lanahan_b_Page_077.tif
f298a996eb14ed042c3ddcbab59ff1e4
5fd6a4b83e3c84bb6a45ba55a354a10b08d17bac
2337 F20101220_AAAMSJ lanahan_b_Page_230thm.jpg
bdb30b3f8001151bbd4368c74c0fccab
4889fdd3b03b924fa0b8dff8a70f54f79530d621
F20101220_AAANPD lanahan_b_Page_078.tif
41e7679c6c0353fb6b3c073b50cbf5b1
fc30d7cdc8de9e27ea59310f934dbfff1346aca0
2086 F20101220_AAAMSK lanahan_b_Page_067.txt
fd1fc765e9e45656530b746e3873e900
a3a4ead5c053a7008fa254cc8be08d4bd2ad074d
F20101220_AAANPE lanahan_b_Page_079.tif
01e21b503ce0b18afa250cf6aad3f6e7
4a4ee347b64289f77d7b565bdca4721117346bdc
67964 F20101220_AAAMFA lanahan_b_Page_222.jpg
8ab6e8178800cf0725d1c2d2b37ec458
084d1b465e4c8cad927676609db667bb2709c460
2168 F20101220_AAAMSL lanahan_b_Page_090.txt
5243cd6049b5d3398e65cfce2b58e727
4b3ca51a730e7f5091920b1f277d2e90b7d4c1b5
F20101220_AAAMFB lanahan_b_Page_225.tif
e738f784ab4c4993d2c2ccf1760ac480
59e09c96c80153c67e89c61819a8a17bbbf2c3f3
115520 F20101220_AAAMSM lanahan_b_Page_068.jp2
ca39e6ae2ca72232150334799723e94e
b62cc834a727bdc3764ac9ab05816ecab2827041
F20101220_AAANPF lanahan_b_Page_080.tif
4a19e752b3787a732a2149e0d155e708
98999ceed7ddae5dd6a4bda9345de0daacc7ed83
5194 F20101220_AAAOMA lanahan_b_Page_220thm.jpg
f4b69bf9400d9774486907a5ce79322c
88aaf01fe871ccbbcaff9d5a21de5401aadf2424
55589 F20101220_AAAMFC lanahan_b_Page_140.pro
cbbce7a369b73bc3d010389806df9802
4243f74833e30ec65749e2e1e300ef39d309b53e
1989 F20101220_AAAMSN lanahan_b_Page_031.txt
86847975701d38061507d5d1649c39e1
19906f7a3b94c77d97422871c6336d2831c96a08
F20101220_AAANPG lanahan_b_Page_081.tif
3869d952a5b9f76cda7efe32b10c8155
0e01bf3904ef7cc1f3bc9c19ff38781a85e71088
2007 F20101220_AAAMFD lanahan_b_Page_211.txt
6eacb2a744395da594e0351235438e60
ef36c8ed6246b5e857575dca823efb23567782ea
89475 F20101220_AAAMSO lanahan_b_Page_105.jpg
fb17ec9e76856fc46debffd73416e7a2
750d189e8ceb9be84128deaeb5947367f40486c6
F20101220_AAANPH lanahan_b_Page_083.tif
b0a6ec17c860ffd38bcf36151762e805
d51300b48e7f5dfb15740bf07a97c6e9420389e5
21888 F20101220_AAAOMB lanahan_b_Page_222.QC.jpg
c280a74923b846be5e17187c0767a4b9
e9288b3f242e9537732572250a77bf05ee283cd0
88064 F20101220_AAAMFE lanahan_b_Page_140.jpg
783f6c3bf78905effd2d03cf8db78ce4
625713893a58915506e73eb669561401191aefa3
F20101220_AAAMSP lanahan_b_Page_058.txt
3687459a5a4f0c8e692f17f4d282938a
2962ef54f44802a6495d51a12b1c07a4165a4743
F20101220_AAANPI lanahan_b_Page_084.tif
859b4315927fa92d0b4cf5572431503d
84cf7be568c63071200972ec408d21b766a96d9d
5839 F20101220_AAAOMC lanahan_b_Page_222thm.jpg
ff9601c50b7d46114e93cb19b113da04
3b8b10e5cddc80727a736933844afb927cb4037c
6100 F20101220_AAAMFF lanahan_b_Page_038thm.jpg
5cd4588c32ef942427bd9ab623d6e0aa
c865719056a4b06c75f4c56c0e00c0ef9887f833
F20101220_AAAMSQ lanahan_b_Page_141.txt
82f719d283740a37da026bc29781bd90
251d1ab8a1acc64a2f4267c1cda6ab5e9d8a57f1
F20101220_AAANPJ lanahan_b_Page_085.tif
851d2847652ff9fe3ea7033f58a203a6
03fdca9b10e01d454a493f1a699701f26c1e8edc
5659 F20101220_AAAOMD lanahan_b_Page_229thm.jpg
1ca58e7bed873262b4f438fcea793965
bf68f7228d04475bb59a5971444c16284a2a8842
2087 F20101220_AAAMFG lanahan_b_Page_075.txt
9ae9fd7fcc426ba5a80ea8dd6e718881
f5cbdbee3330405ab4ed6de9f28f5d3e05d03c8c
2048 F20101220_AAAMSR lanahan_b_Page_041.txt
f4152a95da3570a7517df12b47c322f3
95f41fab865bd92945b852659bce6f02160c6567
F20101220_AAANPK lanahan_b_Page_086.tif
0d10d40977df908507c13040c0a997df
b393bed9f397ba5b567fce287cb92539fe33db67
6574 F20101220_AAAOME lanahan_b_Page_232thm.jpg
161f98a71e90c066f05e242f8b733af7
5b034a19b5f8c87e51997eb0c5c2d9135a93fe9b
110892 F20101220_AAAMFH lanahan_b_Page_075.jp2
bf5e625b51c426beb53ce940c6a00bb9
fba0f3eca7fb96c263642670a39e4e279b7e6b86
F20101220_AAANCA lanahan_b_Page_162.tif
38ba8561bcb300e7fcf50170a7ffdb80
706c12e30814c2d8c2975dbf7c4546aedd84c39c
85306 F20101220_AAAMSS lanahan_b_Page_177.jpg
030475e357d4dc62daaf0d4bc5dcdc7b
c0f853340f4b950e5e989cbc37410ea74df20886
F20101220_AAANPL lanahan_b_Page_087.tif
2a8d463d7ba268d7d7d4903d410cf940
7928f5fe977ec0f2976c469092afe0fe3b2cbbcc
27171 F20101220_AAAOMF lanahan_b_Page_233.QC.jpg
a4ecb6d593cbaee32f872327b50926cb
39c8b750bb32b1149a5080f5032e018ff29d01d1
F20101220_AAAMFI lanahan_b_Page_017.tif
c68420dddfe19b3c518566b145c4782a
444a95197c17e6e3dc480702a3c0123b746a6fbb
2027 F20101220_AAANCB lanahan_b_Page_124.txt
c736ddf24d1ca6ba9ac8520e57c60a08
82a0459413fe4b615bc82c9f0d3bc86a46393549
6220 F20101220_AAAMST lanahan_b_Page_207thm.jpg
27f4972dc5815eb2aa436c0c3d67c268
e52c9bd06d88f72461ca27eb34fab1174920012a
F20101220_AAANPM lanahan_b_Page_088.tif
976c8c6733f0471b75b59cd702d2a1ed
5bd7c1d423ba0a08c4511f28fa5122c738b88e03
26181 F20101220_AAAOMG lanahan_b_Page_235.QC.jpg
bb0caa771cba687e7a44d5a586bcd2ab
f71676869fabd341b120774ae74a12db1b268c60
84885 F20101220_AAAMFJ lanahan_b_Page_181.jpg
64b32cf737d970908cb3ed9323b9bd13
4c49f2b8734cf24e5184c1e135ea149ba8efd993
F20101220_AAANCC lanahan_b_Page_082.tif
af2a8c78846675b57d631f43c79e314f
58534ecdaa4fd7c0a5f19eb593ec5022d43be62f
26510 F20101220_AAAMSU lanahan_b_Page_018.QC.jpg
6e35ea6af38ddf4cb5788f4703c0a85a
4fae70f3af049523522d0376c000b83645ff9039
F20101220_AAANPN lanahan_b_Page_089.tif
4dd95111009f91dc4a58f58a3680fbe2
a913213523d1282316eb4b788566f2e569200501
6391 F20101220_AAAOMH lanahan_b_Page_235thm.jpg
2c60fa6489da949e72be6571f6e6bb09
ec34b5aac716054120573bd9b53a64ba167c0e65
F20101220_AAAMFK lanahan_b_Page_137.txt
27cb8ccf2bb6aaf31b53ea53a576069d
3cc484e7adae8b007d3e0a82e5cfd38bd0819b36
61347 F20101220_AAANCD lanahan_b_Page_227.jpg
f4acd027a515a65e392f5d57c4e1a840
d0b2e9e28705a85f86dbd052b768d03172b3e9fe
4933 F20101220_AAAMSV lanahan_b_Page_179thm.jpg
495e5e9a0b2ef89917dbeae3572811f3
098cd7f8aa9a6362c3bc444a8a80bfb5c7b743af
F20101220_AAANPO lanahan_b_Page_090.tif
702741377cc89b16de8f4d57782ff685
6a3711a66e5af3843ebc7a5392f2b03e6157abf4
25343 F20101220_AAAOMI lanahan_b_Page_236.QC.jpg
0a8978c9f1ef96ee928cb0074fbcf089
e07fba5726a20bb40c53fad7d10a301575afa34c
80652 F20101220_AAAMFL lanahan_b_Page_086.jpg
26162233f5a65508eb4778e19c62db98
59f8c424f1846046c81f476c23648d8020bdeb26
110884 F20101220_AAANCE lanahan_b_Page_215.jpg
bd0b5c80ea1b91c6d9358aa96e6b1e07
f9f1db3a2f4ac7f82a543e3e9f75ca1813d3864d
53216 F20101220_AAAMSW lanahan_b_Page_047.pro
5be2426130cde320b30264d416934ef8
8e43df1f5e55aa0d6be9bdcbdb942091ee907229
F20101220_AAANPP lanahan_b_Page_091.tif
e74560ad8ae5ca010915fdc88da2d850
40a57d02519ba659eda6a54d2bf2ce8de0be28f9
6240 F20101220_AAAOMJ lanahan_b_Page_236thm.jpg
a0528bf3a4ee62471c8d07e8e735ebd4
23b7a9cf383d472f3dd947036762d95fbf5bd278
F20101220_AAAMFM lanahan_b_Page_049.tif
460c05a5dcd8c14a4a94783e0d761b99
4d07c838771ffb601de6745a96e7ee9e45225e1a
F20101220_AAANCF lanahan_b_Page_187.tif
68dbcd57983492414f4da0515257148c
b6cabcff3ad7222643f07b1471eb007e39cb4ac7
2395 F20101220_AAAMSX lanahan_b_Page_167.txt
3b9558be1222ed4dc952a0cf6151e188
aeb19f9dcfbd6e962c0bc1232f834249d532a0e3
F20101220_AAANPQ lanahan_b_Page_093.tif
cb875837312fae6bf1382ccaba88b134
763991fa17671acb3217f56150fd15bbc7440a59
25099 F20101220_AAAOMK lanahan_b_Page_238.QC.jpg
649d6700d0737ba179446b8592644871
029d80a77473c53f89bcb818dc224693b6b3cbc4
24754 F20101220_AAAMFN lanahan_b_Page_057.QC.jpg
4009bf4a6912b7b7b829afe69d1776dd
c27038deed33863c62c424f52f167f50ef29caac
F20101220_AAANCG lanahan_b_Page_041.tif
d668d21188d1562ceca3b1c5aed762d1
28cd1a79375ef165ba715a6a33d7757262baf08e
111718 F20101220_AAAMSY lanahan_b_Page_188.jp2
ce1ffed36696d668e9d98cdd8f83ab5a
f04d76a1cfcebb72d1a162130d7bca8499401921
F20101220_AAANPR lanahan_b_Page_094.tif
40f240811ab43fb7eb5d09d8771b4c26
5fbfa6bceecf61f910c2fa52f24d6d4cb29f034d
6287 F20101220_AAAOML lanahan_b_Page_239thm.jpg
7920b288027c98bb5fc93dbeeb8242c6
6958666fdaebe3281f28111271ab4446a5e4ffc0
F20101220_AAAMFO lanahan_b_Page_196.tif
bd6cedd9fc7beaf27c7daf8e482e9996
85b3c569598a8dac2880f60f0295fe5e2db9e480
6322 F20101220_AAANCH lanahan_b_Page_143thm.jpg
fde7e5d72b1ed92c0cf670f1cfc7e0c1
732be97d1dd0092015191da2e1d97c27a4dd4db7
102342 F20101220_AAAMSZ lanahan_b_Page_203.jp2
a584884d40dbb0986687f99744360509
aff237fca0b4c4ed1bf2eec904fdcf4be5edfca6
F20101220_AAANPS lanahan_b_Page_095.tif
146f050b625fb93aead3c62fc6da1ff5
056f128ed3f664a2d7b6d2cb6a7d184519edc1ee
3156 F20101220_AAAOMM lanahan_b_Page_242thm.jpg
a03c26cda29133c543f1e9b220890b9c
4e65ff5a1b2dce4cd7848a8cac2724df30ba8dbc
1732 F20101220_AAAMFP lanahan_b_Page_139.txt
47dc6facd1f319465a0df477f32df1db
41710ab00e41fbcbd5a372bab3faf5fe6de331fd
F20101220_AAANCI lanahan_b_Page_089.txt
6b316a20b262c4a2a9051cfbc5a474cd
96d3a6f5c8900fd02e123a956301e432a6ae026a
F20101220_AAANPT lanahan_b_Page_098.tif
5689295b7cba33c5758d86f785de490e
1f57853b5ca0d60522917e5b4a81a9aa537f701f
84173 F20101220_AAAMFQ lanahan_b_Page_034.jpg
82a5c44f154bbed28a0130aeaba5a430
69bc35be9bb383ecd0699ce6635d0b01053a6d7b
109760 F20101220_AAANCJ lanahan_b_Page_098.jp2
912c6561668aff4a497cf454c71542c3
dc4c14910a29f20f6db88d4b1ca6816a6af3c4fa
F20101220_AAANPU lanahan_b_Page_099.tif
d1c7f7bf5bb90db1e56c8fa229f32b6e
ff1f210aa23462b5a5bed287221c2b72d4ddd2e9
915925 F20101220_AAAMFR lanahan_b_Page_191.jp2
ea7fc1c910e8536bda12a77e6c7c716f
07f0cf308aaa141d91aeb89ab22c74cb8ef61f10
27019 F20101220_AAANCK lanahan_b_Page_051.QC.jpg
8091340b988904b198741ea7e384236e
2ee7e7f824a4f69e38a915a55a2755215badd0a9
F20101220_AAANPV lanahan_b_Page_102.tif
8dfcbf43bef4e4be565729f4ff77339e
bfaec4eabb93402ac1151477c8d110d56f75fc42
107180 F20101220_AAAMFS lanahan_b_Page_017.jpg
df1a2393748ba6fdcc6b27cb1deaca87
936317cb80628ab8e9d9b0326c229c1a4c8908d1
49103 F20101220_AAANCL lanahan_b_Page_166.pro
1ddd79c105579bcbc86ae0fb67b9a14c
ae74c7d7d915e059437140a5f184033444c9187a
F20101220_AAANPW lanahan_b_Page_103.tif
5968b6e89a52fa212095988422c22291
f3bcd2718e5a9e2234e0115312856324a5fdac09
1981 F20101220_AAAMFT lanahan_b_Page_063.txt
b1ada3df935ba4c5d0f2ca923921ba22
56ac998416c679bad594fdf79fa662dffc1f1951
278800 F20101220_AAANCM UFE0015440_00001.mets FULL
a90f9e255179625f4ce374a2b319a903
84a86e23d3e055469989d2ef0b69445ba2d05d82
F20101220_AAANPX lanahan_b_Page_107.tif
36fb61ce8194373548696dda66e77da2
f8859fcc006b0a9b9a2d1b5d100cde7b841dbe4b
21600 F20101220_AAAMFU lanahan_b_Page_004.QC.jpg
e610a16ccca657573baf429136b359ea
f96718a0102b0a1e180b47fc48c7130c76ecd66c
F20101220_AAANPY lanahan_b_Page_110.tif
c072396101e9091ef8ed5eef91a7bc3b
8a8a3eee1b7499a1753054dc23b6b284d8c72ca9
1805 F20101220_AAAMFV lanahan_b_Page_164.txt
22c39b8aace7e5edf712aa57f3cd700f
a5f36c0a2a7473016e9e4c8b5c59af97c1ed9f45
F20101220_AAANPZ lanahan_b_Page_113.tif
dcaaf726dc2c33c2504a800797e2253b
0437d9a15811d6044b5b49e0d135d5ad681d26b9
F20101220_AAAMFW lanahan_b_Page_026.tif
7631dbab64d7912dc2ba79f2b4d46b0a
cededd12cc6370492dcc64150a984e3e1c983595
126621 F20101220_AAANCP lanahan_b_Page_009.jpg
65a5c6e6f5a400d46248add05069b180
671c45a2e5038101b9c49a9cbdead319dcfb5c51
27395 F20101220_AAAMFX lanahan_b_Page_159.QC.jpg
75e42c5ab90e19a40ab2d1dc9b2842c9
84f66b4aeb758ab8f15f433d983cd286986a794d
109588 F20101220_AAAMYA lanahan_b_Page_077.jp2
0e6ae19df6473ff661897408a7a877af
d240a9eff6f23a30f2e9118f59a7804e3cca1e35
105712 F20101220_AAANCQ lanahan_b_Page_010.jpg
7cfb87d797f62ffde7ef924e91d9a449
00927a4fa848f0609fb143281e091ab1a3c44bd9
48779 F20101220_AAAMFY lanahan_b_Page_201.pro
620328ed9c05bd2b1c39dac2db53be18
0fa8f7fdd1781b949c3db50d235e9d76c13eee15
1858 F20101220_AAAMYB lanahan_b_Page_200.txt
2fa817b28e4b5e395e48a38cebaed245
83e59bba39eeb2a990add2893a9833141fef40ce
67437 F20101220_AAANCR lanahan_b_Page_012.jpg
9e79dc765d0951d717a47405614e5137
abce3b75026e68b1fed1fe87f58588a5643fd10b
F20101220_AAAMFZ lanahan_b_Page_140.tif
94ab860aa811f28e75c7cdb85dc1f716
b89620e16c2945c5c028b3785cb0e0d5568d8f3a
37942 F20101220_AAAMYC lanahan_b_Page_064.pro
41415877249ab4a35b2b730cc4d21735
f6e1bc7e280283b77cf7678759d785f4460a0762
70722 F20101220_AAANCS lanahan_b_Page_014.jpg
680f6b4dbbf4763c0d30e5c430107884
e27f035404fc9e4256b129ef854f17ba6a736889
78927 F20101220_AAAMYD lanahan_b_Page_013.jp2
498208f904d513cfab049b0157d0e6f2
1b6027e68e45d419741edb41c04975bd9a36c371
83397 F20101220_AAANCT lanahan_b_Page_015.jpg
f9b820e3ac59d295a481d993ad0db490
fea421e4537a7a2b2218b7900ab91aee48125b44
6235 F20101220_AAAMYE lanahan_b_Page_009thm.jpg
fa251062558e23243b80a60808a33d63
fb17741a96596244ff8d7d9629ce40b276b5944b
79578 F20101220_AAANCU lanahan_b_Page_016.jpg
de49f14e67ef1affc8d29e7e4bd43b5d
6a00bf1f2750bdca41be241cef8899ee8e1a4b03
50996 F20101220_AAAMYF lanahan_b_Page_074.pro
cd010487980b14e60df6fec1795f37b8
b9665f71bb5c571ac9f085c6d69d13410f6a538c
81130 F20101220_AAANCV lanahan_b_Page_020.jpg
b86e5dcfc7dd212c701fdea685674afd
8913b83ff253420defc2a0d5cf671e5be441b006
25020 F20101220_AAAMYG lanahan_b_Page_028.QC.jpg
17cd7d55d7fe5483fc96fbd2d6e7a805
2adc2fcf3decd1a8d6c3856b4895cee40ca91446
81491 F20101220_AAANCW lanahan_b_Page_021.jpg
966ac418013d8c737321fa272b87bc1d
c826ee4f41f2144a7e4ec054fa536ee05f300c7c
F20101220_AAAMYH lanahan_b_Page_209.tif
c66cb29e3c0ca957cfb0b0e3c3135e93
593062692cdf4b1ff26618a25ba2b84dbe615e10
79429 F20101220_AAANCX lanahan_b_Page_022.jpg
678fcb2ded09019300384cf65590ebfc
6382fa2c20ce0e8b55b8b292d301e320e6d3587e
31589 F20101220_AAANVA lanahan_b_Page_154.pro
c3ad3ef492f4129573030e10d35d3394
2e439088df52ff6fd20a98a431898904d3f960ef
6404 F20101220_AAAMYI lanahan_b_Page_034thm.jpg
db20a283eef5a59d5794790677613425
2b0768a14abca753b7023578993db838f02a9110
53502 F20101220_AAANVB lanahan_b_Page_156.pro
35ade08c4f7623b3e6ac31694f585229
58a1e7261cc36d67c7197762dd4db04ce55ffd51
25515 F20101220_AAAMYJ lanahan_b_Page_092.QC.jpg
69799171b3ba19ee2e2cc43a9630c8ae
3e2981e67d0f774ca2dbdbf0cd01e64564bd6507
73604 F20101220_AAANCY lanahan_b_Page_027.jpg
1718559132d9fbd8e9119b4807955119
c0d4aeb4a3eceec6e7d6ec65c7f51746c5567e65
24154 F20101220_AAANVC lanahan_b_Page_157.pro
c7d7cacdd39eb7641bcb3c1369879133
3074912f620d17e16aae9c308041b3b949dedf41
F20101220_AAAMYK lanahan_b_Page_172.tif
ebca0702d49f55bdbe6f483227a0ea51
7c48d80df111d0732d7257beb51f0042441ed218
79510 F20101220_AAANCZ lanahan_b_Page_028.jpg
4eb8f216347b33a090d562b72b49e907
43ed9a5b91c69ddaec0c06ff3e16aad028427e0a
55013 F20101220_AAANVD lanahan_b_Page_159.pro
fff14d51a572fd256d82882114cdf1da
2bdfdc76d28e6553f9b417b4c10ac9b00aa31afa
6326 F20101220_AAAMLA lanahan_b_Page_136thm.jpg
3eca2dcb8b295d5c522aa171cb44dd2e
34d8cdb8a70431cb2248a3ffba8ffa07ee604f2f
113892 F20101220_AAAMYL lanahan_b_Page_051.jp2
b6b93a73ebbd47c281ff6a99d885905d
0faefce6bd003398de525e9d2b9a193c9e93e299
53062 F20101220_AAANVE lanahan_b_Page_162.pro
86317909e1ca50b82b06e134d0357085
6aa507281ff73a2f29ff63c6fefc8982d956c78a
108827 F20101220_AAAMLB lanahan_b_Page_112.jp2
b829ed130ad1389d056cd481aa7f16e3
4d0aa3f1f21a5c7b81aff1fe8500864b051a86f1
6128 F20101220_AAAMYM lanahan_b_Page_145thm.jpg
5701c25992a9ebd01c819eb6820021cc
b72c7e44b15549987cfa12c4062f902a07847689
51761 F20101220_AAANVF lanahan_b_Page_163.pro
57e1d0026561dc6d5e340a848927759d
95f4a2a3d52bb8a1b1dd0d5eb7f6125f12574f37
6048 F20101220_AAAMYN lanahan_b_Page_134thm.jpg
2e397abd421262ba83c9c4a9afcca0f9
6ac5197825d984388f86bc1e46d07c32f386a985
45556 F20101220_AAANVG lanahan_b_Page_164.pro
7ec68f2cae98a1d384039f0cfb35ee5e
837bc7eb055921c2192f4119896387fff3e26d06
F20101220_AAAMLC lanahan_b_Page_236.tif
46defb230d94bf4cf5f885ac14648a54
b18896fbe6ae001df17035fd7d4c8b1648177fd6
5554 F20101220_AAAMYO lanahan_b_Page_016thm.jpg
f2d7f9ea17c2c5dc413dadc4ddd713c9
9530bc4a2d50a104504a79fbd870f3f36ed273a2
46328 F20101220_AAANVH lanahan_b_Page_165.pro
1bda4d92047641dd604fae37ee5ab77c
6baae3d7603a4679baea649f3b2a42a29d7b4c4a
F20101220_AAAMLD lanahan_b_Page_112.tif
8f2d4ab5f43bb20de67f24ad814ca511
d44602d44b772dc669171422a02442590a5a7fc9
56295 F20101220_AAANVI lanahan_b_Page_167.pro
f9cccabe044a79871e7b829eec858088
abd4002c40ba9569a7ec36ff095662da7b0e4de3
53532 F20101220_AAAMLE lanahan_b_Page_196.pro
91e6ae58f6b5291d0c0687e5b7eed5ce
7c32435e9c09bf15970ee7084cee204a29323b02
F20101220_AAAMYP lanahan_b_Page_112.jpg
5c93675c0c133bb1c9aacf68fff359e3
a99910b1086e62c740033fcb196e1bd941af63cf
48070 F20101220_AAANVJ lanahan_b_Page_168.pro
e630f578ba2aca0892959830a3b0e641
7a0286e170ce29e16e4167dc3a600739a32335d0
6084 F20101220_AAAMLF lanahan_b_Page_175thm.jpg
239d9352ff03571c36114e9125eea4bb
218431ae49a29b40cfe6d4639a790d13d99360cb
111596 F20101220_AAAMYQ lanahan_b_Page_187.jp2
cc755fc122154799c52175fe7abdbd3e
ad77148e26ddd0029526b22dfb2594901a756188
49446 F20101220_AAANVK lanahan_b_Page_169.pro
58db2b0721e4d25616bad18be190e1e5
3c49287683cab311d3288e737808413bb95281bd
84065 F20101220_AAAMLG lanahan_b_Page_052.jpg
86679aa3bbfa54f6a09882fa1a12d885
b93fdbcb4e0cfa31036f6d5843cccf4026980dac
84281 F20101220_AAAMYR lanahan_b_Page_104.jpg
ecfa1a558aff40446f625a4730fb5acd
5341686d90948c41db8b5fd69354bfce8d6426a0
108334 F20101220_AAAMLH lanahan_b_Page_086.jp2
25ef8b0699cc19b25348ed236d0382a8
2f7e26d7fc7f04f3c31c34af62510198c16563c6
111274 F20101220_AAANIA lanahan_b_Page_018.jp2
b9a9a6c7315227f8095e7ed03b0f2211
1c8266bb86792d480f5f6b97b08f139ec9800f47
25122 F20101220_AAAMYS lanahan_b_Page_036.QC.jpg
85e0926b118bd19448d5684079a49e43
2233cea0a2fbfe52c1edb9786bb0c0d0059392da
53999 F20101220_AAANVL lanahan_b_Page_174.pro
56d6525e522be2e87200bc769e0ce965
9ba5b9caddce4b497c4272eba9490e65db2e957a
8121 F20101220_AAAMLI lanahan_b_Page_001.QC.jpg
0d4ded01c8d79756e7f45523fe036c4a
5fc280de7aca50e1fd46d8dad0b6af553e2a6455
108646 F20101220_AAANIB lanahan_b_Page_019.jp2
539791e20824e7e7fc6f5953b94f0884
212e9b75521bac56ddefdd58fa07b0b71633d202
26217 F20101220_AAAMYT lanahan_b_Page_073.QC.jpg
822f7ea5cfe30d2ccbed2a81e3a37704
7adb335b7704a00b933a24443f65a8200817e440
17881 F20101220_AAANVM lanahan_b_Page_175.pro
ed0c35eebc4d5442b321b1deeeee3c2d
86a136eba8446d24f71e687e8d9719b9a0929d8f
112711 F20101220_AAAMLJ lanahan_b_Page_162.jp2
aaff0c6ee3e22cebc00d0c26636bcc07
72694f5388adcc277f17c5407901e0acdf2aa4b1
103222 F20101220_AAANIC lanahan_b_Page_022.jp2
d54beb14323dadf87d4d62a6d2d282c3
34b5f6126b92ed8718e8af526c807dd00a222641
5928 F20101220_AAAMYU lanahan_b_Page_087thm.jpg
f2406ce0ab3e9fc7d261c2373a6d5c1d
7fc0ab21e34073642b90ea7783a5625f9f751c4e
53262 F20101220_AAANVN lanahan_b_Page_176.pro
188fd832561c7eb62ff8c9c2597f0a00
ee60c107287ff35a13ac4314a73bb84f9d5ac454
102391 F20101220_AAAMLK lanahan_b_Page_208.jp2
51bf76f214f24a21018f9622969f9378
bbc8ae8eb2eb253d45b4c8dd2c01a924d514672c
111751 F20101220_AAANID lanahan_b_Page_024.jp2
b035ecf1d855097a789d2aaebbdd22ac
35e0245b6a87811509d6f75b711796c1a9cc6e20
25789 F20101220_AAAMYV lanahan_b_Page_191.pro
a5bbeaba94bd0d07de6bf304a738995e
eba70f079b006ec4325bfa7d8a2094fad098b3d5
63358 F20101220_AAANVO lanahan_b_Page_178.pro
431ce51180d4819e41f9a5a50eca7e15
710997c70a41398341e8e9cb9850dcc6e00474d9
103939 F20101220_AAANIE lanahan_b_Page_025.jp2
88b455dc7042f3dffb1a5cfd20e71790
20d25b1eaf4517bad667a2f5ca5c69f3fb7df444
2030 F20101220_AAAMYW lanahan_b_Page_149.txt
c0b9046b4379336b033a489c07179aea
eecf0aec78053a4e021b8cf49a575afc92cc3fc0
39870 F20101220_AAANVP lanahan_b_Page_179.pro
f3430c6120d7b9f2f91ecc31e0a52903
95437b700c43c0124f10ce1d61710c0ee5dd8df3
89181 F20101220_AAAMLL lanahan_b_Page_120.jp2
d4d0a8d0c3e225482e963ba5d494259c
be8c02e150aad94d150588726ff5ed26319efc9d
94886 F20101220_AAANIF lanahan_b_Page_027.jp2
1405f2bfdf0c838ac17c3ac24e9cdc64
2a5efed6c37f56a47e81fd45e0026f0d9a15cf0d
F20101220_AAAMYX lanahan_b_Page_120.tif
b1a1e80c6c5157a8105bed428c98b7fd
20d07f4efdb70453207714914f113b97a7bab5cb
40488 F20101220_AAANVQ lanahan_b_Page_180.pro
ff71d9f6c2f26afdc74f0eef1fac058a
e60c428f011cbd6e68d36951f3f56efccd1f702a
6111 F20101220_AAAMLM lanahan_b_Page_228thm.jpg
f783fdec56e5cb6ca5be3967d4504d30
fa7043843b48d20973ecf623333960764d41e333
104973 F20101220_AAANIG lanahan_b_Page_028.jp2
c8928cc7eb5ac4ca6999ede6ce46d5f6
982f0785efb640e8dd84242d12873e60b528cbae
6011 F20101220_AAAMYY lanahan_b_Page_015thm.jpg
ff46b0f47a3e02c287c4a08d75c17b45
04650666de07b0e80e10cff04c4d9fa0afc755d0
51658 F20101220_AAANVR lanahan_b_Page_181.pro
e6ebf618e330e5cf3d20638456a14f89
ea6c514f9a3a24c7bad0b9b68640971170352aa3
67083 F20101220_AAAMLN lanahan_b_Page_223.jpg
9785449d08004a8a4f84c4a766e56e08
51f50ce470017b202714f48f297c14095e6925df
113833 F20101220_AAANIH lanahan_b_Page_029.jp2
ce569a7c8a7bebf28054b6d2cff9467a
d18a850c6e70be144522f247580f10143ec5be3d
6465 F20101220_AAAMYZ lanahan_b_Page_029thm.jpg
6241d319eaa2e7d2949ed3f68fbc615f
848ae51b86aa17d163d82b5682453aa64f9d809f
27986 F20101220_AAAOFA lanahan_b_Page_234.QC.jpg
d671e2d06d888d43735395b48ab3faf1
319f3717f8d35be4abb18fd4c5cbdd8445b269d3
52082 F20101220_AAANVS lanahan_b_Page_182.pro
add0159b0dbc1e0445e9643ca1ad092a
111d12ba5147f97e857ed38c4e2ffa8f13b694a1
1913 F20101220_AAAMLO lanahan_b_Page_136.txt
5b8f4345265af27c97cd464014d757b9
89af4d9aae0092c15f58c24142fa8b1560373cdf
112155 F20101220_AAANII lanahan_b_Page_030.jp2
36d068e791a0c95185551d4b38bd7e2c
39a0c7d76417cae88e7df9fc42ac3781669d7c1b
24946 F20101220_AAAOFB lanahan_b_Page_063.QC.jpg
de23cc1ac058448f38c041de12de62a0
b4fa8a706cebcef420247109ce55198c7e447639
53843 F20101220_AAANVT lanahan_b_Page_183.pro
8783e3b40fd1e79fb56b14f882a24542
d3ed03c0d825402660821d1c2aa4faf2e126e422
58812 F20101220_AAAMLP lanahan_b_Page_233.pro
28304069cd412f264dd97d692b22d28a
dca9968954af1808eef15abc9cc0aff245e74c43
110345 F20101220_AAANIJ lanahan_b_Page_031.jp2
3a7bd15aeebce8eca8dda8919d3b1334
a8c960807ff97550dbfd990ecfd4c511b074ace8
24394 F20101220_AAAOFC lanahan_b_Page_189.QC.jpg
d17892c4ba04fac5c8fd4aac46213f44
61d8beeeea26887b1d39534848b7c4be75d07e21
52883 F20101220_AAANVU lanahan_b_Page_187.pro
d3a5388d898df062fbbb62a693fb5efb
67905531a8e744a55665f1c2c1c534bcbea9f4ad
F20101220_AAAMLQ lanahan_b_Page_021.txt
2cea1691a1a2adc2ca64564fbc489973
f4bdcc98b37743a686137b497d6e021d84233205
118132 F20101220_AAANIK lanahan_b_Page_032.jp2
b6857ebd3a2af07670f4063edf9a8d2f
641ac5adbc7cb33317744fdc0b20abd05cf3c56f
24185 F20101220_AAAOFD lanahan_b_Page_150.QC.jpg
ecd328abee2c5875ef16d4b6025b6f85
025436518633d8ff8b31efee1123c76467be8785
50220 F20101220_AAANVV lanahan_b_Page_190.pro
d00c7299519b138a19394892cf58fa7f
5dc7ebc081c842e085a26dd528a164d8a0d5ad10
25945 F20101220_AAAMLR lanahan_b_Page_072.QC.jpg
5cbf7f3ab6e878d3e8ea6598206356bc
fbe9d5d5f8aaf6b3c5e2c0435bb68fd8471dd310
105791 F20101220_AAANIL lanahan_b_Page_035.jp2
955233d24fa18ca4b90be5f760c8b936
0708c64be9898db7e6220398a23bebdabd625f53
6087 F20101220_AAAOFE lanahan_b_Page_020thm.jpg
bb94a75268515bd1024029148336cae7
dcf28beacfc40ba6ea1a599a2b17873bd32277b3
52698 F20101220_AAANVW lanahan_b_Page_193.pro
2a9953c13683d9b07ecebdee97d5c2e9
a8f46448ba48630a4ac451c900571b6db9721816
F20101220_AAAMLS lanahan_b_Page_131.tif
a06703b699ba81e7786b30268ac805ca
2de646512f4f8186066baae4cd19ded938537e15
110970 F20101220_AAANIM lanahan_b_Page_038.jp2
ba3e00bc4857d5cef6e5823f74b2f6b1
2533f2726a2a62763fe15e2c8f3587093f6db3d4
22255 F20101220_AAAOFF lanahan_b_Page_134.QC.jpg
0e8f759997a358591e60f9646fb9ea21
af81a5054cdabfede3560905e019b7fa87cf39aa
50879 F20101220_AAANVX lanahan_b_Page_194.pro
ea9d24773bf46694d0896431d9080d82
f4ce57049f1b311f2a46092b226e454dfa0cca71
108489 F20101220_AAAMLT lanahan_b_Page_124.jp2
e682fcdd138b5300d7557cf585eb3a35
f4716bd915d70d6637e1005024503f757937ba7e
113347 F20101220_AAANIN lanahan_b_Page_040.jp2
f5abe40fe166a8d9c3eecf223591736c
3151dc3dc5b9266fb1cd2cbdc8b31057f576faec
6041 F20101220_AAAOFG lanahan_b_Page_107thm.jpg
b162f0f321e4cc881f453068625565f3
67f907286042abf7a37f6cd7e68c32916785bcd8
51532 F20101220_AAANVY lanahan_b_Page_198.pro
c3b3f54842946a701fa96650b4811161
600bdd69ed37de51dba336b482d51928f513b7d0
58600 F20101220_AAAMLU lanahan_b_Page_216.pro
49995ae086d4d36ba8bbcafa57a9ce71
0495e67f2bf7d1fc12c398fee920f66ad65cfcbd
114132 F20101220_AAANIO lanahan_b_Page_041.jp2
bdb6be9215c5ad6bcb789e547495b02e
1b45b48e40a2fdd8e51c54b2244ff93012c8ae00
3602 F20101220_AAAOFH lanahan_b_Page_218thm.jpg
09fd015cce980bfb604ef7fedfd8ed15
ce9d0c0da052b041ccaaa24eb5a363c37f426bdc
21847 F20101220_AAANVZ lanahan_b_Page_199.pro
3a1f896fb6703653eadf99a9f89df1ee
6e44d8e77a03a832408f9b8376088a4912d112d8
F20101220_AAAMLV lanahan_b_Page_105.tif
e7d4d4f29f015ca6239b2bfec65e6732
75666f6e5f012ea1f461e9551c4057660b6cfd64
105258 F20101220_AAANIP lanahan_b_Page_043.jp2
1d187df526320b307ff8870d9da0e48e
55e1e077afa6f98dbce0b25135031d0dfcdf5d19
27768 F20101220_AAAOFI lanahan_b_Page_041.QC.jpg
aa98c46d3977f251f4302ec569b26a83
dd0fe91b191c14007cd3ea5ee34534630a1f2193
F20101220_AAAMLW lanahan_b_Page_028thm.jpg
94b7769770b982e89a530489168a7ea6
f8081daffcebacfb1d77c3c69f0beb8cd073a0ab
110545 F20101220_AAANIQ lanahan_b_Page_044.jp2
4af3454e0001d68464f84789ca0623ef
79e4da4ea906a31945aa5a2c07a2d788e8d8a0c0
25827 F20101220_AAAOFJ lanahan_b_Page_030.QC.jpg
35800748adf7ec53fd234455e30c49f5
e0141676c71ac8a7f959de21cca2a870d344037d
50470 F20101220_AAAMLX lanahan_b_Page_011.jpg
63dd69b6c94f50a148d821b887bd3c96
fb070b1bb5c515eab3b1a9e18fc681667d745d45
111295 F20101220_AAANIR lanahan_b_Page_045.jp2
a25c8355125220426fcb9f604536ec3e
20efd4adf98a8497f83fbd7f027d927063f58cc7
25823 F20101220_AAAOFK lanahan_b_Page_116.QC.jpg
58dca451094ba5b38d86efdab2fd1b67
6ff64698e77a5b3f0f97e579a26a9a6a94446175
48268 F20101220_AAAMLY lanahan_b_Page_094.pro
b11178ee60265503bca7b877bdbcc959
e83cdcb7f5bd6079b91124aa51ad392063f013cd
115066 F20101220_AAANIS lanahan_b_Page_047.jp2
3121393e12368fae988629dab09cb280
08cceeffc29bd8792b7d248156bf93bd23419fed
6245 F20101220_AAAOFL lanahan_b_Page_024thm.jpg
73d5b39c09f002d95d739747fa30582a
ea155baa7f199631b2ca17ce18bb86a5673dfef2
F20101220_AAAMLZ lanahan_b_Page_024.txt
c9b4b0461f8853f3095c0270ff88f5da
bf40680c8c024be51ac4a3ea4040ad502e85934f
108359 F20101220_AAANIT lanahan_b_Page_048.jp2
d0e531ad8d4e8aa4b69a1df34e32eedd
e3e0867ea18cab2ef3766c1fc05baf3c6f2630e4
5070 F20101220_AAAOFM lanahan_b_Page_226thm.jpg
89f62c755c2c35970aa2bd4a45d3147f
6066d1f988135402dae64cfaef9fbbe3b6330184
110759 F20101220_AAANIU lanahan_b_Page_049.jp2
6af0a63d786e6f6929070b55cbfc87d9
bce3192d1ade0a1d29903bf05eb934318c3e26d2
6161 F20101220_AAAOFN lanahan_b_Page_070thm.jpg
aa254c25792a477ee975f4618cb55653
d1fcd134a174930e56692246142b4e3347a54f4a
108767 F20101220_AAANIV lanahan_b_Page_052.jp2
586720747a244c21525bbab6bc99c0cd
3661ce7067b5a00d6bda3b78b4bbcc6f9f741ccd
24071 F20101220_AAAOFO lanahan_b_Page_025.QC.jpg
f6578288e578ffd6c2e0a4529f6a701c
6760280a92e772a46d7efd8acd5145f9961b7577
115291 F20101220_AAANIW lanahan_b_Page_053.jp2
d52a8ba7ba37b9ddaffdff92cadf6c46
5190a77ee946ea14d7359aba37997cab37d264ed
24659 F20101220_AAAOFP lanahan_b_Page_165.QC.jpg
b768305896c4663ee059242bf8df9277
20dd016a03ef1b86efd6d3265f640c633fbae8dc
111474 F20101220_AAANIX lanahan_b_Page_054.jp2
4bc6eac31c400e53bbf2180ddddfe9b4
adb0f203e616655865ab40d30c7c1953a98786ae
2650 F20101220_AAAOFQ lanahan_b_Page_026thm.jpg
d8a8d950b8e9f6ed211e5fe444629da7
46df9f0c5281cf4c8f541127fca58d150bd8b088
112280 F20101220_AAANIY lanahan_b_Page_055.jp2
99c363234a5879d7f33e3aab14d12399
ea8b12dac0630ac976232a12349593adbd9844aa
25608 F20101220_AAAOFR lanahan_b_Page_126.QC.jpg
fb0830af63098a953d982a6c40188da2
daef16976b45bbbdeacee30ee92ea01ff82f589d
112033 F20101220_AAANIZ lanahan_b_Page_058.jp2
7742dfcaf8c7f8fd90428fa3bbd86dcd
6a672d7b5f90df8e70a44b1cb13c42f07961b71e
6439 F20101220_AAAOFS lanahan_b_Page_067thm.jpg
74d0fbf76ee6ae22f763647f2fb1055f
6415755fefad7babfa2e3e81283c27b24dcdff1e
10144 F20101220_AAAOFT lanahan_b_Page_131.QC.jpg
27b5f9cec152675b20cd51595ebae890
cb5c4d23b09a75b231bd4e6b7a5f02cdc132fa45
6401 F20101220_AAAOFU lanahan_b_Page_055thm.jpg
3a2715e18a9b0881a1aeb113ce53d270
ea7c8228c4b9f17cc82f33f656c53260228d4cdc
51909 F20101220_AAAMRA lanahan_b_Page_130.pro
2b4175b242e950d087c50c1af5979566
a375b5607c4ff62a53f3428ef91668ec6e0c0450
26569 F20101220_AAAOFV lanahan_b_Page_054.QC.jpg
b6a74584c737ee9475c53d50d7bdb8ca
3e7d54881f51ffec9147c2e82d64ca6cc0abab45
82698 F20101220_AAAMRB lanahan_b_Page_184.jpg
2001ae80392a0ea9540ecdb96017725c
7d1b980a430c8340a0618693d509c635cafb6cc9
361363 F20101220_AAAOFW UFE0015440_00001.xml
3d16b1533f6c18d324f258fd8b62f13f
ccfee04c7e2a5a4d449925adbe2ba51aa7aee0bb
6291 F20101220_AAAMRC lanahan_b_Page_111thm.jpg
1c94c3ba9b8878140e597d0c2c7464cf
f3d251d638deaa33c0b09e455c212f31c70cfa8d
1385 F20101220_AAAOFX lanahan_b_Page_002.QC.jpg
e979af66bce8a79972599b50c611c10b
36e6dbdd75e9929e28eaa200264c80b8b3c272ba
F20101220_AAAMRD lanahan_b_Page_185.tif
e8456c2baa150f003fb5f933702db848
30acbac318ede2ec2f0fef56659ee13adbff6562
25575 F20101220_AAAOFY lanahan_b_Page_006.QC.jpg
5d9d604120b2769f795f67062e9b3a9f
c1dcb7bb5b7112e4bb216e22a1f4119666772146
108999 F20101220_AAAMRE lanahan_b_Page_039.jp2
aefa2570bd1b9d7b6d87e0db69227af0
50109a10664ebab1b66e7c9546a7b95162b43555
5588 F20101220_AAAOFZ lanahan_b_Page_006thm.jpg
c91c925b1e5302984c9c94629b1cc27d
c1027bb3e9689da04298acec7725e668203d36de
29094 F20101220_AAAMRF lanahan_b_Page_221.QC.jpg
164acd6f389bbdfba81cfc7c78d58217
936b44e4082085ccd41b77428651bb2b6b3e17d1
1966 F20101220_AAAMRG lanahan_b_Page_083.txt
74f41cf8372d5c59766a0f1be55b3214
50d0603f74ec2eb292775ba45127571f26b219aa
F20101220_AAANOA lanahan_b_Page_027.tif
2a1aa2ec146ad39d73b6877a0e1cb236
804749c9e78d5a63de6fb358dc585024ca459b51
F20101220_AAAMRH lanahan_b_Page_028.txt
a1e76490a2e2d08c3b7f8a8ac7577871
9a9c74d5aaa37067e1ecc6cf0c956294e614e97f
F20101220_AAANOB lanahan_b_Page_029.tif
d58b24faa4841405ae4051cacd688f7b
ec1300f6146b7973071f68c2d221ea2028a8baf9
F20101220_AAANOC lanahan_b_Page_031.tif
3ed01040ad1b9a0f05f85c4003772b05
195b035f4bdd9400c66101a95dba0378d4b9d121
25720 F20101220_AAAMRI lanahan_b_Page_237.QC.jpg
5aa9995ee6d4a548fdb0798a26d708a4
71941a9d792e318c0af83d0bdd0f6d9b6692a577
F20101220_AAANOD lanahan_b_Page_033.tif
f398faf22588a91b368186897982584b
5a58d98ff9ced7d5104e6166f35654331333d085
65229 F20101220_AAAMRJ lanahan_b_Page_214.pro
8c81752d5f9ff3215c0e2080e19f821d
a198f3486fb68f7fdf98e243418ceb529ee298e8
12530 F20101220_AAAMRK lanahan_b_Page_242.QC.jpg
bd217e61baa81314ccfb63d0bf52a371
6185111f86c66132825c5f9d9656e51a61c3b249
F20101220_AAANOE lanahan_b_Page_039.tif
632b8e4fd78c3994b697835b484a3130
59e3e04891674e5332980b1ad9f29859c5a60209
48267 F20101220_AAAMEA lanahan_b_Page_043.pro
2680806251b6cfc0782bf46292115b72
1e65ce597bd077e3a7b9eb6cdb6adfd0559797a3
6583 F20101220_AAAMRL lanahan_b_Page_159thm.jpg
03df3f0d7e44d4ccf4b06a16755aab15
cf32ebda5806686f3d18bd3d68f9e110fa31c9ad
F20101220_AAANOF lanahan_b_Page_042.tif
f2f83018f5f89c0b79f8e4e06f884133
54d26704203439817363e187352f43f4f3e4d9a7
F20101220_AAAMEB lanahan_b_Page_183.tif
9594a6bcb2935199a57675583f35c611
84a8f2f823cd55d1b78b4057f08ccbc57cd443e3
1201 F20101220_AAAMRM lanahan_b_Page_002.pro
303003d535e057d78d2e74ccdd70707c
37ecba3c06b32ae2053529b59c668fd208ff36f8
F20101220_AAANOG lanahan_b_Page_044.tif
429b4746a1b7a9ecb45fbe37aa1e3564
da94e1ef9d36c5fcbebf3c818f824c812a433fce
52169 F20101220_AAAMEC lanahan_b_Page_041.pro
f264f3fc247daaf086781258cbe0cb18
eb27c20b67d2b3151a10fb257a7163d0ed6a088a
6299 F20101220_AAAMRN lanahan_b_Page_162thm.jpg
90034a95bc160b711dac572bf55a3f89
56b2a3a81e4c8b2bcd846127c76ac0702f01c167
F20101220_AAANOH lanahan_b_Page_045.tif
fb893ede2edd0e5c7eb7db3131230b21
4961b13ea6c28bc56be9e3fad63f4d76bfd170a0
19646 F20101220_AAAOLA lanahan_b_Page_191.QC.jpg
ade9c9884f9f64a9458f777db3284e08
deef4defcb076ac3a34b55c985d9fb47925bdc93
71918 F20101220_AAAMED lanahan_b_Page_222.jp2
fbd7892e01238ce3f521da5894ad0179
2d7d687b1f98a38594a4c7e89818ce144073477f
28124 F20101220_AAAMRO lanahan_b_Page_240.QC.jpg
8ce6ae0a5849f3a3729a198f8781d917
b7d246003cc68faf16acf51b2ff45edc317076d7
F20101220_AAANOI lanahan_b_Page_046.tif
3dfd45b6a53fb437d4eb6a86cb748724
52368d7f68f788154922a2e09ab878bb407a2adc
27145 F20101220_AAAOLB lanahan_b_Page_192.QC.jpg
5ffa008f5d823620dfc72d1189c6e10c
fc452aa83f39227782cedae61265ce24ca15caaf
82786 F20101220_AAAMEE lanahan_b_Page_059.jpg
744121785febc2a33b26240d92be62b1
905ea1bcdd2260fed2a15ddcd75c8dc43e9fff3b
20975 F20101220_AAAMRP lanahan_b_Page_223.QC.jpg
a9cf29ad10b6413ad7fd9dad9c94c6b0
3a905217a4d8789e75c91017419886542a40c5ac
F20101220_AAANOJ lanahan_b_Page_048.tif
b216687471765546e403cfebbb753ed0
4ff02374ac0ef698af4aa13d019c39c636041744
6412 F20101220_AAAOLC lanahan_b_Page_192thm.jpg
b27ee2ccb348d98a90d5d5a4b8d120de
c74ecbcff557dcd13d5a91a64428724a6453d601
2072 F20101220_AAAMEF lanahan_b_Page_051.txt
ed76ec35cfefab200b4daafd2a2e696b
639ef2df8611cfc427bf6b22ed395581adb670a4
84011 F20101220_AAAMRQ lanahan_b_Page_018.jpg
c1bb35705a9ee971ba767a971ef5442a
cc279ac0c543f61c19dc7f853a8b2d07f82680a2
F20101220_AAANOK lanahan_b_Page_050.tif
406e569c1e87c312e8685cc7c888e87b
c3450f4b9a6245e633caab59b65656d9239df071
25439 F20101220_AAAOLD lanahan_b_Page_194.QC.jpg
6f2182c4ae874357f0282a30ae814ec7
1b709ba263d3732af0bc31a279fc6abcdb99f9be
52179 F20101220_AAAMEG lanahan_b_Page_015.pro
a28bb46a8ca123dc53709fff7d9caf7d
d2ece494e74e45a2f039aa2f92744be2096765da
20883 F20101220_AAAMRR lanahan_b_Page_175.QC.jpg
165bede433ae13ebb3c3cd2d070cdcb3
a59e70295bd0a2908ed2c415041f221d7419c978
F20101220_AAANOL lanahan_b_Page_051.tif
c47669ba69ea87271f0514c388bdcc93
0c77ccccbd1110d0d650fc06b664a5a68601f990
F20101220_AAAOLE lanahan_b_Page_194thm.jpg
568588b885a7a2cfd97cf61775aa290d
da55473d358f0deb0d03a4a46321004726dc6cd2
F20101220_AAAMEH lanahan_b_Page_206.tif
c6e30e6cf74fcfdf73a5b6d1e6a934d1
877f4b864a752d32e7346722099f497d749c8deb
110106 F20101220_AAANBA lanahan_b_Page_074.jp2
5b12286cb80cc1238e4bf747cbaf9093
63d33a30ca535ce36ecaf252e17becf8c36b5f33
868 F20101220_AAAMRS lanahan_b_Page_199.txt
9c7bc2c620c035720f82f94fe3b226b4
76850f23f554922349b03e457c334bcf2984e1a9
F20101220_AAANOM lanahan_b_Page_056.tif
681f7cebd1c3aca4eff1115ae4a2a6a9
074e7effb9a98e3215d71c019a22ec09f7440960
27376 F20101220_AAAOLF lanahan_b_Page_196.QC.jpg
49b34854579f75bd043101db409e8d46
f830dc25b37ffd9eb1909008cfdb5e9bc901e4f6
26905 F20101220_AAAMEI lanahan_b_Page_099.QC.jpg
88e8790622516ae590fca84a42392b8d
37cf6ab8ba1bbdca9e819ec5876a8cd47f33a74f
70801 F20101220_AAANBB lanahan_b_Page_108.jpg
8a8fbfcf6c7c8b026e422bac138c47c0
62b428d56124515e4b050c882edc29c79d683bde
39683 F20101220_AAAMRT lanahan_b_Page_026.jpg
965ee639fffc5274348e6221190e31db
5c60885dd2dc78511b5f3f5f66de2bf6db68785e
6369 F20101220_AAAOLG lanahan_b_Page_196thm.jpg
c62499c9b3d2512fa777b19633ae8f5c
979c8f4e79285647d23799afb1e09d17423ce88e
F20101220_AAAMEJ lanahan_b_Page_166.tif
8b8442f14a0fe77f4b8551dec892f5bd
9a9d661aa77dc8087b842ce72eef99dd85004ef9
20477 F20101220_AAANBC lanahan_b_Page_179.QC.jpg
daee4bafaa19ceb756321f779dcb3e9b
5d599c57837deb0b2a00e39261e9b9fce7cf31fb
47800 F20101220_AAAMRU lanahan_b_Page_126.pro
f196c20633562d69c6d4adfb705c52ab
4949e7314bffa7cfb5c8ec620fa96e895036eb57
F20101220_AAANON lanahan_b_Page_057.tif
eae8976c679cd944f42defce591985f2
1eb4f66535ea73af5c2a3b69574277779443c7a4
26344 F20101220_AAAOLH lanahan_b_Page_197.QC.jpg
242a28737ffa02416c8f5ae4d1627882
aa4654935099aa40a5c74b28de08f06e1fcc5924
2412 F20101220_AAAMEK lanahan_b_Page_113.txt
4cf0ee703b9e7bf8d31bc5493abb2d8b
9c770f24f7ac5d1f89376d30b167a126516baace
89896 F20101220_AAANBD lanahan_b_Page_237.jpg
31af36b0bfe3af718ec53405df8446be
ab119be8edbfc61fae98c349a9855bd58f2525ae
78724 F20101220_AAAMRV lanahan_b_Page_025.jpg
5ecf1064bfa6c4b27e353a9a4c0c0308
6dbab3f9ac88b8a2eb4003b5217d625fac2284d7
F20101220_AAANOO lanahan_b_Page_059.tif
9e39c92587ce121d683f9e13c92775cd
7ca41e369aecdb3e869b90273f92aa9c5fdd073d
26447 F20101220_AAAOLI lanahan_b_Page_198.QC.jpg
ceb5dc6a77605004dda243295e5bec10
789cea6e9f37988b93d3e25a8bb741603e177dbb
6221 F20101220_AAAMEL lanahan_b_Page_100thm.jpg
f9435aa04a1c4b9ff49f75cdd310a5a7
0ce40162bbaed67416dd15a9d267aaee8f2d770e
25511 F20101220_AAANBE lanahan_b_Page_225.pro
c796e63e853622ce074de399c49a4d63
b7de8ecf4d32ba5d660f0cef4d02c55254e4d2f9
1701 F20101220_AAAMRW lanahan_b_Page_120.txt
9a52755c88d2f34a3add5d69d05b3fbc
004cbca85193cf124efbde74aa3557a4afdf2e0b
F20101220_AAANOP lanahan_b_Page_060.tif
4486eeb20360ef637601de7298d8f9a7
c813b5354563ac11994433cc5d807c8f5d0c2b10
6065 F20101220_AAAOLJ lanahan_b_Page_201thm.jpg
38f50a287a768d50ddda1cd9cfebc2f6
7de636a26890e3f06afbf77aee338466a5c30766
96390 F20101220_AAAMEM lanahan_b_Page_202.jp2
56c8eefab18301400d794dcad0b01aa2
fdbfb2a16e4afcb9687293452aeafbc032f50d45
2064 F20101220_AAANBF lanahan_b_Page_121.txt
a0dac9bcee2f82fca8ef5afc7df51680
2845ef7b9d7730896e146a5c97433fb4365ff855
F20101220_AAAMRX lanahan_b_Page_226.tif
eb7357b849a3561a4edd12a5978ddd35
1d9014ea668ae313e795cd29f010723e708e2ea8
F20101220_AAANOQ lanahan_b_Page_061.tif
1f08e8637a6158bda6d838e7724a4119
5e524ae089e4fca85ccb5415a7dba0fc208400b1
22491 F20101220_AAAOLK lanahan_b_Page_202.QC.jpg
1d567eca9dd4305e1003dccc28a5355b
ac77a4eb325ee9e2089dd612c0797c5fd12ca6d0
26855 F20101220_AAAMEN lanahan_b_Page_173.QC.jpg
6557797975c408e26548ae8792061e52
749acb95a0a0a57182fd659f5f7cc69266f57d96
31253 F20101220_AAANBG lanahan_b_Page_186.pro
4e6276f388792fc9d61eb88e9992bc1f
922d2d0e7e8ee2b7f29deab9b1fa5af55c6745e6
6531 F20101220_AAAMRY lanahan_b_Page_118thm.jpg
7c0512079b769819bb8c737721403a6d
38dbc9be267b7dbb6d2353be7dcfcf164fc08b56
F20101220_AAANOR lanahan_b_Page_063.tif
d5e61766e9ad1afbcf10f1e4f70d5bf1
9b9a019389fb7a2c155f3de703ea68a390e5c8bd
5453 F20101220_AAAOLL lanahan_b_Page_202thm.jpg
2afd37492874c4cb55e6ae2eb7a44973
f55a8960b46317e05369d96f9e045368f0aa9353
685 F20101220_AAAMEO lanahan_b_Page_230.txt
4a08e515a4d8bfd3eb213192b11d8ed2
e6da45c0543b4d3847a67c307ae3edb5b4108d43
F20101220_AAANBH lanahan_b_Page_169.tif
dde506843ea91ca56e9ec6e901993c6a
8727f29e5e967606693605b434578217510f1477
F20101220_AAAMRZ lanahan_b_Page_133thm.jpg
f717d9fe1c81e29a0c5fe73be5d462e5
41062972ae7b9dfd1a65ee009dc54d944aedfef1
F20101220_AAANOS lanahan_b_Page_064.tif
95f5cf03ff7b9526345a4101fe42d872
749b636ba3e6d107b467a585d6fd4d108c7713fb
24635 F20101220_AAAOLM lanahan_b_Page_203.QC.jpg
2eddcfc9edfa25e9dfb820898c224658
587e1a3b5d6345068d4649c2ca85090073bcff69
F20101220_AAAMEP lanahan_b_Page_163.txt
029ff236e17730ee238a5c516db75174
1be5532551d4911650edd7d86aeae6c8be17caa5
49967 F20101220_AAANBI lanahan_b_Page_086.pro
eb17079ecf1caa6cea62d48b53e63cea
079fbc4c612442690ffa65de5f05c1f18910c582
F20101220_AAANOT lanahan_b_Page_065.tif
b3a24d7803f78c5ec2b412815c9c89a1
d57fc241c2e5dea5c518a821c1564a7438e9f6b0
24928 F20101220_AAAOLN lanahan_b_Page_206.QC.jpg
8acac79bbff509a99041fb5de970cfb8
401def3d1caeb5aeb615b6a75016e5735de94b09
6415 F20101220_AAAMEQ lanahan_b_Page_128thm.jpg
6552253c36c507a8b41b4cfe717b743f
c355a0cee14bacb833215a5eede131cc33b74f6c
2145 F20101220_AAANBJ lanahan_b_Page_127.txt
5ebb42de9ccb4fa920e84b59788830be
cf0606adff5eb0cb584a5d3ca32303b124a417b3
F20101220_AAANOU lanahan_b_Page_067.tif
e876c22109162015ec4b179a3d8abdbd
b9ed870c2c29100aa188ce963bdf11dd1626fe1e
6225 F20101220_AAAOLO lanahan_b_Page_206thm.jpg
d4801305fdc54a76e1ee5a375d98a0ae
2ce0c63ba1dc6d33347b010db128a80ccd28abfc
26987 F20101220_AAAMER lanahan_b_Page_129.QC.jpg
1f8e71e428b7d6406c8a786a368b8c83
3ebf115fa5ebf55720e72416b92409c296744604
51272 F20101220_AAANBK lanahan_b_Page_030.pro
f03643bc7577d38af67d580e013d6be7
871034c72717a945fa044d6daef633322d685ceb
F20101220_AAANOV lanahan_b_Page_068.tif
4fb8cf4a5f0d4a15ec282a9d7661d9e0
c3d979d0c7b4110b4b1bf73d8edccb8be3f1686b
24066 F20101220_AAAOLP lanahan_b_Page_208.QC.jpg
1aad2f7589024bf5ab935d648f5405d8
a244a7a22fd2783c2dc4173128b8b554ff232e42
82327 F20101220_AAAMES lanahan_b_Page_211.jpg
a83efaddd97b74afe5d75811bc69bca2
acae647c108e636b60214ab674c3ffe8b4d8e1bf
69214 F20101220_AAANBL lanahan_b_Page_004.jpg
9fea7b30fb8bff7e1f79e6e07a413ba3
2b7a69c32651d45cb988a77de46f99ab5f804cb8
F20101220_AAANOW lanahan_b_Page_069.tif
1480683e239054b36988ec232794db32
94a37884897e55c29608247133f303381b462457
941 F20101220_AAAOLQ lanahan_b_Page_209thm.jpg
c0f996f6777c3658e68fa5632400c1e7
44e38fd10d6937fc27eff0a5122ecf16f3bbf12b
F20101220_AAAMET lanahan_b_Page_168.tif
a3c26e71e62376476f65e7a26159a136
1e925c5245ad5931be7cdec3e4bba87474ff1566
F20101220_AAANBM lanahan_b_Page_035.tif
c18b4eda2064816930a961074fe127b4
b8d8d86a538a40ff7d53e53c1275be49e55cd976
F20101220_AAANOX lanahan_b_Page_070.tif
55ff02f40aed23e7ba6c8c81db047351
b4b757373fa3973e7e3c5b7381640f990c550f84
18213 F20101220_AAAOLR lanahan_b_Page_210.QC.jpg
1333935c69fd171ad639fb4f12de328c
710460f49333cdccf2133a9669d818888c624cac
22836 F20101220_AAAMEU lanahan_b_Page_200.QC.jpg
703ab5c0acbf43eaf637f5e966905a00
41b643ea5a333947c201eb20b47c0a5386a913aa
6201 F20101220_AAANBN lanahan_b_Page_060thm.jpg
e45b7910f8f6aa482a1a9b65fb6469db
d020cddd69828c6c35cbc3a02f0aa7f1d29a30ad
F20101220_AAANOY lanahan_b_Page_071.tif
e6e9bbb36d6186711c85c414ce63aaa0
1448ee21a92d729ebf42685c5b2163ff0f0bbda9
5998 F20101220_AAAOLS lanahan_b_Page_211thm.jpg
379ed2b273ef92bd03c0b104ec106d16
6bbed6ddf79bed82196fa2a416a8b13dbe4b0784
24595 F20101220_AAAMEV lanahan_b_Page_133.QC.jpg
98d59446ee90103e120fe306a9c37a09
6b270b3c17ba3f95d0df3ed32e56f75c316d94e6
2465 F20101220_AAANBO lanahan_b_Page_234.txt
ec460e7a52590eac94235de78cf264d4
c529941a3ee75d079151d388a4036e0f305875a1
F20101220_AAANOZ lanahan_b_Page_073.tif
8dfdb616c95023c229c0c8a3d863d912
cc197b6bcbc129547b07128a70acc45db97d447b
24513 F20101220_AAAOLT lanahan_b_Page_212.QC.jpg
fc159cdd906fa67161d58577895c18ab
88296769899d9dfe962a2e7a7b6ad235ae62e18e
87327 F20101220_AAAMEW lanahan_b_Page_129.jpg
0e64b19fb267d641469b024707ad8f8f
85d5a40cf10c748c0c4441070fa74ffea67ad289
F20101220_AAANBP lanahan_b_Page_205.tif
4b56f7b1e86db4f3b15903325e5ea95b
ddaccfe1257b580b2a7211ada385358df2421e1a
28065 F20101220_AAAOLU lanahan_b_Page_214.QC.jpg
d0e026d00ae9b040fbbf21bba72d6d3a
c98384295f63345a4ca57d630ddcea3a883f747c
26563 F20101220_AAAMEX lanahan_b_Page_177.QC.jpg
9cfa95afe1f07e1d3207ffbc4fefd5b9
1824d18a5dbc10710bef274263163a6b78e0be4f
26479 F20101220_AAAMXA lanahan_b_Page_055.QC.jpg
00bb4cacae7e99cccb30e406768fe2f9
be9588cb0df08b38d9f62c5f1ea70a300e9cb596
25102 F20101220_AAANBQ lanahan_b_Page_224.pro
1ce7cd4deb7886048f2cc1ac973a5d17
1d23a9fe28cd8dbaf3d5d8d18317261c05d1a25d
F20101220_AAAOLV lanahan_b_Page_214thm.jpg
0ec14645d93dd38bd381dacae9076e1b
bd543f7a3e09c24def857aae3b893e39f3a6e097
F20101220_AAAMEY lanahan_b_Page_098.txt
7d27aca914e1314246317f18ccb7e838
c5091b214a153987af88cae87ff5e96267f2517c
83260 F20101220_AAAMXB lanahan_b_Page_093.jpg
2b7a333573b20d32e244c04e7468681d
eee077c12a362ffa3da80e8ad34141a558da6651
41739 F20101220_AAANBR lanahan_b_Page_014.pro
0bfccdf3d137e15ffc4fba451a5826f8
1468b562f79afbc978a97cdf595564de52cc6030
29540 F20101220_AAAOLW lanahan_b_Page_215.QC.jpg
4ce106208af99a29e4ed166c3538e247
84e83dc06dec163e3d8478288ae08cc47ebfd893
F20101220_AAAMEZ lanahan_b_Page_108.tif
fa6210912fbf35c02b8d217aef6118f9
ea1cebb16d2cc5a81d92934af21b5f8251f434aa
53107 F20101220_AAAMXC lanahan_b_Page_128.pro
42a2056d77dcc23964dc148f018c21a2
966ed1cbb5483ac902b0907951d150eb7cba9d53
106289 F20101220_AAANBS lanahan_b_Page_020.jp2
4da131a1ebf117c3779f7dc50dd38508
35449ad6a1d5072b0577e4b0f1b1cdc5fa74bc9c
26338 F20101220_AAAOLX lanahan_b_Page_216.QC.jpg
03d3d0c94eb4dbec3a4b5c926829a5e4
1bff74f1bdfee957b4eaf98e04709d970508186a
6248 F20101220_AAAMXD lanahan_b_Page_198thm.jpg
79aff861d93463b2fbaa50f366d28de5
b0e2d3250d152939d8bd3c463386c9f5bb30e7c0
84866 F20101220_AAANBT lanahan_b_Page_010.pro
a96895e21be2967b2dd22491f7e7dbc9
9143acfe66600ab4a8d91996eeaa50706031b4dc
6230 F20101220_AAAOLY lanahan_b_Page_216thm.jpg
7133755d91e6babbaa4d70089e33d201
375a7044f706d196a87069e8cbc6e47c0a60cb9e
102901 F20101220_AAAMXE lanahan_b_Page_126.jp2
e01932813e721fab50ee2236d4dc9971
74eddc37b5b04fcf8c4da33ec7d38bcb013bd547
106284 F20101220_AAANBU lanahan_b_Page_194.jp2
5988e46de86f9116f928974e095680ad
31dfc7673d4c9c96fda5a19eb876189130153774
6313 F20101220_AAAOLZ lanahan_b_Page_219thm.jpg
3876fd841f5f9889eac429f8a70b1f0d
3ec30f7bc18cdb441124f1a55db9ff5d0fafae7a
F20101220_AAAMXF lanahan_b_Page_216.tif
3883f771befb79bca629c764fa2684f5
3d07a76c48236552eb1fd7bfdbcf231cf18481ba
17838 F20101220_AAANBV lanahan_b_Page_131.pro
30934831a43823c8fe552498cae7b83e
f7660d6ce2c8f1079effbc7c090815e7e9f763b5
78799 F20101220_AAAMXG lanahan_b_Page_005.jpg
f943e25e846b16115842f2feb80c220f
72cadd36aa3e92e4f969dcb7a0a46f96458b1ad6
F20101220_AAANBW lanahan_b_Page_054.tif
daa7bb5dfc89bc53d3ed84cb7186e033
1a4d280897a9e74ec7fba74918cc5ad2512c8c52
57550 F20101220_AAAMXH lanahan_b_Page_173.pro
7d2f7bdfd38b022bfa12eb1730fa78a1
42b921e54d75282c9c5edb2f265a93994cb377b4
48216 F20101220_AAANUA lanahan_b_Page_080.pro
3eaa5559fe024ca7fb2c7680aae3e56e
183f6729a2e81c67e98673b3317fc5428bdc7e26
86311 F20101220_AAAMXI lanahan_b_Page_127.jpg
a52ac31a3447847f77701c5e6619306f
c6f2e389f72bbdc54afb7eb556ddf0d6870c8aa3
48461 F20101220_AAANBX lanahan_b_Page_158.pro
bae9ff008bc6639839379ea471aafca6
9e427b5ef76f4e83927128fcb2542d86138efe39
51624 F20101220_AAANUB lanahan_b_Page_081.pro
6cc88df6f29f9e4145ccc6f7a74a2bf0
8ab58b7b6d5de683f756d2805a6ac44073cafa96
2275 F20101220_AAAMXJ lanahan_b_Page_239.txt
a42e3ca433141f557467f8db68726697
3959be466a0c906ffa60f0b93c92735ab62e1c2e
F20101220_AAANBY lanahan_b_Page_238.tif
b12d6532c0f3ab1cd3d10e7d410df948
038eae06c1c188ad8be99657c18067857dc2a93b
46572 F20101220_AAANUC lanahan_b_Page_083.pro
c3965e3cc90df3d5944eb80f19faa354
183875544a3ae9f380c49a5b2d9ebc2fbbe51250
2120 F20101220_AAAMXK lanahan_b_Page_096.txt
2e26d0d1c18c4b893fb11c1f46c1dc64
d58f2e50e858a22d3e1f3ec22308c1f6752448a1
17435 F20101220_AAANBZ lanahan_b_Page_224.QC.jpg
0569331dd3d66fdf3f90f2681d48fe80
8ebfe7176ffcf82bb0f1533fda23dd172d43fc7f
48327 F20101220_AAANUD lanahan_b_Page_085.pro
8493b42d42a31e6af75d8c60351f6881
8aa799528c3777c60a32adaa7f0ff065c47155c9
F20101220_AAAMKA lanahan_b_Page_002.tif
44e0eba79a2a53ced1c8961a0bf49c62
19bc3dde1f54ff16030d513e673048b1651b2ef0
103291 F20101220_AAAMXL lanahan_b_Page_016.jp2
9c0438d3aecf837399ab5d33dfe1f539
63750f71a8412c4ea1c88ceaff637f7e7a7d558e
24305 F20101220_AAANUE lanahan_b_Page_087.pro
4aa76fd57bd8eb2e21ae237587ca5735
ca11503fadb9ecddc53b5cbdc552a44c384bf536
F20101220_AAAMXM lanahan_b_Page_040.tif
1349cef8d96b134ef1a89bd6230e6c39
de89b07730f91c0c99ec2acc8d634b17ae50f2b7
51497 F20101220_AAANUF lanahan_b_Page_093.pro
8e5934546cdaa54b5652bb0d85999b8f
0e6cb6a925de5edd2aab21385aee50b2d22a86c4
51590 F20101220_AAAMKB lanahan_b_Page_104.pro
7a2cc54a2fad25a2a521ec27a3ea57b3
75085df041314eef79317709b69d28b4fe1fe7bf
87521 F20101220_AAAMXN lanahan_b_Page_047.jpg
a9567cd766df5396d04186182f507d4e
a6c7792ee84a7c1d46e7a060e05e2a807d9a5f29
53292 F20101220_AAANUG lanahan_b_Page_096.pro
5ef3358d2c1547a95448e31678a37b84
579f02073d4944ba53a95296e02ea8be5e1820c8
85462 F20101220_AAAMKC lanahan_b_Page_141.jpg
1ef0732a0c6cdcdbca800c15cd1f0cf4
b0a154996cc17b3f57e7c95edbdb525a87f596d8
50187 F20101220_AAANUH lanahan_b_Page_097.pro
7328f09d55a015282409f8e7def55b0f
0cb5d1170e8f6b2c52696c4b8428399e85e0af27
109365 F20101220_AAAMKD lanahan_b_Page_042.jp2
31f7269e7d7c970214980141aa544609
31ccf9847e383a6fbae76ec133038b7d1e915f76
53266 F20101220_AAAMXO lanahan_b_Page_192.pro
561094c9fbf04dd34d2c40d0eb968631
16650af5505c8f98a173341ae1c34fc978f8e50f
53375 F20101220_AAANUI lanahan_b_Page_101.pro
2527dc78487f675acfa6feb3a18812b5
22fb225890d19cbcdf3702d36c487a2689d46a86
51591 F20101220_AAAMKE lanahan_b_Page_099.pro
8e23aff49a8de4b47e575ced161c76af
a3313a6710a187723e746b05020e04b05c068c97
F20101220_AAAMXP lanahan_b_Page_115.txt
f8f09f02c8526d846c5f52362c579862
eb647c3db3e5ab6448f357471e85b1a9e674fef8
49609 F20101220_AAANUJ lanahan_b_Page_102.pro
d0484babbb2aab331a53fb9d5c82a5e9
a8bd400b0f97afe40bc91eb0cd9dc8dab9e341e5
54397 F20101220_AAAMKF lanahan_b_Page_090.pro
f67545c8db7210a8116d8bb1392dfe9d
c086b861eaaaf6db91b1aa24f09776f04d2b6de4
5489 F20101220_AAAMXQ lanahan_b_Page_083thm.jpg
1cb0f760e9dea43914ee5b96e6264e79
741b30955b15ec3764c494d2dd3a7c532134ec91
F20101220_AAAMKG lanahan_b_Page_142.tif
1779b70901960b97942aafdb5c9ce76e
9e77c85e17b19f71a3877047f01655b40f5a7999
6262 F20101220_AAAMXR lanahan_b_Page_130thm.jpg
066682ef254822854fc63f64504de9cd
d02381d7284fd38e718a5d49c384c6e54b761e12
53278 F20101220_AAANUK lanahan_b_Page_109.pro
9dcaebc20914742f506d1963e347db3a
a0eaa50461163e6f5bab4e2eb5b452773b321241
6389 F20101220_AAAMKH lanahan_b_Page_032thm.jpg
5b49297479fee6cd49f15b9d8a56710b
c526c3979be5e74c20dacb1db32b4b32517b75ce
9763 F20101220_AAANHA lanahan_b_Page_209.jpg
10afc059e96409f77c11dec366b3ff25
85ee834a70eecf9b53983f599306a2330188b6a3
6253 F20101220_AAAMXS lanahan_b_Page_109thm.jpg
bd6e40e608aaf2887bdec95d92c8d2ae
cf8036906f918617c26bfbec0120112ac2aff2aa
44215 F20101220_AAANUL lanahan_b_Page_110.pro
629bbeec348263e04ab96ba004b1a43b
9d07ea9a42fd0f3ee2ca31047a66773a70ddc846
106077 F20101220_AAAMKI lanahan_b_Page_092.jp2
aba870adc2822b8b3df0e574e7d15fe5
9ca9ffed9bb25f1c6b41c646c400daaa96035644
58820 F20101220_AAANHB lanahan_b_Page_210.jpg
c41fd63ac190d34bfaec5b8ea8626ade
149608b9cda911c98071ddac5a27255a49579dbc
53329 F20101220_AAAMXT lanahan_b_Page_160.pro
2e36764f3cfc495cab0c8b77f5da293b
4f8010fa2d2337b41a76d3e6a55e7cf62c472931
60457 F20101220_AAANUM lanahan_b_Page_113.pro
fff8a079195a97558ae2ecf5ebb2a9a4
786e1a0368c5c84189cfb6a9f2b4b0b407b388e9
51681 F20101220_AAAMKJ lanahan_b_Page_049.pro
92840668405c55963627c74b0da86556
bdbef6200e8f9c74c61433a3aca72f3d5c0552f1
F20101220_AAANHC lanahan_b_Page_212.jpg
d944fed083d01d5cae8a5e6ba49669a8
47a377c2211abb005ba5a8dc876d07ca60b648e8
48020 F20101220_AAAMXU lanahan_b_Page_022.pro
8172b79dfb249dde15ad1e6d2b6503b9
025cfb75e224bb7cd1292419e90d454e2f29bd6a
48663 F20101220_AAANUN lanahan_b_Page_115.pro
3058253237f4d537861ca618f1eb9033
161fd50520e49aadbb1d26dde9f3cf6b8a32f87c
80990 F20101220_AAAMKK lanahan_b_Page_035.jpg
4563a721418493fd2a137abf54df8d98
af854f527b6fd3e596d9dbaa192591d3ce5612cf
104876 F20101220_AAANHD lanahan_b_Page_213.jpg
b744a6c24de365d4dfba4750e691edac
8e5ba67f60ea90abae362fb27189982d17dfdd92
24271 F20101220_AAAMXV lanahan_b_Page_084.QC.jpg
209cf0107b17e7701440e434d58fb11f
1e1501edc7400f584a754a80ba7de850bcab02cd
56188 F20101220_AAANUO lanahan_b_Page_117.pro
7a962f418af2b9ac8020060088996d86
bcc09636041bf259e6cd90eec611ee2c7ad09b2b
F20101220_AAAMKL lanahan_b_Page_052.tif
b2b6ecad2a21dc5ce231144d1a33d9fa
346ae3ef55c2bac3ea99e2b9e2f68f162b1924dd
101580 F20101220_AAANHE lanahan_b_Page_217.jpg
e329535d5c5b30ce7325201def88fe5c
15dcca233e58781561e915f7f33e5361737ce3cf
F20101220_AAAMXW lanahan_b_Page_178.tif
f47367d9a584b9a442558e3b7f97a47a
d54056498d49232d62bf2f9b800104157b2abf13
57460 F20101220_AAANUP lanahan_b_Page_118.pro
1c8834577391ff35a120c2780372be58
ba1e36fd3166eb0dfd04bdb42fb94cdc757ff324
48624 F20101220_AAAMKM lanahan_b_Page_103.pro
39c2b143a932f3ded7166b80a18b9c50
3ec32fcb2fcede90311dd08a78422caf16940159
56372 F20101220_AAANHF lanahan_b_Page_218.jpg
5f1382511dc2161e0502d79476d29f50
88823c9d349535bb98a58ed56faa441a9ef217c9
120756 F20101220_AAAMXX lanahan_b_Page_006.jpg
3fd1980dbbf4a2648a646d0344b940b7
5acc905b10b75c4ec3e764a3aba5ddbf95f129e1
54303 F20101220_AAANUQ lanahan_b_Page_129.pro
120cab77000216d61c475523fadf736d
96121b6a368bedfa35b48a52c9f605d8160a1664
6319 F20101220_AAAMKN lanahan_b_Page_073thm.jpg
75009b1245a42b281d733e5bf698ec5e
596714d429b6f167b2dc6309e95a36a80bdfd007
73505 F20101220_AAANHG lanahan_b_Page_220.jpg
984682633e3d9111b8fb0260de51e416
9b68cd2ce479e858fd885825971e0ce8a8870f6a
71857 F20101220_AAAMXY lanahan_b_Page_202.jpg
38170883c4d91d1c22ebb68528ba895c
c63f0573b8d3572ce5d4dff5a85e8bb155872d6c
32919 F20101220_AAANUR lanahan_b_Page_134.pro
456fca32484553359c66dd770e470041
2dcd22c26314af47f1234101dea9bf38093864c0
55850 F20101220_AAAMKO lanahan_b_Page_155.jpg
48ea29181db4129d7b0367b01f76b1da
a239f1f234b240ce63c4bfde721e59cc6b3d0a64
115547 F20101220_AAANHH lanahan_b_Page_221.jpg
953916b5139454c5d54add34b0e03dda
1e3706080b62a95f143887741a868c458768cbe5
6300 F20101220_AAAMXZ lanahan_b_Page_044thm.jpg
10f237ecd6f281f0975cf2b681e434f6
1ceea695fd33d7ccac820efc8972429a8e17fdcd
26701 F20101220_AAAOEA lanahan_b_Page_128.QC.jpg
8a28ecf3d441913ea1d8392127d31ae9
fe4250ac25460e059564bb5ba21394fabfcc4ff6
48527 F20101220_AAANUS lanahan_b_Page_136.pro
53ace953a2e5c9a2cb1e743c5a517208
4af9930c081e1158fd875a9236c13369516819ee
52806 F20101220_AAAMKP lanahan_b_Page_024.pro
29e3b10a90ad8eac103b877bf889ce77
ef81656878567999f67ab3cb8ca791a3b6854796
54629 F20101220_AAANHI lanahan_b_Page_224.jpg
fcc71ea56043294c0898ad48cbe0a5cb
bb3384227f3f47edff1e0db1d21ba9c2ac87aa59
6368 F20101220_AAAOEB lanahan_b_Page_188thm.jpg
336936c92138c2656bb1fd94628052e3
11916666d42e411c84fbc59d87c34c9a77d45454
52815 F20101220_AAANUT lanahan_b_Page_137.pro
f579faed61b0f95c4e861ab94f860793
0931e22d1eabf3aab327d54563cbe51a565841ee
102336 F20101220_AAAMKQ lanahan_b_Page_145.jp2
170841523854d835cbc2ee84ee12f0e7
a14a4a4227c7549ed58ac0e64a9002792156b307
66453 F20101220_AAANHJ lanahan_b_Page_226.jpg
e1c25c46c95b935fe94a777a135bc440
ebf9e322ce70a80774dd5349b1e8f264cb66cb8a
24279 F20101220_AAAOEC lanahan_b_Page_010.QC.jpg
25d3f0c8884be53677d614189bc83594
60654ec07c3f6b0c4bb6d7ee827e02156b26347a
43574 F20101220_AAANUU lanahan_b_Page_139.pro
699d47dbabc373fdeac526db3b39a0e2
8c33a7323fc6c9563ad24a5d2fcb3fd9dfe7c190
2017 F20101220_AAAMKR lanahan_b_Page_116.txt
df1c88b1e1edd949387dfa2779d6575b
0854ed2c8713ef6527497d5f8ba981b2035211d8
85810 F20101220_AAANHK lanahan_b_Page_228.jpg
4662e3c841fe49c97c1089660bb4555c
1186e2db504816a5d824674f0fa510c3fd59de87
9920 F20101220_AAAOED lanahan_b_Page_230.QC.jpg
2fc54318e53d5678acbb5d1101d106f4
ac4d403d55daae6c234c909c2b7a60f7ad5f63aa
46456 F20101220_AAANUV lanahan_b_Page_148.pro
f4b1ef047681057d3391774dbf61c52c
cb30e589c8144b864effdd8e73e26275f8cd5557
6028 F20101220_AAAMKS lanahan_b_Page_126thm.jpg
ee354bb054234ea0739ac187ff890333
6bc3b0c4243709a47676c734471c6ce40956a8e5
80146 F20101220_AAANHL lanahan_b_Page_229.jpg
a5c057bbfa11f1a3f1fa5b565e2c6693
b42d59fbeaf4026859a7e0e18c4cdd6daa1dba34
6425 F20101220_AAAOEE lanahan_b_Page_167thm.jpg
5466ed3f481151c290b0a768ebfa4566
0e38f80aeff67baf5e28de6dff93bb2d37f913ec
51648 F20101220_AAANUW lanahan_b_Page_149.pro
9bd12c566388037246d94ba8892a4e77
eed3c324d9e412bf98bc74c444f2593f10df2e50
109194 F20101220_AAAMKT lanahan_b_Page_069.jp2
cddd998a042b82afe7574cedd460c909
56fcf8f0cb6f34042207ff73c208d7c8c009db71
29526 F20101220_AAANHM lanahan_b_Page_230.jpg
13461036dd9331b0c958da300265f914
41b06f0f3bb20bf73464cc5ef08ee30ecb5b308c
24650 F20101220_AAAOEF lanahan_b_Page_151.QC.jpg
82d7644e790c74a73fca4618cbe1ef33
e21df0c882e6a6922f56ecf3ff0d59d2bc6117f9
48894 F20101220_AAANUX lanahan_b_Page_151.pro
361470d04504e0bcbc48cc5b34f8dd3d
f8f90e04eaa6c7b88f1a3a85f8a68b048790c616
84037 F20101220_AAAMKU lanahan_b_Page_044.jpg
0fb42e7af46943064034b6c96e205c57
c010e481af0f670c0c5d28bbf5d8da48db22b723
92329 F20101220_AAANHN lanahan_b_Page_232.jpg
2e4e96e810583934fc4df8837b069b6a
f7c1030ea9a622462d1819ebf5c6751f32f5f328
798 F20101220_AAAOEG lanahan_b_Page_003thm.jpg
62abb4598ebf8a697b9ebe57a5a3935f
53d52746b2f374d23730533a5eb9aaf64eb1b8d4
27155 F20101220_AAANUY lanahan_b_Page_152.pro
ae3b0485399ea9425e21ac3bec42d245
c59c8f061d22bdeb54e828083180bf2feaddc3fa
F20101220_AAAMKV lanahan_b_Page_039.txt
b4beea39e26c3d02e0fdc444312241bd
a4c6a179611214da9a26033903483769ca595816
92880 F20101220_AAANHO lanahan_b_Page_233.jpg
c068c63942cc38a46748cdd344904704
584abb7288e1a13f7db216c1e6237720382b8590
20319 F20101220_AAAOEH lanahan_b_Page_220.QC.jpg
2e847d70b8c9d88734782f071bd71307
299c3a274764f158e467b891a214ddf05e462636
41590 F20101220_AAANUZ lanahan_b_Page_153.pro
1258a36b7f45e19206aa6a39523fc9c1
2a2aa42ff36b8f185caf13034988a1ca70c64748
F20101220_AAAMKW lanahan_b_Page_151.tif
d1d3bb545152c54904c614249a354bda
cf0d9a822378fc3aa3a89ac5037ca7a34b46f6dc
92083 F20101220_AAANHP lanahan_b_Page_235.jpg
5d54600255d91e92e1c5311b92306fdf
d005a561127bbf482bb0c8273e4d7beead87100b
6213 F20101220_AAAOEI lanahan_b_Page_147thm.jpg
e2f0d474a88e3a8921e59d2c0b0ce9c2
4ad28ee6d0889de84ba7bc44d62251459272a7f8
89527 F20101220_AAANHQ lanahan_b_Page_238.jpg
f49579a04954548edb2dbff0971cc6ea
449c3d104f04209e351c196f2d0ee2e8464be225
4750 F20101220_AAAOEJ lanahan_b_Page_155thm.jpg
06d4b9aab191ec838a2fdb6940f74c88
f49ba72c1140876621ba9f08464ab336686db3a1
84255 F20101220_AAAMKX lanahan_b_Page_024.jpg
e8065a40248be283f4207c9767b1e1e3
1c6f2b27fdd8d941097f193bb17dec04ea943be4
102366 F20101220_AAANHR lanahan_b_Page_240.jpg
2ae1daaea19a84d6257258482e818107
ab1bb5a78097b290ab51d980c66f563c533b7452
25051 F20101220_AAAOEK lanahan_b_Page_115.QC.jpg
9cec626c940aef298372e541d588553d
00381263c8eb1c96bd553161b11abac158b77e85
F20101220_AAAMKY lanahan_b_Page_177.txt
459b745e8a2cbf166c84d95a559f165e
9a5a38a3727b9d2ff2c8eafa37402900c82f6331
29931 F20101220_AAANHS lanahan_b_Page_001.jp2
22dea85957b435feb4a0fd6b50f9b710
767010bb9784d9b5b519f31ef2f32d906748f100
25109 F20101220_AAAOEL lanahan_b_Page_093.QC.jpg
fc830b1e0f71f72a15854d95b64b4cc1
72964787d9cf15b5771c44b4f70b084938e5e7fb
50955 F20101220_AAAMKZ lanahan_b_Page_147.pro
ef5f63a9642e8a1f683d90b3b4bef7de
17aec5c20bc53b7f19a4ac6cec99270da9c6a104
F20101220_AAANHT lanahan_b_Page_002.jp2
daf655fce46c20689c3211d0ea24f28d
74caa5e89c590e6c6a9e202878127162c277d0e4
26673 F20101220_AAAOEM lanahan_b_Page_049.QC.jpg
4a037b23801031dfa14f0af973af1c82
20e482f0e4cab0a68046aa240a02009569175261
10503 F20101220_AAANHU lanahan_b_Page_003.jp2
3a3abab7f90edcb89bf051ebe8587265
8e405e82c6c90101a46a6aae2438b33f082436f0
24651 F20101220_AAAOEN lanahan_b_Page_071.QC.jpg
07d5c05a9dcbfc7ae82ad260cae6ab1b
29edcbdce3d4bea5d43bcca8b8deed03536bb1da
1051966 F20101220_AAANHV lanahan_b_Page_008.jp2
becae3c71a35956af0a08d8c048fe090
2d367cde4f80ed9b9329d3906d2f0399373387f2
5971 F20101220_AAAOEO lanahan_b_Page_151thm.jpg
767ea10b2b2e4f48e2b60c40555fbcf7
4fc9d8bcdc4372710d3cb855713da47f13b9fde2
1051982 F20101220_AAANHW lanahan_b_Page_009.jp2
89c0bdcf46d87357d0d366235bd9accf
b00eb3c051daaf568322e0e4563276b169eb55ed
24632 F20101220_AAAOEP lanahan_b_Page_142.QC.jpg
d0e6aeeaa4736430491105ff4168a0ee
e18c7cb1e8ecc26cb213338f0c070e0f7774c536
1051959 F20101220_AAANHX lanahan_b_Page_010.jp2
d704e7b093759dbdbc4acaec68580c57
7b48730611d3399aadd345f9571914c036168fff
3713 F20101220_AAAOEQ lanahan_b_Page_241thm.jpg
cc38b235ed260b491eae0ab27d74a946
0a8da982e881eaea1efb8fc5e927cceb1e1caa36
91671 F20101220_AAANHY lanahan_b_Page_014.jp2
2df7b9122612987425f175970b0aaec9
3c44dd0188be6ec0d69e7c6d0f504f234a3c102a
6475 F20101220_AAAOER lanahan_b_Page_091thm.jpg
8a3e848649c4737aee8dd2fb79dd71f1
4bca420a4307a0973cc97a62771992982e5af48e
1051970 F20101220_AAANHZ lanahan_b_Page_017.jp2
caf75e24091b975a31650c5430718a66
77d68f9e0c467af21e1ba3a8fbf29844e1506610
26376 F20101220_AAAOES lanahan_b_Page_207.QC.jpg
13ccf7d0fb517e17442adcccc573ffcc
d83a49fafb2f6530694471409f930cb14d673e82
4970 F20101220_AAAOET lanahan_b_Page_224thm.jpg
6f39ff755b12f4e9db7c12643783a875
457ae70f8e2ac336d086640183442f984e0f4dea
17155 F20101220_AAAOEU lanahan_b_Page_005.QC.jpg
979399b9e0cc5d8738a2275c773f00e9
5cb3007487397f5b327ebeb2a81c506379596ed8
131642 F20101220_AAAMQA lanahan_b_Page_217.jp2
12cbe707317dde2f9e1f5347027d4ad0
642090c914b3720450e3099f446e6061d064286d
6411 F20101220_AAAOEV lanahan_b_Page_165thm.jpg
eb21610a64f7773ae1d1c19f1ab99d23
0b659290c855e532759b3edac2e7ed58c003cea0
F20101220_AAAMQB lanahan_b_Page_182.tif
a28ccbadd1b3317e7c83857cf7933259
ae0acbf1dccfb84b08b558daed53393afed55fd8
25032 F20101220_AAAOEW lanahan_b_Page_124.QC.jpg
1c8aab1ba62912ff5de2fc4bea0a2d57
bc51114450fe5c271f4fb0a6fc51734b5b737ffe
21604 F20101220_AAAMQC lanahan_b_Page_111.QC.jpg
a82be96129b11cb368212248fb966fe9
00821e6d8474783d01a6c3783ecf2077163f69ab
6480 F20101220_AAAOEX lanahan_b_Page_177thm.jpg
559acd41f99bbcfceeca720ddb4c5458
6a4e026eae3379748e5508c1756cabdb27761363
4369 F20101220_AAAMQD lanahan_b_Page_009.txt
39406c54313d6f5f8dda188b8b05c69e
c2814f3c067574870b74649fdfde1040f9349f16
6130 F20101220_AAAOEY lanahan_b_Page_031thm.jpg
3cee8798b64f98bd34444b55a026eefd
89b76b4996727e2c3e23ce332ada86df7112c9ef
F20101220_AAAMQE lanahan_b_Page_232.tif
e5e18977834401399fea7fc21a1635d3
3ebebaa0452f74a2ab291b7229d4dca5fe7e0602
49320 F20101220_AAAMQF lanahan_b_Page_026.jp2
a00bd6b13e1ab3483061b01d88a9c807
d5921ef3a3bfcd588f02353358d9e7ca840e0024
F20101220_AAAOEZ lanahan_b_Page_062thm.jpg
d61d215b8f3bd4bc1d5fb86fb9200fe0
0f97dd8765816c639afa9eb8f6b510c005cc57ca
1051972 F20101220_AAAMQG lanahan_b_Page_005.jp2
5a2b117cc08c58d5b63ac90e0fe9d8ac
f0e01934899bb3933ba6c5e92cf0058e929d1280
151359 F20101220_AAANNA lanahan_b_Page_221.jp2
e21a516a2b1d728109bd6e735e54653e
dd3ba5c2bdd1a99119236acf99a9eda01c55219b
58547 F20101220_AAANNB lanahan_b_Page_225.jp2
efa245af0033ed6eb7d6c59b05f379e4
e44eab1b8cf757d725915a839116ad786a9430c0
51352 F20101220_AAAMQH lanahan_b_Page_058.pro
866d939d3acdf11e2d74677f494b346c
711382db482afb62e21bd4748b1862d68a6aaea0
73785 F20101220_AAANNC lanahan_b_Page_226.jp2
2e9652598a68ae472e5f12be19e9a95d
7db8fc24e63932b79581a02d1a5e58eafb628254
6195 F20101220_AAAMQI lanahan_b_Page_046thm.jpg
a92f4103ef91654f44f1dc9252fcd77b
239a33eae927ba68e5d7cb2d6a640dc2cbd276e9
55389 F20101220_AAAMQJ lanahan_b_Page_236.pro
1aec0577a1e464bc4528d5080c5036d1
6579469756f6a6fa149fa785639193e8b3645be4
67719 F20101220_AAANND lanahan_b_Page_227.jp2
e5f2c6821744c5151b3cca38efcdb944
785776dcda1a3c2f643cd6ab20b3657cf4d5967d
52679 F20101220_AAAMQK lanahan_b_Page_188.pro
1675ef10d706aee511118a410e8df171
2824281cec0159ea09b8b2007062a2b8cc385aee
95512 F20101220_AAANNE lanahan_b_Page_229.jp2
ccee78614bf5f2c6227c544c41ab58a7
5337b8d6c6fede3cf188a3f23a00cc49c4038169
1533 F20101220_AAAMDA lanahan_b_Page_219.txt
e3bd68c3338a39c98b0b9e792545cb64
3529ff83f5675d2c99b52720c5210e2673bf1d83
108502 F20101220_AAAMQL lanahan_b_Page_100.jp2
8506f7301cf73d32b64646ce86c41794
0dc23553e083c7f277c913ca0b8d3c406f1a0cc3
38211 F20101220_AAANNF lanahan_b_Page_230.jp2
36863fe53610a5226825c3b9dfcabc1b
ee6744924f7416882632b84a00022dd8f4ecf853
F20101220_AAAMDB lanahan_b_Page_235.tif
f27279159fda922fbaa98c6a32daf8f3
f879e09865d7ff26f9d860bfe04bae42f65f4353
138150 F20101220_AAAMQM lanahan_b_Page_240.jp2
43334feb8ba72bdca987a63104cfff64
a082c735c6379e6d49cdfe464f47e3dfa5dbdcf6
107829 F20101220_AAANNG lanahan_b_Page_231.jp2
028bc1f6e2da2d46d10e17e671bdd71b
fe322a0973b7ec904dc26b225e934bdbc5dc38a4
24877 F20101220_AAAMDC lanahan_b_Page_035.QC.jpg
947bedff2d93fdaad587cace6bf90d2c
6c870b83230e5c02d6ad8f49f1bcacb2fac466ae
F20101220_AAAMQN lanahan_b_Page_204.tif
eadb6d30b0a1fe0b6b7d7c5cb5bc1faf
78fb2f3b480812df7a4de10293443f2c8d71b9db
133211 F20101220_AAANNH lanahan_b_Page_234.jp2
1ed7604fbc3af5c277ebb81fad2bb61d
e96da3304e9ff39bdf9f272f632ea56bfe035de0
20850 F20101220_AAAOKA lanahan_b_Page_154.QC.jpg
ecac0cbaa1b52b361c855b4d5608b42c
431b4fcfdaa984da425b2c06f572dbd233377741
105579 F20101220_AAAMDD lanahan_b_Page_136.jp2
372e0d784f1b4a57cc11c2cbd0de7a04
cef05cb13a430ccf510f74e5ecf1fcb00d7d2c76
6476 F20101220_AAAMQO lanahan_b_Page_096thm.jpg
1539ca3f5d30c20187a6f5902de970ad
2044185dbc213adb7a97d2685bcdf674e4c45af7
122217 F20101220_AAANNI lanahan_b_Page_237.jp2
7cb2a3a8c613c8189f9a5abe8a68ddc0
a79a5718a828779f76d802d569fcd7b320f404cc
27300 F20101220_AAAOKB lanahan_b_Page_156.QC.jpg
a23ed4b82a4492665f503296ede0675a
a2abec6e064bf5a8e342a05bc0a9a18dea9f98a7
F20101220_AAAMDE lanahan_b_Page_030.tif
e2341e4d38b3cb40fbc460a64648deb8
94a01ba71b681b1d90abecb101b261868d86dd88
53425 F20101220_AAAMQP lanahan_b_Page_053.pro
6efa21555087b0e88cbfb6122f0d2070
20e8da256d2930746c2a8ca81132a8b54fde8d38
50267 F20101220_AAANNJ lanahan_b_Page_242.jp2
7443db3da45d5328e126f0260ccb04e8
e15742ec8dd984492130be142133ac735fd4771d
F20101220_AAAOKC lanahan_b_Page_156thm.jpg
cf4d450035132e56fce6b35529d03e2e
a76248188907c034893dc35da03529bd5af44917
709 F20101220_AAAMDF lanahan_b_Page_131.txt
90948551814ff802444795c7736d7149
f1f68b5b34372669886eb9fa7dd23d093145392e
47156 F20101220_AAAMQQ lanahan_b_Page_228.pro
2bfe3cdbc10b804325edbe7035f372b8
fd7035b969256c966a6cbf4e922b1afda3065a2e
F20101220_AAANNK lanahan_b_Page_001.tif
0619877d2a11b713a78ef22f73eb3eaa
5ffccf1d09781b81eee806ed8a555cdce68490ac
18238 F20101220_AAAOKD lanahan_b_Page_157.QC.jpg
b28af53d3d6e3f0b2a4365acac93aba9
3edc9f622bb2bf8b98d2e044bd276c136f6dc345
112344 F20101220_AAAMDG lanahan_b_Page_198.jp2
cdabdb6a51a7bd972387c7f3692f19e7
1d6c671553262d9e3a5132c378e2f4d3eb04212f
83037 F20101220_AAAMQR lanahan_b_Page_069.jpg
e3d8196cee9ca872756fdf92f8c746e4
7b96440bac09b652d4ed9e875228a3a50e036a7a
F20101220_AAANNL lanahan_b_Page_003.tif
1942190ceb070c2c8969e36a418038d0
ea546e1c4847e696f285ecf81f5ada90d0a176da
5139 F20101220_AAAOKE lanahan_b_Page_157thm.jpg
1c63e07e3a8356b447c6e6beba72e664
dbeb5e46097434f42779b3b8135814487ffd6eb1
110827 F20101220_AAAMDH lanahan_b_Page_104.jp2
a203d685fd63935671bc4c571df2433a
8b1515634c50b9d8db31707301bf0b98a903d04d
F20101220_AAANAA lanahan_b_Page_062.tif
d35198bbf69d89df579405d1200bcde9
5b99a2d69d7d003114ba2d49013ae7bb4daddd66
6154 F20101220_AAAMQS lanahan_b_Page_204thm.jpg
7f986496bea714ffd9ed7ecded579ea2
52c4b7aabf7261772f2fc6bf0d67265480bff4ce
F20101220_AAANNM lanahan_b_Page_004.tif
6acf5ae5be065c994b31cc4df4d35129
742082a0f931c9093dc11df8de1aef3dbc92afde
24644 F20101220_AAAOKF lanahan_b_Page_158.QC.jpg
5225bbfec57a4f2542a6300d54f8b1b0
6704a8e23667e3b40a8e0ac7787c18daf8238ae0
2019 F20101220_AAAMDI lanahan_b_Page_190.txt
11cc963b2fe519c292fea1fcbfa494b1
b06dfd8c577a62d29c322b1a2d5e37a798f46e54
49563 F20101220_AAANAB lanahan_b_Page_092.pro
90247e904bab0654e9f660827b41fb62
d3605936786cc84bc31c9cbd01225e696434548d
83524 F20101220_AAAMQT lanahan_b_Page_076.jpg
6ddbb21a433c5604f64bac1fd6bbe1f7
3f3ad04a60481ce052f2876af156c4019c654574
F20101220_AAANNN lanahan_b_Page_007.tif
b87b303174aa060e3a8f205cea47e2c5
955e45c5215cc091d7765789c986bf3174d46924
6052 F20101220_AAAOKG lanahan_b_Page_158thm.jpg
dcfc1b7ac5fbb44f4ceb61a2688f4388
56f4d28f2e5f5a421bcffad9da3002aa756044ef
F20101220_AAAMDJ lanahan_b_Page_053.tif
4c97c1821fd638ea8e93a412b5fdef23
fe2fe4f07cc7aa0a006ecfb3e74b3b5e73251289
60726 F20101220_AAANAC lanahan_b_Page_224.jp2
20415208879844815ab9836d13c8ac86
932900af23827192a33a0e342ade9ee55e30df23
50323 F20101220_AAAMQU lanahan_b_Page_031.pro
061c4ec06dd49e7d220cdba4550d8fc1
9e663f7a6942bc0999d33569c33e5d7aeb2f3094
F20101220_AAANNO lanahan_b_Page_008.tif
4019ff38fbbdc15d7ef1ee6c8f996d32
fb201da2df0d3bab1f8f907795a89870a37d724e
26507 F20101220_AAAOKH lanahan_b_Page_160.QC.jpg
114edcd5c11f6185626ae095bde0e0e8
298fccf699d38f5ba7df2397511d5bf9204a24f2
83016 F20101220_AAAMDK lanahan_b_Page_143.jpg
9502ec748ac345922d4062d02dbde970
25b29b9e06bab30f26a5459322c55e85efeb1cbf
110916 F20101220_AAANAD lanahan_b_Page_144.jp2
4d53d2573b6af34ac798060167877297
eaaa3f6061d281537c11c1ffe8f894d1666d81ec
97775 F20101220_AAAMQV lanahan_b_Page_113.jpg
c0cc65f30908e23885c07fee677d48a1
f479cba8d5011249fa39627a630939766367554f
F20101220_AAANNP lanahan_b_Page_009.tif
91e446453757694c8c5482930f9a139d
fb692bb2d3695fd8a4466e7dbeb5e2056428d09b
6386 F20101220_AAAOKI lanahan_b_Page_160thm.jpg
4ddefb91bea58f17cf2475b2369ff3a9
e09f2115874448076367fddef850d49989b0c57d
114960 F20101220_AAAMDL lanahan_b_Page_089.jp2
aa38ba1b7e59073d5245c814d3550613
e4fe1ace14790924fda11ceb6e0b1417fcbffe2b
5611 F20101220_AAANAE lanahan_b_Page_223thm.jpg
573f43a74bfc70b9a3dfc30e508e68cf
2482da9cb9adcda8840c9e216a0ceff38cd38c52
79187 F20101220_AAAMQW lanahan_b_Page_085.jpg
fbd66ace3c4fa850c578afa8097ab749
36568132d142d33fc1d57c39432792b6fb69b395
F20101220_AAANNQ lanahan_b_Page_011.tif
48ed43a4386e5a5e7d95326b0e25f39c
cecc8175a5f7d17052344637822c5d7e2d0d8b64
18966 F20101220_AAAOKJ lanahan_b_Page_161.QC.jpg
a1563f73f65181f7327c784a1302971f
de26b72741c34d3e0e75da5e1bd29f1bbed27720
F20101220_AAAMDM lanahan_b_Page_204.txt
3a73aaf9259457922fad2d03e7b3e171
e886212eccf36fa55a470fc669eb1fe371c31fd6
6419 F20101220_AAANAF lanahan_b_Page_081thm.jpg
fdb89226daccf9b928f5122c0579cf06
7d6cec78d0d3704ebf1c47eabda980d7ff4a6e7c
26713 F20101220_AAAMQX lanahan_b_Page_188.QC.jpg
14d265167829a94ab90bd9163b249eeb
2ba7115542240faaf87ab81e2d699706f49f6ad1
F20101220_AAANNR lanahan_b_Page_012.tif
8555e02685d23a485fb21a9bfdc7a347
5b88be2f81c402bcfd3599e6aad0f64fd6682c24
24455 F20101220_AAAOKK lanahan_b_Page_166.QC.jpg
9885d8e5d404d1bb55ecb7551b418694
aeb6877dcf172d0098ca8acc70186ca9f6db2915
1944 F20101220_AAAMDN lanahan_b_Page_025.txt
3a3e67689e3c865f35b6adb98d7976ea
1cbc96f9fa4a1e2ebf33ab5e7e6d3f1cab58d2a8
F20101220_AAANAG lanahan_b_Page_097.tif
8dca00a228c8ce66441b385c1d4a59d3
77091b8f94800b4c66adbe250e515f734802c4ac
43444 F20101220_AAAMQY lanahan_b_Page_202.pro
387145d7de8b8b2212e448e2e4597f29
e883c98a9a952940626884afc94c9a474f9604da
F20101220_AAANNS lanahan_b_Page_013.tif
ed1c41b2ec3398b24f0f4e04dbe9beaa
87be51bdec07a045b9aac55310adafc8ee06baf4
F20101220_AAAOKL lanahan_b_Page_166thm.jpg
93d3ee02bee0e92f5cbf3aa8e6e381ac
5b2f8ccb6d4fbb44873bc048fb54f68f90babb0f
29698 F20101220_AAAMDO lanahan_b_Page_227.pro
e81beb84a3e76ade5781b9d646c5d353
5d4d223affa99455af0c1351231b57bdc8cebf11
2767 F20101220_AAANAH lanahan_b_Page_215.txt
decc681a1178966cbed5f5193c013299
0470bf31c32a7563d6768d2ebc17d6fe1eca537b
81627 F20101220_AAAMQZ lanahan_b_Page_115.jpg
ff9432d240e602b3d370e7f1e4799feb
3f3c221cc04d2ac4225e228d65a2d20783074cc4
F20101220_AAANNT lanahan_b_Page_015.tif
1ff3e1a2fde717d7d901efe080ea1e45
13bdba743e00a8c7e5d478e3158e38df047b8be1
25497 F20101220_AAAOKM lanahan_b_Page_168.QC.jpg
b08d80806aa4a7df0c3e9c90c4f2db68
965161665293ffdabca1966d219ed9bd198a6ec9
2674 F20101220_AAAMDP lanahan_b_Page_214.txt
9b6ab81012d94ede52ef90e6ba341d54
002d32545b79d11db24bdfb507e7dc217c56c563
F20101220_AAANAI lanahan_b_Page_100.tif
0fa68182fb48654be6ccfbc8cbd8dec9
2ba03684475af522cdd76d306010bbd393054599
F20101220_AAANNU lanahan_b_Page_016.tif
2075c787704993351396677e9b438494
d44b4037cbfaf11f5182efbbc017f3359fbd45ff
6453 F20101220_AAAOKN lanahan_b_Page_168thm.jpg
f062210e0e3312d2569b7674b061028e
f5244f4adb3b7c5d7ea17f7b816d2a0ec6e5b572
5692 F20101220_AAAMDQ lanahan_b_Page_154thm.jpg
1bdca0d0112edfef95597d7d0ad7bf7b
60b562522f2415aa205b1afccbcc1fcb9925ae1e
54163 F20101220_AAANAJ lanahan_b_Page_089.pro
b25ccb482136756dd5cbae2862226b95
5484b9a076ed1b1018ce7745420450e937a70c0d
