Winter 2004

Talking History

Redirecting the history debate

Academics rage about whose version of history should prevail. Commentators fulminate about the ignorance of today’s kids. And none of it helps teachers guide young people to historical literacy. The 12-point index to historical literacy, discussed here by TONY TAYLOR, is for all levels and all jurisdictions.

A couple of years ago I was teaching twentieth century history to a group of year 10s. In the first week of term 1, I set them a routine pre-test to see how much they knew. Questions about leading events and figures in the twentieth century.

What follows are the responses of one student to questions on Russia.

Q: Who was Lenin?

A: Singer in the Beatles.

Q: What did he do?

A: Made good music.

Q: How do you know?

A: Listen to their music.

Which made me smile, but then it made me think. Her reply was a classic history horror story. Or was it? If you think about it a bit more, why should this student (I’ll call her Kim) know about Lenin? What teacher, prior to year 10, would have helped her find out? Why would she have wanted or needed to find out anyway? OK, I know that there is such a thing as prior historical knowledge but that kind of knowledge is frequently very patchy and inconsistent. So, how dim was I to set a test that asked my students questions about people and events that they had almost certainly never encountered before in school?

Nevertheless, this anecdote was exactly the kind of response that public commentators would have seized on with that ‘going-to-hellin-a-handbasket’ glee. Because these commentators would almost certainly expect Kim and her friends to be as knowledgeable about the past as they are; these (mainly) men in their 50s and 60s with 40-plus years of wide reading behind them and university degrees. Kim, on the other hand, was 14, played a lot of sport, didn’t watch a lot of TV, really enjoyed films, didn’t read much and had no university degree. Just your average year 10 student.

However the story didn’t end there. It occurred to me, when reading Kim’s response, that we really need a way to move public and private debates about historical knowledge away from fruitless and hot-tempered arguments and more towards a discussion of research-based professional issues. To create this, we need a framework for historical literacy. That might allow discussion to focus on real historical concepts, instead of getting stuck in the ‘my history is better and more important than yours’ dead end.

The National Centre for History Education then came up with a 12point index of historical literacy. The term ‘literacy’ had been deliberately selected because it has much more political strength than many of the usual pedagogical expressions such as ‘framework’ or ‘standards’, and it needs to be broad enough to apply to all levels of schooling in all jurisdictions. So, for the concept to work, it really needs to have both political clout and a curriculum fit.

What is historical literacy?

Historical literacy is based on the view that all school students are entitled to study history. Understanding the past is an important part of life as a whole, not just of school life. Historical literacy is about social and political empowerment.

Events: knowing and understanding events

The role of a teacher of history is to introduce students to events.

Narratives: understanding the shape of change and continuity over time; understanding multiple narratives; dealing with open-endedness

The work of a teacher of history is to allow students to develop an understanding of narratives, an ability to place events in context.

Skills: using the evidence (examining artefacts, documents, graphics, etc); issues of provenance

Evidence should be assessed in terms of provenance, accessibility, gaps.

Understanding and dealing with language of the past

Dealing with the language of the past (archaic terms such as ‘diggings’); dealing with the language of historical time (‘century’ or ‘era’); dealing with the language of historical description and analysis (‘revolution’ or ‘democracy’). Students and teachers need to develop together an understanding of language issues as part of the process of building a rich and accurate historical vocabulary.

Understanding historical concepts

Understanding key concepts such as causation, motivation and empathy.

Using and understanding ICT-based resources

For example, students and teachers have to deal with the Internet, the virtual archive, as one of many historical sources.

Connecting the past with the self and the world today

Large numbers of students feel that school history is ‘disconnected’ from their personally-acquired views of the past. One of the key jobs of teachers of history is to harness the everyday curiosity about the past that exists in the community, and ensure that school history makes a real connection with the past for these students.

Understanding the rules and the place of public and professional debate

Debates about historical events are an essential part of historical thinking. It is an important exercise to draw students’ attention to the idea that historians and commentators disagree—thus reinforcing the view that explanation is subjective, and that evidence is incomplete and to be tested in argument.

Understanding and using creativity in representing the past

Essentially, this is recognising that history is not merely a written or spoken narrative. Events may be usefully explained, explored, understood and appreciated in various creative formats, such as dramatic reconstruction, artwork, multimedia presentation, collage or fictional writing.

Understanding the moral and ethical issues involved in historical explanation

In exploring the moral and ethical dilemmas implicit in any historical circumstance, teachers and students develop a foundation in values education, based on real events.

Understanding the use and value of scientific and technological expertise in investigating the past

Inquiry in history has become increasingly reliant on technical and scientific advances. It is important for students to know and appreciate the role played by other specialist disciplines in the systematic study of history.

Historical reasoning

History is about the presentation of informed, sequenced and persuasive argument. It requires a level of understanding of particular events that is beyond a mere ability to deconstruct. Historical literacy is not the same as critical literacy.

A more detailed outline of historical literacy may be found in the National Centre’s Making History: a guide for the teaching and learning of history in Australia. It can be found at www.hyperhistory.org.

Postscript

At the end of the term, my students had an unseen test. Kim did very well. Here is her response to Question 5.

Q: Why did Russia have two revolutions?

A: Russia had two revolutions because the first one was not as successful as it could have been. The first Revolution took the people’s trust of the Tsar away but when the Bolsheviks promised the people what they wanted (peace, land, bread) they gave their support to the Bolsheviks who were also supported by the army. The second Revolution gave the Bolsheviks power. They took over prime targets (stations, post offices) and an army (led by Trotsky) stormed the Winter Palace and took control.

Tony Taylor is based in the Faculty of Education, Monash University. From 2001–03 he was director of the National Centre for History Education in its first period of funding.

The author owns the copyright in this article. For information related to the reuse of this work in any form please contact the publisher denise.quinn@curriculum.edu.au