Colonial period (1600–1776). Education in Colonial America during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was heavily influenced by cultural norms that colonists brought with them from Europe and was largely dependent on social class and wealth. Formal schooling in the 13 colonies was often tuition based and was intended to provide classical training (primarily to boys of wealthy families) in literacy and numeracy. Education was not systematic, organized, or compulsory, and opportunities varied greatly from colony to colony. Additionally, much of the educational content was religious, and its purpose was to prepare individuals to live as godly citizens and to prosper in the growing economy. As a general rule, teachers were young, single men in transition to more stable careers. There were no formal academic requirements for becoming a teacher; most were selected based on their moral fiber and adherence to local religious values rather than for their ability to teach (Drury & Baer, 2011, p. 2). Laws and customs forbade teaching slaves and free African Americans, but primary education was available to most other white children through Dame Schools, run by women of high moral character but often limited education.

During this time, immigrants continued to arrive by ship and the new world had a wealth of raw materials that needed to be developed by skilled workers, however. Therefore, some boys (and later girls) were trained on the job through apprenticeships. The system of apprenticeships provided young boys the opportunity to learn a trade from a “master” and within seven years have the skills needed to begin one’s own business. The master also trained the young man in matters of faith and religion in order to prepare him to live a pious life. Apprenticeships benefited society in two ways; they helped the economy grow, and they prepared children for vocation. Another common practice of the times was for families to provide informal vocational training for children at home that provided them with the knowledge and skills they needed for survival, in this case surviving and conquering the wilderness. Although records of assessment practices from both formal and informal education in colonial America are absent, we can surmise that they were based on evidence of mastery of the skill being learned and that the teacher, master, or parent adjusted instruction in practical ways until his pupil had the knowledge and skills required to successfully complete the task.

Ultimately, educational opportunities were hit and miss at best, and over time, colonist began to see a more concerted need to provide education for all of its citizenry that served the practical needs of humanity and began to realize the value of learning as a tool for gaining independence (Spring, 2001, p. 13).

Early National period (1776–1840). Soon after America fought for and gained independence from Great Britain, the newly formed republic realized that if it was to survive, thrive, and become a great nation, then its citizens must be educated—all of them. This philosophy was strongly promoted by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Noah Webster, and other theorists in the late eighteenth century who began to cast a vision for American education. One of the first significant attempts to organize education in the United States occurred in 1779 when Thomas Jefferson introduced into the Virginia legislature a “Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge” with three assumptions: (1) republican government and democratic decision making required an educated and literate citizenry, (2) education should be a political function and not a religious one, and (3) educational control should be visited in state governments (Gutek, 1991, p. 33). In this document, we see the first seeds of accountability. Jefferson wrote:

Over every ten of these schools an overseer shall be appointed annually by the aldermen at their first meeting, eminent for his learning, integrity, and fidelity to the commonwealth, whose business and duty it shall be, from time to time, to appoint a teacher to each school, who shall give assurance of fidelity to the commonwealth, and to remove him as he shall see cause; to visit every school once in every half year at the least; to examine the scholars; see that any general plan of reading and instruction recommended by the visitors of William and Mary college shall be observed; and to superintend the conduct of the teacher in every thing relative to his school. (Gutek, p. 48)

Notice that teachers were evaluated but not the students or their academic achievement. The bill called for evidence that the “scholar” had a general plan of instruction and that he was conducting himself in a proper manner. Though not a stringent and well-defined plan for accountability, it was a start.