F20101220_AAANNV lanahan_b_Page_018.tif
84a6d7550082c2e712700fa79983ef15
fe6d07a5364614a5396ce133b97b8f8156aaeb90
25350 F20101220_AAAOKO lanahan_b_Page_169.QC.jpg
6bd9988404de7e9963aa18bbc7f94bfb
948fd0c748ea0724af648f6e8082d22d03a09bce
F20101220_AAAMDR lanahan_b_Page_207.tif
5080b4f86c985aaa9cecab85b8cc9dd6
964130c2ee88c12d1df3ba09f9ac0987490e7507
51513 F20101220_AAANAK lanahan_b_Page_135.pro
1b99b6fc8103c039ada5e4a2322732d2
69758a27789d10f1a8af553a14a3a4ac62c51403
F20101220_AAANNW lanahan_b_Page_021.tif
1cc1301af6201e607d503bb03885e88f
36dae00d32b96681a368d1ec24f0589e51674f4d
6096 F20101220_AAAOKP lanahan_b_Page_173thm.jpg
6a9ef0522aacffb3d396602da52acb03
687c789ea78eea9dc0acd77d5eec18e001ff0c83
46826 F20101220_AAAMDS lanahan_b_Page_142.pro
92596c2e9009c40a6ce94a7fbc2a4f4e
2be11139eb34e2b51c68fcaf3bbcaf5f46b7ee5c
107984 F20101220_AAANAL lanahan_b_Page_021.jp2
30f4b201b24e06bfa2c2bb4083a79237
e68d56a2c2fc7a1a1ccf7c010b050ba1268c8b02
F20101220_AAANNX lanahan_b_Page_022.tif
5709942125a564bb1a0efd586bd68b2e
9862a042d4fe5592cb81d8cd00ac63ba20f79ead
26113 F20101220_AAAOKQ lanahan_b_Page_174.QC.jpg
10cec466141f24cc283c9cdcbbaefa9e
52aa2c2286977e77ea9080165588b20c499a6a03
83455 F20101220_AAAMDT lanahan_b_Page_219.jpg
cdaba1e49da17a2b9deaaa9302913f57
9145686d79c826eefda2016025b6b22a7541bea9
4548 F20101220_AAANAM lanahan_b_Page_210thm.jpg
b533ff8cd23dcd9555c8ef11f09b8f51
067eefc184f60e44d725ebe6ab933d45ff787bbc
F20101220_AAANNY lanahan_b_Page_023.tif
842f70dabe99d23fe1d0db829910f407
e15fdff124fbdd7f40147b1b70eb8e8ae9e2ea1b
6098 F20101220_AAAOKR lanahan_b_Page_174thm.jpg
f3868d22c22e75a0eac9679ca4b6c5d7
dd774aa24ab4eb6f3e9aed0bd0126f246653e35a
22965 F20101220_AAALZE lanahan_b_Page_171.QC.jpg
1499a085b84f15e322e6f0fa6fe4c7bb
f9477e51328f069b19053e74c801339237d4b735
101647 F20101220_AAAMDU lanahan_b_Page_228.jp2
ce3ee748435c8867cfe1d58807ab4a21
ae060e9e4e86b11f83f4e9e5b2f4dedf1fe30071
54667 F20101220_AAANAN lanahan_b_Page_105.pro
40415b288cb6f912ea8e724e42127293
b5cbbc7b662cf918be9655df0aa86e876f008d1e
6510 F20101220_AAAOKS lanahan_b_Page_178thm.jpg
7c2173ebc141fd86c5c2c8723735a816
da8cfbdb249a2b2b78b8b5c07bb56e679abd8dc9
44645 F20101220_AAALZF lanahan_b_Page_027.pro
bb1533e46e5a7f4e673e493a44ce6c2d
7ed15212bc1db78d7c71603acc0ffeae55244ddf
61360 F20101220_AAAMDV lanahan_b_Page_234.pro
accd1d51ff4f1596ea23736dfc8e4b09
dc1e3d09ac000659cdaac4746135c0e2967388c6
F20101220_AAANAO lanahan_b_Page_101.tif
cfe448a893ffdd57303e59348319487b
8eb2db4bd9de56dd5635cd91b84abcabaac9ba9e
F20101220_AAANNZ lanahan_b_Page_024.tif
4e1e9c3326819c7c3556ca47e143e70c
eb45e4dae5148394d63c51105a4d9b618e837b42
6021 F20101220_AAAOKT lanahan_b_Page_180thm.jpg
96fb861f89d791d15fd4c7b0976eda86
398585d389d244f426687cdd151a554903df2d08
50336 F20101220_AAALZG lanahan_b_Page_063.pro
8852d430316461d59a75ef53e379ea71
f137adcb8c10c20179914a8cedfd6eb60ad538a6
112176 F20101220_AAAMDW lanahan_b_Page_160.jp2
ba4110fcaf8a8821c7478bc27b50915d
7f52105fd51bcd5363a848ce2884b6ce48c1aea9
F20101220_AAANAP lanahan_b_Page_213.tif
fbcf1a36d188409e47d8576063c46f54
eb9ca12032ef7d1cc1af0f03a2167efbac76c790
26275 F20101220_AAAOKU lanahan_b_Page_181.QC.jpg
ca9be57daada49690410832c10c607a4
03c7985040ea762a74379641fcaec095972d2fb7
25161 F20101220_AAALZH lanahan_b_Page_167.QC.jpg
410fe9f86c193666a997208df448c7d1
c25b694c3735938700136d515d0f111f55f9de71
46919 F20101220_AAAMDX lanahan_b_Page_133.pro
9160b2850e205fd418f4fb19565f6d89
9535398ce1620a128f17d7a9a8898dff543ffabf
2109 F20101220_AAAMWA lanahan_b_Page_091.txt
143886669a062772a313be786500cdd5
282d9fad59a38c43f72fb0639562e1a1fb8c8cf1
F20101220_AAANAQ lanahan_b_Page_020.txt
7db6d73633c04a8611332a8a7934dc35
ce6a377348b498e28f8eac22f52a5f0a7c538e49
6379 F20101220_AAAOKV lanahan_b_Page_183thm.jpg
1f67f4698edc7e6e58a36fe778eac6cb
2dc1647886006bf0ffc9d7576b9d76c8f994765d
88717 F20101220_AAALZI lanahan_b_Page_089.jpg
8ab22191fd1f44350bba9cb5b3e2c79b
bfbb93fc96b84cd42253a8545ad85783adacd804
F20101220_AAAMDY lanahan_b_Page_104.tif
900f24f52526d7024ec0a8a655882691
9a114b2d2e0ea8a45ced3a00570dcb9f71e1ed68
F20101220_AAAMWB lanahan_b_Page_149.tif
23c18b004048329b1f4fe2b587116920
c537e2f418773525706d3fdf3461a152d970bded
103955 F20101220_AAANAR lanahan_b_Page_166.jp2
c1216c4a60a0af7b9a9a810007ad6724
040babc6a50284cd1ca4a201aaca8a9a04f5be18
6200 F20101220_AAAOKW lanahan_b_Page_184thm.jpg
996b60448b66563126020704d198d9f3
a4e3b2415a1ba8ffad7281a9201dcc8f6a0a84ef
26501 F20101220_AAALZJ lanahan_b_Page_172.QC.jpg
1e52153ad77dacfcc50c35a96ba488cb
f85eb4ead7fc933e8479ffd00a04af8060b94c4b
52015 F20101220_AAAMDZ lanahan_b_Page_177.pro
5f5c187d289e08875fb2a43bcc990fd1
2ed6607900914922d17b042f798358fda2c57d8a
68889 F20101220_AAAMWC lanahan_b_Page_153.jpg
f4310467863d3f394c57b60c8740cb0c
afdf3a6416f8b82cbeb9e8cc7917d44427c7766d
23143 F20101220_AAANAS lanahan_b_Page_180.QC.jpg
7607548f806bf24043bf06827167f8cb
55068208b3820d62014ffb1d7e117edfdaeca2a2
6254 F20101220_AAAOKX lanahan_b_Page_187thm.jpg
aa1d3aeebf5b8e1029ac3a16d9d1b88b
7f97c88fc03950850e6a4b64c61aaef132c096cb
27203 F20101220_AAALZK lanahan_b_Page_193.QC.jpg
5cfa34ffdaab199a1d8427fecda06915
e15db723f26636bdbd4caf66f480843cb99a27dd
27444 F20101220_AAAMWD lanahan_b_Page_118.QC.jpg
8fda0285d4e35f1ada31abcc4ec7b0d6
cb4d2d22c54fffd0e93b3879592ad48b6bbbc4d9
F20101220_AAANAT lanahan_b_Page_152.tif
fc09d551862bd6b4e7717aafada822e7
9e13fc46bd376fd8e187e97f67174daf1704a0e2
6080 F20101220_AAAOKY lanahan_b_Page_189thm.jpg
9f4740c77785e2178bc8a196cdf78a53
ab8dee38c7707ea92519299847254bb40a37ae39
40087 F20101220_AAALZL lanahan_b_Page_242.jpg
18c2d9aa79f0ae1cf089a358b09d6d24
f1126dd38d43b70fc2398aff9fb150cdca95fa5c
51922 F20101220_AAAMWE lanahan_b_Page_122.pro
3f2eaa30251c42f6cdfa9cddbeb8505a
7870027b1820d38439673ad8813cbeb3aff7982d
5628 F20101220_AAANAU lanahan_b_Page_231thm.jpg
91b7ea2faa170bb9cbe083b66001fecd
2e3090b809162c5d8a0e905d9f838e39e7e7b9de
5875 F20101220_AAAOKZ lanahan_b_Page_190thm.jpg
528f7793d659283f685d37dfa8799482
5b3c5e90a2a859ef60e8b0c29398190a00c41c7a
128074 F20101220_AAALZM lanahan_b_Page_008.jpg
a1afef9de6bd294d7573675ec4a00869
acd92284f625a190e542b44202336dcc41f1f046
11556 F20101220_AAAMWF lanahan_b_Page_026.QC.jpg
b6de77ccd64ea98a8debcb8eeb35d9da
469525d9a32dd742137acdfc7421afeec1fd7b5e
24557 F20101220_AAANAV lanahan_b_Page_211.QC.jpg
ccc5ec19498e9bc9874373b4eacf6793
be59b449b8438f329d6615a60124c9a25092f5d2
6284 F20101220_AAALZN lanahan_b_Page_054thm.jpg
7f34945049175566d621d883a8be3df5
a4b4df2b61451ba39c86221249fb7b61992959fb
6350 F20101220_AAAMWG lanahan_b_Page_172thm.jpg
0c723e856102df1fbc55bfdbabec25d3
db09702ed3ba389a355c57b74203a78eb406ce6e
F20101220_AAALZO lanahan_b_Page_179.tif
512f2bbd802eecc043ff4de954877d1f
6050a477cd4465600df0747126659029cd2d4f54
117671 F20101220_AAAMWH lanahan_b_Page_159.jp2
cb5649a4d8f8e5d63637e0ccda6ee128
4a6704f7dda0d1d1a503db5ebda85c72b86df0b1
27311 F20101220_AAANAW lanahan_b_Page_088.QC.jpg
9c09fb85ea975261d78ee26f2617f0ec
a0641a70d8b25b2e7daf257765a54ce937ff59ed
52345 F20101220_AAANTA lanahan_b_Page_033.pro
4449c8c2842f6c69e28cc6582011db25
fab7600e9cf6266291281c0736f35c40a366f95b
48271 F20101220_AAALZP lanahan_b_Page_071.pro
ef9911d4fd0baed0a77e3417201ff320
763e58d2b3ce8ca4c61ce495e805e5ff33510f63
53773 F20101220_AAAMWI lanahan_b_Page_091.pro
5ecbe7a014996a8dfb8be4059dabf98b
a5c0e7d66142af4ae4bf106a50834aecb9d2f2e8
86826 F20101220_AAANAX lanahan_b_Page_041.jpg
b148c359a727a9bd9d8f45ebf59ae266
e5ca836522b3cb7f656ce7e9e75efd096c5c4574
51145 F20101220_AAANTB lanahan_b_Page_034.pro
9b377bfe450d221bf93f9a905d20d10d
b34e2a8b6fd6bbed1f29696c097044921600c96d
F20101220_AAALZQ lanahan_b_Page_082.pro
d3b1e5cfa8119a0ac8af47c7059fd618
4b493e77b5dabe38f7120b146463b2dc857d53f2
50179 F20101220_AAAMWJ lanahan_b_Page_184.pro
2f4ed05667266f22729d67ae50844ff8
bb551b409f6793423dc62aa24748da9b2488067c
2583 F20101220_AAANAY lanahan_b_Page_240.txt
b6968401983ab2dd6fe4c50dc09dca96
5f20eeb03de82558f9b563f1ce2904fc7d6eb004
49033 F20101220_AAANTC lanahan_b_Page_035.pro
abf46d9458d891398d739f3d7e227915
f17a5fe910010d3c2d854aa758e9c0534d301d94
1231 F20101220_AAAMWK lanahan_b_Page_224.txt
04b352ecce329d2ac3d11ce27f6034b5
09ee7b9fe3569aa0df07334322e38ded521db59d
28457 F20101220_AAANAZ lanahan_b_Page_178.QC.jpg
ef728e947ec6f175a50ec487d9f03354
f74a5e8c71fc922042b9851f43470c721c710d22
50734 F20101220_AAANTD lanahan_b_Page_036.pro
d5c5c4d75f00b0f7227c5e1d6bc1b16a
e799dc8b64667b05851919fe2e159d1a09018136
53519 F20101220_AAALZR lanahan_b_Page_114.pro
e4b1d78168d2b57b1322280e072a2d9c
4dc10aae5d901097a2c83fc92013e059ad56487b
111515 F20101220_AAAMWL lanahan_b_Page_106.jp2
e57ee0b34a20194ea1f0f1690256c6ca
4d0c49a99efe4f79116b31037d38a760a0301679
44427 F20101220_AAANTE lanahan_b_Page_037.pro
ae8269a5f4f3c2d637b7e550b5fe1b13
79dea5ac1f9272c1fecd5d22d90deb5e9b680a56
48914 F20101220_AAAMJA lanahan_b_Page_231.pro
2e3770767ba2940d23c271d150a3d9f4
38cb5207403297d3fe3d5bd2965a1d0d3d3a05f7
2035 F20101220_AAALZS lanahan_b_Page_044.txt
86418613d885d7aa5de6c136c19341c7
a94b0e3d89ee418a94866722d662ed66ef8e2158
25526 F20101220_AAAMWM lanahan_b_Page_094.QC.jpg
6ba8560d2433449d1a77e7646bf940de
f27ff8078c7a5c5a2dfe3990c29bb5394b92a649
50965 F20101220_AAANTF lanahan_b_Page_038.pro
e73c89e1d66342978717010005f7a98a
75ac9272389835937e43b1100895021fba444182
5482 F20101220_AAAMJB lanahan_b_Page_164thm.jpg
3f23f2279dc6c8a21ac6ab7c3851c35f
fa14c10b978130a9f6a8673ebbc78862ea18a749
821072 F20101220_AAALZT lanahan_b_Page_223.jp2
4bcb5bacb6b873fc635a72c157f89511
d0796b518ab518ae0e71863a15893bd5b7e7c960
52472 F20101220_AAANTG lanahan_b_Page_040.pro
12aa6b690437cc8e64f1f3acf874cd14
e43af701f2fb5dd2039f26220eedac1472fafd0e
5980 F20101220_AAAMJC lanahan_b_Page_036thm.jpg
e343606f153ce53d7b767c27f4e488e9
19cd42a40114599c29c186cb148abe54e19ede1c
18855 F20101220_AAALZU lanahan_b_Page_013.QC.jpg
7d6fe2c12d11eb8e537109bf94d5c914
0d00c5417ccc7d3097bce88c6d757cd2ee12619e
2090 F20101220_AAAMWN lanahan_b_Page_192.txt
c8bafe9faa5e3091247e3db9a2220de7
80a8da5d5119eca6175dc1d401d818dae00d5943
50039 F20101220_AAANTH lanahan_b_Page_042.pro
79db9939abd1c6e5a03cfb2317e8fd20
1bbe8d5cbb5404f2e649ab85fa785ed6e69567a5
2327 F20101220_AAAMJD lanahan_b_Page_235.txt
623762dadc052a95a249d48911ac4ba2
24831fd980befe81e3477e4ae172ad7b2bb6fe85
115398 F20101220_AAALZV lanahan_b_Page_091.jp2
4f752c08b8b529b044607e0d66a17bbb
cd598182a699aba702884654329a4cc61fad872c
82374 F20101220_AAAMWO lanahan_b_Page_147.jpg
b8752a128e5916a272304b69ab24bc27
ff6f13f7d69e3c4c7cdbdaa9de10c2e8f3d17125
50163 F20101220_AAANTI lanahan_b_Page_045.pro
cabeb7ee83d34a695ab7f920313bb20b
1733f3e81bc210694137269833fc19c1bcbde612
5711 F20101220_AAAMJE lanahan_b_Page_022thm.jpg
629003bb6796411ab4aacba89c851966
32109f64fe1c65111e3be85f63227068b67eb7e3
F20101220_AAALZW lanahan_b_Page_037.tif
259a952e111abf2e199fc3452d900ed3
cd1b9bf24aa1a50aa6d7774c6393c6dd51619cff
49555 F20101220_AAAMWP lanahan_b_Page_069.pro
25b4f06346afae55268de04753f85fd7
a9faf2faa7e5b9855cb508d94fe45337374b5569
216 F20101220_AAAMJF lanahan_b_Page_209.txt
30678e1079378578f34bbf30481af7c4
6f02320696eb40373768e5960002ea59498b44f4
82738 F20101220_AAALZX lanahan_b_Page_194.jpg
e21cc93a0cdc728d8a6716f8027b4790
678d1ecbc4b6f1379519a0c3d74726ae1815567f
F20101220_AAAMWQ lanahan_b_Page_139.tif
5254f82928d56dc4a600e61ce5633392
95377b3ddfb1bce0b821f88b1ce746e85a64bb18
51878 F20101220_AAANTJ lanahan_b_Page_046.pro
91697a7b49b1a6f201ac5c167afc44a3
cd514338f3ad389a320154f134fc793fe1e0157c
4266 F20101220_AAAMJG lanahan_b_Page_002.jpg
cfeb09c3d47e8afaaddd99236799af6e
dcd6fcb270df8a35acbb425244da9c2a4dfff01a
102896 F20101220_AAALZY lanahan_b_Page_133.jp2
b2a45c9dd0129671a9c1c156ad740181
f525a4de6df5ccef8cdd605159b4f2bdcec79ff6
50469 F20101220_AAAMWR lanahan_b_Page_124.pro
5203c5f1239e1041ded9e8c278476fca
fdd8b537ddc5924c3510f12e380e2641b7486933
F20101220_AAANTK lanahan_b_Page_051.pro
d630c4b108f3b74ddfd3a18efa6215a1
d4a1f8dcb5fa65c9a4d67b3059d72fef59fa1935
110304 F20101220_AAAMJH lanahan_b_Page_121.jp2
1dc2976f439254dcd0c157f5278cdcec
a5d6093137536f34ed83cc26860b1ecb52129674
6219 F20101220_AAALZZ lanahan_b_Page_040thm.jpg
3ae7be4fcbe3a832147a34a243063559
676d92c00cc2fbd1914a507eb746c33bab1b42ab
86540 F20101220_AAANGA lanahan_b_Page_172.jpg
befc45c10a043c6dcd452ae124e4d8d5
44327bb50bca45d5196746848a9a86082b94bd8a
51879 F20101220_AAAMWS lanahan_b_Page_225.jpg
349cc01c3332a4e3df01413c192a5c9c
036103db06c4b0467ad6d80dd3d532242d9ec8b2
50870 F20101220_AAANTL lanahan_b_Page_052.pro
3975766c1d75b70392df7a1cf58fa047
f2c2e283d628ec61df19d7f90adbfb227c57647d
F20101220_AAAMJI lanahan_b_Page_211.tif
7dd7bded76d62717bb61e7b2c1e64855
712a27a1ef0d10b1da16563734c96a690590c998
91875 F20101220_AAANGB lanahan_b_Page_173.jpg
671aee1278078912b0575fa3173264df
0bd420d59fe819e432791ad3ed02f37ff8ab2931
41178 F20101220_AAAMWT lanahan_b_Page_120.pro
aedff3b86c5ceb632bbc6c7b07b71e66
ea706256999ab1a792d091a52ca9a62572e735f0
F20101220_AAANTM lanahan_b_Page_054.pro
21880c6144d306601c1a7d78e8d28db3
367a26e34cc0cf8267d04ae488ef76fd1740706c
48165 F20101220_AAAMJJ lanahan_b_Page_060.pro
96f0f7319f8e2a7134e3df8746e8d20c
a66d7698266ab53590fcc287e2db3e2f1e5cc46e
66205 F20101220_AAANGC lanahan_b_Page_175.jpg
2baee99f6237d5596f50c7e326c1dccd
d2c936caeee5fda6e2a03e67aa956b2964e42652
5525 F20101220_AAAMWU lanahan_b_Page_200thm.jpg
2bf6504d6f9337940d05fa2702d5ec01
54d7b27dc299208a4bedd913e9db391b1f6b7342
50240 F20101220_AAANTN lanahan_b_Page_056.pro
e5508b0272ba5471786eb46dff2a0a97
d054621ead899e3ad821d71276eb98956596b923
F20101220_AAAMJK lanahan_b_Page_223.tif
bdc722929851349b53af7301f0a43cdf
ce19f48f5aa9e383944995107fb42a3ae9673059
85871 F20101220_AAANGD lanahan_b_Page_176.jpg
449df8a7e4cb2d1c5474eddbf7380fd7
a7e6d4814ae08ecc702b70a568d41e6009d0e310
37110 F20101220_AAAMWV lanahan_b_Page_012.pro
79bc5ed0a002000133a8b49677dc06d5
a8cca2bb6e32616ead1ee7d627dd8e58dbc07958
47993 F20101220_AAANTO lanahan_b_Page_057.pro
c2a26510b96fb042d28f59702c4c8911
2d08405b3018823ba4b0b0388c0533a37a85f55d
50984 F20101220_AAAMJL lanahan_b_Page_138.pro
461297dd7989de0b4011d05f3984f6e8
2ea0eef4965260f44462dd33dc7188392d4a3388
101800 F20101220_AAANGE lanahan_b_Page_178.jpg
bc0c7b3042bc5514368ae49aed9d0db6
b821280217de386957155cf3e4712e4efe104749
1995 F20101220_AAAMWW lanahan_b_Page_078.txt
02b8278d889d53afd7797c6401398aaa
7efcac8f04b7546de10df1ff19e811f36482f52a
48784 F20101220_AAANTP lanahan_b_Page_059.pro
ec517fae0cfa6a965a01f71f77007e6f
74ba9d97122123ba628a0a5a833cf614344e4000
47776 F20101220_AAAMJM lanahan_b_Page_025.pro
738d982480938ad609c61ebfa36f9243
747d87dda566e0fe90d43f219bfc44295f7a97b5
66635 F20101220_AAANGF lanahan_b_Page_179.jpg
db92d6ac1aef7d210f826987a14b25b1
2df85d8832f3134d02b9043cbe1e98166be59f32
24346 F20101220_AAAMWX lanahan_b_Page_145.QC.jpg
e2f5d2d4c256c0977c6b3fa163a75ca7
c9e608cab1cb3d829f267884a5a72b3a7cecf971
50367 F20101220_AAANTQ lanahan_b_Page_062.pro
55ecc23dc7f8aa48f28ea5ca005da4e0
54e210221c9e8a3718d7307c6d2f317b3e856918
122079 F20101220_AAAMJN lanahan_b_Page_236.jp2
99987390c49d0dc6545584e52e771697
476328662140b12eb6e14b1a4d603784d92072c7
74338 F20101220_AAANGG lanahan_b_Page_180.jpg
5f5889b7959210b445e8bd48473e76ef
b945ffa1bf0a56c668c5599f8edf5a2067e1988a
F20101220_AAAMWY lanahan_b_Page_076thm.jpg
dceafa288414c532d9fe8f0b32abb0d9
814033962b4cf3881c69743490704852162c222d
41506 F20101220_AAANTR lanahan_b_Page_065.pro
e91cdf7629bb1e58e1417b1ccda8b1cd
d89dad26a6d5cc80074775cc9d6681979117e2bd
F20101220_AAAMJO lanahan_b_Page_079thm.jpg
95d1342e771e3f83a1560f17e6b0b925
62ac51187f5463a422ca7a844432fcbd152a7ae3
85449 F20101220_AAANGH lanahan_b_Page_182.jpg
d233daee8d963a00e3b87ea98cef76fc
7be268ff5c107cb8d555e927df234f8354b19de4
86811 F20101220_AAAMWZ lanahan_b_Page_004.jp2
a72f779a86a601123b604eb0e7cd9fd4
263aedd38e1e338c046f784abb272f33f9897103
27533 F20101220_AAAODA lanahan_b_Page_114.QC.jpg
33675dbbfbe394135cbc594700397d23
222bea6c91d8519d4353c9dc532704694fdb06c8
49774 F20101220_AAANTS lanahan_b_Page_066.pro
925dbf2bb8d4efeb37adad24339992d6
d7ee09dd63689541d90c38b4278534772fe265f0
104121 F20101220_AAAMJP lanahan_b_Page_057.jp2
c1154b693ec9b6632a0fd2571a55a90d
32a11384bb7d4bc778fac4a6901dbb9acfa32b3a
86956 F20101220_AAANGI lanahan_b_Page_183.jpg
6a41383324b073545fc3eb872200342a
892e9bee7c0246d0f2d06f9623707deba326766d
6178 F20101220_AAAODB lanahan_b_Page_193thm.jpg
bb46e5e64b9116e773207de4e1bf1c7c
e76b182fe83d12ffe8d9f80e12e5000367d7007e
51312 F20101220_AAANTT lanahan_b_Page_070.pro
f97f870daf3359cb0b37df80b4153273
f8b363247a1dc3ec761fbcb643a935ece56981cd
47054 F20101220_AAAMJQ lanahan_b_Page_220.pro
8925127653684e7c4d7160afbc492698
dc60f770e67ea72aa9349aaa3f71a0a6bccfa4ae
83076 F20101220_AAANGJ lanahan_b_Page_185.jpg
653505e7be5463e6b6bc5dc21f4bc4f4
de7c5cd7506bd8b92e99c193a8a16e6704cf8f6c
6333 F20101220_AAAODC lanahan_b_Page_163thm.jpg
318e1398f24809fe94fba7e1f3f06a27
fdc2cd42f2f0eedde07bf6507d5d8673e1c1af6a
51512 F20101220_AAANTU lanahan_b_Page_072.pro
3d8a7a8ae9c7e2e00cc3b839f53c2061
22108619da195fd8b81ba7947eb240d8cc26c5bf
5337 F20101220_AAAMJR lanahan_b_Page_191thm.jpg
4474a1c172739fa9339262eb32addc41
46246bd2a8f439dbb14d8b686e83f06629f199d3
71732 F20101220_AAANGK lanahan_b_Page_186.jpg
de7e9feadfdc3e8f708992f2e5f29094
55c88c7f203749d033438313afab1859eba4b5c5
28883 F20101220_AAAODD lanahan_b_Page_009.QC.jpg
8f148ef634d05f9888ce1c9b58c7c38a
7d9e0c1baa5db93ec11a303da989445a447c43ba
51858 F20101220_AAANTV lanahan_b_Page_073.pro
1b4de0dd1976d4eb211b34bd1fa6ea06
55f9e31b90bc2b456de80841c39f525700698c3a
97439 F20101220_AAAMJS lanahan_b_Page_216.jpg
eb51850030b1b8e1cd4c56765ac62edc
fb989f7448c09a90c7389fa5abfec357bc0ff363
86276 F20101220_AAANGL lanahan_b_Page_187.jpg
39df7a9671a62f22d2e9e2c22e2a4a72
9b1022b7eeb37d0850a1abd8b8a762c6af2fd0ad
26860 F20101220_AAAODE lanahan_b_Page_217.QC.jpg
ed586fa1d6e213206c40ae4245148381
c285f94d383b69a9bc29facac4777348eb17c3ea
52178 F20101220_AAANTW lanahan_b_Page_075.pro
4dc607a7f4fcd659c87f687f26813d23
d6282bdd6ba1a927c45d6e0f959c1733f63877f2
3038 F20101220_AAAMJT lanahan_b_Page_199thm.jpg
d847f82588ebbac112f2e364372780b5
c06454f5f43a2f4a1268474adb2d53f26684d6d2
85583 F20101220_AAANGM lanahan_b_Page_188.jpg
066ea58675aa981716f56bf79e57c691
3be0ca348423a54aaf36cac84649cbe3980d766c
27049 F20101220_AAAODF lanahan_b_Page_040.QC.jpg
95c64868102422c35d0927f0754ba6ae
1ff62825ed904ef193b0695947bfeaa7f7b4a7b2
50392 F20101220_AAANTX lanahan_b_Page_076.pro
86a20487d0c4bdff40e8d87ba4e4ef0a
c1596c2a89a61012c0e057914f786e0f7cb77290
5856 F20101220_AAAMJU lanahan_b_Page_023thm.jpg
f3512c723a529312d8cd7ec956812134
9b05c72189e9a352765e2703b3281d21c2b68315
78821 F20101220_AAANGN lanahan_b_Page_189.jpg
c6eebc551d4546b8c8d32c5168414784
e680a44d81693c6ff4e55fb6a9fa5687e90f61ff
21780 F20101220_AAAODG lanahan_b_Page_153.QC.jpg
813ab964d9b802b963a62ef93d44fdce
7a64531cc91a8b878c9cb8fcade4fb797fb37fb9
51174 F20101220_AAANTY lanahan_b_Page_077.pro
623a66e0cacf8829630c176c4c8c2dbf
1ce1442536082d78a4c5a43e63ae14f56ceb8e4a
6796 F20101220_AAAMJV lanahan_b_Page_215thm.jpg
d867c25584cf2fde0233a48575a6dcb8
f8c07e7538f989309c47aaacd0ebce380d70bdb8
82782 F20101220_AAANGO lanahan_b_Page_190.jpg
c4e52bfdd700aa764455ba1908fc6cbb
21b9d7f1405979a1f9f0cf7f89bffccb4c997e88
6518 F20101220_AAAODH lanahan_b_Page_137thm.jpg
12fe146d9b018282a6c6c88abdf68a0b
67745204833ad5b1f9148ae566fba8ae62bfc903
49424 F20101220_AAANTZ lanahan_b_Page_079.pro
1d23185d1a12d50dd9f9094cf787145e
7728bb0e4c40940081c63d53acd583439b6d041b
2082 F20101220_AAAMJW lanahan_b_Page_187.txt
4c4b3e13b65b0b698212b526b038962c
685e05d6d9ad5889a415d4e2afbf7018ee47208f
62902 F20101220_AAANGP lanahan_b_Page_191.jpg
f1a3e9fe451e0ab5260a851936d36257
f68526ac89842949c2deec07a5c9511a92fef7fe
18413 F20101220_AAAODI lanahan_b_Page_227.QC.jpg
16c8b84ec7e92a56e61d3eadb09c550a
0935de83a7e7679a2a2f57e076a5695a7ab28fd1
58165 F20101220_AAAMJX lanahan_b_Page_241.jpg
25d77e5e443c642920a326bcdf9f84a7
08d40ebbbf8a8e61b189b452da05a429aa76be6b
87011 F20101220_AAANGQ lanahan_b_Page_192.jpg
792039116863551de3f3e4889d001c76
864f7ea52228c3f3a4ab1ce5ec0839e86e24a446
6541 F20101220_AAAODJ lanahan_b_Page_181thm.jpg
1111e96cb666d21acfe14115ee5f564f
12d1afadb86d9e4d05afbff6945c2ec5386f5051
F20101220_AAAMJY lanahan_b_Page_229.tif
7a8e8e1b9572fe5d80d173819546cd3e
ffbed81772b0b391d8242c704edf73784f835c85
91276 F20101220_AAANGR lanahan_b_Page_197.jpg
9797138e9af4f06585792ea08c3ee869
bffb7d4a49d85509774780686db065341284aa82
6407 F20101220_AAAODK lanahan_b_Page_053thm.jpg
1e38c0a3240f89abca64a7673758fe96
911b046d6aa404ef6575188472155254c8ddb0ac
49425 F20101220_AAAMJZ lanahan_b_Page_016.pro
3b88f11f90b4d19f8eba6d16b191f640
480b47f17c3e88013e2ad34e87a14b7dce6e6883
85787 F20101220_AAANGS lanahan_b_Page_198.jpg
2a7f4959dea2ba9b980aa8c2015d1aa7
470a5d2b7de94bb70bf33dbbc118832da0470bec
F20101220_AAAODL lanahan_b_Page_116thm.jpg
92dfe0de9bc9dd6c4a3192a881f533f5
a482d52b7face08b421cbfa57535f6a6a79aa700
38450 F20101220_AAANGT lanahan_b_Page_199.jpg
4619c4b3639734ec212c9abad6a6c4f0
832aa40a2fa996a371632bcaf5748a87f718f216
6320 F20101220_AAAODM lanahan_b_Page_237thm.jpg
5116686852f076bd11ff95cd0c3a0cc5
dafee5c93678d594ab6ad49a66155cf081a1ad6c
75411 F20101220_AAANGU lanahan_b_Page_200.jpg
6dc0f8defd57a45166911e4465dfc944
19e4b5199a809cf676afd0447aead02e9a0a775b
26401 F20101220_AAAODN lanahan_b_Page_101.QC.jpg
557b4b2b3b17c534aac828442dc95bc6
2be80a93a60b3079f6b4778711765970952753f3
80995 F20101220_AAANGV lanahan_b_Page_201.jpg
cc995c37d0a4328686d54734e8bc0120
fb8d3e925843720d1282a6f6f766b1909d7cd4bf
28375 F20101220_AAAODO lanahan_b_Page_017.QC.jpg
ab338db9792c8332ea537d78dd43dde2
36f376a2ff1f2c328cdeca34cb98aceda9e3cd1a
78453 F20101220_AAANGW lanahan_b_Page_203.jpg
a325d5ec6b54c8cbaec90bf38712e288
17fdf3c68846436f45916d3c67702dbb62776414
F20101220_AAAODP lanahan_b_Page_129thm.jpg
3ef0bd3b5c4d44225090e1543c25d736
c7c3197d14c6b49c229effdeae1cb54d93381a2d
81068 F20101220_AAANGX lanahan_b_Page_204.jpg
329f05e9833f19bfe8fce8d0b6676958
5038e577928e43954e259142dca01fbf24b9e7df
956 F20101220_AAANZA lanahan_b_Page_087.txt
333677bbe987adca29ad162810289ccc
847765ff2e7dc4a6ce1dafbdce5f6975510a7079
6205 F20101220_AAAODQ lanahan_b_Page_169thm.jpg
f95d9add6153bee40bba254a3fa4c955
41ed5632fc1cd0d30f05be8d96e47a2af25df4e1
86205 F20101220_AAANGY lanahan_b_Page_205.jpg
74d2764ff27429f23fd839984cc88f06
62fcf60b0b65731cecaf0d932ac1e1429892ff98
2204 F20101220_AAANZB lanahan_b_Page_088.txt
7e15f484c0e66b5a57c9bf22434187d3
5c59b42d74b9ac9542fb47795ad3de38a9d03a51
5522 F20101220_AAAODR lanahan_b_Page_004thm.jpg
1e8e64eb882740ae56f7fd22ae54b90f
7b49c50e4870eca6c167aa480755f700089b16f9
77502 F20101220_AAANGZ lanahan_b_Page_208.jpg
2c3d52854b3ff1a1fa12f7100de7101c
64d4cb0fde4663d21eb3149084155d3ce7ca2203
1984 F20101220_AAANZC lanahan_b_Page_092.txt
b45596cbddcd8b453787c31c8b44b264
0e76a56a31f3729b0dbd470fa6762fa2386a8f7f
26409 F20101220_AAAODS lanahan_b_Page_138.QC.jpg
2a0ace8272044c2a449ef139a109d2a5
3f308ffac8e09c6ad7e3f244b4ecdcc176843b72
2056 F20101220_AAANZD lanahan_b_Page_093.txt
7444093f9c0d371b3d9d3cf02b5490fe
9263855c1dfa6658cfca0845a5003fda970497da
6139 F20101220_AAAODT lanahan_b_Page_205thm.jpg
29ce564b45c9c4dd854dc6183d0a560d
f8e08bd5ceb740748db6af260b897c9110bda9aa
F20101220_AAANZE lanahan_b_Page_094.txt
e9b32139bd5c49486caae692c1e7763c
5ab3df90b68303cc5a450b63a7cce452d548789a
26381 F20101220_AAAODU lanahan_b_Page_034.QC.jpg
627f5ad862545902a791087293a69141
372ce399981c89f9bd1a13497542c8c6d37dbffa
81700 F20101220_AAAMPA lanahan_b_Page_206.jpg
648b36e5bceb2dd3129adbc01f777e26
7478db72b1ad5c80d404c7da63a98c57dff645a0
1973 F20101220_AAANZF lanahan_b_Page_097.txt
fb7c81c410fbfd64b54b90c35e9b9b1a
50a516d96f1e0e169e71f277b837fa566dee29b7
6272 F20101220_AAAODV lanahan_b_Page_101thm.jpg
ad3f737816ec481698378f2078d47ab2
3715b322b851be7e6f6af33701be7df34feee00c
F20101220_AAAMPB lanahan_b_Page_146.tif
2f9031f38a99a00d309dadaa9cd1904f
d8d3c460f5047a10bf17cc628590664585a02986
2121 F20101220_AAANZG lanahan_b_Page_101.txt
8a29cad5470a4179f0f8f066e77a8764
6c1765f7cf5eda7469c6a473df82db085883d10b
F20101220_AAAODW lanahan_b_Page_238thm.jpg
a99560b201672c4757866704989c3448
e50c60eaca5a0c7ebb275a6c60251b47f8910c7b
F20101220_AAAMPC lanahan_b_Page_074.tif
5bf9069cbfd1ce5015c12558ecd1ca99
b638e6ba29e93f45b9101b7f9e975bd111de2ba3
1951 F20101220_AAANZH lanahan_b_Page_102.txt
9334bf75bc59dd78f1ddfa69b554b9f2
256c75402e4a861476e516822d79371e4a77b05c
5477 F20101220_AAAODX lanahan_b_Page_132thm.jpg
815d04d4388df85469870e022af17315
e2e32b7e58d1d4fe970737d50d0a7b63554d2e67
F20101220_AAAMPD lanahan_b_Page_115.tif
c8e0341aea038b0829c32717207eba67
5150d6fd294befc445fa0c6ac9bcef54afac754a
F20101220_AAANZI lanahan_b_Page_103.txt
85d38fed410be9a728afd29dfb30319c
44ee97634c483da4aa8aa56e0b325b6b2d293017
106793 F20101220_AAAMPE lanahan_b_Page_206.jp2
31e0ac14942b9ae8610fe83216dfc160
b9dd10c7cf15404552826eb78c322574b0a07d2a
F20101220_AAANZJ lanahan_b_Page_106.txt
2fb244a4ec6e9d98bd8a2fcc410b5b12
ca5f30712da7f49279e4ab527bfdc60648315f42
F20101220_AAAODY lanahan_b_Page_127thm.jpg
ce4ad57ee3643b69553c222b845297dd
c8a32e4c78cfb560bd2beb77a60bf9eaa4a18a62
24816 F20101220_AAAMPF lanahan_b_Page_239.QC.jpg
3c1c25c73fbffb5e4a67fe36ee4f036d
6fea661e89bcf40bec1579869f436981ad5e0d22
1921 F20101220_AAANZK lanahan_b_Page_107.txt
13cce1a89b58002acd4b0ba7307f4428
9e9a87cd2a2b4830da023f20c454c6b4cf0c75a9
28136 F20101220_AAAODZ lanahan_b_Page_213.QC.jpg
78115e700b04cb24d84fe615707c0dc7
4ae9bcf5ae5e6f2636fdbbe4acf635552d388129
88004 F20101220_AAANMA lanahan_b_Page_179.jp2
e77e06b48d7f4eb30eda124be5b5900a
7fcebf4c6488c1ce009e9ad9e6bd3533d128be6c
2126 F20101220_AAANZL lanahan_b_Page_109.txt
04b0be18f1b90d95698a5123f5a90726
5127337aa73bd5bd70ba7322ccf471bdce5ff592
2284 F20101220_AAAMPG lanahan_b_Page_236.txt
237ac8df367bf21c8456d095778ac38e
5de41db65dca7bd3d0a56013a1f3bcf0a01a7013
1026571 F20101220_AAANMB lanahan_b_Page_180.jp2
c029add01a52451e78bd23702b049a75
50ded9b683c13852ba9c637b758ab3da4205fb0a
1750 F20101220_AAANZM lanahan_b_Page_110.txt
b5f128058c8591d4e422fcec91f5aab5
0e110174204ca9749ae2a30ac9f262861a1bacf3
769767 F20101220_AAAMPH lanahan_b_Page_087.jp2
bf013d43ed0fac45ac2bc16e39b81847
bc1ebd603f493941b33f6851ecfc2710d070f4d1
1076 F20101220_AAANZN lanahan_b_Page_111.txt
818a4a9375f57c2bca379b04f5b4fc45
56037c0cba4bb8a89824b06fa6e5f5b315654066
F20101220_AAAMPI lanahan_b_Page_214.tif
ee585320a1f0044377e9330169bbba66
917695b83dfe3ad2c779ff60ac146870c24bc381
111567 F20101220_AAANMC lanahan_b_Page_181.jp2
1d3fde5528f3cf7ce5a9966a80971c19
3cb52e5c0c42e4ed34b2e96ba36e55d22dbe6d40
1965 F20101220_AAANZO lanahan_b_Page_112.txt
42a6786b2e5b0b9948e3cdff3636a757
9bb6fd4031ef06c41a88eabaeb5826a6fefc848b
26541 F20101220_AAAMPJ lanahan_b_Page_070.QC.jpg
0dd4f677410054697e1220a93af4ebce
0c14c2d2e6e7dd825d41350f0a8611f5fbbfbf5a
111019 F20101220_AAANMD lanahan_b_Page_182.jp2
ac63f0c72753b5070108833311f95776
97f8ff9c635307f1f4f574701f908ece295422b5
87217 F20101220_AAAMPK lanahan_b_Page_051.jpg
6543a561cf19b46060a2698f811ca3d0
f717745440e9821d6217bc4d5cc9950bbc44e6a9
113899 F20101220_AAANME lanahan_b_Page_183.jp2
d9aacfc0c73741335d14b4de6728e662
104d869529a599a295cba06c79103f4564d1f7a5
6594 F20101220_AAAMCA lanahan_b_Page_105thm.jpg
da173959ffe1fd08588787572cb48486
1b5ae6ace6f45e48d87fdd8ccf2c9f65ce871d23
2095 F20101220_AAANZP lanahan_b_Page_114.txt
40117dc91179967c9b745a0b6e325351
ae8b773eae146f81727cf042d174ab4d85bd8af7
55856 F20101220_AAAMPL lanahan_b_Page_239.pro
a333b70e43b52820e88a6791118e14e0
d7d658d28d5895e53dbcd911ba6de60234a4e3ed
109893 F20101220_AAANMF lanahan_b_Page_184.jp2
4ec9a5978467533b6625514575971cfc
70b51ad60a6dd0484f362d85cf40e4f8522a29be
25556 F20101220_AAAMCB lanahan_b_Page_123.QC.jpg
8399e9c5aecd365b1348d9bbfc712e0e
bb2ddeabe94b9d9e391cc30ced3a55e8030a1d3c
2288 F20101220_AAANZQ lanahan_b_Page_118.txt
bf59cb3dd0d8c07f7c82ad05f3fe9a0c
81aa311033d55c7c5829731e5d7f3f32bea17085
24504 F20101220_AAAMPM lanahan_b_Page_060.QC.jpg
2f48c3fc23dd64af6b6b32db581afa48
e7a258d59756a1321fd0bef4baf8120419c63d07
107565 F20101220_AAANMG lanahan_b_Page_185.jp2
c82862aa1f64ed6e673653c4b4b61087
4dcf1c486c8996926fd7b1e060a4b618f4a296eb
89640 F20101220_AAAMCC lanahan_b_Page_088.jpg
410937c20cefd506c1b4a41cee476cae
05c8dc80b1f35c248fde544d39449ffebe47be1d
F20101220_AAANZR lanahan_b_Page_122.txt
2a88de02cdfc39b360e3204c5fe35e27
154add50fb0acc08ff6c94656574fbdc5531ea9d
26746 F20101220_AAAMPN lanahan_b_Page_184.QC.jpg
74f0dc006077312f634529535516d0dd
db2c57a4a726360adb4ecebc23fc0707ef9c6e3f
1048599 F20101220_AAANMH lanahan_b_Page_186.jp2
73d72621031624f441d8003ec8de178f
99afec8384779d7a325f7fb55b2ea84089e181f5
28678 F20101220_AAAOJA lanahan_b_Page_113.QC.jpg
2d57717fa01b4625133f042ff615da9d
16f7bbb254642736cff7fc70213ee53ac0d03c93
99282 F20101220_AAAMCD lanahan_b_Page_037.jp2
40190575cb742935d759e4ad0ffb5047
6377dd1abdc93212b7feb67786527c7ffb2cd26a
1949 F20101220_AAANZS lanahan_b_Page_123.txt
1799828aaebe646c6d9169a3c3066cbe
cff6b4c20703075558425e0666450e5761ceab6a
5460 F20101220_AAAMPO lanahan_b_Page_171thm.jpg
42b78f23adf70d9e1ca57bca857d7510
770a3bd28ecac6f3e80c0003da7c29747770aeae
113638 F20101220_AAANMI lanahan_b_Page_192.jp2
7a570e85fd0f4616ca1187833c333414
1aebf2ce204664f94184de1a9b8c04f617cf0933
6306 F20101220_AAAOJB lanahan_b_Page_114thm.jpg
300bfee7e893d3437e7d2eeced9294d9
0737cd60335cfdff67bbae067adf81802e8cd674
50862 F20101220_AAAMCE lanahan_b_Page_116.pro
a1b9b62fb29dd59061e9aedab7445b39
436c8221da929923889f9087d67b4e980713e5e5
2006 F20101220_AAANZT lanahan_b_Page_125.txt
632988a7bfa93b22261686dd1aec23d5
3e9d5991466bb32640651acd0ec1c792412c136b
50865 F20101220_AAAMPP lanahan_b_Page_125.pro
632eee261ccb074ed5dde16164732f1e
ab1fa3eaadbe1e40e0f1f9e61131fcff5fa3ff56
109921 F20101220_AAANMJ lanahan_b_Page_193.jp2
53b1e547379570d2d62bf273da68b92e
f52a95e6ae138ee2fb647a9e1a083033096cfdef
5960 F20101220_AAAOJC lanahan_b_Page_115thm.jpg
b2e5c411e9dc46ef9a76af9d0b0792a0
f13dfae455f706b31141742d716b691b07b1755b
55698 F20101220_AAAMCF lanahan_b_Page_032.pro
01626422b14367cbe656424f29c3c217
beb29e3c010aa9794f37a6c12368b31bc02ab4d0
2176 F20101220_AAANZU lanahan_b_Page_129.txt
0c315b2ad651f6f0c326ba686c75da98
d782ac7212a293d7898e58d0db8238ef4f0ef7e7
57262 F20101220_AAAMPQ lanahan_b_Page_197.pro
19c2d60bbdd7d9a8f20f602645957c24
a3bfc23bba8b1cf1a2872a1b867d3a2cff76af90
105092 F20101220_AAANMK lanahan_b_Page_195.jp2
20641d6a7fadeff797861d6f6bf7e804
16ecfcb0353340fc189c1489134eacc162e72218
6644 F20101220_AAAOJD lanahan_b_Page_117thm.jpg
e57fc21eb817110d35c1a8b251bfb0c7
500b4634900b38ccc364c153c3f80f06f2b8d958
F20101220_AAAMCG lanahan_b_Page_133.tif
a0b63449f64c5e804eb5e85bb28aa803
cf3815019a8d2c9852a73a70f65ea482d712caa6
2043 F20101220_AAANZV lanahan_b_Page_130.txt
337c814edc0d7e14bc04961e92dc2a3c
65e669fb73f73201a1a63db429eb6df7bb36735e
F20101220_AAAMPR lanahan_b_Page_227.tif
94bf7b1ff03b685351f05ea30d66633f
59ac38a0edbfe1f4c038ac0c5f90bdbc4ec291ec
114073 F20101220_AAANML lanahan_b_Page_196.jp2
05f4386dd49c7b7885af29ba38396e99
e7f1a3bcf635f33fdc7d90598491062d2ef3610d
21489 F20101220_AAAOJE lanahan_b_Page_120.QC.jpg
54c0f35f20863dea1a6756f4b49d829e
0911859e63df0a637dcc918acb027cac7bcedc30
25681 F20101220_AAAMCH lanahan_b_Page_136.QC.jpg
fadef318c52af9951fbdf12029b9132f
8cea6fcad90e32d3ee0e555b343e583473680729
1821 F20101220_AAANZW lanahan_b_Page_132.txt
189955df72785916654d9cd1f058f25e
23c821746b60011e76fb1ed02d5b5eff4184ec42
2139 F20101220_AAAMPS lanahan_b_Page_105.txt
2fa746f5ea46430fd5202f4b0176417f
faefabb5dc6bf6e6fa14e7d1c6823cc8020d00c1
118044 F20101220_AAANMM lanahan_b_Page_197.jp2
ab2b6f0c605a91ba2fbac748a6e832a0
4c024def06f12c9f516987e1db8f16ad21b81cc0
5379 F20101220_AAAOJF lanahan_b_Page_120thm.jpg
ce818e5c9df169c12aba001f281a4943
c188be2c779add196ace2b9241030155058f2677
F20101220_AAAMCI lanahan_b_Page_055.jpg
e9374ded5d4fbf1cbb28a90d4689c365
eed2277f7148994a1d4fd021631e730a15a57c20
1792 F20101220_AAANZX lanahan_b_Page_134.txt
4f470abde55d1972e975572749ec99eb
c135046895f1c591d538bc5179e4deea9cc33513
90157 F20101220_AAAMPT lanahan_b_Page_159.jpg
932ec8c898da4b105be16b7a59203764
206c4aa3fbaa1e9f4db63c125956faaf23217312
49962 F20101220_AAANMN lanahan_b_Page_199.jp2
47fd3009b40c4e0476f54f5bd015c92f
f1bd8ee96e672150e60c78d32c3f2fd61bee66fb
26258 F20101220_AAAOJG lanahan_b_Page_121.QC.jpg
de171583b0ab909bdbea4ce0852e3db0
8f8e0a5131f7699d178836f09932d9bb6d0b4e9a
2063 F20101220_AAAMCJ lanahan_b_Page_144.txt
5f836fd28fdb9f5fc46dbc0d99e7ff7e
ef92e35bd004f66f6a2f4d005d0b71110d498bd6
F20101220_AAANZY lanahan_b_Page_135.txt
f1429172a8eee0e8d100fb27c69a52ba
e200ee9804bdb22487bfadef1984b1109898d04b
6258 F20101220_AAAMPU lanahan_b_Page_075thm.jpg
0a3b8e6518b3991a46374dbaf6642058
6024fb283e3e89db1cb6f3804fb28351b2f4eed3
103560 F20101220_AAANMO lanahan_b_Page_201.jp2
c0fca171efeafe8063fd43a9d994f1b3
be87c442a663c5cab1748270ceb2304aac4ad001
25907 F20101220_AAAOJH lanahan_b_Page_122.QC.jpg
c1f56cbd067e9874b65a866e56aeb642
5dbac56e75a5e59dae084a231c65615b4889b8c8
1862 F20101220_AAAMCK lanahan_b_Page_161.txt
8c089e69a39b0cfa1fc92c39b9d39e22
7f93b5a5b6881a387392306a5493b9ba89c8605f
2258 F20101220_AAANZZ lanahan_b_Page_140.txt
5da48d77c94868354caeb2ae51372a1a
b80b99da71f93ca2870903d0f9eba130af2c00bd
2137 F20101220_AAAMPV lanahan_b_Page_183.txt
7fffa10313e34f7e740ca3e396cab584
a7aed4cf452e8861b8e552327199ce29ace43bee
111697 F20101220_AAANMP lanahan_b_Page_205.jp2
273b436f86b9eecadd9ea60d509a8f4d
1682a1cf0933de90f573c8639877a7bb80d47002
6242 F20101220_AAAOJI lanahan_b_Page_123thm.jpg
440c2593ed2c8c6a0187b6fe9f0bac88
1c0b647d98e46ae42b83b0e85996e5e3b788a09f
F20101220_AAAMCL lanahan_b_Page_242.tif
ec784ab6b6a8cb475b942ed2af8be11b
b2d4f68c154d8688deda4a43b409cadc8386780a
111164 F20101220_AAAMPW lanahan_b_Page_046.jp2
8e1637285ca224a46c199c33ef88a527
e56229f17abf961359b40b0d154083823e074c75
110724 F20101220_AAANMQ lanahan_b_Page_207.jp2
0d8c2815d74ef4f9baa6e95659827cfe
2646ee6eea7bcd609eda2e4c2120ddccee94b964
6259 F20101220_AAAOJJ lanahan_b_Page_125thm.jpg
2eb4a93f7c40132cf31c1193d5585a6d
9c11759a7c53ec8070a920656edd8572e28d4214
F20101220_AAAMCM lanahan_b_Page_058.tif
6a0b2970e9e35bd00ef3f55471424e91
da35ae565d44a93023d85426ae6cc1c6d4772cd2
2066 F20101220_AAAMPX lanahan_b_Page_169.txt
afb75d02e76967d20f2a3712a3513bf3
c47e761f00f6de181a1b3cfbf8d9168f261a9d67
12550 F20101220_AAANMR lanahan_b_Page_209.jp2
ccd4d3e447598e3f05baee7133f0f000
adf772426dd84cb6b4ddf04e7533022b06f71df4
26035 F20101220_AAAOJK lanahan_b_Page_127.QC.jpg
26171ce9eb950a3879462ca98ea94fe9
7bf3214cb5286a471ef33c5c6900b23e25315bce
F20101220_AAAMCN lanahan_b_Page_034.tif
799f4ea816157056331bf0e7a8b1e7c5
946d8e36676d6fecf68627d480a29346eb6835f9
108731 F20101220_AAAMPY lanahan_b_Page_076.jp2
8fcc14e8cfb3f34b21d16d8dedcaff5a
9d20c3b171b5c450a77face3cb7df179869397ee
107376 F20101220_AAANMS lanahan_b_Page_211.jp2
c3b427d660c1e8d8b8a6f7c3c0f638f0
4c0d146b68d878983198a9f215099da9ace2d33a
F20101220_AAAOJL lanahan_b_Page_130.QC.jpg
238b4beac7bfab20af7a17b1d6d7f020
4dd2f906aa1ec3d31ff41d905a816c8a6ff0cbe2
F20101220_AAAMCO lanahan_b_Page_191.tif
da1e0369f4ce797967c25cc096ae8573
26999c17b504687ae5163aa0d653f1e78e8c23f2
F20101220_AAAMPZ lanahan_b_Page_104thm.jpg
a1f5236de3b672e8ea8ce4ea6f36c332
30d3ee60c3f3a6a21da7735790d298df67d0cf8d
135837 F20101220_AAANMT lanahan_b_Page_213.jp2
55d6ed9661f9fedb244780733f20de3d
55e432ea6454a2f0e4d3b1621465e59a594f79be
27194 F20101220_AAAOJM lanahan_b_Page_135.QC.jpg
833c3b2061f636dc5d7cb18bd9a289a4
714b311c0520930e43438f57d6a9175b6043f6a0
F20101220_AAAMCP lanahan_b_Page_200.tif
f0e87396007af5704e0849850d2a75bc
4b1b05eea80ecc78000ee00efc7b08a19310f25a
131474 F20101220_AAANMU lanahan_b_Page_214.jp2
f515fe9a1f12f414e8295657b89a11b2
565eaa72ab686405bd0e23e1196c65d76544d0ad
6565 F20101220_AAAOJN lanahan_b_Page_138thm.jpg
b2c9438f05135ddf036f400db7b35c3f
67ad0428c9c07031befdf574c610a61eea59d203
F20101220_AAAMCQ lanahan_b_Page_019.tif
582e6eca62fb4812c0c69a381a4a282d
48ba7b44dd69c6143efdae15c7b6257fe097f615
137355 F20101220_AAANMV lanahan_b_Page_215.jp2
e40fd7de5e7b568033f17e630a5cec35
cd53acd84a825d817bae5f59b2c3b00e81efeedd
22723 F20101220_AAAOJO lanahan_b_Page_139.QC.jpg
3e57e6aa318783509dfbbecc6433c0bd
a070f582d55ce46aef7319349e1b859f2bf9cd27
5103 F20101220_AAAMCR lanahan_b_Page_227thm.jpg
99b9b906ff2d49e996565cdb64894d2a
49fa5142647d60a17033b0f42f62acba96998eb2
120221 F20101220_AAANMW lanahan_b_Page_216.jp2
c663c1b9063ad17964d09ce23bb1500e
ee46df7e9beaee3bd14d6197fa18a7dca29984f8
5451 F20101220_AAAOJP lanahan_b_Page_139thm.jpg
1b5c682b6bb4e5f80e1051e192d9dee6
1b90bcee247ffe5fa3c0ce28084cda7dead2456c
118600 F20101220_AAAMCS lanahan_b_Page_118.jp2
240fbe2a06844af084914d3257142a43
569e26554fb98b1d5b106a87012eb297b4b13889
71579 F20101220_AAANMX lanahan_b_Page_218.jp2
c12ea0734d68f4cd47256026bb0f53c4
105df0ad28810513a96611d674c8f0f1be246839
27027 F20101220_AAAOJQ lanahan_b_Page_140.QC.jpg
443d5b6b335c91d25fa9ea29b975b479
7ae4cc75b7d3b6ab4a539a3f2108bd056dbd048a
106071 F20101220_AAAMCT lanahan_b_Page_066.jp2
7ce598e6f2c20ddcbc402b21e2a4f4bc
0a403a974fda4914997bca4caed7f0bddda3f563
1026968 F20101220_AAANMY lanahan_b_Page_219.jp2
738962496f7eecc4f44845912717873d
64ad281c87411295345833b16fd6a60a8270a313
27175 F20101220_AAAOJR lanahan_b_Page_141.QC.jpg
cc51bea06046e37616b7157e09ec36e3
7d7aff31439a1390463455eee06f8036fc44f8ea
F20101220_AAAMCU lanahan_b_Page_121thm.jpg
9ce5b19777002dcf1dca2e911c8fb088
3b5af7e4b3c2824927c9bf349b89241dc9e1eaa9
979427 F20101220_AAANMZ lanahan_b_Page_220.jp2
9ea912c01d6dcbe35d8264b61493ff32
337bb570429a4f6ffc94de74d4f3d56661e15f2f
25905 F20101220_AAAOJS lanahan_b_Page_143.QC.jpg
bef60ad4095b0e4ced41c4b79029da1f
8da8c862e9ab3786178a7b4ba3edc028de1cc970
6519 F20101220_AAAMCV lanahan_b_Page_217thm.jpg
5cfe2b49f3a82dfcb8cd5c7c52989e5b
7da152150e66b755f7d423e298b7ca0e5f455e99
6191 F20101220_AAAOJT lanahan_b_Page_144thm.jpg
48ddc0542d97fe28ba62eb0123aaa87c
8de3d6915887c030e97710c493ac61d47097f753
78959 F20101220_AAAMCW lanahan_b_Page_150.jpg
b736d97f4e97486b4b29543529fe48a6
374f3f3288a631d8b3401ed11068c2bb9cb34c95
F20101220_AAAOJU lanahan_b_Page_146.QC.jpg
e830ea6d5f2b03f36f12737b881f5cd2
416729cc5cacb170b9f46b6a7d11d27f0757b736
4728 F20101220_AAAMCX lanahan_b_Page_012thm.jpg
bc4f44a16c058b665359851c23a54147
20dd217222cb3d34b94ad4f6ebcd22383be27ab2
25636 F20101220_AAAMVA lanahan_b_Page_056.QC.jpg
291a570af66fef06d8330d8c928c3434
759320b400655abf050f7b1d4a4ecae8902c973c
5710 F20101220_AAAOJV lanahan_b_Page_148thm.jpg
d31300972a56e0b3e700b61ab736d803
84dd81160ccdb421a971192c3a57894fcc3b0f7b
46542 F20101220_AAAMCY lanahan_b_Page_084.pro
b2e9791902b31ef015f882b2915ad159
8d7b5f384b2f4427979213eeff4cac3e5ddba441
6054 F20101220_AAAMVB lanahan_b_Page_093thm.jpg
63828b50b7ac3dc8f5f99892e804ac99
7818c886152f6ff568432ab5d9568fadd74e3825
6302 F20101220_AAAOJW lanahan_b_Page_149thm.jpg
983694238d2c8ef15587b68ff7648754
c23d836bf05efda095985d7d53edcbbbbf20ca63
48498 F20101220_AAAMVC lanahan_b_Page_189.pro
d4a5038f66f00297f7eddcd2f303ca83
12a8d770df9829a69d6fe80d34e6b614d1a850dc
5956 F20101220_AAAOJX lanahan_b_Page_150thm.jpg
e50df2577ba68c8e8fd3ae349488a624
67ac63c80d17f96f456502c875a53ada8a72b228
1861 F20101220_AAAMCZ lanahan_b_Page_133.txt
7934a0589ff11639d7040ba276b518de
95dcb4bad82a16de7aba09ea4b12468f10bd0ff1
50049 F20101220_AAAMVD lanahan_b_Page_211.pro
5782fe7755c6cbca4fddaeb15a52119c
6e55ad493f750f338fb8287d089df91930eb5f86
3405 F20101220_AAAOJY lanahan_b_Page_152thm.jpg
3e77b8d12e2ddf54423f1321edf1cfe3
0f178f77916b99ddd9d21b9ec3c4e14acb5fb46b
63263 F20101220_AAAMVE lanahan_b_Page_064.jpg
29e4313e3a1cee58e4a4c7c596a487d7
de3f6fd92871a8d241955465e01648f965781ecd
5269 F20101220_AAAOJZ lanahan_b_Page_153thm.jpg
99dfdbab63bec1cc8c254fceb0224b08
f261e51b5f544fe8a7b46c349f57502186758c5e
26949 F20101220_AAAMVF lanahan_b_Page_144.QC.jpg
6d193f3cd0830aebc1a4361b1323facf
93c40a6aed10590777d70e4583488f39ce0542e4
2202 F20101220_AAAMVG lanahan_b_Page_032.txt
2f2b624f9364de1f954a49fda924f7cb
33ef7312b800256cd9bf583ae2b792cc1bbc5d48
106183 F20101220_AAAMVH lanahan_b_Page_061.jp2
c6c5265439c060b8c414cc64ba0c48ba
dabbc8a3167eac9eb028b3df0e33f7d4259ef8df
F20101220_AAANSA lanahan_b_Page_210.tif
e727b629e41bf1267ad0a98b3c4b696b
d69f700809429563ca698726a210282173093515
55295 F20101220_AAAMVI lanahan_b_Page_088.pro
3826804bf2d14f97c4b5ed2c4f53d0de
7280fc426880d0bea40609b06349db694cf5db37
F20101220_AAANSB lanahan_b_Page_212.tif
8e927541244727974201e2001bddc626
d68d5d1825510295a33fafdf2524b43967f74243
25869 F20101220_AAAMVJ lanahan_b_Page_097.QC.jpg
f57783371e2a7781597a6a4187ec4233
f83ca165d6b80383dbc0644b8f7157ba5120513d
F20101220_AAANSC lanahan_b_Page_217.tif
37a6691c52ff88872adb480c8d27c0b0
a110f3b092ff2dc76a3781ff37dd7d832e049629
86920 F20101220_AAAMVK lanahan_b_Page_109.jpg
1f4c03c7ca45189bd0224b608c8216c1
d490e68e93adfbbeb2874fe66392aaa496b8449d
F20101220_AAANSD lanahan_b_Page_218.tif
4f7845fe3a052a038ccdabf2fe884d8b
7d2fdf73eed708dbcf411adc083c14b0c7ab4c0d
85572 F20101220_AAAMVL lanahan_b_Page_029.jpg
4ca73f75d2813cae06314fc6ba127e1a
78a1cfe4621b467f800904bc911923ab060f7b2e
F20101220_AAANSE lanahan_b_Page_221.tif
6135dbd4156655714a02cfef27dd1a26
412c28f999b8a5017de7f3890a2a47fe6a4d246c
83225 F20101220_AAAMIA lanahan_b_Page_012.jp2
72f5acaeaa1cd296bfd4d55e7ff6963e
2f54ff2f72c35931974c8aae672e09426ef42846
F20101220_AAANSF lanahan_b_Page_222.tif
88b126a9cd4392a8d953b5084529c872
4e1ca85abaf757a30145ea19c3c8851609c37922
22363 F20101220_AAAMIB lanahan_b_Page_229.QC.jpg
5c30f9f48b21d4922b983a1ff93149a0
7b1afd4fa28eb90c938754b6c87ccc736814c16f
F20101220_AAAMVM lanahan_b_Page_104.txt
2e013984029e438f4649beb88e6f9c47
711b755e97667def69dafd22ef3e0b135a59a405
F20101220_AAANSG lanahan_b_Page_224.tif
138999a4c33a6eecbc25da21c1011da1
13d5a76fa6650747396acb2669fffd9521a62655
106833 F20101220_AAAMIC lanahan_b_Page_190.jp2
13716638958b3c917c9f43e2b3c4189a
b26b57bfb495d36da308a83efb1739ae2d351a82
F20101220_AAAMVN lanahan_b_Page_124.tif
d967cf0ebc9adf0b4d7b32c69e2f486c
4ca830def96ef85e9d3567024fab3030aa80c9fe
F20101220_AAANSH lanahan_b_Page_228.tif
59b2f6fc72af30ddec92b67bac7208fd
a5d7f72ac3a6efe8ff151ecde1dd681721e83145
F20101220_AAAMID lanahan_b_Page_010.tif
7ac94879b79acaf653bb317e3ec35a11
12934eb0b27ecf2bc66833d76769056e7935cb40
F20101220_AAAMVO lanahan_b_Page_043.tif
a499b81be199f1947032ad195f00d8ee
771c5b9d9f0c911009b028d8c25050b6381e99ad
F20101220_AAAMIE lanahan_b_Page_201.txt
cd8e8eec7daa4ff38ad5fdbc274aedef
98115c985ab8bef587e36cdb2eb1bdb8035710b9
16279 F20101220_AAAMVP lanahan_b_Page_225.QC.jpg
c7ba40534595c7a544a179f74736a549
9c7b59a25d25d134035e413fd4f9539dfb5fbf08
F20101220_AAANSI lanahan_b_Page_231.tif
a22df32cab4408407b2562bda355dd86
0d3fb7b4fd8b2f19a87c2079ee4fd544507a4901
5205 F20101220_AAAMIF lanahan_b_Page_014thm.jpg
79f4b911b621aa5431b09373acb53b3e
a24d1e5f566814337d536556d6906d02dfe6f150
1912 F20101220_AAAMVQ lanahan_b_Page_071.txt
e73f0db82fb24fa7369c3e2e85a4bbae
3cbd36fe8a76296bce625d4fd9efd269e5d2caa8
F20101220_AAANSJ lanahan_b_Page_233.tif
1fc5e5fef9fd36a8ff3e47dafaaa8b24
2befe34c8d607f2f22b3fa48ec29895c4f66318a
F20101220_AAAMIG lanahan_b_Page_123.tif
6507391d99cdc18550628ed621a794b6
697dfb819b4addda3fddc19ea47bf75352367b40
72937 F20101220_AAAMVR lanahan_b_Page_132.jpg
f418362fd83a5fe474ba6378ddf27cd1
e53fc381ecf4c0f6ff5098e8cf3dceab2fb5ce4d
F20101220_AAANSK lanahan_b_Page_237.tif
0f5592b9b8c8847729422aa20f3b571e
20245e3a06006d6071dd0a57aa207e33f1ff925b
26308 F20101220_AAAMIH lanahan_b_Page_098.QC.jpg
29b4ac163bcf1b622bcb99bb2a69973c
7e95b40a87867b6d8b5263a6e1cf29afcff4cb59
85695 F20101220_AAANFA lanahan_b_Page_122.jpg
684a348cceead83704731e47587cd5e0
361f7407447f0083004fff34f56dba806c741f76
26385 F20101220_AAAMVS lanahan_b_Page_038.QC.jpg
385cc0634fd037b345d31a34c4762cc6
9b03931129c065862eca8349fc956ab8bc5c34c5
F20101220_AAANSL lanahan_b_Page_239.tif
3c0736eff0ce7759bdd60cc4a46b6b27
71eb36ead81a6db75d99eb844adb8890a396cfb3
49231 F20101220_AAAMII lanahan_b_Page_048.pro
9cda68ef1a152a1e93424d211b3105fe
910a95f312448b42c9f5eec03bae9b07cce8ffbe
79923 F20101220_AAANFB lanahan_b_Page_123.jpg
c9881f2f24abe292618293c3a10793db
9fdd1cf3d5cdc515105678b390d18bb8364dd313
41197 F20101220_AAAMVT lanahan_b_Page_108.pro
8ea9783afa75fb2e76d158f386c6b934
bc678ab8b013edc0ae7f98d4b4984e01dfdf0dd5
F20101220_AAANSM lanahan_b_Page_240.tif
0a2de65e6d7e6a79ff0d7f62a81c14b5
033e20b07de8a34f264f79b388822bd3bc1419c6
78663 F20101220_AAAMIJ lanahan_b_Page_241.jp2
45dd943c76f6c6b26fcade767e1e8cba
2841c3df2285f0a1fda20242996a366afd732088
84527 F20101220_AAANFC lanahan_b_Page_125.jpg
19663fdbe93523ebab2d060dc5aa2a3a
a7ab3cbe6dc846e87cce5497dd13db9891ec6bd0
49665 F20101220_AAAMVU lanahan_b_Page_021.pro
1ace0c8a292138da8ec326457a0930ed
5668f485ad798608f215039febb15ce19a54b507
F20101220_AAANSN lanahan_b_Page_241.tif
162963df645e2dde0e753edcccbd9d88
de1f1cc17fbe07f3fadbd1ea12ad0d464bfc1d7d
1960 F20101220_AAAMIK lanahan_b_Page_143.txt
72edd8381bbd121aad2cf4b8f8f659db
01fe98000114ee3dbca010bab7cd86f4c30eb001
79107 F20101220_AAANFD lanahan_b_Page_126.jpg
8827e0987ed399089e39cd8906f1e3d4
b2cd38e45cad0e8d7d5d31001699f7e13f88c79c
757 F20101220_AAAMVV lanahan_b_Page_175.txt
8899733ed9a489510677669207d2c036
c8e0b15ec12d43de7362df6cb721cd56c5625420
10305 F20101220_AAANSO lanahan_b_Page_001.pro
22e221d4030c7a701acbbfc20e3a9b8c
7416582ffb98782946d8c29bba44084ef9f1481e
F20101220_AAAMIL lanahan_b_Page_047thm.jpg
fc6652f7401523fd4fe9f1bfa42ffbaf
204e5f11e6f42be031b806aa8f14065fb5f2945e
84305 F20101220_AAANFE lanahan_b_Page_130.jpg
5bf72872c9ef4ecb38b4b31219b8f564
b55277649fdf7dddcb95395158205576a2a084b9
27132 F20101220_AAAMVW lanahan_b_Page_182.QC.jpg
739b6497dce07477478b8ba859a55119
45e37f09d454b6a98d5690cb9b82c43eff6d5754
3682 F20101220_AAANSP lanahan_b_Page_003.pro
6726b1da3bc9a2e1f115472f8328dd32
0e04acb5610cb2b25ff3712c1b59e7dc480a9233
6085 F20101220_AAAMIM lanahan_b_Page_176thm.jpg
6924411189360564ff27e5a5f012fca6
c00b548df7e0fba8424bdcc800b2cfa53e30346a
31460 F20101220_AAANFF lanahan_b_Page_131.jpg
c6abdd13a9b75d67819c3747258d8aea
048c098c1007cbd3af90bf24aa6c4e38de9f386e
22112 F20101220_AAAMVX lanahan_b_Page_014.QC.jpg
46c6a5f5622002c4a668e2f7c810b286
2e4a12b42c44a1131b721a2d231a3e1f7f447faa
39843 F20101220_AAANSQ lanahan_b_Page_004.pro
802516b8d09faf6efd85d6218ac25572
72069bd84eab8f538ea807a52a822d85fe5091f8
52390 F20101220_AAAMIN lanahan_b_Page_106.pro
abef4959119f1f846ac7cba831956046
a03d12701df3bfd9fb5c18a391fff4627a12fcaf
84104 F20101220_AAANFG lanahan_b_Page_135.jpg
8632295c2d8587972501e8e2edb9d49f
bc70f1127ab78af758648d6e1486ebb5e7e3d81a
52941 F20101220_AAAMVY lanahan_b_Page_172.pro
ef3e2f306d2a29497e2bd4210cba92c6
848cb2c1b13c62b46f0ec759aa44d31194045f1e
99966 F20101220_AAANSR lanahan_b_Page_006.pro
f385434453343c8a744aa1d7ced8b7fd
af7592a3ea43e9d37afbd2d50202ba82d308b4e5
61113 F20101220_AAAMIO lanahan_b_Page_161.jpg
96ae1c93436c97a1e0bb8acec4902b05
563bfa47302af7a3c27c4357fbeb8ec04e572988
86993 F20101220_AAANFH lanahan_b_Page_137.jpg
52db6d78c509abaf88c662daf448ce6c
a5e5a27853d11e00e62bff740df991b4376d5ba2
127572 F20101220_AAAMVZ lanahan_b_Page_233.jp2
c0ad8141722e120c91fa7e37e67ec0a7
e9cc687b549b88a2ec6d175cca03bcad74201a88
2361 F20101220_AAAOCA lanahan_b_Page_233.txt
0e7a70936dfab634940ecf148b2634d9
a774716282c784ba5a6d3a5db551b860c68abc72
104367 F20101220_AAANSS lanahan_b_Page_009.pro
76d976de489e7ef31911b59ff159c81a
a4e357039dabf596464beddd750e3a6152a21746
F20101220_AAAMIP lanahan_b_Page_106.tif
01e56b5012c8238be433bd7034334461
ec55c8cf37508ac3da49bd6752af0f3dadea9a7d
72982 F20101220_AAANFI lanahan_b_Page_139.jpg
0ab655149f607155f8dfeeb212d52ca0
556c86b6c402896c3bdb369f812e882e0a285cb6
891 F20101220_AAAOCB lanahan_b_Page_242.txt
789b78fd55bc858d2f62296b2a0c572f
47d193f0f6f76f7105ce3229179c0b7423dd235b
38200 F20101220_AAANST lanahan_b_Page_011.pro
6cdf076780903dfb2adae2e1cdd1cdc2
7c4b53096aa7520e5211eccfc7d5236fb2fa1476
1782 F20101220_AAAMIQ lanahan_b_Page_014.txt
5ab7c4d3ca48f0567c202db885c33422
0255a6d76fad2086356fa269be74bdce103c7cbb
85708 F20101220_AAANFJ lanahan_b_Page_144.jpg
53b6555b388ee0caf6662e00b600af4a
cfe58f7bddf84589d99a7f2f51791dfbf10fa36c
2052 F20101220_AAAOCC lanahan_b_Page_001thm.jpg
a73098def0c47f24f6b6e51106a885d3
562130cd9af18bda4dcfb36846182e1f5cf66b5d
35743 F20101220_AAANSU lanahan_b_Page_013.pro
7124177f098ab6f2a6007b5ab7610ccf
659af6cfb6c974d07e492413034855a155b3388a
48979 F20101220_AAAMIR lanahan_b_Page_061.pro
a6470d2475686581f47521d8bdf81aa8
f7cf84c2b6f5dc1957c94ef0a7e31888832a5579
76668 F20101220_AAANFK lanahan_b_Page_145.jpg
5b5b5e8dc5b9ab3af4d68b51fecc5c92
ad08a5847eb2455be1b6064a3c045dc65fe76015
1975745 F20101220_AAAOCD lanahan_b.pdf
a5cc9c99e144ee17179662d4111e9781
6573ec5f9f86c5baefab550be1d1b61c1214865f
52206 F20101220_AAANSV lanahan_b_Page_018.pro
6d7542df7016b22b06113db0a71a1538
82bf949d80d1c08bf9587fa2d75b5c28a56b44f6
59450 F20101220_AAAMIS lanahan_b_Page_013.jpg
0e9c41bad1dd8c57038454ed80b1d7bd
f956383162bcdb633633ca96cf3a33f89d0cb15a
85514 F20101220_AAANFL lanahan_b_Page_146.jpg
2be3e43c1541e9e5559cb8faf369af7e
70d79a4a767e1ffccb9e8c3d918f432c87f52814
25298 F20101220_AAAOCE lanahan_b_Page_190.QC.jpg
17235bd9303f231613b01a87a47fc100
bc389cd5ec9b300e8f299bb4238e4e7e6d3c395e
49196 F20101220_AAANSW lanahan_b_Page_020.pro
9ff9e94211e69306b7233285f9d3d7c0
435e431f853dfda0dc4b231a9103154e4a879ff1
4491 F20101220_AAAMIT lanahan_b_Page_225thm.jpg
9921c8fb5438f9c92b3789c884ab3c55
3ac9f55b32aede4c0139221d2f1251d37f536c98
76605 F20101220_AAANFM lanahan_b_Page_148.jpg
7bca4337c628e41261b78a0efab73b1f
5e70c6a6eb9eea6a5e2c76b60320e1dec678fcc1
6396 F20101220_AAAOCF lanahan_b_Page_112thm.jpg
92e8669364d618e22f1c36576de53127
0150c9ff897093bde5b34faf171146cfe1a1bcf0
47972 F20101220_AAANSX lanahan_b_Page_023.pro
2a4bc06280ce8de9957a6d46a601b8f0
6c2c79e23ee02c1d8374d813917df441afc6ce5e
F20101220_AAAMIU lanahan_b_Page_183.QC.jpg
43805d147505011a08466f1e497df859
090da42845ccc2ea477a741088eb64a89d078dad
83599 F20101220_AAANFN lanahan_b_Page_149.jpg
f05ef4a168bd5626a85c58d70abf5b90
7a6030309e695d4828329090dc785a07601c45d7
26225 F20101220_AAAOCG lanahan_b_Page_162.QC.jpg
bf6befc92bc817c20a9cd44f098d00d2
d82a9bae3726e95ccde475055a89c5414f0d8bf4
22119 F20101220_AAANSY lanahan_b_Page_026.pro
486de5a41cae51efb371f8e518f0b82a
50abf9e3ca4cc2a7b0549707092030d54d75d0bf
F20101220_AAAMIV lanahan_b_Page_057thm.jpg
dd4870f3131b402bd76dfc2292f8ab94
7d97fc04cd4f095be5dcf77406b391ecf7c32533
67613 F20101220_AAANFO lanahan_b_Page_154.jpg
072d0552deb06175d2947f17d4c94279
bf544a4151e2768468432d4316f6e32151049c19
21351 F20101220_AAAOCH lanahan_b_Page_087.QC.jpg
35182a7ef5df8c91537c6cde6cd0a1c1
531a8fc17b553d466404d71f3016a2804cf02508
52303 F20101220_AAANSZ lanahan_b_Page_029.pro
068c7fafc2d452f4303a30f8c58755e7
fccec63c293853ac23f802ff68311737f72473ec
F20101220_AAAMIW lanahan_b_Page_132.tif
f3762cb6b9d54dc925affa6f9a3a0e96
36fb3d56649abaa9971ccacce0196a0162085b88
57413 F20101220_AAANFP lanahan_b_Page_157.jpg
89823333b9b1d9cbc456ee2a15317c15
9487d35635fab7c1102ab70e52f3e6c3b13ac6ca
6553 F20101220_AAAOCI lanahan_b_Page_113thm.jpg
c997be9fd9c17e877b36c5db6537ba2e
b2d17596ae5443a239d9e1e46fe4a404e51452c8
27262 F20101220_AAAMIX lanahan_b_Page_032.QC.jpg
f0d3f78a74ed3a325b079267a5340d24
9a58b82dea6653e7b1eeb05e3ac8fa0e4f9c31d4
80208 F20101220_AAANFQ lanahan_b_Page_158.jpg
657a5fe2da51a98d84c824882963bc98
32e806d1c269d7a46a07761f6ddb19d9e0e18c27
26555 F20101220_AAAOCJ lanahan_b_Page_163.QC.jpg
a59c467add9788b0572bb79fad253ffc
0da15678ed9e1dfc5aa32c13c5e4a3ba27c4d2c8
1077 F20101220_AAAMIY lanahan_b_Page_152.txt
c99571eb067a47d40ee624f167b47361
b5073f97f5526b871d33a07c80be97ed50c577df
86661 F20101220_AAANFR lanahan_b_Page_160.jpg
8b92ec48e454d81180d3a6cf7ccf59a1
a768345a22045469898ee9355b9bb38dd6473d2a
27412 F20101220_AAAOCK lanahan_b_Page_137.QC.jpg
f6b74505cca5bc6c131f3fba76c1baab
8d164c76e4b5c1ceb793204b4f72e81fff7a2dff
F20101220_AAAMIZ lanahan_b_Page_055.tif
cba14a14f5ee70badef0dafc0fd682d3
db539595c5e26549bef25eb43f7da8e0e173ec03
85872 F20101220_AAANFS lanahan_b_Page_163.jpg
fe8d60bcd01e79d467b393fd6279df8b
9e430a4191698797dcf146b36932ca739a61e5d9
5978 F20101220_AAAOCL lanahan_b_Page_084thm.jpg
499ed5d1ab85feda21969543cc6300ac
769f0a08f65ad5245f4532a9890d94eef52956b9
74640 F20101220_AAANFT lanahan_b_Page_164.jpg
8fad9ca121f5b4e890f25b6cb5ccbb84
4a6ccbaf41395b3de8aa88ae56057f642f06996b
F20101220_AAAOCM lanahan_b_Page_122thm.jpg
30342a06c764f654038f977f31703dec
705d1f6e01182b9e381d03cc8a4aac8df02884be
78695 F20101220_AAANFU lanahan_b_Page_165.jpg
bbafe2d6124d6c561879a318136bfcd9
bc13f2bcdc9899f4a82ae091ab1781d29cc26df0
13690 F20101220_AAAOCN lanahan_b_Page_011.QC.jpg
26fc199073aec095fb35363ebac17441
ff5c112f3b433d2e81f967eea794ff88ebb3ce62
79407 F20101220_AAANFV lanahan_b_Page_166.jpg
7a040c3b126ab85ea60e3e8dcb97ba8c
2e10d67a92b4c465e373398a15ba6307b633b4f9
20022 F20101220_AAAOCO lanahan_b_Page_064.QC.jpg
167e90e28a0a2842b58d56145f81e7fe
cf7528d28965a45975341884a55d987cc4a2d2e1
88457 F20101220_AAANFW lanahan_b_Page_167.jpg
ee6c3b121d2d8a14a399cf94c58a52c3
53dc001827b7fb092aab8df988fa696f1d6d61da
6533 F20101220_AAAOCP lanahan_b_Page_233thm.jpg
4761d6dffeea15ed58ec0335ab53593a
425146ef6fa59b101f5ecb3f1cb296a2f0238d8f
80333 F20101220_AAANFX lanahan_b_Page_168.jpg
0c9911592c77497673c4562ff3c6e198
f87b2c3f16bbc4c9e6c24eb19c82231208e30d76
1934 F20101220_AAANYA lanahan_b_Page_048.txt
f88fb74fc6106c7adc4e2d80a9e95d29
7349c9d5f762e64a229bbdb21e83422018b1a466
6115 F20101220_AAAOCQ lanahan_b_Page_035thm.jpg
85a865214231037060614eaba7152b02
c4787710247f1db1fcf1a8000fe833bd8d48c957
F20101220_AAANFY lanahan_b_Page_169.jpg
d206a81e3577be2245e57c3b69123481
023c4468e6a89e27b065805381d50e98f67ce106
2037 F20101220_AAANYB lanahan_b_Page_049.txt
f60b441866007012d6b018b8e289e0e2
51dbf713f12b33be4b770b0be43e4d0dba9861f3
17265 F20101220_AAAOCR lanahan_b_Page_155.QC.jpg
1b99b34bb6e39691aecd241352b2227a
aa9d55229f2102475f21989e3b87008cf428f04f
86707 F20101220_AAANFZ lanahan_b_Page_170.jpg
98619b373c5030d0b26921c1bf429a6d
de9a44f922f0230bf0dda34f48ed6700c9542bcb
2051 F20101220_AAANYC lanahan_b_Page_050.txt
6d129a7a586c4242e579fc83a159b8d7
a5d4aa7f7f2993865afbff99a3a53b8ab0b91e13
26147 F20101220_AAAOCS lanahan_b_Page_170.QC.jpg
2b838967ab4b15626c5598aaaa6bae9d
14d29a725749a156027a8e64faa82e5b6b93f443
F20101220_AAANYD lanahan_b_Page_052.txt
b0ddc6c74a4d9bec383a80049b5ea367
ec1beda25142a6576aee6d9fcb2c8901102cf4c7
5959 F20101220_AAAOCT lanahan_b_Page_212thm.jpg
540d8efafa88882645e2f971e65f53e1
98cd6a7806fc280666a28acb3c3f8abc50ff2cfe
2091 F20101220_AAANYE lanahan_b_Page_053.txt
7327eead50ca7c1780eb28fded8480fa
00a1fd1f6158b4cb19993e4db2c9eb2409c6e15f
24873 F20101220_AAAOCU lanahan_b_Page_176.QC.jpg
d13ef94c459e4337de4c9f98330b13d1
9e1775f6a0f30adbd6671d6149fe292c01049936
103445 F20101220_AAAMOA lanahan_b_Page_023.jp2
1fe278712a2b0f7a6f8e06c3c4610f78
da738b88f49aca6829b5314e653d7b7250ecf393
2028 F20101220_AAANYF lanahan_b_Page_054.txt
9a817dc455a79a34eb69ba41efae0b8d
36da876c2dc296b2e378eefd52e1fdde982b25e2
6435 F20101220_AAAOCV lanahan_b_Page_135thm.jpg
d758bf677d5e9a60d976ff2aca766b6e
4ab3a934c2a7406a60a10651a7ed10ccc6074c1a
F20101220_AAAMOB lanahan_b_Page_215.tif
92d5dcfb88c1a67df776ecdc589eee0c
af2b0eb112f574a630d5d8784fad697fc84de6e0
2071 F20101220_AAANYG lanahan_b_Page_055.txt
c50d8508e065dc99695d24667cf0d1d4
13be4c64d9ffd1803f8d2d76dfbf04db570994f2
5363 F20101220_AAAOCW lanahan_b_Page_027thm.jpg
e1d4ea4a841619925625d3bc1001eab7
ba808e731ee513ea0d676e4478c8563b1cf042e7
26799 F20101220_AAAMOC lanahan_b_Page_031.QC.jpg
d85f797881abaf74fab2159df3c8b9b2
250f6e3675b8d3198068c409c08c13395fbed400
F20101220_AAANYH lanahan_b_Page_056.txt
ffdfcd7a667987561a11baa3ae8bef3f
e449c27a8c1cc2859aff93756d226cfa71df2178
51384 F20101220_AAAMOD lanahan_b_Page_146.pro
5a46eb97c24356cf57b5437ac35ced23
8a4aa2bb9e047e2b1dc031e7facbe72eadefae50
1897 F20101220_AAANYI lanahan_b_Page_057.txt
806347d15e92e013661a51fdd7a733c3
9fbcea87e27055b95bb1cf232e780c0a280e11d0
6715 F20101220_AAAOCX lanahan_b_Page_240thm.jpg
56e2a2de41cf5a66cad0dd3a70268cd9
fa30f2108ad596933955f21714c52a70451caf1b
6294 F20101220_AAAMOE lanahan_b_Page_182thm.jpg
8573cd52c8f0fc4b26b41ec8492ddebb
5d5b889e59c880fcb6650d21b9bc04a347e0ef9c
1922 F20101220_AAANYJ lanahan_b_Page_059.txt
0ab8a6d22423eb0e367d4cb3380b6b84
ed973e23c475a8f1fea6d9e6252c726fdd092b6b
3468 F20101220_AAAOCY lanahan_b_Page_209.QC.jpg
7a3cd2bba668bb8a08fb4f012b58de29
72cd9e671337f82c4f21bdacd4e5bbb0e5283eef
1899 F20101220_AAANYK lanahan_b_Page_060.txt
b333d94c878e6e0d939f02ad8508a842
15748362b732f158a7a2cc4025a5c0e40ab90c59
14887 F20101220_AAAOCZ lanahan_b_Page_152.QC.jpg
b811155a0934d230d203ce6476d72ff4
21a3bf94463ee3eafa60d38ff8d3be5c4c2b679b
19197 F20101220_AAAMOF lanahan_b_Page_226.QC.jpg
fcae94de758160ad6764a26c2dc00041
abac4bba5fcfd0b3d4f3768149cf30c7b0d6ea25
100419 F20101220_AAANLA lanahan_b_Page_142.jp2
79c02c831978e2e9540d83c32bf5cc24
9a50fcc2638a4567ae820da6e7b23c37a54c07e0
2016 F20101220_AAANYL lanahan_b_Page_062.txt
b3a5e29ce34dd73a109dce08bc4ece22
5fb7539b56f3935c7f0d6099d3e6844ff30109a5
6354 F20101220_AAAMOG lanahan_b_Page_185thm.jpg
06cf131085224ccc2302a4d7779178e4
3e4b8c8f5d0057f2ff3c3f4706f8141b3f57e066
1510 F20101220_AAANYM lanahan_b_Page_064.txt
81baa9ba998f571e74242eddad5da00d
29cc01328799c95a7a1fcc84ab6b1d12f8302812
F20101220_AAAMOH lanahan_b_Page_072.tif
30f660c72cb891d95a17fec4234c024d
8b1dce161242bde71c4bf78e08b89e4bf08f053b
108401 F20101220_AAANLB lanahan_b_Page_143.jp2
cf7acc80e91b8ebe09ac02b01e99e2e8
17697911841fdd73ea7f441f7268e2deb3879000
1780 F20101220_AAANYN lanahan_b_Page_065.txt
17dca880f0922158e0e0d81209cd3c32
87ec42f86f9a31941c23307678d8051c5f0de6ab
104408 F20101220_AAAMOI lanahan_b_Page_123.jp2
ee5643e73254f6eef97df040871a7687
35b8948da09930b31dae19c6221ca2f116008d29
110479 F20101220_AAANLC lanahan_b_Page_146.jp2
d3e594940c170dcb17ebfdb5e4df5201
c01f3eae10340037734c3140cddff448215b30dd
34904 F20101220_AAAMOJ lanahan_b_Page_218.pro
93ecfba23ab833bae0fa227afdd49a9b
8a3a4295a6cfbd2f9426f7afae781cf20b410e86
109230 F20101220_AAANLD lanahan_b_Page_147.jp2
53444fd589050d77e69497556cc62dca
0907670408232b4f75847e68bd32e739cd8d8a61
2034 F20101220_AAANYO lanahan_b_Page_066.txt
6e950493dd2491471077760e91660b42
294a43a7ec162bcfe836135e84726bb0d6565bb0
5097 F20101220_AAAMOK lanahan_b_Page_065thm.jpg
dd0de6db25ae89ed060302b509e38aa9
b30d9d0dc230a2827eccd435f9a687614fec6a55
99610 F20101220_AAANLE lanahan_b_Page_148.jp2
b30410461b5a5c8f1555b8f4a3c6f631
9a78587daf73fd07c2a5d98ae77a648bfc42c5b8
72602 F20101220_AAAMBA lanahan_b_Page_171.jpg
24ccdec8f1f98be7bf393ace2a01fe15
390135430ae1e66cc30f9a1b8e050997afc3fb8f
2022 F20101220_AAANYP lanahan_b_Page_069.txt
f862b1aba9766fc138f00224045432d0
e73b6cf31b96160f32eb563fa7dff5abc3203926
1739 F20101220_AAAMOL lanahan_b_Page_171.txt
496c860f210de32b151230a7a01774b8
bd218fe257e803918d7f88a1fa2f46cc5335bfd4
109717 F20101220_AAANLF lanahan_b_Page_149.jp2
b5d570328032d6a1d64a1228249f3679
098f79060ca5c6788cd4aed8f1df7f4f9516a5bb
107587 F20101220_AAAMBB lanahan_b_Page_214.jpg
d6e46275bdb35ea83acb8365bd732d1d
42e6ca8488676c7b9638700e29a3a8c45d118ce2
2059 F20101220_AAANYQ lanahan_b_Page_072.txt
2ef79a59115b52bccffc2cc5139851bb
0765970f14ec7c61c4915ff94731bc21861a8b26
F20101220_AAAMOM lanahan_b_Page_025.tif
5cb567b2c069a594791e12a6728e44b5
974db014bdc595ea12739b4ce5cd16f5155589a1
103717 F20101220_AAANLG lanahan_b_Page_150.jp2
e7dfa428adf10b304a7f76c601a581af
d0d54c5dcc31ed13faa6ec3b31ab29215c3ce177
112255 F20101220_AAAMBC lanahan_b_Page_170.jp2
994f52cfa2fcd29416349493b20e56c2
3f638c5589d9764937cc312282ed7e6daaf86012
2058 F20101220_AAANYR lanahan_b_Page_073.txt
03ccc03e1252dc9a8b3fcba0532722be
55a7e15e1a790ec68d6d093332bb7c8b64e97708
1843 F20101220_AAAMON lanahan_b_Page_084.txt
e3768808b0622313aaad0252dad88c83
a8741c34eb92a1b5b7eec64b82fccdd17e271097
104838 F20101220_AAANLH lanahan_b_Page_151.jp2
a1b18f948dda10fd9aa1ca0300e81dc4
317e8c9074022bc0ddf0051a0fa3b3dd4ecf89f3
25867 F20101220_AAAOIA lanahan_b_Page_078.QC.jpg
3763472d5cc95cde49ddb7f6eff2407a
64188a63250dfac0922e6b58d209b10462e6655d
1452 F20101220_AAAMBD lanahan_b_Page_241.txt
316eb201bd7c2a0ce9ddce1a353a1aad
df819842f7a6c4197807e7d3f79090097048276b
F20101220_AAANYS lanahan_b_Page_074.txt
fddc02be5fbcdc5d9128b20649c2a83d
8f5e94aa3a71fa52b902bd8f92353ecd64d66f5a
F20101220_AAAMOO lanahan_b_Page_134.tif
9e0e48c6faa12d76cbdb17a17753cdef
24b06bbb9abc25198ae5ecc0eb27ac293f9231db
61933 F20101220_AAANLI lanahan_b_Page_152.jp2
e7b9970924bcdcb11274440cc56d7e78
8fcb9696ec67d9ae7b2cbee5aee145856d9e9bb7
6163 F20101220_AAAOIB lanahan_b_Page_078thm.jpg
589e3bd088822b9b9ca96d1cba5d140c
a0fed3bcc23f1f9e7f2bdad9b4dee2274f3d54b3
F20101220_AAAMBE lanahan_b_Page_017.pro
3dfc48597a752e208f5e4a86d36642b0
62c7fcfbc420e2ac8abf86ad4576b5461ba6cf2e
1985 F20101220_AAANYT lanahan_b_Page_076.txt
913fb9ed3eb558cf06c23d812ad711a2
83d2af76e0388224686a70ac3741f449fb8c8316
F20101220_AAAMOP lanahan_b_Page_146.txt
c34bcecb852aa81e66990276ee2e40f6
024f63a0c95cd667e17c72e945132ec6d97b6e47
989872 F20101220_AAANLJ lanahan_b_Page_154.jp2
a0000c3c363da381af4116824a9500fe
cb4d4e95254333c03ec59ee30bd556cb871f2a5b
24806 F20101220_AAAOIC lanahan_b_Page_080.QC.jpg
ba3673d0d82f12f43b35f739da79bba4
33737e85720c41e032ee384a97af34aa836312fe
F20101220_AAAMBF lanahan_b_Page_052thm.jpg
ae25f18fb154fcb150442253b953c115
f428468f252f618af12c0b6848f60b58c94a88e6
2010 F20101220_AAANYU lanahan_b_Page_077.txt
474d542d09224167739c73b2ece7899d
2d2f42f746facbb3ba2150c3aa17b15e8ad16bf3
48237 F20101220_AAAMOQ lanahan_b_Page_107.pro
a79df2047e349cc758f5433726508c23
715eb24497cd6fe1da89c49df0ae96894cade2ae
813864 F20101220_AAANLK lanahan_b_Page_155.jp2
8abba51fd83d2f5bb7d510099f16aaf2
9bda33a943859e974cab2d42acb11d6f8b84c0bd
5817 F20101220_AAAOID lanahan_b_Page_080thm.jpg
0f7db80640f94432a853e7444c74ece2
ac46245c90fb4d686e11ad33e81b88e62a547306
50082 F20101220_AAAMBG lanahan_b_Page_019.pro
6953e0df14213caaa9385d8fa0eeb812
f6e2ea7e63700d19bd0635cffb8fb88b22d1429c
1986 F20101220_AAANYV lanahan_b_Page_079.txt
d8df0690803ca3762bc793fa4a8c8022
4d4768ccfb0ac126ebc7bc26c4f2d35ead080d7c
1051984 F20101220_AAAMOR lanahan_b_Page_011.jp2
f2167d1fb954cac7325f59004612c43c
2c8a3f52b37c66babc2ef7ac19eea57aa8840c44
114284 F20101220_AAANLL lanahan_b_Page_156.jp2
1261a79367193578c8d79dd85eea7ad6
e9ae378e6a769eaa6082f5edb49033f73f4d1280
27004 F20101220_AAAOIE lanahan_b_Page_081.QC.jpg
9b83c07ff81403e5521ff6cf0d6703e0
9bdcc239e9aad0d32e02b711a6ca12c776f34186
2033 F20101220_AAAMBH lanahan_b_Page_099.txt
f79af12eaf51a1c8a5e3bfea7b33cddb
2f42c7a07938e33201171ad21167771595f3203f
1930 F20101220_AAANYW lanahan_b_Page_080.txt
1245056689e0ab76ba188b3bd8434a6e
4c3f74797ec1e8b4106005525e921d1f96daf702
5897 F20101220_AAAMOS lanahan_b_Page_186thm.jpg
6602f1beb8a4a35441912807c23fd387
33e270988b03e912dcb5947744e9880c832889d9
827338 F20101220_AAANLM lanahan_b_Page_157.jp2
2a5d965764a4013e5fa42af00fbe696d
1679e60625e538c8e4ad6316e4284db5dd2c2a14
23235 F20101220_AAAOIF lanahan_b_Page_082.QC.jpg
6a1afc401a5d686cc4d09fd9a562f94e
2f81cfa8a06496ee434b898599c8558ade990a90
24853 F20101220_AAAMBI lanahan_b_Page_079.QC.jpg
9760d554275c51e29ccbedff47c091d4
49848746a4d5f0af386956c54e7cbfbc9f124af0
F20101220_AAANYX lanahan_b_Page_081.txt
105ef4c566310d93a0d098f6df21e7c7
e73acea07f8d24bbff831e517ab1c398e862382d
2255 F20101220_AAAMOT lanahan_b_Page_117.txt
288de57bfc4306dcebaa454cfb39f7ea
d83e0093d674bbe44b7b23cc79bb84ae21b8048b
106672 F20101220_AAANLN lanahan_b_Page_158.jp2
e48438880a3419fd9203fd4436c0abdc
bfd80c67b18182648058b05ba5a3eb93fc41f008
5634 F20101220_AAAOIG lanahan_b_Page_082thm.jpg
598251b9ffd8c945692ef88649e01ae8
7937147a3ebaead3f39033d3a5ac54f8f6ed5f62
27224 F20101220_AAAMBJ lanahan_b_Page_106.QC.jpg
a944bec96b0969e36fc5dab1517686fe
621ff48b05414e101c2c98fae098d8ee4595846a
1801 F20101220_AAANYY lanahan_b_Page_082.txt
69b35679783bff4d965ccd672ee4b082
6e420101938f092440a52944524c62476223a548
6400 F20101220_AAAMOU lanahan_b_Page_099thm.jpg
44b68508cf5ed5d98d45465be890d648
d13fc4560b12db010afad752fd712ba84f94eeef
900598 F20101220_AAANLO lanahan_b_Page_161.jp2
3bf76a4aa19efa3eeee0649f495f9b9a
5843d3b847ca482ce20d0580837646485e0eabcd
22487 F20101220_AAAOIH lanahan_b_Page_083.QC.jpg
d2396ffdeff11f51957e1bc70ad89d84
fb98a7bbff16839e527f4c12ea445170e249644b
26517 F20101220_AAAMBK lanahan_b_Page_100.QC.jpg
41f1eb6bbcb69124648c41738eee31b3
be9cc2973bbd6b2aa070045cbe24b82ec53bb032
F20101220_AAANYZ lanahan_b_Page_086.txt
9750d1d07ac3f95d1331aaf77d1e1c4d
2e37060a22613d998566d52dcfad7691ab03800a
25281 F20101220_AAAMOV lanahan_b_Page_219.QC.jpg
eb1fe96a9488a7130cc76f30d380d574
d18e19192d7d5aa259c79645877ddfb38d224939
97863 F20101220_AAANLP lanahan_b_Page_164.jp2
c821803a83afdc3f95d64dc1854e09d5
70c9031809e09bab444b17916e6bf827ef6e63f8
6108 F20101220_AAAOII lanahan_b_Page_085thm.jpg
118373cadb4a51f11c076db06f07bfa9
6bbd9b0cca29d1b7071b40470dd1cc19288ee973
85023 F20101220_AAAMBL lanahan_b_Page_038.jpg
fcee332bd2d41963c2aba057318c0900
4c61c97d67abcbdeebbc6af5a123055c1fd91ee0
6241 F20101220_AAAMOW lanahan_b_Page_069thm.jpg
9b51daf979ac0206e2613eaaa6758837
65cfcbbf0a9be10aecc337975fcb08bb54985a30
1051969 F20101220_AAANLQ lanahan_b_Page_165.jp2
3cfd3343ad303ea9a00aac9dda0ec433
d0c1348479e2dc0dbe32b912efd37cd3c070ea72
25479 F20101220_AAAOIJ lanahan_b_Page_086.QC.jpg
c36e65a517661ec2c2a6e18a84ceba55
40adfcab4de76f203c2639d07085ab747c7848e3
84091 F20101220_AAAMBM lanahan_b_Page_031.jpg
6c16e881b27e9943d58e1c3f862c9d59
8f959fed20611cfcfd93c6a469ac50ee03de2f63
81072 F20101220_AAAMOX lanahan_b_Page_195.jpg
4774184e61e2e5a6c9914d5eee49c2c1
1a31794309304833529f0f0ae35d76e6f0702fbf
1051983 F20101220_AAANLR lanahan_b_Page_167.jp2
06d84ce5b37c48989e92984beb1998b2
1c71d5e9dc08e29154267cdaa99232a903c5cafc
5988 F20101220_AAAOIK lanahan_b_Page_086thm.jpg
f36faa79aaabe59f2a922b721af40afe
c5111e9b5e98a9ddd5024f7e1d9212780811e086
6283 F20101220_AAAMBN lanahan_b_Page_094thm.jpg
32cd01e0b944e124b929873b38a3d82c
610c7536eafb77297d955c064cbb5655b87b8c63
81230 F20101220_AAAMOY lanahan_b_Page_063.jpg
d0cec8d3f5e183b401dfb000e5bb980b
6c2c6ed78e4a57db44e5530e079c95217c85137f
1051967 F20101220_AAANLS lanahan_b_Page_168.jp2
410a298bd89b83857baf6c38aae8deb6
44f7021f8130c53b74ab7a621a716b59766936e0
6503 F20101220_AAAOIL lanahan_b_Page_088thm.jpg
6ff95a84de4dea4624e9aea13bd83e24
863c53a05a7f49520a055a79a5592dff47bf9a91
2047 F20101220_AAAMBO lanahan_b_Page_070.txt
fad983c804c4257a5fe9247bdd076a63
bd45154a06179cc5eaa56634d8bbcc6129d8af8f
25751 F20101220_AAAMOZ lanahan_b_Page_103.QC.jpg
4a0eacb1bc9840a77122d376715f8fb0
2afc162f07f1648af87ac1b8c3a68a02c1e50281
1051955 F20101220_AAANLT lanahan_b_Page_169.jp2
51ffa5ca76b134f529e3d2d063fd8410
872898ddae928c58f2e9fb3fa8cc8c3173438eda
26085 F20101220_AAAOIM lanahan_b_Page_090.QC.jpg
982e4a2df531e69556a816fc9ac59a08
cfe4784c9e188a49909ae2f2f3caafd06694358e
86558 F20101220_AAAMBP lanahan_b_Page_050.jpg
9d73b947cacd42ccba345a617b545339
2aea8c48cb40b3462f6b45531e68bdc6a871415f
95931 F20101220_AAANLU lanahan_b_Page_171.jp2
f2236ad997a2c8a7faba82648774196b
175fd4789c0e0416f1ecf54481cbe4514e2b475d
6126 F20101220_AAAOIN lanahan_b_Page_092thm.jpg
adc5bd209be7060e8d554eed1127a88a
d6dd48336dfb6c93ed2f52ddee608379aa885e9e
111867 F20101220_AAAMBQ lanahan_b_Page_033.jp2
c3ccdd80dd006d96b2c9e46a472ad5c7
783479d8fc5bf649e007f596c53bb1f8610c44ff
111739 F20101220_AAANLV lanahan_b_Page_172.jp2
33047e3cad42e67e721e38b9bfd7ea8a
e0fccb0eddb22cdf2713e2ffb097510bec6dc511
25875 F20101220_AAAOIO lanahan_b_Page_095.QC.jpg
c1119d47faba7d3e9cb2bd87014553fe
0b921a8ef2c613b4140741a21dbf9073ed923b4e
26215 F20101220_AAAMBR lanahan_b_Page_077.QC.jpg
6b273decf397b208a736aa89bb4c8847
d1f9d5b111dd88c13d6ed04607a777c97d51827c
111575 F20101220_AAANLW lanahan_b_Page_174.jp2
896b59ebe79a295bc25e06e2b91622eb
cf1955ebdab6dae35e5a0ec31e53e2004334d1b8
F20101220_AAAOIP lanahan_b_Page_095thm.jpg
3bff01fdd2d5536420f1777f7335e379
3c11409c2988eb3f7886ec97a3d7e4ca71b46d37
49079 F20101220_AAAMBS lanahan_b_Page_123.pro
ebb44ae86dea7ef7b0c1f0b850e9966e
54e778a7d57ca852796c6dc4d49f0fb41e844396
1051948 F20101220_AAANLX lanahan_b_Page_175.jp2
58eca0d2e6a9296cce7fb76ad4d98e2c
a700145f6ce6dd1ffaaebcddab471305b6583f88
6209 F20101220_AAAOIQ lanahan_b_Page_097thm.jpg
2a0a672aa18758567cd65d6e8d317322
8db571fd7a690f0e2e945417d3b8e5e8dfca25b3
87242 F20101220_AAAMBT lanahan_b_Page_156.jpg
1237625ce51e2de74725c0f714225491
2c9859b1a6f742a24f6bc1e0817f22f5ff0f0faa
109585 F20101220_AAANLY lanahan_b_Page_176.jp2
cc9472edf98e0031ec099967c1e37296
a1aa68dbdf9a073089dbf78e45fec0054f531b07
6246 F20101220_AAAOIR lanahan_b_Page_098thm.jpg
e87d70131974380b6bee4b979a2b41e5
b934dd1a9d413835ea20c69f6e5c2aa3cfc38fda
22494 F20101220_AAAMBU lanahan_b_Page_186.QC.jpg
465e446a372a0e12e2a31d779c7f7d11
55c6db0e634e93b9f394caca9b0a4c262d25a8a4
128904 F20101220_AAANLZ lanahan_b_Page_178.jp2
046096e6259b51904a66ebfa842397a6
e16f117cb95674b012933a8d5e7eab9f0f1615ee
24800 F20101220_AAAOIS lanahan_b_Page_102.QC.jpg
e544ee13581b32c6c584334572d2cf40
fc360ee66fdb70617bbff5ecbfdb3fa6922ec2bb
1894 F20101220_AAAMBV lanahan_b_Page_126.txt
2cd19bb53b1d9cb773891f32aa38b962
d72eeab4fab79a9b8acfaed46185388f7c6b8731
F20101220_AAAOIT lanahan_b_Page_102thm.jpg
2551b5096ddddb2d0c25bfbbf55dc565
a6edec6f5cdcb2c8d03ab3d09937f77aef9c51a7
6123 F20101220_AAAMBW lanahan_b_Page_124thm.jpg
12487f5b848fdb34652a6058d46c33ac
b0a84ca902e43d49cb7f65fbec87e258b4a60e50
6097 F20101220_AAAOIU lanahan_b_Page_103thm.jpg
f39cd2e8bcab5ad4ffd915601917a2b1
5dd93a0524f1b666cbecb75898f1548b3011a24b
6132 F20101220_AAAMBX lanahan_b_Page_025thm.jpg
6988f37fec0737cea78992c0bde674bc
8882373bb5e98ea097211fb7c6944e14460ef107
F20101220_AAAMUA lanahan_b_Page_104.QC.jpg
cb3d69812441b533c68feba79f44c575
b165fdac02eebf21aba2592dfd6594825d62d195
24432 F20101220_AAAOIV lanahan_b_Page_107.QC.jpg
2cdbb706bd14b567ca8cfdf20c7b083c
e14b422f4dbec77f9c7c0e6f59ee53ec23dfa855
6684 F20101220_AAAMUB lanahan_b_Page_234thm.jpg
87d45c7e9e32b6c1e8df9e6db69eedd7
7bcf22d023878e5be490f1e4a0a261add739603b



