Social Decision -Making in the New Zealand Curriculum In this chapter I will discuss the process of social decision-making in more detail. The following aspects will be addressed in order to explain the issues that surround this process:

w Links with other processes
w The Action Aspect
w The context for teaching social decision-making

Links with Other Processes
The precursors of today’s curriculum dealt with social decision- making in two very different ways. The first draft highlights social action as being on an equal par with knowledge and ideas and values. The decision-making aspect is seen as being underpinned by the essential skills. In the revised draft the term “social action” was not mentioned. The curriculum that omitted social decision-making would not provide students with the opportunity to develop an awareness of social issues so that they can contribute in some way to positive social change. I believe that social action was perceived as a way that people in the future could influence society, and this was not what certain sectors of the educational and economic circles wanted.

Social decision-making is a process that, like the other processes – values exploration and inquiry necessitates the development of essential skills. Examples showing the relationship between the essential skills and the process of social decision -making can be seen on page 19 of Social Studies in the New Zealand Curriculum. The rationale for including social decision- making as an integral process of social studies education is seen in the aim of Social Studies and described as a need for students to “participate in a changing society as informed, confident and responsible citizens.” SSNZC (p8).

In some ways it is regrettable that the term “action” has been removed from the social action label or as we now know it; social decision-making. Real Action is what SDM is all about. An Australian text for teaching Social Studies links social criticism and social action together. Marsh, (1987) states that the central goal of social action is to help students recognise conflict in their society and search for ways to resolve these situations. An excerpt from Australian social studies planning kit reinforces this view relating to social action: “I know what’s going on, I’m part of it, and I’m doing something about it” cited in O’Connell, (The Advisor 1999).

Carol Mutch, (1999) elucidates the links between the three processes. To summarise, she maintains that the inquiry process involves students collecting, analysing, and reflecting on the process and the product. The values exploration process has students clarifying their own values and those of others. Social decision- making is the next step in the process as it relies on the information collected and reflected on in the previous two processes so that an appropriate course of action can be taken.

The Action Aspect
In this section I will expound the current views about social decision making and give examples as to how they are interpreted and implemented by various educational writers and teachers.

Social action or social decision- making has been accepted as an important aspect of social studies curricula. However, it is a skill that has remained relatively undeveloped. As the joint author of the University of Waikato Position Paper on Social Studies, Paul Keown contributed to the ongoing debate about social studies. The paper was commissioned by the Ministry of Education in order to provide advice on the nature and purpose of social studies.

Keown’s involvement with this paper and contributions to social studies in both research and active participation at all levels of planning and delivery lends weight to his ideas and implementations in this subject. In his paper, “The Nature of Social Studies and Role of the Values Exploration and Social Decision-Making Processes.” Keown (1999) points out that although the term social decision-making is used in our curriculum document, the details regarding the action end of social decision- making remain circumspect. It is evident that teaching social decision- making skills is seen as problematic for teachers and schools. The writers of the “Position Paper” (1997) comment that the process of social action is poorly developed and frequently misunderstood by those who are expected to incorporate it into social studies programmes. The implementation of a new curriculum has not really changed that aspect of this process.

The action in social decision- making is the most important part. Edward de Bono writes:

“Too often education is about description and analysis. That is the academic tradition and they are easier to teach than teaching how to act. But the real world involves action as well as knowledge.” Cited in The Advisor (1999)

De Bono isn’t a social studies educator but he is one of several outside this field who emphasise the importance of lateral thinking and the development of the information processing skills that the labour force in general will need to be equipped with now and in the future. Real action needs to be linked to real situations and involve students in making a difference that matters. The challenge for teachers is to build the possibility of social action into units of work so that the action is linked to the knowledge that students gain.

However, although real action has to be linked to the context of learning, it has to be about ethical decision-making and informed participation, not just as a service to the community. Kay Harrison voices her concern about this growing dimension in the United States; she terms it “service learning”. Helping those less fortunate than ourselves by performing acts of service in their communities, does not teach students about the injustices in our world. If the action is out of context then it is not the result of social analysis and consequent social criticism. “Students are not learning what is wrong and needs changing: they are learning about a necessary component in our society – the charitable sector” Harrison (1998 p10). Although responsible social action needs to have a knowledge base and a sense of agency it must be meaningful and effective in the face of injustice and inequality.

There is the very real fear that student participation in social action may address a problem that has a certain amount of risk attached to it. For example, if it appears to the community that the teacher has encouraged inappropriate political activity, this may cause a negative response towards the teacher or the school. Judging from the discussions I have had with my own staff and comments that social studies programme developers have made I have gathered that teachers and schools may be unwilling to promote social action in any depth because they know that there is a chance the students will move out of the neutral zone that is acceptable to the wider community.

If real action takes place, and the students begin to involve themselves in community issues in order to solve a problem or assist in contributing ideas to generate some solutions there is a chance that this will happen. The questions about what is appropriate and who are the judges of appropriateness must be considered.

The Context for Social Decision-making
For students to participate effectively in social decision- making, they need to work with factual information to construct their own concepts about a wide range of local and global issues. They will repeat this process again and again to assist them in refining their analytical skills in order to be able to apply them to different situations. Real social action and decision making is the result of an understanding of the concepts involved and a clarification of the students own values and willingness to hold onto them as they apply them to a specific situation by carrying out an action.
This presumes that students have an ability to learn about and conceptualize difficult and abstract ideas about social situations.

Social decision- making encourages and enables students to participate in their community; this brings up images of lobbying, voting, petitions and public advocacy. In this light the skills needed for social decision- making are directed students whose cognitive processes can cope with investigative learning. The table below shows that the skills involved in social decision making are usually reserved for levels 3 and above in SSNZC. Paul Keown has adapted these processes.

