Search

This paper looks at the experiences of school history education and explores the impact this education has had on the development of young adults and their sense of identity in England. Adopting a qualitative approach, this study used semi-structured interviews with twenty young adults, aged 18–22, some from white backgrounds, but most from minoritized ethnic backgrounds.1 Four broad categories were identified in the data, namely 'values and value', 'identity development', 'curriculum connections' and 'narrative templates'. In the majority of cases, these young adults felt that history was important and had a role to play in addressing societal issues such as racism. However, the curriculum largely ignored the histories of minoritized ethnic groups, as the dominant narrative template favoured a white, Anglo-centric view of the world, and so served to fuel a sense of disconnection to the curriculum and to the state more generally. This paper suggests there is a need to pay closer attention to the place of history education in shaping a sense of belonging and personal identity, through a multiperspectivity approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explored the extent to which secondary school history teachers in England willingly engaged with a series of concurrent curriculum reforms, and the factors that shaped their level of agency in the process. The curriculum has been the target of sustained reform by many governments, and accountability measures are frequently used to compel teachers to engage with the process of change, as teachers are often seen as resistant to change. Data were obtained through online surveys conducted annually from 2015 to 2017, providing a large, longitudinal data set of over 1100 individual responses. Responses to closed items were analysed using SPSS to generate descriptive and inferential statistics, and qualitative responses were coded to identify key themes. Generally the teachers were reluctant to engage in the process of reform. There was some statistically significant variation between teachers in different types of school. Teachers' willingness to engage with changes was also related to their sense of subject identity. However it is evident that accountability measures dominates teachers' thinking, and even impacts on what teachers choose to do in non-examined phases of the curriculum. This appears to diminish teachers' agency when creating a curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debates about the purpose and content of history education in schools have been prevalent in most Westernised democratic nations over the last 30 years. Under discussion are essential questions concerning national identity/ies, competing narratives and the aims of history education. The impact of ‘history wars’ has been felt within both Australia and England, as conservative commentators – including politicians and historians – have raised concerns about the depth and effectiveness of history education and have sought to make significant changes to the history curriculum for schools. This analysis examines the history wars in Australia and England, exploring the view that history education has been in danger and/or crisis and examining the curricular implications of a move toward greater recognition of national narratives. It raises some essential tensions that remain regarding two aspects of history teaching in both nations: (1) historiography and (2) chronological understanding. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The history of history education, past and present, often resembles a history of contestation, in which rival and polarized understandings of the meanings of 'history' and 'history education' vie for dominance (Nakou and Barca, 2010). A common polarity in debates on history curricula is the opposition between 'knowledge' and 'skill', an opposition that has had considerable currency in recent curriculum reform processes in England which have emphasised 'core knowledge' (DfE, 2013). Drawing on examples of classroom practice (Chapman, 2003; Woodcock, 2005; Buxton, 2003) and on systematic research and theorizing (Shemilt, 1983; Lee and Shemilt, 2009) this paper aims to destabilize such binary talk and to explore the ways in which 'first order' knowledge and understanding about the past and 'second order' or metahistorical knowledge and understanding of how the discipline of history works are both logically inter-related and inseparable in practical terms. The notion of historical 'enquiry' (Counsell, 2011) is explored as a pedagogic tool for the simultaneous development of these inter-related dimensions of historical thinking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]