PAGE 1

PRACTICING TEACHERS AS ELEMENTARY SOCI AL STUDIES METHODS INSTRUCTORS: THEIR BELIEFS ABOUT THE ISSUES THEY ENCOUNTERED IN PREPARING PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS By BRIAN K. LANAHAN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006

PAGE 2

Copyright 2006 by Brian K. Lanahan

PAGE 3

This dissertation is dedicated to Ty Thebaut in gratitude for her example of how to live life with your glass more than half full.

PAGE 4

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank the members of my supervisory committee, Drs. Elizabeth A. Yeager, Diane Yendol-Hoppey, Elizabeth Bondy, Sevan Terzian, and Stephen Smith, for their advice and assistance du ring this process. In particul ar, I thank Dr. Yeager for her unflappable support, and I thank Dr. Yendol-H oppey for the opportunity to teach the elementary social studies methods course. I am extremely grateful to my parents, Dennis Lanahan and Mary Ellen Lanahan, for their love and support of my siblings a nd me throughout our education. Thanks go to my grandparents Charles R. Thebaut, Josephi ne N. Thebaut, Dennis J. Lanahan Sr. and Wanda B. Lanahan for their support of the education of all thei r grandchildren. I am indebted to my brothers and sister and their spouses for th eir support, especially during the last year, they are the greatest gift my mother and father ever gave me. I appreciate the efforts of the many ment ors and teachers who assisted me during my education, inside and outside the cl assroom: Sr. Thomas Joseph, Mr. Leo Kindon, Ms. Joanne Walsh, Mr. John P. Wilwol, Rev. James R. Flynn, Mr. Brian Sears, Dr. Ken LaBrant, Dr. James Lima, Ms. Sue Hoag, Mr Paul Nowicki, and Mr. Mike Holloway. Dr. John Johnston deserves thanks for putting my body back together more than once. Also, thanks go to the Panera staff, especially Sarah and Nicole. Finally, I must say a special thank you to my mother, who taught me that the harder you get knocked down, the higher you bounce.

PAGE 5

v TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................xi ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................x ii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 Introduction and Purpose of the Study.........................................................................1 Rationale for Study.......................................................................................................1 Statement of the Research Problem..............................................................................2 Research Questions.......................................................................................................2 Theoretical Orientation.................................................................................................3 Guiding Research..........................................................................................................5 Guiding Theory.............................................................................................................6 The Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design..................................................7 Role of the Researcher..................................................................................................8 Methodology.................................................................................................................8 Participants................................................................................................................... 9 Data Collection Methods..............................................................................................9 Observations...............................................................................................................10 Data Analysis..............................................................................................................10 Study Limitations and Delimitations..........................................................................12 Description of Chapters..............................................................................................12 Potential Significance of the Study.............................................................................13 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............................................................................14 Introduction.................................................................................................................14 Teacher Beliefs...........................................................................................................15 The Beliefs-to-Practice Connection....................................................................17 Changing Beliefs.................................................................................................18 Summary of Teacher Beliefs......................................................................................20 Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction....................21 Dr. Henry Merrill.................................................................................................21 Dr. Rahima Wade................................................................................................24

PAGE 6

vi Self-Portraits of the Practice of Elemen tary Social Studies Methods Professors.......25 Dr. Marilynne Boyle-Baise.................................................................................25 Dr. John Benson..................................................................................................27 Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu.....................................................................................28 Dr. Janice McArthur............................................................................................30 Summary of Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction..............................................................................................................31 Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction.............................................................31 Challenge #1: Negative Past Expe riences with Social Studies...........................32 Challenge #2: Lack of Interest in Teaching Social Studies.................................32 Challenge #3: Confusion Over the Nature of Social Studies..............................33 Challenge #4: Conflicting Conser vative Sociological Beliefs............................34 Challenge #5: Selecting What to Teach..............................................................35 Challenge #6: Using the Concurrent Social Studies Field Experience...............36 Summary of Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction........................................38 Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies..........................................................39 The Expanding Horizons Curriculum.................................................................39 Research on Effective Elementary Social Studies Practice.................................40 Five Requirements for Powerful Social Studies..................................................41 The Effects of the No Child Left Be hind Act and High-Stakes Testing on Elementary Social Studies...............................................................................45 Loss of instructional time.............................................................................47 Quality..........................................................................................................48 Summary of Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies.....................................48 Conclusion..................................................................................................................49 3 METHODS.................................................................................................................52 Review of the Purpose of the Study...........................................................................52 Statement of Problem.................................................................................................52 Research Questions.....................................................................................................53 Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design.......................................................53 Study Methodology....................................................................................................55 Guiding Theory...........................................................................................................56 Theoretical Orientation...............................................................................................56 Role of the Researcher................................................................................................57 Participants.................................................................................................................59 Explanation of Dual Roles......................................................................................60 Course Information.....................................................................................................61 Data Collection Methods............................................................................................62 Interviews............................................................................................................63 Observations........................................................................................................64 Written Documents..............................................................................................65 Data Analysis..............................................................................................................66 Verification of InterpretationTrustworthiness........................................................67 Credibility............................................................................................................67 Transferability.....................................................................................................67

PAGE 7

vii Dependability and Confirmability.......................................................................68 Description of Chapters.......................................................................................68 Summary of Methods..........................................................................................69 4 ALEXIS JOHNSON...................................................................................................70 Introduction.................................................................................................................70 Background Information.....................................................................................71 Professional Experiences.....................................................................................72 Petty Research and Development School............................................................72 Elise Elementary..................................................................................................73 Alexiss Classroom and Instruction.....................................................................73 What Beliefs About Social Studies Educa tion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?.75 Beliefs Concerning Teaching..............................................................................75 Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies........................76 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods.......................................78 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teacher s Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course?............................................................................79 How Does Filling These Dual Roles Info rm Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum?......................................................81 Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Channels of Communication............................................................................81 Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing..........82 What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course?...................................................................83 Issues Related to Methods Students....................................................................84 Conservative social beliefs...........................................................................84 Tension between content and methods.........................................................85 Students negative experiences with Social Studies....................................85 Issues Related to the Status of El ementary Social Studies and Field Placement.........................................................................................................86 Lack of respect and professional de velopment for elementary Social Studies.....................................................................................................86 Lack of time for elementary Social Studies.................................................87 Other field placement issues........................................................................88 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles...................................................................90 Content and theore tical knowledge..............................................................90 Limited time.................................................................................................91 Credibility.....................................................................................................91 Negotiations for instructional time and freedom..........................................92 Advantages of filling dual roles...................................................................93 Themes and Summary of Findi ngs for Alexis Johnson..............................................94 5 DAN CHARLES........................................................................................................95 Introduction and Background Information.................................................................95 Professional Experiences.....................................................................................95

PAGE 8

viii Owen Elementary................................................................................................96 More Cooperative School....................................................................................97 Dans Classroom and Instruction........................................................................98 What Beliefs About Social Studies Educa tion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?.99 Beliefs Concerning Teaching..............................................................................99 Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies........................99 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods.....................................101 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teacher s Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course?..........................................................................102 How Does Filling These Dual Roles Info rm Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum?....................................................104 Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Channels of Communication..........................................................................104 Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing........106 What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course?.................................................................107 Issues Related to Methods Students..................................................................107 Conservative social beliefs.........................................................................107 Tension between content and methods.......................................................108 Students negative experiences with Social Studies..................................109 Issues Related to the Status of El ementary Social Studies and Field Placement.......................................................................................................109 Lack of respect and professional de velopment for elementary Social Studies...................................................................................................109 Lack of time for elementary Social Studies...............................................110 Other field placement issues......................................................................111 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles.................................................................112 Content and theore tical knowledge............................................................112 Limited time...............................................................................................113 Credibility...................................................................................................113 Negotiations for instructional time and freedom........................................115 Advantages of filling dual roles.................................................................115 Themes and Summary of Fi ndings for Dan Charles................................................116 6 NORA IGLESIAS....................................................................................................119 Background Information...........................................................................................119 Professional Experiences...................................................................................119 Thebaut Elementary...........................................................................................120 Howe Elementary..............................................................................................120 Noras Classroom and Instruction.....................................................................121 What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?122 Beliefs Concerning Teaching............................................................................122 Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies......................123 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods.....................................124 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teacher s Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course?..........................................................................125

PAGE 9

ix How Does Filling These Dual Roles Info rm Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum?....................................................127 Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Channels of Communication..........................................................................127 Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing........128 What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course?................................................................129 Issues Related to Methods Students..................................................................129 Liberal beliefs.............................................................................................129 Content vs. methods tension and students negative experiences..............130 Student Behavior........................................................................................131 Issues Related to the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and the Field Placement.......................................................................................................132 Lack of respect for the elementary Social Studies methods course...........132 Lack of professional development in elementary Social Studies...............133 Lack of time for elementary Social Studies...............................................133 Other field placement issues......................................................................133 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles.................................................................134 Content and theore tical knowledge............................................................134 Limited time...............................................................................................135 Credibility...................................................................................................135 Negotiations for instructional time and freedom........................................136 Advantages of filling dual roles.................................................................136 Themes and Summary of Fi ndings for Nora Iglesias...............................................137 7 CROSS CASE FINDINGS.......................................................................................140 Introduction...............................................................................................................140 What Beliefs About Social Studies Educa tion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?140 Beliefs Concerning Teaching............................................................................140 Beliefs Concerning Social Studies....................................................................142 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies....................................................144 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods.....................................147 Summary...................................................................................................................149 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teacher s Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course?..........................................................................152 Shared Belief-to-Practice Connections..............................................................152 Individual Belief-toPractice Connections........................................................154 Dan.............................................................................................................154 Nora............................................................................................................155 Alexis.........................................................................................................156 Influence of Course Materials on Beliefs..........................................................157 Summary...................................................................................................................158 How Does Filling These Dual Roles Info rm Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum?....................................................159 Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Channels of Communication..........................................................................159

PAGE 10

x Beliefs About the Status of Social St udies in the Elementary Curriculum.......163 Summary...................................................................................................................166 What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course?................................................................167 Issues Related to Methods Students..................................................................167 Conservative social beliefs and liberal social beliefs.................................167 Content vs. methods tension.......................................................................169 Students negative experiences with Social Studies..................................171 Student behavior.........................................................................................171 Issues Related to the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and the Field Placement.......................................................................................................172 Lack of professional development for elementary Social Studies.............172 Lack of time and respect for elementary Social Studies............................174 Other field placement issues......................................................................175 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles.................................................................177 Content and theore tical knowledge............................................................178 Limited time...............................................................................................179 Credibility...................................................................................................180 Negotiations for instructional time and freedom........................................181 Advantages of filling dual roles.................................................................183 Summary...................................................................................................................184 8 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................187 Summary of the Findings of the Study.....................................................................187 Recommendations for Supporting and Improving Social Studies Methods Instruction by In service Teachers........................................................................188 Field Placement.................................................................................................188 Methods Course.................................................................................................189 College of Education.........................................................................................190 Future Research........................................................................................................191 Research on Inservice Teachers Serving as Methods Instructors.....................191 Research on Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction...........................192 Research Elementary Social Studies.................................................................193 Conclusion about the Status of Elementary Social Studies......................................194 APPENDIX A PROTOCOLS...........................................................................................................197 B SYLLABUS..............................................................................................................206 LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................224 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................235

PAGE 11

xi LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Ph. D. vs. Ed. D........................................................................................................... ..4 4-1 Alexis’ classroom........................................................................................................74 5-1. Dan’s Classroom.........................................................................................................98 6-1. Nora’s Classroom.....................................................................................................121 7-1 Beliefs Concerning Teaching....................................................................................141 7-2 Beliefs Concerni ng Social Studies............................................................................142 7-3 Beliefs Concerning T eaching Social Studies.............................................................144 7-4 Beliefs Concerning T eaching Social Studies.............................................................148 7-5 Belief-to-Practice Connections Shared......................................................................152 7-6 Belief-to-Practice Connection Dan............................................................................154 7-7 Belief-to-Practice Connection Nora..........................................................................155 7-8 Belief-to-Practice Connection Alexis........................................................................156 7-9 Channels of Communication.....................................................................................162 7-10 Issues Related to Methods Students........................................................................167 7-12 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles........................................................................178

PAGE 12

xii Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education PRACTICING TEACHERS AS ELEMENTARY SOCI AL STUDIES METHODS INSTRUCTORS: THEIR BELIEFS ABOUT THE ISSUES THEY ENCOUNTERED IN PREPARING PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS By Brian K. Lanahan August 2006 Chair: Elizabeth Anne Yeager Major Department: Teaching and Learning Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary schools, there is a need for strong methods instruction. However, elementary social studies methods instruction at the university level can be idiosyncratic and difficult to characterize, because methods courses often are taught by teachers from a variety of educational and professional backgrounds, incl uding inservice teachers. The individuals examined in this study served in the dual roles of inservice teachers and elementary social studies methods instructors. The st udy was informed by four major areas of literature: portraits of practice in social st udies methods instructi on, teaching and learning of elementary social studies, elementary soci al studies methods, and teacher beliefs. Case study methodology was employed, and the theory that teacher beliefs drive practice was the lens used to examine the beliefs and practices of the three participants while

PAGE 13

xiii chronicling the issues they encountered. Observ ations of methods inst ructors, interviews, and written documents supplied the data to complete this investigation. Findings from this study suggest that individuals serving in these dual roles engaged in practices based on their personal beliefs and experiences, and were privy to unique information about the status of elem entary social studies in the elementary curriculum. These individuals also encounter ed issues related to methods students, the status of elementary social studies and field placements, and filling dual roles. To further support individuals serving in these dual roles, recommendations for supporting and improving social studies methods instruc tion by inservice teachers are included. Suggestions for further study are recomme nded, including research about inservice teachers serving as methods instructors, elemen tary social studies methods instruction in general, and further elementary social studi es research. Finally, conclusions about the status of elementary social studies are disc ussed. Overall, filling these dual roles served to facilitate the participants ’ methods instruction and gave them unique insights into the status of social studies. The ability of th e participants to relate and react to the experiences and concerns of the met hods students proved to be valuable.

PAGE 14

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction and Purpose of the Study Elementary social studies methods instruc tion at the university level can often be idiosyncratic and difficult to characterize (Slekar 2006). While there is generally an agreed upon need to understand how met hods courses can better prepare preservice teachers to engage in social studies pract ice to meet the needs of diverse student populations (e.g., McCall & Andringa 1997; Ukpokodu 2003), portraits of those typically instructing these courses are rare. Elementary social studies methods courses are often taught by teachers from a variety of educat ional and professional backgrounds: “Retired (secondary) social studies teachers, retired pr incipals, teachers with a Masters degree in curriculum and instruction and other willing bu t possibly not qualified people carried the bulk of the load” (Slekar 2006, p. 255). This obser vation is mirrored at the University of Florida, where inservice teach ers often serve as social st udies methods instructors. A need exists to understand the particular belie fs that fuel the methods practices of these instructors and the issues th ey encounter as inservice te achers instructing a methods course. Rationale for Study The teacher education experiences of clas sroom teachers concerning social studies “cannot be overlooked as factors that shape teachers’ knowledge and classroom practices” (Yeager & Wilson 1997, p. 122). Despite the power that such experiences have over teachers, little is known about how the beliefs of inservice methods instructors

PAGE 15

2 influence their methods practices, and how fillin g these dual roles in turn influences their beliefs about social studies at the elementa ry level. Nespor (1987) suggested a further examination of such beliefs: “Little attention has been acco rded to the structures and functions of a teacher’s beliefs about their ro les, their students, the subject matter areas they teach, and the schools they work in” (p. 317). While there are many powerful portraits of how beliefs influence the inst ruction of social studies teachers (e.g., Wineburg & Wilson 1991), portraits of how be liefs affect the methods practices of inservice teachers serving as social studies methods instruct ors are virtually nonexistent. This study seeks to fill this void in the literature. Statement of the Research Problem Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary schools, there is a need for strong methods in structors. In many colleges of education, it is common practice to employ inservice teacher s to teach methods courses. A void in the literature exists concerning the beliefs, practices, and issues encountered by these instructors, so little is known about how to best support them as they perform their duties. Thus, whatever new information is collected adds to the scholarship about the practitioners who fill this role, and in the future will assist colleges of education to better support these instructors. Research Questions This research study will seek to answer the following questions: 1. What beliefs about social studies educa tion do these inservic e teachers hold? 2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers ho ld inform their practice in their social studies methods course? 3. How does filling these dual roles inform their beliefs about the place of social studies in the elementary curriculum? 4. What do these inservice teach ers believe are the issues they encountered while teaching the methods course?

PAGE 16

3 Theoretical Orientation It is customary for qualitative research ers to detail their philosophical and epistemological assumptions, such as the c hoice of methodology and procedures for data collection and analysis, because these assumptions guide all aspects of their study (Gale 1993; LeCompte & Preissle 1993). This study is built upon a constructivist framework (Crotty 1998; Schwandt 1994). Ce ntral to constructivism is i nquiry into the experiences of individuals and a descripti on of the world as it is felt and understood by the individuals (Schwandt 1994). In this st udy, the experiences are those of the inservice methods instructors as they understand them. These e xperiences form the basis for constructed meanings of events, situations, and belie fs. This process occurs over time and is influenced by the individual’s actions, but also by personal histories and contextual factors (Schwandt 1994). In this study, it appears that the individual inservice methods instructors draw upon their dual ro les of methods instructor and inservice teacher to form their mental constructions, which in turn inform their methods practice. The results of this study are reported in th e tradition of dissertations to fulfill the requirements for the Doctor of Education degree at the University of Florida. In this tradition: The main purpose of the study is to describe (and analyze) a particular situation or a chronicle of events for a particular sample. A theory, or components of a theory, may be used to generate descriptive cate gories, but advancemen t or testing of the theory is less important than documenting the event for this specific sample. (University of Florida 1983) For other requirements for an Ed. D. disserta tion see figure 1-1. Therefore, the intent of the study is to determine how the instructors’ beliefs about elementary social studies

PAGE 17

4 influence how they perform their role as “cu rricularinstructional gatekeepers” while serving as methods instruct ors (Thornton 1991, p. 237). Figure 1-1 Ph. D. vs. Ed. D. Also, within this tradition, “[q]uestions or hypotheses that guide the data analysis may be generated from either a theoretical pe rspective or a practical perspective to yield

PAGE 18

5 information useful to decision-makers in this or similar settings” (University of Florida 1983). Given that the intention of this di ssertation is to unders tand the beliefs and practices of inservice teache rs who serve as social studies methods instructors, the questions and hypotheses that guide this study are guided by a practical perspective to generate data that will facilitate the improve ment of instruction by individuals in similar situations. Guiding Research This study draws upon four major areas of re search as the basis for the literature review in Chapter 2: the literature regarding por traits of practice in social studies methods instruction (e.g., Slekar 2006), the teaching and learning of elementary social studies (e.g., Barton & Levstik 2004) and elementary social studies methods (e.g., Owens 1997), and teacher beliefs (e.g., Pajares 1992). A brie f description of each area literature follows examples from each of the areas of literature to be discussed in Chapter 2. In a recent work, Slekar (2006) detailed the connections between the beliefs and resultant practices of an elementary social studies methods professo r. Slekar found that the professor believed the goal of social studies education was transmission of the American cultural heritage (see Martorella 1994). This belief about social studies education informed the professor’s beliefs a bout social studies me thods instruction. The professor in question stated that the main job of elementary social st udies teachers was to serve as “knowledge conveyors,” a belief th at served as the basis of his methods instruction. In 2004, Barton and Levstik published an extensive discussion of the teaching and learning of history at the elementary level, Teaching History for the Common Good In their book, Barton and Levstik discuss the multitude of positions, perspectives, and stances that are adhered to for the teaching of history at the el ementary level. Illustrative

PAGE 19

6 of the absence of consensus in history a nd social studies educ ation is Barton and Levstik’s statement about the central concer n of history educati on: “We cannot answer the question, ‘What kind of education prepar es students for participatory democracy?’ because, quite frankly, no one knows” (p. 35). Given the lack of definitive answers to important questions such as this, teachers often rely on their beliefs to inform their instructional practices. Also important to understanding the practi ces of teachers, methods instructors included, is Barton and Levstik’s suggestion: “To understand why teachers engage in the practices they do, perhaps we need to turn to the socially situated purposes that guide their actions” (p. 244). In the case of the inservice instructors in this study, the consideration of “socially situated purposes ” aids in understanding the basis of their particular beliefs and resultant practices. While the literature focused exclusively on elementary social studies me thods is not as extensive as the literature focused on elementary social studies education or teache r beliefs, a number of works exist that are important to this study. One such work is Owens’ 1997 article, “The Challenges of Teaching Social Studies Methods to Preser vice Elementary Teachers,” in which Owens describes six issues specific to methods inst ruction of elementary social studies. Chapter 2 also details the literature concerning teacher beliefs, which serves as the theoretical lens for this study and is briefly described below. Guiding Theory The theory that teacher beliefs drive pract ice has been applied to many educational situations (e.g., Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark & Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989; Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000;

PAGE 20

7 Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994). This theory holds promise for understanding teacher practices: “Educators are now beginni ng to realize that teachers (preservice teachers, beginning, or experienced) do hold implic it theories about students, the subjects they teach, and their teaching responsibilities” (Fang 1996, p. 51). The theory that beliefs drive practice has been applied more of ten to preservice (e.g., Armento 1996) and inservice teachers (e.g., Shulman 1987). R ecently, the effects of teacher beliefs on practices have been applied to the beliefs and resultant practices of an elementary social studies methods professor (Sle kar 2006). The present study ex tends this theory to the beliefs and practices of inservice teachers serv ing as social studies methods instructors. The Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design The choice of a qualitative design is based on Patton’s (1990) assertion that the intent of qualitative research is to “provi de perspective rather than truth, empirical assessment of local decision makers’ theori es of action rather than generation and verification of universal th eories, and context-bound e xplorations rather than generalizations” (p. 491). In this study, the local decisi on makers are the inservice instructors; the study explores their beliefs concerning th eir social studies methods instruction. Important to this study is a desi gn that facilitates a depth of understanding over breadth: “Qualitative methods permit th e evaluation researcher to study selected issues in depth and detail” (Patton 19 90, p. 165). The study employs a qualitative approach to create a rich description of each participant’s beliefs in order to understand his or her practices (Lincoln & Guba 1985). The complexity of teacher beliefs makes it difficult to study them well using qua ntitative methodology (Nespor 1987).

PAGE 21

8 Role of the Researcher As the researcher in this study, I have th e advantage of having focused on social studies instruction in my own work as an elementary teacher and during my doctoral studies. Moreover, I hold the advantage of be ing a fellow instructor of the same social studies methods course taught by the study partic ipants. The role of th e researcher in any qualitative study is to capture the reality and/or contexts th e research subject inhabits. The researcher should become the huma n instrument for data collection and interpretation by having a theoretical sensit ivity that creates an awareness of the subtleties of the data bein g collected and analyzed (L incoln & Guba 1985). This theoretical sensitivity is demonstrated by the researcher’s insights and ability to derive meaning from the data. In the case of this st udy, my theoretical sensit ivity is based on my experiences as an elementary social studies teacher, my knowledge of the professional literature concerning elementary social studies and my concurrent experience of teaching the same methods course. Methodology This study employs case study methodology to investigate three different participants and “seeks out both what is comm on and what is particular about the case” (Stake 1994, p. 238) through the analysis of multip le sources of data such as interviews, observations, and document analysis (Patton 1990; Stake 1994; Yin 1994). Case studies allow for an intensive, holistic, and in-dep th investigation of e ach teacher as a unit (Feagin, Orum & Sjoberg 1991; Merriam 1998; Stake 1994). Finally, Merriam’s (1998) contention that a case study is more focuse d on process than on outcome, and more on context than on specific variables, is impor tant for the current study because of the complex and unique nature of teacher beliefs and their influence on teaching practices.

PAGE 22

9 Participants I selected participants as a result of criterion sampling “to review and study all cases that meet some predetermined crit erion of importance” (Patton 1990, p. 176). The participants meet two criteria: They are inservice teachers, and they instruct an elementary social studies methods course I gained access to the participants by approaching each of them in the context of our shared role as elementary social studies methods instructors and inviting them to take part in the study. I secured institutional permission through the Institutional Review Boar d of the University of Florida and the Research and Evaluation Department of the School Board of Alachua County. The participants are all in service elementary teachers under th e age of 35, with at least five years of teaching experience, who instruct a section of Social Studies for Diverse Learners (SSE 4312) at the University of Florida. Data Collection Methods Data sources include interviews, observations of social studies methods instruction, and document analysis. This approach is based on Patton’s (1990) belief that “[q]ualitative methods consist of three kinds of data collection: (1) in-depth, open-ended interviews; (2) direct obser vation; and (3) written documents” (p. 10). All of these sources are used in this study to create a co mprehensive description of the participants and their beliefs. The use of multiple da ta sources is also based on Yin’s (1994) suggestion to use multiple sources of data when constructing case studies in order to increase the reliability of the data and provide multiple examples of the participants’ approach to the topics of interest. Finally, in terviews allow the participants to explain and describe their beliefs about methods instruc tion and the issues th ey encountered during

PAGE 23

10 the process, as well as provide a frame of reference for the observations of methods instructors. A large proportion of the data analyzed in this study is generated from at least two interviews with each participant lasting approximately 60-90 minutes, based on Patton’s (1990) belief that “[d]irect quotations are th e basic source of raw data in qualitative inquiry” (p. 24). The first interview provides data about the participant’s personal and professional background and his or her beli efs about teaching. The second and any follow-up interviews are based on inform ation from previous interviews and observations. The interviews are semi-str uctured based on Patton’s (1990) interview guide approach, in which the format, topics, a nd issues are covered in a specified outline form and the interviewer determines the order and the wording of each question. The interview guide approach allows for adjustme nts to the particulariti es of each interview and/or participant. Interviews are audio ta ped and transcribed. The interview questions reflect the major areas of interest in this study. Observations Data collection includes five to six th ree-hour observations of social studies methods instruction for each participant. Du ring the observations, I positioned myself in the back of the classroom to make my presence as unobtrusive as possible. All observations conclude with an informal convers ation with the instruct or to provide him or her with the opportunity to di scuss the class just complete d. During each observation, I took extensive field notes to describe the ev ents that take place during the class. Data Analysis Data analysis occurs as a process of “examining, categorizing, tabulating, or otherwise recombining the evidence” (Yin 1994, p. 102). It proceeds in order to generate

PAGE 24

11 useable information about the areas of interest of the study, and it occurs within-case and cross-case to ensure high-quality accessible da ta while generating documentation of the analysis, as well as retention of the data a nd the associated analys is after the study is completed (Huberman & Miles 1994). Also, data reduction “makes sense of massive amounts of data, reduces the volume of info rmation, and identifies significant patterns” (Patton 1990, p. 371). The data in this study need to be reduced to a salient and manageable set in order to be properly an alyzed. Several qualitative researchers have stated that analysis should be an ongoing pr ocess starting at the beginning of the study and not reserved for the end (e.g., Merriam 1998; Stake 1995). Based on this belief the data reductions in the following order: Free coding after the first r ound of interviews; then data analysis and development of codes to be used as a starting point to analyze inst ructional observation data Codes verified by a second coder Data analysis after all observations are completed using the previously generated codes, adjustments of codes as necessary af ter this analysis, a nd then use of codes to analyze the teacher-provided documents and the final interview data Analysis of data to identify the emergi ng themes across the data (Lincoln & Guba 1985) and verification of analys is by the res earch auditor Reduction of the data set on the basis of the identified themes in order to draw conclusions (Patton, 1990) Presentation of conclusions to participants for verification Verification of interpretation In order to keep the interpretations, re ductions, and resulting conclusions closely linked to the data, I incorporate a series of verification steps into the process. Two experienced researchers superv ise the study in order to crea te investigator triangulation (Denzin, 1984), which is especially important in light of the diffi culty of understanding

PAGE 25

12 the complex interactions of the two roles that each of the participants performs and the influence of these roles on instruction. I also perform member checking throughout the project, including the verification of findi ngs, conclusion, and final presentation. The chair of my doctoral committee serves as research a uditor (Cutcliffe & McKenna 2004). Study Limitations and Delimitations The proposed study is restricted to three el ementary teachers in the Alachua County area who also instruct a section of Social St udies for Diverse Learners at the University of Florida. The study is limited by the amount of access granted by th e teachers to their instruction and thei r teaching philosophy. Description of Chapters This dissertation uses a traditional form at. Chapter 1 introduces the purpose of the study, the research questions, and the backgr ound of the problem. Chapter 2 reviews the literature regarding portraits of practice in social studies me thods instruction (e.g., Slekar 2006), the teaching and learning of elementary social st udies (e.g., Barton & Levstik 2004) and elementary social studies met hods (e.g., Owens 1997), and teacher beliefs (e.g., Pajares 1992). Chapter 3 describes the methods, including information about each of the participants and their settings, the sampling rationale the research design, and the process used to analyze the data. Chapte rs 4–6 describe each participant and the withincase findings related to each particular participant. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case findings and conclusions of the study. Ch apter 8 summarizes the findings, makes recommendations to support social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers, suggests directions for further research, and provides conclusions about the status of elementary social studies.

PAGE 26

13 Potential Significance of the Study The study may advance our knowledge of how to utilize social studies methods instructors from a variety of educational and professional backgrounds to teach a methods course effectively. In additi on, by addressing the issues the participants recognize, this study informs us about the specific supports inservice teachers need in order to be effective. The results from this study also fill a particular void in the literature: Is what Merrill (a methods instructor) di d more common in social studies methods courses than I wish to believe? However, I cannot really answer that question because the literature lacks descriptive acc ounts of social educators engaged in the practice of teaching and learning in social studies methods courses. (Slekar 2006, p. 255) This study provides such accounts.

PAGE 27

14 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This review of the literatur e addresses four major areas of research related to the beliefs, practices, and issues encountered wh ile serving as elementary social studies methods instructors. These four areas include: teacher beliefs, portraits of the practice of elementary social studies met hods professors, the issues of elementary social studies methods, and finally, research in elementa ry social studies. In keeping with the dissertation guidelines for the E d.D. degree, this review cons ists of literature “focused more on studies of similar events, similar settings, and/or similar samples to those in this particular study” (University of Florida 1983). The review of the literatur e on teacher beliefs describes how a teacher’s personal beliefs about teaching and learning have a prof ound effect on his or her relationships with students, curriculum, and instruction. This body of research provides insight into the relationship between the beliefs and instructi onal practices of the participants in this study. The literature concerning po rtraits of the practice of elementary social studies methods professors reveals the paucity of such scholarship and the unique ways their beliefs influence practices within the contex t of an elementary social studies methods course. An examination of the closely rela ted research on elementary social studies methods reveals the specific issues relate d to teaching social studies methods in the current high-stakes environment, where soci al studies is not cu rrently included in accountability systems and is thus less of an inst ructional priority. Fina lly, a survey of the

PAGE 28

15 literature on elementary social studies leads to a discussion of a possible revision of the elementary curriculum and the influence of the No Child Le ft Behind Act and high-stakes testing on elementary social studies. Teacher Beliefs The literature concerning teacher belief s provides a lens through which I examine the research participants. Following is a description of the body of literature that examines how the specific beliefs teachers hold influence and, at times, dictate their instructional practices. In the context of this study, the be liefs held by these inservice teachers are especially interesting because of the influence of their dual roles, the ambiguous nature of social studies in genera l, and the currently imperiled status of elementary social studies. In their positions as methods instru ctors, they are introduced to a variety of strategies and so cial studies theories through va rious instructional materials that influence their beliefs about elementary social studies instruc tion. In thei r positions as inservice elementary teacher s, they are able to ‘road test’ the knowledge they have gained through the methods course and judge the effectiveness and practicality of these strategies and theories. Given the unique a nd powerful relationship of these dual roles on the participants’ beliefs, it is imperative not only to label these beliefs, but also to understand their effects on methods instruction. Challenging the partic ipants’ beliefs will be a whole array of outside factors that can influence th eir methods instruction. These outside factors include the expectations a nd biases of their methods students, the expectations of the course’s supervising professor, the impe riled status of elementary social studies, the restricti ons and boundaries of the methods course, and the culture of university, among other things.