Although the founding fathers recognized the need for organized education, industrialism consumed the country’s youth, and most children received minimum schooling, if any. Many children continued to learn from their parents at home or through apprenticeships. In response, Joseph Lancaster introduced a system of education in which large groups of children could be educated cheaply. However, the quality of education was questionable. In this system, 200 to 1000 students were gathered in one room and seated in rows of ten. The adult schoolmaster, who may or may not have been qualified, taught the brighter students (monitors or prefects) who then taught the students in their rows. Other students were used as monitors to track attendance, to assess and promote students, to distribute supplies, and so on—hence the name “monitorial schools.” Due to the structure of the system, teachers were relegated to the position of organizer, and students learned through rote memorization, drill, and practice. The process of teaching was of military precision, automatized and formalized, leaving little room for creativity and innovation. This was one of the first examples of mass education. The curriculum focused on literacy, numeracy, Christian principles, and civic duty related to patriotism of the newly formed republic. African Americans had greater access to formal instruction in the North, but education for Southern African Americans was still forbidden in an attempt to protect the institution of slavery. Monitorial schools were short lived and eventually replaced by a more “modern” system of education involving grouping students by age and using the lecture method of instruction instead of monitors and prefects.

Common School period (1840–1880). Continued recognition that the health of the nation depended on education for all of its populace gave rise to the “common school”—a precursor of public school education as we know it today. Horace Mann (1796–1859), considered the Father of the Common School movement, proposed a system of education that was free, universal, and non-sectarian. The first common schools served elementary white children and focused on literacy, numeracy, and citizenship. The movement grew throughout the early nineteenth century, concurrent with westward expansion and an influx of European immigrants. Rural common schools were often one-room schoolhouses with multiple grade levels taught in the same room. The teacher was largely responsible for oversight and was given much autonomy with scarce accountability. Common schools in urban areas were more structured—overseen by a board of trustees and governed by a principal, superintendent, and teachers—and began to align students by age as well as standardize and sequence the curriculum. Accountability was still limited to making sure that students attended school and teachers did what they were supposed to do. After the Civil War as the United States became more industrialized, many schools in large urban areas adopted the factory model of organization while the one-room schoolhouse remained a fixture in the rural areas of the South, Midwest, and Western states. Southern states enacted Jim Crow laws that legalized segregation—claiming “separate but equal” opportunities for recently freed slaves. During this time, taxpayers began to pay for public education, attendance became compulsory, and standardization became the goal in order to accommodate the great number of students in attendance and to ensure quality instruction.

By the mid-nineteenth century, the elementary classroom was firmly established in the ideology and practice of instructionism. Instructionism, a phrase coined by Seymour Papert (1993), refers to a transmission model of communication in which a teacher instructs by transmitting facts to a passively receptive student. In this traditional vision of schooling, the goal is to get facts and procedures into students’ heads and then test them to see what they have acquired. It is often referred to as teacher-centered or an instructivist approach to teaching and learning. Students were expected to listen to their teacher talk, take notes, memorize, recite, and work quietly and independently at their desks. They were to face the front, respond in unison or raise their hand to answer a question, and speak only when spoken to. Assessments were generally oral recitations based on students’ ability to memorize, and errors often resulted in punishment. Ranking was the typical method of grading both for the recitations and for formal examinations and was conducted by the master of the school or by an outside board (Cureton, 1971, p. 2). Schools supported by public money demanded the right to determine if the money was well spent, and in addition to examining buildings, administration, and school records, some inspections included an examination of the teachers and students as well. In some districts, superintendents held public meetings where the teacher was interviewed and questioned, resulting in retention or dismissal.

During that time a group of school reformers hoped to replace traditional classroom practices with a more learner-centered approach to learning as introduced by Swiss educator Johann Pestalozzi (1746–1827). Pestalozzi, considered the “Father of Modern Education,” popularized the first systematic method of instruction that was learner centered. He asserted that education should be centered on the child not the curriculum and that children learned through experiences and discovery, advocating for an inductive method of inquiry. This was perhaps one of the first attempts to combine psychology and the understanding of how students build knowledge with the process of teaching and learning. One might consider his approach the beginning seeds of constructivism—a philosophy of education that contends that learning is an active process where learners build on existing knowledge. This philosophy of learning was also embraced by other school reformers who recognized the potential for moving away from instructionism with its automation and dull recitations that had become the norm in American schools, and a number of “practice schools” using progressive methods emerged as a result.

The major impact of Pestalozzian theory was its emphasis on relating instruction in the early years to objects in the real world, on learning by doing, and on the importance of activity, as opposed to sitting...