Those processes aimed At level 3 upwards in SSNZC have been levelled for pupils at all levels but “appropriate to their age and abilities” Keown (1999 p.64).

The Nature of the Processes.
Social Decision Making Process

P. Keown (1999). Social Studies on Broadway Workshop.

Perhaps the most important feature of Keown’s adaptation of the process related to the curriculum levels is that it is possible to implement more complex aspects of the process at any stage. This in no way disregards the curriculum levels but does involve teachers in looking for opportunities to extend thinking in ways that are appropriate to the needs and experiences of the pupils.
work that brings into focus important dimensions of learning such as skills, knowledge and understanding. The tasks support practice in schools and are in line with current theory in student achievement. Using these tasks to gather data for this research adds strength and validity to the rationale and results of my study.

The following excerpt from the 1997 assessment cycle clearly depicts how these skills or processes are not regarded as a separate entity of learning but rather add to the total picture of student achievement in the skills of social studies.

The example of the NEMP task Roller Bladers is used to show a clear parallel between the process steps that Keown has adapted and the process of social decision making that students are expected to achieve in. In this activity students watch a short video clip which shows some roller bladers having problems using their roller blades safely in a school. The students are asked to work through a sequence of problem identification and problem solving processes.

(click to enlarge)

Literature Review
This review will provide contextual information to highlight the difficulties that have been endured for those implementing the process of social decision- making in the curriculum. I will cover early global studies in this skill and then focus on research in New Zealand. To conclude this literature review I will focus on the information that has arisen from research regarding the most effective approach to teaching social decision- making.

Early Studies in Social Decision Making
There is very little written on social decision- making as an isolated skill within the parameters of the New Zealand curriculum. However early research on thinking and decision- making skills was evident as early as the 1930s in the United States. Reviews of methods and materials used for developing critical thinking in students became part of the empirical work of the period. Glaser cited in Shaver (1991) carried out measurement of the effectiveness of these methods and materials. He concluded that the direct instruction of thinking skills improved high school students’ ability to think critically.

More pertinently, Hyram 1957 (cited in Shaver 1991) researched the upper grades of an elementary school to see if these age groups were capable of increased achievement in these skills. Hyram’s experiment which lasted four months substantiated Glaser’s 1941 work and concluded in the in favour of direct teaching of critical thinking. Later in 1963 Taba advanced this theory by defining learning as a constructive activity rather than a responsive one. In constructive activities learning is a function that occurs as the learners try to derive meaning from the experience. This was an important development in the thinking about decision- making in social studies as it provided the rationale and procedures for embedding instruction on thinking processes within instruction on content objectives.

Although some of these studies are over 50 years old they still have relevance in the analysis of the social studies curriculum and in particular to the development of the social decision- making process.

Research on early learning suggests that by age seven children are capable of formulating accurate and abstract concepts. Armento, (1986). Furthermore, there is evidence that if children are involved in well planned and structured activities at an early age they are they could learn more difficult and abstract concepts much earlier than expected. Rice (1996).

Recent Research in New Zealand
In the 1980s the Department of Education approved a survey on Social studies subjects. The aim of these surveys was to provide teachers and the Government factual information that would be useful when planning future teaching and learning programmes. The survey was guided by the following questions:

1. What are aims and objectives of social studies, and are teachers aware of these aims?
2. What happens in classrooms, what skills and activities are students involved in?
3. How do students perform? What skills, attitudes and knowledge do they acquire?
4. What is the expectation of the community regarding the teaching and learning of these subjects?

In relation to Social decision making or higher level thinking skills the results of this survey showed that there were few lessons planned for the development of such skills and students had few opportunities to practice higher level thinking and social and valuing skills.

In response to the Report on the Social Studies Subjects Surveys (1987) and possibly because of the lack of availability of data on the specific topic of social studies skills. Graeme Whitehead conducted a research to determine the balance of skills taught and assessed in social studies programmes. His findings showed that in the early years of schooling the focus was on social and co-operative skills with an increase of the inclusion of critical and creative thinking skills from year 4 onwards. In years 5 & 6 values exploration started to have more emphasis but decision- making remained low. By year 7 & 8 there was an overall increased emphasis on all the thinking skills except for decision -making which was less well represented.

The data indicated that there was an obvious discrepancy between what was taught and assessed in the early and middle years of schooling compared to years 7 & 8. One suggested reason for this was that the revised draft which was in use at the time of this research, gave little or no guidance on how to teach and assess values and social decision-making.

Although the current curriculum identifies the key elements of social decision- making from level 1 upwards it does not define or give guidance for students below level 3 to develop the more difficult “thinking skills” like conceptual thinking and originality. Barr (1993). As noted earlier in the literature there is evidence to support students successfully achieving in these higher order thinking at an early age skills if they are involved in well planned and structured activities that are aimed at teaching more complex and sophisticated skills.

Literature gives some indication of reasons why there is such a superficial treatment of this skill in many classrooms in New Zealand. Keown believes that knowledge and facts are seen as being much more “rational, predictable, reliable and trustworthy” Keown, (p.139 cited in Benson & Openshaw 1998) than the more unreliable nature of feelings and opinions. Teachers in classrooms also reinforce this tradition as factual teaching is trusted and easier to teach and assess. Gilbert, (1996) maintains that assessment of social action requires clarification of the knowledge and skills in relation to appropriate activities. The appropriateness is addressed to the particular group of students, their age, how well the nature of the activity suits the learning needs and desired outcome within a meaningful context.