PAGE 29

16 The background of a teacher is important to consider due to its effect on beliefs about teaching (Fang 1996; Nespor 1987). In th e case of these instructors, each has a unique personal, educational, and professional background that has served to form his or her beliefs about teaching and learning in gene ral, and social studies in particular. These beliefs must be examined: “To understand teach ing from teachers’ perspectives, we have to understand the beliefs with which they define their work” (Nespor 1987, p. 323). As Sturtevant (1996) stated, “We must learn far more about the beliefs, attitudes, and perspectives of teachers in the educational process” (p. 251). This examination is especially important for soci al studies teachers. Given the many dilemmas they face in the current educational climate, beliefs are often the basis for making instructional decisions when there are no clear-cut choices because beliefs help in “distinguishing between better and worse courses of ac tion, rather than right and wrong ones…” (Hargreaves 1995, p. 15). These dilemmas have been exacerbated by the impact of high stakes testing as teachers are faced with de creasing instructional time for social studies. In general, teachers and their beliefs ar e typically conservative in general (Cuban 1984; Cuban 1993; Goodlad 1990; Lortie 1975; Owens 1997; Sarason 1996). Conservative instructional beliefs are often formed early in teachers’ lives when they themselves are students (C alderhead 1991; Lortie 1975; Sugrue 1997; Wideen, MayerSmith & Moon 1998). In addition to this “a pprenticeship of observation,” many other factors, such as socioeconomi c status, type of school attende d, and parental and societal influence, can inform a teacher’s be liefs (Wilson, Readence & Konopak 2002). These more conservative instructiona l beliefs have endured largel y because the people typically attracted to the teaching profession were once successful students in schools with

PAGE 30

17 traditional instructional methods, and thus, th ey form beliefs based on these experiences (Fehn & Koeppen 1998; Slekar 1998). These be liefs extend to all areas of education, including curriculum, teaching, learning, and ofte n extend in to the social realm (Pajares 1992). The Beliefs-to-Practice Connection Numerous studies have suggested teacher beliefs form the basis for instructional decisions (e.g., Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark & Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989; Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000; Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994). This situation is especially important for understanding the practices of the instructors in this study because of the autonomy that university level instructors of ten enjoy. Yet, while the be liefs-to-practice connection has been implicitly understood for decades, the re search community has not explored it in depth because of the difficulty of examining beliefs with quantitative methods (Pajares 1992). Reflecting a ‘coming of age’ of th e beliefs-to-practice research, Fang (1996) stated: Educators are now beginning to realize that teachers (preservice teachers, beginning, or experienced) do hold implicit theories about stude nts, the subjects they teach and their teaching responsibil ities, and that these implicit theories influence teachers’ reactions to teacher education and their teaching practice. (p. 51) Despite the inextricable connection between beliefs and practices, teachers sometimes have conflicting beliefs that lead to contra dictory instructional d ecisions (Cornett 1990). These contradictions often appear as a mi smatch between the content taught and the methods used to deliver the content. For ex ample, a teacher may have a strong belief in teaching the principles of democratic partic ipation, yet may favor instructional methods

PAGE 31

18 that are didactic and authoritarian. Beliefs ar e also constrained by other factors that may be imposed upon teachers – for example, they may experience tension between their expressed belief in preparing students for positiv e social interactions and the pressure to cover content (Cornett 1990). In situations like this, the teacher is responding to an external pressure that creates a mi smatch between beliefs and practices. The reality that practices do not always follow beliefs extends to preservice teachers. Often, education students arrive at their first field placement full of exciting and innovative teaching ideas, and then see th eir actions constrained by the institutional expectations in the field placement (A rmento 1996; Owens 1997; Wilson & Yeager 1997); thus, there is a disconnect between what they have been learning in their teacher education program and the unique challenges of a real classr oom (Henning & YendolHoppey 2004). This disconnect in social studies is descri bed by Leming (1992) as the ‘two cultures’ of the academy and the cl assroom. Often, preservice teachers end up conforming to the more conservative instruct ional practices and e xpectations of their mentor teachers (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Owens 1997; Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994; Wilson & Yeager 1997), and this desire to c onform creates difficulties in fulfilling the ‘theory to practice’ promise of a concurrent field placement (YendolHoppey & Tilford 2004). Moreover, when preser vice teachers begin their first year of teaching, inconsistencies between their stated be liefs and actual practices may continue if there is no opportunity to address the discrepancy (Mal lette & Readence 1999; Wilson 2000). Changing Beliefs Within the educational research community, a certain level of disagreement exists regarding the difficulty of changing teacher beliefs. Much of the research on the

PAGE 32

19 possibility of changing beliefs has focused on the beliefs of preservice teachers. Some researchers believe that it is possible to in fluence preservice teac hers’ beliefs during a teacher education program (Angell 1996; Featherstone 1992; Guyton 2000; Johnston 1990), while other researchers believe it is diffi cult to change preser vice teachers’ beliefs at all (Lortie 1975; Pajares 1992; Richardson 199 6), particularly in the area of social studies (Virta 2002). It may be that the degree to which preservice teachers change their instructional beliefs depends upon the extent to which the new ideas they encounter conform to their previous be liefs (Angell 1996). Nonetheless, simply having preservice teachers discuss and express their beliefs is insufficient for change: While reflection is central to teacher deve lopment, the mirror of reflection does not capture all there is to see in a teacher. It tends to miss what lies deep inside teachers, what motivates them most about their work, and it is this motivation to achieve a precise purpose that also in fluences their instructional practices. (Hargreaves 1995, p. 21) When preservice teachers leave their teacher education programs, researchers have noted, their first year of work can profoundly change their beliefs (Featherstone 1992; Hargreaves 1995). In such cases, the strain of understanding and performing their new roles as classroom teachers is a strong enough force to influence previously firm beliefs. When teachers do settle into their roles as “curricular-instruc tional gatekeepers” (Thornton 1991, p. 237), they often resist cha nges to their instru ctional beliefs and practices, especially in light of specific educational reforms or mandates that regularly come down the pike. Moreover, if teachers are denied input into these reform initiatives, their instructional beliefs are not likely to change to reflect the imposed reforms (Cuban 1986). Thus, teachers will always retain some control over instruction in their classrooms (Hargreaves 1995). This fact is important in understanding the beliefs and practices of

PAGE 33

20 the methods instructors in this study in rela tion to externally im posed pressures that influence social studies instructi on at the elementary level. Finally, as noted earlier, Pa jares (1992) has argued th at beliefs are shaped in childhood and often endure throughout one’s car eer. Pajares also claimed that beliefs may change when individuals experience a chan ge in authority. His claim is especially important to this study because of the “cha nge in authority” experienced by inservice teachers as they move into the role of methods instructor. Teachers in various subject areas have differing beliefs and justify their instructional decisions based on those belief s (Readence, Kile & Mallette 1998); social studies teachers are no differe nt (Leming 1991; Wilson 2000). One of the difficulties in determining teacher beliefs about social stud ies is the ongoing debate – still taking place – over what exactly should be taught (Brophy & Alleman, in press; Thornton 2005). Yet it is also important to note that, no matter how the curren t debate over what should be taught is resolved (if ever), social studies teach ers continue to exert a great deal of control over what actually happens in their classrooms (Thornton 1991). Summary of Teacher Beliefs Research on teacher beliefs has examined the enduring nature of these beliefs (Lortie 1975) and their powerful influence on instructional practice (Pajares 1992). Some researchers have noted inconsistencies between the stated beliefs of teachers and their actual instructional practices (Cornett 1990). Mo st often, these inconsistencies relate to external constraints imposed on teachers. Ther e also has been much debate about whether teacher beliefs can really change. Some resear chers have reported it is possible to change beliefs (Guyton 2000), while others have noted that beliefs are formed early in life and are very resistant to change (Richardson 1996). Finally, the re search on beliefs of social

PAGE 34

21 studies teachers shows their similarity to t hose of other subject area teachers (Leming 1991), and that social studies teachers do indeed use these beliefs to make instructional decisions (Thornton 1991). Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction Shulman (1987) observed, “One of the frus trations of teaching as an occupation and profession is its extensive individual a nd collective amnesia, the consistency with which the best creations of its practitioners are lost to bot h the contemporary and future peers” (p. 11). While significan t portraits of practice exist in elementary social studies methods literature, they are rare; fortunately, two recent portraits of practice have been added. In order to analyze and organize the information in these portraits, I have applied four conceptual categories: beliefs about teaching at the elementary school level, including instructional traditi ons and the nature of teachers; beliefs about the nature and purpose of social studies as a school subject; beliefs about teaching elementary social studies; and beliefs about teaching social studies methods to preservice teachers. Dr. Henry Merrill Slekar (2006) analyzed the beliefs and practices of Dr. Henry Merrill, while arguing the beliefs and practices of social studies methods prof essors are “largely absent from the research literature” (2006, p.244), a nd that this absence leaves important questions unanswered: “How does a methods professor view soci al studies subject matter? How does a methods professor view teaching and learning? What are the underlying beliefs that guide the social st udies methods profe ssor?” (2006, p. 244). Slekar also points out elementa ry social studies methods cour ses are taught by instructors from a wide range of professional and philos ophical backgrounds; thus, “the idea of ‘common practice’ in these courses ma y not be too common” (2006, p. 241).

PAGE 35

22 As a former elementary principal, Merri ll held particular beliefs concerning teaching and learning at the elementary le vel. Merrill believed his methods students came to his course with “negative thoughts abou t this course already. .” stemming from their experiences as students (2006, p. 246). Merrill thought elementary teachers had too many other responsibilities and argued that th is burden often led to “poor content being taught” (2006, p. 250). Based on this belief, Me rrill required his students to plan their lessons based on Hirsch’s Core Knowledge b ecause “it gives you the materials and what to teach” (2006, p.250), stating, “They (teacher s) could just concern themselves with weaving Core Knowledge into engaging lesso ns that elementary children would find enjoyable” (2006, p. 251). These beliefs connect ed to Merrill’s beliefs about social studies and social studies teaching. Merrill also held specific beliefs conc erning the nature and purpose of social studies, adhering to a “philosophy of social st udies education with particular attention paid to his passionate belief in the Amer ican story as the core” (2006, p. 241). For Merrill, the stories of America’s past formed “our common” heritage and were part of his vision of history as “transmission of the cu ltural heritage” (Martorella 1994). Merrill believed it was important for children to learn about historical figur es through instruction like his ‘Monument Man’ lesson, where stud ents created a monument to important historical figures using strips of paper with quotations and important facts. Consistent with his “cultural heritage” vision, Merrill did not “introduce his students to what some social educators might view as common pr actice—historical th inking, participatory democracy, and multiculturalism” (2006, p. 241). By ignoring these skills and focusing

PAGE 36

23 solely on the “grand narrative,” Merrill intend ed to provide an exclusively celebratory history to elementary children. For Merrill, the main job of elementary teachers was to serve as ‘knowledge conveyors,’ not historians. Merrill stated th at elementary students should have “exposure to deep content” that was “made enj oyable” by including “gimmicks” (2006, p. 247) and other devices to ensure the content was fun fo r elementary students. This “deep content” was to be organized around Hirsch’s Core Knowledge: “… I thi nk this is a great curriculum to teach in the elementary school” (2006, p. 250). Merrill wanted his preservice teachers to re-explore history content as students. Consequently, he taught lessons to his methods students that were “exciting activities and enjoyable experiences with history subject matter” (2006, p. 254). Merrill argued his methods students should acquire a large fund of historical knowle dge through a survey course, based on the Core Knowledge curr iculum. Merrill employed a three-step approach to support his vision: He used the works of Diane Ravitch to explain what was wrong with the elementary curriculum; he used Hirsch’s Core Knowledge curriculum and Cultural Literacy theory to argue for a hist ory curriculum; and he introduced Joy Hakim's history text as a teaching resource. Slekar argues that more methods professors need to create “self-portraits” in the action-based research tradition to impr ove methods practice (2006, p. 256). He concludes: The social studies professoriate consis ts of scholars from large research universities, practitioners from colleges at liberal arts institutions, research practitioners from state teaching universi ties, adjunct faculty from hidden corners of higher education. We need to ask ques tions about each of these populations. We need to know who they are. We need to know why they are engaged in the social

PAGE 37

24 studies endeavor, and we need to know why and how they teach as they do (p. 256). Dr. Rahima Wade Misco (2005) reviewed the beliefs and pr actices of Dr. Rahima Wade through a lens of moral education, revea ling how her strong beliefs in civic participation influenced her social studies methods course. Wade is a nationally recognized scholar on the preparation of elementary social studies t eachers to teach for social justice and civic engagement through service learning. Wade believed that preservice teacher s often had very limited knowledge backgrounds and needed structured experiences to broaden their understanding of social problems and to give them a working knowledge of the issues. With regard to social studies specifically, Wade’s beliefs are in al most direct contrast to the “transmission of the cultural heritage” (Martore lla 1994) vision of Merrill. Wade adhered to a “reflective inquiry” and “informed social criticism” vision of social studies (Martorella 1994). To support her vision, Wade introduced stude nts to her “Toward the Common Good” curriculum model for elementary social studies, which focuses on developing understanding concerning “issues of c onflict, democracy, human rights, and interdependence” to promote the “common good” by teaching skills of “discussion, decisions, and details” (Misco 2005, p. 538). Part of Wade’s curriculum included discussions about what Misco labeled “closed and grey areas,” which require students to practice dealing with decisions having no clear-cut answers ( p. 542). These acquired skills were part of Wade’s focus on help ing elementary students understand multiple perspectives on complex civic issues.

PAGE 38

25 Wade advocated problem-solving instru ction, which included discussion and deliberation at weekly class meetings wher e elementary students could voice concerns and find commonalities. Wade also advocated introducing elementary students to the idea of the ”common good” with an examina tion of free trade “t hrough role-playing the perspectives of different institutions, part icipants, and stakeholde rs involved” (p. 539). Another instructional activity favored by Wade was a more structured form of deliberation where students assembled a “topten” list covering st udents’ opinions on a contentious topic. In addition, Wade beli eved in having her methods students actively participate in the instruction they were to deliver to elementary students. To experience democratic deliberation, Wade’s methods stude nts deliberated the use of scarce resources and took field trips to investigate the sources of trash in their community. Self-Portraits of the Practice of Elemen tary Social Studies Methods Professors A number of self-portraits created by various elementa ry social studies methods professors are important to the current st udy. While none of these pieces of scholarship was created exclusively to be expository self -portraits, they still il lustrate the direct connection between the individual beliefs a nd practices of these professors and their approach to methods instruction. I have appl ied the same conceptual categories to these self-portraits. Dr. Marilynne Boyle-Baise Boyle-Baise described her beliefs and pr actices in a 2003 artic le titled, “Doing Democracy in Social Studies Methods.” Her beliefs concerning the nature of teaching and learning at the elementary leve l were rooted in Paley’s (1992) book, “ You Can’t Say You Can’t Play ” (1992). Like Paley, Boyle-Baise pr omoted a classroom culture where students “learn to care for others and to connect across difference” (Boyle-Baise 2003, p.

PAGE 39

26 61). In addition, Boyle-Baise thought most preservice teachers did not believe that “doing democracy” was part of their job as teachers. Their concept of “making a difference” mostly included helping elemen tary students improve their behavior and perform better in school. Boyle-Baise sought to expand the responsibilities of her methods students to include ‘doing democracy’. Boyle-Baise conceptualized social studies as “reflective inquiry” and “informed social criticism” (Martorella 1994), in which the principles of democracy serve as the foundation. This vision of social studies directly connects to Boyle-Baise’s belief that social studies should create a citizen who is “a reformer: critical, socially conscious, comfortable with dissent, and ready for activ ism” with a “justice-oriented, differencesensitive stance” (Boyle-Baise 2003, p. 51). Th is approach aims to create citizens prepared for participatory democracy. Boyle-Baise believed elementary children should receive instruction that allows them to: investigate, deliberate, serve, and act; using deliberation to identify, mull over, and critique causes of inequiti es; providing opportunities to serve with and learn from members of disenfranchised communities; a nd grappling with issues of injustice, pondering their redress, planni ng for, and possibly acting for, social change. (2003, p. 59) To teach these skills, Boyle-Baise advocated pa rticular instructional activities such as the creation of a “cooperative bi ography” where students ch ronicled the life of “an outstanding citizen” (p. 61). This activity integrated hist ory, geography and civic study, and required students to work together and make democra tic decisions concerning the book’s content. Boyle-Baise also discussed her beliefs a bout social studies methods instruction, saying that “the social studies methods cour se is an appropriate place to practice and

PAGE 40

27 reflect upon doing democracy” (p. 50). In a ddition to doing democracy in a methods course, Boyle-Baise stated, “[w]e can locate soci al justice and change at the center of our agenda” (p. 53). Boyle-Baise admitted that some instructional act ivities traditionally considered part of a methods course may need to be eliminated in order to meet the goals of the course: “In a tightly packed methods course, adding service learning usually means deleting something else…the inclusion of service learning will likely displace the teaching of an original, thematic unit of st udy…” (p. 60). Difficult instructional choices such as these highlight a challenging d ilemma facing methods instructors who have strong beliefs that displace tr aditional methods practice. Th is situation also illustrates Hargreaves’s (1995) claim that when faced with a dilemma and no clear-cut choices, teachers will often use their own beliefs to make their decisions. Dr. John Benson In a somewhat narrower and more focuse d work, Benson’s (1998) article “Using an Inquiry Approach with Preservice Teachers to Explain the Process of Facts, Concepts, and Generalizations” described his beliefs based on the work of Banks (1990) and the resultant practices related to promoting th e understanding and use of generalizations by preservice teachers for instruc tion. Benson believed that the typical preservice teacher only has experience with elementary social studies instruction focused on memorization of facts, especially memorizing such things as the states and capitals. Benson conceptualized social studies as “social science” (M artorella 1994) by actively engaging his methods students in the creation of generalizations. Benson explained how the typical states-and-capital s activity does not teach any “concepts” or “generalizations,” or even ensure understan ding of what a “state” or a “capital” is. Concerning social studies inst ruction, Benson stated that “teachers need to have the

PAGE 41

28 blueprint of the knowledge pyramid in mi nd as we plan our lessons” (Benson 1998, p. 227). Benson argued that facts can be interestin g, but they need to be presented in a manner in which children can build a higher level of conceptual understanding that can then be applied to other situations. Benson contended that preservice teachers have a difficult ti me grasping teaching for generalizations and seeing the “big picture” when planni ng instruction. To model teaching for generalizations, Benson engaged his preservice students in creating a unit where students worked with facts to develop concepts and create ge neralizations based on those concepts. To help his students see th e “big picture,” Benson engaged them in “building their own pyramids of knowledge….to think of the big pict ure in planning their social studies units and lessons” (Benson 1998, p. 227). Benson’s attention to these issues illustrates one of the issues faced by methods pr ofessors described later in this chapter. Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu Ukpokodu’s (2003) article, “The Challenges of Teaching a Social Studies Methods Course from a Transformative and Social Reconstructionist Fram ework,” drew upon the works of McLaren (1989) and Ladson-Billings (1991) “to develop preservice teachers’ skills for teaching from a critical pedagogy” (Ukpokodu 2003, p. 78). Ukpokodu’s approach often put her at odds with her typi cally socially conserva tive (e.g., Owens 1997) preservice teachers from middle-clas s European-American backgrounds. Ukpokodu expressed the belief that preservice teachers need to “develop an appreciation for human interdependency, learn to construct a plura list perspective and a sense of collective responsibility, and commit to promoting a just and peaceful solution to global concerns” (p. 75). Ukpokodu argued that preservice teachers bring biases, misconceptions, and stereotypes to their work, which creates resi stance to a transformative social studies

PAGE 42

29 methods course. To overcome these biases, Ukpokodu showed videos such as “500 Nations,” including the video’s discussi on of the events at Wounded Knee, to demonstrate the concept of multiple perspectives on a historical event. Ukpokodu’s vision of social st udies was “informed social criticism” (Martorella 1994). She relied on multicultural knowledge and understanding to reach the stated goals of social studies (NCSS 1994), unlike the civic skills approach of Wade and Boyle-Baise. Like Wade (2003), Ukpokodu was critical of th e elementary social studies curriculum, and she argued that it failed to educate a grea t majority of students including preservice teachers, about their identities, roles, and re sponsibilities in a pa rticipatory democracy. But unlike Benson, Ukpokodu did not discuss he r beliefs about actual social studies instruction at length, only mentioning the n eed to teach elementary students to discuss controversial issues in an effective and ci vil manner, and advocating for the use of books such as This Is My House by Arthur Dorros (1996) to teach the NCSS theme of “people, places, and environment.” Ukpokodu taught her methods course from a “transformative and social reconstructionist perspective” with a desire to “[expand] the curriculum to include people of color, women, unsung heroes, children, and global perspectives” (2003, p. 75). The course aimed to help preservice teachers develop the skills for using critical pedagogy with the use of “open inquiry, exploration of social issues, stud y of human conditions, social justice, and activism” (p. 75). In order to overcome multicultural illiteracy, Ukpokodu required her students to research the personalities, roles, contributions, and perspectives of diverse individuals from American history using Takaki’s (2003) A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America and similar books.

PAGE 43

30 Dr. Janice McArthur McArthur’s (2004) article, “Involving Preservice Teac hers in Social Studies Content Standards: Thoughts of a Methods Pr ofessor,” focuses specifically on instructing preservice teachers how to use standards. Mc Arthur’s goal for her methods instruction was “to convince preservice teachers to use standards as a foundation for improving the quality of social studies edu cation and to develop their posi tive attitude toward social studies content” (2004, 82). Concerning teaching in general, McArthur believed, based on federal mandates, the choice of teachers is not whet her to include standards, but how to do so. McArthur stated that most preservice teachers hold the limited vi ew that elementary social studies is based on the content and skills found in textbooks, and on memorization. Professing her faith in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) McArthur stated the crafters of the act “embraced increased teacher acc ountability with the intent of advancing student learning” (p. 79). Interestingly, McArthur did not discuss her beliefs about the purpose and nature of social studies. Perhaps indicative of the curr ent educational climate, McArthur presented a vision of social studies as “standards based,” a concept not included in Martorella’s (1994) descriptive typology of the five mo st prevalent visions of social studies instruction. Moreover, McArthur did not mention any particul ar instructional methods for elementary social studies, only discussing the importance of using scientifically proven instructional methods. McArthur also approached methods instru ction with a strong advocacy of the No Child Left Behind Act, claming it has “a we ll-documented record of success” (2004, p. 79) and a reliance on “standards based” in struction. McArthur believed preservice

PAGE 44

31 teachers should understand the concept of sta ndards early in their teacher preparation programs. Based on this belief, her social studies methods cour se concentrated on teaching the required standards with “appropriate preparation for planning and teaching” (2004, p. 80). Summary of Portraits of Practice in Elemen tary Social Studies Methods Instruction Portraits of practices in elementary social studies methods inst ruction are rare, but “eminently educative” (Slekar 2006, p. 255). Po rtraits of the pract ices of two very different and thoughtful methods pr ofessors were featured in th is section. Both Dr. Henry Merrill and Dr. Rahima Wade made explic it connections between their beliefs and instructional practices. Also reviewed were se lf-portraits of the be liefs and practices of four other methods instructors. Dr. Ma rilynne Boyle-Baise and Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu both described methods instruction with the aim of social justice, the former using democracy as the vehicle, and the latter using multicultural knowledge and competency. Dr. John Benson presented a model of methods instruction to provide his students with the skills and knowledge to teach social studies using genera lizations. Finally, the social studies vision of Dr. Janice McArthur demonstrated the gr owing power and influence of ‘standards based’ instruction a nd its ability to dictate instru ctional practices of methods professors. These portraits suggest that be liefs do indeed influence practices in elementary social studies methods courses. Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction To understand the issues of teaching an el ementary social studies methods course, it is helpful to look at Owens’ (1997) study of instruction at seven institutions of higher education in South Florida, where he identifi ed six specific issues to elementary social studies methods instruction. While explaini ng these issues, Owens (1997) observed it is

PAGE 45

32 especially important, “when generalists in el ementary education may be teaching social studies methods…the generalists must be aw are of the challenges that come with the territory” (p. 113). What follows will be a discussion of these issues, guided by Owens’ (1997) six challenges as a framework. Challenge #1: Negative Past Experiences with Social Studies The first challenge for elementary social studies methods instructors is how to overcome the negative perceptions held by many preservice elementary teachers of social studies in general (Henning & Yendol-H oppey 2004; Owens 1997). In Owens’ (1997) study, more than two-fifths of the preservice teachers described their own past social studies courses as boring, a perception formulated duri ng their “apprenticeship of observation,” (Lortie 1975, p. 65), when inst ruction generally emphasized textbooks and rote memorization (e.g., Henning & Yendol-Hoppe y 2004; McArthur 2004). Attempts to overcome these negative experiences have at tim es met with little success. This is doubly unfortunate, as teachers can communicate thei r own dislike of the subject and reproduce the poor instruction they themselves once received (Chapin & Messick 1999; Turner 1999), continuing a vicious cycle that can only se rve to weaken the future of the subject. Challenge #2: Lack of Interest in Teaching Social Studies The second challenge awaiting methods instru ctors is the belief that other subjects in the curriculum are more de sirable to teach than social studies. In Owens (1997) study, 33.2% of the preservice teachers surveyed report ed their interest level for teaching social studies as "low." This finding has been supported by many methods professors (Benson 1998; McArthur 2004, Slekar 2006). This challe nge leads to an even greater one: how can the preservice teachers get excited about the varied possibilitie s for social studies

PAGE 46

33 instruction when they lack interest in the field itse lf (McArthur 2004; Owens 1997; Slekar 2006; Wade 2003)? Challenge #3: Confusion Over the Nature of Social Studies The third challenge awaiting methods instru ctors is confusion over the definition of social studies: “How can preservice elem entary teachers adequately understand the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of social studies if they believe social studies is one of the academic disciplines in the social sciences” (Owens 1997, p.114)? In a situation where preservice teachers are unabl e to articulate the correct definition of social studies, there is little hope they will be able to deli ver effective instruction. This situation is not entirely the fault of the pres ervice teacher. The history of social studies is full of conflicting views about its nature a nd definition (e.g., Barr, Barth & Shermis 1977; Brophy & Alleman, in press; Thornton 2005) This creates a ‘moving target’ for preservice teachers to understand. Practicing teachers, curricu lum specialists and school administrators, whose views concerning the field of social studies have the most imme diate impact on students, are sometimes at odds with the definition propos ed by the National Council of the Social Studies (NCSS). While NCSS has determined th at effective social studies instruction should “prepare young people to identify, unders tand, and work to solve problems facing our diverse nation in an increasingly in terdependent world” (NCSS, p. 159), many practitioners have interpreted the field far differently. For example, Thornton (2001) has argued that many view social st udies instruction as a method to inculcat e specific values within a child, whether those values are pa triotism, idealism and free enterprise or cultural pluralism, environmentalism and community service. Even elementary social studies methods professors have struggled with a definition of the field, with some

PAGE 47

34 emphasizing “facts, concepts and generaliza tions” (Benson 1998), while others approach methods courses with a “multicultural so cial reconstructionist approach” (Ukpokodu 2003). At whatever level, the nature and pur pose of social studies is assuredly going to be determined, not by a relatively faceless organization, but by the instructor in the classroom (Thornton 1991). Challenge #4: Conflicting Conservative Sociological Beliefs The fourth challenge is to persuade pres ervice elementary teachers to adopt and teach the social studies goal of worki ng to improve society (Owens 1997). Often, preservice teachers will agree w ith liberal and egalitarian id eals, but then disagree on specific, contentious social issues related to reaching that ideal. Most preservice teachers come from rural areas, small towns or suburba n communities, with li ttle experience or knowledge of diverse cultures, and many pref er to teach children who are similar to themselves and have little interest in multicultural ideals (e.g., Henning & YendolHoppey 2004; McCall & Andringa 1 997; Owens 1997; Ukpokodu 2003). These preservice teachers bring biases, misconceptions and stereotypes that contribute to their negative disposition toward teaching minor ity children (McCall & Andringa 1997; Ukpokodu 2003), and are difficult to change (Parajes 1992). This is of particular interest for this study. Owens details how often met hods professors hold significantly more liberal social beliefs than the preservice t eachers they instruct. Confirming that beliefs inform practices, the methods professors often instruct from the more liberal “reflective inquiry” or ”informed social cr iticism” (see Martorella 1994) perspective, which is often at odds with the “far more conservative” soci al beliefs of a typical preservice teacher (p. 116). When preservice teachers hold conservative social beliefs they often do not feel the need to teach with the goal of social change which put them at odds with the goal social

PAGE 48

35 studies: "prepare young people to identify, understand, and work to solve problems facing our diverse nation in an increasingly interdependent world" (NCSS, 1994, p. 159). While conservative beliefs are the norm occasionally preservice teachers hold more liberal social beliefs that are more aligned goals of social studies More liberal social beliefs often led teacher to question the status quo and teach for social change. There is hope, as Angell (1998) determined it was difficult, but possible, to change the “traditional” instructional beli efs of preservice teachers dur ing a social studies methods course. Slekar (1998) drew a similar c onclusion, attributing the difficulty to disagreement between the experiences of pr eservice teachers duri ng their “apprenticeship of observation.” Challenge #5: Selecting What to Teach The fifth challenge relates to the conti nuing expansion of the number of topics deemed pertinent to social studies education at the preservice le vel (Owens 1997). As content demands increase, so does pressure on instructors to prepare preservice elementary teachers to teach this new conten t adequately. Currently, methods courses are overburdened with too many demands, beggi ng the question, “How should teachers be educated to tend the curricular-instructi onal gate?” (Thornton 2001, p. 72). This burden also relates to the fact that elementary so cial studies teachers are lacking in content knowledge (Chapin and Messick 1999; Frit zer & Kumar 2002; Owe ns 1997; Parker & Jarolimek 1997; Thornton 2001; Ukpokodu 2003; Sl ekar 2006). Consider, for example, that elementary teachers scored only 54 per cent correct on a basic test of chronological events in American history (Fritzer & Ku mar 2002). Based on such findings, teachers’ subject matter knowledge has become a central concern of some educational research in

PAGE 49

36 determining the depth and breadth of knowledge teachers must know to teach elementary students (Thornton 2001). The content problem is also related to the “liberal arts co mponent of teacher education and…to methods in the professi onal education compone nt….[T]his separation of subject matter and method in the educa tion of social studies teachers, although conventional, poses problems” (Thornton 2001, p. 77). In this traditional division of studies, it is assumed that preservice teachers have learned the necessary content during the liberal arts component of their education. However, this is often not the case, shifting some content obligations to the methods course. Social studies methods teachers cannot cover all the content knowledge in their methods courses, and yet, they cannot assume adequate content knowledge of their pr eservice teachers (Fritzer & Kumar 2002) resulting in a true “Catch 22”. Despite the documented lack of content know ledge of preservice teachers, a widely held belief (e.g., Fresch 2003; Morin 1996, T hornton 2001) exists that methods courses should retain a singular focus on social studi es methods, such as “inquiry, immersion, small group discussion, and problem solvi ng, cooperative learning, simulation, role playing, storytelling, guided fa ntasy, modeling, demonstration, historical investigation, research, creating, and reflecti ng” (Fresch 2003, p. 70). The best solution is most likely a balanced approach covering a “thorough educa tion of teachers in th e subject matters of the curriculum, methods, and their inte rrelationships” (Thornton 2001, p. 78), achieved with a thoughtful alignment of social studies prerequisites and methods instruction. Challenge #6: Using the Concurrent Social Studies Field Experience The sixth and final challenge awaiting me thods instructors is the difficulty of utilizing a concurrent field pl acement effectively (Owens 1997). This is associated with

PAGE 50

37 the reality that almost all the instructional st rategies suggested in most elementary social studies methods courses, such as role-playi ng, simulation and inquiry projects, are active and social learning experiences that are often at odds with the more ‘traditional’ teaching styles of cooperating teachers. In certain cases, cooperating teachers actively discourage the use of more progressive teaching methods and require students to employ traditional methods (Yeager & Wilson 1997). Despite th e reluctance of many cooperating teachers to support the innovative practi ces introduced to preservice te achers in methods courses, there is an agreed-upon need for a concurre nt field placement for elementary social studies methods students (e.g., Fresch 2003; Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Morin 1996; Owens 1997). Despite the unfortunate disconnect between what is taught in a methods course and what is practiced within the placement, research has shown the field placement is beneficial for both elementary st udents and preservice teachers (Kelleher & Cramm 1996; Leming 1989; Mori n 1996; Owens 1997); as Fresch states, “The ability of the preservice teachers to make connections between the course on campus and the teaching in the field enabled them to provide challenging and enriching experiences for the children” (2003, p. 75). Further adding to the challenge of concurrent field placements are school settings where social studies is not tested or part of an accountability scheme—social studies is of ten given only 30 minutes a week or is nonexistent—making what is learned in a met hods course impossible to see in classroom practice (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Yendol -Hoppey & Tilford 2004). To address this challenge, colleges of education need to monitor field placements to ensure that preservice teachers have an opportunity to w itness social studies instruction and are allowed to utilize the social studies st rategies they have learned (Owens 1997).

PAGE 51

38 Summary of Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction In summary, there are a numb er of issues specific to elementary social studies methods instruction. The first is related to the preservice teachers’ negative past experiences with social studies as students during their “apprenticeship of observation” (Lortie 1975). If their perceptions based on th ese experiences are not changed, preservice teachers will communicate and reproduce the poo r instruction they received when they become classroom teachers (Chapin & Me ssick 1999; Turner 1999). The current challenge of a lack of interest in teaching social studies creates further challenges for methods professors (Benson 1998; McArthur 2004; Slekar 2006). Another challenge is the longstanding confusion and debate over th e nature of social studies (Thornton 2005). This situation makes for difficulty when pres ervice teachers are unable to articulate the definition of social studies (Owens 1997). The generally conservative social beliefs of preservice teachers also are a challenge, as those who choose to become teachers often have conservative social beliefs (Goodlad 1990; Lortie 1975), and this inhibits them from fully embracing the more progressive views that characterize social studies (NCSS 1994). The lack of content knowledge among pres ervice elementary teachers (Fritzer & Kumar 2002) creates yet anothe r challenge for methods instructors as they select a curriculum. When methods students are conten t-deficient, methods instructors must use their own judgment to determine the workab le instructional balance of “content” to “methods” (Thornton 2001). The final challe nge is how best to capitalize on the concurrent field placement when the cooperati ng teacher limits the instructional freedom of the preservice teacher (Owens 1997), or th e preservice teacher is placed in an environment where social studies instruction is nonexistent or extremely limited (YendolHoppey & Tilford 2004).

PAGE 52

39 Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies The Expanding Horizons Curriculum The standard curriculum for elementary social studies (sin ce 1934) has been slightly differing versions of Paul Hanna’s expanding horizons/environments curriculum (EH) (Thornton 2001; Turner 1999; Wade 2002). In the last few years, EH has been critiqued for, among other things, a lack of c ontent at the first three grade levels and a lack of exposure to other countries until middle school (e.g., Fritzer & Kumar 2002), prompting some more conservative critics to advocate for including only history in the social studies curriculum (Ravitch 1987). Ho wever, as Barton and Levstik (2004) have pointed out, definitive answers in social studies education, especially on critical questions, are not easily decided and often result in endless debate. As a result, EH has been the subject of a number of critiques over the years, but the curriculum has proven to be quite durable (Wade 2003). Most recently, in response to the ‘history only’ critic s, Brophy and Alleman (in press) suggest a reconceptuali zation of the elementary social studies curriculum based on cultural universals. They seek not to abandon the EH curricu lum completely; rather, they favor “retaining most of the same topics, but developing them more coherently and shifting emphasis from the expanding comm unities sequence to introducing students to the fundamentals of the human conditi on…” (in press). Brophy and Alleman’s reconceptualization rejects some of the recent calls (Ravitch 1987) to abandon a pandisciplinary approach and replace it with a history emphasis, disputing point by point the arguments put forth by the history-only advocates. For example, Brophy and Alleman especially reject the notion that children need “fanciful” heroes to emulate. These advocates for a “cultural universal” conception of the field of social studies describe a

PAGE 53

40 curriculum model that focuses on “…human activities involved in pursuing needs and wants related to cultural universals.…because teaching students about how their own and other societies have addressed these purpos es provides a sound basis for developing fundamental understandings about the human condition…” (in press). Also of particular interest to this study are th e critiques and alternatives to EH provided by one of the methods professors profiled in the “portraits of practice” section of this chapter. Based on a review of the literature concerning EH, Wade (2002) summarized the three major critiques of EH as: “(1) the nature of child ren’s life experiences and learning in modern society; (2) the nature of the EH curriculum; and (3) the present state of elementary social studies” (p. 117). In light of these criti ques, Wade (2002) proposed the “Toward the Common Good” curriculum, with the goal of helping students learn about and address the problems and needs of a contemporary and diverse world. Research on Effective Elementa ry Social Studies Practice In 1987, Lee Shulman broke new ground w ith his article, “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations for the New Reform.” Shulman called for the documentation of the “wisdom of practice” of teaching. While arguing many eff ective teachers kept their knowledge in their classrooms, Shulman also ca lled for extensive and contextualized case studies of effective teachers and their pr actices. To understand these case studies, Shulman described the seven categories of knowledge for effective teaching of them “pedagogical content knowledge,” or “the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners and presented for instruction” (Shulman, 1987, p. 8) is often perceived as indispensable. Case studies based on the observation of expert teachers are central in modeling pedagogical content

PAGE 54

41 knowledge. Building on the work of Shulma n, O.L. Davis called for “educational practitioners and researchers to undertake, write, and publish cas e studies of wise practices” (Davis 1997, p. 3). By doing so, soci al studies methods instructors will be provided with a model for new teachers to emulate, and perhaps develop an understanding of what it mean s to be an effective educator within social studies. In October 2000, the journal Social Educa tion devoted almost an entire issue to “wise practice in challenging classrooms.” In this issue, the wise practices of teachers working in challenging settings were docum ented, an idea that Y eager and Davis (2005) slightly modified and explored in their book, Wise social studies teaching in an age of high-stakes testing: Essays on cl assroom practices and possibilities. In 1994, the National Council of Social Studies issued “Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies,” which listed fi ve requirements for powerful social studies teaching and learning. The following section will summarize those five requirements and provide examples of “powerful social studies” by drawing on examples from Yeager and Davis’s (2005) book. Five Requirements for Po werful Social Studies The first requirement is that instruction should be meaningful to both teacher and students. The course material must meet th e objectives of the t eacher, and the content must be useful to students in and out of class. Effective teaching will consist of meaningful learning activities and assessmen ts focused on the central ideas of the instruction. The effective teacher will “cons truct, together with her students, based on their needs and interests” the content to be learned (Barton, 2005, p. 28). One method, which makes instruction meaningful, is for te achers to capitalize on students’ interests about a particular subtopic. For example, during a unit on Florida history, students

PAGE 55

42 revealed a curiosity about the identities a nd roles of loyalists a nd patriots during the American Revolution. In an effort to make the lesson relevant and meaningful, the teacher seized upon this interest and had his students explore those identities and roles to satisfy their curiosity and encourage a greate r understanding of Fl orida history (YendolHoppey, Jacobs & Tilford 2005). By encourag ing students to explore their interests within a broad but defined area, the instru ction was both meaningful and memorable. The second requirement for powerful soci al studies teaching and learning is integrative instruction. Effective instruction will integrate a wide range of content and instructional approaches and whenever possi ble, the most effective teachers will be capable of incorporating the use of technol ogy to expand the variety of sources students can draw upon (Libresco 2005). There are two ty pes of integration: integration across the disciplines in the field of social studies and integration across school subjects. The former shows students how all the disciplines within social studies interact: “If students are to understand how the social world opera tes, they cannot study history or geography or economics or any of the other components of social studies in is olation” (Barton 2005, p. 23). To this end, teachers are required to us e skills from all areas of social studies to ensure students have complete understanding of the content. Given today’s overloaded curriculum, “i ntegration across subject areas is a practical necessity” (Barton 2005, p. 26). If t eachers are to deliver powerful instruction, they must “learn how to integrate” social st udies instruction into other subjects (Libresco 2005, p. 37). Integration across subject areas is not only efficient, but pedagogically sound: “How would students lear n the content if not through text, visual images, and the collection of data? How would they c onstruct their understa nding if not through

PAGE 56

43 speaking, writing, drawing, and other such displays” (Barton 2005, p. 25)? These questions must be answered if students are to be exposed to effective social studies instruction. The third requirement for powerful social studies teaching and learning is valuebased instruction. Effective instruction will rais e ethical questions about content, with the aim of fostering student concern for th e common good (McBee 1995). This instruction will highlight the implications of controversial content and challenge students to make value-based decisions (Hess 2005). To this end, teachers must be awar e of their personal opinions and seek out sources to provide a balanced presentation of information. By raising ethical questions and c ontroversial issues that “chall enge students to think beyond the boundaries of their own community” teachers “open students’ eyes to the perspectives and values of others…” (Foster and H oge 2000, p. 368), teachers can accomplish two important tasks: “to encourage st udents to realize that they can effect change and to open students’ minds to the beliefs of others” (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 369). The teacher should also encourage students to act upon thei r beliefs and remind students that taking action in the name of their beliefs is part of the “socio-political protest” history of America (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 368). The fourth requirement is instruction must be challenging. Effe ctive instruction will have ambitious goals and standards. The teach er is responsible to ensure students meet those goals and standards. Moreover, instruction should compel students to think creatively and critically, suggest solutions, and take positions on public issues. Teachers should challenge the beliefs and the academic sk ills of their students, and teachers should expect their students to “work with a variety of sources, en counter varying perspectives

PAGE 57

44 and conflicting opinions, develop conclusions and arguments based on evidence, and collaborate with others as part of a learning community ” (Barton 2005, p. 19). Through careful questioning about th eir beliefs, students are pushed to go beyond their own experiences and examine their own prejudi ces and misinformation (Foster & Hoge 2000). The final requirement is instruction to be active for both teacher and students. The teacher must design and adjust the curriculum to reach the instructional goals in such a way that students must actively construc t their knowledge. Such activities involve making decisions and solving problems, and “t hey provide students the chance to pursue their own interests, as we ll as to relate new learni ng to previous knowledge and experience” (Barton 2005, p. 14). Moreover, by actively constructing their own knowledge, students build their own interpreta tions, “to create something, to put things back together, to ‘transform,’ self-consciousl y, the data in front of them” (Bryom 1998, p. 2). Such interpretations must be based on the available evidence and held up to inspection. In order to strengthen thei r own teaching, educators must be able to adapt a lesson in progress to meet the students’ needs and reach the objective of the lesson, according to the “specific contexts and clues” of each unique classroom (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 370). Teachers also need to be active outside of the classroom by continually interrogating their own instruction (Barton 2005). This reflecti on comes in the form of thinking “long and hard about why she teaches and what sh e teaches” (Libresco 2005, p. 37). What better method to develop within student s the ability to think reflecti vely and critically than by having educators ensure that they practice such thinking themselves?

PAGE 58

45 The Effects of the No Child Left Be hind Act and High-Stakes Testing on Elementary Social Studies The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the resultant focus on high-stakes testing is exacerbating, rather than solv ing, educational problems (Neill 2004; Neill Guisbond & Schaeffer 2004; Von Zasrtow, & Janc 2004; Wade 2002; Yeager 2005). NCLB is built on four principles: “accountabilit y for results, more choices for parents, greater local control and fl exibility, and an emphasis on doing what works based on scientific research” (U.S Department of Education 2004). NCLB mandates an accountability model to be used by America' s public schools by attaching sanctions for states that did not comply with its po licies (Guthrie & Springer 2004). Under its provisions, performance standa rds are used as benchmarks for improvements that must show ‘adequate yearly progr ess’ (AYP). All schools mu st show continual progress towards meeting their AYP goals or face c onsequences, such as allowing students to leave the school in favor of a more successf ul school, or the replacement of existing teachers and administrators (Guthrie & Springer 2004). In her article, “Staying Alive: Social Studies in Elementary Schools,” Angela Pascopella (2005) describes the harsh reality co ncerning social studie s and the impact of high-stakes testing: “It’s a crisis. Social studie s, particularly in the elementary grades, has been pushed to the back burner in schools” (p. 30). Because measurements of social studies achievement are not included in the NLCB accountability system, social studies is in sharp decline, prompting some to initiat e nationwide discussions of how to salvage social studies in the school curriculum (H oward 2003). The severity of the situ ation is such that “members of visiti ng accreditation t eams have heard administrators and faculty proudly announce that they do not teach any so cial studies or science in elementary

PAGE 59

46 school because they focus all their attenti on and energy on reading and math” (Fritzer & Kumar 2002, p. 51). In the state of Florida, the high-st akes testing program is the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). The data generated by the FCAT is used to assess schools under the No Child Left Behind Act. The Florida Department of Education explains that FCAT is “part of Florida’s ove rall plan to increase student achievement by implementing higher standards. The FCAT, administered to students in Grades 3–11, contains two basic component s: criterion-referenced te sts, measuring selected benchmarks in Mathematics, Reading, Sc ience, and Writing from the Sunshine State Standards; and norm-referenced tests in R eading and Mathematics, measuring individual student performance against national norms (F lorida Department of Education 2006). As a result, social studies achievement is not assessed on the FCAT. While almost every state has its own set of elementary social studies standards (B uckles, Schug, & Watts 2001) and “[m]ore than half of the states (n ot Florida) have statewide assessments in social studies” (Chapin & Me ssick 1999, p. 11). Mirroring nati onal trends, social studies has nearly disappeared from the curriculum in many schools in Florida (Fritzer & Kumar 2002; Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Ne ill & Guisbond 2005; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). There is hope, however. In cases where social studies instruction is “blocked” and children change classrooms for social studies, actual instruction is more likely to occur (Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). In additi on, professional development schools are more likely to emphasize the untested subjects because of their focus on teacher preparation in all subjects (Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). Despite the efforts of many,

PAGE 60

47 the prognosis from the elementary social st udies community for the subject’s long-term health is ‘fair.’ If there is not a concer ted and organized effort that prognosis could become ‘terminal.’ Accountability-driven assessment also ha s had two major effects on teaching and learning in elementary schools: less time for social studies instruction and a diminished quality of the overall educatio nal experience. All the focus remains on assessment testing, in spite of the fact that evid ence indicates that a focus on te sts actually decreases student motivation and increases the proportion of students who leave school early (Amrein & Berliner 2003). Loss of instructional time Instructional time for social studies is shrinking. As previously discussed, under the weight of the No Child Left Behind Act, schools must demonstrat e “adequate yearly progress” in the assessed subjects. As a result “schools nationwide have scaled back on P.E., health, social studies, and foreign language classes to devote more time and resources to reading, writing, math, and sc ience—courses tested under the federal law and used to evaluate schools” (NEA 2004, p. 26). Not surprisingly, this situation has led to increased tension in the elementary school over the teaching of soci al studies: “The test is the curriculum, and instruc tion is controlled by the impera tive to raise test scores” (Neill & Guisbond 2005, p. 31). When social stud ies is not assessed, instructional time shrinks and social studies teachers end up at odds with administrators who “are demanding more reading and math instruc tion” (Knighton 2003, p. 293). Moreover, this situation is heightened in schools with poor test scores, “where nearly half of the principals report moderate or large decreases in social studi es instruction” (NEA 2004, p.

PAGE 61

48 27). As a result, the actual amount of time devot ed to social studies instruction ends up being determined by administrators. Quality The greatest effect of the loss of social studies and other areas not assessed on highstakes assessments is a drop in the level of quality of students’ experiences with the subject. In response to the pressure to raise te st scores, teachers have reported “a sacrifice in the quality of their teaching and student s’ experiences in the classroom” (Neill & Guisbond 2005, p. 31). The result is a decline of quality instruction within elementary social studies. As is ofte n the case, state standards offer a narrow curriculum that “revolves around memorized random information that turns the subjec t into a travesty” (Neill & Guisbond 2005, p. 31). Finally, and most tragically, teacher s are required to teach testing skills from expensive commerci ally produced materials “as early as the second grade” (Knighton 2003, p. 291). Surely, th e influence of high-stakes testing has produced a situation where powerful social st udies instruction is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible (Yeager 2005). This only serves to reinforce the perception among students that social studies is “worth less,” ensuring that Owens’s (1997) second challenge, integral to creating effective soci al studies teachers, may never be overcome. Summary of Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies There has been considerable important re cent research relevant to this study. Critiques of the “Expanding Horizons” curriculum have grown louder in the last few decades, calling for teaching a more history-ba sed elementary social studies curriculum. As a result, proponents of retaining a pandisciplinary approach (e.g., Brophy and Alleman, in press; Wade 2003) have offered their own curriculum revisions that promote

PAGE 62

49 problem-solving skills and global awareness. There also has been research on effective social studies practice in elementary teaching. Much of the recent scholarship on effec tive social studies practice has grown out of Shulman’s (1987) work titled, “Knowledge and teaching: foundations for the new reform,” in which he called for the docume ntation of the “wisdom of practice” of effective teachers. Shulman’s ideas have been applied to social st udies instruction and have resulted in a number of pieces of scholar ship that capture effective social studies practices. This scholarship, in combin ation with the 1994 (NCSS) statement “Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies,” provided illustrative examples of the five requirements for effective practice. Finally, the negative effects of the No Child Left Behind Act (N CLB) on elementary social studies were discussed. Overall, NCLB has reduced both the quality and frequency of social studies in elementary schools, ultimately influencing perceptions of the field among both students and preservice teachers. Conclusion To understand the beliefs of th ese inservice teachers who se rve as elementary social studies methods instructors, I reviewed th e literature concerning teacher beliefs. The research on teacher beliefs suggests a strong beliefs-to-practice connection exists as teachers perform their duties. This connection means the particular beliefs teachers hold often heavily influence their instructional prac tices; thus, knowledge of these beliefs is necessary to understanding and improving inst ructional practices. At times, there are inconsistencies in the beliefs and practices of teachers, stemmi ng most often from conflicting beliefs they hold or external pr essures mandating practices inconsistent with those beliefs. There is a certain level of disagreement among researchers about the

PAGE 63

50 difficulty of changing teacher’s beliefs about so cial studies instructi on, but there exists a general agreement that a teache r’s attitudes toward the fiel d are formed early in life, during the time they are first exposed to social studies as young students. The instructional beliefs of social studies teachers, like all other teacher s, tend to be rather conservative, and enable the teach er to retain ultimate contro l over what happens in his or her classroom. To understand the practices of elementary social studies methods professors, I examined research literature concerning me thods instruction by ex amining the relevant portraits of practice in the fi eld. These portraits revealed un ique perspectives concerning social studies instruction while serving to highlight the indivi dual issues faced and solutions developed by elementary social st udies methods instructors. Consider, for example, the portraits of two very differe nt methods professors, which revealed two thoughtful and highly organized examples of methods instruction, both of which exhibited a strong belief to pr actice connection. In addition, f our distinct self-portraits also suggested a strong beliefs-to-practice connection among four methods professors who adhered to four distinct visi ons of social studies education. I reviewed the research l iterature concerning elementa ry social studies methods instruction and elementary social studies to understand the issues associated with teaching an elementary social studies methods course. I used Owens’ (1997) six challenges as an organizational structure and supported or illustrated each one by examining the literature. While all six issues are important to unders tanding the situation, two issues stood out as particularly interes ting because how they have been exacerbated by the current focus on high-stakes testing. Th e “lack of interest in teaching social

PAGE 64

51 studies” and “using the concurrent social st udies field experience” issues have been compounded in recent years because of the increasing focus on othe r subject areas now stressed as part of testing accountability sy stems. These accountability systems also have served to create negative per ceptions of social studies. I also surveyed the literature concerni ng recent research in elementary social studies to understand the relevant topics currently under review. The pandisciplinary ‘Expanding Horizons’ curriculum has proven dura ble, despite the perpetual debate about its effectiveness and appropriateness. Mo st recently, ‘Expanding Horizons’ has been criticized by some conservative historians who seek to replace it with a history-based curriculum. This recent round of criticism has spurred advocacy of pandisciplinary social studies and the putting forth of alternative mode ls of social studies that retain at least parts of the ‘Expanding Horizons’ curriculum. To capture the ‘wisdom of practice’ of effective social studies instruction, some recent research has focused on recording the practices of effective teachers. Finally, I reviewed recent rese arch regarding the effects of the No Child Left Behind Act and high-stakes testing on elementary social studies. This review revealed the negative effect this legislation and its resultant accountability schemes are having on elementary social studies due to its untested status.

PAGE 65

52 CHAPTER 3 METHODS Review of the Purpose of the Study As detailed in Chapter 2, there is a pauc ity of literature reviewing the beliefs and practices of elementary social studies methods professors at the university level. Of the few existing quality portraits, all the profe ssors cited the 1994 NCSS position statements concerning the aims of social studies as validation for the basis of their methods instruction. However, their practices varied greatly a nd depended mostly on their personal beliefs about social studies education. There is a total lack of portraits of inservice teachers serving as methods instructors (Slekar 200 6). At the university where the study was completed during the spring 2006 se mester, four of the five elementary social studies methods sections were taught by inservice teachers and the fifth was taught by the researcher. Based on a need to understand the beliefs, practices, and issues of these instructors, this study was designed to capture portraits of three of these instructors. Statement of Problem Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary schools, there is a need for strong methods in structors. In many colleges of education, it is common practice to employ inservice teacher s to teach methods courses. A void in the literature exists concerning the beliefs, practices and issues encountered by these instructors, so little is known about how to best support them as they perform their duties. Thus, whatever new information is collected adds to the scholarship about the

PAGE 66

53 practitioners who fill this role, and in the future will assist colleges of education to better support these instructors. Research Questions This research study sought answ ers to the following questions: 1. What beliefs about social studies edu cation do these inservice teachers hold? 2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers ho ld inform their practice in their social studies methods course? 3. How does filling these dual roles inform th eir beliefs about the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum? 4. What do these inservice teach ers believe are the issues they encountered while teaching the methods course? Question one addresses the participants’ beliefs concerning teaching in general, social studies, teaching soci al studies, and teaching social studies methods. Question two addresses their belief-to-practice connections noted in the data and confirmed by the participants. Question three addresses the in formation the participants have about the status of elementary social studies, how they come by that information in each of their roles, and what beliefs they have about the st atus of elementary social studies and testing. Finally, question four comprised the majority of the findings and focused on the issues related to methods students, the status of elementary social studies and the field placement, and issues related to filling dual roles. Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design Babbie (1983) defined qualitative research as “the non-numerical examination and interpretation of observation for the purpos e of discovering underlying meanings and patterns of relationships” (p. 537). A qualitati ve design was selected for a number of reasons. The study was explorator y, while the beliefs and practices of elementary social studies methods professors ha ve been chronicled, the beli efs and practices of other

PAGE 67

54 educators who instruct elementary social studies methods course s remain unrecorded. Because the study was exploratory, a qualitati ve design was selected to allow for a flexible yet rigorous inquiry; such flexib ility is difficult with a quantitative design (Lincoln & Guba 1985). The choice of a qua litative design also was based on Patton’s (1990) assertion that the intent of qualitative research is to “provide perspective rather than truth, empirical assessment of local decisi on makers’ theories of action rather than generation and verification of universal theories, and cont ext-bound explorations rather than generalizations” (p. 491). This study requ ired a design that f acilitated depth of understanding over breadth (Cre swell 1998): “Qualitative me thods permit the evaluation researcher to study selected issues in de pth and detail” (Patton 1990, p. 165). For depth and detail, a rich description of each participant’s beliefs was created to better understand his or her practices (Lincoln & Guba 1985). A “rich description” is possible with a qualitative design that uses interviews and observations to unders tand teachers’ beliefs and the context in which those beliefs ar e enacted (Cornett 1990; Pajares 1992).The underlying beliefs were specific to each teach er, and it was necessary to understand these beliefs while looking through the lens of an inservice teacher working as a methods instructor. Moreover, a quali tative approach accounts for the context in which the phenomenon of interest takes place (Creswe ll 1994; Lincoln & Guba 1985; Patton 1990). A consideration of context is especially impor tant for this study, given the many external factors discussed in Chapter 2, which affect how these inst ructors perform their duties. Like all qualitative studies, this research did not intend to present a definitive “truth” of the given situation; the intention was to el icit reflection by the reader to create an opportunity to learn about the situ ation under examination (Stake 1995).

PAGE 68

55 Study Methodology The study employed a case study methodol ogy. The choice of case studies is consistent with the dissertati on requirements for the Doctor of Education degree: “Data may be analyzed using methods…For exampl e, case studies and c ontent analyses of interview protocols are common” (University of Florida 198 3). The study included three participants and sought to uncover “both what is common and what is particular about the case” (Stake 1994, p. 238) through the analysis of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and document anal ysis (Patton 1990; Stake 1994; Yin 1994). Feagin, Orum, and Sjoberg (1991) defined a case study as “an in-depth, multi-faceted investigation, using qualitativ e research methods” (p. 2). For this study, a case was defined as a “single bounded system or an instance…” (Merriam 1988, p. 153); each participant served as a specific case. Case st udies allowed an intensive, holistic, and indepth investigation of each teacher as a un it (Feagin et al. 1991; Merriam 1998; Stake 1995). Merriam’s (1998) contention that a ca se study is more focused on process and context was important for this study because of the complex and unique nature of the teachers’ beliefs and teaching practices (Nespor 1987). Perhaps the most important factor in the selection of a case study methodology was the Feagin et al. (1991) statement that case studies explore in detail the how and why of specific situations. Yin (1994) added that case studies are not only suitable for answering how, but also what. Regarding qualitative research, Marshall a nd Rossman have noted that “there is no such thing as a perfectly designed study” and case studies are no exception to this rule (1999, p. 42). Case studies have a number of lim itations; chiefly, a case is one instance of a “single bounded system or an instance…” an d not representative of a certain population (Merriam 1988, p. 153). Moreover, case studie s rely on descriptive information provided

PAGE 69

56 by researchers and participants, leaving r oom for the loss of important details and differing perceptions. Finally, much of the inte rpretation in case st udies is based on the recollection of past events, and therefore is su sceptible to problems inherent to memory. Guiding Theory This study was guided by the theory that t eachers’ beliefs drive their practice (e.g., Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark & Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989; Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000; Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994). Specifically, Pajares (1992) st ated that “the beliefs teachers hold influence their perceptions and judgments, which, in turn, a ffect their behavior in the classroom” (p. 307). This theory was applied to understanding part icipants’ practices based on Fang’s (1996) statement that “educ ators are now beginni ng to realize that teachers (preservice, beginning, or experienced ) do hold implicit theories about students, the subjects they teach, and thei r teaching responsibilities” (p. 51). The theory that beliefs drive practice has been applied most of ten to preservice (e.g., Armento 1996) and inservice teachers (e.g., Pajares 1992). In Ch apter 2, the effect of teachers’ beliefs on their practices is illustrated by the stated beli efs and the resultant practices of elementary social studies methods professor Dr. Merr ill (Slekar 2006). The current study extended this theory to the beliefs and practices of inservice teachers serving as social studies methods instructors. Theoretical Orientation It is customary for qualitative research ers to detail their philosophical and epistemological assumptions regarding met hodology, procedures for data collection, and analysis (Gale 1993; LeCompte & Preiss le 1993). This study was based on a

PAGE 70

57 constructivist framewor k (Crotty 1998; Schwandt 1994). C onstructivism is not a strictly dictated set of beliefs or pro cedures, but a general descriptor of a family of methods and philosophies to provide researchers with a general direction, and merely suggests “directions along which to look,” rather than “provide descriptions of what to see” (Schwandt 1994, p. 221). Constructivism views each individual as th e central agent in creating his or her own understanding of the world thr ough experience (Crotty 1998). Ce ntral to cons tructivism is an inquiry into individuals’ experiences a nd a description of the world as felt and understood by the individuals (Schwandt 1994). In the case of this study, the experiences were those of the inservice methods instruct ors as they felt and understood them. These experiences formed the basis of constructed m eanings of events, situations, and beliefs. This process occurs over time and was infl uenced by the individuals’ actions, personal histories, and contextual factors (Schwandt, 1994). Role of the Researcher The role of the researcher in this qualitative study was to capture the reality and contexts that the research subjects inhabited. As the researcher, I attempted to become the human instrument for data collection and interpretation while being aware of the subtleties of the data collect ed and analyzed (Lincoln & Guba 1985). This theoretical sensitivity was demonstrated by my insight a nd ability to derive meaning from the data. Lincoln and Guba (1985) believe humans ar e the “instrument of choice” for qualitative research because they are able to respond to environmental cues, interact with the given situation, collect information at multiple le vels simultaneously, perceive situations holistically, process data upon receipt, request verifica tion of data, and explore unexpected occurrences. Included in any qua litative study is a brief biography of the

PAGE 71

58 researcher: “Interpretive rese arch begins and ends with the biography and self of the researcher” (Denzin 1989, p. 12). I began my teaching career working with poor and minority students as part of Teach for America. I was drawn to Teach fo r America because of its social justice agenda. During my two years with Teach for America, I worked in the inner city of Houston, Texas, in a school where more than 95 percent of the students qualified for Title I funding. During the 1998–1999 school year, I taught a fifth grade ESOL class, composed mostly of students transitioning to full-time Englis h instruction after exiting a bilingual education program. During th e 1999–2000 school year, I taught a third grade bilingual class, with Spanish as the language of instruction. During the 2000–2001 school year, I attended the University of California at Santa Barbara and earned a Masters of Education degree in Elementary Education. My masters’ thesis was an action research project involving ESOL students and mathematics instruction. I also completed ESOL coursewo rk and professional development to support second language learners during their acqui sition of the English language. During the 2001–2002 school year, I relocated to Jacksonv ille, Florida, and taught second grade ESOL to an extremely diverse class with a number of students from Eastern Europe and Central Africa. During the 2002–2003 school ye ar, I again taught second grade ESOL while emphasizing social studies instructi on as a means by which to connect to my diverse student population. As the researcher in this study, I had th e advantage of focusing on social studies instruction in my own work as an elementa ry teacher and during my doctoral studies. I also held the advantage of being an instructor of the same social studies methods course

PAGE 72

59 taught by the study participants. As a full-time doctoral student, I had the luxury of almost a singular focus on this study. This was beneficial for a case study approach because, as Merriam states, “case study invest igators immerse themselves in the totality of the case…” (Merriam 1988, p. 60). In this study, my theoretical sensitivity was based on my experiences as an elementary soci al studies teacher, my knowledge of the professional literature concerning elementa ry social studies, and my concurrent experience of teaching the same methods course. Along with the advantages of my previous experiences were a few disadvantages that surfaced in the form of bias. Th e acknowledgement and understanding of a researcher’s bias are important in a qual itative study because, according to Miles and Huberman (1994), “there is a strong and of ten unconscious tendency for researchers to notice supporting instances and ignore ones that don’t fit thei r pre-established conclusions” (p. 263). While my personal phil osophy concerning social studies education is still evolving, I do hold a number of beliefs about what I think is effective social studies instruction. For example, I favor social studies instruc tion that attempts to connect to the lives and perspectives of minority st udents. I also have a strong conviction that social studies instruction should be desi gned to allow students to make their own interpretations of both historical a nd contemporary events and issues. Participants The unit of analysis was one instructor and the context he or she inhabited (Merriam, 1998). Participants were selected as a result of criterion sampling “…to review and study all cases that meet some predeter mined criterion of importance” (Patton 1990, p. 176). Participants selected fo r the study met two criteria: Th ey were inservice teachers, and they instructed an elementary social studies methods course. Participants were

PAGE 73

60 approached in the context of our shared ro le as elementary social studies methods instructors and invited to pa rticipate in the study. Institut ional permission was secured through the Institutional Review Board of the University of Florida and the Research and Evaluation Department of the School Board of Alachua County. The three participants were inservice elementary teachers under the ag e of 35 with at least five years of teaching experience who instructed a se ction of Social Studies fo r Diverse Learners at the University of Florida. Two of the participan ts were female and one was male. Two of the participants taught fourth grade; one ta ught first grade. All were White/European American and from middle-class backgrounds. For one participant, this was the first experience with any university level instruct ion; another had taught the social studies methods course during the previous semester while the third had previous experience teaching the social studies methods course, al ong with a methods course in literacy. To ensure confidentiality, each participant assumed a pseudonym for use in the final report. A full description of each participant and his or her settings can be found in Chapters 4– 6. Explanation of “Dual Roles” ‘Dual roles’ signifies the participants serv ed concurrently as inservice teachers and methods instructors. Traditionally, elementary methods courses are taught by professors and graduate students trained in the specific discipline. In larger teacher education programs, there are multiple sections of the same methods course needing an instructor. Few advanced graduate students specialize in elementary soci al studies, thus creating the need to recruit advanced graduate students who are “generalists” or who specialize in other disciplines. In situations when ther e are no advanced gradua te students available, inservice teachers with a master’s degr ee in education are recruited. Among the

PAGE 74

61 participants, Dan and Alexis were part-time advanced graduate students specializing in literacy and also serving as inservice teachers. Nora was an inservice teacher with a master’s degree in Special Education. Furthermor e, all three participants were teachers at the field placement site of roughly half of their methods students. Course Information Because this course often is taught by instructors without specialized elementary social studies training, a suggest ed syllabus and course materi als have been developed to facilitate instruction. Each inst ructor was given the freedom to instruct the course as they wished, within the guidelines established by the supervis ing professor, Dr. Young. The participants taught “Social St udies for Diverse Learners,” which served as the singular social studies methods course in the teacher education program. The course focus in the provided syllabus states, “Throughout the soci al studies methods course you will learn how to use the tools of inquiry as a teacher in a social studies cl assroom. Inquiry is a ‘questioning’ stance that good teachers assume as professionals who plan for, carry out, and study the impact of their instruction” (See appendix B) While the course closely aligns to the “reflective inqui ry” vision of social studies, it incorporates elements of “social science” and “informed social criti cism” into the provided syllabus as well (Martorella 1994). The “Key Tasks” represen t a social science vi sion: “The content exploration should result in the prospective teacher presen ting the following: an enduring understanding (generalization) supported by a synthesis of content from a variety of resources, and identification of related st andards” (See appendix B). James Loewen’s Lies My Teacher Told Me which the students read and then presented a chapter, represents an “informed soci al criticism” vision. The course does not focus exclusively

PAGE 75

62 on these three visions; it presen ts all five competing visions of elementary social studies as described by Martorel la (1994) in detail dur ing the first class. The syllabus describes a suggested culmin ating assignment, the social studies integrated teaching project, as “a mini-unit integrating social studi es and another content area. This mini-unit will be a culmination of a ll that we learned this semester and consist of three Pathwise lessons” (See appendix B). As the first unit that the methods students plan and actually teach, this assignment is qu ite challenging. During th e final two classes, the methods students make ten-minute presenta tions on their units by sharing their lesson plans and providing student work samples. Data Collection Methods Data were collected through interviews a nd observations of social studies methods instruction. This approach wa s based on Patton’s (1990) belief that qualitative methods require three types of data collection: in-dep th, open-ended interviews of the participants; direct observations of actions in their contex t; and collection of written documents. The use of multiple sources of data enhanced the credibility of the findings. That is, each type of data collected affords an opportunity to create an understanding of the topics being analyzed; this, in turn, provide s more credible findings. The use of multiple data sources also was based on Yin’s (1994) suggestion to use multiple sources when constructing case studies in order to increase the reliabi lity by providing multiple examples of the participants’ approach to the topics of interest. Data was collected in the following sequence. The first interview of all the participants was conducted followi ng an initial observation al l the participants. After the first interview five to six observations were conducted of each of th e participants. After completion of the observations a interview wa s conducted with all of the participants.

PAGE 76

63 Interviews Patton (1990) stated that “ qualitative interviewing begins with the assumption that the perspective of others is meaningful, knowab le, and able to be made explicit” (p. 278). In this study, interviews made instructors’ pe rspectives explicit by gi ving participants an opportunity to explain themselves and their situations (Spradley 1979). Interviewing was “a powerful way to gain insight into e ducational issues through understanding the experience of the individuals whose lives constitute education” (Seidman 1991, p. 7). Much of the data was generated from inte rviews based on Patton’s (1990) statement: “The raw data of interviews are the actual quotations spoke n by interviewees. There is no substitute for these data” (p. 347). Two in terviews lasting approximately 60–90 minutes each were conducted with each participant. The first was a background interview to gather data about the participant’s pers onal and professional b ackground, beliefs about teaching, and the major areas of interest in the study (See appendix A). The questions for the first protocol originated from my own personal experien ces as a methods instruction, my initial observations of all the participants and the relevant recent research. In addition three articles in particular informed the creation of the first pr otocol. Owens (1997) provided information about the challenges of elementary social studies. Yendol-Hoppey and Tilford (2004) shed light on the contextual issues facing elementary social studies methods instruction and the lack of professional development focused on elementary social studies. Thornton (2005) highlight the ‘content vers us methods’ tension found in all elementary social studies methods courses. The questions for the second interview were developed using the following steps: First, the transcripts from the first interv iew were reviewed for missing data and to

PAGE 77

64 determine areas in need of clarification, verification, or extension. Next, methods instruction observation field notes were re viewed to determine actions, events, or statements in need of clarification, verifica tion, or explanation. Fina lly, a general protocol was developed for use with all participants, and individuals protocol s were developed for each individual participant (See Appendix A). Included in both of these protocols were specific examples of actions, events, or stat ements used as text for the participants’ responses, in order to gain deeper access to their beliefs and insights. Included in these examples were statements made by a part icipant or students during the previous interviews or observations, and pr esented to all the participants to add further depth to the data. Moreover, some comments made by me thods students during class that were unknown to the participants at the time were made known to them, in order to provide another perspective to which th e participants could respond. All interviews were semi-structured ba sed on Patton’s (1990) interview guide approach in which the format, topics, and issues were covered in a specified outline form, and the interviewer determined the order and the wording of each question. The interview guide allowed for adjustments of each interv iew and participant. All interviews were recorded and transcribed by the researcher, and reviewed by the participant for accuracy (Lincoln & Guba 1985). Observations In order to collect data and gain greater insight into comments made during the initial interview, I conducted observations based on Patton’ s (1990) statement that in addition to interviews, “the description of events observed remains the essence of qualitative inquiry” (p. 392). During the observa tions, I paid special attention to how the participants’ beliefs about social studies surfaced during methods instruction, including

PAGE 78

65 belief statements and actions representing or re lated to new or previously stated beliefs. Also during the observations, I pa id close attention to events, actions, or statements that represented an issue encounter ed during the participants’ me thods instruction for future verification. Data collection included five to six th ree-hour observations of social studies methods instruction for each participant. These observati ons were conducted as direct observations (Patton 1990). Direct observati on differs from participant observation in that, as a direct observer, I did not become a participant in the instruction and attempted to be as unobtrusive as possible. In this study, direct observation was the only type of observation possible, given that each instructor was responsible for the section he or she taught. Moreover, my participation might ha ve distorted the data. All observations concluded with a conversation with the instruct ors to give them an opportunity to discuss the class. During each observation, I took extens ive field notes to describe the events that took place and comments made during class. Written Documents Written documents were examined to provide further data related to the participants (Patton, 1990). Access to written documents in this study was limited. The participants were asked to provide any documents they felt would shed light on their methods instruction. They had no documents to offer. The majority of the data generated by written documents was from the provided sy llabus, which each participant slightly adapted to reflect the logisti cal particularities of his or her section, such as contact information and class days (See appendix A) Nonetheless, the example syllabus did provide insights into the suggested structur e and focus of the course. In addition, the books and readings suggested by the provided syllabus were us ed as sources of data.

PAGE 79

66 Data Analysis Data analysis was a process of “examin ing, categorizing, tabulating, or otherwise recombining the evidence” (Yin 1994, p. 102). Da ta analysis occurred within and across cases and was “aimed at ensuring (a) high-qua lity, accessible data; (b) documentation of just what analysis were carried out; and (c) retention of data and association analysis after the study is complete” (Huberman & Miles 1994, p. 27). Data reduction was used to “make sense of massive amounts of data, redu ce the volume of information and identify significant patterns…” (Patton 1990, p. 371). Seve ral qualitative researchers have stated that analysis should be an ongoing process starting at the beginning of the study (e.g., Merriam 1998; Stake 1995); thus, an alysis was an ongoing process. Data reduction proceeded in the followi ng order: Following the first round of interviews, free coding was completed, data were analyzed, and codes were developed and used as a starting point to analyze inst ructional observation data. These initial codes were based on the main research questions of the study to be consistent with the tradition of dissertations for the Doctor of Educati on degree, where “results are based on themes corresponding directly to cont ent and structure of documents or interview protocols” (University of Florida 1983) After all observations were completed, the data were analyzed using the previously generated codes. To better represent and organize the data, codes were adjusted after anal ysis of the observation data an d used to analyze the final interview data. All data were analyzed to identify the emerging themes across the data (Lincoln & Guba 1985). The data set was reduc ed to data related only to the identified themes in order to draw conclusions (Patt on 1990). These conclusions were presented to the participants for verification.

PAGE 80

67 Verification of Interpretation—Trustworthiness To establish trustworthiness, this study considered one central question: “How can an inquirer persuade his or her audiences that the findings of an inquiry are worth paying attention to, worth taking account of?” (Lin coln & Guba 1985, p. 301). Lincoln and Guba (1985) listed four criteria to establish trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility To increase credibility, Stak e (1995) stated it is “better to give the reader a good look at the researcher” (p. 95). Lincoln and Guba (1985) recommend a number of strategies to increase the probability that findings and interpretations of a qualitative inquiry will be credible, includ ing peer debriefing and memb er checking. Peer debriefing is defined as “a process of exposing oneself to a disinterested peer in a manner paralleling an analytic session and for the purpose of e xploring aspects of the inquiry that might otherwise remain only implic it within the inquirer’s mind” (Lincoln and Guba 1985, p. 308). Member checking was important to ensu re the researcher “represented those multiple constructions adequately; that is, that the reconstructions that have been arrived at via the inquiry are credible to the constr uctors of the original multiple realities” (Lincoln & Guba 1985, p. 296). Member check ing also improved the quality of the findings by “regularly provid(ing) critical obs ervations and interpre tations” (Stake 1995, p. 115). I performed member checking thr oughout the project, including during the verification of findings, conc lusion, and final presentation. Transferability External validity and genera lizability, in the quantitative sense, are not relevant to qualitative research, so Li ncoln and Guba (1985) suggest ed the use of the term

PAGE 81

68 “transferability” (p. 288) to discuss similar notions for the results obtained from a qualitative inquiry. Results from a qualitative inquiry are specific to the context in which they are studied, which limits the possibility of external validity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Transferability is determined by the readers and their intere st “in making a transfer to reach a conclusion about whether transfer can be contemplated as a possibility” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 316). Transferability in this se nse depends on the presentation of “solid descriptive data” or “thick de scription” (Patton, 1990) in or der to determine the “degree of similarity between sendi ng and receiving contexts” (L incoln & Guba 1985, p. 297). Dependability and Confirmability Dependability and confirmability both were established with one “properly managed” (Lincoln & Guba 1985) research aud it. To establish dependability, the auditor reviewed the entire process through each st age of inquiry, including all methodology. The auditor then established that the research pr ocess was correctly and consistently applied to the research questions being considere d, after which the findings were confirmed (Lincoln & Guba 1985). Description of Chapters This dissertation adopted a tr aditional format. Chapter 1 introduced the purpose of the study, the research questi ons, and the background of the problem. Chapter 2 reviewed the literature rega rding portraits of practi ce in social studies (e.g., Slekar 2006), teacher beliefs (e.g., Pajares 1992), the teaching and le arning of elementary social studies (e.g., Barton & Levstik 2004), and elementary so cial studies methods (e.g., Owens 1997). Chapter 3 described the methodology, the sampli ng rationale, the research design, and the process used to analyze the data. Chapte rs 4–6 describe each participant and the withincase findings related to each particular participant. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case

PAGE 82

69 findings and conclusions of the study. Ch apter 8 summarizes the findings, makes recommendations to support social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers, suggests directions for further research, and provides conclusions about the status of elementary social studies. Summary of Methods This study is an inquiry in to inservice teachers’ beliefs, practices and issues encountered while they serve as elementary social studies methods instructors. The rationale for the choice of a qualitative design was based primarily on a desire to create in-depth and holistic portraits of the partic ipants. Specifically, th e study employed a case study methodology and each participant served as an individual case. The theory that a teacher’s beliefs influence his or her in structional practices guided the study. Theoretically, the study was based on a cons tructivist framework and the associated notion that individuals create their own understanding of the wo rld through their experiences. In this study, the ro le of the researcher was to serve as the human instrument for data collection and analysis The participants for this study were selected to fulfill criteria of being inservice t eachers and elementary social studies methods instructors. All of the participants taught the same elementary social studies methods course, more or less based on a provided syllabus and suggested lessons and activities described in this chapter. Data were collected through interv iews and observations, and analyzed through coding procedures in order to organize and re duce the data. Verification of interpretation and the findings was carried out to enhance cr edibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability.

PAGE 83

70 CHAPTER 4 ALEXIS JOHNSON Introduction Chapter 1 served as an introduction to th e research questions and an overview of how the study was to be conducted. Chapter 2 wa s a review of the lit erature relevant to the research questions. Chapter 3 offered an ex planation of the research methods used to conduct the study. The purpose of chapters 4–6 is to present the case findings for each participant. As previously noted, the resu lts of this study are reported to fulfill the requirements for the Doctor of Education degree at the University of Florida (University of Florida, 1983). To be consistent with this tradition, the results re ported in this chapter were organized in a manner to inform edu cational professionals in any subject area, particularly elementary social studies methods instructors. The findings in chapters 4–6 are organized by research questions: 1. What beliefs about social studies edu cation do these inserv ice teachers hold? 2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers ho ld inform their practice in their social studies methods course? 3. How does filling these dual roles inform th eir beliefs about the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum? 4. What do these inservice teach ers believe are the issues they encountered while teaching the methods course? Following this chapter are chapters 5 and 6, the withincase findings related to these research questions for two other partic ipants. These chapters also are organized by the research questions. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case findings of the study. Chapter 8 summarizes the findings, makes recommendations for support of social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers, suggests directions for further research, and provides

PAGE 84

71 conclusions about the status of elementary social studies. Followi ng are the findings for Alexis Johnson. Background Information Alexis, a fifth year teacher in her late 20s, taught first grade at the K–12 laboratory school affiliated with a larg e state-supported “research one” university that offered the social studies methods course. Alexis was also a doctoral student in curriculum and instruction at the universit y, focusing on reading and lite racy and also on professional development of teachers. The only memory of elementary social studies Alexis had was memorizing the states and capitals in fourth grade. In high school, Alexis was especially interested in contemporary history and civics. After earni ng an A.A. at a community college, Alexis earned both her Bachelors degree in Elemen tary Education and a Master of Education degree with a specialization in Reading and Literacy from the university where she now instructs the methods course. During her te acher education program, Alexis took one social studies methods course taught by a dynamic instructor whom she described as “very inspiring to me” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This instructor focused on using social studies to integrate all academic subject areas, and Alexis used the unit she created during the course as an example for her methods students. Recently Alexis became a National Boardcertified elementary teacher and was very active in professional development activities. She a ttended the Florida Technology Conference and the International Reading Association National Conference, and presented at the National Association of Laboratory Schools Conference. During the semester in which the study took place, Alexis was instructing the methods course for a

PAGE 85

72 second time, having also done so the previous se mester. She also expressed an interest in teaching a literacy course in the future. Professional Experiences Alexis began her teaching career in an adjoining county, where she taught at a small rural school that served a mostly White population from low socioeconomic backgrounds. During her five years there, sh e taught first grade exclusively and was provided a prescribed curriculum in every subject area, including social studies. However, during this time, Alexis maintained control over her classroom in her role as “curricular-instructional gatek eeper” (Thornton 1991) stating, “I would just close my door and do what I wanted” (Ale xis, Interview, 3/14/06). Petty Research and Development School Alexis has taught the last tw o years at Petty Research and Development School, which functions as a part of the uni versity’s College of Education and is not administered by the local county School Board. As a laboratory school, this K–12 institution serves students from all parts of the county, and the school population intentionally reflected the race, gender, and socioeconomic characteristics of th e state as a whole. The school’s web site explains the role of a laboratory scho ol: “to serve as a vehicle for research, demonstration, and evaluation regarding te aching and learning while utilizing the resources available on a stat e university campus” (Petty 2006 ). Alexis’s classes were non-tracked, and the teachers, as employees of the university, were expected to experiment with innovative teaching methods. At dismissal time, the school’s diversity wa s obvious as children of different ages, socioeconomic, and cultural groups mix eas ily. While the school has a number of portable classrooms connected by walkways the campus visually appeared well

PAGE 86

73 organized and overall radiates a positive lear ning environment. Alexis enjoyed teaching at Petty: “The way I teach now is the way I’ve always dreamed of teaching and never had the opportunity to in a county setting and in a district se tting” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis believed Petty was not “as co ncerned with high stakes testing as some other places are” and was more focused on “having kids be very well rounded” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis se rved as the elementary math coordinator at Petty and participated in the Florida Reading Initiative. Elise Elementary The methods students in Alexis’s class co mprised interns from Petty Research and Development School, as well as from Elise El ementary, which is located in a small, predominantly middle class town close to the university and serves a mostly White population with a small percen tage of African American and Hispanic students. The school’s web site noted its st atus as an "A" school the two previous years and proudly proclaims its affiliation with the university: Elise Elementary is a partner with the University. We host pr e-service teachers each semester and provide them a place to learn and grow. They help us by providing extra helping hands in our classroom and help our teachers grow and improve in their skills. Welcome! (Elise 2006) Alexis’s Classroom and Instruction Alexis’s classroom seemed typical of ma ny first grade classrooms, stuffed with learning resources and lined with printed material on every possible surface, while maintaining a cramped, yet organized appearan ce. The room was configured with tables to seat four to five students, a specially ca rpeted area large enough fo r the entire class to congregate and many bookcases containing lear ning materials. Alexis had a positive rapport with students during met hods instruction. Her sense of humor was evident, with

PAGE 87

74 comments such as, “Are you really that blonde ?”(Alexis, Class, 3/ 07/06). Also evident was her tremendous patience and professionalism when confronted with a rude student Figure 4-1 Alexis’ classroom while attempting to set up for class (Alexis, Cl ass, 4/4/06). Overall, she projected a very knowledgeable and confident persona. Alexis’s teaching style was a mix of teach er-led discussion and activities, or group activities that took place at the student tables During the lecture, students often accessed Alexis’s knowledge as an experienced teach er; during table discussions, Alexis would circulate and quietly listen to the various conversations and then offer her comments, which she often prefaced with “in my opinion.” The methods students were very attentive and gave the impression they respected and lik ed Alexis. Overall, Alexis’s instruction appeared organized, informed, and effective.

PAGE 88

75 What Beliefs About Social Studies Educat ion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? As discussed in Chapter 2, teachers’ beliefs about the subjects and students they teach greatly influence their instruction. Thes e beliefs are important to consider because of the variety of definitions regarding what constitutes soci al studies and the currently imperiled status of social studies educati on. The word “belief,” like many words, has a somewhat variable and subjective meaning. This is especially true in the context of “teacher belief” research, as noted by Pajares: “It will not be possible for researchers to come to grips with teachers’ beliefs, however, without fi rst deciding what they wish ‘belief’ to mean. .” (1992, p. 308). This study used a definition of the term ‘belief’ similar to that of Dewey (1933). Dewey defined ‘belief’ as: …something beyond itself by which its value is tested; it makes an assertion about some matter of fact or some principle or law [and] covers all the matters of which we have no sure knowledge and yet which we are sufficiently confident of to act upon…and also the matter that we now accept as certainly true, as knowledge, but which nevertheless may be quest ioned in the future. (p.6) The findings for this question are organi zed into three sections: beliefs about teaching, beliefs about social studies and t eaching social studies, and beliefs about teaching social studies methods. This organi zation extends to the findings for the same research question in Chapters 5 and 6. Beliefs Concerning Teaching Alexis Johnson expressed a number of belie fs about teaching in general. When asked to define teaching, Alexis responde d, “Teaching by definition, I think, is showing someone how to do something…” (Alexis, Interv iew, 3/14/06). This belief was evident during Alexis’s methods instruct ion, particularly when worki ng with students to craft a generalization for their units. Alexis expresse d her belief in the importance of teaching with the goal of creati ng lifelong learners, “…essentially wh at I’m trying to do is get kids

PAGE 89

76 to be lifelong learners” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis expressed her belief in sharing power in both the elementary clas sroom—“Your kids shoul d have a voice in your classroom” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06)—and duri ng methods instruction—“I think we should give the methods students more voice…” (Alexi s, Interview, 5/10/06) This belief is consistent with chapter 2, “Resp ecting Children,” in Wolk’s (1998) A Democratic Classroom a reading in the syllabus. Alexis discussed her belief in teaching a wellrounded child: “I believe in teaching the whole child and not just material. I don’t teach material. I teach kids” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). In order to meet the needs of each child, Alexis believed “it is my job to alwa ys find a way to reach every child no matter where they are in whatever subject area that I happen to be teaching them in or instructing them in” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). A similar sentiment is also found in A Democratic Classroom where Wolk offered his “ten th ings I believe about children”; number two is “children grow and develop differently” (p. 14). Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies The basis for her elementary social studies practice was Alexis’s belief that “social studies is everything that’s ha ppening around us all the time. It’s our social world and I think it’s the study of people and life” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). While not explicitly related to the “cultural un iversals” curriculum promoted in Brophy and Alleman’s book Powerful Social Studies for Elementary Students a reading in the syllabus, Alexis’s remarks do resemble Brophy and Alleman’s defi nition of cultural universals as “basic needs and social experiences found in all soci eties, past and present” (1996, p. 13). Concerning social studies teaching in gene ral, Alexis expressed her belief in the power of innovative instructiona l practices (Alexis, Intervie w, 5/10/06). This was evident in the practices she shared with her methods students: “Did I te ll you guys about using

PAGE 90

77 my smart board to use Google Earth to ‘fly ’ to Egypt and the Nile…” (Alexis, Class 4/11/06). The key to understanding Alexis’s ap proach was her fervent belief in teaching for “understanding” rather than teaching fo r “coverage.” She explains: “We’re teaching for real understanding. Am I teaching kids to memorize the states and capitals? Or am I teaching kids to understand that land is divi ded up in different ways? That’s a bad example, but that’s it” (Alexis, Interview, 3/ 14/06). This belief emanated from the social studies methods instruction Alexis received as a teacher education student. Her methods course was taught by an innovati ve instructor who “encouraged us to write units that had…generalizations to create understanding rather than cove rage” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Teaching for generalizations focuse s on how the facts are related and using those concepts to build generalizations that can be applied to sim ilar situations (Benson, 1998). Teaching for generalizations was the goa l of the instructi onal unit and a “Key Task” in the suggested syllabus: Students will demonstrate subject matter expertise by synthesi zing social science content and developing an enduring understa nding for an assigned social studies topic to a named grade. The content expl oration should result in the prospective teacher presenting the following: an e nduring understanding (generalization) supported by a synthesis of content from a variety of resources, and identification of related standards. (See appendix B) Alexis also expressed her beli ef in integrating social studi es into other subject areas to give students multiple experiences with th e same content: “I definitely think that integration is key. When you can integrate social studies into math, or economics …there’s just tons of ways that I think it could be integr ated to improve understanding” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Integration of social studies into other subject areas also was a requirement of the teaching unit to be completed by the methods students: “Each

PAGE 91

78 partnership will be required to complete a mini -unit integrating social studies and another content area” (See appendix B). Alexis also believed in delivering instruc tion that was both critical and balanced: “When we talk to kids, we need to talk about the fact that all peopl e have parts that are not good” (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). The book Lies My Teacher Told Me presented a critical view of history aimed at providi ng a more balanced portrayal of American history. The book was a reading in the suggested syllabus an d provoked some of the most interesting and revealing dialogue of the semester (Alexis, Cl ass, 3/07/06). A critical and balanced presentation of social studies also c onnected to Alexis’s be lief in the need for civics instruction: “teaching kids how to make decisions and teaching kids how to survive in a community …” (Alexis, Interview, 3/ 14/06). This sentiment is also conveyed in A Democratic Classroom which devotes an entire chapter to “Classroom as Community” (Wolk 1998). The tension between teaching stud ents to be both criti cal and constructive citizens presented a challenge to Alexis: “How do we teach kids about things that are not that good and still teach for ci vic participation?” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods An extension of her belief in the importa nce of teaching elemen tary social studies for “real understanding” was Alexis’s main goa l for methods instruction: “The main thing I want them to understand… is to stop worryi ng about coverage of facts and to teach the bigger idea” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Her goal was also reflected in the “Key Tasks” in the suggested syllabus (See appendix B) Alexis strongly conve yed her belief in the ubiquitous nature of social studies when told by her methods students that they would not be able to include social studi es because of FCAT pressure: “I tell them that there’s no way not to include social studies in their instruction” (Alexi s, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis

PAGE 92

79 also believed in the importance of her met hods students seeing her as a credible teacher who walks her own walk: “I think it’s very impor tant for them to see me as a teacher first and foremost. I am a teacher of students a nd this is what I do every day, and I want them…to believe what I say” (Alexis, Interv iew, 3/14/06). Finally, she believed in the importance of exposing her methods students to the same type of ac tive instruction that she advocated for elementary students: “When I set up the centers wh ere they’re actually engaging in different ways to use social studies experiences…I feel like they get a feel for how powerful this kind of instruct ion is” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teach ers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course? Based on their beliefs, all teachers make d ecisions daily about the material they teach and the type of instruction they pr ovide (Richardson 1996; Thornton 1991; Wilson Konopak & Readance 1994). The findings in this section provide specific examples of belief-to-practice connections related to teac hing an elementary social studies methods course. During the final interviews, connec tions between the beliefs and practices recorded during observations or the first interview were discussed and my associations verified by the participants. Alexis voiced strong beliefs about the importance of teachers researching the content they want to teach a nd resisting the pressure to “cover” material from a textbook: “I never want to turn out a teacher that feel s like they need to rely on something else to provide the instruction, rather than themselves ” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This belief is supported in Brophy and Alleman’s book a nd was the basis of the “Content Info” assignments in Alexis’s syllabus (See a ppendix B). Based on this belief, Alexis

PAGE 93

80 constantly reminded her students, “…you have to really prepare for the units you’re going to teach and you need to know your content…” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). In order to capitalize on her dual roles, Alexis believed “it’s important for them to see me teaching because what it actually s hows is that I walk the walk” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). To allow her methods students to see how she instructs her elementary students, Alexis s howed video of her teaching: Here it is in reality. Here’s what…I’m te lling you is important instruction. Here’s what it looks like in my classroom. It’s no t a public video. It’s not perfect student; it’s not perfect kid; it’s not perfect me. It ’s just reality. And I think that it’s important for them to see what I’m talk ing about in action. (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) In addition, the use of video provided exam ples of Alexis’s often stated belief, “everything happens in social studies…my endof-the-year video were the highlights of our year; 70 percent of it is of social studies events that have happened in our classroom. So I feel like it just makes concrete what I’m trying to tell them” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Another of Alexis’s beliefs was th e importance of having other subject areas integrated into social studies in meaningf ul ways: “Amazing things that can be done because everything is integrated into social studies…” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). One way this belief was communicated to the met hods students “is with th e reading strategies (in the provided course material s) so they have to apply re ading strategies to their own content area of reading” (Ale xis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis engaged her methods students in conversations about what meani ngful integration would look like (Alexis, Class, 2/28/06). She explained the lesson: “We worked through some ideas of what would meaningful integration look like? So, throwing out an example, having a

PAGE 94

81 discussion about that… is that re ally math that you’re integrat ing or is that just junk…” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? The participants in this st udy had access to a unique pe rspective on the status of social studies in the elemen tary curriculum. With connect ions to both of the “two cultures” of social studie s education (Leming 1989), th ey were able to see how elementary social studies was being presented to preservice teachers in a social studies methods course; they also saw the realities of classrooms and schools and were privy to information unlike anyone else in the social studies teaching profession. The findings in this section focus on three issues: what information the participants had access to about elementary social studies, how they receive d this information, and, most importantly, their opinions about the status of social st udies based on information and experiences in both roles. Information Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Channels of Communication Alexis had access to exclusive information about the status of elementary social studies at Petty Research and Developm ent School and Elise Elementary. While discussing how filling these dual roles informed her beliefs about the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum, Alexis la mented, “I think that it has definitely made me see how important it is, and how much it isn’t happening” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). When asked how she came by information about the status of social studies at Elise Elementary, Alexis reported, “only thr ough the (methods) students and the university supervisor…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Even with this limited knowledge, Alexis

PAGE 95

82 assessed the differences between the two sc hools: “I think teac hing social studies ‘traditionally’ happens more at Elise” (A lexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Based on her knowledge of both schools, Alexis knew that “…in a lot of schools social studies is integrated into the reading bloc k” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) Alexis’s fellow teachers at Petty often asked her for clar ification of the course’s re quirements: “…a teacher here whose (methods) students I had was constantly asking me ‘What is it you’re really expecting of them?’” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06) The cooperating teachers’ questions gave Alexis information about the kind of social studies instru ction the cooperating teacher offered in her classroom. Referring to this cooperating teacher, Alexis reported, “She did not really understand what the (m ethods) students were doing, which gave me an idea of what she was really doing in he r classroom…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). She explained as a methods instructor, she had a window into many classrooms at Petty: “I have insights into a lo t of different classrooms around here” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis knew social studi es was indeed being taught in a majority of classrooms at Petty, but felt the quality of instruction was not always th e highest (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing Alexis also made astute comments about a possible disconnect between what the methods students were learning about teaching social studies and what they would be able to retain working in schools that do not s upport social studies inst ruction: “I think to myself, ‘Okay, here they are. They’re not teach ers yet. Here we’re teaching them all this really hip stuff; are they going to forget it?’” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Concerning the amount of actual social studi es instruction going on in most public schools, Alexis

PAGE 96

83 reported, “It’s quite appalling, actually.…and it ma kes me wonder what we can really do” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Despite the relatively elevated status of social studies at Petty Alexis was acutely aware of the secondary status of social studie s in other schools statewide. Asked what she believed was necessary to raise the status of social studies instruct ion in the state of Florida, Alexis was frank: “What is it going to take?…It’s going to ha ve to be tested on the FCAT, and I think that’s the most horribl e thing they could do…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis’s concerns a bout social studies being adde d to the FCAT were based on her belief that “true understanding of genera lizations and true understanding of people in social studies can’t really be assessed a w hole lot on a written test” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). She also believed there was a need for accountability, but was concerned with the current “snapshot” approach: “I think that we have to have accountability, but I have a problem with so much being hinged on one test” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course? As noted by Owens (1997), teaching an elemen tary social studies methods course is accompanied by a number of particular issues, each of which creates an opportunity for improvement. In order to examine the issues encountered by an inse rvice teacher serving as a methods instructor, I have organized th e findings related to this research question into the following three categories: issues rela ted to students, issues related to the status of elementary social studies and the field pl acement, and issues related to dual roles. In addition, there are issues faced by the participan ts were particular to inservice teachers serving as methods instructors and there we re issues any person could encounter while instructing an elementary social studies me thods course. The issues related to methods

PAGE 97

84 students and the issues related to the status of elementary social studies and the field placement are endemic to the instruction of any elementary methods course and the issues related to filling dual roles are issu es specifically related to participants. The organization of these findings extends to chapters 5 and 6. Issues Related to Methods Students The issues discussed in this section are those most closely related to the methods students themselves and how those students in fluence elementary social studies methods instruction. Conservative social beliefs Teachers tend to come from White/Europ ean American backgrounds and to have traditional and conservative social beliefs (e.g., Cuban, 1984) that may inhibit their ability to embrace the social studies goal of promoting soci al progress. That goal was summarized by NCSS in 1979: “to engage st udents in analyzing and attempting to resolve the social issues confronting them” (267). Similarly, these students’ conservative social beliefs favor the status quo. These findings were supported by the students in Alexis’s class. When asked if her students held more liberal or more conservative social beliefs, Alexis reported, “more conservative. I tend to have some liberal beliefs and that can be very difficult for them (methods stude nts)….They seem to vi ew their beliefs as reality…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Al exis’s students’ traditional and conservative social beliefs surfaced during the discussion about the book Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen. In the discussion, one student flippantly stated, “Do you… [think] she would really teach her kids this stuff, lik e all the Indians died. .go home and have a feast?” (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). The other st udents at the table al so were very doubtful about the truthfulness of the book. Later, duri ng class discussion, the same student asked

PAGE 98

85 Alexis, “How do you teach this, with all the bad stuff?” To which Alexis responded, “What do I teach? I do not teach Thanksgivi ng day…I teach a unit about immigration” (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). Duri ng the final interview, Alexis reflected on these comments: “It just shows how ingrained those beliefs are and how difficult it is to change beliefs…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Interestingly, this class of students began the semester by asking “how do we not teach just ‘white man’ s history’” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). The students’ previous experiences apparently se rved as a filter that inhibited them from learning new ways of thinking about certain historical events a nd figures. Angell (1998) noted a similar difficulty in changing the be liefs of preservice teachers concerning the teaching and learning of social studies. Tension between content and methods While discussing possible solutions to th e tension between content and methods, Alexis highlighted another complication: “I don’t know how much more we can add onto the (teacher education) program. I don’t know that one class in anything is sufficient knowledge to prepare teachers” (Alexis, Interv iew, 3/14/06). In an attempt to overcome this challenge, Alexis often reminded her st udents to do their own research on the topics they teach because “you will never know everything you need to know about American History” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). Students’ negative experience s with Social Studies Other issues discussed in chapter 2 incl uded methods students’ negative previous experiences and dislike of social studies (Cuban 1991; Downey & Levstik 1991; Levstik 1996, Owens 1997), and the widespread lack of social studies historical content knowledge among elementary social studies methods students (Fritzer & Kumar 2002). This lack of content knowledge extends to all the other disciplin es that are parts of social

PAGE 99

86 studies, such as geography and economics. Th is lack of knowledge creates an inherent tension in instructing an elementary social studies methods course Methods instructors must convey how to teach social studies, as well as the content of the disciplines that make up social studies. Students’ past negative experi ences with social studies were evident in Alexis’s course when many students reported havi ng boring social stud ies instruction in elementary school (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). Many of these negative experiences were the result of “social studies teaching that gene rally was not the most powerful, and they remember having to memorize the states and capitals” (Alexis, In terview, 5/10/06). Issues Related to the Status of Elementa ry Social Studies and Field Placement As noted by Yendol-Hoppey and Tilford (2004), field placements can complicate methods instruction because of both the variet ies of instruction a nd, in some cases, the lack of instruction provided to students. Lack of respect and professional deve lopment for elementary Social Studies When asked if she believed her students approached this class with the same amount of respect as they approached met hods courses for the assessed areas, Alexis responded, “I would say probably the first couple of classes, and I would say especially the group that I have this semester didn’t rea lly” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). However, she believed that the group’ s approach to the course improved during the semester, saying, “halfway through the semester they definitely put as much importance on it as they do some other subjects” (Alexis, Intervie w, 5/10/06). This initia l lack of respect was at least partially, if not totally, related to the untested status of elementary social studies. “We were talking about the democratic community, A Democratic Classroom the book. One of them was concerned that taking time to do extended projects would detract from

PAGE 100

87 ‘real learning’ that they needed to show on the FCAT” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). After this comment, Alexis engaged the class in a serious discussion about what “real learning” was. Alexis believed that the students’ leve l of respect for the course and elementary social studies improved as a result of her effo rts: “I don’t want to say my pressure, but my pressure on them to see this as somethi ng equally as valuable as anything else that they’re doing….My enthusiasm for it, I hope impressed them” (A lexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis also noted that the lack of professional development opportunities was a challenge: “I can’t think of any professional development experience I’ve had in social studies, ever” (Alexis, Interv iew, 3/14/06). When asked w hy she believed there was a lack of professional development for social studies, Alexis frankl y reported, “…my first response is that I think that because it’s no t tested on FCAT, nobody cares about it. I also think that social studies is seen as not as important as the other subject areas” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). While not directly rela ted to methods instruction, this lack of professional development may lower the overall quality of social studies instruction witnessed by the methods students in their placements. Lack of time for elementary Social Studies Due to FCAT pressure, many cooperating teachers gave the methods students limited time to teach their units. During unit presentation, the students made many comments about their limited instructional ti me, such as, “We only had thirty minutes and this was taught during…reading time….” (Alexis, Class 4/11/06). However, a few students reported that their teacher did provide them with an acceptable amount of instructional time: “We had a very good teacher; she was very flexible; she gave us lots of time” (Alexis, Class 4/11/06). Despite eve r-present FCAT pressu re, Alexis believed

PAGE 101

88 the social studies methods course was helpi ng to change the attitudes of the methods students. She stated: “Seeing them understa nd that teaching for democracy is important. And getting them to feel like, yes, this is really possible. Yes, I can really do this” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Other field placement issues One of the main issues effecting Alexis ’s instruction was the poor quality of examples, or lack of examples, of social studies instruction pr ovided by the cooperating teachers. This placed Alexis in a difficult position because “…it becomes very difficult for me to espouse something that they don’t ac tually get to see in practice very much” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Du e to Petty’s higher level of so cial studies instruction, this challenge only highlighted the differences be tween the two schools. The Elise interns had a very different setting than t hose at Petty, Alexis said: The classroom settings that a lot of my students are in are not exemplary classrooms. Or they certainly aren’t exem plary social studies teaching….That is the biggest challenge, trying to make sure th at they get everything that they need without stepping on the toes of another teacher. (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) Significantly, some methods students at Elise Elementary reported a complete absence of social studies instruction: “They never had so cial studies, except wh at we did…” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). Reflecting back on statements like this, Alexis lamented, “I know the students at Elise did not see as much social studies” (Alexis, Interv iew, 5/10/06). This situation required Alexis to make instru ctional and assessment compromises: “How do you grade students in completely different placements?” (Ale xis, Interview, 5/10/06). Another field placement challenge occu rred because some cooperating teachers mandated either the content or the instruc tional methods for the students’ units. This challenge was evident from student comments su ch as, “She just wants us to teach about

PAGE 102

89 what the book taught” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06) ; “she (cooperating teacher) wanted us to stick to the teacher guide” (Alexis, Class 4/ 11/06); and “the teacher gave us the entire unit” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). However, Al exis reported the following situation in which she was successful in helping her students overcome a difficult situation: “These methods students were given a topic that they had to teach kids map skills…the teacher had really dug her heels in” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis met with the students outside of class and, with Alexis’s help, th e students were able to plan and teach a successful unit. “In the end we were able to work out a generaliz ation, and the lessons turned out to be great” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). However, Alexis also recalled a pair of methods students in a sim ilar situation who did not seek her assistance and ended up with a less successful unit. During the final interview, Alexis discusse d the issues associated with kindergarten placements. She noted a possible source of th e difficulty: “Kindergarten is really an interesting year of development.…until you have a firm grasp of what that level of development is, planning a social studies uni t is very difficult” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). The methods students’ inability to accurately assess ki ndergarten students’ developmental levels often resulted in in struction beyond the students’ skills. For example, “one group had a unit where they ju st could not understa nd where the students were and had to start over” (A lexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alex is also noted that much of the instruction in kindergarten is very “socia l in nature,” and often students had difficulty recognizing instruction that wa s a part of social studies (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Methods students’ inability to recognize th e opportunities for social studies instruction

PAGE 103

90 could possibly be related to their limited ove rall experience with social studies and their resultant narrow concept of the nature of social studies. Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles Discussion of inservice elementary teacher s who also serve as methods instructors is barely present in the research literature. Slekar (2006) discussed the situation, but only to acknowledge the absence of research on th e topic. The followi ng discussion describes issues Alexis encountered while serving in thes e dual roles. Content and theoretical knowledge Alexis noted her own lack of content knowledge related to the disciplines of social studies, a situation that can be traced back to her own experiences as a student: “I can’t remember a whole lot of elementary soci al studies experiences besides the common memorizing of the states and capitals and th e preamble to the Constitution” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Fortunately, Alexis receiv ed better social studies instruction during high school. “I had excellent social studies t eachers in high school, ex cellent in my view that they hooked me” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). The connection between Alexis’s topics of interest and her elementary soci al studies instruction was obvious. One of the units Alexis covered with her first grade students was about ancient Egypt. Alexis recalled, “The history parts were the parts that hooked me. I’ve always been very interested in Civil War history, American hi story, world history, ancient Egypt; things like that were always very interesting to me” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). However, Alexis realized she did not have an e xpansive content knowledge: “I lack content knowledge in many areas” (Ale xis, Interview, 5/10/06). Also, when asked about her knowledge of the current theory and resear ch concerning elementary social studies,

PAGE 104

91 Alexis again noted a perceived deficiency: “Sometimes I feel like I am talking about things I do not have a lot of depth of knowle dge about” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Limited time Alexis noted her lack of time related to be ing both an inservice teacher and a social studies methods instructor: “Time is my bigge st disadvantage. I don’t have as much time to devote to my methods students as I do, of course, to my own students” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Often the requirements of filling both roles created the need for Alexis to make decisions about her priorities: “my priority is my original students, not necessarily my master’s students” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). During a particularly stressful week, Alexis commented to me, “T hinking about getting all these units graded next week…just sends me over the edge…for my stress leve l…” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). During the final interview, the time issue came up again when discussing grading the units. However, Alexis noted grading was not as difficult as the previous semester “because I had already seen where they were with the presentations” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Her close attention to the students’ presentations was obvious, as she provided feedback and led the class in discussion about each unit (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). Credibility One of the first things that became apparent when I observed Alexis during methods instruction was the substantial amount of respect her methods students gave her. This was obvious during my first observation wh en a student asked me, “Are you here to observe her? She rocks” (Alexis, Class, 3/ 07/06). The credibility Alexis enjoyed came primarily from her status as an alumna of the same teacher education program as her students, her visibility and accessibility as an on-site cooperating teacher, and her use of instructional videos that featured her teaching social studies to her first grade class. When

PAGE 105

92 asked if she believed being an inservice teach er affected her credibility, Alexis noted, “It’s amazing. I think that they listen more to what I say becau se I am actually doing this work every day than they would to so mebody who was a professor and was at the university” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Al exis went on to explain why she believed being an inservice teacher enhanced her credibil ity in the eyes of her methods students: “I know what it’s like to be the teacher. I know what it’s like to have limited time. I know how to integrate social studies into my othe r subject areas” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). After further reflection, Alexis noted another factor in her credibil ity: “I will not teach those methods students anything I have not taugh t myself” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Negotiations for instructional time and freedom The resistance of some cooperating teach ers to provide students with total instructional freedom and instructional ti me put Alexis in an awkward position. For example, she did not relish in itiating negotiating for instruc tional time and freedom with her Petty colleagues: “A disa dvantage for me, especially be ing on site, is fielding other teachers who may not see social studies in the same light as I do. I have to navigate some of that for my students in some ways” (Alexi s, Interview, 3/14/06) Alexis acknowledged some of this resistance was due to a l ack of knowledge by the cooperating teachers: “…some teachers don’t teach for generalizations and they don’t have an understanding of that, and when I send students out to go do that kind of teaching…I have to run some interference there sometimes” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). During their unit presentations at the end of the semester, the students also noted some cooperating teachers’ lack of knowledge about social studies. When discussing the cooperating teacher who had “dug her heels in” when insi sting her methods students teach map skills, I asked Alexis if she attempte d to negotiate with the teacher. Alexis said the teacher was

PAGE 106

93 at Elise Elementary and she did not know he r, but noted, “There would have been an attempt to negotiate using the university supervisor. That’s th eir job…I would not approach the teacher” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Advantages of filling dual roles Alexis also discussed the advantage she ha d by being able to provide narrated, realworld, first person instructional examples thro ugh the use of a video recording of herself teaching. Alexis believed this was important because it allowed her students to see instruction in a real classroom. “I’ve show n them a lesson…of me teaching or of me working with a group of students …and you s ee kids acting like total turkeys. Not listening. You see me…redirecting attention” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Moreover, by using video, Alexis was able to demonstrate how she also struggled as a social studies teacher: “I showed them a video of me trying to ask students what they thought about the Chinese zodiac. That completely flopped… So I showed them where I went wrong…” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). By viewing thes e struggles, students were able to see the real-world challenges of teaching elementary social studies. Another advantage to filli ng these dual roles was ha ving access to elementary social studies resources fo r use during social studies methods instruction. While discussing the “centers” activity, Alexis noted she not only used the resources provided to her as a teacher at Petty, but she also included her own, saying, “a lot of that stuff was my stuff, my personal stuff” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). During the final interview, Alexis also mentioned her intention to use a dditional personal resources, such as her grandfather’s tax return from the 1940s along with a new commercially-produced resource: “I picked this up fo r next year; it is a primary sour ces kit, reproductions of Ellis Island documents” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). With access to these resources, Alexis

PAGE 107

94 felt she could ensure her methods students w ould learn about teaching social studies with student-tested resources. Themes and Summary of Findings for Alexis Johnson Alexis Johnson voiced a number of beliefs about social studies education, including her definition that teaching is “showing someone how to do something…” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Many of Alexis’s beli efs were supported by the suggested syllabus or by readings in the suggested syllabus. Rega rding social studies in general and social studies teaching in particular, Alexis emphasized her conviction that social studies is part of everyday life and should be a part of everyday instruction. He r belief-to-practice connections were evident during my intervie ws and observations. Tw o particular beliefs had the greatest effect on Alex is’s instructional practices: “teaching for understanding” and the importance of social st udies instruction. Ma ny of Alexis’s inst ructional practices were related to these two issues. While fill ing the dual roles of methods instructor and inservice elementary teacher, Alexis was pr ivy to unique knowledge about the status of social studies in the elemen tary curriculum and about th e overall lack of quality and frequency of social studies in struction. Alexis’s experiences in these dual roles convinced her that the inclusion of so cial studies on the FCAT test which she thought would be unfortunate, may be the only way to improve the status of social studies education. Alexis faced a number of issues while t eaching the methods course: issues related to the students themselves, issues related to the status of elementa ry social studies and field placement, and issues related to f illing these dual roles. The next chapter will discuss the findings in regard to anothe r research participant, Dan Charles.

PAGE 108

95 CHAPTER 5 DAN CHARLES Introduction and Background Information Chapter 5 discusses the case findings fo r Dan Charles. Dan was an experienced fourth-grade teacher in his eighth year at Owen Elementary. As a child, Dan “always knew I was going to be a teacher. There was ne ver any doubt” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). His only memories of social studies inst ruction as an elementary student were “memorizing the states and the capitals, memorize where this goes on the map, memorize whose export…”, all of which he felt was “v ery, very less than relevant to me” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). After completing high school in South Florida, he earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Elementa ry Education at the same university that offered the elementary social studies met hods course that he taught. He was nearing completion of a specialist’s degree in Edu cation at this same university. During his teacher education program, Dan had one social studies met hods course, about which he noted, “I must say that I was not real thrilled with it when I was finished….I really don’t remember much about the class at all” (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06). In the final year of his teacher education program, Dan was placed at Owen Elementary and was hired before he graduated. Professional Experiences At Owen Elementary, Dan taught third and fifth grades during his first year and fourth grade for the last seven years. Dan de fined teaching as “helping someone else gain understanding of something new” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Recently Dan became a

PAGE 109

96 National Board-certified elementary teacher. Dan also benefited from the school’s close relationship with the univer sity, based on the designation of Owen Elementary as a Professional Development School (PDS), which is defined: Professional development schools are part nerships formed by teacher education programs and pre-K–12 schools intent on shar ing responsibility for the preparation of new teachers, the development of experienced faculty members, and the improvement of practice-all with the goal of enhancing student achievement. (Levine 2002, p. 65) In addition to his relations hip with the university as a methods instructor, he was also an advanced graduate student. Through his school’s PDS status, Dan was part of a program that enabled inservice teachers to earn graduate credit by taking specifically designed classes with university personnel to address issues sp ecific to their schools. This relationship has had a profound effect on his scho ol: “Our school has grown so much that I can’t even describe all the changes” (Dan, In terview, 5/4/06). This relationship provided Dan with a number of opportuni ties to participate in professional deve lopment activities, including making presentati ons at the Professional Development Schools Council conference. In addition to these professiona l development activities, he served as a cooperating teacher by taking a fu ll-time intern during the previous school years. During the semester in which the study was comple ted, Dan was teaching the social studies methods course for the second time. He also instructed a language arts methods course during two previous semesters. Overall, he benefited from a longstanding and multifaceted relationship with the university. Owen Elementary Owen Elementary is also situated in De nnis County, but unlike Petty Research and Development School, it is under the auspices of the county school board. Owen is in a town approximately fifteen miles from the uni versity. Situated in a rural setting, Owen is

PAGE 110

97 a unique school that only serves students in gr ades three, four, and five. It has a diverse student population, including a majority of Wh ites with some African Americans and a few recently settled students from Mexic o. In the school year before the study, Owen Elementary was labeled as not making “ad equate yearly progress” under the NCLB accountability system, due to poor performan ce of a student subgroup on standardized tests. This created pressure to improve st udent achievement in the assessed subjects. Owen Elementary has a longstanding tradition of a fourth-grade field trip to St. Augustine as part of the study of Florida hi story. The tradition of this field trip has provided room in the curriculu m every year for social st udies instruction. The school building is an interesting design intended to promote “open classrooms” with the use of movable partitions. However, most of the rooms have been permanently renovated into traditional classrooms. The methods students in Dan’s class comprised interns from Owen Elementary and More Cooperative School. More Cooperative School. More Cooperative School is a K–8 school located in a small town twenty miles from the university. Also in a rural setting, Mo re serves a mostly White population with a few African American students. The top of the school’s website reads, “More Cooperative School—Developing confident, motivat ed, self-disciplined learners who will contribute to improvement of self, fam ily, and nation” (Mor e 2006). From comments made by the methods students, instruction at More tended to be more “traditional” and based on a prescribed curriculum in each subject area (Dan, Class, 3/22/06).

PAGE 111

98 Figure 5-1. Dan’s Classroom. Dan’s Classroom and Instruction In his early thirties, Dan had a positiv e and easygoing manner that worked well with both his fourth grade and his methods st udents. This attitude was evident in his discussion of the NCLB act, about which he quipped, “If a teacher would have named it, it would have been ‘all children leap forwar d’” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). Unlike the other participants, Dan did not instru ct the methods course in his classroom; instead, he used a larger classroom set aside for instruction of education classes. The room was used by many different instructors; the walls were a dorned with evidence of the varied courses taught there. I observed from the back of the class and was able to hear the conversations at many of the tables where the students sat. Dan’s teaching mostly comprised brief in struction about the topic of interest, followed by directions for an activity ba sed on the topic and ending with a class

PAGE 112

99 discussion. Often, Dan provided examples from his own teaching and always seemed to have a relevant piece of student work on ha nd. The activities were very exploratory in nature, as students worked togeth er to create a position or a visual representation of their ideas. During discussions, Dan would take the role of facilitator rather than leading the discussion, and he mostly acted only to keep the conversation on t opic and ensure that everyone was able to contribute. Overall, Da n’s instruction appear ed very well planned, student-centered, and interactive. What Beliefs About Social Studies Educat ion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? Beliefs Concerning Teaching Dan believed that teaching should be st udent-centered and based on meeting the students’ particular needs. When asked a bout his approach to teaching, he replied, “Teaching can never be the same because you teach a person. You never teach a subject to a person” (Dan, Inte rview, 3/17/06). This belief was ev ident in the way he planned and conducted his methods course. He also voiced th is belief to his methods students during a discussion about planning their own instructio n: “You are going to have to change your teaching to meet your students” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). As an example, Dan explained how he calculated his reaction on 9/11: “I need ed to know who my kids were. .I knew that those kids did not need to see what was going to be on TV” (Class 4/19/06). While “Meeting the Needs of Students” was listed as an objective in the suggested syllabus, Dan discussed working towards meeting his students’ needs on many occasions prior to his involvement with the course (See appendix B). Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies When asked to define “social studies ,” Dan responded with a complex and multifaceted definition that illustrate d his still-developing beliefs:

PAGE 113

100 I think social studies has become more over-encompassing than before…I always kind of explained it as more removed from where you are right now. And in the past few years, what I’ve kind of been deve loping is this definition of social studies happen(ing) all the time. (D an, Interview, 3/17/06) Dan went on to describe how so cial studies was not only its many individual disciplines, such as history, geography, and economics, but also encompassed things such as “social skills, social awareness, social understandi ng” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). This broadbased belief about the nature of social st udies led to a definition that was a “more concrete understanding of social studies…before it was mo re of an abstract. I thought of history and different things ve rsus more social skills and more affective elements of social studies” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). These skills also figured heavily in Dan’s beliefs about the importance of social studies instruction for students: …in order to become part of a social societ y, and the society as a whole. To be able to participate, to be able to cope with problems, solve problems…[Social studies] has a role in everything that all of your students do all day. So if you ignore it, you’re really going to hurt your students in the long run. (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06) Dan’s broad definition of soci al studies was evident when he addressed 9/11 during class: “It’s basically a social studies issue that…takes over every part of the students’ daily lives…how are we going to address it?” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). While Dan’s idea of social studies reflected elements of Brophy and Alleman’s concept of “life application” of social studies (1996, p. 43), it appeared from his comments that Dan’s ideas had been developing over a number of y ears before he taught the methods course. Dan’s belief in an all-encompassing defi nition and in the impo rtance of social studies was one of the themes for the course, along with three other specific beliefs about social studies: teaching student s to be critical consumers, presenting honest portrayals, and integrating other subject areas. First, he discussed the importance of teaching elementary students to be critical consumer s of the information presented to them by

PAGE 114

101 saying: “One of the most important things is that you want your stude nts to question their sources…” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06) This also related to Dan’s belief in the importance of presenting appropriately complex and honest por trayals of events, is sues, and people to elementary students: “We should be teaching all of the qualities that some people may have” (Dan, Class, 4/2/006). However, as discussed later in this chapter, teaching elementary students to be critical of thei r sources and presenting honest portrayals of historical figures turned out to be difficult for some of his methods students to fully embrace. Finally, Dan made constant refere nce to his belief in the importance and feasibility of integrating other subject areas in to social studies inst ruction: “Use social studies to teach other things…it can be done if you try hard enough to make the connections” (Dan, Class, 4/19/06). Dan not ed his firsthand experience and success during the previous year in inte grating social studies into read ing: “It gave us the ability to teach pretty good social studie s” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods Dan also exhibited very st udent-centered beliefs concer ning social studies methods instruction. While discussing his approach to helping hi s methods students craft a generalization for their teaching unit, Dan explained how he met with each pair on multiple occasions until all the pairs had a suitable generalization. While meeting students’ needs was a theme, his dominant belief specific to social studies methods instruction was summarized by the following st atement: “Well, I almost think like I’m trying to save social studies, keep it in the classroom” (D an, Interview, 3/17/06). This belief was related to Dan’s experience at Owen Elementary, when the school failed to meet “adequate yearly progress” the previous year and devoted more and more attention to the assessed subjects. This led to a cutback in social studies instruction.

PAGE 115

102 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course? On numerous occasions, Dan discussed the importance of making lessons meaningful for elementary students. He be lieved that when students were required to think critically and make their own judgme nts about presented material, it was more likely the lesson would be meaningful. Th is belief carried over into his methods instruction and was evident dur ing his discussion of the cente rs activities (Dan, Class, 3/14/06). Instead of immediat ely telling the methods students how he would have used a particular center, he instructed them to “look at the things critically and make decisions…here [are] some things…What can you do with [them]? What are some drawbacks? And it really ge ts them to make sound judgments…and it would be more meaningful” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). This belief was particular ly evident during the 9/11discussion, when he posed the question, “I f you were in the classroom on 9/11, what would do you for the moment, and then thereafter… for the rest of the year?” (Dan, Class, 4/19/06). Instead of beginning the conversati on with how he handled the situation, he posed the question and let the students come up with their own solutions. The methods students recalled their own personal experiences as students on 9/11 and then as a table group formulated and defended possible reacti ons to similar events in the role of classroom teachers. Each group came up with very different plans and the ensuing discussion was a powerful and meaningful e xperience because each student used their personal experiences to consider their reactions as teachers. If Dan had simply told the class how he reacted to the s ituation then twenty eight ot her perspectives would have gone unheard and unconsidered.

PAGE 116

103 Dan also believed his methods students need ed a variety of inst ructional examples: “…this is what a fourth-grade RAFT (assignmen t) looks like…” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). In addition to his personal examples and those pr ovided in the course materials, he also solicited instructional examples at the be ginning of each class by asking for “social studies sightings” because he did not “want th em to think that I’m the only way. Because, I mean, I’m one person and one grade level at one school in one place. And so I want them to be able to see a broade r picture” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Because Dan believed in a broad definition of social studies (“It’s social skills, social awareness, social understanding”), he wanted to expand his methods students’ definition of social studies by bringing in ex amples from his classroom: “I try to get students to discuss it and talk about why th ey think this is something that can be addressed in social studies. Why is this social studies?” (Da n, Interview, 3/17/06). Directly related to his past experiences as a social studies methods student was Dan’s belief that he needed to make a “a pe rsonal connection” with his methods students (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). The instructor in his methods cour se did not share information about previous professional experiences, making it difficult for Dan to connect to the instruction. Based on this experience, he bega n his first methods cla ss with “overheads of my kids and where I’ve taught and populat ions…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). As discussed later in this chapter, such a practice created a strong personal connection between Dan and his methods students. Dan’s stated belief “that no matter what ha ppens I’m never going to be doing it the same way twice” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) a ligned with his practice of surveying his methods students during the first class with a questionnaire that “asks the students how

PAGE 117

104 they appreciate learning best…and how they lear n…and so what they’ll do is look at that, and that’s how I try to craft the rest of th e semester…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). This practice also related to his be lief that “to make the most meaning out of the content, I have to help meet thei r learning styles, just like any othe r kid” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan had strong beliefs regarding the need to focus his methods instruction on “saving social studies” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/ 06). That is why he instructed his methods students in how to address critic al barriers to social studies instruction. One such critical issue was the lack of time for instruction: I have to teach them how to negotiate, in ad dition to what social studies is and how to do it. I teach them, well, here’s how you have to negotiate. You have to say, here’s one of the things that I have to do; can we somehow try to integrate it with other things? Can I teach ‘cause and e ffect’ through my unit on social studies? (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? Information Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Channels of Communication Based on serving in the dual roles of elem entary social studies methods instructor and elementary teacher, Dan had access to unique information about the status of elementary social studies at his school, More Cooperative School, and Dennis County. Dan knew that allocated time for social studie s was shrinking: “…a couple years ago they had a different schedule…but everyone in Owen Elementary and More Cooperative School had social studies time blocks” (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06). The results of the new time schedule were clear: “If you follow all the procedures perfectly, there is no time for social studies…I think 20 mi nutes or 15 minutes, some amou nt of time that’s impossible to do anything” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Becau se of this change, the choice to reduce social studies instruction often was not up to the cooperating teacher, “and most of the

PAGE 118

105 mentor teachers that I know who love teachi ng social studies.…think it’s really valuable, think it’s very important. But they feel like they can’t teach it because of the other things…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). He al so noted some teachers were unwilling to allow social studies instruction until after th e FCAT test was administered. However, he saw a silver lining to the situ ation. Some cooperating teachers were using their interns as an excuse to “make room for social studies in their curriculum” and resisted “whatever pressure they might have from their CRT or principal…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Alarmed, Dan reported that testing pressure was even limiting the freedom to integrate social studies: We taught reading through social studies. So we would do units on something and we would do…comprehension strategies and th ings [like] that…B ut this year we were unable to do that because of—I don’t know if the guidelines are stricter or the monitoring is tighter or what …we were told before that we were not allowed to do that because if we have a different group of students that we teach for reading or for social studies, we were unable to ov erlap them… (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06) The mandated time schedule was also hurting methods instruction, because methods students were unable to witness actua l instruction: “This year the interns are having to rework their schedules so they can se e social studies, if it is happening at all, much less participate in it a nd do their units” (Dan, Intervie w, 3/17/06). This created a situation where methods students “have to work probably twice as hard to get something done with social studies…because of all the ot her factors that are preventing them (the cooperating teacher) from being able to do it themselves” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). As a teacher, Dan was aware of how a prescribed and enforced time schedule created situations in which powerful social studies instruction was difficult if not impossible: “We received little nasty letters la tely saying that we are to teach 90 minutes of direct reading instructi on…I don’t know where it comes from…I’m sure it’s from the

PAGE 119

106 county office but I don’t know that for a fact ” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan summed up how working as a methods instructor provided him with information: Being the methods instructor and by experien cing and by looking at all the trends over time, over other places…I can see what’s happening. I think other teachers right now don’t see what’s happening with social studies…They don’t realize that it’s really being swept under the rug (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). As a teacher in Dennis County for eight year s, Dan recalled times when there was more flexibility in regard to the s ubjects to be taught, and how much time was to be allotted to each subject. He noted when changes starte d: “I guess two or three years ago the county…I don’t know if it’s a state thing or whatever…the y’ve reworked the way the schedule is…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Also, as a teacher, Dan was subject to oversight to ensure he was teaching only the assessed skills: “We have people who are constantly reminding us, you have to be doing reading. And reading is not this. Reading is not that. Reading is not the other” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing Dan humorously summed up his beliefs about the status of so cial studies: “It’s almost like, shhhh, we’re doing social studies – don’t look!” (Dan, In terview, 5/4/06). Based on this situation, Dan believed schools we re not preparing students for the future: “Students that are graduating are going to have a real hard time in society because they’re not going to know how to solve a lot of the problems that th ey have…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Dan explained the resu lts of all the pressure: “Bec ause of these bureaucratic issues, we’re having to change the way we’re teaching” (Dan, Inte rview, 3/17/06). He shared a common belief concerning the ‘giveand-take’ of social studies testing: I think if it was put on the FCAT, it w ould be sort of a doubled-edged sword, because it would be taught more in classr ooms, it would be more of a priority in classrooms, it would be something that would be on your prescribed curriculum schedule, but at that same time it might be cheapened…because it will probably

PAGE 120

107 just assess standards which will be facts/concepts. It probably won’t be able to assess the generalizations the kids take away because how can you assess that with a standardized test? You can’t (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). For Dan, a clear understanding of the situ ation carried its own burden: “Pretty much the biggest struggle…is knowing that th ere’s less and less of it happening…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course? Issues Related to Methods Students The following section is a discussion of issues Dan encountered related to the methods students. Conservative social beliefs One of the most difficult issues Dan en countered during the methods course was the conservative social beliefs of his methods students. These beliefs were most evident during discussion of the book Lies My Teacher Told Me when students were having a hard time accepting the information in the book. One group shared the following comments: Who says this guy is like the bible of history? Kids will end up fighting over history. A parent is going to be like, ‘Why is my kid learning this?’ This is a very hateful book. We have a shared history. That is what textbooks do. You want kids to question things, but not everything. I was reading this stuff…and I consider myself an educated person…I did not know what he was talking about (Class, 3/22/06). While discussing this during the final interview, Dan summed up the situation:

PAGE 121

108 I mean, the reason I like to have that book around is to engage in conversations like this…what happened was they held their e xperiences stronger, so they thought that this guy (Loewen) was the one who was lying, not their classroom teachers (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan’s observations illustrate why it can be difficult to overcome students’ conservative social beliefs, which may constr ain an inservice teacher ’s ability to align his/her teaching prac tices with students’ ideological beli efs. To cite another example, in the “Social Studies Philosophy” assignment, one of Dan’s methods stud ents said that she believed the student should be the center of the curriculum, but during instruction she clearly needed to be in charge. Accordi ng to Dan, “her whole philosophy of teaching interfered with her idea of what social studies is” (D an, Interview, 5/4/06). Tension between content and methods Dan noticed that the typical preservice elementary teacher reached his social studies methods course with limited content kno wledge, noting that most of his students, “had a real, real weak, limited background in the social studies we’ve taught. And they’ve had to do a lot of work to figure th ings out” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). This situation prompted Dan to suggest to his methods students, “You are all going to be students and teachers of social studies if you are going to teach it…” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). Dan noted that this lack of know ledge often surfaced when methods students included inaccurate historical information in their lesson plans. Dan reported that he was often able to catch these mistakes before the methods student taught the lesson and suggested the student “review the material” in order to correct the information (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan’s method students’ lack of basic content knowledge created a dilemma for his methods instruction, forcing him to choose be tween teaching content or helping students

PAGE 122

109 correct their mistakes, which took away time that should have been focused on teaching instructional methods. His stude nts’ lack of exposure to so cial studies cr eated another challenge for Dan: His students did not really know what social stud ies is. He stated: The first day of class they come in with this preconceived notion that it’s maps and dates and people. And we have to talk about…a whole bunch of different things” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). The methods students’ narrow conception of social studies most often included celebratory history and holid ay art projects, prompting one student to quip, “My mom still has my turkey I made in first grade. (Dan, Class, 3/22/06) Students’ negative experience s with Social Studies Students’ negative experiences with elemen tary school social studies instruction challenged Dan’s methods instruction. Most often, these negative experiences came from textbook reading, answering questions on worksh eets, and rote memorization activities. Dan explained, “It was all segmented. Ther e were no connections…I had to know the states and capitals” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) While evidence of the students’ negative experiences was not as prevalent in Dan’s cl ass as with the other participants, it was nonetheless an issue he had to consider. Issues Related to the Status of Elementa ry Social Studies and Field Placement The following section is a discussion of th e issues Dan encountered related to the status of elementary social studies and the schools where the methods students were placed. Lack of respect and professional deve lopment for elementary Social Studies The methods students in Dan’s course were well aware of the peripheral and untested status of elementary social studi es. This caused some students to openly question the feasibility of some of the more in-depth and time-consuming social studies instructional methods he suggested during th e course. When asked about the situation,

PAGE 123

110 Dan confirmed, “There are many experiences th at I can think of wh ere a lot of people would bring up the FCAT, and we can’t do that because of the FCAT, or can’t do this because of FCAT” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). He used such comments to remind his students of the importance of social studies, stating, “Social studies is something that’s important and it’s being left out” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). Another challenge related to th e status of elementary social studies was the lack of available social studies pr ofessional development opportunities. When asked about any social studies-related activitie s in which he had participate d, Dan responded, “I wish our district provided a lot more with social st udies…If there’s a reading in-service, your sub will be paid for. If it’s so cial studies, you have to pay if you want to do it” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Lack of opportunities fo r professional development in social studies made it difficult to share social studies practic es directly with othe r experienced teachers. However, based on his own personal interest and his position as a fourth-grade teacher, Dan sought out his own profe ssional development opportunities: “The only thing that I’ve really done as far as I know has just be en through my own personal interest, and just working with the (grade level) team that I have” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Lack of time for elementary Social Studies The secondary status of social studies became most evident at the school and classroom levels during the students’ unit pres entations at the end of the semester. The following comments were made by Dan’s met hods students during their presentations: We had to focus down due to time constraints. We started a unit on the middle ages …but FCAT and spring break messed it up…We ran out of time. We had about ten minutes a day.

PAGE 124

111 We are in first grade and they do not ev er have social studi es…We had to stay within the constraints we were given. We did not have the chance to go over it because we were running out of time (Class 4/26/06). When asked about challenging situations, incl uding lack of time for social studies, Dan replied, “I think we’re very limited in what we’re able to do because…the experiences they’re having with external pressures or whatever limit what we’re able to do” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Despite the wi despread nature of this challenge, Dan felt that the elementary social studies methods course was more successful at creating awareness about these issues than when he was a methods student: I think…actually the way it’s structured ri ght now is a whole lot better than it was when I was there eight, nine, ten years ago…it has a more active stance to where it’s alerting people to what’s going on and trying to make people more aware [not to] do that when you become a teacher. (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Other field placement issues Other challenging issues related to the placem ent but not directly to the status of elementary social studies emerged during the semester. One cha llenge was cooperating teachers mandating the content or instructional methods of the social studies units created by the methods students. The methods student s commented during th e unit presentations at the end of the semester, “We did not have ve ry much leeway”; “we had to give a test”; “we had to give a study guide” (Class, 4/26/ 2006). When asked about this situation, Dan responded: “This semester it seemed to be about 40 percent of the cooperating teachers said exactly what had to be taught” (Da n, Interview, 5/4/06). Most often when cooperating teachers mandated the content a nd instructional methods, the units were textbook-driven and resulte d in weak generalizati ons and student work.

PAGE 125

112 Kindergarten placements posed another inte resting challenge re lated to the field placement of students. Some methods students felt their students were not ready for some of the more challenging social studies skills, saying, “Our ki ds have a hard time seeing things from other points of view” (Dan, Cl ass, 3/22/06). When asked about some of the comments made by his methods students rela ted to difficulties in kindergarten placements, Dan responded, “[In] a lot of lowe r grade levels, a lot of the interns…don’t seem to think their kids can do it. They almost feel like, well, we have to teach them to read first or they just play” (Dan, Intervie w, 5/4/06). To overcome this challenge, he pushed his methods students “to think out of th e box a little bit” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan reported when methods students rose to this challenge, they were able to create meaningful instruction for their students. Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles The following section is a discussion of the issues Dan encountered related to filling the dual roles of inservice teacher and methods instructor. Content and theoretical knowledge A particular challenge to Dan’s social studies methods instruction was his own limited theoretical and historical content know ledge in social studies. This challenge stemmed from his experiences as an elementary and high school student, where he felt he did not learn adequate histori cal content, and from his expe riences as a teacher education student in the social studies methods c ourse, where he felt he did not gain enough theoretical knowledge ab out social studies instruction: “I don’t feel like I know enough about teaching social studies sometimes” (D an, Interview, 3/17/06). Dan offered insight into the difference between a practicing teac her serving as a methods instructor and a university-based person in th e same role, “I think that the big difference between

PAGE 126

113 university-based and sch ool-based is [that] university-based people just are more familiar with that (theoretical knowledge), have mo re experiences with that” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). When discussing his own historical cont ent knowledge, Dan quipped, “I’ve always thought that I have…the worst social studies background as fa r as facts content” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan believed this gave him something in common with his methods students because of his similar experien ces in elementary and high school, which included taking an advanced placement Amer ican history class. Dan believed his own lack of historical content knowledge had improved because of his position as a fourthgrade teacher: “I’ve learned a whole bunch more since I’ ve been teaching fourth grade…and every year I’ll learn more about it” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Limited time Like all teachers, Dan himself was presse d for time to complete the obligations associated with being a classroom teacher; being a methods instructor added another set of obligations: “Yeah, time is really tough…sometim es it really is hard to get a lot of this stuff done” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). As the semester drew to a close, he had to do additional work grading the methods students’ units. When asked if this work took away from his preparations for teaching his elem entary students, he responded, “It really didn’t…and I don’t know if I should say this but I always made my [elementary students] kids the first priority ” (Dan, Intervie w, 5/4/06). Credibility When observing Dan’s methods instructi on, I could clearly see that he had a personal connection and a substantial amount of credibility with his methods students. This can be traced to three pa rticular sources of credibility: his status as a former student

PAGE 127

114 of the same teacher education program as his methods students; his visibility, approachability, and expertise as an on-site teacher and cooperating teacher; and his connections with the university as an advanced graduate student. As a former student of the same teacher education program, Dan was familiar with his methods students’ experiences. He reminde d them of his experiences in the same program with comments such as, “When I started, I was a shy person” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). He stated: “I told them that I went through (the program), so I think that’s part of it…knowing that I graduated from the same [program]…so I talk about things that I did with them and I think that’s part of it” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan was also able to ensure his credibility and es tablish a positive connection with his students because of the perspective gained from his position as a fourth-grade teacher: “My most important priority is getting it (social studies) into my kids, and a lot of the interns; that’s where they are right now…it’s hard er for them to connect to what somebody’s study said or…somebody’s theory” (Dan, Interview, 3/ 17/06). When asked why he believed this type of credibility was not extended to former teachers who become university-based professionals, Dan explained, In their (methods students) mind, because you’re two feet away from a classroom or one year away, they don’t consider you in the same area or the same field as someone who has been in there this morni ng or five minutes ago or right there… (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) However, Dan’s close connection with his me thods students and approachability as an on-site teacher had an interesting drawback: A lot of times the interns w ill say things and do things that I just don’t know that they would say or do if it was a univers ity-based person. .talk about their other instructors, and how they ar e this, they have this manne rism, or they do this thing, and they’re not very intelligent…(Dan, Interview, 3/17/06)

PAGE 128

115 This attitude of familiarity placed Dan in an uncomfortable position, and he had to remind his methods students of the unprof essional nature of such comments. Negotiations for instructional time and freedom A final advantage Dan believed he had as an on-site practicing teacher was his ability to help his methods students negotia te with their cooperating teachers for instructional time and creative freedom for thei r social studies teaching units. Dan let his methods students know he was willing to help with negotiations: “If you are ever having trouble where I can help you, le t me know” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). When asked how he approached such discussions, Dan said: The interns would say, ‘My teach er won’t let me.’ And I am able to negotiate more because I know the conditions; I know most of the teachers. I don’t know all of the ones from More, but I know some of them And I can say, look, I know what she’s teaching, I know how she does it. I’ll go w ith you. We can talk together and we can come up with an idea. (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Thus, given the limited amount of instruc tional time and freedom afforded by some cooperating teachers, Dan’s position as an onsite, practicing teacher may have been one of the most important advantages he had. Advantages of filling dual roles In addition to enhanced credibility and opportunities for a pers onal connection with his methods students, Dan felt that being a practicing teacher se rving as a methods instructor had additional adva ntages. Being an inservice teacher allowed him more access to authentic resources than a university-base d instructor: “I also think we have more resources available, real resources in clas srooms the kids are using…we have access to whatever is being used right now in the c ounty” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Indeed, he often used these resources during his me thods instruction. In addition, Dan had experience with the social studies strategies th at were part of the c ourse. This was evident

PAGE 129

116 when he provided his methods students with student work samples from his elementary students, noting, “The RAFT strategy is one of my favorite reading response strategies…once you do it with your kids, it quickly becomes a favorite with kids…” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). When an unfamiliar or new strategy came to his attention, Dan tested the strategy on his own elementary st udents (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Moreover, when his methods students expressed doubts about the feasibility of a recommended strategy, Dan invited the student s to his room to observe: But by having them see that these are real kids, and it doesn’t have to look like the ideal perfect lesson that you might s ee sometimes, in order to do a good job teaching social studies, I think that it helps the (methods) students see that what’s in this book can happen in this room with these kids, believe it or not. (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) Themes and Summary of Findings for Dan Charles On the whole, Dan voiced beliefs ab out teaching that centered on adapting instruction to meet the individua l needs of elementary students, as well as the needs of his methods students. He discussed his beliefs in the value of social st udies instruction for elementary students and the f act that his own personal defi nition of social studies had expanded to include such thi ngs as social skills. Dan be lieved his main job as an elementary social studies methods instructor was to “save” social studies from being eliminated from the elementary school curriculum. Based on his beliefs about social studies and his students, Dan engaged in specific practices he felt were consiste nt with his beliefs. For ex ample, since he believed in “saving” social studies, he in structed his methods students in how to negotiate for social studies instructional time. He also voiced strong support fo r the need to make social studies meaningful for elementary students by allowing them to think critically and to make choices about topics of study. Furthermore, because Dan believed his methods

PAGE 130

117 students needed to know a variety of instructi onal examples, he engaged in the practice of surveying his students at the beginning of ev ery class for examples of social studies instruction from their placements. His own e xperiences as a methods student led him to make personal connections with his methods stude nts; thus, he started his first class with information about his educational and profe ssional experiences. Also evident was his belief in the need to tailor his instruction to meet the needs of his students; thus, he surveyed his students at the be ginning of the semester about their learning styles and planned his instructional methods based on this information. Dan’s dual roles as methods instructor and practicing teacher made him a wellinformed professional and provided him with nuanced knowledge about the status of social studies in the elemen tary curriculum in his school and in Dennis County. This knowledge was gained through long-term experi ence at the same school, enabling him to note the sharp decline in time a llotted to social studies inst ruction at his school and at schools countywide. In additi on, Dan’s experiences instruct ing the methods course led him to believe that cooperating teachers felt direct pressure not to engage in any social studies instruction; by having an intern, they felt it was “safe” to teach social studies because the interns were require d to do so. Dan described the current status of social studies in the elementary curriculum as ‘awf ul’ and expressed concerns about the future of elementary students who did not re ceive any social studies instruction. Dan discussed a number of issues associ ated with his social studies methods instruction and noted two major issues related to his methods students. While reflecting on comments made by his methods students in response to the book Lies My Teacher Told Me Dan discussed the method students’ conser vative and critical interpretation of

PAGE 131

118 the book’s content. Moreover, he noted a number of issues related to the status of social studies; chief among these was th e lack of instructional time afforded to social studies and the issues this presented for methods instruction. Finally, Dan discussed issues related to filling dual roles of methods instructor and inserv ice teacher. Dan believed his long-term, multifaceted relationshi p with the teacher education program and his visibility as an inservice teacher accorded him a high le vel of credibility with his methods students. He also noted that his presence on campus fac ilitated negotiations for instructional time for the interns placed at his school site.

PAGE 132

119 CHAPTER 6 NORA IGLESIAS Background Information Chapter 6 discusses the research findings fo r Nora Iglesias, an experienced fourth grade teacher at Thebaut Elementary. In her early thirties, Nora attended a large state university for her first two years of college before finishing at a smaller regional state university closer to where she grew up. During her undergraduate teacher preparation program, she had one social st udies methods course, which sh e described as “very poorly taught by a retired teacher” (Nora, Intervie w, 3/16/06). However, Nora’s teacher education program also included a general me thods course in which she wrote a large unit on the state of Alaska that she used as a model during her methods instruction. Nora graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Elementary Educati on. After two year s of teaching, she enrolled in graduate studi es at a small state school in the Northeast, where she earned a dual master’s degree in Educationa l Psychology and Special Education. Professional Experiences Nora’s first official classroom expe rience came during her student teaching internships. Her first two were at an unde r-resourced elementary sc hool in a large urban area serving poor and minority students. Her fina l internship was at an elementary school close to where she grew up. Sh e described it as “a great e xperience, and my cooperating teacher was absolutely great” (Nora, Intervie w, 3/16/06). Nora’s first teaching job was in a small industrial town in the mid-South. He r two years of teaching there were followed by a year of teaching fourand five-year-olds in a preschool setting. Then Nora came to

PAGE 133

120 the local area and began teaching at Thebaut Elementary, where she has been for the last four years. Nora has participated in professional devel opment experiences related to her role as a fourth grade teacher, including attending a wo rkshop at a local museum to learn about Florida history. Nora also belongs to th e Florida Reading Association, attends its conference every year and belongs to the International Readin g Association, whose conference she attended twice. The semest er during which the study was conducted was Nora’s first experience teaching the social studies methods course. She planned to instruct the course again in the future. Thebaut Elementary Thebaut Elementary, located within walki ng distance of the university, is adjacent to a large park and is dott ed with many mature trees, giving the campus a suburban feel. A large elementary school by district sta ndards, Thebaut Elementary was rezoned recently, resulting in an increased number of students with a lower socioeconomic status. Thebaut Elementary is under the auspices of the Dennis County School Board and has experienced changes in the past few years related to time schedules, which limits the time spent on social studies instruction. In spite of these pressures, Nora reported social studies instruction was valued at her school and instructional time for social studies was a required part of each grade level’s daily sc hedule. Nora’s methods students came from Thebaut and Howe Elementary schools. Howe Elementary Howe Elementary is located on the outskirts of the town where the university is located. Howe offers a single curriculum up to third grade and two separate curricula for students in fourth and fifth grades, “Academ y of Traditional Studies” and “Academy of

PAGE 134

121 Math, Science, and Technology.” White stude nts comprise 40 percent of the student population, African Americans 45 percent, and 15 percent represent other groups. Howe’s AYP Status was listed as provisional, but the sc hool had earned an “A” grade from the state the three previous years (H owe 2006). Despite this grade, the comments made by Nora and the methods students placed there indica ted that Howe was a lower performing school than Thebaut. Figure 6-1. Nora’s Classroom Nora’s Classroom and Instruction Nora’s classroom was situated close to the entrance of Thebaut Elementary and across from garden plots cared for by each grad e level. Visually organized, the room was typical of many fourth grade classrooms, filled with learning materials and with students’ desks formed into tables, with an overhead projector at the front of the room. One wall was all windows, allowing in natural light a nd framing in its view a large oak tree. With all of the methods students packed into all th e available desks, two students and I had to

PAGE 135

122 sit in the back at additional tables next to the well-worn collection of Harry Potter and Chronicles of Narnia books. Nora’s focus on reading inst ruction and children’s literature was evident from the posters adorning the wall s. Social studies instruction was listed in the posted daily agenda, “10:30–11:30—Social Studies” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). Nora’s positive and matter-of-fact persona worked well with her methods students, and she often used humor to spice up discussions or pr ovided amusing examples of fourth grade behavior. Overall, she was very engaging, pe rsonable and well liked by her students. Typically, Nora started class by taking care of administrative and procedural concerns; then she used the provided c ourse materials to organize and guide her instruction. Nora’s instruction focused on “real world” applications of social studies, with class discussions highlighted by examples fr om Nora’s experiences with the topic of interest. Nora stayed within the general struct ure of the provided materials, but also gave ample time to address individual students’ co ncerns and always expanded the discussion to include students’ interest s. Overall, Nora’s instruction was concise, applied, and interesting. What Beliefs About Social Studies Educat ion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? Beliefs Concerning Teaching Nora’s beliefs about teaching focused on th e value of creating meaningful learning experiences for students in a practical and e fficient manner. Nora’s “practicality ethic” (Doyle and Ponder 1977–78) served as the main theme for her course: “Make it cost effective” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). Typicall y, a comment about the importance of being practical was followed by another about the im portance of making learning experiences meaningful: “something meaningful, active and f un” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Nora also professed her belief in the importance of making elementary students critical thinkers:

PAGE 136

123 “That’s our goal, to get them to think for th emselves” (Nora Class 4/ 19/06). This belief aligned with the “informed soci al criticism” vision of the Lies My Teacher Told Me assignment and, as will be noted later, No ra’s methods students voiced similar beliefs during their presentations. Based on insights gained during her teachi ng career, she believed in a balanced approach to teaching: “What happens is the pe ndulum swings too far to the extreme with, say, whole language and phonics, when really we need to be looking at a balanced approach” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). This belief extende d to her thoughts about the prospect of having social studi es included on standardized test s: “I just think we have taken this as far as the pe ndulum can swing, and we are officially stuck” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies Nora discussed her beliefs about what soci al studies is, the reasons it should be taught, what it teaches, and how it should be taught. She believed social studies “is anthropology, sociology, histor y, economics, and philosophy. And I think it is the field of study where people learn and examine and evalua te and apply our relationship to each other and to the world and communities” (Nor a, Interview, 3/16/06). Nora’s definition closely resembled the NCSS definition f ound in Brophy and Alleman (1996). Noting her lack of experience with social studies, Nora said her beliefs have changed because of her access to the course materials: “My beliefs ha ve changed in five years. Really, probably my beliefs have changed in the last three months, from teaching this class and reading this stuff” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Th is was one of the few occasions any of the participants directly attri buted any of their beliefs to the provided materials.

PAGE 137

124 Nora cited civic skills as the primary sk ill learned through social studies: “I think it’s really important to teach them what it’s about to be a citizen a nd what happens in the government” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). A similar sentiment was noted by Brophy and Alleman (1996) when they described one of their goals for social studies as “civic efficacy.” Nora noted other reasons social st udies should be included in the curriculum: “Every child needs to learn about those t opics—history, geography, all those subtopics under social studies” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06) When asked what social studies did for elementary students, she responded that the mo st important would be to “expose them to other cultures and kind of a multicultural appr eciation” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Asked what ideas elementary students should take away from the social studies units, Nora echoed the “Key Task” in the provided syllabus: “Everything is connected and there are similarities throughout many gr oups of people and lands” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). This belief was evident during instruction when Nora modeled how a good generalization could be applied to any context, not only the context in which it was learned (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods In discussing her beliefs about teaching so cial studies methods, Nora cited her main goal for methods instruction as “to hopefully inspire a group of future teachers to embrace social studies as a subject area that n eeds to be taught well. It does not need to be pushed to the wayside” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). She constantly verbalized and emphasized this belief in her course. Conn ected to this goal was the importance she assigned to her having her met hods students leave her course “more aware and more able to teach social studies effectively” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). She also believed in the importance of coaching the students through wr iting and teaching the so cial studies units,

PAGE 138

125 “starting from scratch and building—even t hough it’s just three le ssons; building a unit, teaching a unit, and then evaluating their teach ing of those lessons are important” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course? Based on her belief that her main job as a methods instructor was to “perpetuate the value that is placed on social studies” (Nor a, Interview, 3/16/06), Nora constantly reminded her methods students of their job as future teachers: “You guys are going to have to work hard to integrate…and make su re they are having meaningful social studies experiences…because if you guys do not, it is no t going to happen” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). Highlighting one of the requirements in the sy llabus, Nora commented, “I think it’s very easy to integrate social studies content to ot her areas” (Nora, Inte rview, 3/16/06). Based on this belief, she often used examples fr om her own teaching to provide real-life examples of social studies integration (e.g., Nora, Class, 3/22/06). She often reminded her students, “Remember, it is important to ta ke every opportunity to use social studies content and integrate it into your instructi on” (Nora, Class, 3/22/06). On one occasion Nora pulled out her laminated literature circle cards she used with her elementary students and used them to demonstrate how to integrate social st udies content in to reading (Nora, Class, 3/22/06). One of Nora’s beliefs that served as a theme for her methods course was the “practicality ethic” she often stressed: “I guess one thing I’ve stre ssed that I haven’t mentioned is the practical aspect to life in the real world of teachi ng” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). When discussing the effectiveness of including costumes a nd props in social studies instruction, she expresse d her focus on being practical in different terms, “I have

PAGE 139

126 established with my students th at I’m not really into ‘cute’ ” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Based on her belief in the practical, she ofte n reminded her methods students to “make it cost-effective” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). When asked what actions she took in the methods class to demonstrate being pract ical, Nora recounted: “I woul d start telling stories about my classroom or students I’ve had or lessons I’ve taught, strategies that have worked or haven’t worked” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Buttressing Nora’s belief in practicality was her desire to make social studies instruction meaningful. After noting she was not “into cute,” Nora discussed the correct use of costumes and props for instruction, stat ing that they would be appropriate only if they “make the lesson meaningful” (Nora, Inte rview, 5/2/06). To de monstrate her belief in the importance of meaningful instruction, she arranged for all of the methods students to attend the Florida Folk Festival at Thebaut Elementary. After completing their study of Florida history, she had her fourth grade st udents get “in a group and make boards and dress up and teach about the Civil War in Florid a, teach about the citrus industry” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Nora’s concept of “meaningful” instruction was centered on creating instruction that was memorable for students, slight ly different than Brophy and Alleman’s notion of “meaningf ul” instruction, “The content selected for emphasis is worth learning because it promotes progress towards important social understanding and civic efficacy goals, and teaching methods help students see how the content relates to those goals” (1996, p. 44-45).

PAGE 140

127 How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? Information Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Channels of Communication Like the other participants, Nora had a uni que insight into the status of social studies at Thebaut Elementary and Howe El ementary. Noting the di fferences between the two, Nora commented on the frequency of soci al studies instruction at Thebaut: “In my classroom, in my grade level, we teach soci al studies every day” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). She said that while social studies was taught everyday at Thebaut, not all students received social studies instruction: Unfortunately, it always happens with th e lower performing students being taken out of social studies, and that does happen here. I will say social studies is taught when our Title I low readers go to Title I classes or other services… (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06) Nora explained why she believed social studies was absent from Howe: Because of the choices that the Howe facu lty or principal make or…sometimes the county dictates stuff that you have no cont rol over, but their reading program is called Success for All…so that requires many hours in the morning…so when you make choices like that as a blanket thing for an entire school, you’re limited [in the ability to teach social studies], and it’s not the teacher’s fault. (Nora Interview, 5/2/06) Nora noted that in the past it was possible to integrate social studies into other subjects: “I wish that we could integrate it like they used to into the reading and the math, but there’s just so much accountability and we have to teach these skills and so on. .” (Nora Interview, 3/16/06). Nora also noted the different ways she r eceived information about the status of social studies. Through her communications with other teachers, Nora noted the status of social studies at low performing schools: “I know it’s really bad at some schools in this county and across the state. People I know that teach in other places [t ell me that social

PAGE 141

128 studies is] usually the first thing to go” (N ora, Interview, 3/16/06). As a teacher at Thebaut, Nora witnessed firsthand the declin ing status of social studies: “I think, unfortunately, that the purpose right now for social studies is the time that you can pull kids out to do re-teaching for reading skills for FCAT…” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). As a methods instructor, Nora could see how recen t changes in the district timetable were followed differently at different schools: “H owe students said ‘we have just never seen social studies taught.’ Becau se they’re there until 11:30, and maybe it’s taught very infrequently in the aftern oons” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Nora compared this knowledge gained as a methods instructor to her experiences at Thebaut, where social studies was taught every day, as evident in Nora’s posted daily agenda: “10:30–11:30— Social Studies” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). Nora gained additional insight from her methods students: Some of them said, we see it once a wee k. Some of them said, it’s in the afternoon…Some of them said that their teach er, their team, or their grade level, or whatever, rotated like a month of science a nd then a month of social studies. (Nora Interview, 5/2/06) This information clearly showed the differing st atus of social studies at the two schools. Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Testing When asked what she thought about the stat us of elementary social studies in general, Nora noted: “Oh, it’s disgusting. Makes me want to cry. Both social studies and science, I believe, should be pa rt of the curriculum” (Nora Interview 3/16/06). She made astute comments about the source of the pressure to reduce social studies instruction: “I think it’s like a political ag enda, obviously not a purpose that I agree with. But I do think that’s why social studies has been cut so much and put on the back burner…” (Nora, Interview 3/16/06). While pondering the positives and negatives of the inclusion of social

PAGE 142

129 studies in the testing programs, Nora su mmed up the dilemma: “I don’t think it will improve social studies instruction. But I think it will improve the daily schedules…Quality, I don’t know. You can do a lo t of harm if you teach social studies inappropriately and ineffectiv ely” (Nora Interview 3/16/06) During a class discussion, Nora hit a similar note: “I’m not excited about more testing…but I am happy it will get the subject area more attention” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). During the final interview, Nora reflected on her previous comments about elemen tary social studies a nd testing: “I don’t hate the FCAT test…The way the tests are use d, the money that’s spent on it, that’s what bothers me, and frankly I don’t want to see a ny more FCAT tests, whether it’s social studies or home economics” (Nora, Intervie w, 5/2/06). Nora’s comments highlight the complexity of the issue. What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course? Issues Related to Methods Students The issues discussed in this section are mo st closely related to the methods students themselves and how their experiences and be liefs influence elementary social studies methods instruction. Liberal beliefs Nora’s students’ openness to accepting new information could be related to the environment created by the class composition. Unlike the other secti ons of the methods course, Nora’s section had more than one or two non-White/European American females. While these females were the majority, Nora’s section also had three White males, two Hispanic females, and two African American females. The students’ liberal beliefs were evident in their comments during the group presentations of chapters from the book Lies

PAGE 143

130 My Teacher Told Me : “We really found some common misconceptions that we were taught” (Nora, Class, 3/29/06) Nora responded, “That is w hy we need to keep being critical of our sources” (Nora, Class, 3/ 29/06). While presenting one group’s chapter, a student noted, “This book made me really think hard about why I was taught the version of history I was…because I was in a mostly White school” (Nora, Class, 4/12/06). This section of students voiced significantly more liberal views than the other sections. Nora noted that she believed she was successf ul in overcoming many of the historical misconceptions held by her students (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Content vs. methods tension and students’ negative experiences Nora partially attributed this lack of knowledge to the methods students’ previous negative experiences with social studies inst ruction: “I’d say ove r half of them had negative experiences that they shared” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Initially Nora was concerned about her own level of knowledge : “I wouldn’t have the facts to press everybody. But when I started teaching, I realized that they actually know a whole heck of a lot less than I do” (Nora, Interview, 5/ 2/06). This lack of cont ent knowledge surfaced during the planning of th eir instructional units: “There we re actually many instances. I didn’t correct them but I knew they needed to explore something further…So I had them further research it” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). During observations, I noted several occasions when students would make historical ly inaccurate statements. Nora then made a suggestion about how to address the lack of historical content knowledge: “But to me, I think it would be more meaningful to take out those weekly assignments and do some sort of content knowledge every week on a differe nt part of history or a different topic” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06).

PAGE 144

131 Student behavior Nora had an issue related to the behavior of one methods student. During the first few weeks of the methods course, the student failed to hand in assignments and often was late or absent from class. In my observation notes, I recorded four occasions when he was late, once by 43 minutes. Based on the student’s behavior in the methods course, Nora knew she needed to take action: “Being a fourth grade teacher, I did my early identification and realized he was going to be a challenge, and that he needed some guidance and some pushing to realize that he needed to do his work and attend class” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). During instructi on, the student would often make inflammatory remarks, such as, “Isn’t it true that, in or der to be the president you have to be a white male?” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). This comm ent was made in the company of two female African American students. After an encouraging confer ence early in the semester Nora had a second, more pointed conference with the student and told him to turn in his assignments. The second conference was also ineffective: “The next week he didn’t even come to class—not only did he not have his assignments, but he didn’t even attend cla ss or e-mail me to tell me he wasn’t coming, which is policy” (Nora, Interv iew, 5/2/06). At this point, Nora contacted university personnel about the situation. With this additional pressure, the student soon began turning in many of his assignments, prom pting Nora to note, “I learned a lot, how to deal with a college student that is not beha ving correctly. And it’s a little different than dealing with fourth graders th at aren’t behaving correctly” (N ora, Interview, 5/2/06). While wrapping up the discussion about this situation, Nora made an insightful comment about the student and his motivations : “He realizes by being a little different and being vocal about being different, that he is kind of stirring the pot a little bit and he

PAGE 145

132 receives attention for that” (Nora, Intervie w, 5/2/06). When asked if she believed the student’s poor performance in the class had anything to do with a lack of respect for her related to her position as a sc hool-based (not university-bas ed) instructor, she said she would be surprised if he was exemplary in other courses. However, she noted, “It could have been exacerbated, like maybe it was even worse because he thought I was a pushover” (Nora, Intervie w, 5/2/06). Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and the Field Placement The following section is a discussion of th e issues Nora encountered related to the status of elementary social studies and the schools where the methods students were placed. Lack of respect for the elementary Social Studies methods course Nora did not believe her methods students l acked respect for the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum. Intere stingly, however, she felt her students did not approach the social studies methods course as seriously as other me thods courses: “I’ve heard them talk about their r eading methods classes that they ’re also taking this semester. They do seem to have more…formal assessmen ts, which may lend to them taking it more seriously” (Nora, Interview, 3/ 16/06). Asked if she believed the students’ approach was related to the secondary status of social st udies, Nora replied, “No, it is because of the different ways the students are going to be assessed” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). She went on to explain that the assessments in the soci al studies methods course were more project based, while the assessments in the reading methods course were “more formal” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). She believed this led st udents to take the reading course more seriously.

PAGE 146

133 Lack of professional developmen t in elementary Social Studies One issue Nora attributed to the status of social studies was the lack of professional development opportunities with regard to elemen tary social studies: “There’s so few inservices and things like that focused on specifically teaching social studies” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). During a discussion about th e possibility of adding elementary social studies to the FCAT, Nora noted: “The only goo d thing that I can see is that maybe there will be training—for example, in-services—because it’s going to be an FCAT test now, so all of a sudden we’ve got something it’ s on” (Nora, Interv iew, 3/16/06). Lack of time for elementary Social Studies There were stark contrasts between the tw o elementary school sites in terms of the amount of time devoted to social studies in struction. None of the methods students from Thebaut Elementary indicated that they l acked the opportunity to see social studies instruction. On the other hand, Nora noted that “some of my Howe (E lementary) students said, ‘we have just never seen social studies taught.’ Because they’re there until 11:30, and maybe it’s taught very infrequently in the afternoons or something” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Other methods students from Howe Elementary confirmed the situation: “Social studies is taught once per month” (Nora, Class, 3/ 8/06). The lack of time for social studies instruction also extended to the time allotted for the methods students to teach their social studies units, prompti ng one student to comment during the unit presentation: “We wish we would have ha d more time” (Nora, Class, 4/26/06). Other field placement issues Nora discussed field placement issues not re lated to the status of elementary social studies. One such issue was when cooperating teachers mandated the topic and/or the methods of instruction for the social studies unit (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). This was

PAGE 147

134 evident during the methods students’ presenta tions of their teachi ng unit; students noted that: “It was our only option to do [it] because this is the only unit they do this semester” (Nora, Class, 4/19/06). In other situations, methods students elected to do content-driven units based on topics traditionally covered: “T hey were in fifth grade and they did fifth grade social studies topics,” and “Maria did the Southeast region…it’s something that we teach here in fourth grade in social studies so she picked up on that for her unit” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Nora noted issues with methods students in kindergarten placements, such as those having difficulties teaching kindergarten st udents larger concepts; as noted by one methods student, “We should have done baby steps” (Nora, Class, 4/26/06). Nora remarked that such difficulties were widesp read among kindergarten placements: “I had four duos in kindergarten placements, and they all had a challenging time coming up with an appropriate social studies unit topic” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). No ra associated this difficulty with two different issues related to lower elementary classrooms. First, the lower elementary grades do not have “classes and subjects,” and s econd, “the report card focuses more on basic skills such as letter recognition” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles Following is a description of the issues No ra encountered while serving in the dual roles of elementary school teacher and elemen tary social studies methods instructor. Content and theoretical knowledge As noted earlier, Nora was initially concerned about her level of content knowledge, only to discover her methods st udents knew less than she did (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Nora’s c ontent knowledge had benefited from her experiences as a fourth grade teacher and the focus of her grade level team on Florida history: “I went to a

PAGE 148

135 workshop, and it was mostly our teachers…i t was all fourth grade stuff” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). She was also concerned about her knowledge of elementary social studies theory and teaching methods, which she related to the poor instruction she received during her own teacher education pr ogram: “I only had that one social studies class and, no, it was not useful at all” (N ora, Interview, 3/16/06). Based on these concerns, she said she intended to improve her knowledge befo re the next time she taught the course (Nora, In terview, 5/2/06). Limited time Nora cited the lack of time as one of he r biggest challenges, especially finding time to grade her methods students’ work: “It’s de finitely hard, time management. I need to work on my grading” (Nora, In terview, 5/2/06). Like the othe r participants, I asked Nora what she would do if she had to choose be tween time for elementary students and her methods students. Nora responde d: “If I had to choose, it would be my elementary kids” (Nora Interview, 5/2/06). At no time did I feel that Nora was unprepared, but I did get a sense during the observations that she was occasionally harried. Credibility Nora was slightly concerned about her credibility with her methods students because she was not an alumnus of their t eacher education program and did not have experience teaching university courses (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). When asked to explain her feelings, Nora responded: I think that when the (methods) studen ts know that you’re not on campus, and you’re a ‘teacher teacher,’ they use you differently. I think in general there’s probably a little less respect or maybe a little less like ta king it seriously than if you were teaching on campus (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06).

PAGE 149

136 Also, while Nora’s lack of familiarity with the structure and personnel did not affect her credibility, it did challenge her logistical sk ills, such as entering grades and doing other computer-based administrative tasks. Negotiations for instructional time and freedom Interestingly, Nora did not see any need to negotiate on behalf of her methods students for instructional time or freedom (N ora, Interview, 5/2/06). Possibly, this was related to the status of social studies at Thebaut. Social studies was a required part of the daily schedule, although the social studies ti me block sometimes was interrupted to pull out students for other servi ces, including FCAT remedia tion. Given this situation, cooperating teachers tended to have daily instructional time to provide the methods students with time to teach, but because the su bject was seen as nonessential, there was less concern with the quality or c onsistency of the instruction. Advantages of filling dual roles Constantly evident during her methods inst ruction was Nora’s ab ility to capitalize on her role as a practicing elementary teacher to facilitate her methods instruction. This was apparent when, in the middle of a class discussion about the use of literature circles (a reading strategy), Nora pulled out a class set of laminated handouts she used to conduct literature circles with her fourth grade students (N ora, Class, 3/22/06). Asked about the advantages of teaching her methods course in her elementary classroom, Nora responded, “I loved it. I can’t imagine trying to teach somewhere else, like in a college class. Everything was very accessible to me…” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Nora also benefited from her role as a cooperating teacher : “I think it is an advantage that I work with interns. So I think I understand wher e they’re (methods students) coming from” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). The advantages of having an intern also were evident when

PAGE 150

137 Nora provided examples of social studies less on plans used by her previous interns (Nora, Class, 3/8/06). As mentioned earlier, one of Nora’s main successes during her methods instruction was conveying the importance of creating pr actical and meaningful social studies instruction. When asked why she thought this was such an important message for her methods students to hear, Nora said, “The students would…perk up. .Now we’re going to hear something that’s useful, it just seem ed…the students were more engaged” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Nora credited this ph ilosophy to a retiring t eacher who told her, “Nora, whatever lesson, whatever activity, wh atever great idea you have, make sure that the student output equals or exceeds your i nput into preparing it” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). During the presentations of the units at the end of the semester, it was evident her methods students understood this philosophy. On e group admitted to spending too much time preparing things for instruction that di d not enhance student le arning (Nora, Class, 4/26/06). Themes and Summary of Findings for Nora Iglesias Nora voiced practical beliefs about teach ing in general and often advised her students to focus their efforts on meaningful activities for their students. She discussed the value of social studies instruction for elem entary students, especia lly civics skills, as well as the ease and importance of using so cial studies content to practice non-fiction reading skills. Like all the ot her study participants, Nora di scussed the depressed state of elementary social studies and connected the lack of social studies w ith the poor level of civic participation in the U.S. She stated that promoting social stud ies instruction was the number one goal of her soci al studies methods course.

PAGE 151

138 Based on filling the roles of both methods instructor and practicing teacher, Nora was able to make a number of observations about the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum. While her school had been able to keep its social studies program “alive,” the time set aside for social studies sometimes was interrupted to pull out low performing students for remedial reading, writ ing, and math skills. But based on her role as a methods instructor, Nora knew this si tuation was better than other schools where almost no social studies instruction took place. Nora’s beliefs informed her practices in the social studies methods course. She believed that her main job as a methods inst ructor was to teach her students about the value of social stud ies instruction. Based on this, she taught her students instructional methods such as integrating social studies into reading instruction. Her commitment to practical and meaningful social studies instruction led Nora to offer her experiences as a classroom teacher as examples of such in struction. She also required her methods students to attend an event show casing her elementary students’ social studies work that she felt was meaningful. Nora encountered many issues during he r methods instruction. Some of these issues were related to her methods stude nts’ lack of content knowledge, which on occasion led to the inclusion of incorrect in formation in their unit plans. To overcome this challenge, Nora required students to do more research until they discovered the correct information. Chief among the issues Nora faced was the unprofessional and substandard performance of a particular student. Nora discussed three major issues related to the status of elementary social studies. At the beginning of the methods course, she no ted that her methods students did not seem

PAGE 152

139 to approach the social studies methods course as seriously as they did methods courses in other subject areas. As the semester progres sed, this perception le ssened as the interns became more aware of the importance of soci al studies. Nora voiced serious concerns about the availability of soci al studies instructional exampl es for her students at Howe Elementary. She also suggested that if so cial studies were included on the FCAT, it would possibly create more professional de velopment workshops for social studies. Finally, she discussed issues related to filling the dual roles of inservice teacher and elementary social studies methods instruct or. She expressed a desire to improve her theoretical and content knowledge of elementary social studies. She also noted several occasions when she was able to capitalize on her experience as an elementary teacher by offering practical advice to her methods st udents, but acknowledged the limitations of relying solely on practical knowledge fo r someone filling these dual roles.

PAGE 153

140 CHAPTER 7 CROSS CASE FINDINGS Introduction Chapter one introduced the study and its purpose. Chapter two discussed the literature relevant to the research questi ons. Chapter three discussed the research methodology employed. Chapters f our, five and six were the within-case findings for each of the research participants. This ch apter compares and contrasts the research findings concerning the three participants. Mo re specifically, it examines their beliefs about social studies, how these beliefs affect ed their methods instru ction, how serving in these dual roles informed them about the stat us of social studie s in the elementary curriculum, and the issues they encountered. The four research que stions organize the findings in this chapter. Findings for each of the participants were compared and contrasted with the relevant research liter ature when possible. This is followed by a discussion concerning reasons for the similari ties and differences among the participants and in relation to the re search literature. What Beliefs About Social Studies Educat ion Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? Beliefs Concerning Teaching The three participants voiced similar beliefs about teaching in general and the importance of adapting their instruction to meet students’ needs. Concerning the definition of teaching, Alexis said: “Teaching by definition, I think, is showing someone how to do something…” (Alexi s, Interview, 3/14/06). She quickly added to the definition: “It is my job to always find a way to reach every child, no matter where they

PAGE 154

141 Figure 7-1 Beliefs Concerning Teaching are, in whatever subject area that I happen to be teaching them” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). On a similar note, Dan stated: “Teaching is helping someone else gain an understanding of something new” (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06). Dan’s belief in the importance of meeting students’ instructional needs was a major theme of his instruction: “Teaching can never be the same because you teach a person. You never teach a subject to a person” (Dan, Inte rview, 3/17/06). Dan often shared this belief with his methods students: “You are going to have to change your teaching to meet your students’ needs” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). For Nora: “Teaching is helping someone to be able to do something they could not do before” (Nora, In terview, 3/16/06). Nora also agreed about the importance of meeting stude nts’ instructional needs: “I n order to help every child learn about them, we need to look at accommoda tions and make sure that there are ways

PAGE 155

142 to get to all of the student s” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06) While “Meeting the Needs of Students” was listed as an objective in the s uggested syllabus, for all three participants this was a preexisting belief. These comm ents mirror the belief s and practices of effective teachers: “Effective teachers have always considered their students' uniqueness (e.g., academic needs, talents, interests, learning styles) in planning, teaching, and evaluating lessons” (Edwards, Carr, & Siegel 2006, p. 587). Beliefs Concerning Social Studies There were slight differences in the partic ipants’ beliefs about social studies. Alexis described social studies as “ev erything that’s happening around us all the time. It’s our Figure 7-2 Beliefs Concer ning Social Studies

PAGE 156

143 social world and I think it’s the study of people and life” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Asked if her beliefs have changed in the last fi ve years, Alexis replie d: “I think that it hasn’t changed as much because (her social studies methods instructor) is the one that really showed me that it’s everything. So having that as an undergrad…really kind of shaped my thinking” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Dan reported a similar perspective: “Social studies is basically a set of…information that you need in order to become part of a social society, and the society as a whole… To me social studies is almost life” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Dan’s definition of soci al studies had changed from what he once believed: “In the past few years what I’ve kind of been developing is this definition [that] social studies happens all the time…It’s so cial skills, social awareness, social understanding. .” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Striking a slightly different note, Nora reported social studies: “is anthropology, so ciology, history, economics, and philosophy. And I think it is the field of study where pe ople learn and examine and evaluate and apply our relationship to each other and to th e world and communities” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Due to her involvemen t with the course, Nora’s definition had evolved: “My beliefs have changed in five years…probably my beliefs have changed in the last three months from teaching this class and reading th is stuff” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Dan and Alexis both expressed a more nuanced defini tion of social studies, while Nora’s comments closely reflected the NCSS (1992) defi nition of social studies (also quoted in Powerful Social Studies for Elementary Students ): “systematic study drawing upon such disciplines as anthropology, archaeol ogy, economics, geography, history, law, philosophy, political science, psychology, religi on, and sociology, as well as appropriate content from the humanities, mathematics, and natural sciences” (NCSS 1992). The

PAGE 157

144 durability of Alexis’s beliefs stemming from her positive experiences as a social studies methods student attests to the pow er of good methods instruction. Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies While discussing their beliefs about teachi ng social studies, all participants noted the need to present elementary students with a balanced and somewhat critical version of social studies content. In the context of discussing the instru ction of contr oversial issues, Dan and Alexis offered almost identical comments about presenting students with a balanced and honest depiction of historical figures: “We s hould be teaching all of the qualities that some people may have” (Dan, Clas s, 4/2/06); “When we talk to kids, we Figure 7-3 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies

PAGE 158

145 need to talk about the fact that all people have parts that are not good” (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). Nora noted the desira bility of creating independent thinkers: “That’s our goal, to get them to think for themselves” (Nora Class 4/19/06). This cr itical and balanced approach also aligned with the Lies My Teacher Told Me assignment. Numerous scholars have noted the im portance of providing students with a balanced, realistic view of c ontemporary society and histor y, arguing that if students are presented with a version of the world that is not open to interpretation, they will assume they are powerless to effect change a nd transform it (e.g., Shor 1992). Most often, teachers fear parental complaints about discussing controversial issues (McBee 1995). This fear was exemplified in a comment made by a methods student during the Lies My Teacher Told Me discussion: “A parent is going to be like, ‘Why is my kid learning this…?’” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). In addition to fears of parental retr ibution, elementary teachers often feel incapable of teaching c ontroversial topics: “Lower grade teachers often do not feel properly trai ned or prepared and reluctan t to engage controversial issues” (McBee 1995, p. 38). While participants noted many other beliefs about teaching social studies, their advocacy for presenti ng balanced and critical social studies instruction was significant. Given the methods students’ similar ethnic backgrounds, these comments might have been made to encourage the methods students to adopt a more balanced and critical social studies prac tice so they could work more effectively with diverse student populations. Each of the participants discussed the neces sity of integrating social studies into other subject areas. Nora described how so cial studies integration took place in her classroom:

PAGE 159

146 We’re working on our butterfly garden…at th e same time we had a little lesson on the place in Mexico where the monarchs mi grate every winter. And that’s locations in the world and science, so I think it’s very easy to in tegrate social studies content to other areas. (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06) Likewise Alexis discussed the ease of in tegration: “Amazing things could be done because everything is integrated into social studies” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). During class, Dan offered a similar opinion to his me thods students: “Use so cial studies to teach other things…you can if you try hard enough to make connections” (Dan, Class, 4/19/06). The subject most often suggested for inte gration was reading. When discussing the attempt by the teachers at Owen Elementary to pr eserve social studies in their curriculum, Dan noted their success with reading integrat ion: “Last year was pretty okay because we got away with it, so to speak. We taught r eading through social studies” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). During a class discussi on, Nora also promoted readi ng integration: “Remember, it is important to take every opportunity to us e social studies conten t and integrate it into your (reading) instruc tion” (Nora, Class, 3/22/06). Wh ile discussing the heavy focus on reading strategies in the me thods course, Alexis explaine d the benefit to the methods students: “So they have to apply a reading st rategy to their own content area of reading. I think that shows them that thes e kinds of strategies in teachi ng kids how to be strategic readers is easily integrated into social st udies content” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). While the participants’ belief in integration resembles chapter nine of Powerful Social Studies for Elementary Students all three spoke of experiences with integration even before their involvement with the course. Integrati on of social studies into other subject areas has long been advocated as a means of improving student learning: “A further characteristic of powerful social studies is integration” (Barton 2005, p. 26). When they

PAGE 160

147 have integrated social studies into other subject areas, “teachers should not only expect them (students) to use reading and writing in social studies, but also help them become better readers and write rs through their work in the s ubject” (Barton, 2005. p. 25). Also, social studies integration into reading at th e elementary level has been suggested as a means to improve struggling r eaders’ skills by a number of researchers (e.g., Johnson & Janisch 1998; Jones & Lapham 200 4). Reflecting the threatened status of social studies, integration into reading has most recently been promoted to ensure that social studies is taught. If teachers do not adopt in tegration, then “socia l studies, science, health and social skills are often put off to the side and forgotten” (NEA 2003, p. 292). Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods All the participants voiced the need to “save” elementary social studies through methods instruction. Nora noted the need to pr omote social studies in the face of attempts to narrow the curriculum: I think that one of my main j obs is to perpetuate the valu e that is placed on social studies, so that maybe future teachers will remember that this is a valued subject area and it shouldn’t just be cut when everything else seems more important. (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06) Dan echoed this view: “I almost think like I’m trying to save social studies, keep it in the classroom…I want them to unde rstand that social studies, like other subjects…should not be something that is re moved” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Alexis shared the same concern: “I have to convi nce them how important social studies is, no matter how often they are told it isn’t” (Ale xis, Interview, 5/10/06). The participants’ concerns are echoed in much of the releva nt literature, including Howard (2003), who noted: “As standards-based reform gains ground, so cial studies is getting squeezed in this era of standards-based education. What I consid er the most important discipline, social

PAGE 161

148 Figure 7-4 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies studies, has been treated as a second-class subject” (p. 285). Similar to Leming (1989), Howard suggested that social st udies professors are out of touc h with the reality of social studies in schools and need to do more research on how to save social studies instead of simply how to teach social studies. There was interesting unanimity in terms of the participants’ favorite social studies methods lesson. All three cited the “centers” le sson as their favorite. In this lesson the methods students experienced social studies fr om an elementary student’s perspective as they participated in activities such as wo rking with primary sources and “doing”’ an archeology dig. Alexis noted the centers lesson was the methods students’ favorite

PAGE 162

149 because “they’re actually engaging in differe nt ways to use social studies strategies” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) Nora thought the centers le sson was powerful because “in the end, from our discussion when we got back to class, it seemed like a lot of them got ideas that they were going to use in their units” (Nora, Inte rview, 3/16/06). Dan believed the centers lesson should be expanded: I just like it because it just seems…like if we could do th is every class it would be …much more meaningful…like take one of those centers every class and just build on it. It would make it more meaningful to the interns. (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Given that the centers represented different instructional methods, Dan’s comment speaks directly to the “content versus methods” de bate discussed later in this chapter. Wade (2003) explored the benefits of so cial studies methods students engaging in the activities they will one day use with elem entary students, especially with regard to advocating for social justice. Like Wade each of the participants knew active participation often promotes understandi ng and retention: “…I just know…if my…elementary school kids do it, then they ’re more likely to remember it and do it again” (Nora, Interview, 5/ 2/06). Moreover, given the lack of experience that methods students often have with elementary social studies, these centers may be the first time they have been exposed to such learning experiences. Summary The participants concurred in their beliefs about social studie s education. All held similar views about the importance of adapti ng instruction to meet students’ individual needs and having methods and elementary stude nts actively participat e in instruction. Through these two beliefs, participants demons trated what Shulman (1987) referred to as the “wisdom of practice.” Shulman describe d seven categories of knowledge that form a teacher’s “wisdom of practice. ” First, the participants’ be lief in the importance of

PAGE 163

150 meeting students’ needs is what Shulman called “knowledge of learners and their characteristics” (p. 8). This knowledge is ga ined by asking questions about students such as: “What do they already know?” and “What do they need to know in order to be successful in this lesson?” The application of this knowledge is represented by Dan’s comment that “no matter what happens, I’m never going to be doing it the same way twice” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Shulman also referred to “general pedagogical knowledge” (p. 8), which he described as “broad principles and stra tegies of classroom management and organization that appear to transcend subject matter” (p. 8). The application of this knowledge is exemp lified by Nora’s comment: “…I just know…if my…elementary school kids do it, then they ’re more likely to remember it and do it again” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/ 06). By having their methods st udents actively participate in instruction, the participants were transferri ng the knowledge they gained as elementary teachers and applying it to methods instruction. The participants’ definitions of social st udies slightly differed. Alexis and Dan offered almost identical definitions that reflected a slightly more nuanced and applied description than Nora’s, which closely refl ected the NCSS definition. The difference in these comments possibly was related to Alexis ’s and Dan’s slightly longer exposure to the social studies literature and experience te aching the course. All th ree participants also expressed a belief in the importance of a balanc ed and somewhat critical presentation of social studies content to elemen tary students. This belief is closely related to the goal of social studies articulated by NCSS (1979), which labeled th e mission of social studies education: “to engage students in analyzing and attempting to resolve the social issues confronting them" (NCSS 1979, p. 267). This mission was echoed in Dan’s statement

PAGE 164

151 that social studies is a set of skills: “To be ab le to participate, to be able to cope with problems, solve problems…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). NCSS (1989) described this goal as the development of “critical attitudes a nd analytical perspectives appropriate to analysis of the human condition” (p. 65). The participants’ comments all reflected a desire to prepare methods students to provide elementary students with social studies instruction aligned with these central goals. The participants expressed some beliefs related to the endangered status of elementary social studies. The uniformity of the participants’ belie f in integration, and their specific belief in reading as the s ubject to be integrated, may be due to the participants’ backgrounds. A ll had extensive backgrounds in reading; Dan previously served as a literacy methods instructor, Al exis focused on liter acy during her doctoral studies, and Nora was involved in improving reading instructi on at Thebaut. Given these experiences, they were most familiar with reading integration and thus more apt to suggest it to the methods students. While the integration of social studies and reading is supported in the resear ch literature (e.g., Bart on 2005), the particip ants’ selection of reading also was related to the untested stat us of social studies. Alexis made this connection for her students: “…you can tell from these units [that] integration is the key for getting it in (social studi es)…these days” (Alexis, Cla ss, 4/11/06). The participants’ belief in the importance of promoting social studies instruction through their methods instruction seems directly related to elementa ry social studies’ status as a “left behind” subject (NEA 2004).

PAGE 165

152 How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their Social Studies Methods Course? Participants gave many examples of belie fs-to-practice connections. What follows is a discussion of the beliefs that had the gr eatest effect on their practices, both as a group and individually. Shared Belief-to-Practice Connections Figure 7-5 Belief-to-Practi ce Connections Shared All the participants shared beliefs in th e importance of social studies instruction and the need to promote social studies thr ough their methods instruct ion. Alexis validated her belief in the importance of social studies as follows : “because everything we do is within a social world” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Dan struck a similar tone: “It has a role in everything that all of your students do all day. So if you ignore it, you’re really going to hurt your students in the long run” (D an, Interview, 3/17/06). Nora lamented the effects of the current situation: “I think it’s tragic that wh at is going to happen is we are…basically raising a genera tion of children who are going to grow up to be citizens who may or may not know how somebody gets to be president” (A lexis, Interview, 5/10/06). All three also disc ussed the need to promote social studies through their methods instruction: “My main job is to perp etuate the value that is placed on social

PAGE 166

153 studies” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06); “I have to convince them how important social studies is” (Alexis, In terview, 5/10/06). Based on these shared beliefs, each part icipant engaged in similar practices reflecting those beliefs. Dan urged his students: “Remember, you guys have to do this…social studies will allow you to get to know your students better, and it will be the only subject some of your students will like; you can’t leave it out” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). Nora cited the need for civic skills: “If you do not have social studies, you are going to have kids who can’t participate in society…” (Nora, Class, 3/22/06). Alexis appealed to the methods students’ sense of duty: “You n eed to work hard to include it (social studies); if you don’t, you are not doing your job to prepare th em for real life” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). Based on their shared belief in the need to promote social studies through their methods instruction, each partic ipant included either reminders or instruction to enable their methods students to “fit” social studi es into their curriculum. Alexis included reminders about the need for integration: “Y ou need to know how to effectively integrate this stuff (social studies) into reading, or you will not have time to teach it” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). Dan included instruction abou t how to actually negotiate for instructional freedom and time to include social studies: “I have to teach them how to negotiate in addition to what social st udies is and how to do it…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Consistent with her belief in meaningful instruction, Nora reminded her students: “You guys are going to have to work hard to integrate…and make sure they are having meaningful social studies e xperiences…because if you guys do not do it (social studies), it is not going to happen” (Nora, Class, 3/8/06).

PAGE 167

154 Individual Belief-to-Practice Connections In addition to their shared beliefs an d the resultant practices, each of the participants expressed individua l beliefs connected to practices that served as a theme for their instruction. Dan Figure 7-6 Belief-to-Practice Connection Dan If any one belief characteri zed Dan’s methods instructi on, it was the importance of meeting individual students’ n eeds. Explaining this belief, Dan stated: “One of the big things that I think about teaching is that no matter what happens, I’m never going to be doing it the same way twice” (Dan, Intervie w, 3/17/06). This belief was directly connected to Dan’s practice of surveying his methods students about their learning styles: At the beginning of the semester, I give sort of, at the first cla ss, actually, I give a reflection…It asks the students how they a ppreciate learning best. What I think [I understand] their learning style…that’s how I try to craft the rest of the semester.…So I…kind of tailor it to where part of the cl ass would be one way, part of the class would be [an]other and some classes would be…diffe rent, but I figured for them to make the most meaning out of the content I had to help meet their learning styles just like any other kid. (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) The other participants also believed in the importance of meeting students’ needs, but for Dan this belief was the central them e of his methods instruction. Dan’s actions reflect those of effective teachers as described by Tomlinson (1999). Tomlinson explained that effective teachers use technique s that allow them to meet their students’ needs, such as the engagement of students through different learni ng modalities, multiple

PAGE 168

155 approaches to all aspects of lessons, stude nt-centered lessons, a combination of whole class, group, and individual in struction, and a proactive rath er than reactive attitude. These techniques closely resemble Dan’s effort s to meet the needs of his students. Nora Figure 7-7 Belief-to-Practice Connection Nora Nora’s belief in the importance of practi cal and meaningful instruction served as the main theme for her methods instruction. No ra verbalized this belief: “…one thing I’ve stressed that I haven’t mentioned is the prac tical aspect to life in the real world of teaching” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). This belief surfaced in Nora’s methods instruction, with comments such as: “Make it cost effec tive” (Nora, Class, 3/8/ 06). This belief was buttressed by Nora’s belief in the importa nce of meaningful instruction: “If it is meaningful, they’re going to remember it mo re” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). To provide her methods students with examples of meani ngful instruction, Nora had them all attend the “Florida Folk Festival” at Thebaut Elem entary, where her fourth-grade elementary students “make boards and dress up and teach ab out the Civil War in Florida, teach about the citrus industry” (Nor a, Interview, 3/16/06). Nora’s focus on practical concerns st rongly resembles Doyle and Ponder’s (1977– 78) practicality ethic. While discussing the adoption of changes in practice, Doyle and Ponder stated that changes in schools also mu st pass teachers’ test of the practicality ethic, which is based on three criteria: instrumentality, congruence, and cost.

PAGE 169

156 Instrumentality relates to how well the innovation is explaine d to teachers. Congruence is how well the innovation fits th e teacher’s existing beliefs and practices. Cost measures the ratio of effort to results for the inn ovation. Cuban (1986) applie d this ‘practicality ethic’ to the adoption of technology, expl aining that teachers adopt new technology “when a technological innovation helped them do a better job of what they already decided had to be done and matched their vi ew of daily classroom realities” (p. 66). Nora’s practicality ethic most closely resembles Doyle and Ponder’s notion of “cost.” She attributed the origin of her practicality et hic to the wisdom offered to her by a retiring teacher; during the final interview, Nora re called a story she shared with her methods students in which the teacher offered this advice: “Whatever less on, whatever activity, whatever great idea you have, make sure the student output equals or exceeds your input into preparing it…I think that has helped me survive in this job” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Alexis Figure 7-8 Belief-to-Practice Connection Alexis Alexis demonstrated strong beliefs ab out the need to teach for enduring understanding through generalizatio ns. “My main job as a methods instructor is to get them to understand they are teaching for mean ing, not memorization” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Based on this belief, Alexis provided her students with multiple examples of teaching for understanding through the use of generalizations. “When I teach them about

PAGE 170

157 generalizations, I try to give them as many examples as possible of powerful generalizations…so they understand it…going over facts to concep ts, concepts to generalizations…I modeled the lesson by giving them definiti ons of facts, concepts, and generalizations. I stressed that facts can be seen as the lowest form of knowledge, that concepts grow from facts, and that genera lizations are drawn from concepts” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). With this instruction, Alexis hoped to ensure that her methods students understood an approach that is re flected in the research on teaching for generalizations (Benson 2003). Influence of Course Materials on Beliefs While determining the exact source of the pa rticipants’ beliefs wa s not the focus of this study, the data indicated as much when one of the explicitly stated beliefs aligned with the suggested course material. As disc ussed in Chapter 3, a need exists to have structured course materials pr ovided to instructors with limited backgrounds in social studies; undoubtedly, these cour se materials influenced th e participants to varying degrees. However, they did not determine the main themes common to all participants or even specific to each individua l participant. Wolk (1998) identified a similar experience while working with sixth grade teachers: What was taught in each of those classr ooms was very different versions of the same official curriculum. On paper we were teaching the same content, but in reality there were differe nces, many of which were profound (emphasis in original), differences in what was being taught in those five classrooms. (p. 51–52) In terms of “saving social studies” with their methods instruction, the provided course materials did not heavily reflect th is theme, but the participants’ firsthand knowledge and experiences concer ning the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum did. In addition, the common theme of integrating social studies into other

PAGE 171

158 subject areas aligned with the provided materials, yet all three participants discussed preexisting beliefs and experien ces with integration. The provided materials affirmed the participants’ beliefs in integr ation, giving them the tools to promote integration with their methods students. Moreover, the themes partic ular to each particip ant—meeting students’ needs, practical and meaningful instruc tion, and teaching for ge neralization—were all preexisting beliefs. While these findings suppor t a relationship between the participants’ beliefs and the provided materials, there was no clear “cause and effect” in terms of the materials. Summary Evidence suggests a strong belief-to-practice connection for all participants. All participants shared a belief in the importance of social studies instru ction and the need to promote social studies through their methods instruction, and each engaged in similar practices reflecting these belie fs. In addition, each voiced indi vidual beliefs connected to practices serving as a theme for their inst ruction. According to Stern and Shavelson (1983), teachers are professi onals who make judgments based on the uncertain and complex school and classroom contexts they inhabit; forming their beliefs and these judgments are the basis of their classroom be havior and instructional practices. Stern and Shavelson’s (1983) findings echo those of a nu mber of other researchers (see Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark & Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Fang 1996; Leming 1989; Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Richards on 1996; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000).

PAGE 172

159 How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? Information Concerning the Status of Elem entary Social Studies and Channels of Communication Due to the pervasive influence of account ability systems on elementary social studies understanding how the participants received information about the status of elementary social studies and what beliefs they have based on this information is important to understand. While se rving in these dual roles, participants were privy to unique information about the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum and this information came to them to through various channels. Dan recognized that, in the past, the district allowed more time for soci al studies instruction: “…a couple years ago they had a different schedule…but everyone in Owen Elementary and More Cooperative School had social studies time blocks” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). However, according to Dan, “If you follow all the procedures perfectly there is no time for social studies…I think 20 minutes or 15 minutes, some amount of time that’s impossible to do anything” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan also recognized how the mandated schedule negatively affected the ability of methods stude nts to observe social studies: Last year when I taught the social studi es course, everyone at our school actually was in classrooms where there was time to get into social studies. This year, the interns are having to rework their schedules so they can see social studies even if it is happening, much less participate in it and do their units. (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Alexis asserted that social studies instruc tion varied greatly in quality even at Petty, a school somewhat sheltered from testing pressures (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Meanwhile, both Dan and Nora reported information that alarmed them about the status of social studies: Due to pressure a nd the increasing level of oversight, teachers

PAGE 173

160 were losing their freedom to integrate social studies into other s ubjects. According to Dan: We taught reading through social studies. So we would do units on something and we would do…comprehension strategies and th ings [like] that…B ut this year we were unable to do that because of—I don’t know if the guidelines are stricter or the monitoring is tighter or what …we were told before that we were not allowed to do that because if we have a different group of students that we teach for reading or for social studies, we were unable to ov erlap them… (Dan, In terview, 3/17/06) Nora reported a similar situation: “I wish that we could integrat e it (social studies) like they used to into the reading and the ma th, but there’s just so much accountability and we have to teach these skills, and so on…” (Nora, Interview, 3/ 16/06). Nora also had firsthand information about decisions made concerning which students have access to social studies instruction: Unfortunately, it always happens with th e lower performing students being taken out of social studies, and that does happen here. I will say social studies is taught when our Title I low readers go to Title I classes or other services… (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Testing pressure also influenced the coope rating teachers’ ability to teach social studies. According to Dan, “most of the ment or teachers that I know who love teaching social studies…think it’s really valuable, thi nk it’s very important. Bu t they feel like they can’t teach it because of the other things…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Dan realized that hosting a methods student could actually cr eate space for the cooperating teacher, thus enabling social studies instruction in the face of pressure not to teach it. He illustrated how a cooperating teacher could negotiate such space: “I have to do this because I told the university that I would let [the methods students] fulfill their requirements” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). He added that some c ooperating teachers allow the methods students to teach their units “regardless of whatever pressure they might have from their CRT or principal…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06).

PAGE 174

161 Finally, Nora also noted th at filling these dual roles helped her to identify the differences in the status of social studies at Thebaut and Howe Elementary: Because of the choices that the Howe facu lty or principal make or…sometimes the county dictates stuff that you have no cont rol over, but their reading program is called Success for All…so that requires many hours in the morning…so when you make choices like that as a blanket thing for an entire school, you’re limited [in the ability to teach social studies], and it’s not the teacher’s fault. (Nora Interview, 5/2/06) This insight highlights the importance th at contextual factors play in both obstructing and promoting elementa ry social studies practice. Serving in these dual roles opened many cha nnels for the participants, granting them access to information concerning the status of social studies in the elementary curriculum. As teachers, these participants worked “in the trenches” and were aware of how actual social studies in struction occurred. Often, Dan received mandates that squarely focused all reading instruction on sk ills needed for the FCAT test: “We have people who are constantly reminding us: you ha ve to be doing reading. And reading is not this. Reading is not that. Reading is not the other” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Dan also knew of mandates prescribing in structional time that, if fo llowed, would leave little time for social studies instruction: “We received littl e nasty letters lately saying that we are to teach 90 minutes of direct reading instru ction…I don’t know where it comes from…I’m sure it’s from the county office, but I don’t kno w that for a fact” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Meanwhile, as a teacher Nora has learned about school-specific cu rricular decisions made about social studies; “I think, unfortunately, that th e purpose right now for social studies is the time that you can pull kids out to do re-teaching for reading skills for FCAT…” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Her di scussions with other teachers at “low

PAGE 175

162 Figure 7-9 Channels of Communication performing” schools led her to understand that “it’s really bad at some schools in that social studies is] usually the first th ing to go” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). As methods instructors, the participants had access to informa tion about how social studies was being taught at the schools wher e their methods students were placed. Based on information gained from her methods students, Alexis stated: “I think teaching social studies ‘traditionally’ happens more at Elise” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). She also had a window into her colleagues’ classrooms at Petty (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). In her role

PAGE 176

163 as a methods instructor, she became uniquely aware of how social studies was taught there: A teacher here at Petty whose students I had was constantly asking me, “What is it you’re really expecting of them?” She di d not really understand what the students were doing, which gave me an idea of what she really [was] doing in her classroom…(Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06) Nora also learned about the amount of so cial studies taught at Howe from her methods students: Some of them said “we see it once a w eek.” Some of them said “it’s in the afternoon.”…Some of them said that their teacher, their team, or their grade level or whatever rotated, like a month of scie nce and then a month of social studies. (Nora Interview, 5/2/06) Meanwhile, Dan discussed a more longitudina l view of the situation as a result of his long-term experience in Dennis County a nd his work as a methods instructor: Being the methods instructor and by experien cing and by looking at all the trends over time, over other places…I can see what’s happening. I think other teachers right now don’t see what’s happening with social studies…They don’t realize that it’s really being swep t under the rug. (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Through these channels of communication, th e participants became aware of unique information about social studies, which led to their beliefs about the status of social studies. Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum Based on this information the participants he ld particular beliefs about the status of social studies in the elementa ry curriculum. Dan effectivel y summarized the participants’ beliefs about the status of social studies: “It’s almost like, shh hh, we’re doing social studies – don’t look!” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) This attitude reflected the reality that, in certain schools, testing pressure has driv en social studies instruction “underground.” Alexis expressed concern about her ability as a methods instructor to effect change: “…it

PAGE 177

164 makes me wonder what we can really do” (Ale xis, Interview, 3/14/06). Nora echoed this sentiment as well: “Oh, it’s disgusting. Makes me want to cry. Both social studies and science, I believe, should be part of the curriculum…” (Nora, Interview 3/16/06). The participants’ experiences allowed them to understand how little social studies instruction actually occurred: “I think that it has definitely made me see how important it is and how much it isn’t happening” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) This knowledge was difficult for Dan: “Pretty much the biggest struggle…is knowing that there’s less and less of it happening…” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). According to Nora, the source of the pressure to reduce social studi es instruction was “like a poli tical agenda, obviously not a purpose that I agree with. But I do think that’s why social st udies has been cut so much and put on the back burner…” (Nora, Interv iew 3/16/06). Dan also expressed similar beliefs, but applied them to his school set ting: “Because of thes e bureaucratic issues, we’re having to change the way we’re teaching” (Dan, Inte rview, 3/17/06). The participants’ comments reflected and c onfirmed much of the current research about the status of social st udies in the elementary curricu lum. With the recent push for more accountability, NCLB has been the worst thing that has ever happened to social studies. Unfortunately, NCLB accelerated a preexisting downturn in social studies education, noted by Houser in 1995 when he documented how elementary social studies was losing ground to other subjects in the curr iculum even then. In addition, it is evident that social studies enjoyed a more promin ent status in the curriculum in 1995. The participants’ remarks about how test ing pressure was reducing the amount of social studies instruction confirm previous research in similar contexts (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). Nora’s comments about how

PAGE 178

165 political influence has accelerated the decline of social studies have been corroborated by such social studies experts as Jesus Ga rcia, former president of the NCSS: What has happened with No Child Left Behi nd is that someone has made a political decision that reading, writing, and arithmetic are the core subjects that we need to spend a considerable amount of time and money on in grades three through eight. And it put social studies on the back burner. (Pascopella, 2005, p. 30) Indeed, this created a situation in which methods students have difficulty teaching a subject they have never even seen taught. Given that the absence of social studies from accountability measures will continue to obstruct elementary social studies teachi ng, the participants commented on the issue of adding social studies to account ability programs. All three par ticipants agreed that this would increase the amount of actual instruct ion and overall focus on th e subject, but they also voiced a uniform concern about the effect this would have on the nature of social studies instruction and the ability of a standardized test to capture true un derstanding: If social studies is going to be taken seriously as a subjec t that needs to be taught…that is going to be th e thing (FCAT) that springs it off…but I don’t really think that true understanding of generalizat ions and true understanding of people in social studies can really be assessed a whole lot on a writ ten test. (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) In addition, Dan commented on the need to have prescribed time for social studies: I think if it was put on the FCAT, it w ould be sort of a doubled-edged sword, because it would be taught more in classr ooms, it would be more of a priority in classrooms, it would be something that would be on your prescribed curriculum schedule, but at that same time it might be cheapened…because it will probably just assess standards which will be facts/concepts. It probably won’t be able to assess the generalizations the kids take away because how can you assess that with a standardized test? You can’t (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) Nora concurred: “I don’t think it will impr ove social studies instruction. But I think it will improve the daily schedules…Quality, I don’t know. You can do a lot of harm if you teach social studies inappropriately and ineffectively” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06).

PAGE 179

166 Nora responded in a similar manner when her methods students asked the same question: “I’m not excited about more testing…but I am happy it will get the subject area more attention” (Nora, Class, 3/8/ 06). Alexis also framed the dilemma similarly: “What is it going to take?. .It’s going to have to be test ed on the FCAT, and I think that’s the most horrible thing they could do…” (A lexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Summary While fears concerning a narrowly concei ved assessment are valid, some recent research also contends that no strict correlation exists be tween high-stakes testing and poor instruction. Barton, for example, has argue d that, “There is no necessary connection between content standards and high-stakes tests on the one hand, and low-level, rote instruction on the other” (2005, p. 29). More over, some research has suggested that assessment mandates can, in certain cases, s timulate and possibly improve instruction. One such example was provided by Libresco: “I found evidence to illustrate how an exceptional teacher has been able to move in significantly new di rections, and…turn the test mandates into stimuli for new and expande d wise practices in social studies” (2005, p. 33). While the evidence suggest ing that testing social stud ies narrows the curriculum and limits teaching practice is persuasive a nd abundant, educators and decision makers should consider possible alternatives, give n the current absence of social studies instruction from a majority of elementary classrooms.

PAGE 180

167 What Do These Inservice Teachers Belie ve are the Issues They Encountered While Teaching the Methods Course? Issues Related to Methods Students The following section discusses some of th ese issues and their effects on methods instruction. Figure 7-10 Issues Related to Methods Students Conservative social beliefs and liberal social beliefs One stark contrast among the three methods classes was the nature of the comments in reference to the book Lies My Teacher Told Me The methods students in Dan’s and Alexis’s classes voiced quite conservative beliefs, while students in Nora’s class expressed more liberal beliefs. Typical of the comments made by Dan and Alexis’s methods students were: “Kids will end up fighting over history…” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06); “Do you really think she would teach her kids th is stuff, like all the Indians die. .now go home and have a feast?” (A lexis, Class, 3/07/06). Only twice did I ever step out of my ro le as silent observer to participate. Following the above comment in Alexis’s clas s, I prompted the student to ask Alexis what she teaches about Thanksgiving. Oblig ing me, the student asked Alexis: “How do you teach this…with all the bad stuff?” (Alexis, Class, 3/07 /06). Alexis responded: “I do not teach Thanksgiving. .I teach a unit about immigration” (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06), and

PAGE 181

168 she proceeded to explain how and why she di d this unit. Reflecting on these comments during their final interviews, Al exis and Dan made similar observations: “They held their experiences as stronger, so they thought that this guy (Loewen) was the one who was lying, not their classroom t eachers” (Dan, Interview, 5/ 4/06); “it just shows how ingrained those beliefs are and how difficult it is to change beliefs…” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Paradoxically, many of the students in Alexis’s class began the semester wanting to know “how to not teach ‘white man’s history’” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). In contrast, the students in Nora’s class e xpressed liberal beliefs when discussing the book and agreed with its perspective; for exam ple: “This book made me really think hard about why I was taught the version of histor y I was…because I was in a mostly White school” (Nora, Class, 4/12/06). The conservative social beliefs voiced by Da n’s and Alexis’s students reflected the conservative and traditional nature of teach ers in general (e.g., Cuban 1984; Cuban 1993; Goodlad 1990; Lortie 1975; Owens 1997; Sarason 1996). The disconnect between Alexis’s methods students’ comments about the book and their prof essed desire to not teach “white man’s history” also is s upported in the literature (e.g., Hinchey 2004). Moreover, teaching the traditiona l narrative of history supports a status quo that thus far had served these mostly middle-class white st udents well, as was represented in this comment: “You want kids to question things, but not everything” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). These beliefs make it difficult for methods st udents to accept one of the main goals of social studies education: “t o prepare young people to identif y, understand, and work to solve problems facing our diverse nation in an increasingly interdependent world” (NCSS 1994, p. 159). The inability of some methods st udents to accept information contrary to

PAGE 182

169 their particular world view makes teaching fo r this goal difficult, and may explain “the tendency among teachers to function as profession al ideologists, apologists for, or at least preservers of the status quo” (Gins burg & Newman 1985, p. 49). Also, conservative social beliefs often interfere with the methods students’ abil ity to reconcile their teaching practices with the goals of social studies. Dan recalled a student who needed to be “in charge” during instruction, and the fact that “her whole philosophy of teaching interfered with the idea of what social st udies is” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). The contrasting nature of the public co mments made by stude nts in the three different classes cannot be attrib uted to the instructors’ ethn icities or public dispositions on related issues, though those were similar. The decisive factor was a subtle difference in the students themselves. Nora’s class had a majority of female, middle-class, White students, but there also were two female African American and two female Hispanic students. While the simple presence of minor ity students did not cha nge the tone of the conversation in other classes, the outspoken natu re of these four particular students could have been an important factor in Nora ’s class. During the presentation of the Lies My Teacher Told Me chapter concerning the invisibility of racism in American textbooks, an African American student’s voice cracked with emotion as she stated: “Some of the things in this book made me mad; these are things I should have known as a child” (Nora, Class, 4/19/06). It is impossibl e to know whether the shift in the class’s opinion could be attributed to this or any other incident, but this stud ent’s comments had a noticeable impact on her classmates. Content vs. methods tension All the participants noted a lack of knowledge concerning the content of the disciplines that make up social studies. This compromised the participants’ abilities to

PAGE 183

170 instruct the methods students in how to te ach social studies. While there is content knowledge specific to all the social studies di sciplines, lack of historical content was most conspicuous. As Nora noted, “They actually know a whole… lot less than I do” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Dan noted a sim ilar situation: “They have had a real, real weak, limited background in the social studies we’ve taught. And they’ve had to do a lot of work to figure things out ” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Due to this lack of content knowledge, the participants often had to corr ect historical inaccuracies in lesson plans before they could be taught. How best to address the situation was bro ached during the interviews. Alexis made an astute observation as sh e highlighted the two major i ssues creating the problem: “I don’t know how much more we can add onto th e (teacher education) program. I don’t know that one class in anythi ng is sufficient knowledge to prepare teachers” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis’s concerns about overload in the teacher education program was confirmed by a student’s comment: “All th ese classes run together for me…” (Dan, Class, 4/19/06). Nora offered an interesti ng solution to the problem, based on feedback she received from her methods students: [O]ver half said they felt…they have already done [these strategies] in other methods classes…I think it would be more meaningful to take out those weekly assignments and do some sort of content knowledge every week on a different part of history or different topic. (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06) Thornton (2001) addressed this issue effectively: “What, in particular, do they need to study in the subject matters of the social sciences?…and what should they learn about its effective direction to desired results, th at is, method?” (p. 72) The problem begins before the students get to the methods course because of the wide variety of disciplines associated with social science: “What teachers study of the social sciences in their liberal

PAGE 184

171 arts courses may be only loosely coupled with the school social studi es courses they are expected to teach” (p. 74). Like Alexis, Thor nton is concerned that methods courses are overburdened, and: “frequently the very idea of preparation in method is regarded as intellectually lightweight” (p. 75). Thornton comes down in favor of a focus on method over content: “There is simply no alternativ e to the thorough education of teachers in the subject matters of the curricu lum, methods, and their inte rrelationships” (p. 78). This particular issue needs more examination and wi ll continue to challenge teacher educators for the foreseeable future. Students’ negative experience s with Social Studies Like Owens (1997), the methods students’ negative experiences when they were school children challenged th e participants’ methods inst ruction. Most often, these negative experiences stemmed fr om poor instruction and dampened their enthusiasm to teach the subject. While recalling an activity during the first class, Nora commented: “I’d say over half of them had negative experien ces that they shared” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). These negative experi ences included reading a text book and answering questions listed in the back, or memorization activities. As Dan explained: “It was all segmented. There were no connections. It was…I had to know the states and capitals” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Many of the methods prof essors featured in Chapter Two noted that such negative experiences created difficu lty for elementary social studies methods instruction (Benson 1998; McArthur 2004; Owens 1997; Slekar 2006). Student behavior One case of student behavior offered a chal lenge for one of the participants. Nora had a methods student who often showed up la te for class and often failed to hand in assignments. Nora recognized this problem be havior early in the semester: “So, being a

PAGE 185

172 fourth-grade teacher, I did my early identific ation and realized he was going to be a challenge” (Nora, Interview, 5/ 2/06). Nora kept him after cl ass and explained: “These are the things you’re missing, a nd you really need to get thes e things turned in” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Unfortunately, her efforts were to no avail; the student was absent the next class and did not hand in any work. At th is point, Nora realized that she “needed to talk to (the subject area coor dinator)” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). After administrative action, the student handed in the work, and Nora learned an important lesson: “I learned a lot [about] how to deal with a college student that is not behaving correctly. And it’s a little different than dealing with fourth gr aders that aren’t behaving correctly” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). None of the other instructors had similar problems; fortunately, Nora’s difficulty with this student was an isolated event. Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and the Field Placement The status of social studies in the elemen tary curriculum and its effects on methods students’ field placements are di scussed in this sec tion, as are issues so lely related to the field placement. Lack of professional developmen t for elementary Social Studies The lack of professional development presen ted a challenge to participants’ social studies practices in their role s as teachers and as methods instructors. A ll participants noted the lack of professional development for social studies Alexis could not remember ever attending a teacher in-service for soci al studies: “Nothing district-sponsored, for sure” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Nora ma de a similar complaint: “There’s so few inservices and things like that focused on specifically teaching social studies” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). While Dan remembered at tending in-services in the past, he wished

PAGE 186

173 Figure 7-11 Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and the Field Placement that there were more provided by the distri ct (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Asked why she believed there were so few in-services for soci al studies, Alexis stat ed: “My first response is that I think it is because it’s not te sted on FCAT; nobody cares about it” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Clearly, th e participants believed that this lack of professional development opportunity limited their ability to expand and grow as instructors of social studies, and also limited the ability of th eir elementary colleagues who served as cooperating teachers to do the same. The lack of professional development for so cial studies instruc tion has been noted in the literature. This creates a problem fo r teachers who wish to improve their social studies skills. These teachers must either st udy social studies literat ure or seek out and pay for professional development on their own (Knighton 2003; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). The similarity of the participants’ remark s and the reflection of those remarks in the research literature undersc ore the pervasiveness of the problem.

PAGE 187

174 Lack of time and respect fo r elementary Social Studies A major challenge to the participants’ methods inst ruction was the lack of instructional time given to the methods st udents by cooperating teachers. This issue surfaced during the students’ presentations of their units: “We only had thirty minutes” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06); “we wish we would have had more time” (Nora, Class, 4/26/06); “we have to focus down due to time constrai nts” (Dan, Class, 4/ 26/06). This situation severely limited the methods students’ abil ity to teach in an in-depth manner. The three participants also reported a sub tle, but noticeable, lack of respect for social studies related to the fact that the subject was not included on the FCAT test. Dan and Alexis both recalled situations in wh ich students would state their concerns about investing instructional time in social studies for fear of losi ng time that could be devoted to FCAT preparation. One such incident occu rred in Alexis’s class: “One of them was concerned that taking time to do extended projec ts would detract from ‘real learning’ that they needed to show on the FCAT” (Alexi s, Interview, 3/14/06). Dan recalled many incidents “where a lot of people would bri ng up the FCAT, and ‘we can’t do that because of the FCAT’” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). Nora also believed that this lack of respect was related to the untested status : “Until it’s tested and used for accountability purposes, I do not think that it will have th e respect. I do not think it will get the attention” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06). Both issues are directly related to the impe riled status of elementary social studies (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004). The lack of inst ructional time has been attributed to testing pressure: “Members of visiting accred itation teams have heard administrators and faculty proudly announce that they do not teach any social studies or science in elementary school because they focus all th eir attention and energy on reading and math”

PAGE 188

175 (Fritzer & Kumar 2002, p. 51). Moreover, this s ituation is more prevalent in schools with poor test scores “where nearly half of the prin cipals report moderate or large decreases in social studies instruction” (NEA 2004, p. 27). Indeed, Pascopella was correct when she stated: “It’s a crisis. Social studies, particul arly in the elementary grades, has been pushed to the back burner in schools” (2005, p. 30). Other field placement issues The lack of examples of social studie s instruction was an issue for all the participants during the entire course, as ev idenced by the comments of methods students in class discussions. During the presentations of the units at the end of the semester, the issue became more troubling when some student s revealed that their social studies unit was the only social studies teaching that occurred in their field placement the entire semester: “They never had social studies, except what we did…” (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06); “we never saw any social studies” (N ora, Class, 4/26/06). Also, the complete absence of social studies was more prevalent in the lower grades: “We are in first grade and they do not ever have social studies” (Dan, Class, 4/26/06). Again, the participants’ comments are refl ected in the literature. The lack of instructional examples could also be related to cooperating teachers’ si mple lack of desire to teach the subject. Owens ( 1997) reported: “A third of th e participants (33.3 percent) reported their directing teachers were either "uninterested" or "v ery uninterested" in teaching social studies” (p. 117). Also the total absence of social studies from classrooms has also been reported: “In many cases, social studies was granted thirty minutes a week or was not part of the weekly schedule at all” (Yendol-Hoppe y & Tilford 2004, p. 22). This situation also impacted the connection to what was st udied in the methods course: “This made connecting what they were l earning in methods coursework difficult”

PAGE 189

176 (Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford, 2004, p. 22), a nd “counterproductive” (Owens, 1997, p. 117). A field placement issue not di rectly related to the status of social studies was the practice of cooperating teachers mandating either the content or instructional methods of the interns’ social studies units: “It was our onl y option to do [it] because this is the only unit they do this semester” (Nora, Class, 4/19/06). In some cases, the cooperating teachers required the methods students to stick to the textbook for content and instructional methods: “She just wants us to teach about what the book taught” (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). In other cases, the cooperati ng teacher mandated the c ontent, instructional method, and amount of instructional time. As one methods student explained: “We had to stay within the constraints we were given” (Dan, Class, 4/26/06). This is not limited to social studies at the elementary level. In their 1997 study, Yeager and Wilson noted a similar situation at the secondary level: “Cooperating teachers actively discouraged th e use of inquiry-based teaching me thods and considered them to be too impractical or ineffi cient” (p. 124). Owens (1997) illustrates how the current situation may be more troubling than in the past: “Over 30 percent of the participants were placed with directing teachers whom they described as having a ‘traditional’ teaching style” (Owens 1997, p. 117). An unexpected issue that surfaced during th e semester related to lower elementary placements, especially kindergarten. Methods st udents in these placements had difficulty assessing the developmental level of their students, and thus with choosing a developmentally appropriate topic and le ssons for their unit. The problem was commented on by methods students in a kinderg arten placement as they discussed their

PAGE 190

177 unit: “We should have done baby steps” (Nora, Class, 4/26/06). Alexis was able to address the situation w ith some of the methods students who sought extra help. During the final interview, Alexis described the difference between the units of the methods students who approached her for help and others who did not: If you looked at the two units side by side, one was 40,000 times better than the other because they really had a grasp of where K stude nts’ development is…where the other ones started a lesson, had abso lutely no idea, co uld not understand why the kindergarten students did not understa nd what a community was, and had to really regroup. (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06) The selection of the unit topi c was particularly difficult for the methods students. Nora stated: “So it’s definitely difficult. And I know some of my students had a tough time coming up with…the appropriate curric ulum topic” (Interview, 5/2/06). Some methods students underestimated the abilities of their students: “They don’t seem like their kids can do it. They almost feel like…we ha ve to teach them to read first or they just play” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). The inability of elementary social studi es methods students to effectively assess and deliver developmentally a ppropriate instruction has not been fully explored in the social studies literature. However, the pla nning and delivery of appr opriate instruction to kindergarten students has been addressed for a variety of topics, such as map skills (Bohan 2001) and the workings of the post offi ce (Maple 2005). Indeed, this unexpected issue was accentuated by the disproportiona te number of kindergarten placements in relation to other grade levels. Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles The issues discussed in this section relate to filling the dual roles of in-service elementary teacher and elementary so cial studies methods instructor.

PAGE 191

178 Figure 7-12 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles Content and theoretical knowledge Like the methods students, the particip ants felt that they lacked a deep understanding of all the di sciplines associated with social studies. This perceived lack of knowledge extended to the theoretical foundations of elementary social studies. When the topic of theoretical knowledge arose, the par ticipants expressed similar concerns. Asked if she felt a need to expand he r theoretical knowledge, Nora re plied: “Definitely” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). To the same questi on, Dan noted that he often understood the theoretical material and how it connected to his practice as an elementary teacher, but he was not familiar with “all the names (of the theorists) and such” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06). This issue also affected Alexis’s methods pr actice: “Sometimes I feel like I am talking about things I do not have a lot of dept h of knowledge about” (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06).

PAGE 192

179 Elementary social studies methods instru ctors’ theoretical an d content knowledge has not been discussed in the literature. Participants’ difficulties were surely related to those of the methods students as discussed by Thornton (2005). In addition, this issue also relates to the particip ants’ individual backgrounds. As noted earlier, both Dan and Nora had methods instruction that they desc ribed as “poorly taught ” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06) and “not real thrilled with” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) This situation contributed to their lack of theoretical knowledge. Howe ver, Alexis had methods instruction she described as “inspiring” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Interestingly, when the participants did note strength in a particular content area it was related to specific aspects of their personal or professional background. When discussing their content knowledge, both Nora and Dan noted strength in their knowledge of Florida history, which is cover in 4th grade. Moreover, Alexis noted strength rela ted to her experiences in high school. Asked if the content knowledge she gain ed in high school affected he r social studies instruction, Alexis replied: “Definitely” (A lexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Limited time Time to devote to methods instruction pres ented a challenge to all the participants. Both Alexis and Nora cited time as their greatest challenge: “Time is my biggest disadvantage” (Alexis, Intervie w, 3/14/06); “time would be the biggest thing” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Dan noted a similar ch allenge: “Time is really tough” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). The time issue was most often associated with grading the methods students’ work. Nora noted difficulty with the issue on more than one occasion: “Time management and I need to work on my grading” (Nora, Interview, 5/ 2/06). In the context of a stressful day, Alexis commented: “Thinking about getting all thes e units graded next week…just sends me over the edge…for my stress level…” (A lexis, Class, 4/4/06). Dan

PAGE 193

180 noted that the time crunch required him to ta ke work home on the weekend: “Yeah, time is really tough…Saturda y, I’ll check their papers” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). When asked if they had to choose between their methods instruction and elementary instruction, all participants made the same decision: “I alwa ys made my kids the first priority” (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06); “if I had to choose, it woul d be my elementary ki ds” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/06,); “my priority is my original students, not necessa rily my master’s students” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06) The similarities of the participants’ comments only underscore the rigorous requirements of filling these dual roles. The time challenges of inservice teachers also serving as methods instructors has not been explored in the literature. Moreover, while this issue did pr esent a legitimate con cern, I concluded that the participants’ concerns were related mos tly to their own high expectations for both their elementary and methods practice. Credibility Instead of negatively affec ting their credibility with the methods students, the participants’ status as inservice teachers for the most part seemed to enhance their credibility. Asked about this i ssue, Alexis reported: “It’s am azing. I think that they listen more to what I say because I am actually doi ng this work every day than they would to somebody who was a professor and was at the university” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Nora reported that using her own classroom for methods in struction even helped her credibility: “I loved it. I can ’t imagine trying to teach somewhere else, like in a college class” (Nora, Interview, 5/2/ 06). Dan noted that his shared priority with the methods students enhanced his credibility and the abilit y of the methods students to relate to him: “My most important priority is getting it (soc ial studies) into my ki ds, and a lot of the interns; that’s where they are right now…it’s harder for them to connect to what

PAGE 194

181 somebody’s study said or…somebody’s theory ” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). Dan also noted a decisive factor regarding credibility: In their (methods students) mind, because you’re two feet away from a classroom or one year away, they don’t consider you in the same area or the same field as someone who has been in there this morni ng or five minutes ago or right there… (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06) Thus, their proximity to the classroom seemed to be the greatest source of credibility for the participants. Another decisive factor for the credibil ity issue was the participants’ status as alumni of their methods students’ teacher e ducation program. Dan noted that his alumni status helped, as did Alexis, who said: “I told them that I went through (the program), so I think that’s part of it. I m ean, knowing that I graduated fr om the same, well, a similar program that they’re in…” (Alexis, Interv iew, 3/17/06). Interestingly, Nora’s lack of alumni status did not seem to negatively affect her credibility with her methods students. This issue, like the others associated w ith inservice teachers serving as methods instructors, has not been fully investigated. Negotiations for instructional time and freedom The participants’ roles in negotiations for instructional time and freedom stimulated the most diverse comments. Asked about he lping methods students talk to their cooperating teachers, Alexis noted: “Another disadvantage for me, especially being on site, is fielding other teachers who may not see social studies in the same light as I do…” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). During the final interview, Alex is strengthened her position while discussing a teacher at another school who was mandating the content of a methods student’s unit: “There would have been an attempt to negotiate, using the university supervisor; that’s their job…I would not a pproach the teacher” (Alexis, Interview,

PAGE 195

182 5/10/06). Conversely, Dan felt that his ability to negotiate with teachers at his school was an advantage and an opportunity to teach the methods students to do the same: “I am able to negotiate more because I know the condi tions. I know most of the teachers…” (Dan, Interview, 3/17/06). In addition, Dan advertis ed his services during methods class: “If you are ever having trouble where I can help you, let me know” (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). In contrast to the other participants, Nora did not do any negotiating for her methods students; she did not see the need. The disparities in the participants’ comments possibly related to their professional backgrounds and differences in the schools in which they worked. While Alexis was a teacher with seven years of experience, she had only been at Petty for two years. This might account for her hesitation in approachi ng her fellow teachers. On the other hand, Dan was an equally experienced teacher, but his entire career had been at Owen Elementary. Dan’s length of tenure and familiar ity with the other teachers at Owen might allow him to comfortably approach his co lleagues and ask for concessions for his methods students. Nora was equa lly as experienced as the ot her two, and she had been at her school for four years. However, she did not see the need to negotiate for her methods students. Possibly, this was rela ted to the status of social studies at her school. Social studies was included in the da ily schedule at Thebaut, although of secondary importance because of the practice of removing at-risk students for FCAT remediation and other pull-out services. This could possibly have created situati ons in which social studies teaching took place, but the cooperating teache rs were less concerned with the substance of social studies instruction, sinc e it was “filler” in the schedule.

PAGE 196

183 Advantages of filling dual roles There were other distinct advantages to filling these dual roles that all the participants enjoyed. The first was access to authentic social studies resources currently in use with elementary students. This a dvantage was evident during a discussion in Nora’s class concerning use of “literature circles” for social studies instruction. During this discussion, Nora pulled out the laminated literature circle cards she used with her elementary students to facilita te her instruction (Nora, Cla ss, 3/22/06). Dan discussed his access to the most recent resources provide d by the district: “…we have access to whatever is being used right now in the county” (Dan, Interv iew, 3/17/06). While she did not have access to the county resources, Alex is more than made up for it with her own personal collection of resources, such as her Jackdaws kit (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Another advantage was the ability of the pa rticipants to provide real-life examples of social studies instruction and student wo rk. Through the use of video, Alexis provided her methods students with examples of teach ing her first-grade students: “I’ve shown them a lesson, of me teaching or of me wo rking with a group of students on how to represent sounds using musical instruments that a Chinese dragon would make” (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). The use of examples from the participants’ elementary practice was evident in almost every methods class I obs erved, as Nora also noted: “All the time I’m talking or showing them something that ha ppens in my fourth-grade room” (Nora, Interview, 3/16/06). Dan was pa rticularly adept at using st udent work from his fourthgrade class. On one particular occasi on, Dan provided his methods students with examples of the “RAFT” strategy from his students (Dan, Class, 3/22/06). The advantages of filling these dual roles has not been chronicled in the literature, but these do represent a possible means of bridgi ng the gap between the realities of social

PAGE 197

184 studies instruction in schools and the social stud ies practices encouraged by universitybased social studies professionals. This gap was described by Leming (1989) as the “two cultures” of social studies. During the final interviews, I introduced Leming’s work to the participants, and then we discussed the ability of someone serving in these dual roles to bridge the gap. Dan explained the possibilities for someone se rving in these dual roles: I think I can do it a lot more than maybe pe ople in other situations can because one of the things I’m going to try to do more of is use my video in my classroom. But by having them see that these are real kids, and it doesn’t have to look like the ideal perfect lesson that you might see sometim es, in order to do a good job teaching social studies, I think that it helps the (methods) students see that what’s in this book can happen in this room with these ki ds, believe it or not. (Dan, Interview, 5/4/06) When discussing the same topic, Nora conne cted filling the “two cultures” gap to her practicality focus and suggested: I feel like I was successful in that role as an instructor. That was one of the things I really enjoyed, and I could sense [it]…whe n I would start telling stories about my classroom or students I’ve had, or lessons I’v e taught, or just stra tegies that have worked or haven’t worked. (N ora, Interview, 5/2/06) Alexis confirmed the other participants’ viewpoints, but cited the ability of the methods students to see her as a teacher who actually does “in-depth stuff” as the key to bridging the gap between what is presented in the methods textbooks and what happens in a real classroom (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Summary The participants’ comments reflected the real ities of teaching an elementary social studies methods course. The ubiquitous “elephant in the living room” in the participants’ comments was the detrimental effect of high-st akes testing on elementary social studies instruction in general. Accord ingly, a majority of the issues the participants encountered related to the effects of highstakes testing. These effects were felt most acutely in the

PAGE 198

185 field placements, where methods students saw little social st udies instruction and for the most part were severely restricted in the am ount of social studies they were allowed to teach. This lack of instructi onal time for social studies wa s very similar to situations described by several researchers (e .g., Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Fritzer & Kumar 2002; Guisbond & Schaeffer 2004, 2003; Neill & Guisbond 2005; Knighton 2003). The participants experien ced all of the six issues de scribed by Owens (1997), most notably the cooperating teachers’ lack of desire to teach social studies. While this lack of desire certainly must have existed in 1997, it has no doubt been exacerbated by the current focus on accountability. The participan ts did report issues not noted by Owens that have been discussed elsewhere – for example, the content vs. methods tension discussed by Thornton (2001), and the lack of professional development for elementary social studies noted by Yendol-Hoppey and T ilford (2004). One challenge not previously noted in the literature was the difficulty experienced by the methods students in kindergarten placements. Conversely, the majority of the participants ’ successes related to serving in the dual roles of inservice elementary teacher and el ementary social studies methods instructor. Being an inservice teacher allowed the particip ants to relate well to the methods students and provide real-life connections and examples of elementary social studies instruction. These advantages symbolize a possible wa y of bridging the gap described by Leming (1989) as the “two cultures” of social studies. Leming noted : “There exists in social studies a persistent abyss wh ich separates the teaching liv es of practicing classroom teachers from the research interests and methods class preparation of future social studies teachers” (1989, p. 404). Leming argued that these two distinct cultures within the social

PAGE 199

186 studies profession are separated by their purpo ses; that is, the uni versity-based social studies “intelligentsia” is more focused on creating social change, whereas real teachers are less concerned with social change and more focused on traditional practices that have been “proved” to work. Leming concluded: “T he head has lost touch with the body” (p. 406). To create positive changes in social studi es practices, Leming cited the need for “a common meeting ground where m eaningful dialogue between the two cultures can take place” (p. 408). The participants in this study may represent a common meeting ground because of their access to, and their ability to par ticipate in, both cultures. As yet, the advantages and disadvantages of filling the dual roles I have described have not been fully explored in the literature.

PAGE 200

187 CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary of the Findings of the Study Overall, filling the dual roles served to enhance the participants’ methods instruction and give them unique insights into the status of so cial studies. The ability of the participants to relate and react to the experiences and concerns of the methods students proved to be invaluable. The lack of university-level experience, and theoretical and content knowledge related to elementary social studies, did not prove to be insurmountable barriers to the participants’ methods instruction. These deficiencies were mitigated by the structured nature of the provided course materials, the participants’ professional experiences as elementary teache rs, and their hard work and professionalism as methods instructors. The long-term retenti on of inservice elementa ry teachers to serve as methods instructors would further mitigate, if not eliminate, these deficiencies. By and large, while serving as methods instructors, the participants performed admirably while filling this critical need. While the participants served well as methods instructors, it would be unwise not to include a discussion of what is lost when in structors without advan ced preparation teach an elementary social studies methods course. Indeed, the participants felt were able to communicate a solid understanding of social studies teaching and learning to their methods students. However, they did not focus on some of the more advanced concepts in social studies education, such as historical inquiry, participatory citizenship, and social justice. This contrast was noticeable when co mparing the participants’ statements to those

PAGE 201

188 of the methods professors found in chapter 2. This is, of course, an unfair comparison, because elementary social studies is not the exclusive focus of the participants as it is with the featured professors. But it does reveal what is lost. Recommendations for Supporting and Im proving Social Studies Methods Instruction by Inservice Teachers To further support individuals serving in these dual roles, and to fulfill the requirements of a Doctor of Education di ssertation, I will discuss “implications for practice” (University of Florida 1983). These suggestions are organized by the level to which they apply. All are based on data I collected on the three instructors during one semester and by no means definitively represen t any deficiencies related to the course. Moreover, all of these sugges tions are based on creating an ideal situati on for supporting and improving social studies methods instruct ion by inservice teachers, and may not be applicable to the realities of public school s and a large teacher education program. Field Placement To support and improve social studies met hods instruction by inservice teachers, I recommend two changes that could take place at the field placement level. The university field supervisors could become more involve d to ensure that methods students have sufficient time and instructional freedom to t each their social studies units. This would ensure better application of methods instruction and reli eve pressure on the methods instructors and students to nego tiate. Also, at the field plac ement sites, there could be increased support for social studies instruc tion to improve its quality and frequency for interns to observe. This support could take the form of on-site inservice activities provided by university-based personnel. The in service activities could mitigate the lack

PAGE 202

189 of district social studies in service and align the methods a nd purpose of social studies instruction at the field placement with the methods and purpose advanced by the course. Methods Course At the course level, four suggestions could improve social studies methods by inservice instructors. First, teachers servi ng in the district who have shown exemplary social studies instructional e ffectiveness could be observed by methods students and new methods instructors. Efforts should continue to recruit exemplary elementary social studies teachers to instruct th e methods course, especially te achers who also are advanced graduate students, teachers working in high poverty schools, teachers with academic training in one of the social studies discipline s, and secondary social studies teachers with middle school experience. Also, efforts should co ntinue to retain instructors; the learning curve for this course is steep, and experi ence in teaching the c ourse proved to be invaluable. As a form of professional development, methods instructors could observe each other teaching the methods class, as well as observe university-bas ed personnel teaching a methods class, to share practices and pr ovide examples for new instructors. The information I gained through observing others in this course was invaluable for my own instruction, as well as my understanding of the issues of elementary social studies methods instruction. Moreover, a social studies methods read ing packet could be provided to new instructors to build theoretical knowledge and understanding of criti cal issues. I suggest the following five readings as a start:

PAGE 203

190 1. Barton K. & Levstik L. (2004). Teaching History for the Common Good This book provides an organized and extensive disc ussion of the current research on history education, while acknowledging the subj ective nature of the endeavor. 2. Owens W. (1997). “The Challenges of Teaching Social Studies Methods to Preservice Elementary Teachers.” The Social Studies 88, 113-120. Owens presents six challenges endemic to elementary social st udies methods instruct ion; although dated, all six still are relevant. 3. Benson J. (1998). “Using an Inquiry Approach with Preservice Teachers to Explain the process of Facts, Concept, and Generalization.” The Social Studies 89, 227– 31. Benson provides an excellent outline of teaching this unfamiliar but important instructional strategy. More in -depth explanations of this process exist (e.g., Banks, 1990), but this article is a concis e, easily understood road map. 4. Thornton S. (2001).” Educating the Edu cators: Rethinking Subject Matter and Methods. Theory Into Practice, 2001, Vol. 40, No. 1, 72-78. Thornton clearly outlines the “content versus methods” tension and expl ains why methods should be of utmost importance. 5. Yeager EA & Davis OL, Eds. (2005). Wise Social Studies Teaching in an Age of High-Stakes Testing: Essays on Cl assroom Practices and Possibilities The chapters featuring elementary teachers provide exam ples of how powerful instruction can take place in a high-stakes environment. College of Education At this level, two particular issues co uld be addressed. First, there could be a greater effort to adapt the cl ass schedule of the methods st udents so that they can see social studies instruction within the time cons traints of the district’s mandated schedule.

PAGE 204

191 This would allow methods students to make the theory-to-practice connections promised by a concurrent field placement. Finally, in order to address the content vs. methods issue, the alignment of the social science re quirements for preservice teachers could be considered to better fit the needs of future teachers. A reasonable place to begin would seem to be requiring that all preservice elemen tary teachers take at least one U.S. history course and one U.S. government course so that they will be able to address the content covered in the state curriculum standards. Future Research Research on Inservice Teachers Serving as Methods Instructors While there are many avenues for future research concerning inservice teachers serving as methods instructors, I believe four deserve part icular attention. First and foremost, research needs to fu rther explore the advantages of individuals serving in dual roles. While not the aim of this study, the a dvantages of this situation were evident, especially in regard to closing the “theor y to practice gap” and connecting the “two cultures” of social studie s education described by Leming (1989, 1992). Further research into addressing the theo retical knowledge of individuals filling these dual roles needs to be e xplored. As evidenced in the findings, a lack of theoretical knowledge was not the deciding factor in the success of these instructors. However, a review of the elementary social studies and elementary social studies methods literature could identify “key readings” th at would assist generalist, in service elementary teachers in developing a working knowledge of the th eoretical literature in order to enhance methods practice. The perceptions of methods st udents with regard to inserv ice teachers who instruct methods courses also warrant investigation. Understanding ho w preservice teachers view

PAGE 205

192 these instructors likely could mitigate the possible drawbacks and further improve the ability of these instructors to connect with the preservice teachers and deliver effective methods instruction in all subject areas. Finally, there should be further explorati on of the effects of a suggested syllabus and course materials on instru ctors’ beliefs about social studies teaching and learning, especially when the instructors have little previous experience with the material. I observed a strong relationship between the participants’ beliefs and the provided materials, and in the case of Nora, the rela tionship seemed particularly powerful. This begs two important and unanswered questions : What is the role of the supervising professor in determining the na ture of the course? And what happens when an instructor has conflicting views? Moreover, because these questions are not unique to social studies methods instruction, they could extend to sim ilar situations in teacher education programs and could be addressed by teacher education rese archers from a variety of subject areas. Research on Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction Elementary social studies methods instru ction must address more forcefully the current high-stakes testing environment, becau se instruction is only powerful if delivered. The skills and knowledge necessary to “fit it in” should be identified and added to the methods literature. The participants’ focus on “fitting it in” and th eir heavy emphasis on “saving” social studies speak to the severity of the situation from th e perspective of those doing the instruction. The difficulties encountered by methods st udents in kindergarten placements also warrant further investigation. While this chal lenge surfaced in relation to teaching social studies methods, there are larger difficultie s among preservice teachers with planning and delivering developmentally appropriate instru ction in other subjects. Social studies

PAGE 206

193 researchers could contribute to and benefit fr om an integrated approach to studying this issue with other subject area researchers. Furthermore, research is needed to understand how to en list better support among cooperating teachers for methods instruction and how to address the differing purposes and methods typically encountered in the fi eld placement. When cooperating teachers do not share a common purpose and do not know much about the methods their interns are supposed to utilize, the ability of methods students to observe and practice what they have been taught is limited. Any progress made toward enlisting cooperating teacher support would improve the situation, because currently some cooperating teachers are unknowingly acting as a barrier to implementing what is taught in methods courses. Research Elementary Social Studies Several areas of elementary social studies are in need of attention. First, the field needs an expansive literature re view on the status of elemen tary social studies in the curriculum and an analysis of the current res earch. Those involved with elementary social studies at all levels could then use the findings to crea te a plan of action for addressing the most immediate issues In my view, if th e current situation is al lowed to continue, the subject will eventually exist only on paper. We also need more discussion and analysis of the possible benefits and drawbacks of placing elementary social studies conten t on standardized test s and including it in accountability systems. I believe the research community needs to addr ess this issue if it wants “a place at the table” in designing th e assessments. Perhaps the time will come when lawmakers in this state will mandate the inclusion of social studies assessment in accountability systems, or when social stud ies researchers will c onclude that testing

PAGE 207

194 social studies is the only mean s of preserving the subject. In either case, testing social studies knowledge is tricky, and perhaps that is why we continue to avoid it. Further research into contex tual support for social stud ies is also warranted to uncover the factors at th e district, school, and classroom leve ls that facilita te elementary social studies instruction. Wh ile factors at the school leve l have been documented to some extent, more research at all three levels is needed. Overall, the academic community that conducts research on elementary social studies could direct more effort toward ensuring that social st udies instruction takes place in more classrooms. Research on elementary social studies practice is invalu able to ensure the quality of practice, but these efforts are in vain if social studies instruction occurs only in a few classrooms. Conclusion about the Status of Elementary Social Studies Elementary social studies is caught in a “downward spiral.” Wh ile social studies has never had the status of reading, wr iting, and mathematics in the elementary curriculum, it was once considered an integral part of education. This is no longer the case. The pressure of high-stakes testing has eviscerated elementary social studies instruction. If I was concerned about the status of elementa ry social studies before conducting this study, now I am distressed. The findings in this study show that quality social studies instruction is taking place in only a few classrooms in these schools on a regular basis. For a moment, consider the long term implicat ions of this situation. Due to the lack of quality social studies instruction, future elementary teachers will never learn what social studies actually is dur ing their “apprentices hip of observation.” When these future elementary teachers get to th eir social studies methods course, the instructors will not only be required to teach them how to teach so cial studies, they will have to teach what

PAGE 208

195 social studies is. During the course, these preservice teachers will encounter field placements where little social studies instruction takes place, as well as directing teachers who resist the appli cation of knowledge from the methods course and who resist giving up instructional time. Then, with an improve d but unpracticed concep tion of how to teach social studies, they will comp lete the methods course and ev entually make it to their own classrooms, where, most often, they will expe rience tremendous pressure to disregard any substantive social studies instruction that doe s not directly relate to a major holiday or cultural celebration. There hope for the future. This study is only one lens through which to view the situation; others exist. The experiences of these inservice teachers serving as methods instructors provide examples of how the dow nward spiral is progressing—and how it can be stopped. Consider the examples of Dan a nd Nora. Both had poor elementary social studies methods instruction as university stude nts, but because of their belief in the importance of social studies instruction, they we re able to maintain some form of social studies practice. Also consider the example of Alexis, whos e methods course acted as a vehicle for preserving social studies inst ruction. She described her ow n excellent social studies methods instructor, who helped her devel op a strong commitment to social studies instruction and a belief in th e importance of the subject. Thes e cases provide hope that all is not lost. When preservice teachers have stro ng social studies methods instruction, they are more likely to see the value of social st udies education and then are more likely to teach social studies to their elementary st udents when they become teachers. The solid

PAGE 209

196 understanding and motivation that a good methods course affords can ensure that social studies instruction takes place. This should be our ultimate goal.

PAGE 210

197 APPENDIX A PROTOCOLS 1. General Background and Instructional Questions 2. Why did you become a teacher? 3. Define the word ‘teaching’. 4. How would you describe your philos ophical approach to teaching? 5. Describe your educational background from high school to graduate school including institution, location, degrees and major(s). 6. If you did not study Elementary Educati on as your main focus what else did you study? 7. How much of your teacher education was directly re lated to Social Studies instruction? 8. Describe your occupational history including schools, location, population, subjects, grade leve ls, years teaching. 9. How much experience have you had as a university level instructor? Courses? Frequency? Education and Professional Experiences 10. What professional development activities have you participated in related to the social studies, ei ther district provided or those you sought out on your own? 11. What professional organizations do you belong to? 12. Have you ever held any positions in th ese organizations? Please describe. 13. Describe any professional conferences/meetings you have attended and/or presented at. 14. Describe any other professi onal activities you have been or are involved with. Social Studies Questions 15. Define ‘Social Studies’.

PAGE 211

198 16. Tell me about your previous experiences with social studies as a student … 17. If needed: Tell me about a positive pers onal experience with social studies? 18. If needed: Tell me about a positive profe ssional experience with social studies? 19. Have these experiences influence what you teach during your methods instruction? If so, how? If not, why not? 20. How has your definition of ‘social studies” changed over the last 5 years? If so, how? Probe: Why has your definition changed? 21. Can you tell me how you feel about the stat us of social studies in the state of Florida in general? 22. Can you tell me how you feel about the stat us of social studie s in the PROTEACH program? 23. What purpose do you believe soci al studies serves in th e elementary curriculum? Social Studies Methods Questions 24. Tell me about a social studies methods lesson you really enjoyed teaching…. 25. How would you describe your philosophical approach to social studies methods instruction? 26. What do you see as your main job as a methods instructor? 27. What is your overall goal for your methods students? What do you want them to be able to do after ta king your course? 28. What values or ideas do you stress in your social studies methods instruction? 29. If a preservice teacher asked why they should include social studies in their instruction what reason s would you give them? 30. How do you convey to your methods student s the importance of social studies? 31. Do you feel that your students approach your social studies methods course as seriously as they approach the met hods courses in the assessed areas? 32. Can you give me an example from your methods instruction when you felt a student did not perceive so cial studies as important? 33. What preparations did you receive as a preservice teacher that prepared you to teach social studies in the elementary classroom?

PAGE 212

199 34. How do you model integration of others s ubject in to your soci al studies methods instruction? 35. What considerations for a high stakes environment do you require your methods students to make in their unit plans? 36. What advantages do you feel you possess as a methods instructors as an inservice teacher? 37. What disadvantages do you feel you have e xperienced as an inservice teacher who teaches a methods course? 38. What successes have you experience during your methods instruction? 39. What particular challenges have you e xperienced during your methods instruction? 40. Have you brought any examples of a lesson plan and/or student work from your own classroom in to your methods instruction? 41. How does working in these dual roles in fluence your methods instruction? Elementary Social Studies Instruction 42. What is your overall goal for your elemen tary social studies instruction? 43. Tell me about a social studies lesson you really enjoyed teaching…. 44. How does filling the dual rolls of elemen tary classroom teacher and methods instructor effect your elementary social studies instruction? 45. Since you have started teaching the methods course have you been teaching more social studies in your elementary classroom? 46. Do you believe that teaching the methods course has improved your social studies instruction? 47. Has filling these dual rolls changed your perspective/opinion about the place of social studies in the elementary curriculum? Second InterviewGeneral Protocol 48. Explain Leming’s two cultures theory. Q-Do you believe that you are able to bridge this gap because of the dual roles you inhabit? 49. Do you feel that using your own classroom facilitates your methods instruction and adds to your credibility? 50. Often during unit presentations the methods students seemed to really value how “cute” students looked while they were par ticipating in the instruction or they

PAGE 213

200 highlighted students work when a studen t wrote something that was “cute” or “sweet”? Did you notice this? 51. What do you see as your main job as a met hods instructor now that the course is over? 52. What do you believe needs to happen to rais e the status of soci al studies in the elementary curriculum? 53. Did you ever feel that you lacked any theoretical knowledge about elementary social studies that would have helped you? 54. Did you ever feel that you lacked any cont ent knowledge that would have helped to instruct the course? 55. How does filling these dual roles inform your beliefs about the place of social studies in the elementary curriculu m? What have you seen and heard? 56. “Nothing district sponsored for sure. Even when there was an adoption of a Social Studies textbook in Ted County while I wa s there. There was no professional development tied to that. Um, and I I can ’t think of any professional development experience I’ve had in Social Studies ever.” Q-How do you think the lack of professional development for social studies at the inservice le vel effects methods instruction for preservice teachers? 57. “We’re teaching for real understanding. I think that that is um, that is my job, is to plant that seed so that hopefully when they go out, they go, hmmm, what am I really teaching here? Am I teaching kids to memorize the states and capitals? Or am I teaching kids to understand that la nd is divided up different ways?’ I noted during my observations of unit presenta tions many students had “content driven units. Q-Why do you think it is so difficult to overcome the need methods students feel to “cover” particular content? 58. What kind of experiences did your methods students have as elementary students? (First Class Activity)? What kinds of instruction do they remember receiving? 59. What was the general level of interest of your methods students concerning teaching social studies? That is do you th ink they are excited about teaching social studies? 60. “My job is to perpetuate the value that is placed on Social Studies so that maybe future teachers will remember that this is a valued subject area and it shouldn’t just be cut when everything else seems more important” QWhat do you believe needs to happen to raise the status of social studies in the minds of preservice elementary teachers? 61. “Um, I would say a particular example was in probably the second class. We were talking about the democratic communit y, Democratic Classrooms, the book. Um,

PAGE 214

201 one of them was concerned that taking time to do extended projects would detract from real learning that they needed to show on the FCAT. So we had a pretty serious discussion about what real learni ng is.” Q-Were there any other similar incidents? 62. How has the pressures brought on by high st akes testing effected your social studies methods instruction? 63. Did any methods students mention the effects of testing pressure on their ability to teach their social studies unit? 64. “I said that maybe it will put more focus on it but I didn’t think you know, that it’s unfortunate that you have to make it an FCAT test to bring back the focus on a subject area that’s so important in my opinion. I don’t think it will improve Social Studies instruction. But I think it will impr ove the daily schedules. So I don’t know if that would be a good thing, but that’s the only good thing that I can see is that maybe there will be training for example, you know? In-services because it’s gonna be an FCAT test now all of a sudde n we’ve got something it’s on.” QAny more thoughts about social st udies testing now that the co urse is over? Should we be trying to get on the test? 65. If I was to ask one of your methods stude nts “what is social studies” what do you think they would have said before the course? What do you think they would say now? 66. “..because the kids in my Methods cla ss haven’t seen Social Studies at the elementary level and maybe they have but no one ever told them and they don’t really know what it looks like and they kind of come with the attitude of like, what am I really gonna do?” Q-Do you feel like sometimes you are not only teaching your methods students how to teach social studies but what social studies is? 67. Did you ever have a student openly question the value/importance of social studies during class or in a reflection/paper? 68. Given the predominately European Am erican middle class female student population did you feel it difficult to have conversations about diversity issues? 69. Do you believe that you hold more conservati ve or more liberal social beliefs than your methods students? 70. Did any of your methods students ever voi ce extremely conservative or liberal beliefs? If so did their beliefs ever affect how they received your methods instruction? 71. Was there ever a time that you felt you ha d a philosophical/political conflict where they held very different belie fs on an issue then you did?

PAGE 215

202 72. “Who says this guy is like the bible of history….Kids will end up fighting over history…” “ A parent is goi ng to be like ‘Why is my kid learning this…”….”This is a very hateful book”…. “We have a shared history, that what textbooks do” …“You want kids to question things, but not everything.” “Do you really think she (teacher) would really teacher her kids this stuff, lik e all the Indian s die...go home and have a feast?” Q-What do think about these comments? 73. “..obviously I’m speaking about older elementa ry school kids but I think it’s really important to teach them what it’s about to be a citizen and you know, all the things that go along with it”. Q-How do you thi nk we could better a ddress the instruction of civic skills in this course? 74. Were there any “special” activities that you added or changes you made to the course? If so why did you think it wa s important to include the activity? 75. This course has been developed over a numbe r of years and it has a lot of structure and components. Did you ever have trouble fitting all the ‘pieces’ in? 76. Do you feel like the structure of the course limited your freedom as an instructor? For example, were there times when you wa nted to include activ ities and projects that either did not fit or were too time consuming? 77. As the course progressed did you rely more or less on the provided materials? 78. If you had more instructional time to teach the course what would you add? That is if you had more class sessions what would you add? 79. What kinds of challenges related to a lack of content knowledge on the part of the preservice teachers did you experience? 80. What do you think is the best way to address the content knowledge issue? 81. What do you think is the purpose the field placement serves during this course? 82. What did you hear back from your methods students about the status of social studies at their school site s? ….Once in class Dan used the term “Social Studies Sightings” to describe the situation. Do you feel that this represents the situation among your preservice teachers? 83. Do you feel like your methods students faced particular challenges based on their placements, for example K placements? 84. What do you feel your methods students gained from the field placement? 85. One time I over heard to methods students discussing their unit and one said, “She (co-op teacher) just wants us to teach a bout what the book taught”. Q-Do you feel that your methods students were ever restra ined by the teacher in their placement? Is this a reoccurring theme?

PAGE 216

203 86. How do you deal with the fact that these interns do not have the opportunity teach social studies? Do you consider the diffe rence in placements when you graded their units? 87. Did any students note that the social studi es instruction they provided was the only social studies instruction the students received that was not textbook/worksheet based? 88. At anytime during the semester did you feel overextended, that is you had too much to do and not enough time to do it? Do you feel that teaching the methods course added to this feeling? 89. Was there a time when you felt like eith er your methods instruction or your elementary instruction was effected by k eeping up with all yo ur responsibilities? 90. No need to be specific, but did you have any stressful personal events that took place during the semester that effected your methods instruction. 91. I know you plan to teach this course again. What will you do the same next time? …..what will you do different? 92. If you had the opportunity to talk to an inservice elementary teacher who was going to teach next fall what would be your advice? 93. What kind of training do you believe woul d help similar instructors teach this course? Alexis Protocol 94. “Thinking about getting all these units graded next week……..just sends me over the edges….for my stress level..” Q-How did it all go in the end? 95. Did the ‘Centers’ activity come from you? 96. What did this course look like when you got it? 97. “Um, that it is my job to always find a way to reach every child no matter where they are in whatever subject area that I happ en to be teaching them in or instructing them in”. Q-What does this look like with a methods student? 98. How do you think your methods instruction has improved this semester over last semester? 99. “Um, I always enjoyed Social Studies. I’ve always enjoyed things like History. Um, not so much Geography or Economics, but parts of Social Studies I do enjoy very much. I had excellent ah, Social St udies teachers in high school, excellent in my view that they hooked me”. Q-Do you f eel that your interest in history gives you better content knowledge than an average elementary teacher?

PAGE 217

204 100. “Um, but I do think that the way that we are able to integrate our social studies teaching, again combining it with some reading strategies which we’re doing because in a lot of schools Social Studies is integrated into the reading block. Well, ah, one of the ways we do it is with the read ing strategies. So they have to apply a reading strategy to their own content area of reading. Um, I think that that shows them that these kinds of stra tegies in teaching kids how to be strategic readers is easily integrated into Social Studies cont ent”. QIs there a connection in between the heavy reading strategies focus and integration in your mind? Did you put all the reading strategies in the course? 101. “I think it’s very important for them to see me as a teacher first and foremost. I am a teacher of students and this is what I do every day and I want them, want them to believe what I say”. Q-How do you make sure they see you as a teacher besides the videos? 102. “Because, you know, in in my class I have Pe tty interns but also Elise interns. And the Elise interns have a very different setting than the Pett y interns do. And it becomes very difficult for me to espouse something that they don’t actually get to see in practice very much”. Q-Do you f eel like the Elise interns suffered because of their lack of exposure to examples of SS instruction? Was it evident in their units? Dan Protocol 103. “For Edgar and Jose ..who do not speak E nglish …” Q-Do you think having such a diverse elementary class help s your methods instruction? 104. You let the methods students do a lot of the teaching? Why? 105. How do you include your experiences with the St. Augustine field trip in your methods instruction? Why? 106. “The purpose of social studies is to teach kids to see history from multiple perspectives….I do this all the time w ith kids..”. Q-How do you think we could do this better during the course? 107. “In social studies we have more placements where social studies is more direct instruction…of course you are changing that…” Q-How does this effect the methods course? 108. “So what does this mean for teachers..” Q-You are constantly referring back to classroom instruction. Why do you think that is important? Nora Protocol 109. “Any other Howe people who are concerned with the technology issue…I can help you after class…” Q-Was this a problem gi ven that you required your students to integrate technology in to their units?

PAGE 218

205 110. “Worse than nine year olds”. Q-Did you fi nd the level of maturity of your methods students challenging? 111. Is making copies a challenge? Are you limited? 112. You mentioned the value of being ‘Practical” often in the first interview and in class. Do you feel parts of your teacher education were not practical? Why do you think this is so important? 113. “…for example, some of my Howe students said, we’re never, we just never seen Social Studies taught”. Q-Do you thi nk your Howe students saw less real SS instruction? If so why? 114. “I hate to say it, but I ca n say the impression I’ve gotte n hearing them talk about their Reading Methods classe s that they’re also taking this semester, um, they do seem to have more maybe like formal assessments which may lend to them taking it more seriously”. Q-Now that the course is over do you still feel this way? 115. “I think that um, when they know, when the students know that you’re like not on campus and you’re a teacher teacher they use you differently…Yeah, I think, I don’t think all of them, but I think in general there’s proba bly a little less respect or maybe a little less like taking it seriously th an if you were teaching on campus and you were, you know? An instructor at the university”. Q-Now that the course is over do you still feel this way?

PAGE 219

206 APPENDIX B SYLLABUS Social Studies for Diverse Learners SSE 4312 Spring,2006 COURSE FOCUS Throughout the social studies methods course you will learn how to use the tools of inquiry as a teacher in a so cial studies classroom. Inquiry is a “questioning” stance that good teache rs assume as professionals who plan for, carry out, and study the impact of their instruction. This course is designed to move you beyond thinking li ke a college student to help you begin thinking like an elementary teacher. Th inking like a teacher requires asking the questions that professionals ask ab out their teaching practice. We will explore the following teacher inquiry themes: Inquiry into the context, Inquiry into content, Inquiry into studen t learning, Inquiry into the acts of teaching as well as Inquiry into professional self. READINGS Wolk, S. (1998). A Democratic Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Alleman, & Brophy, J (1996) Powerful Social Studies for Elementary Students. Ft. Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace. Loewen, J. (1995). Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong. New York: Touchstone. Instructor: Alexis Johnson Email: Alexis@Johnson.com Phone: 352-392-9191 Office: Rm. 111 Petty D.R.S. Office Hours : By appointment

PAGE 220

207 Obenchain, K. & R. Morris (2003). 50 Social Studies Strategies for the K-8 Classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. ARTICLES Articles can be found on-line in the co urse reserves section of the library website. This can be accessed from home using your Gatorlink account. UAS Key Tasks Key Tasks assess your mastery of knowledge, skills and dispositions that the State of Florida requires of all entry-level educator s. In this course, we will cover several Accomplished Practices. Your mastery of each indicator will be measured by your work on a Key Task. ***To pass this course you must successfully complete all Key Tasks and receive a rating of "Met with We akness" or higher. No exceptions will be made to this rule, even if you do not plan to teach after graduation. Students who receive a "Not Met" rating will be offere d a chance to redo the Key Task or, in some cases, to complete a comparable ta sk assigned by the instructor. Students who do not complete their makeup work satisfactorily (with a" Met-with-Weakness" or higher rating) will receive either "an incomplete" or "a failing grade" in the appropriate fill-in at the instructor's discretion. Students who fail the course must repeat it later. 8.1/8.4 Students will demonstrate subject matter expertise by synthesi zing social science content and developing an enduring understandin g for an assigned social studies topic to a named grade. The content exploration should re sult in the prospective teacher presenting the following: an enduring understanding (g eneralization) supported by a synthesis of content from a variety of resources, an d identification of related standards.

PAGE 221

208 ESOL StandardsThere are several ESOL standards associated with this course. Standard 2: Recognize the major differences and similarities among the different cultural groups in the United States. Standard 14: Plan and evaluate instructional out comes, recognizing the effects of race, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and religion on the results. Standard 15: Evaluate, select, and employ appr opriate instructional materials, media, and technology for ESOL at el ementary, middle and high school levels. Standard 16: Design and implement effective unit plans and daily lesson plans which meet the needs of ESOL students within the context of the regular classroom. Standard 18: Create a positive classroom environment to accommodate the various learning styles and cultur al backgrounds of students. MET Enduring understanding (generalization): The proposed understanding is a big idea or core process at the heart of the disc ipline. Enduring understanding is framed as a generalization specific enough to guide teaching and assessing but overarching enough to enable transfer. Synthesis of content: An organized, comprehensive narrative summary of the content tied to the generalization. Provides the back ground teacher knowledge needed for a teacher to understand, develop, and teach the enduring understanding. Variety of resources: An extensive list of resources have been used and multiple types of resources are used: Encyclopedia Non-fiction books Social Science textbooks Social Studies Methods textbooks Internet Journal articles Children's social studies textbooks Appropriate citations included. Identification of related standards: Explicit connection made to NCSS and Sunshine State Standards. MET WITH WEAKNESS Enduring understanding (generalization) The understanding is important but not of the highest priority; or it may be more accurately descri bed as important knowledge and skill (i.e., understand how to use a primary document for research). Synthesis of content Narrative of the content matter is extensive but not clearly tied to enduring understanding. Narrative tied to enduring understanding but a comprehensive review of the subject matter isn’t present. Variety of resources Multiple types of resources included but lacks depth of resources Or Depth of resources present but multiple types of resources not included. Appropriate citations included. Identification of related standards Missing either NCSS standards or Sunshine State Standards. And/or Mismatched standards. NOT MET Enduring understanding (generalization) The understanding as stated is a straightforward fact, skill, or attitude, not a big idea or core proce ss at the heart of the discipline (worth being familiar with, but not the highest priority of impor tance for an entire course of study). Synthesis of content Narrative is lacking in comprehensive review of the subject matter and subject matter of review disconnected from enduring understa nding. Variety of resources Multiple types of resources included but lacks depth of resources And Depth of resources present but multiple types of resources not included. Citations not included. Identification of related standards Missing NCSS and Sunshine State Standards.

PAGE 222

209 Standard 21: Use formal and alternative met hods of assessment/evaluation of LEP students, including measurement of language, literacy and academic content meta-cognition. Social Studies for Diverse Learners Tentative Calendar Class Meets: 12:50-3:50 at P.K. Yonge Room G-131 Date Topic Reading Due And Strategy Assignmen t Due Class 1: January 10th What is Social Studies? What is the purpose of Social Studies? January 17th No Class Class 2: January 24th Creating a Democratic Classroom What does it mean to teach for democracy? Democratic Classroom Chapters 1-4 Obenchain & Morris, #2, 4 Strategy : Sticky Notes Date Topic Reading Due And Strategy Assignmen t Due Class 3: January 30th **Note Change to Monday!* Creating A Learning Community/Curriculu m Planning Democratic Classroom Chapters 5-8 Strategy : 6 Thinking Hats Learning Community Project/ Unit Topic Due Class 4: February 7th Curriculum Planning Alleman & Brophy Chapter 3,7 *Begin Book Commercia

PAGE 223

210 Obenchain & Morris #17, 33 Strategy : 3,2,1 ls Class 5: February 14th Assessment/Curriculu m Planning *Create Generalizations in Class Alleman & Brophy, Chapter 10 Assessment Article— Choose in class Strategy : Jigsaw *Content Info Due *Download Sunshine standards and Bring to class http://sun shinestate standards. net/ (in pairs) Class 6: February 21st Pedagogy to Support Social Studies Articles: Barton, K. Analyzing Historical Photographs in the Elementary Grades. McCormick, T. Letters from Trenton, 1776: Teaching with Primary Sources Morris, R. Using Artifacts As A Springboard to Literacy Wade, R. Beyond Charity: Service Learning for Social Justice Obenchain & Morris, #7, 8, 10, 14, 27, 28, 34, 40, 41, 42, 48 Strategy: RAFT *Evidence of Prior Knowledge Due Class 7: February 28th Culturally Responsive Social Studies Pedagogy *Meeting the Needs of Students Short, D. & Echevarria, J. Teacher Skills to Support English Language Learners Fitzgerald, J. & Graves, M. Reading Supports for All *Critical Autobiogra phy Due*

PAGE 224

211 Ferguson, J. & Abrams, J. Teaching Students from Many Nations Singer, J & Singer, A. Creating a Museum of Family Artifacts Strategy: Concept Map Class 8: March 7th Making Content Meaningful— Successful Integration *Lesson Plan Workshop Alleman & Brophy Chapter 6,9 Roush, N. Colonial Williamsburg Electronic Field Trips Or Molebash, P. & Dodge, B. Kickstarting Inquiry with Web Quests and Web Inquiry Projects Obenchain & Morris, #31 Strategy: Summarizing March 14th No Class-Spring Break Class 9: March 21st Teaching Content from Multiple Perspectives Lies My Teacher Told Me Ch.1-4 Strategy : Literature Circles Class 10: March 28th Teaching Content from Multiple Perspectives Lies My Teacher Told Me Assigned Chapter Chapters 11,12 Presentati on on Lies My Teacher Told Me Chapter

PAGE 225

212 April 4th No Class – PKY Spring Break s s 11: April Sensitive Issues (Holocaust, Terrorism, War in Iraq, Religion ) McBee, R. Can Controversial Topics be Taught in the Elementary Grades? Article on sensitive issue (to be chosen in class) Strategy : Opinion-Proof Class 12: April 18th Public Issues and Current Events Articles: Larson, B. Current Events and the Internet: Connecting “Headline News” to Perennial. Hicks & Ewing Bringing the World Into the Classroom with Online Global Newspapers Strategy : ABC Brainstorming *Bring a current event to class *Lesson Plans and Reflection on Student Learning Due 1st half of Lesson Presentati ons Class 13: April 25th Project Presentations *Sharing Philosophies Class Evaluations Finish Presentati on of Lessons KWL & Teaching Philosophy Due

PAGE 226

213 Tasks Percent Points Participation in class discussions and group projects. 10% 30 Reading Strategies: Assigned Each Week 15% 45 Critical Autobiography 5% 15 Learning Community Project 10% 30 Lies My Teacher Told Me Presentation 10% 30 Personal KWL 10% 30 Social Studies Teaching Project 40% 120 Part A Evidence of Content Preparation *Bibliography of Varied Resources *Organized Content (using web, essay, bullets) 15 Evidence of Student prior knowledge *Interview/survey students about your topic. *Summarize results and use in planning 15 Create Overall Generalization *related to Sunshine State Standards *Evidence of content Knowledge 15 Part B Three Pathwise Lesson Plans that Support the Learning of the Generalization 10 *Each lesson plan contains objectives that support the generalization 5 *Use of a Social Studies Strategy introduced in class or readings (Simulation, primary source, service learning, current events, discussion/deliberation, character education) 15 *Evidence of Meaningful Integration (At least language arts component) 10 *Well Developed Accommodationsindividual to students 10 *Authentic Assessment Strategybeyond questioning or observation 10

PAGE 227

214 Part C Reflection on Student Learning (separate) 10 Presentation 10 TOTAL 100% 300 **Late Assignments will be penalized 2 points per day. Absences in excess of 1 class or 3 hours will also negatively impact grades. Three tardies to class equals one absence. If you miss a class, please cont act the instructor to find out what you missed. Make-up work will be due at the beginning of the next class. Grading Grading Criteria and Scale A 270-300 B+ 255-269 B 240-254 C+ 225-239 C 210-224 D+ 195-209 D 180-194 Explanation of Assignments Weekly Readings and Strategies Each week you will have assigned readings and accompanying reading strategies that will help to facilitate your comprehension of the readings and promote in-class discussion. The reading strategy will be collected during each class. Critical Autobiography This assignment is meant to force you to look at your background critically and understand what you bring to your students and your teaching. You will

PAGE 228

215 be asked to map out your life’s hist ory and write a reflection summarizing how your background will impact your teaching. Learning Community Project In order to build a classroom communi ty and a democratic environment for students to learn, a teacher needs to inquire into their context and the students she/he teaches. This assignme nt will ask each partnership to devise a way to gather information from stud ents, organize that information in a user-friendly way, and then reflect on how you will use this information throughout the semester. Accomplished Practice #1 Assessment Accomplished Practice #4 Critical Thinking Accomplished Practice #5 Diversity Accomplished Practice #9 Learning Environments Accomplished Practice #10 Planning Lies My Teacher Told Me Presentation You will work with a group of students to present one chapter from Lies My Teacher Told Me to the cl ass. Since they have not read this chapter you will need to present them with the “big” id eas from this chap ter and perhaps sell them on wanting to read it themselves Projects may take any form, last 1015 minutes each, and must include a co nnection to how this information could be used in the classroom. Accomplished Practice #4 Critical Thinking Accomplished Practice #5 Diversity Personal KWL A KWL is a chart for organizing information that you K now, W ant to Know, and have L earned. You will need to consis tently add information to the K and W sections of this chart be fore you read and to the L column at the end of each class. You should organize the KW L by the topics for each class day. This chart will be a work in progress over the course of the semester.

PAGE 229

216 Social Studies Philosophy At the end of the semester, you will reflect over your KWL to create your own social studies teaching platform. Accomplished Practice #8 Kn owledge of Subject Matter Social Studies Integrated Teaching Project Each partnership will be required to co mplete a mini-unit integrating social studies and another content area. This mi niunit will be a culmination of all that we learned this semester and co nsist of three Path wise lessons. Start talking to your mentor teacher about a topic. Accomplished Practice #1 Assessment Accomplished Practice #2 Communication Accomplished Practice #4 Critical Thinking Accomplished Practice #5 Diversity Accomplished Practice #8 Kn owledge of Subject Matter Accomplished Practice #10 Planning Quality of Writing All students must demonstrate competence in writing. Ability to write will be a part of the social studies a ssessment and can affect final grade. Instructional Modifications Students with disabilities, who need reasonable modifications to complete tasks successfully and otherwise satisfy course criteria, are encouraged to meet with the instructor as early in the course as possible and to identify and plan specific accommodations. St udent will be asked to supply a letter from the Office for Students with Di sabilities to assist in planning modifications. Student Conduct Code The University of Florida has a student conduc t code that states that all work that you submit is your own work. In collaborative task s you must participate equally with other

PAGE 230

217 members of the group. By signing up for this course and reading this syllabus you agree to the University of Florida Student Code. Y ou promise not to cheat or plagiarize and to inform the instructor if you become aware of dishonest behavior on the part of other students in the class. Failure to comply with the academic honesty guidelines 6C1-4.017, F.A.C. is a violation of the University of Florida Student Conduct Code and may result in expulsion or any lesser sanction. In this cla ss be especially careful that you do not plagiarize by copying work from the Intern et without properly crediting its source.

PAGE 231

224 LIST OF REFERENCES Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2003). The e ffects of highs-stake s testing on student motivation and learning. Educational Leadership, 60 (5) 32-38. Angell, A. (1998). Learning to teach social studies: A case study of belief restructuring. Theory and Research in the Social Education 26, 509-529. Armento, B. (1996). Teaching and learning hist ory. In Sikula, J., Buttery, T. & Guyton, E. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 485-502). New York: MacMillan Library Reference, USA. Babbie, E. (1983). The practice of social research (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Banks, J. (1990). Teaching strategies for the soci al studies: Inquiry, valuing, and decision-making White Plains, N.Y.: Longman. Barr, R., Barth, J., & Shermis, S. (1977). Defining the social studies Arlington, VA: National Council for the Social Studies. Barton, K. (2005). I’m not saying these are goi ng to be easy: Wise practice in an urban elementary school. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis (Eds.), Wise social studies teaching in an age of high-stakes tes ting: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities (pp. 11-32). Greenwich, CT: In formation Age Publishing. Barton, K., & Levstik, L. (2004). Teaching history for the common good Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Benson, J. (1998). Using an inquiry approach with preservice teachers to explain the process of facts, c oncept, generalization. The Social Studies, 89 (5), 227-231. Bohan, C. (2001). Begin where I am: kindergarten geography. Social Studies and the Young Learner 14 (2), 20-1. Boyle-Baise, M. (2003). Doing demo cracy in social studies methods. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31 (1), 50-70. Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (1996). Powerful social studies for elementary students Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

PAGE 232

225 Brownell, M., Yeager, E., Rennels, M., & R iley, T. (1997). Teachers working together: What teacher educators and researchers should know. Teacher Education and Special Education 20, 340-359. Buckles, S., Schug, M., &Watts, M. (2001). A national survey of state assessment practices in the social studies. The Social Studies, 92 (4), 141-146. Byrom, J. (1998). Working with sources: Skep ticism or cynicism? Putting the story back together again. Teaching History, 91 32-40. Calderhead. J. (1991). The nature and gr owth of knowledge in student teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education 7 531-535. Chapin, J., & Messick, R. (1996). Elementary social st udies: A practical guide White Plains, NY: Longman. Clark, C., & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thoug ht processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook or research on teaching (pp. 255-296). New York, NY: MacMillan. Cobb, C. (2004). Looking across the states: Perspectives on school accountability. Educational Foundations 18 (3-4), 59-79. Cornett, J. (1990). Teacher th inking about curriculum and in struction: A case study of a secondary social studies teacher. Theory and Research in Social Education 18 248-273. Creswell, J. (1994). Research design qualitative and quantitative approaches Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research : Meaning and perspective in the research process Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Cuban, L. (1984 ). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1980 New York, NY: Longman. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920 New York, NY: Teachers' College Press. Cuban, L. (1991). History of teaching in so cial studies. In J. P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social st udies teaching and learning (pp. 197-209). New York, NY: Macmillan. Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms 1880-1990 New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

PAGE 233

226 Curriculum Task Force of the National Comm ission on Social Studies in the Schools. (1989). Charting a course: Social st udies for the 21st century Washington, DC. Cutcliffe J., & McKenna H. (2004). Expert qua litative researchers and the use of audit trails. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 45 (2) 126-135. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, Accountability, and School Reform. Teachers College Record 106 (6) 1047-1085. Davis, O. L. (1997). Beyond “best practices” toward wise practices. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 13, 1-5. Denzin, N. (1984). The research act Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Denzin, N. (1989). Interpretive biography Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Deschenes, S., Tyack, D. & Cuban, L. ( 2001). Mismatch: Historical perspectives on schools and students who don't fit them. Teachers College Record 103 (4) 525-47. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education New York, NY: Free Press. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company. Doyle, W., & Ponder, G. (1977-78). The prac ticality ethic in teacher decision making. Interchange 8 (3), 1-12. Downey, M., & Levstik, L. (1991). Teaching and learning history. In J. P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 400-410). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company. Edwards, E., Carr, S., & Siegel, W. (2006) Influences of experiences and training on effective teaching practices to meet the needs of diverse learners. Education, 126 (3), 580-592. Fang, Z. (1996). A review of the resear ch on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Researcher 38, 47-65. Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). A case for case study Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Featherstone, H. (1992). Learning from the first years of classroom teaching: The journey in, the journey out East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. Fehn, B., & Koeppen, K. (1998). Intensive documen t-based instruction in a social studies methods course and student teachers’ att itude and practice in subsequent field experiences. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26 461-484.

PAGE 234

227 Florida Department of Education (2006). The Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. Retrieved May 10th, 2006, from h ttp://firn.edu/doe/sas/fcat.htm. Foster, S., & Hoge, J. (2000). Dismantling th e wall, one brick at a time: Overcoming barriers to parochialism in social studies classrooms. Social Education, 64 (6), 368370. Fresch, E. (2003). Children preservice teachers teach: Effects of an early social studies field experience. International Journal of Social E ducation: Official Journal of the Indiana Council for the Social Studies, 18 (1), 67-80. Fresch, E. (2004). Preparing preservice elemen tary teachers to use primary sources in teaching history. International Journal of Social Education, 19 (1), 83-103. Fritzer, P., & Kumar, D. (2002). What do pr ospective elementary teachers know about American? Journal of Social Studies Research 26 (1), 51-59. Gale, J. (1993). A field guide to qualitati ve inquiry and its cl inical relevance. Contemporary Family Therapy 15, 73-91. Ginsburg, M., & Newman, K. (1985). Social inequalities, schooling, and teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 36 (2), 49-54. Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospect for the future. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Goodlad, J. (1990). Teachers for our nation’s schools San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Guba, E. (Ed.). (1990). The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Guthrie, J., & Springer, M. (2004). A nation at risk revisited: Did “wrong” reasoning result in “right” results? At what cost? Peabody Journal of Education, 79 (1), 7-35. Guyton, E. (2000). Powerful teacher education programs. In J. D. McIntyre & D. M. Byrd (Eds.), Teacher education yearbook VIII: Re search on effective models for teacher education (pp. ix-xii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hargreaves, A. (1995). Development and desi re: A postmodern perspective. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman A. (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. 9-34). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Hakim, J. (1993). The history of us. New York, NY: Oxford Press.

PAGE 235

228 Henning, M., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2004). C ontext in Methods Course Learning: Lessons for partnership work. Teaching Education, 15 (4), 401-16. Hess, D. (2005). How do teachers’ political vi ews influence teaching about controversial issues? Social Education, 69 (1), 47-49. Hirsch, E. (1987). Cultural Literacy: What ev ery American needs to know Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Houser, N. (1995). Social studies on th e back burner: Views from the field Theory and Research in Social Education 23 (2), 147-168. Howard, R. (2003). The shrinking of social studies: As st andards-based reform gains ground, social studies is getting squeezed. Social Education, 67 (5), 285-288. Johnson, M., & Janisch, C. (1998). Connec ting literacy with social studies. Social Studies and the Young Learner 10 (4), 6-9. Johnston, M. (1990). Teachers’ backgrounds and beliefs: Influences on learning to teach in the social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 18 (3), 207-233. Jones, C., & Lapham, S. (2004). Teaching readin g skills in the elementary social studies classroom. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 17 (2), 1-8. Kelleher, R., & Cramm F. (1996). Developing an d using cases of social studies teaching. Canadian Social Studies, 30, 128-131. Knighton, B. (2003). No Child Left Behind: The impact on social studies classrooms. Social Education, 67 (5), 291-295. Ladson-Billings. G. (1991). Coping with multic ultural illiteracy: A teacher education response, Social Education, 55 (3): 186-89. LeCompte, M., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Leming, J. (1989). The two cultures of social studies education. Social Education 53 404-408. Leming, J. (1991). Teacher characteristics and social studies education. In J. P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 222-234). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company. Leming, J. (1992). Ideological perspectives w ithin the social studi es profession: An empirical examination of the "two cultures" thesis. Theory and Research in Social Education, 22, 293 312.

PAGE 236

229 Levine, M. (2002). Why invest in professional development schools? Educational Leadership 59 (6), 65-68. Levstik, L. (1996). Negotiating the historical landscape. Theory and Research in Social Education, 24, 393-397. Libresco, A. (2005). How she stopped worrying and learned to love the test…sort of. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis (Eds.), Wise social studies teac hing in an age of highstakes testing: Essays on cla ssroom practices and possibilities (pp. 33-50). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Loewen, J. (1995). Lies my teacher told me: Everythi ng your American history textbook got wrong. New York, NY: Touchstone. Mallette, M., & Readence, J. (1999). A be ginning teacher’s thoughts about reading: Influences from within and without. In T. Shanahan & F. Rodriquez-Brown (Eds.), Yearbook of the national reading conference 48 (pp. 500-509). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference. Maple, T. (2005). Beyond Community Helpers: The Project Approach in the Early Childhood Social Studies Curriculum. Childhood Education, (81) 3, 133-138. Martorella, P. (1994). Social studies for elementary school children: Developing young citizens. New York, NY: Merrill. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. McArthur, J. (2004). Involving preservice teach ers in social studies content standards: thoughts of a methods professor, The Social Studies, 95(2), 79-82. McBee, (1996). Can controversial topics be tau ght in the early grades? The answer is yes! Social Education 60 (1), 38-41. McCall, A. & Andringa, A. (1997). Learning to teach for justice and equality in a multicultural social reconstructio nist teacher education course. Action in Teacher Education 18, 57-67. McLaren, P. (1989). Life in schools: An introducti on to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education New York, NY: Longman.

PAGE 237

230 Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case st udy applications in education San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Morin, J. (1996). A research st udy designed to improve the prep aration of social studies teachers. Education, 117, 241-251. Misco, T. (2005). The moral nature of elementary social studies methods. Theory and Research in Social Education, (33) 4, 532-547. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, D.C.: Govern ment Printing Office. National Council for the Social Studies. ( 1979). Revision of the NCSS social studies curriculum guidelines. Social Education, 43 261-78. National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectation of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies Washington, D.C.: NCSS. Neill, M. (2003). Low expectations and less le arning: The problem with No Child Left Behind. Social Education, 67 (5), 281-284. Neill, M. & Guisbond, L. (2005). Excluding childr en, lost learning: The cost of doing business with NCLB. Social Studies for the Young Learner, 17 (4), 31-32. Neill, M., Guisbond, L., & Schaeffer, B. (2004). Failing our children: No Child Left Behind undermines quality and equity in education. The Clearing House, 78 (1) 1216. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies 19, 317-328. No subject left behind ? Think again. (2004). NEA Today, 23 (3). Onosko, J. (1989). Comparing teachers’ thin king about promoting students’ thinking. Theory and Research in Social Education 17, 174-195. Owens, W. (1997). The challenges of teachi ng social studies methods to preservice elementary teachers. The Social Studies 88, 113-120. Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers ’ beliefs and educational re search: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research 62, 307-332. Paley, V. (1992). You can’t say you can’t play. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

PAGE 238

231 Parker, W. & Jarolimek, J. (1997). Social studies in elementary education (10th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Pascopella, A. (2005). Staying alive: So cial studies in elementary schools. Social Studies for the Young Learner 17 (3), 30-32. Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluati on and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Ravitch, D. (1987). Tot sociology or what ha ppened to history in the grade schools? American Scholar, 56 343-353. Readence, J., Kile, R., & Mallette, M. (1998). Secondary teachers’ be liefs about literacy: Emerging voices. In D. Alvermann, K.. Hinc hman, D. Moore, S. Phelps, & D. Waff (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents’ lives (pp. 129-148). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes a nd beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 102-119). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster Macmillan. Sarason, S. (1996). Revisiting “The culture of the school and the problem of change .” New York, NY: Teachers College. Schwandt, T. (1994). Constructiv ist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118-137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Seidman, I. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critica l teaching for social change. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teach ing: Foundations for the new reform. Harvard Educational Review 57, 1-22. Slekar, T. (1998). Epistemological entanglemen ts: Preservice elementary school teachers’ “apprenticeship of observation” and teach ing history. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26 485-507. Slekar, T. (2006). Preaching history in a soci al studies methods course: A portrait of practice. Theory and Research in Social Education 34 (2), 241-258. Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

PAGE 239

232 Stafford, B., Williams J., Nubla-Kung, A., & Po llini, S. (2005). Teaching at-risk second graders text structure via social studies content, Teaching Exceptional Children, 38 (2), 62-65. Stake, R. (1994). Case studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 220-235). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stern, P., & Shavelson, R. (1983). Reading teachers' judgments, plans, and decision making. The Reading Teacher 37 280-286. Steven S. (2004). Teaching reading skills in the elementary social studies classroom, Social Studies and the Young Learner 17, (2), insert 1-8. Sturtevant, E. (1996). Lifetime influences on the literacy-related inst ructional beliefs of experienced high school history teacher s: Two comparative case studies. Journal of Literacy Research. 28, 227-257. Sugrue, C. (1997). Student teachers’ lay theories and teaching identities: Their implications for prof essional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 20, 211-225. Takaki, R. (1993). A different mirror—A histor y of multicultural America Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Company. Thornton, S. (1991). Teacher as cu rricular-instructional gatekeeper in social studies. In J. P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 237-248). New York, NY: Macmillan. Thornton, S. (2001). Educating the educator s: Rethinking subject matter and methods. Theory Into Practice, 40( 1), 72-79. Thornton, S. (2005). History and social studies: A question of philosophy. International Journal of Social Education, 20 (1), 1-8. Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Turner, T. (1999). Essentials of elementary social studies (2nd ed). Needham, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Ukpokodu, U. (2003). The challenges of teaching a social studies methods course from a transformative and social reconstructionist framework. The Social Studies 94, 7580.

PAGE 240

233 United States Department of Education (2004). No Child Left Behind. Retrieved May 10th, 2006, http://www.ed.gov/nclb/l anding.jhtml?src=pb 2004. University of Florida (1983). Is the proposed study more appropriate for the Ph.D. or Ed.D.? Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http ://www.coe.ufl.edu/web/?pid=87. Virta, A. (2002). Becoming a history teacher: observations on the beliefs and growth of student teachers Teaching and Teacher Education, 18 (6), 687-698 von Zasrtow, C., & Janc, H. (2004). Atrophy: The condition of the liberal arts in America’s public schools. Council for Basic Education Wade, R. (2000). Beyond charity: Servic e-learning for social justice. Social Studies and the Young Learner 12 (4), 6-9. Wade, R. (2002). Beyond expanding horizons: Ne w curriculum directions for elementary social studies. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 115-130. Wade, R. (2003). Teaching preservice social st udies teachers to be advocates for social change. The Social Studies, 94, 3, 129-133. Wade, R. and Raba, S. (2003). The Chicago experience: Border crossing for social studies pre-service teachers. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31 (2), 153173. Walberg, H. (2003). Accountability unplugged: The nation doesn't yet know whether accountability-based reforms will work, because they have barely been tried. Education Next, Spring. Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon B. (1998) A critical analysis on the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68 130-178. Wilson, E. (2000). From the university classroom to secondary classroom: An examination of two teachers ’ beliefs and practices about literacy in the social studies. In T. Shanahan. & F. Rodriquez-Brown (Eds.), Yearbook of the national reading conference 49 (pp. 344-359). Chicago. IL: National Reading Conference. Wilson, E., Konopak, B., & Readence, J. (1994). Preservice teachers in secondary social studies: Examining conceptions and practices. Theory and Research in Social Education, 3 364-379. Wilson, E., Readence, J., & Konopak, B. (2002) Preservice and inservice secondary social studies teachers: Beliefs and instru ctional decisions about learning with text. Journal of Social Studies Research, 26 12-22. Wineburg, S., & Wilson, S. (1991). Models of wisdom in the teaching of history. The History Teacher 24, 395-412.

PAGE 241

234 Wolk, S. (1998). A Democratic classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Yeager, E. A. (2005). Introduction. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis (Eds.), Wise social studies teaching in an age of high-stakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities. (pp. 11-32). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Yeager, E. A. & Wilson. E. (1997). Teaching hi storical thinking in the social studies methods course: A case study. The Social Studies 88, 121-126. Yeager, E. A. & Davis, O. L. (Eds.) (2005). Wise social studies teaching in an age of high-stakes testing: Essays on cl assroom practices and possibilities. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Yendol-Hoppey, D., & Tilford, K. (2004). Does anyone care about elementary social studies?: Dilemmas of teaching elementary social studies methods within a high stakes testing context. Social Studies Review, 44 (1), 21-25 Yendol-Hoppey, D., Jacobs, J., & Tilford, K. (2005). Voices of Florida elementary school teachers: Their conceptions of wise so cial studies practice. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis (Eds.), Wise social studies teaching in an age of high-stakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities (pp.51-68). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

PAGE 242

235 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Brian K. Lanahan was born in Jacksonville, Florida, on August 7th, 1975, as the fifth of the five children of Dennis Lanahan and Mary El len Lanahan. Brian received his undergraduate degree in 1997 from Troy State Univ ersity in Spanish and Social Science. Brian was selected as a Teach for America Corps member in 1998 and placed in Houston, Texas. In Houston, Brian taught a fifth gr ade ESOL class and a third grade bilingual class. During 2001-2002 school year Brian attended the University of California at Santa Barbara and earned a Master of Education degree in Elementary Education. From 20012003 Brian taught second grade ESOL in J acksonville, Florida. From 2003-2006 Brian completed his doctoral studies at the Universi ty of Florida, focusing on social studies Education.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0015440/00001

Material Information

Title: Practicing Teachers as Elementary Social Studies Methods Instructors: Their Beliefs about the Issues They Encounter in Preparing Preservice Elementary Teachers
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0015440:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0015440/00001

Material Information

Title: Practicing Teachers as Elementary Social Studies Methods Instructors: Their Beliefs about the Issues They Encounter in Preparing Preservice Elementary Teachers
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0015440:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












PRACTICING TEACHERS AS ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES METHODS
INSTRUCTORS: THEIR BELIEFS ABOUT THE ISSUES THEY ENCOUNTERED IN
PREPARING PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS















By

BRIAN K. LANAHAN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2006


































Copyright 2006

by

Brian K. Lanahan



























This dissertation is dedicated to Ty Thebaut in gratitude for her example of how to live
life with your glass more than half full.















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank the members of my supervisory committee, Drs. Elizabeth A. Yeager,

Diane Yendol-Hoppey, Elizabeth Bondy, Sevan Terzian, and Stephen Smith, for their

advice and assistance during this process. In particular, I thank Dr. Yeager for her

unflappable support, and I thank Dr. Yendol-Hoppey for the opportunity to teach the

elementary social studies methods course.

I am extremely grateful to my parents, Dennis Lanahan and Mary Ellen Lanahan,

for their love and support of my siblings and me throughout our education. Thanks go to

my grandparents Charles R. Thebaut, Josephine N. Thebaut, Dennis J. Lanahan Sr. and

Wanda B. Lanahan for their support of the education of all their grandchildren. I am

indebted to my brothers and sister and their spouses for their support, especially during

the last year, they are the greatest gift my mother and father ever gave me.

I appreciate the efforts of the many mentors and teachers who assisted me during

my education, inside and outside the classroom: Sr. Thomas Joseph, Mr. Leo Kindon,

Ms. Joanne Walsh, Mr. John P. Wilwol, Rev. James R. Flynn, Mr. Brian Sears, Dr. Ken

LaBrant, Dr. James Lima, Ms. Sue Hoag, Mr. Paul Nowicki, and Mr. Mike Holloway.

Dr. John Johnston deserves thanks for putting my body back together more than once.

Also, thanks go to the Panera staff, especially Sarah and Nicole.

Finally, I must say a special thank you to my mother, who taught me that the harder

you get knocked down, the higher you bounce.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKNOW LEDGM ENTS ........................................ iv

LIST OF FIGURES ........................ ........................... xi

ABSTRACT.................. .................. xii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ................... .................. .............. .... ......... .......

Introduction and Purpose of the Study .................................. .................1
Rationale for Study ...................................... .............. ..... .. ............................
Statem ent of the Research Problem .........................................................................2
Research Questions................................... ...........2
Theoretical O orientation .............................................3
Guiding Research.................... .... .....................5
Guiding Theory ................ ................... ......... .. ................ ........ .6
The Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design............................... ........7
Role of the Researcher............... ............. .. ........ ............... .......... 8
M methodology ...................................... ........... .......... ... 8
Participants ................................................. .........9
D ata C collection M ethods .................................................. ...............9
Observations ......................................................... ................ 10
Data Analysis................... ...................................... 10
Study Lim stations and D elim itations.................................................................... 12
Description of Chapters ................. ...... .................................... ... ........ 12
Potential Significance of the Study.................................................................... 13

2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .....................................................................14

Introduction...................................... ................................. ......... 14
Teacher Beliefs ............... ........... .. .............. ......... .... ........ 15
The Beliefs-to-Practice Connection .............................................. ......17
Changing Beliefs ................ ........................................... ........18
Sum m ary of Teacher B eliefs ......................... ........................................20
Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction....................21
Dr. Henry Merrill.................. .. .....................21
Dr. Rahima W ade ..................... .......... .......... .. ...... 24


v










Self-Portraits of the Practice of Elementary Social Studies Methods Professors.......25
D r. M arilynne B oyle-B aise ........................................ ................. 25
Dr. John Benson .............................................. ..... ...27
Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu ........................................ ...............28
Dr. Janice M cArthur ............ ......... ........ ........ .................. ....... ... .... 30
Summary of Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods
Instruction .............. ................. .. ... .. ........ ......... 3 1
Issues of Social Studies M ethods Instruction........................................ .................31
Challenge #1: Negative Past Experiences with Social Studies ........................32
Challenge #2: Lack of Interest in Teaching Social Studies............................32
Challenge #3: Confusion Over the Nature of Social Studies ..............................33
Challenge #4: Conflicting Conservative Sociological Beliefs .........................34
Challenge #5: Selecting W hat to Teach ........................................ ................. 35
Challenge #6: Using the Concurrent Social Studies Field Experience ...........36
Summary of Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction ............ .................38
Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies ................. ............................39
The Expanding Horizons Curriculum ..............................................39
Research on Effective Elementary Social Studies Practice..............................40
Five Requirements for Powerful Social Studies................ ......41
The Effects of the No Child Left Behind Act and High-Stakes Testing on
Elem entary Social Studies ........................................................ 45
Loss of instructional time ....................................................................................47
Quality ......................_. ...._.. ............. .........48
Summary of Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies ...............................48
Conclusion...................................................49

3 METHODS .................................................52

Review of the Purpose of the Study ................... .......................... ..... ...52
Statement of Problem ............... ............. ........ .... .... .... ...... 52
Research Questions............................... .....................53
Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design.................................................53
Study M methodology ......................................... ...... ..... ...55
Guiding Theory ................... ... ..... ....................56
Theoretical Orientation................................... ......... 56
Role of the Researcher.... ............... ....... .. .. ................. 57
Participants ......................................... ....... ........59
Explanation of "Dual Roles" ...............................................60
Course Information................ .. ................. 61
D ata Collection M ethods ................................................ ............... 62
Interviews ........................................ .........63
Observations .................... ..... .................. 64
W written Documents........... ..... .............. 65
Data Analysis................................ .. .. .... .. ........66
Verification of Interpretation-Trustworthiness.............................................67
Credibility ...................... ...................... 67
Transferability .....................................................67









Dependability and Confirmability ............... .............................68
D description of C h apters .................................................................................. 6 8
Sum m ary of M methods ............................................... ............... 69

4 A LEX IS JOH N SON .................................................70

Introduction Inf.........ormation ..............................................................................7
Background Information .............. ....................71
Professional Experiences ............................................................................. 72
Petty Research and Development School...................................................72
Elise Elementary ..... .......... ... .. ........ .. .... ..............73
Alexis's Classroom and Instruction.................... .. ......................73
What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? .75
B eliefs C oncerning Teaching .................... .................. .................75
Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies....................76
Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods .....................................78
How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their
Social Studies Methods Course?...................................79
How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of
Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? ........................ ....................81
Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and
Channels of Communication............................................... ......... ..................81
Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Testing ..........82
What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered
W while Teaching the Methods Course? ............. ..................... ..............83
Issues Related to M ethods Students .............................................. ......84
Conservative social beliefs .............. ............................... ........... 84
Tension between content and methods............................. ..........85
Students' negative experiences with Social Studies ....................................85
Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Field
Placement ............... .. .. .. ... .. ... .... ........ ..86
Lack of respect and professional development for elementary Social
Studies........................... ..... ............... ........ 86
Lack of time for elementary Social Studies .............. .... ............87
Other field place ent issues ............................. ............... 88
Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles ...........................................90
Content and theoretical knowledge................. .......... .... .................90
Lim ited tim e ..............9..........................1
Credibility................................. ............ ........91
Negotiations for instructional time and freedom................................... 92
Advantages of filling dual roles ....................................................93
Themes and Summary of Findings for Alexis Johnson............................................94

5 DAN CHARLES .......................................... ........ ...............95

Introduction and Background Information.........................................................95
Professional Experiences......................................... ...............95









Owen Elementary ....................................... ........ ........ 96
M ore Cooperative School ................................. .................... ..................97
D an's Classroom and Instruction ........................................................... .. 98
What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold? .99
B eliefs C oncerning Teaching .................... .................. .................99
Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies.....................99
Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods ...................................101
How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their
Social Studies Methods Course?......... ..........................102
How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of
Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? ........................ ..................104
Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and
Channels of Communication......... ......... ..................104
Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Testing ........106
What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered
W while Teaching the Methods Course? ................... ............... ............... 107
Issues Related to Methods Students ................ ............................107
Conservative social beliefs.................................................. .......... 107
Tension between content and m ethods............................ ............... 108
Students' negative experiences with Social Studies ................................109
Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Field
Placement .................. .. .. ..... ... .. .. .............. 109
Lack of respect and professional development for elementary Social
Studies........................... ..... .............. ........ 109
Lack of tim e for elem entary Social Studies ...............................................110
Other field place ent issues ................. ............... ..................................111
Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles ................ ........ ....... ........ ..........112
Content and theoretical knowledge........ .................. ....... ......112
L im ited tim e ......... ..... .... .................................. 113
Credibility................................. ........... ........113
Negotiations for instructional time and freedom.............................115
Advantages of filling dual roles .......................... ........ ..................115
Themes and Summary of Findings for Dan Charles ...... ...............................116

6 NORA IGLESIAS ...... ................ ..... .. ......... ................ 119

Background Information................ ................... ...............119
Professional Experiences....................................... ... ............ ...............119
Thebaut Elementary................................................ 120
Howe Elementary .............. ............ ......... ........ ..............120
Nora's Classroom and Instruction................................ ........... 121
What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?122
B eliefs Concerning Teaching .................... ................................. .. 122
Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies...................123
Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods ...................................124
How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their
Social Studies M ethods Course?............... ......................... ......... 125









How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of
Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? ........................ ..................127
Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and
Channels of Com munication..................................................... ................127
Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Testing ........128
What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered
While Teaching the Methods Course?....................................................129
Issues Related to Methods Students ...................... .................129
Liberal beliefs............................... .. .. ...... ........ 129
Content vs. methods tension and students' negative experiences............130
Student B behavior ................. ....... ... ..... ......... .................. .. ..... 131
Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and the Field
Placem ent ............. ................... ...... .... ........ .......... ...........132
Lack of respect for the elementary Social Studies methods course........ 132
Lack of professional development in elementary Social Studies.............133
Lack of time for elementary Social Studies ..............................................133
Other field place ent issues ......................................... 133
Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles ..........................................134
Content and theoretical know ledge............................................................134
L im ited tim e .................................................................................. 135
Credibility................................. ........... ........135
Negotiations for instructional time and freedom..................136
Advantages of filling dual roles ..... ........................................136
Themes and Summary of Findings for Nora Iglesias ......................................137

7 CROSS CA SE FINDIN GS.............................................................. ............... 140

Introduction............... ............. ...... .. ....... .. .......................... .... ...... 140
What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?140
Beliefs Concerning Teaching ................................ ............... 140
Beliefs Concerning Social Studies ....................................... 142
Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies ..................................... 144
Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies M ethods .....................................147
Sum m ary ................. ..... ............ ... .. ........ ... .. .... .... ... .. ......... 149
How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their
Social Studies M ethods Course?................. ............................................... 152
Shared Belief-to-Practice Connections....................................................152
Individual Belief-to-Practice Connections ........................................................154
Dan ...................................................... 154
N ora ...................................... ...... ........... .155
Alexis ........................... .......... ............. ......... 156
Influence of Course M materials on B eliefs......................................................... 157
Sum m ary .................. ...... ..... ...... ..... ... .. ............................................ ...... 158
How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of
Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum? ........................ ..................159
Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and
Channels of Com munication.................. ..................................................159










Beliefs About the Status of Social Studies in the Elementary Curriculum....... 163
Summary ..................... .. .. ....... ...... .. .. ................ 166
What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered
While Teaching the Methods Course?.............. ......................................167
Issues Related to M ethods Students ................. ................. ......................... 167
Conservative social beliefs and liberal social beliefs...............................167
Content vs. m ethods tension............... .....................169
Students' negative experiences with Social Studies ................................171
Student behavior. ................. ....... .. ........ ....... ......... .............. 171
Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and the Field
Placem ent ................ ................... .. .. ................. ....... .. ............ 172
Lack of professional development for elementary Social Studies ............172
Lack of time and respect for elementary Social Studies .........................174
Other field place ent issues ......................................... 175
Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles ..........................................177
Content and theoretical know ledge............................................................178
Lim ited tim e .......... ......... ......... ......................... 179
Credibility................................. ........... ........180
Negotiations for instructional time and freedom..................181
Advantages of filling dual roles ..... ........................................183
Summary ............................. ..... ............. 184

8 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 187

Sum m ary of the Findings of the Study ................. .............. ........................ ......187
Recommendations for Supporting and Improving Social Studies Methods
Instruction by Inservice Teachers ...................... ........................................ 188
Field Placement .......................................... ......... 188
Methods Course................ .................189
College of Education ............................ ................. ........190
Future Research ........... ..... .................... .... ........ ..................191
Research on Inservice Teachers Serving as Methods Instructors ...................191
Research on Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction...................... 192
Research Elementary Social Studies .................................. ........... 193
Conclusion about the Status of Elementary Social Studies......................................194


APPENDIX

A PROTOCOLS ....................................... ...... ........ ........197

B SYLLABU S................... ........................................... ........ .............. 206

LIST O F R EFER EN CE S ..................................... ...................................................... ...... 224

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................................ ............... 235
















LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

1-1 Ph. D. vs. Ed. D. ........................... .............. ........ .4

4-1 A lexis' classroom .......................................... .. ..............74

5-1. Dan's Classroom.......................... ....... ..............98

6-1. Nora's Classroom ............. ........ .......... ............ ....... ..... ...........121

7-1 Beliefs Concerning Teaching ................. ..............................141

7-2 Beliefs Concerning Social Studies ................................ ............... 142

7-3 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies......................................144

7-4 Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies...................................... 148

7-5 Belief-to-Practice Connections Shared............................ .................. 152

7-6 Belief-to-Practice Connection D an.................................... ................. 154

7-7 Belief-to-Practice Connection Nora .............................. ............... 155

7-8 Belief-to-Practice Connection Alexis.................................. .... ......... 156

7-9 Channels of Communication ....................... ..................................162

7-10 Issues R elated to M ethods Students ....................................................... 167

7-12 Issues Related to Filling Dual Roles.......................... ... ......................... 178
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education

PRACTICING TEACHERS AS ELEMENTARY SOCIAL STUDIES METHODS
INSTRUCTORS: THEIR BELIEFS ABOUT THE ISSUES THEY ENCOUNTERED IN
PREPARING PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS


By

Brian K. Lanahan

August 2006

Chair: Elizabeth Anne Yeager
Major Department: Teaching and Learning

Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary

schools, there is a need for strong methods instruction. However, elementary social

studies methods instruction at the university level can be idiosyncratic and difficult to

characterize, because methods courses often are taught by teachers from a variety of

educational and professional backgrounds, including inservice teachers. The individuals

examined in this study served in the "dual roles" of inservice teachers and elementary

social studies methods instructors. The study was informed by four major areas of

literature: portraits of practice in social studies methods instruction, teaching and learning

of elementary social studies, elementary social studies methods, and teacher beliefs. Case

study methodology was employed, and the theory that teacher beliefs drive practice was

the lens used to examine the beliefs and practices of the three participants while









chronicling the issues they encountered. Observations of methods instructors, interviews,

and written documents supplied the data to complete this investigation.

Findings from this study suggest that individuals serving in these dual roles

engaged in practices based on their personal beliefs and experiences, and were privy to

unique information about the status of elementary social studies in the elementary

curriculum. These individuals also encountered issues related to methods students, the

status of elementary social studies and field placements, and filling dual roles. To further

support individuals serving in these dual roles, recommendations for supporting and

improving social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers are included.

Suggestions for further study are recommended, including research about inservice

teachers serving as methods instructors, elementary social studies methods instruction in

general, and further elementary social studies research. Finally, conclusions about the

status of elementary social studies are discussed. Overall, filling these dual roles served

to facilitate the participants' methods instruction and gave them unique insights into the

status of social studies. The ability of the participants to relate and react to the

experiences and concerns of the methods students proved to be valuable.















CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Introduction and Purpose of the Study

Elementary social studies methods instruction at the university level can often be

idiosyncratic and difficult to characterize (Slekar 2006). While there is generally an

agreed upon need to understand how methods courses can better prepare preservice

teachers to engage in social studies practice to meet the needs of diverse student

populations (e.g., McCall & Andringa 1997; Ukpokodu 2003), portraits of those typically

instructing these courses are rare. Elementary social studies methods courses are often

taught by teachers from a variety of educational and professional backgrounds: "Retired

(secondary) social studies teachers, retired principals, teachers with a Masters degree in

curriculum and instruction and other willing but possibly not qualified people carried the

bulk of the load" (Slekar 2006, p. 255). This observation is mirrored at the University of

Florida, where inservice teachers often serve as social studies methods instructors. A

need exists to understand the particular beliefs that fuel the methods practices of these

instructors and the issues they encounter as inservice teachers instructing a methods

course.

Rationale for Study

The teacher education experiences of classroom teachers concerning social studies

"cannot be overlooked as factors that shape teachers' knowledge and classroom

practices" (Yeager & Wilson 1997, p. 122). Despite the power that such experiences have

over teachers, little is known about how the beliefs of inservice methods instructors









influence their methods practices, and how filling these dual roles in turn influences their

beliefs about social studies at the elementary level. Nespor (1987) suggested a further

examination of such beliefs: "Little attention has been accorded to the structures and

functions of a teacher's beliefs about their roles, their students, the subject matter areas

they teach, and the schools they work in" (p. 317). While there are many powerful

portraits of how beliefs influence the instruction of social studies teachers (e.g.,

Wineburg & Wilson 1991), portraits of how beliefs affect the methods practices of

inservice teachers serving as social studies methods instructors are virtually nonexistent.

This study seeks to fill this void in the literature.

Statement of the Research Problem

Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary

schools, there is a need for strong methods instructors. In many colleges of education, it

is common practice to employ inservice teachers to teach methods courses. A void in the

literature exists concerning the beliefs, practices, and issues encountered by these

instructors, so little is known about how to best support them as they perform their duties.

Thus, whatever new information is collected adds to the scholarship about the

practitioners who fill this role, and in the future will assist colleges of education to better

support these instructors.

Research Questions

This research study will seek to answer the following questions:

1. What beliefs about social studies education do these inservice teachers hold?
2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers hold inform their practice in their social
studies methods course?
3. How does filling these dual roles inform their beliefs about the place of social
studies in the elementary curriculum?
4. What do these inservice teachers believe are the issues they encountered while
teaching the methods course?










Theoretical Orientation

It is customary for qualitative researchers to detail their philosophical and

epistemological assumptions, such as the choice of methodology and procedures for data

collection and analysis, because these assumptions guide all aspects of their study (Gale

1993; LeCompte & Preissle 1993). This study is built upon a constructivist framework

(Crotty 1998; Schwandt 1994). Central to constructivism is inquiry into the experiences

of individuals and a description of the world as it is felt and understood by the individuals

(Schwandt 1994). In this study, the experiences are those of the inservice methods

instructors as they understand them. These experiences form the basis for constructed

meanings of events, situations, and beliefs. This process occurs over time and is

influenced by the individual's actions, but also by personal histories and contextual

factors (Schwandt 1994). In this study, it appears that the individual inservice methods

instructors draw upon their dual roles of methods instructor and inservice teacher to form

their mental constructions, which in turn inform their methods practice.

The results of this study are reported in the tradition of dissertations to fulfill the

requirements for the Doctor of Education degree at the University of Florida. In this

tradition:

The main purpose of the study is to describe (and analyze) a particular situation or
a chronicle of events for a particular sample. A theory, or components of a theory,
may be used to generate descriptive categories, but advancement or testing of the
theory is less important than documenting the event for this specific sample.
(University of Florida 1983)

For other requirements for an Ed. D. dissertation see figure 1-1. Therefore, the intent of

the study is to determine how the instructors' beliefs about elementary social studies











influence how they perform their role as "curricular- instructional gatekeepers" while

serving as methods instructors (Thornton 1991, p. 237).


PPLD. E dD.
1. Gu ding questions for the study are The main purpose of the study is to describe
formulated in association with theoretical (and analyze e) a particular situation or a
constructs. For e ample, the main purpose of chronical of events for a particular sample. A
the study maybe testing application of a tiwor, or components of a theory, may be
particular theory or rimpettiln dziLcxies used to generate descriptive categories- but
Failure to be able to m eairTTuLflld, p .'lE dw advancement or testing of the theory is less
diosen theory to the data collected would important than d:-Uiir eLaui ithe event for this
result in abortion of the study If new theory is specific sample.
developed its need is justified by pointing out
inadequacies in previous theories.
2. The literature revi ew is focused heavily on the The liteature review may be focused more on
theory, and empirical studies in which studies of similar events, similar iemirul
researchers have tested that theory perhaps in and or similar samples to tho se in This
different settings with different samples, particular study
3. Questions or %hpotheses hraE guide the data Questions or I.p po&heses dtit guide the data
analyses must be generated around variables analysis may be generated from either a
that play prominent roles in the "guiding theoretical perspective or a practical
theor. perspective to yield information useful to
decision-makers in this or similar :ea[ii

4. Primary target audience for the study is the The primary target audience for the studyis
community of scholars who do research on primarily educational decision-makers. who
the theory chosen to guide the study work with the tpe of group studied
5. Data will be analyzed and reported around An-- Iiterertir tfhem es that arise from the
themes that have direct bearing on the data are likelyto be reported i C die, have
theoretical focus of the study. implicate ons for educational practice.
Organization and presentation of results are Orgarization and presentation of results may
primarily relatedto Lnidaliri? -ieore6ii-al be based on themes corresponding direc-rl, o
constructs rather than the surface structure of content and structure of documents or
documents reviewed or data collection interview protocals.
instruments.
7. Data are analyzed using methods learned in Data may be analyzed using methods learned
the PhD. qualitative track. (For ampl e in the E dD. qualititative track (For e amp e.
etrhilraplh histori- ography, or educational case studies and contet analyses ofinterview
criticism m etods are more comm on case protocals are common).
study methods that do not permit indepth
analysis .are unusual)
S. Discussion of results must include a section Di session of results must include a sect on
on how the present findings e:: tend dwe body dealing with implications for practice.
of know edge supporting or failing to support
the zuidii'n theory

Figure 1-1 Ph. D. vs. Ed. D.

Also, within this tradition, questionsos or hypotheses that guide the data analysis

may be generated from either a theoretical perspective or a practical perspective to yield









information useful to decision-makers in this or similar settings" (University of Florida

1983). Given that the intention of this dissertation is to understand the beliefs and

practices of inservice teachers who serve as social studies methods instructors, the

questions and hypotheses that guide this study are guided by a practical perspective to

generate data that will facilitate the improvement of instruction by individuals in similar

situations.

Guiding Research

This study draws upon four major areas of research as the basis for the literature

review in Chapter 2: the literature regarding portraits of practice in social studies methods

instruction (e.g., Slekar 2006), the teaching and learning of elementary social studies

(e.g., Barton & Levstik 2004) and elementary social studies methods (e.g., Owens 1997),

and teacher beliefs (e.g., Pajares 1992). A brief description of each area literature follows

examples from each of the areas of literature to be discussed in Chapter 2.

In a recent work, Slekar (2006) detailed the connections between the beliefs and

resultant practices of an elementary social studies methods professor. Slekar found that

the professor believed the goal of social studies education was transmission of the

American cultural heritage (see Martorella 1994). This belief about social studies

education informed the professor's beliefs about social studies methods instruction. The

professor in question stated that the main job of elementary social studies teachers was to

serve as "knowledge conveyors," a belief that served as the basis of his methods

instruction. In 2004, Barton and Levstik published an extensive discussion of the teaching

and learning of history at the elementary level, Teaching History for the Common Good.

In their book, Barton and Levstik discuss the multitude of positions, perspectives, and

stances that are adhered to for the teaching of history at the elementary level. Illustrative









of the absence of consensus in history and social studies education is Barton and

Levstik's statement about the central concern of history education: "We cannot answer

the question, 'What kind of education prepares students for participatory democracy?'

because, quite frankly, no one knows" (p. 35). Given the lack of definitive answers to

important questions such as this, teachers often rely on their beliefs to inform their

instructional practices.

Also important to understanding the practices of teachers, methods instructors

included, is Barton and Levstik's suggestion: "To understand why teachers engage in the

practices they do, perhaps we need to turn to the socially situated purposes that guide

their actions" (p. 244). In the case of the inservice instructors in this study, the

consideration of "socially situated purposes" aids in understanding the basis of their

particular beliefs and resultant practices. While the literature focused exclusively on

elementary social studies methods is not as extensive as the literature focused on

elementary social studies education or teacher beliefs, a number of works exist that are

important to this study. One such work is Owens' 1997 article, "The Challenges of

Teaching Social Studies Methods to Preservice Elementary Teachers," in which Owens

describes six issues specific to methods instruction of elementary social studies. Chapter

2 also details the literature concerning teacher beliefs, which serves as the theoretical lens

for this study and is briefly described below.

Guiding Theory

The theory that teacher beliefs drive practice has been applied to many educational

situations (e.g., Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark &

Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989;

Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000;









Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994). This theory holds promise for understanding

teacher practices: "Educators are now beginning to realize that teachers (preservice

teachers, beginning, or experienced) do hold implicit theories about students, the subjects

they teach, and their teaching responsibilities" (Fang 1996, p. 51). The theory that beliefs

drive practice has been applied more often to preservice (e.g., Armento 1996) and

inservice teachers (e.g., Shulman 1987). Recently, the effects of teacher beliefs on

practices have been applied to the beliefs and resultant practices of an elementary social

studies methods professor (Slekar 2006). The present study extends this theory to the

beliefs and practices of inservice teachers serving as social studies methods instructors.

The Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design

The choice of a qualitative design is based on Patton's (1990) assertion that the

intent of qualitative research is to "provide perspective rather than truth, empirical

assessment of local decision makers' theories of action rather than generation and

verification of universal theories, and context-bound explorations rather than

generalizations" (p. 491). In this study, the local decision makers are the inservice

instructors; the study explores their beliefs concerning their social studies methods

instruction. Important to this study is a design that facilitates a depth of understanding

over breadth: "Qualitative methods permit the evaluation researcher to study selected

issues in depth and detail" (Patton 1990, p. 165). The study employs a qualitative

approach to create a rich description of each participant's beliefs in order to understand

his or her practices (Lincoln & Guba 1985). The complexity of teacher beliefs makes it

difficult to study them well using quantitative methodology (Nespor 1987).









Role of the Researcher

As the researcher in this study, I have the advantage of having focused on social

studies instruction in my own work as an elementary teacher and during my doctoral

studies. Moreover, I hold the advantage of being a fellow instructor of the same social

studies methods course taught by the study participants. The role of the researcher in any

qualitative study is to capture the reality and/or contexts the research subject inhabits.

The researcher should become the human instrument for data collection and

interpretation by having a theoretical sensitivity that creates an awareness of the

subtleties of the data being collected and analyzed (Lincoln & Guba 1985). This

theoretical sensitivity is demonstrated by the researcher's insights and ability to derive

meaning from the data. In the case of this study, my theoretical sensitivity is based on my

experiences as an elementary social studies teacher, my knowledge of the professional

literature concerning elementary social studies, and my concurrent experience of teaching

the same methods course.

Methodology

This study employs case study methodology to investigate three different

participants and "seeks out both what is common and what is particular about the case"

(Stake 1994, p. 238) through the analysis of multiple sources of data such as interviews,

observations, and document analysis (Patton 1990; Stake 1994; Yin 1994). Case studies

allow for an intensive, holistic, and in-depth investigation of each teacher as a unit

(Feagin, Orum & Sjoberg 1991; Merriam 1998; Stake 1994). Finally, Merriam's (1998)

contention that a case study is more focused on process than on outcome, and more on

context than on specific variables, is important for the current study because of the

complex and unique nature of teacher beliefs and their influence on teaching practices.









Participants

I selected participants as a result of criterion sampling "to review and study all

cases that meet some predetermined criterion of importance" (Patton 1990, p. 176). The

participants meet two criteria: They are inservice teachers, and they instruct an

elementary social studies methods course. I gained access to the participants by

approaching each of them in the context of our shared role as elementary social studies

methods instructors and inviting them to take part in the study. I secured institutional

permission through the Institutional Review Board of the University of Florida and the

Research and Evaluation Department of the School Board of Alachua County. The

participants are all inservice elementary teachers under the age of 35, with at least five

years of teaching experience, who instruct a section of Social Studies for Diverse

Learners (SSE 4312) at the University of Florida.

Data Collection Methods

Data sources include interviews, observations of social studies methods instruction,

and document analysis. This approach is based on Patton's (1990) belief that

qualitativeie methods consist of three kinds of data collection: (1) in-depth, open-ended

interviews; (2) direct observation; and (3) written documents" (p. 10). All of these

sources are used in this study to create a comprehensive description of the participants

and their beliefs. The use of multiple data sources is also based on Yin's (1994)

suggestion to use multiple sources of data when constructing case studies in order to

increase the reliability of the data and provide multiple examples of the participants'

approach to the topics of interest. Finally, interviews allow the participants to explain and

describe their beliefs about methods instruction and the issues they encountered during









the process, as well as provide a frame of reference for the observations of methods

instructors.

A large proportion of the data analyzed in this study is generated from at least two

interviews with each participant lasting approximately 60-90 minutes, based on Patton's

(1990) belief that "[d]irect quotations are the basic source of raw data in qualitative

inquiry" (p. 24). The first interview provides data about the participant's personal and

professional background and his or her beliefs about teaching. The second and any

follow-up interviews are based on information from previous interviews and

observations. The interviews are semi-structured based on Patton's (1990) interview

guide approach, in which the format, topics, and issues are covered in a specified outline

form and the interviewer determines the order and the wording of each question. The

interview guide approach allows for adjustments to the particularities of each interview

and/or participant. Interviews are audio taped and transcribed. The interview questions

reflect the major areas of interest in this study.

Observations

Data collection includes five to six three-hour observations of social studies

methods instruction for each participant. During the observations, I positioned myself in

the back of the classroom to make my presence as unobtrusive as possible. All

observations conclude with an informal conversation with the instructor to provide him or

her with the opportunity to discuss the class just completed. During each observation, I

took extensive field notes to describe the events that take place during the class.

Data Analysis

Data analysis occurs as a process of "examining, categorizing, tabulating, or

otherwise recombining the evidence" (Yin 1994, p. 102). It proceeds in order to generate









useable information about the areas of interest of the study, and it occurs in ihil/i-case and

cross-case to ensure high-quality accessible data while generating documentation of the

analysis, as well as retention of the data and the associated analysis after the study is

completed (Huberman & Miles 1994). Also, data reduction "makes sense of massive

amounts of data, reduces the volume of information, and identifies significant patterns"

(Patton 1990, p. 371). The data in this study need to be reduced to a salient and

manageable set in order to be properly analyzed. Several qualitative researchers have

stated that analysis should be an ongoing process starting at the beginning of the study

and not reserved for the end (e.g., Merriam 1998; Stake 1995). Based on this belief the

data reductions in the following order:

* Free coding after the first round of interviews; then data analysis and development
of codes to be used as a starting point to analyze instructional observation data

* Codes verified by a second coder

* Data analysis after all observations are completed using the previously generated
codes, adjustments of codes as necessary after this analysis, and then use of codes
to analyze the teacher-provided documents and the final interview data

* Analysis of data to identify the emerging themes across the data (Lincoln & Guba
1985) and verification of analysis by the research auditor

* Reduction of the data set on the basis of the identified themes in order to draw
conclusions (Patton, 1990)

* Presentation of conclusions to participants for verification

* Verification of interpretation

In order to keep the interpretations, reductions, and resulting conclusions closely

linked to the data, I incorporate a series of verification steps into the process. Two

experienced researchers supervise the study in order to create investigator triangulation

(Denzin, 1984), which is especially important in light of the difficulty of understanding









the complex interactions of the two roles that each of the participants performs and the

influence of these roles on instruction. I also perform member checking throughout the

project, including the verification of findings, conclusion, and final presentation. The

chair of my doctoral committee serves as research auditor (Cutcliffe & McKenna 2004).

Study Limitations and Delimitations

The proposed study is restricted to three elementary teachers in the Alachua County

area who also instruct a section of Social Studies for Diverse Learners at the University

of Florida. The study is limited by the amount of access granted by the teachers to their

instruction and their teaching philosophy.

Description of Chapters

This dissertation uses a traditional format. Chapter 1 introduces the purpose of the

study, the research questions, and the background of the problem. Chapter 2 reviews the

literature regarding portraits of practice in social studies methods instruction (e.g., Slekar

2006), the teaching and learning of elementary social studies (e.g., Barton & Levstik

2004) and elementary social studies methods (e.g., Owens 1997), and teacher beliefs

(e.g., Pajares 1992). Chapter 3 describes the methods, including information about each

of the participants and their settings, the sampling rationale, the research design, and the

process used to analyze the data. Chapters 4-6 describe each participant and the ii i/hill-

case findings related to each particular participant. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case

findings and conclusions of the study. Chapter 8 summarizes the findings, makes

recommendations to support social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers,

suggests directions for further research, and provides conclusions about the status of

elementary social studies.









Potential Significance of the Study

The study may advance our knowledge of how to utilize social studies methods

instructors from a variety of educational and professional backgrounds to teach a methods

course effectively. In addition, by addressing the issues the participants recognize, this

study informs us about the specific supports inservice teachers need in order to be

effective. The results from this study also fill a particular void in the literature:

Is what Merrill (a methods instructor) did more common in social studies methods
courses than I wish to believe? However, I cannot really answer that question
because the literature lacks descriptive accounts of social educators engaged in the
practice of teaching and learning in social studies methods courses. (Slekar 2006, p.
255)

This study provides such accounts.














CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This review of the literature addresses four major areas of research related to the

beliefs, practices, and issues encountered while serving as elementary social studies

methods instructors. These four areas include: teacher beliefs, portraits of the practice of

elementary social studies methods professors, the issues of elementary social studies

methods, and finally, research in elementary social studies. In keeping with the

dissertation guidelines for the Ed.D. degree, this review consists of literature "focused

more on studies of similar events, similar settings, and/or similar samples to those in this

particular study" (University of Florida 1983).

The review of the literature on teacher beliefs describes how a teacher's personal

beliefs about teaching and learning have a profound effect on his or her relationships with

students, curriculum, and instruction. This body of research provides insight into the

relationship between the beliefs and instructional practices of the participants in this

study. The literature concerning portraits of the practice of elementary social studies

methods professors reveals the paucity of such scholarship and the unique ways their

beliefs influence practices within the context of an elementary social studies methods

course. An examination of the closely related research on elementary social studies

methods reveals the specific issues related to teaching social studies methods in the

current high-stakes environment, where social studies is not currently included in

accountability systems and is thus less of an instructional priority. Finally, a survey of the









literature on elementary social studies leads to a discussion of a possible revision of the

elementary curriculum and the influence of the No Child Left Behind Act and high-stakes

testing on elementary social studies.

Teacher Beliefs

The literature concerning teacher beliefs provides a lens through which I examine

the research participants. Following is a description of the body of literature that

examines how the specific beliefs teachers hold influence and, at times, dictate their

instructional practices. In the context of this study, the beliefs held by these inservice

teachers are especially interesting because of the influence of their dual roles, the

ambiguous nature of social studies in general, and the currently imperiled status of

elementary social studies. In their positions as methods instructors, they are introduced to

a variety of strategies and social studies theories through various instructional materials

that influence their beliefs about elementary social studies instruction. In their positions

as inservice elementary teachers, they are able to 'road test' the knowledge they have

gained through the methods course and judge the effectiveness and practicality of these

strategies and theories. Given the unique and powerful relationship of these dual roles on

the participants' beliefs, it is imperative not only to label these beliefs, but also to

understand their effects on methods instruction. Challenging the participants' beliefs will

be a whole array of outside factors that can influence their methods instruction. These

outside factors include the expectations and biases of their methods students, the

expectations of the course's supervising professor, the imperiled status of elementary

social studies, the restrictions and boundaries of the methods course, and the culture of

university, among other things.









The background of a teacher is important to consider due to its effect on beliefs

about teaching (Fang 1996; Nespor 1987). In the case of these instructors, each has a

unique personal, educational, and professional background that has served to form his or

her beliefs about teaching and learning in general, and social studies in particular. These

beliefs must be examined: "To understand teaching from teachers' perspectives, we have

to understand the beliefs with which they define their work" (Nespor 1987, p. 323). As

Sturtevant (1996) stated, "We must learn far more about the beliefs, attitudes, and

perspectives of teachers in the educational process" (p. 251). This examination is

especially important for social studies teachers. Given the many dilemmas they face in

the current educational climate, beliefs are often the basis for making instructional

decisions when there are no clear-cut choices because beliefs help in "distinguishing

between better and worse courses of action, rather than right and wrong ones..."

(Hargreaves 1995, p. 15). These dilemmas have been exacerbated by the impact of high

stakes testing as teachers are faced with decreasing instructional time for social studies.

In general, teachers and their beliefs are typically conservative in general (Cuban

1984; Cuban 1993; Goodlad 1990; Lortie 1975; Owens 1997; Sarason 1996).

Conservative instructional beliefs are often formed early in teachers' lives when they

themselves are students (Calderhead 1991; Lortie 1975; Sugrue 1997; Wideen, Mayer-

Smith & Moon 1998). In addition to this "apprenticeship of observation," many other

factors, such as socioeconomic status, type of school attended, and parental and societal

influence, can inform a teacher's beliefs (Wilson, Readence & Konopak 2002). These

more conservative instructional beliefs have endured largely because the people typically

attracted to the teaching profession were once successful students in schools with









traditional instructional methods, and thus, they form beliefs based on these experiences

(Fehn & Koeppen 1998; Slekar 1998). These beliefs extend to all areas of education,

including curriculum, teaching, learning, and often extend in to the social realm (Pajares

1992).

The Beliefs-to-Practice Connection

Numerous studies have suggested teacher beliefs form the basis for instructional

decisions (e.g., Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark &

Peterson 1986; Cuban 1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989;

Onosko 1989; Pajares 1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000;

Wilson, Konopak & Readance 1994). This situation is especially important for

understanding the practices of the instructors in this study because of the autonomy that

university level instructors often enjoy. Yet, while the beliefs-to-practice connection has

been implicitly understood for decades, the research community has not explored it in

depth because of the difficulty of examining beliefs with quantitative methods (Pajares

1992). Reflecting a 'coming of age' of the beliefs-to-practice research, Fang (1996)

stated:

Educators are now beginning to realize that teachers (preservice teachers,
beginning, or experienced) do hold implicit theories about students, the subjects
they teach and their teaching responsibilities, and that these implicit theories
influence teachers' reactions to teacher education and their teaching practice. (p.
51)

Despite the inextricable connection between beliefs and practices, teachers sometimes

have conflicting beliefs that lead to contradictory instructional decisions (Cornett 1990).

These contradictions often appear as a mismatch between the content taught and the

methods used to deliver the content. For example, a teacher may have a strong belief in

teaching the principles of democratic participation, yet may favor instructional methods









that are didactic and authoritarian. Beliefs are also constrained by other factors that may

be imposed upon teachers for example, they may experience tension between their

expressed belief in preparing students for positive social interactions and the pressure to

cover content (Cornett 1990). In situations like this, the teacher is responding to an

external pressure that creates a mismatch between beliefs and practices.

The reality that practices do not always follow beliefs extends to preservice

teachers. Often, education students arrive at their first field placement full of exciting and

innovative teaching ideas, and then see their actions constrained by the institutional

expectations in the field placement (Armento 1996; Owens 1997; Wilson & Yeager

1997); thus, there is a disconnect between what they have been learning in their teacher

education program and the unique challenges of a real classroom (Henning & Yendol-

Hoppey 2004). This disconnect in social studies is described by Leming (1992) as the

'two cultures' of the academy and the classroom. Often, preservice teachers end up

conforming to the more conservative instructional practices and expectations of their

mentor teachers (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Owens 1997; Wilson, Konopak &

Readance 1994; Wilson & Yeager 1997), and this desire to conform creates difficulties in

fulfilling the 'theory to practice' promise of a concurrent field placement (Yendol-

Hoppey & Tilford 2004). Moreover, when preservice teachers begin their first year of

teaching, inconsistencies between their stated beliefs and actual practices may continue if

there is no opportunity to address the discrepancy (Mallette & Readence 1999; Wilson

2000).

Changing Beliefs

Within the educational research community, a certain level of disagreement exists

regarding the difficulty of changing teacher beliefs. Much of the research on the









possibility of changing beliefs has focused on the beliefs of preservice teachers. Some

researchers believe that it is possible to influence preservice teachers' beliefs during a

teacher education program (Angell 1996; Featherstone 1992; Guyton 2000; Johnston

1990), while other researchers believe it is difficult to change preservice teachers' beliefs

at all (Lortie 1975; Pajares 1992; Richardson 1996), particularly in the area of social

studies (Virta 2002). It may be that the degree to which preservice teachers change their

instructional beliefs depends upon the extent to which the new ideas they encounter

conform to their previous beliefs (Angell 1996). Nonetheless, simply having preservice

teachers discuss and express their beliefs is insufficient for change:

While reflection is central to teacher development, the mirror of reflection does not
capture all there is to see in a teacher. It tends to miss what lies deep inside
teachers, what motivates them most about their work, and it is this motivation to
achieve a precise purpose that also influences their instructional practices.
(Hargreaves 1995, p. 21)

When preservice teachers leave their teacher education programs, researchers have noted,

their first year of work can profoundly change their beliefs (Featherstone 1992;

Hargreaves 1995). In such cases, the strain of understanding and performing their new

roles as classroom teachers is a strong enough force to influence previously firm beliefs.

When teachers do settle into their roles as "curricular-instructional gatekeepers"

(Thornton 1991, p. 237), they often resist changes to their instructional beliefs and

practices, especially in light of specific educational reforms or mandates that regularly

come down the pike. Moreover, if teachers are denied input into these reform initiatives,

their instructional beliefs are not likely to change to reflect the imposed reforms (Cuban

1986). Thus, teachers will always retain some control over instruction in their classrooms

(Hargreaves 1995). This fact is important in understanding the beliefs and practices of









the methods instructors in this study in relation to externally imposed pressures that

influence social studies instruction at the elementary level.

Finally, as noted earlier, Pajares (1992) has argued that beliefs are shaped in

childhood and often endure throughout one's career. Pajares also claimed that beliefs

may change when individuals experience a change in authority. His claim is especially

important to this study because of the "change in authority" experienced by inservice

teachers as they move into the role of methods instructor.

Teachers in various subject areas have differing beliefs and justify their

instructional decisions based on those beliefs (Readence, Kile & Mallette 1998); social

studies teachers are no different (Leming 1991; Wilson 2000). One of the difficulties in

determining teacher beliefs about social studies is the ongoing debate still taking place

- over what exactly should be taught (Brophy & Alleman, in press; Thornton 2005). Yet

it is also important to note that, no matter how the current debate over what should be

taught is resolved (if ever), social studies teachers continue to exert a great deal of control

over what actually happens in their classrooms (Thornton 1991).

Summary of Teacher Beliefs

Research on teacher beliefs has examined the enduring nature of these beliefs

(Lortie 1975) and their powerful influence on instructional practice (Pajares 1992). Some

researchers have noted inconsistencies between the stated beliefs of teachers and their

actual instructional practices (Cornett 1990). Most often, these inconsistencies relate to

external constraints imposed on teachers. There also has been much debate about whether

teacher beliefs can really change. Some researchers have reported it is possible to change

beliefs (Guyton 2000), while others have noted that beliefs are formed early in life and

are very resistant to change (Richardson 1996). Finally, the research on beliefs of social









studies teachers shows their similarity to those of other subject area teachers (Leming

1991), and that social studies teachers do indeed use these beliefs to make instructional

decisions (Thornton 1991).

Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction

Shulman (1987) observed, "One of the frustrations of teaching as an occupation

and profession is its extensive individual and collective amnesia, the consistency with

which the best creations of its practitioners are lost to both the contemporary and future

peers" (p. 11). While significant portraits of practice exist in elementary social studies

methods literature, they are rare; fortunately, two recent portraits of practice have been

added. In order to analyze and organize the information in these portraits, I have applied

four conceptual categories: beliefs about teaching at the elementary school level,

including instructional traditions and the nature of teachers; beliefs about the nature and

purpose of social studies as a school subject; beliefs about teaching elementary social

studies; and beliefs about teaching social studies methods to preservice teachers.

Dr. Henry Merrill

Slekar (2006) analyzed the beliefs and practices of Dr. Henry Merrill, while

arguing the beliefs and practices of social studies methods professors are "largely absent

from the research literature" (2006, p.244), and that this absence leaves important

questions unanswered: "How does a methods professor view social studies subject

matter? How does a methods professor view teaching and learning? What are the

underlying beliefs that guide the social studies methods professor?" (2006, p. 244).

Slekar also points out elementary social studies methods courses are taught by instructors

from a wide range of professional and philosophical backgrounds; thus, "the idea of

'common practice' in these courses may not be too common" (2006, p. 241).









As a former elementary principal, Merrill held particular beliefs concerning

teaching and learning at the elementary level. Merrill believed his methods students

came to his course with "negative thoughts about this course already. ." stemming from

their experiences as students (2006, p. 246). Merrill thought elementary teachers had too

many other responsibilities and argued that this burden often led to "poor content being

taught" (2006, p. 250). Based on this belief, Merrill required his students to plan their

lessons based on Hirsch's Core Knowledge because "it gives you the materials and what

to teach" (2006, p.250), stating, "They (teachers) could just concern themselves with

weaving Core Knowledge into engaging lessons that elementary children would find

enjoyable" (2006, p. 251). These beliefs connected to Merrill's beliefs about social

studies and social studies teaching.

Merrill also held specific beliefs concerning the nature and purpose of social

studies, adhering to a "philosophy of social studies education with particular attention

paid to his passionate belief in the American story as the core" (2006, p. 241). For

Merrill, the stories of America's past formed "our common" heritage and were part of his

vision of history as "transmission of the cultural heritage" (Martorella 1994). Merrill

believed it was important for children to learn about historical figures through instruction

like his 'Monument Man' lesson, where students created a monument to important

historical figures using strips of paper with quotations and important facts. Consistent

with his "cultural heritage" vision, Merrill did not "introduce his students to what some

social educators might view as common practice-historical thinking, participatory

democracy, and multiculturalism" (2006, p. 241). By ignoring these skills and focusing









solely on the "grand narrative," Merrill intended to provide an exclusively celebratory

history to elementary children.

For Merrill, the main job of elementary teachers was to serve as 'knowledge

conveyors,' not historians. Merrill stated that elementary students should have "exposure

to deep content" that was "made enjoyable" by including "gimmicks" (2006, p. 247) and

other devices to ensure the content was fun for elementary students. This "deep content"

was to be organized around Hirsch's Core Knowledge: "... I think this is a great

curriculum to teach in the elementary school" (2006, p. 250).

Merrill wanted his preservice teachers to re-explore history content as students.

Consequently, he taught lessons to his methods students that were "exciting activities and

enjoyable experiences with history subject matter" (2006, p. 254). Merrill argued his

methods students should acquire a large fund of historical knowledge through a survey

course, based on the Core Knowledge curriculum. Merrill employed a three-step

approach to support his vision: He used the works of Diane Ravitch to explain what was

wrong with the elementary curriculum; he used Hirsch's Core Knowledge curriculum and

Cultural Literacy theory to argue for a history curriculum; and he introduced Joy Hakim's

history text as a teaching resource.

Slekar argues that more methods professors need to create "self-portraits" in the

action-based research tradition to improve methods practice (2006, p. 256). He

concludes:

The social studies professoriate consists of scholars from large research
universities, practitioners from colleges at liberal arts institutions, research
practitioners from state teaching universities, adjunct faculty from hidden comers
of higher education. We need to ask questions about each of these populations. We
need to know who they are. We need to know why they are engaged in the social









studies endeavor, and we need to know why and how they teach as they do (p.
256).

Dr. Rahima Wade

Misco (2005) reviewed the beliefs and practices of Dr. Rahima Wade through a

lens of moral education, revealing how her strong beliefs in civic participation influenced

her social studies methods course. Wade is a nationally recognized scholar on the

preparation of elementary social studies teachers to teach for social justice and civic

engagement through service learning.

Wade believed that preservice teachers often had very limited knowledge

backgrounds and needed structured experiences to broaden their understanding of social

problems and to give them a working knowledge of the issues. With regard to social

studies specifically, Wade's beliefs are in almost direct contrast to the "transmission of

the cultural heritage" (Martorella 1994) vision of Merrill. Wade adhered to a "reflective

inquiry" and "informed social criticism" vision of social studies (Martorella 1994). To

support her vision, Wade introduced students to her "Toward the Common Good"

curriculum model for elementary social studies, which focuses on developing

understanding concerning "issues of conflict, democracy, human rights, and

interdependence" to promote the "common good" by teaching skills of "discussion,

decisions, and details" (Misco 2005, p. 538). Part of Wade's curriculum included

discussions about what Misco labeled "closed and grey areas," which require students to

practice dealing with decisions having no clear-cut answers (p. 542). These acquired

skills were part of Wade's focus on helping elementary students understand multiple

perspectives on complex civic issues.









Wade advocated problem-solving instruction, which included discussion and

deliberation at weekly class meetings where elementary students could voice concerns

and find commonalities. Wade also advocated introducing elementary students to the

idea of the "common good" with an examination of free trade "through role-playing the

perspectives of different institutions, participants, and stakeholders involved" (p. 539).

Another instructional activity favored by Wade was a more structured form of

deliberation where students assembled a "top-ten" list covering students' opinions on a

contentious topic. In addition, Wade believed in having her methods students actively

participate in the instruction they were to deliver to elementary students. To experience

democratic deliberation, Wade's methods students deliberated the use of scarce resources

and took field trips to investigate the sources of trash in their community.

Self-Portraits of the Practice of Elementary Social Studies Methods Professors

A number of self-portraits created by various elementary social studies methods

professors are important to the current study. While none of these pieces of scholarship

was created exclusively to be expository self-portraits, they still illustrate the direct

connection between the individual beliefs and practices of these professors and their

approach to methods instruction. I have applied the same conceptual categories to these

self-portraits.

Dr. Marilynne Boyle-Baise

Boyle-Baise described her beliefs and practices in a 2003 article titled, "Doing

Democracy in Social Studies Methods." Her beliefs concerning the nature of teaching

and learning at the elementary level were rooted in Paley's (1992) book, "You Can't Say

You Can't Play" (1992). Like Paley, Boyle-Baise promoted a classroom culture where

students "learn to care for others and to connect across difference" (Boyle-Baise 2003, p.









61). In addition, Boyle-Baise thought most preservice teachers did not believe that

"doing democracy" was part of theirjob as teachers. Their concept of "making a

difference" mostly included helping elementary students improve their behavior and

perform better in school. Boyle-Baise sought to expand the responsibilities of her

methods students to include 'doing democracy'.

Boyle-Baise conceptualized social studies as "reflective inquiry" and "informed

social criticism" (Martorella 1994), in which the principles of democracy serve as the

foundation. This vision of social studies directly connects to Boyle-Baise's belief that

social studies should create a citizen who is "a reformer: critical, socially conscious,

comfortable with dissent, and ready for activism" with a "justice-oriented, difference-

sensitive stance" (Boyle-Baise 2003, p. 51). This approach aims to create citizens

prepared for participatory democracy.

Boyle-Baise believed elementary children should receive instruction that allows

them to:

investigate, deliberate, serve, and act; using deliberation to identify, mull over, and
critique causes of inequities; providing opportunities to serve with and learn from
members of disenfranchised communities; and grappling with issues of injustice,
pondering their redress, planning for, and possibly acting for, social change. (2003,
p. 59)

To teach these skills, Boyle-Baise advocated particular instructional activities such as the

creation of a "cooperative biography" where students chronicled the life of "an

outstanding citizen" (p. 61). This activity integrated history, geography and civic study,

and required students to work together and make democratic decisions concerning the

book's content.

Boyle-Baise also discussed her beliefs about social studies methods instruction,

saying that "the social studies methods course is an appropriate place to practice and









reflect upon doing democracy" (p. 50). In addition to doing democracy in a methods

course, Boyle-Baise stated, "[w]e can locate social justice and change at the center of our

agenda" (p. 53). Boyle-Baise admitted that some instructional activities traditionally

considered part of a methods course may need to be eliminated in order to meet the goals

of the course: "In a tightly packed methods course, adding service learning usually means

deleting something else... the inclusion of service learning will likely displace the

teaching of an original, thematic unit of study..." (p. 60). Difficult instructional choices

such as these highlight a challenging dilemma facing methods instructors who have

strong beliefs that displace traditional methods practice. This situation also illustrates

Hargreaves's (1995) claim that when faced with a dilemma and no clear-cut choices,

teachers will often use their own beliefs to make their decisions.

Dr. John Benson

In a somewhat narrower and more focused work, Benson's (1998) article "Using an

Inquiry Approach with Preservice Teachers to Explain the Process of Facts, Concepts,

and Generalizations" described his beliefs based on the work of Banks (1990) and the

resultant practices related to promoting the understanding and use of generalizations by

preservice teachers for instruction. Benson believed that the typical preservice teacher

only has experience with elementary social studies instruction focused on memorization

of facts, especially memorizing such things as the states and capitals.

Benson conceptualized social studies as "social science" (Martorella 1994) by

actively engaging his methods students in the creation of generalizations. Benson

explained how the typical states-and-capitals activity does not teach any "concepts" or

"generalizations," or even ensure understanding of what a "state" or a "capital" is.

Concerning social studies instruction, Benson stated that "teachers need to have the









blueprint of the knowledge pyramid in mind as we plan our lessons" (Benson 1998, p.

227). Benson argued that facts can be interesting, but they need to be presented in a

manner in which children can build a higher level of conceptual understanding that can

then be applied to other situations.

Benson contended that preservice teachers have a difficult time grasping teaching

for generalizations and seeing the "big picture" when planning instruction. To model

teaching for generalizations, Benson engaged his preservice students in creating a unit

where students worked with facts to develop concepts and create generalizations based on

those concepts. To help his students see the "big picture," Benson engaged them in

"building their own pyramids of knowledge... .to think of the big picture in planning their

social studies units and lessons" (Benson 1998, p. 227). Benson's attention to these issues

illustrates one of the issues faced by methods professors described later in this chapter.

Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu

Ukpokodu's (2003) article, "The Challenges of Teaching a Social Studies Methods

Course from a Transformative and Social Reconstructionist Framework," drew upon the

works of McLaren (1989) and Ladson-Billings (1991) "to develop preservice teachers'

skills for teaching from a critical pedagogy" (Ukpokodu 2003, p. 78). Ukpokodu's

approach often put her at odds with her typically socially conservative (e.g., Owens 1997)

preservice teachers from middle-class European-American backgrounds. Ukpokodu

expressed the belief that preservice teachers need to "develop an appreciation for human

interdependency, learn to construct a pluralist perspective and a sense of collective

responsibility, and commit to promoting a just and peaceful solution to global concerns"

(p. 75). Ukpokodu argued that preservice teachers bring biases, misconceptions, and

stereotypes to their work, which creates resistance to a transformative social studies









methods course. To overcome these biases, Ukpokodu showed videos such as "500

Nations," including the video's discussion of the events at Wounded Knee, to

demonstrate the concept of multiple perspectives on a historical event.

Ukpokodu's vision of social studies was "informed social criticism" (Martorella

1994). She relied on multicultural knowledge and understanding to reach the stated goals

of social studies (NCSS 1994), unlike the civic skills approach of Wade and Boyle-Baise.

Like Wade (2003), Ukpokodu was critical of the elementary social studies curriculum,

and she argued that it failed to educate a great majority of students, including preservice

teachers, about their identities, roles, and responsibilities in a participatory democracy.

But unlike Benson, Ukpokodu did not discuss her beliefs about actual social studies

instruction at length, only mentioning the need to teach elementary students to discuss

controversial issues in an effective and civil manner, and advocating for the use of books

such as This Is My House by Arthur Dorros (1996) to teach the NCSS theme of "people,

places, and environment."

Ukpokodu taught her methods course from a "transformative and social

reconstructionist perspective" with a desire to "[expand] the curriculum to include people

of color, women, unsung heroes, children, and global perspectives" (2003, p. 75). The

course aimed to help preservice teachers develop the skills for using critical pedagogy

with the use of "open inquiry, exploration of social issues, study of human conditions,

social justice, and activism" (p. 75). In order to overcome multicultural illiteracy,

Ukpokodu required her students to research the personalities, roles, contributions, and

perspectives of diverse individuals from American history using Takaki's (2003) A

Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America and similar books.









Dr. Janice McArthur

McArthur's (2004) article, "Involving Preservice Teachers in Social Studies

Content Standards: Thoughts of a Methods Professor," focuses specifically on instructing

preservice teachers how to use standards. McArthur's goal for her methods instruction

was "to convince preservice teachers to use standards as a foundation for improving the

quality of social studies education and to develop their positive attitude toward social

studies content" (2004, 82).

Concerning teaching in general, McArthur believed, based on federal mandates, the

choice of teachers is not whether to include standards, but how to do so. McArthur stated

that most preservice teachers hold the limited view that elementary social studies is based

on the content and skills found in textbooks, and on memorization. Professing her faith

in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), McArthur stated the crafters of the act

"embraced increased teacher accountability with the intent of advancing student learning"

(p. 79).

Interestingly, McArthur did not discuss her beliefs about the purpose and nature of

social studies. Perhaps indicative of the current educational climate, McArthur presented

a vision of social studies as "standards based," a concept not included in Martorella's

(1994) descriptive typology of the five most prevalent visions of social studies

instruction. Moreover, McArthur did not mention any particular instructional methods for

elementary social studies, only discussing the importance of using scientifically proven

instructional methods.

McArthur also approached methods instruction with a strong advocacy of the No

Child Left Behind Act, claiming it has "a well-documented record of success" (2004, p.

79) and a reliance on "standards based" instruction. McArthur believed preservice









teachers should understand the concept of standards early in their teacher preparation

programs. Based on this belief, her social studies methods course concentrated on

teaching the required standards with "appropriate preparation for planning and teaching"

(2004, p. 80).

Summary of Portraits of Practice in Elementary Social Studies Methods Instruction

Portraits of practices in elementary social studies methods instruction are rare, but

"eminently educative" (Slekar 2006, p. 255). Portraits of the practices of two very

different and thoughtful methods professors were featured in this section. Both Dr. Henry

Merrill and Dr. Rahima Wade made explicit connections between their beliefs and

instructional practices. Also reviewed were self-portraits of the beliefs and practices of

four other methods instructors. Dr. Marilynne Boyle-Baise and Dr. Omiunota Ukpokodu

both described methods instruction with the aim of social justice, the former using

democracy as the vehicle, and the latter using multicultural knowledge and competency.

Dr. John Benson presented a model of methods instruction to provide his students with

the skills and knowledge to teach social studies using generalizations. Finally, the social

studies vision of Dr. Janice McArthur demonstrated the growing power and influence of

'standards based' instruction and its ability to dictate instructional practices of methods

professors. These portraits suggest that beliefs do indeed influence practices in

elementary social studies methods courses.

Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction

To understand the issues of teaching an elementary social studies methods course,

it is helpful to look at Owens' (1997) study of instruction at seven institutions of higher

education in South Florida, where he identified six specific issues to elementary social

studies methods instruction. While explaining these issues, Owens (1997) observed it is









especially important, "when generalists in elementary education may be teaching social

studies methods.. .the generalists must be aware of the challenges that come with the

territory" (p. 113). What follows will be a discussion of these issues, guided by Owens'

(1997) six challenges as a framework.

Challenge #1: Negative Past Experiences with Social Studies

The first challenge for elementary social studies methods instructors is how to

overcome the negative perceptions held by many preservice elementary teachers of social

studies in general (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Owens 1997). In Owens' (1997)

study, more than two-fifths of the preservice teachers described their own past social

studies courses as boring, a perception formulated during their "apprenticeship of

observation," (Lortie 1975, p. 65), when instruction generally emphasized textbooks and

rote memorization (e.g., Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; McArthur 2004). Attempts to

overcome these negative experiences have at times met with little success. This is doubly

unfortunate, as teachers can communicate their own dislike of the subject and reproduce

the poor instruction they themselves once received (Chapin & Messick 1999; Turner

1999), continuing a vicious cycle that can only serve to weaken the future of the subject.

Challenge #2: Lack of Interest in Teaching Social Studies

The second challenge awaiting methods instructors is the belief that other subjects

in the curriculum are more desirable to teach than social studies. In Owens (1997) study,

33.2% of the preservice teachers surveyed reported their interest level for teaching social

studies as "low." This finding has been supported by many methods professors (Benson

1998; McArthur 2004, Slekar 2006). This challenge leads to an even greater one: how

can the preservice teachers get excited about the varied possibilities for social studies









instruction when they lack interest in the field itself (McArthur 2004; Owens 1997;

Slekar 2006; Wade 2003)?

Challenge #3: Confusion Over the Nature of Social Studies

The third challenge awaiting methods instructors is confusion over the definition of

social studies: "How can preservice elementary teachers adequately understand the

multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of social studies if they believe social

studies is one of the academic disciplines in the social sciences" (Owens 1997, p. 114)? In

a situation where preservice teachers are unable to articulate the correct definition of

social studies, there is little hope they will be able to deliver effective instruction. This

situation is not entirely the fault of the preservice teacher. The history of social studies is

full of conflicting views about its nature and definition (e.g., Barr, Barth & Shermis 1977;

Brophy & Alleman, in press; Thornton 2005). This creates a 'moving target' for

preservice teachers to understand.

Practicing teachers, curriculum specialists and school administrators, whose views

concerning the field of social studies have the most immediate impact on students, are

sometimes at odds with the definition proposed by the National Council of the Social

Studies (NCSS). While NCSS has determined that effective social studies instruction

should "prepare young people to identify, understand, and work to solve problems facing

our diverse nation in an increasingly interdependent world" (NCSS, p. 159), many

practitioners have interpreted the field far differently. For example, Thornton (2001) has

argued that many view social studies instruction as a method to inculcate specific values

within a child, whether those values are patriotism, idealism and free enterprise or

cultural pluralism, environmentalism and community service. Even elementary social

studies methods professors have struggled with a definition of the field, with some









emphasizing "facts, concepts and generalizations" (Benson 1998), while others approach

methods courses with a "multicultural social reconstructionist approach" (Ukpokodu

2003). At whatever level, the nature and purpose of social studies is assuredly going to

be determined, not by a relatively faceless organization, but by the instructor in the

classroom (Thornton 1991).

Challenge #4: Conflicting Conservative Sociological Beliefs

The fourth challenge is to persuade preservice elementary teachers to adopt and

teach the social studies goal of working to improve society (Owens 1997). Often,

preservice teachers will agree with liberal and egalitarian ideals, but then disagree on

specific, contentious social issues related to reaching that ideal. Most preservice teachers

come from rural areas, small towns or suburban communities, with little experience or

knowledge of diverse cultures, and many prefer to teach children who are similar to

themselves and have little interest in multicultural ideals (e.g., Henning & Yendol-

Hoppey 2004; McCall & Andringa 1997; Owens 1997; Ukpokodu 2003). These

preservice teachers bring biases, misconceptions and stereotypes that contribute to their

negative disposition toward teaching minority children (McCall & Andringa 1997;

Ukpokodu 2003), and are difficult to change (Parajes 1992). This is of particular interest

for this study. Owens details how often methods professors hold significantly more

liberal social beliefs than the preservice teachers they instruct. Confirming that beliefs

inform practices, the methods professors often instruct from the more liberal "reflective

inquiry" or "informed social criticism" (see Martorella 1994) perspective, which is often

at odds with the "far more conservative" social beliefs of a typical preservice teacher (p.

116). When preservice teachers hold conservative social beliefs they often do not feel the

need to teach with the goal of social change, which put them at odds with the goal social









studies: "prepare young people to identify, understand, and work to solve problems

facing our diverse nation in an increasingly interdependent world" (NCSS, 1994, p. 159).

While conservative beliefs are the norm occasionally preservice teachers hold more

liberal social beliefs that are more aligned goals of social studies. More liberal social

beliefs often led teacher to question the status quo and teach for social change. There is

hope, as Angell (1998) determined it was difficult, but possible, to change the

"traditional" instructional beliefs of preservice teachers during a social studies methods

course. Slekar (1998) drew a similar conclusion, attributing the difficulty to

disagreement between the experiences of preservice teachers during their "apprenticeship

of observation."

Challenge #5: Selecting What to Teach

The fifth challenge relates to the continuing expansion of the number of topics

deemed pertinent to social studies education at the preservice level (Owens 1997). As

content demands increase, so does pressure on instructors to prepare preservice

elementary teachers to teach this new content adequately. Currently, methods courses are

overburdened with too many demands, begging the question, "How should teachers be

educated to tend the curricular-instructional gate?" (Thornton 2001, p. 72). This burden

also relates to the fact that elementary social studies teachers are lacking in content

knowledge (Chapin and Messick 1999; Fritzer & Kumar 2002; Owens 1997; Parker &

Jarolimek 1997; Thornton 2001; Ukpokodu 2003; Slekar 2006). Consider, for example,

that elementary teachers scored only 54 percent correct on a basic test of chronological

events in American history (Fritzer & Kumar 2002). Based on such findings, teachers'

subject matter knowledge has become a central concern of some educational research in









determining the depth and breadth of knowledge teachers must know to teach elementary

students (Thornton 2001).

The content problem is also related to the "liberal arts component of teacher

education and...to methods in the professional education component.... [T]his separation

of subject matter and method in the education of social studies teachers, although

conventional, poses problems" (Thornton 2001, p. 77). In this traditional division of

studies, it is assumed that preservice teachers have learned the necessary content during

the liberal arts component of their education. However, this is often not the case, shifting

some content obligations to the methods course. Social studies methods teachers cannot

cover all the content knowledge in their methods courses, and yet, they cannot assume

adequate content knowledge of their preservice teachers (Fritzer & Kumar 2002)

resulting in a true "Catch 22".

Despite the documented lack of content knowledge of preservice teachers, a widely

held belief (e.g., Fresch 2003; Morin 1996, Thornton 2001) exists that methods courses

should retain a singular focus on social studies methods, such as "inquiry, immersion,

small group discussion, and problem solving, cooperative learning, simulation, role

playing, storytelling, guided fantasy, modeling, demonstration, historical investigation,

research, creating, and reflecting" (Fresch 2003, p. 70). The best solution is most likely a

balanced approach covering a "thorough education of teachers in the subject matters of

the curriculum, methods, and their interrelationships" (Thornton 2001, p. 78), achieved

with a thoughtful alignment of social studies prerequisites and methods instruction.

Challenge #6: Using the Concurrent Social Studies Field Experience

The sixth and final challenge awaiting methods instructors is the difficulty of

utilizing a concurrent field placement effectively (Owens 1997). This is associated with









the reality that almost all the instructional strategies suggested in most elementary social

studies methods courses, such as role-playing, simulation and inquiry projects, are active

and social learning experiences that are often at odds with the more 'traditional' teaching

styles of cooperating teachers. In certain cases, cooperating teachers actively discourage

the use of more progressive teaching methods and require students to employ traditional

methods (Yeager & Wilson 1997). Despite the reluctance of many cooperating teachers

to support the innovative practices introduced to preservice teachers in methods courses,

there is an agreed-upon need for a concurrent field placement for elementary social

studies methods students (e.g., Fresch 2003; Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Morin

1996; Owens 1997). Despite the unfortunate disconnect between what is taught in a

methods course and what is practiced within the placement, research has shown the field

placement is beneficial for both elementary students and preservice teachers (Kelleher &

Cramm 1996; Leming 1989; Morin 1996; Owens 1997); as Fresch states, "The ability of

the preservice teachers to make connections between the course on campus and the

teaching in the field enabled them to provide challenging and enriching experiences for

the children" (2003, p. 75). Further adding to the challenge of concurrent field

placements are school settings where social studies is not tested or part of an

accountability scheme-social studies is often given only 30 minutes a week or is

nonexistent-making what is learned in a methods course impossible to see in classroom

practice (Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). To address

this challenge, colleges of education need to monitor field placements to ensure that

preservice teachers have an opportunity to witness social studies instruction and are

allowed to utilize the social studies strategies they have learned (Owens 1997).









Summary of Issues of Social Studies Methods Instruction

In summary, there are a number of issues specific to elementary social studies

methods instruction. The first is related to the preservice teachers' negative past

experiences with social studies as students during their "apprenticeship of observation"

(Lortie 1975). If their perceptions based on these experiences are not changed, preservice

teachers will communicate and reproduce the poor instruction they received when they

become classroom teachers (Chapin & Messick 1999; Turner 1999). The current

challenge of a lack of interest in teaching social studies creates further challenges for

methods professors (Benson 1998; McArthur 2004; Slekar 2006). Another challenge is

the longstanding confusion and debate over the nature of social studies (Thornton 2005).

This situation makes for difficulty when preservice teachers are unable to articulate the

definition of social studies (Owens 1997). The generally conservative social beliefs of

preservice teachers also are a challenge, as those who choose to become teachers often

have conservative social beliefs (Goodlad 1990; Lortie 1975), and this inhibits them from

fully embracing the more progressive views that characterize social studies (NCSS 1994).

The lack of content knowledge among preservice elementary teachers (Fritzer &

Kumar 2002) creates yet another challenge for methods instructors as they select a

curriculum. When methods students are content-deficient, methods instructors must use

their own judgment to determine the workable instructional balance of "content" to

"methods" (Thornton 2001). The final challenge is how best to capitalize on the

concurrent field placement when the cooperating teacher limits the instructional freedom

of the preservice teacher (Owens 1997), or the preservice teacher is placed in an

environment where social studies instruction is nonexistent or extremely limited (Yendol-

Hoppey & Tilford 2004).









Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies

The Expanding Horizons Curriculum

The standard curriculum for elementary social studies (since 1934) has been

slightly differing versions of Paul Hanna's expanding horizons/environments curriculum

(EH) (Thornton 2001; Turner 1999; Wade 2002). In the last few years, EH has been

critiqued for, among other things, a lack of content at the first three grade levels and a

lack of exposure to other countries until middle school (e.g., Fritzer & Kumar 2002),

prompting some more conservative critics to advocate for including only history in the

social studies curriculum (Ravitch 1987). However, as Barton and Levstik (2004) have

pointed out, definitive answers in social studies education, especially on critical

questions, are not easily decided and often result in endless debate. As a result, EH has

been the subject of a number of critiques over the years, but the curriculum has proven to

be quite durable (Wade 2003).

Most recently, in response to the 'history only' critics, Brophy and Alleman (in

press) suggest a reconceptualization of the elementary social studies curriculum based on

cultural universals. They seek not to abandon the EH curriculum completely; rather, they

favor "retaining most of the same topics, but developing them more coherently and

shifting emphasis from the expanding communities sequence to introducing students to

the fundamentals of the human condition..." (in press). Brophy and Alleman's

reconceptualization rejects some of the recent calls (Ravitch 1987) to abandon a

pandisciplinary approach and replace it with a history emphasis, disputing point by point

the arguments put forth by the history-only advocates. For example, Brophy and Alleman

especially reject the notion that children need "fanciful" heroes to emulate. These

advocates for a "cultural universal" conception of the field of social studies describe a









curriculum model that focuses on "...human activities involved in pursuing needs and

wants related to cultural universals.....because teaching students about how their own and

other societies have addressed these purposes provides a sound basis for developing

fundamental understandings about the human condition..." (in press). Also of particular

interest to this study are the critiques and alternatives to EH provided by one of the

methods professors profiled in the "portraits of practice" section of this chapter. Based on

a review of the literature concerning EH, Wade (2002) summarized the three major

critiques of EH as: "(1) the nature of children's life experiences and learning in modem

society; (2) the nature of the EH curriculum; and (3) the present state of elementary social

studies" (p. 117). In light of these critiques, Wade (2002) proposed the "Toward the

Common Good" curriculum, with the goal of helping students learn about and address the

problems and needs of a contemporary and diverse world.

Research on Effective Elementary Social Studies Practice

In 1987, Lee Shulman broke new ground with his article, "Knowledge and

Teaching: Foundations for the New Reform." Shulman called for the documentation of

the "wisdom of practice" of teaching. While arguing many effective teachers kept their

knowledge in their classrooms, Shulman also called for extensive and contextualized case

studies of effective teachers and their practices. To understand these case studies,

Shulman described the seven categories of knowledge for effective teaching of them

"pedagogical content knowledge," or "the blending of content and pedagogy into an

understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented,

and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for

instruction" (Shulman, 1987, p. 8), is often perceived as indispensable. Case studies

based on the observation of expert teachers are central in modeling pedagogical content









knowledge. Building on the work of Shulman, O.L. Davis called for "educational

practitioners and researchers to undertake, write, and publish case studies of wise

practices" (Davis 1997, p. 3). By doing so, social studies methods instructors will be

provided with a model for new teachers to emulate, and perhaps develop an

understanding of what it means to be an effective educator within social studies.

In October 2000, the journal Social Education devoted almost an entire issue to

"wise practice in challenging classrooms." In this issue, the wise practices of teachers

working in challenging settings were documented, an idea that Yeager and Davis (2005)

slightly modified and explored in their book, Wise social studies teaching in an age of

high-stakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities. In 1994, the

National Council of Social Studies issued "Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum

Standards for Social Studies," which listed five requirements for powerful social studies

teaching and learning. The following section will summarize those five requirements and

provide examples of "powerful social studies" by drawing on examples from Yeager and

Davis's (2005) book.

Five Requirements for Powerful Social Studies

The first requirement is that instruction should be meaningful to both teacher and

students. The course material must meet the objectives of the teacher, and the content

must be useful to students in and out of class. Effective teaching will consist of

meaningful learning activities and assessments focused on the central ideas of the

instruction. The effective teacher will "construct, together with her students, based on

their needs and interests" the content to be learned (Barton, 2005, p. 28). One method,

which makes instruction meaningful, is for teachers to capitalize on students' interests

about a particular subtopic. For example, during a unit on Florida history, students









revealed a curiosity about the identities and roles of loyalists and patriots during the

American Revolution. In an effort to make the lesson relevant and meaningful, the

teacher seized upon this interest and had his students explore those identities and roles to

satisfy their curiosity and encourage a greater understanding of Florida history (Yendol-

Hoppey, Jacobs & Tilford 2005). By encouraging students to explore their interests

within a broad but defined area, the instruction was both meaningful and memorable.

The second requirement for powerful social studies teaching and learning is

integrative instruction. Effective instruction will integrate a wide range of content and

instructional approaches and whenever possible, the most effective teachers will be

capable of incorporating the use of technology to expand the variety of sources students

can draw upon (Libresco 2005). There are two types of integration: integration across the

disciplines in the field of social studies, and integration across school subjects. The

former shows students how all the disciplines within social studies interact: "If students

are to understand how the social world operates, they cannot study history or geography

or economics or any of the other components of social studies in isolation" (Barton 2005,

p. 23). To this end, teachers are required to use skills from all areas of social studies to

ensure students have complete understanding of the content.

Given today's overloaded curriculum, "integration across subject areas is a

practical necessity" (Barton 2005, p. 26). If teachers are to deliver powerful instruction,

they must "learn how to integrate" social studies instruction into other subjects (Libresco

2005, p. 37). Integration across subject areas is not only efficient, but pedagogically

sound: "How would students learn the content if not through text, visual images, and the

collection of data? How would they construct their understanding if not through









speaking, writing, drawing, and other such displays" (Barton 2005, p. 25)? These

questions must be answered if students are to be exposed to effective social studies

instruction.

The third requirement for powerful social studies teaching and learning is value-

based instruction. Effective instruction will raise ethical questions about content, with the

aim of fostering student concern for the common good (McBee 1995). This instruction

will highlight the implications of controversial content and challenge students to make

value-based decisions (Hess 2005). To this end, teachers must be aware of their personal

opinions and seek out sources to provide a balanced presentation of information. By

raising ethical questions and controversial issues that "challenge students to think beyond

the boundaries of their own community" teachers "open students' eyes to the perspectives

and values of others..." (Foster and Hoge 2000, p. 368), teachers can accomplish two

important tasks: "to encourage students to realize that they can effect change and to open

students' minds to the beliefs of others" (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 369). The teacher

should also encourage students to act upon their beliefs and remind students that taking

action in the name of their beliefs is part of the "socio-political protest" history of

America (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 368).

The fourth requirement is instruction must be challenging. Effective instruction will

have ambitious goals and standards. The teacher is responsible to ensure students meet

those goals and standards. Moreover, instruction should compel students to think

creatively and critically, suggest solutions, and take positions on public issues. Teachers

should challenge the beliefs and the academic skills of their students, and teachers should

expect their students to "work with a variety of sources, encounter varying perspectives









and conflicting opinions, develop conclusions and arguments based on evidence, and

collaborate with others as part of a learning community" (Barton 2005, p. 19). Through

careful questioning about their beliefs, students are pushed to go beyond their own

experiences and examine their own prejudices and misinformation (Foster & Hoge 2000).

The final requirement is instruction to be active for both teacher and students. The

teacher must design and adjust the curriculum to reach the instructional goals in such a

way that students must actively construct their knowledge. Such activities involve

making decisions and solving problems, and "they provide students the chance to pursue

their own interests, as well as to relate new learning to previous knowledge and

experience" (Barton 2005, p. 14). Moreover, by actively constructing their own

knowledge, students build their own interpretations, "to create something, to put things

back together, to 'transform,' self-consciously, the data in front of them" (Bryom 1998, p.

2). Such interpretations must be based on the available evidence and held up to

inspection.

In order to strengthen their own teaching, educators must be able to adapt a lesson

in progress to meet the students' needs and reach the objective of the lesson, according to

the "specific contexts and clues" of each unique classroom (Foster & Hoge 2000, p. 370).

Teachers also need to be active outside of the classroom by continually interrogating their

own instruction (Barton 2005). This reflection comes in the form of thinking "long and

hard about why she teaches and what she teaches" (Libresco 2005, p. 37). What better

method to develop within students the ability to think reflectively and critically than by

having educators ensure that they practice such thinking themselves?









The Effects of the No Child Left Behind Act and High-Stakes Testing on
Elementary Social Studies

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the resultant focus on high-stakes

testing is exacerbating, rather than solving, educational problems (Neill 2004; Neill

Guisbond & Schaeffer 2004; Von Zasrtow, & Janc 2004; Wade 2002; Yeager 2005).

NCLB is built on four principles: "accountability for results, more choices for parents,

greater local control and flexibility, and an emphasis on doing what works based on

scientific research" (U.S. Department of Education 2004). NCLB mandates an

accountability model to be used by America's public schools by attaching sanctions for

states that did not comply with its policies (Guthrie & Springer 2004). Under its

provisions, performance standards are used as benchmarks for improvements that must

show 'adequate yearly progress' (AYP). All schools must show continual progress

towards meeting their AYP goals or face consequences, such as allowing students to

leave the school in favor of a more successful school, or the replacement of existing

teachers and administrators (Guthrie & Springer 2004).

In her article, "Staying Alive: Social Studies in Elementary Schools," Angela

Pascopella (2005) describes the harsh reality concerning social studies and the impact of

high-stakes testing: "It's a crisis. Social studies, particularly in the elementary grades, has

been pushed to the back burner in schools" (p. 30). Because measurements of social

studies achievement are not included in the NLCB accountability system, social studies is

in sharp decline, prompting some to initiate nationwide discussions of how to salvage

social studies in the school curriculum (Howard 2003). The severity of the situation is

such that "members of visiting accreditation teams have heard administrators and faculty

proudly announce that they do not teach any social studies or science in elementary









school because they focus all their attention and energy on reading and math" (Fritzer &

Kumar 2002, p. 51).

In the state of Florida, the high-stakes testing program is the Florida

Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT). The data generated by the FCAT is used to

assess schools under the No Child Left Behind Act. The Florida Department of Education

explains that FCAT is "part of Florida's overall plan to increase student achievement by

implementing higher standards. The FCAT, administered to students in Grades 3-11,

contains two basic components: criterion-referenced tests, measuring selected

benchmarks in Mathematics, Reading, Science, and Writing from the Sunshine State

Standards; and norm-referenced tests in Reading and Mathematics, measuring individual

student performance against national norms (Florida Department of Education 2006). As

a result, social studies achievement is not assessed on the FCAT. While almost every

state has its own set of elementary social studies standards (Buckles, Schug, & Watts

2001) and moreoe than half of the states (not Florida) have statewide assessments in

social studies" (Chapin & Messick 1999, p. 11). Mirroring national trends, social studies

has nearly disappeared from the curriculum in many schools in Florida (Fritzer & Kumar

2002; Henning & Yendol-Hoppey 2004; Neill & Guisbond 2005; Yendol-Hoppey &

Tilford 2004; Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004).

There is hope, however. In cases where social studies instruction is "blocked" and

children change classrooms for social studies, actual instruction is more likely to occur

(Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). In addition, professional development schools are

more likely to emphasize the untested subjects because of their focus on teacher

preparation in all subjects (Yendol-Hoppey & Tilford 2004). Despite the efforts of many,









the prognosis from the elementary social studies community for the subject's long-term

health is 'fair.' If there is not a concerted and organized effort that prognosis could

become 'terminal.'

Accountability-driven assessment also has had two major effects on teaching and

learning in elementary schools: less time for social studies instruction and a diminished

quality of the overall educational experience. All the focus remains on assessment testing,

in spite of the fact that evidence indicates that a focus on tests actually decreases student

motivation and increases the proportion of students who leave school early (Amrein &

Berliner 2003).

Loss of instructional time

Instructional time for social studies is shrinking. As previously discussed, under the

weight of the No Child Left Behind Act, schools must demonstrate "adequate yearly

progress" in the assessed subjects. As a result, "schools nationwide have scaled back on

P.E., health, social studies, and foreign language classes to devote more time and

resources to reading, writing, math, and science-courses tested under the federal law

and used to evaluate schools" (NEA 2004, p. 26). Not surprisingly, this situation has led

to increased tension in the elementary school over the teaching of social studies: "The test

is the curriculum, and instruction is controlled by the imperative to raise test scores"

(Neill & Guisbond 2005, p. 31). When social studies is not assessed, instructional time

shrinks and social studies teachers end up at odds with administrators who "are

demanding more reading and math instruction" (Knighton 2003, p. 293). Moreover, this

situation is heightened in schools with poor test scores, "where nearly half of the

principals report moderate or large decreases in social studies instruction" (NEA 2004, p.









27). As a result, the actual amount of time devoted to social studies instruction ends up

being determined by administrators.

Quality

The greatest effect of the loss of social studies and other areas not assessed on high-

stakes assessments is a drop in the level of quality of students' experiences with the

subject. In response to the pressure to raise test scores, teachers have reported "a sacrifice

in the quality of their teaching and students' experiences in the classroom" (Neill &

Guisbond 2005, p. 31). The result is a decline of quality instruction within elementary

social studies. As is often the case, state standards offer a narrow curriculum that

"revolves around memorized random information that turns the subject into a travesty"

(Neill & Guisbond 2005, p. 31). Finally, and most tragically, teachers are required to

teach testing skills from expensive commercially produced materials "as early as the

second grade" (Knighton 2003, p. 291). Surely, the influence of high-stakes testing has

produced a situation where powerful social studies instruction is becoming increasingly

difficult, if not impossible (Yeager 2005). This only serves to reinforce the perception

among students that social studies is "worthless," ensuring that Owens's (1997) second

challenge, integral to creating effective social studies teachers, may never be overcome.

Summary of Recent Research in Elementary Social Studies

There has been considerable important recent research relevant to this study.

Critiques of the "Expanding Horizons" curriculum have grown louder in the last few

decades, calling for teaching a more history-based elementary social studies curriculum.

As a result, proponents of retaining a pandisciplinary approach (e.g., Brophy and

Alleman, in press; Wade 2003) have offered their own curriculum revisions that promote









problem-solving skills and global awareness. There also has been research on effective

social studies practice in elementary teaching.

Much of the recent scholarship on effective social studies practice has grown out

of Shulman's (1987) work titled, "Knowledge and teaching: foundations for the new

reform," in which he called for the documentation of the "wisdom of practice" of

effective teachers. Shulman's ideas have been applied to social studies instruction and

have resulted in a number of pieces of scholarship that capture effective social studies

practices. This scholarship, in combination with the 1994 (NCSS) statement

"Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies," provided

illustrative examples of the five requirements for effective practice. Finally, the negative

effects of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) on elementary social studies were

discussed. Overall, NCLB has reduced both the quality and frequency of social studies in

elementary schools, ultimately influencing perceptions of the field among both students

and preservice teachers.

Conclusion

To understand the beliefs of these inservice teachers who serve as elementary social

studies methods instructors, I reviewed the literature concerning teacher beliefs. The

research on teacher beliefs suggests a strong beliefs-to-practice connection exists as

teachers perform their duties. This connection means the particular beliefs teachers hold

often heavily influence their instructional practices; thus, knowledge of these beliefs is

necessary to understanding and improving instructional practices. At times, there are

inconsistencies in the beliefs and practices of teachers, stemming most often from

conflicting beliefs they hold or external pressures mandating practices inconsistent with

those beliefs. There is a certain level of disagreement among researchers about the









difficulty of changing teacher's beliefs about social studies instruction, but there exists a

general agreement that a teacher's attitudes toward the field are formed early in life,

during the time they are first exposed to social studies as young students. The

instructional beliefs of social studies teachers, like all other teachers, tend to be rather

conservative, and enable the teacher to retain ultimate control over what happens in his or

her classroom.

To understand the practices of elementary social studies methods professors, I

examined research literature concerning methods instruction by examining the relevant

portraits of practice in the field. These portraits revealed unique perspectives concerning

social studies instruction while serving to highlight the individual issues faced and

solutions developed by elementary social studies methods instructors. Consider, for

example, the portraits of two very different methods professors, which revealed two

thoughtful and highly organized examples of methods instruction, both of which

exhibited a strong belief to practice connection. In addition, four distinct self-portraits

also suggested a strong beliefs-to-practice connection among four methods professors

who adhered to four distinct visions of social studies education.

I reviewed the research literature concerning elementary social studies methods

instruction and elementary social studies to understand the issues associated with

teaching an elementary social studies methods course. I used Owens' (1997) six

challenges as an organizational structure and supported or illustrated each one by

examining the literature. While all six issues are important to understanding the situation,

two issues stood out as particularly interesting because how they have been exacerbated

by the current focus on high-stakes testing. The "lack of interest in teaching social









studies" and "using the concurrent social studies field experience" issues have been

compounded in recent years because of the increasing focus on other subject areas now

stressed as part of testing accountability systems. These accountability systems also have

served to create negative perceptions of social studies.

I also surveyed the literature concerning recent research in elementary social

studies to understand the relevant topics currently under review. The pandisciplinary

'Expanding Horizons' curriculum has proven durable, despite the perpetual debate about

its effectiveness and appropriateness. Most recently, 'Expanding Horizons' has been

criticized by some conservative historians who seek to replace it with a history-based

curriculum. This recent round of criticism has spurred advocacy of pandisciplinary social

studies and the putting forth of alternative models of social studies that retain at least

parts of the 'Expanding Horizons' curriculum. To capture the 'wisdom of practice' of

effective social studies instruction, some recent research has focused on recording the

practices of effective teachers. Finally, I reviewed recent research regarding the effects of

the No Child Left Behind Act and high-stakes testing on elementary social studies. This

review revealed the negative effect this legislation and its resultant accountability

schemes are having on elementary social studies due to its untested status.














CHAPTER 3
METHODS

Review of the Purpose of the Study

As detailed in Chapter 2, there is a paucity of literature reviewing the beliefs and

practices of elementary social studies methods professors at the university level. Of the

few existing quality portraits, all the professors cited the 1994 NCSS position statements

concerning the aims of social studies as validation for the basis of their methods

instruction. However, their practices varied greatly and depended mostly on their

personal beliefs about social studies education. There is a total lack of portraits of

inservice teachers serving as methods instructors (Slekar 2006). At the university where

the study was completed during the spring 2006 semester, four of the five elementary

social studies methods sections were taught by inservice teachers and the fifth was taught

by the researcher. Based on a need to understand the beliefs, practices, and issues of these

instructors, this study was designed to capture portraits of three of these instructors.

Statement of Problem

Given the currently threatened status of social studies instruction in elementary

schools, there is a need for strong methods instructors. In many colleges of education, it

is common practice to employ inservice teachers to teach methods courses. A void in the

literature exists concerning the beliefs, practices and issues encountered by these

instructors, so little is known about how to best support them as they perform their duties.

Thus, whatever new information is collected adds to the scholarship about the









practitioners who fill this role, and in the future will assist colleges of education to better

support these instructors.

Research Questions

This research study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What beliefs about social studies education do these inservice teachers hold?
2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers hold inform their practice in their social
studies methods course?
3. How does filling these dual roles inform their beliefs about the status of social
studies in the elementary curriculum?
4. What do these inservice teachers believe are the issues they encountered while
teaching the methods course?


Question one addresses the participants' beliefs concerning teaching in general,

social studies, teaching social studies, and teaching social studies methods. Question two

addresses their belief-to-practice connections noted in the data and confirmed by the

participants. Question three addresses the information the participants have about the

status of elementary social studies, how they come by that information in each of their

roles, and what beliefs they have about the status of elementary social studies and testing.

Finally, question four comprised the majority of the findings and focused on the issues

related to methods students, the status of elementary social studies and the field

placement, and issues related to filling dual roles.

Rationale for the Choice of a Qualitative Design

Babbie (1983) defined qualitative research as "the non-numerical examination and

interpretation of observation for the purpose of discovering underlying meanings and

patterns of relationships" (p. 537). A qualitative design was selected for a number of

reasons. The study was exploratory, while the beliefs and practices of elementary social

studies methods professors have been chronicled, the beliefs and practices of other









educators who instruct elementary social studies methods courses remain unrecorded.

Because the study was exploratory, a qualitative design was selected to allow for a

flexible yet rigorous inquiry; such flexibility is difficult with a quantitative design

(Lincoln & Guba 1985). The choice of a qualitative design also was based on Patton's

(1990) assertion that the intent of qualitative research is to "provide perspective rather

than truth, empirical assessment of local decision makers' theories of action rather than

generation and verification of universal theories, and context-bound explorations rather

than generalizations" (p. 491). This study required a design that facilitated depth of

understanding over breadth (Creswell 1998): "Qualitative methods permit the evaluation

researcher to study selected issues in depth and detail" (Patton 1990, p. 165). For depth

and detail, a rich description of each participant's beliefs was created to better understand

his or her practices (Lincoln & Guba 1985). A "rich description" is possible with a

qualitative design that uses interviews and observations to understand teachers' beliefs

and the context in which those beliefs are enacted (Cornett 1990; Pajares 1992).The

underlying beliefs were specific to each teacher, and it was necessary to understand these

beliefs while looking through the lens of an inservice teacher working as a methods

instructor. Moreover, a qualitative approach accounts for the context in which the

phenomenon of interest takes place (Creswell 1994; Lincoln & Guba 1985; Patton 1990).

A consideration of context is especially important for this study, given the many external

factors discussed in Chapter 2, which affect how these instructors perform their duties.

Like all qualitative studies, this research did not intend to present a definitive "truth" of

the given situation; the intention was to elicit reflection by the reader to create an

opportunity to learn about the situation under examination (Stake 1995).









Study Methodology

The study employed a case study methodology. The choice of case studies is

consistent with the dissertation requirements for the Doctor of Education degree: "Data

may be analyzed using methods.. .For example, case studies and content analyses of

interview protocols are common" (University of Florida 1983). The study included three

participants and sought to uncover "both what is common and what is particular about the

case" (Stake 1994, p. 238) through the analysis of multiple data sources, such as

interviews, observations, and document analysis (Patton 1990; Stake 1994; Yin 1994).

Feagin, Orum, and Sjoberg (1991) defined a case study as "an in-depth, multi-faceted

investigation, using qualitative research methods" (p. 2). For this study, a case was

defined as a "single bounded system or an instance..." (Merriam 1988, p. 153); each

participant served as a specific case. Case studies allowed an intensive, holistic, and in-

depth investigation of each teacher as a unit (Feagin et al. 1991; Merriam 1998; Stake

1995). Merriam's (1998) contention that a case study is more focused on process and

context was important for this study because of the complex and unique nature of the

teachers' beliefs and teaching practices (Nespor 1987). Perhaps the most important factor

in the selection of a case study methodology was the Feagin et al. (1991) statement that

case studies explore in detail the how and why of specific situations. Yin (1994) added

that case studies are not only suitable for answering how, but also what.

Regarding qualitative research, Marshall and Rossman have noted that "there is no

such thing as a perfectly designed study" and case studies are no exception to this rule

(1999, p. 42). Case studies have a number of limitations; chiefly, a case is one instance of

a "single bounded system or an instance..." and not representative of a certain population

(Merriam 1988, p. 153). Moreover, case studies rely on descriptive information provided









by researchers and participants, leaving room for the loss of important details and

differing perceptions. Finally, much of the interpretation in case studies is based on the

recollection of past events, and therefore is susceptible to problems inherent to memory.

Guiding Theory

This study was guided by the theory that teachers' beliefs drive their practice (e.g.,

Armento 1996; Brownell, Yeager, Rennels & Riley 1997; Clark & Peterson 1986; Cuban

1984; Cuban 1986; Fang 1996; Goodlad 1984; Leming 1989; Onosko 1989; Pajares

1992; Sarason 1996; Shulman 1987; Thornton 1991; Wilson 2000; Wilson, Konopak &

Readance 1994). Specifically, Pajares (1992) stated that "the beliefs teachers hold

influence their perceptions and judgments, which, in turn, affect their behavior in the

classroom" (p. 307). This theory was applied to understanding participants' practices

based on Fang's (1996) statement that "educators are now beginning to realize that

teachers (preservice, beginning, or experienced) do hold implicit theories about students,

the subjects they teach, and their teaching responsibilities" (p. 51). The theory that beliefs

drive practice has been applied most often to preservice (e.g., Armento 1996) and

inservice teachers (e.g., Pajares 1992). In Chapter 2, the effect of teachers' beliefs on

their practices is illustrated by the stated beliefs and the resultant practices of elementary

social studies methods professor Dr. Merrill (Slekar 2006). The current study extended

this theory to the beliefs and practices of inservice teachers serving as social studies

methods instructors.

Theoretical Orientation

It is customary for qualitative researchers to detail their philosophical and

epistemological assumptions regarding methodology, procedures for data collection, and

analysis (Gale 1993; LeCompte & Preissle 1993). This study was based on a









constructivist framework (Crotty 1998; Schwandt 1994). Constructivism is not a strictly

dictated set of beliefs or procedures, but a general descriptor of a family of methods and

philosophies to provide researchers with a general direction, and merely suggests

"directions along which to look," rather than "provide descriptions of what to see"

(Schwandt 1994, p. 221).

Constructivism views each individual as the central agent in creating his or her own

understanding of the world through experience (Crotty 1998). Central to constructivism is

an inquiry into individuals' experiences and a description of the world as felt and

understood by the individuals (Schwandt 1994). In the case of this study, the experiences

were those of the inservice methods instructors as they felt and understood them. These

experiences formed the basis of constructed meanings of events, situations, and beliefs.

This process occurs over time and was influenced by the individuals' actions, personal

histories, and contextual factors (Schwandt, 1994).

Role of the Researcher

The role of the researcher in this qualitative study was to capture the reality and

contexts that the research subjects inhabited. As the researcher, I attempted to become the

human instrument for data collection and interpretation while being aware of the

subtleties of the data collected and analyzed (Lincoln & Guba 1985). This theoretical

sensitivity was demonstrated by my insight and ability to derive meaning from the data.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) believe humans are the "instrument of choice" for qualitative

research because they are able to respond to environmental cues, interact with the given

situation, collect information at multiple levels simultaneously, perceive situations

holistically, process data upon receipt, request verification of data, and explore

unexpected occurrences. Included in any qualitative study is a brief biography of the









researcher: "Interpretive research begins and ends with the biography and self of the

researcher" (Denzin 1989, p. 12).

I began my teaching career working with poor and minority students as part of

Teach for America. I was drawn to Teach for America because of its social justice

agenda. During my two years with Teach for America, I worked in the inner city of

Houston, Texas, in a school where more than 95 percent of the students qualified for Title

I funding. During the 1998-1999 school year, I taught a fifth grade ESOL class,

composed mostly of students transitioning to full-time English instruction after exiting a

bilingual education program. During the 1999-2000 school year, I taught a third grade

bilingual class, with Spanish as the language of instruction.

During the 2000-2001 school year, I attended the University of California at Santa

Barbara and earned a Masters of Education degree in Elementary Education. My masters'

thesis was an action research project involving ESOL students and mathematics

instruction. I also completed ESOL coursework and professional development to support

second language learners during their acquisition of the English language. During the

2001-2002 school year, I relocated to Jacksonville, Florida, and taught second grade

ESOL to an extremely diverse class with a number of students from Eastern Europe and

Central Africa. During the 2002-2003 school year, I again taught second grade ESOL

while emphasizing social studies instruction as a means by which to connect to my

diverse student population.

As the researcher in this study, I had the advantage of focusing on social studies

instruction in my own work as an elementary teacher and during my doctoral studies. I

also held the advantage of being an instructor of the same social studies methods course









taught by the study participants. As a full-time doctoral student, I had the luxury of

almost a singular focus on this study. This was beneficial for a case study approach

because, as Merriam states, "case study investigators immerse themselves in the totality

of the case..." (Merriam 1988, p. 60). In this study, my theoretical sensitivity was based

on my experiences as an elementary social studies teacher, my knowledge of the

professional literature concerning elementary social studies, and my concurrent

experience of teaching the same methods course.

Along with the advantages of my previous experiences were a few disadvantages

that surfaced in the form of bias. The acknowledgement and understanding of a

researcher's bias are important in a qualitative study because, according to Miles and

Huberman (1994), "there is a strong and often unconscious tendency for researchers to

notice supporting instances and ignore ones that don't fit their pre-established

conclusions" (p. 263). While my personal philosophy concerning social studies education

is still evolving, I do hold a number of beliefs about what I think is effective social

studies instruction. For example, I favor social studies instruction that attempts to connect

to the lives and perspectives of minority students. I also have a strong conviction that

social studies instruction should be designed to allow students to make their own

interpretations of both historical and contemporary events and issues.

Participants

The unit of analysis was one instructor and the context he or she inhabited

(Merriam, 1998). Participants were selected as a result of criterion sampling "...to review

and study all cases that meet some predetermined criterion of importance" (Patton 1990,

p. 176). Participants selected for the study met two criteria: They were inservice teachers,

and they instructed an elementary social studies methods course. Participants were









approached in the context of our shared role as elementary social studies methods

instructors and invited to participate in the study. Institutional permission was secured

through the Institutional Review Board of the University of Florida and the Research and

Evaluation Department of the School Board of Alachua County. The three participants

were inservice elementary teachers under the age of 35 with at least five years of teaching

experience who instructed a section of Social Studies for Diverse Learners at the

University of Florida. Two of the participants were female and one was male. Two of the

participants taught fourth grade; one taught first grade. All were White/European

American and from middle-class backgrounds. For one participant, this was the first

experience with any university level instruction; another had taught the social studies

methods course during the previous semester, while the third had previous experience

teaching the social studies methods course, along with a methods course in literacy. To

ensure confidentiality, each participant assumed a pseudonym for use in the final report.

A full description of each participant and his or her settings can be found in Chapters 4-

6.

Explanation of "Dual Roles"

'Dual roles' signifies the participants served concurrently as inservice teachers and

methods instructors. Traditionally, elementary methods courses are taught by professors

and graduate students trained in the specific discipline. In larger teacher education

programs, there are multiple sections of the same methods course needing an instructor.

Few advanced graduate students specialize in elementary social studies, thus creating the

need to recruit advanced graduate students who are "generalists" or who specialize in

other disciplines. In situations when there are no advanced graduate students available,

inservice teachers with a master's degree in education are recruited. Among the









participants, Dan and Alexis were part-time advanced graduate students specializing in

literacy and also serving as inservice teachers. Nora was an inservice teacher with a

master's degree in Special Education. Furthermore, all three participants were teachers at

the field placement site of roughly half of their methods students.

Course Information

Because this course often is taught by instructors without specialized elementary

social studies training, a suggested syllabus and course materials have been developed to

facilitate instruction. Each instructor was given the freedom to instruct the course as they

wished, within the guidelines established by the supervising professor, Dr. Young. The

participants taught "Social Studies for Diverse Learners," which served as the singular

social studies methods course in the teacher education program. The course focus in the

provided syllabus states, "Throughout the social studies methods course you will learn

how to use the tools of inquiry as a teacher in a social studies classroom. Inquiry is a

'questioning' stance that good teachers assume as professionals who plan for, carry out,

and study the impact of their instruction" (See appendix B). While the course closely

aligns to the "reflective inquiry" vision of social studies, it incorporates elements of

"social science" and "informed social criticism" into the provided syllabus as well

(Martorella 1994). The "Key Tasks" represent a social science vision: "The content

exploration should result in the prospective teacher presenting the following: an enduring

understanding (generalization) supported by a synthesis of content from a variety of

resources, and identification of related standards" (See appendix B). James Loewen's

Lies My Teacher Told Me, which the students read and then presented a chapter,

represents an "informed social criticism" vision. The course does not focus exclusively









on these three visions; it presents all five competing visions of elementary social studies

as described by Martorella (1994) in detail during the first class.

The syllabus describes a suggested culminating assignment, the social studies

integrated teaching project, as "a mini-unit integrating social studies and another content

area. This mini-unit will be a culmination of all that we learned this semester and consist

of three Pathwise lessons" (See appendix B). As the first unit that the methods students

plan and actually teach, this assignment is quite challenging. During the final two classes,

the methods students make ten-minute presentations on their units by sharing their lesson

plans and providing student work samples.

Data Collection Methods

Data were collected through interviews and observations of social studies methods

instruction. This approach was based on Patton's (1990) belief that qualitative methods

require three types of data collection: in-depth, open-ended interviews of the participants;

direct observations of actions in their context; and collection of written documents. The

use of multiple sources of data enhanced the credibility of the findings. That is, each type

of data collected affords an opportunity to create an understanding of the topics being

analyzed; this, in turn, provides more credible findings. The use of multiple data sources

also was based on Yin's (1994) suggestion to use multiple sources when constructing

case studies in order to increase the reliability by providing multiple examples of the

participants' approach to the topics of interest.

Data was collected in the following sequence. The first interview of all the

participants was conducted following an initial observation all the participants. After the

first interview five to six observations were conducted of each of the participants. After

completion of the observations a interview was conducted with all of the participants.











Interviews

Patton (1990) stated that "qualitative interviewing begins with the assumption that

the perspective of others is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit" (p. 278).

In this study, interviews made instructors' perspectives explicit by giving participants an

opportunity to explain themselves and their situations (Spradley 1979). Interviewing was

"a powerful way to gain insight into educational issues through understanding the

experience of the individuals whose lives constitute education" (Seidman 1991, p. 7).

Much of the data was generated from interviews based on Patton's (1990) statement:

"The raw data of interviews are the actual quotations spoken by interviewees. There is no

substitute for these data" (p. 347). Two interviews lasting approximately 60-90 minutes

each were conducted with each participant. The first was a background interview to

gather data about the participant's personal and professional background, beliefs about

teaching, and the major areas of interest in the study (See appendix A). The questions for

the first protocol originated from my own personal experiences as a methods instruction,

my initial observations of all the participants and the relevant recent research. In addition

three articles in particular informed the creation of the first protocol. Owens (1997)

provided information about the challenges of elementary social studies. Yendol-Hoppey

and Tilford (2004) shed light on the contextual issues facing elementary social studies

methods instruction and the lack of professional development focused on elementary

social studies. Thornton (2005) highlight the 'content versus methods' tension found in

all elementary social studies methods courses.

The questions for the second interview were developed using the following steps:

First, the transcripts from the first interview were reviewed for missing data and to









determine areas in need of clarification, verification, or extension. Next, methods

instruction observation field notes were reviewed to determine actions, events, or

statements in need of clarification, verification, or explanation. Finally, a general protocol

was developed for use with all participants, and individuals protocols were developed for

each individual participant (See Appendix A). Included in both of these protocols were

specific examples of actions, events, or statements used as text for the participants'

responses, in order to gain deeper access to their beliefs and insights. Included in these

examples were statements made by a participant or students during the previous

interviews or observations, and presented to all the participants to add further depth to the

data. Moreover, some comments made by methods students during class that were

unknown to the participants at the time were made known to them, in order to provide

another perspective to which the participants could respond.

All interviews were semi-structured based on Patton's (1990) interview guide

approach in which the format, topics, and issues were covered in a specified outline form,

and the interviewer determined the order and the wording of each question. The interview

guide allowed for adjustments of each interview and participant. All interviews were

recorded and transcribed by the researcher, and reviewed by the participant for accuracy

(Lincoln & Guba 1985).

Observations

In order to collect data and gain greater insight into comments made during the

initial interview, I conducted observations based on Patton's (1990) statement that in

addition to interviews, "the description of events observed remains the essence of

qualitative inquiry" (p. 392). During the observations, I paid special attention to how the

participants' beliefs about social studies surfaced during methods instruction, including









belief statements and actions representing or related to new or previously stated beliefs.

Also during the observations, I paid close attention to events, actions, or statements that

represented an issue encountered during the participants' methods instruction for future

verification.

Data collection included five to six three-hour observations of social studies

methods instruction for each participant. These observations were conducted as direct

observations (Patton 1990). Direct observation differs from participant observation in

that, as a direct observer, I did not become a participant in the instruction and attempted

to be as unobtrusive as possible. In this study, direct observation was the only type of

observation possible, given that each instructor was responsible for the section he or she

taught. Moreover, my participation might have distorted the data. All observations

concluded with a conversation with the instructors to give them an opportunity to discuss

the class. During each observation, I took extensive field notes to describe the events that

took place and comments made during class.

Written Documents

Written documents were examined to provide further data related to the participants

(Patton, 1990). Access to written documents in this study was limited. The participants

were asked to provide any documents they felt would shed light on their methods

instruction. They had no documents to offer. The majority of the data generated by

written documents was from the provided syllabus, which each participant slightly

adapted to reflect the logistical particularities of his or her section, such as contact

information and class days (See appendix A). Nonetheless, the example syllabus did

provide insights into the suggested structure and focus of the course. In addition, the

books and readings suggested by the provided syllabus were used as sources of data.









Data Analysis

Data analysis was a process of "examining, categorizing, tabulating, or otherwise

recombining the evidence" (Yin 1994, p. 102). Data analysis occurred within and across

cases and was "aimed at ensuring (a) high-quality, accessible data; (b) documentation of

just what analysis were carried out; and (c) retention of data and association analysis after

the study is complete" (Huberman & Miles 1994, p. 27). Data reduction was used to

"make sense of massive amounts of data, reduce the volume of information and identify

significant patterns..." (Patton 1990, p. 371). Several qualitative researchers have stated

that analysis should be an ongoing process starting at the beginning of the study (e.g.,

Merriam 1998; Stake 1995); thus, analysis was an ongoing process.

Data reduction proceeded in the following order: Following the first round of

interviews, free coding was completed, data were analyzed, and codes were developed

and used as a starting point to analyze instructional observation data. These initial codes

were based on the main research questions of the study to be consistent with the tradition

of dissertations for the Doctor of Education degree, where "results are based on themes

corresponding directly to content and structure of documents or interview protocols"

(University of Florida 1983). After all observations were completed, the data were

analyzed using the previously generated codes. To better represent and organize the data,

codes were adjusted after analysis of the observation data and used to analyze the final

interview data. All data were analyzed to identify the emerging themes across the data

(Lincoln & Guba 1985). The data set was reduced to data related only to the identified

themes in order to draw conclusions (Patton 1990). These conclusions were presented to

the participants for verification.









Verification of Interpretation-Trustworthiness

To establish trustworthiness, this study considered one central question: "How can

an inquirer persuade his or her audiences that the findings of an inquiry are worth paying

attention to, worth taking account of?" (Lincoln & Guba 1985, p. 301). Lincoln and Guba

(1985) listed four criteria to establish trustworthiness: credibility, transferability,

dependability, and confirmability.

Credibility

To increase credibility, Stake (1995) stated it is "better to give the reader a good

look at the researcher" (p. 95). Lincoln and Guba (1985) recommend a number of

strategies to increase the probability that findings and interpretations of a qualitative

inquiry will be credible, including peer debriefing and member checking. Peer debriefing

is defined as "a process of exposing oneself to a disinterested peer in a manner paralleling

an analytic session and for the purpose of exploring aspects of the inquiry that might

otherwise remain only implicit within the inquirer's mind" (Lincoln and Guba 1985, p.

308). Member checking was important to ensure the researcher "represented those

multiple constructions adequately; that is, that the reconstructions that have been arrived

at via the inquiry are credible to the constructors of the original multiple realities"

(Lincoln & Guba 1985, p. 296). Member checking also improved the quality of the

findings by "regularly providing) critical observations and interpretations" (Stake 1995,

p. 115). I performed member checking throughout the project, including during the

verification of findings, conclusion, and final presentation.

Transferability

External validity and generalizability, in the quantitative sense, are not relevant to

qualitative research, so Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggested the use of the term









"transferability" (p. 288) to discuss similar notions for the results obtained from a

qualitative inquiry. Results from a qualitative inquiry are specific to the context in which

they are studied, which limits the possibility of external validity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Transferability is determined by the readers and their interest "in making a transfer to

reach a conclusion about whether transfer can be contemplated as a possibility" (Lincoln

& Guba, 1985, p. 316). Transferability in this sense depends on the presentation of "solid

descriptive data" or "thick description" (Patton, 1990) in order to determine the "degree

of similarity between sending and receiving contexts" (Lincoln & Guba 1985, p. 297).

Dependability and Confirmability

Dependability and confirmability both were established with one "properly

managed" (Lincoln & Guba 1985) research audit. To establish dependability, the auditor

reviewed the entire process through each stage of inquiry, including all methodology. The

auditor then established that the research process was correctly and consistently applied

to the research questions being considered, after which the findings were confirmed

(Lincoln & Guba 1985).

Description of Chapters

This dissertation adopted a traditional format. Chapter 1 introduced the purpose of

the study, the research questions, and the background of the problem. Chapter 2 reviewed

the literature regarding portraits of practice in social studies (e.g., Slekar 2006), teacher

beliefs (e.g., Pajares 1992), the teaching and learning of elementary social studies (e.g.,

Barton & Levstik 2004), and elementary social studies methods (e.g., Owens 1997).

Chapter 3 described the methodology, the sampling rationale, the research design, and the

process used to analyze the data. Chapters 4-6 describe each participant and the ii i/hill-

case findings related to each particular participant. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case









findings and conclusions of the study. Chapter 8 summarizes the findings, makes

recommendations to support social studies methods instruction by inservice teachers,

suggests directions for further research, and provides conclusions about the status of

elementary social studies.

Summary of Methods

This study is an inquiry into inservice teachers' beliefs, practices and issues

encountered while they serve as elementary social studies methods instructors. The

rationale for the choice of a qualitative design was based primarily on a desire to create

in-depth and holistic portraits of the participants. Specifically, the study employed a case

study methodology and each participant served as an individual case. The theory that a

teacher's beliefs influence his or her instructional practices guided the study.

Theoretically, the study was based on a constructivist framework and the associated

notion that individuals create their own understanding of the world through their

experiences. In this study, the role of the researcher was to serve as the human instrument

for data collection and analysis. The participants for this study were selected to fulfill

criteria of being inservice teachers and elementary social studies methods instructors. All

of the participants taught the same elementary social studies methods course, more or less

based on a provided syllabus and suggested lessons and activities described in this

chapter. Data were collected through interviews and observations, and analyzed through

coding procedures in order to organize and reduce the data. Verification of interpretation

and the findings was carried out to enhance credibility, transferability, dependability, and

confirmability.














CHAPTER 4
ALEXIS JOHNSON

Introduction

Chapter 1 served as an introduction to the research questions and an overview of

how the study was to be conducted. Chapter 2 was a review of the literature relevant to

the research questions. Chapter 3 offered an explanation of the research methods used to

conduct the study. The purpose of chapters 4-6 is to present the case findings for each

participant. As previously noted, the results of this study are reported to fulfill the

requirements for the Doctor of Education degree at the University of Florida (University

of Florida, 1983). To be consistent with this tradition, the results reported in this chapter

were organized in a manner to inform educational professionals in any subject area,

particularly elementary social studies methods instructors. The findings in chapters 4-6

are organized by research questions:

1. What beliefs about social studies education do these inservice teachers hold?
2. How do the beliefs these inservice teachers hold inform their practice in their social
studies methods course?
3. How does filling these dual roles inform their beliefs about the status of social
studies in the elementary curriculum?
4. What do these inservice teachers believe are the issues they encountered while
teaching the methods course?

Following this chapter are chapters 5 and 6, the ii i/hil/- case findings related to

these research questions for two other participants. These chapters also are organized by

the research questions. Chapter 7 presents the cross-case findings of the study. Chapter 8

summarizes the findings, makes recommendations for support of social studies methods

instruction by inservice teachers, suggests directions for further research, and provides









conclusions about the status of elementary social studies. Following are the findings for

Alexis Johnson.

Background Information

Alexis, a fifth year teacher in her late 20s, taught first grade at the K-12 laboratory

school affiliated with a large state-supported "research one" university that offered the

social studies methods course. Alexis was also a doctoral student in curriculum and

instruction at the university, focusing on reading and literacy and also on professional

development of teachers.

The only memory of elementary social studies Alexis had was memorizing the

states and capitals in fourth grade. In high school, Alexis was especially interested in

contemporary history and civics. After earning an A.A. at a community college, Alexis

earned both her Bachelors degree in Elementary Education and a Master of Education

degree with a specialization in Reading and Literacy from the university where she now

instructs the methods course. During her teacher education program, Alexis took one

social studies methods course taught by a dynamic instructor whom she described as

"very inspiring to me" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This instructor focused on using

social studies to integrate all academic subject areas, and Alexis used the unit she created

during the course as an example for her methods students.

Recently Alexis became a National Board-certified elementary teacher and was

very active in professional development activities. She attended the Florida Technology

Conference and the International Reading Association National Conference, and

presented at the National Association of Laboratory Schools Conference. During the

semester in which the study took place, Alexis was instructing the methods course for a









second time, having also done so the previous semester. She also expressed an interest in

teaching a literacy course in the future.

Professional Experiences

Alexis began her teaching career in an adjoining county, where she taught at a

small rural school that served a mostly White population from low socioeconomic

backgrounds. During her five years there, she taught first grade exclusively and was

provided a prescribed curriculum in every subject area, including social studies.

However, during this time, Alexis maintained control over her classroom in her role as

"curricular-instructional gatekeeper" (Thornton 1991) stating, "I would just close my

door and do what I wanted" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

Petty Research and Development School

Alexis has taught the last two years at Petty Research and Development School, which

functions as a part of the university's College of Education and is not administered by the

local county School Board. As a laboratory school, this K-12 institution serves students

from all parts of the county, and the school population intentionally reflected the race,

gender, and socioeconomic characteristics of the state as a whole. The school's web site

explains the role of a laboratory school: "to serve as a vehicle for research,

demonstration, and evaluation regarding teaching and learning while utilizing the

resources available on a state university campus" (Petty 2006). Alexis's classes were

non-tracked, and the teachers, as employees of the university, were expected to

experiment with innovative teaching methods.

At dismissal time, the school's diversity was obvious as children of different ages,

socioeconomic, and cultural groups mix easily. While the school has a number of

portable classrooms connected by walkways, the campus visually appeared well









organized and overall radiates a positive learning environment. Alexis enjoyed teaching

at Petty: "The way I teach now is the way I've always dreamed of teaching and never had

the opportunity to in a county setting and in a district setting" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06). Alexis believed Petty was not "as concerned with high stakes testing as some

other places are" and was more focused on "having kids be very well rounded" (Alexis,

Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis served as the elementary math coordinator at Petty and

participated in the Florida Reading Initiative.

Elise Elementary

The methods students in Alexis's class comprised interns from Petty Research and

Development School, as well as from Elise Elementary, which is located in a small,

predominantly middle class town close to the university and serves a mostly White

population with a small percentage of African American and Hispanic students. The

school's web site noted its status as an "A" school the two previous years and proudly

proclaims its affiliation with the university:

Elise Elementary is a partner with the University. We host pre-service teachers
each semester and provide them a place to learn and grow. They help us by
providing extra helping hands in our classroom and help our teachers grow and
improve in their skills. Welcome! (Elise 2006)

Alexis's Classroom and Instruction

Alexis's classroom seemed typical of many first grade classrooms, stuffed with

learning resources and lined with printed material on every possible surface, while

maintaining a cramped, yet organized appearance. The room was configured with tables

to seat four to five students, a specially carpeted area large enough for the entire class to

congregate and many bookcases containing learning materials. Alexis had a positive

rapport with students during methods instruction. Her sense of humor was evident, with









comments such as, "Are you really that blonde?"(Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). Also evident

was her tremendous patience and professionalism when confronted with a rude student


Figure 4-1 Alexis' classroom

while attempting to set up for class (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06). Overall, she projected a very

knowledgeable and confident persona.

Alexis's teaching style was a mix of teacher-led discussion and activities, or group

activities that took place at the student tables. During the lecture, students often accessed

Alexis's knowledge as an experienced teacher; during table discussions, Alexis would

circulate and quietly listen to the various conversations and then offer her comments,

which she often prefaced with "in my opinion." The methods students were very attentive

and gave the impression they respected and liked Alexis. Overall, Alexis's instruction

appeared organized, informed, and effective.









What Beliefs About Social Studies Education Do These Inservice Teachers Hold?

As discussed in Chapter 2, teachers' beliefs about the subjects and students they

teach greatly influence their instruction. These beliefs are important to consider because

of the variety of definitions regarding what constitutes social studies and the currently

imperiled status of social studies education. The word "belief," like many words, has a

somewhat variable and subjective meaning. This is especially true in the context of

"teacher belief' research, as noted by Pajares: "It will not be possible for researchers to

come to grips with teachers' beliefs, however, without first deciding what they wish

'belief to mean. ." (1992, p. 308). This study used a definition of the term 'belief

similar to that of Dewey (1933). Dewey defined 'belief as:

...something beyond itself by which its value is tested; it makes an assertion about
some matter of fact or some principle or law [and] covers all the matters of which
we have no sure knowledge and yet which we are sufficiently confident of to act
upon...and also the matter that we now accept as certainly true, as knowledge, but
which nevertheless may be questioned in the future. (p.6)

The findings for this question are organized into three sections: beliefs about

teaching, beliefs about social studies and teaching social studies, and beliefs about

teaching social studies methods. This organization extends to the findings for the same

research question in Chapters 5 and 6.

Beliefs Concerning Teaching

Alexis Johnson expressed a number of beliefs about teaching in general. When

asked to define teaching, Alexis responded, "Teaching by definition, I think, is showing

someone how to do something..." (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This belief was evident

during Alexis's methods instruction, particularly when working with students to craft a

generalization for their units. Alexis expressed her belief in the importance of teaching

with the goal of creating lifelong learners, "...essentially what I'm trying to do is get kids









to be lifelong learners" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis expressed her belief in

sharing power in both the elementary classroom-"Your kids should have a voice in your

classroom" (Alexis, Class, 4/4/06)-and during methods instruction-"I think we should

give the methods students more voice..." (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). This belief is

consistent with chapter 2, "Respecting Children," in Wolk's (1998) A Democratic

Classroom, a reading in the syllabus. Alexis discussed her belief in teaching a well-

rounded child: "I believe in teaching the whole child and not just material. I don't teach

material. I teach kids" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). In order to meet the needs of each

child, Alexis believed "it is my job to always find a way to reach every child no matter

where they are in whatever subject area that I happen to be teaching them in or

instructing them in" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). A similar sentiment is also found in A

Democratic Classroom, where Wolk offered his "ten things I believe about children";

number two is "children grow and develop differently" (p. 14).

Beliefs Concerning Social Studies and Teaching Social Studies

The basis for her elementary social studies practice was Alexis's belief that "social

studies is everything that's happening around us all the time. It's our social world and I

think it's the study of people and life" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). While not explicitly

related to the "cultural universals" curriculum promoted in Brophy and Alleman's book

Powerful Social Studiesfor Elementary Students, a reading in the syllabus, Alexis's

remarks do resemble Brophy and Alleman's definition of cultural universals as "basic

needs and social experiences found in all societies, past and present" (1996, p. 13).

Concerning social studies teaching in general, Alexis expressed her belief in the

power of innovative instructional practices (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). This was evident

in the practices she shared with her methods students: "Did I tell you guys about using









my smart board to use Google Earth to 'fly' to Egypt and the Nile..." (Alexis, Class

4/11/06). The key to understanding Alexis's approach was her fervent belief in teaching

for "understanding" rather than teaching for "coverage." She explains: "We're teaching

for real understanding. Am I teaching kids to memorize the states and capitals? Or am I

teaching kids to understand that land is divided up in different ways? That's a bad

example, but that's it" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This belief emanated from the social

studies methods instruction Alexis received as a teacher education student. Her methods

course was taught by an innovative instructor who "encouraged us to write units that

had... generalizations to create understanding rather than coverage" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06). Teaching for generalizations focuses on how the facts are related and using

those concepts to build generalizations that can be applied to similar situations (Benson,

1998). Teaching for generalizations was the goal of the instructional unit and a "Key

Task" in the suggested syllabus:

Students will demonstrate subject matter expertise by synthesizing social science
content and developing an enduring understanding for an assigned social studies
topic to a named grade. The content exploration should result in the prospective
teacher presenting the following: an enduring understanding (generalization)
supported by a synthesis of content from a variety of resources, and identification
of related standards. (See appendix B)

Alexis also expressed her belief in integrating social studies into other subject areas

to give students multiple experiences with the same content: "I definitely think that

integration is key. When you can integrate social studies into math, or economics

... there's just tons of ways that I think it could be integrated to improve understanding"

(Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Integration of social studies into other subject areas also

was a requirement of the teaching unit to be completed by the methods students: "Each









partnership will be required to complete a mini-unit integrating social studies and another

content area" (See appendix B).

Alexis also believed in delivering instruction that was both critical and balanced:

"When we talk to kids, we need to talk about the fact that all people have parts that are

not good" (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). The book Lies My Teacher Told Me presented a

critical view of history aimed at providing a more balanced portrayal of American

history. The book was a reading in the suggested syllabus and provoked some of the most

interesting and revealing dialogue of the semester (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). A critical and

balanced presentation of social studies also connected to Alexis's belief in the need for

civics instruction: "teaching kids how to make decisions and teaching kids how to survive

in a community ..." (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This sentiment is also conveyed in A

Democratic Classroom, which devotes an entire chapter to "Classroom as Community"

(Wolk 1998). The tension between teaching students to be both critical and constructive

citizens presented a challenge to Alexis: "How do we teach kids about things that are not

that good and still teach for civic participation?" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

Beliefs Concerning Teaching Social Studies Methods

An extension of her belief in the importance of teaching elementary social studies

for "real understanding" was Alexis's main goal for methods instruction: "The main thing

I want them to understand... is to stop worrying about coverage of facts and to teach the

bigger idea" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Her goal was also reflected in the "Key Tasks"

in the suggested syllabus (See appendix B). Alexis strongly conveyed her belief in the

ubiquitous nature of social studies when told by her methods students that they would not

be able to include social studies because of FCAT pressure: "I tell them that there's no

way not to include social studies in their instruction" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis









also believed in the importance of her methods students seeing her as a credible teacher

who walks her own walk: "I think it's very important for them to see me as a teacher first

and foremost. I am a teacher of students and this is what I do every day, and I want

them.. .to believe what I say" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Finally, she believed in the

importance of exposing her methods students to the same type of active instruction that

she advocated for elementary students: "When I set up the centers where they're actually

engaging in different ways to use social studies experiences...I feel like they get a feel

for how powerful this kind of instruction is" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

How Do the Beliefs These Inservice Teachers Hold Inform Their Practice in Their
Social Studies Methods Course?

Based on their beliefs, all teachers make decisions daily about the material they

teach and the type of instruction they provide (Richardson 1996; Thornton 1991; Wilson

Konopak & Readance 1994). The findings in this section provide specific examples of

belief-to-practice connections related to teaching an elementary social studies methods

course. During the final interviews, connections between the beliefs and practices

recorded during observations or the first interview were discussed and my associations

verified by the participants.

Alexis voiced strong beliefs about the importance of teachers researching the

content they want to teach and resisting the pressure to "cover" material from a textbook:

"I never want to turn out a teacher that feels like they need to rely on something else to

provide the instruction, rather than themselves" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). This belief

is supported in Brophy and Alleman's book and was the basis of the "Content Info"

assignments in Alexis's syllabus (See appendix B). Based on this belief, Alexis









constantly reminded her students, "...you have to really prepare for the units you're

going to teach and you need to know your content..." (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06).

In order to capitalize on her dual roles, Alexis believed "it's important for them to

see me teaching because what it actually shows is that I walk the walk" (Alexis,

Interview, 3/14/06). To allow her methods students to see how she instructs her

elementary students, Alexis showed video of her teaching:

Here it is in reality. Here's what.. .I'm telling you is important instruction. Here's
what it looks like in my classroom. It's not a public video. It's not perfect student;
it's not perfect kid; it's not perfect me. It's just reality. And I think that it's
important for them to see what I'm talking about in action. (Alexis, Interview,
3/14/06)

In addition, the use of video provided examples of Alexis's often stated belief,

"everything happens in social studies... my end-of-the-year video were the highlights of

our year; 70 percent of it is of social studies events that have happened in our classroom.

So I feel like it just makes concrete what I'm trying to tell them" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06).

Another of Alexis's beliefs was the importance of having other subject areas

integrated into social studies in meaningful ways: "Amazing things that can be done

because everything is integrated into social studies..." (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). One

way this belief was communicated to the methods students "is with the reading strategies

(in the provided course materials) so they have to apply reading strategies to their own

content area of reading" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis engaged her methods

students in conversations about what meaningful integration would look like (Alexis,

Class, 2/28/06). She explained the lesson: "We worked through some ideas of what

would meaningful integration look like? So, throwing out an example, having a









discussion about that... is that really math that you're integrating or is that just junk..."

(Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

How Does Filling These Dual Roles Inform Their Beliefs About the Status of Social
Studies in the Elementary Curriculum?

The participants in this study had access to a unique perspective on the status of

social studies in the elementary curriculum. With connections to both of the "two

cultures" of social studies education (Leming 1989), they were able to see how

elementary social studies was being presented to preservice teachers in a social studies

methods course; they also saw the realities of classrooms and schools and were privy to

information unlike anyone else in the social studies teaching profession. The findings in

this section focus on three issues: what information the participants had access to about

elementary social studies, how they received this information, and, most importantly,

their opinions about the status of social studies based on information and experiences in

both roles.

Information Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Channels of
Communication

Alexis had access to exclusive information about the status of elementary social

studies at Petty Research and Development School and Elise Elementary. While

discussing how filling these dual roles informed her beliefs about the status of social

studies in the elementary curriculum, Alexis lamented, "I think that it has definitely made

me see how important it is, and how much it isn't happening" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06).

When asked how she came by information about the status of social studies at Elise

Elementary, Alexis reported, "only through the (methods) students and the university

supervisor..." (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Even with this limited knowledge, Alexis









assessed the differences between the two schools: "I think teaching social studies

'traditionally' happens more at Elise" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Based on her

knowledge of both schools, Alexis knew that "...in a lot of schools social studies is

integrated into the reading block" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Alexis's fellow teachers at

Petty often asked her for clarification of the course's requirements: ".. .a teacher here

whose (methods) students I had was constantly asking me 'What is it you're really

expecting of them?"' (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06) The cooperating teachers' questions

gave Alexis information about the kind of social studies instruction the cooperating

teacher offered in her classroom. Referring to this cooperating teacher, Alexis reported,

"She did not really understand what the (methods) students were doing, which gave me

an idea of what she was really doing in her classroom..." (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06).

She explained as a methods instructor, she had a window into many classrooms at Petty:

"I have insights into a lot of different classrooms around here" (Alexis, Interview,

5/10/06). Alexis knew social studies was indeed being taught in a majority of classrooms

at Petty, but felt the quality of instruction was not always the highest (Alexis, Interview,

5/10/06).

Beliefs Concerning the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Testing

Alexis also made astute comments about a possible disconnect between what the

methods students were learning about teaching social studies and what they would be

able to retain working in schools that do not support social studies instruction: "I think to

myself, 'Okay, here they are. They're not teachers yet. Here we're teaching them all this

really hip stuff; are they going to forget it?"' (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). Concerning the

amount of actual social studies instruction going on in most public schools, Alexis









reported, "It's quite appalling, actually....and it makes me wonder what we can really do"

(Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

Despite the relatively elevated status of social studies at Petty, Alexis was acutely

aware of the secondary status of social studies in other schools statewide. Asked what she

believed was necessary to raise the status of social studies instruction in the state of

Florida, Alexis was frank: "What is it going to take?.. .It's going to have to be tested on

the FCAT, and I think that's the most horrible thing they could do..." (Alexis, Interview,

5/10/06). Alexis's concerns about social studies being added to the FCAT were based on

her belief that "true understanding of generalizations and true understanding of people in

social studies can't really be assessed a whole lot on a written test" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06). She also believed there was a need for accountability, but was concerned with

the current "snapshot" approach: "I think that we have to have accountability, but I have

a problem with so much being hinged on one test" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06).

What Do These Inservice Teachers Believe are the Issues They Encountered While
Teaching the Methods Course?

As noted by Owens (1997), teaching an elementary social studies methods course is

accompanied by a number of particular issues, each of which creates an opportunity for

improvement. In order to examine the issues encountered by an inservice teacher serving

as a methods instructor, I have organized the findings related to this research question

into the following three categories: issues related to students, issues related to the status

of elementary social studies and the field placement, and issues related to dual roles. In

addition, there are issues faced by the participants were particular to inservice teachers

serving as methods instructors and there were issues any person could encounter while

instructing an elementary social studies methods course. The issues related to methods









students and the issues related to the status of elementary social studies and the field

placement are endemic to the instruction of any elementary methods course and the

issues related to filling dual roles are issues specifically related to participants. The

organization of these findings extends to chapters 5 and 6.

Issues Related to Methods Students

The issues discussed in this section are those most closely related to the methods

students themselves and how those students influence elementary social studies methods

instruction.

Conservative social beliefs

Teachers tend to come from White/European American backgrounds and to have

traditional and conservative social beliefs (e.g., Cuban, 1984) that may inhibit their

ability to embrace the social studies goal of promoting social progress. That goal was

summarized by NCSS in 1979: "to engage students in analyzing and attempting to

resolve the social issues confronting them" (267). Similarly, these students' conservative

social beliefs favor the status quo. These findings were supported by the students in

Alexis's class. When asked if her students held more liberal or more conservative social

beliefs, Alexis reported, "more conservative. I tend to have some liberal beliefs and that

can be very difficult for them (methods students)... .They seem to view their beliefs as

reality..." (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Alexis's students' traditional and conservative

social beliefs surfaced during the discussion about the book Lies My Teacher Told Me by

James Loewen. In the discussion, one student flippantly stated, "Do you... [think] she

would really teach her kids this stuff, like all the Indians died. .go home and have a

feast?" (Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). The other students at the table also were very doubtful

about the truthfulness of the book. Later, during class discussion, the same student asked









Alexis, "How do you teach this, with all the bad stuff?" To which Alexis responded,

"What do I teach? I do not teach Thanksgiving day...I teach a unit about immigration"

(Alexis, Class, 3/07/06). During the final interview, Alexis reflected on these comments:

"It just shows how ingrained those beliefs are and how difficult it is to change beliefs..."

(Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). Interestingly, this class of students began the semester by

asking "how do we not teach just 'white man's history"' (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06).

The students' previous experiences apparently served as a filter that inhibited them from

learning new ways of thinking about certain historical events and figures. Angell (1998)

noted a similar difficulty in changing the beliefs of preservice teachers concerning the

teaching and learning of social studies.

Tension between content and methods

While discussing possible solutions to the tension between content and methods,

Alexis highlighted another complication: "I don't know how much more we can add onto

the (teacher education) program. I don't know that one class in anything is sufficient

knowledge to prepare teachers" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). In an attempt to overcome

this challenge, Alexis often reminded her students to do their own research on the topics

they teach because "you will never know everything you need to know about American

History" (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06).

Students' negative experiences with Social Studies

Other issues discussed in chapter 2 included methods students' negative previous

experiences and dislike of social studies (Cuban 1991; Downey & Levstik 1991; Levstik

1996, Owens 1997), and the widespread lack of social studies historical content

knowledge among elementary social studies methods students (Fritzer & Kumar 2002).

This lack of content knowledge extends to all the other disciplines that are parts of social









studies, such as geography and economics. This lack of knowledge creates an inherent

tension in instructing an elementary social studies methods course. Methods instructors

must convey how to teach social studies, as well as the content of the disciplines that

make up social studies.

Students' past negative experiences with social studies were evident in Alexis's

course when many students reported having boring social studies instruction in

elementary school (Alexis, Class, 4/11/06). Many of these negative experiences were the

result of "social studies teaching that generally was not the most powerful, and they

remember having to memorize the states and capitals" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06).

Issues Related to the Status of Elementary Social Studies and Field Placement

As noted by Yendol-Hoppey and Tilford (2004), field placements can complicate

methods instruction because of both the varieties of instruction and, in some cases, the

lack of instruction provided to students.

Lack of respect and professional development for elementary Social Studies

When asked if she believed her students approached this class with the same

amount of respect as they approached methods courses for the assessed areas, Alexis

responded, "I would say probably the first couple of classes, and I would say especially

the group that I have this semester didn't really" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). However,

she believed that the group's approach to the course improved during the semester,

saying, "halfway through the semester they definitely put as much importance on it as

they do some other subjects" (Alexis, Interview, 5/10/06). This initial lack of respect was

at least partially, if not totally, related to the untested status of elementary social studies.

"We were talking about the democratic community, A Democratic Classroom, the book.

One of them was concerned that taking time to do extended projects would detract from









'real learning' that they needed to show on the FCAT" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). After

this comment, Alexis engaged the class in a serious discussion about what "real learning"

was. Alexis believed that the students' level of respect for the course and elementary

social studies improved as a result of her efforts: "I don't want to say my pressure, but

my pressure on them to see this as something equally as valuable as anything else that

they're doing... .My enthusiasm for it, I hope, impressed them" (Alexis, Interview,

3/14/06).

Alexis also noted that the lack of professional development opportunities was a

challenge: "I can't think of any professional development experience I've had in social

studies, ever" (Alexis, Interview, 3/14/06). When asked why she believed there was a

lack of professional development for social studies, Alexis frankly reported, "...my first

response is that I think that because it's not tested on FCAT, nobody cares about it. I also

think that social studies is seen as not as important as the other subject areas" (Alexis,

Interview, 3/14/06). While not directly related to methods instruction, this lack of

professional development may lower the overall quality of social studies instruction

witnessed by the methods students in their placements.

Lack of time for elementary Social Studies

Due to FCAT pressure, many cooperating teachers gave the methods students

limited time to teach their units. During unit presentation, the students made many

comments about their limited instructional time, such as, "We only had thirty minutes

and this was taught during...reading time...." (Alexis, Class 4/11/06). However, a few

students reported that their teacher did provide them with an acceptable amount of

instructional time: "We had a very good teacher; she was very flexible; she gave us lots

of time" (Alexis, Class 4/11/06). Despite ever-present FCAT pressure, Alexis believed