Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 59, Issue 5, pp 627–645 | Cite as

On the need to strengthen political-critical thinking in history education

  • Esther Yogev
Article
First Online:
  • 459 Downloads

Abstract

The past twenty years have seen a dramatic change in the research of history education and its meaning in the Western academic world. Basically, there are three productive research directions: (1) a growing interest in cultural studies; (2) an exploration of various educational paths towards shaping a historical consciousness; and (3) cognitive and psychological research. Situated within the second group, but drawing on knowledge that has been gathered in all three research areas, this article focuses on the need to foster a political-critical dimension in the context of history education. The author proposes the implementation of a pedagogy of subversion in history teaching practices. Seeking to unsettle the students’ mind and ignite their intellect, this pedagogy supports the strengthening of political-moral thinking through the use of particular history content and teaching practices that take into account youthful rebellion and typical juvenile desire to fix the world. Adolescent resistance to education can thus be harnessed as a content tool, providing an object for the student to contend with personally as part of his or her maturation and individuation process. The desired outcome of such pedagogical practices is the development of an effective historical consciousness that enhances autonomous thinking, reflective skills and empathetic capabilities among young people. The future use of these capabilities is the ultimate aim of all education towards democratic citizenship.

Keywords

History education Effective historical consciousness Political-critical dimension Pedagogy of subversion Historicisation of memory Education for democratic citizenship (EDC) 

Résumé

De la nécessité de renforcer la pensée politique critique dans l’enseignement de l’histoire – Au cours des vingt dernières années s’est opéré un changement considérable dans la recherche sur l’enseignement de l’histoire et ses conséquences pour le monde universitaire occidental. Il existe au fond trois axes de recherche productive : (1) un intérêt croissant pour les études culturelles; (2) une exploration des diverses voies éducatives visant à créer une conscience historique; et (3) la recherche cognitive et psychologique. Se situant dans le second groupe mais s’inspirant des connaissances acquises dans ces trois domaines de recherche, le présent article traite de la nécessité d’insérer une dimension politique critique dans le contexte de l’enseignement de l’histoire. L’auteure propose d’appliquer une pédagogie subversive dans les pratiques d’enseignement de cette discipline. Cherchant à déstabiliser l’esprit de l’apprenant et à éveiller son intellect, cette pédagogie contribue à renforcer la pensée politique morale en utilisant un contenu historique particulier, ainsi que des pratiques d’enseignement qui intègrent la rébellion juvénile et l’aspiration à reconstruire le monde typique chez les adolescents. Leur résistance à l’éducation peut ainsi être exploitée comme outil de contenu, qui fournit à l’apprenant un objet contre lequel il peut lutter personnellement dans le cadre de son processus de maturation et d’individuation. Le résultat souhaité de ce type de pratique pédagogique réside dans le développement chez les jeunes d’une conscience historique réelle qui favorise la pensée autonome, les aptitudes de réflexion et les capacités d’empathie. L’utilisation ultérieure de ces capacités est l’objectif ultime de toute éducation en matière de citoyenneté démocratique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ahonen, S. (2005). Historical consciousness: A viable paradigm for history education? Curriculum Studies, 37(6), 697–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bar-On, D & Adwan, S. (2009) Lilmod et Hanarativ Hahistori Shel Haaher [Learning the historical narrative of the other]. Beit Jalla, PNA; Prime – Institute for the Study of Peace in the Middle East (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
  3. Bar-Tal, D. (2007). Living with the conflict: Socio-psychological analysis of the Jewish society in Israel. Carmel: Jerusalem. (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
  4. Barton, K. (2001). A socio-cultural perspective on children’s understanding of historical change: Comparative findings from Northern Ireland and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 881–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barton, K. C., & McCully, A. W. (2010). You can form your own point of view: Internally persuasive discourse in Northern Ireland students’ encounters with History. Teachers College Record, 112, 142–181.Google Scholar
  6. Barton, K. C., & McCully, A. W. (2012). Trying to “see things differently”: Northern Ireland students’ struggle to understand alternative historical perspectives. Theory & Research in Social Education, 40(4), 371–408. Google Scholar
  7. Brophy, J., & VanSledright, B. (1997). Teaching and learning history in elementary schools. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  8. Confino, A. (1997). Collective memory and cultural history: Problems of method. American Historical Review, 105(2), 1386–1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Viking Books.Google Scholar
  11. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge & the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  12. Gadamer, H. G. (1999 [1960]). Truth and method (J. Weinsheimer & D. Marshall, Trans.). New York: The Continuum Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  13. Greene, S. (1994). The problems of learning to think like a historian: Writing history in the culture of the classroom. Educational Psychologist, 29(2), 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Halbwachs, M. (1980). The collective memory. New York: Harper & Row Colophon Books.Google Scholar
  16. Heisler, M. O. (2008). Challenged histories and collective self-concepts: Politics in history, memory, and time. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 617(1), 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Himmelfarb, G. (2004 [1987]). The new history and the old: Critical essays and reappraisals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kitson, A. (2007). History teaching and reconciliation in Northern Ireland. In E. A. Cole (Ed.), Teaching the violent past: History education and reconciliation (pp. 123–154). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, P. (2004). Understanding history. In P. Seixas (Ed.), Theorizing historical consciousness (pp. 3–24). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lee, P. (2010). Series introduction: International review of history education. In I. Nakou & I. Barca (Eds.), Contemporary public debates over history education (Vol. 6, pp. 11–16). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Loewen, J. W. (1995). Lies my teacher told me: Everything your American history textbook got wrong. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  22. Lorenz, C. (2004). Towards a theoretical framework for comparing historiographies: Some preliminary considerations. In P. Seixas (Ed.), Theorizing historical consciousness (pp. 25–48). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lyotard, J. F. (1999). Postmodern fables. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  24. Munslow, A. (2000). The Routledge companion to historical studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Nakou, I., & Barca, I. (Eds.). (2010). Contemporary public debates over history education. International Review of History Education series (Vol 6). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
  26. Niens, U., & Cairns, E. (2005). Conflict, contact, and education in Northern Ireland. Theory into Practice, 44(4), 337–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nietzsche, F. (1980 [1874]). On the advantage and disadvantage of history for life (P. Preuss, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  28. Nora, P. (1984). Entre mémoire et histoire: La problématique des lieux. In P. Nora (Ed.), Les lieux de mémoire, Vol. 1, La République (pp. xv–xlii). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  29. Pingel, F. (2010). UNESCO Guidebook on textbook research and textbook revision, 2nd revised and updated edition. Paris/Braunschweig: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization/George Eckert Institute for International Textbooks Research.Google Scholar
  30. Rüsen, J. (2004). Historical consciousness: Narrative structure, moral function, and ontogenetic development. In P. Seixas (Ed.), Theorizing historical consciousness (pp. 63–85). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  31. Seixas, P. (2004). Introduction. In P. Seixas (Ed.), Theorizing historical consciousness (pp. 3–24). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  32. Seixas, P., & Peck, C. (2004). Teaching historical thinking. In A. Sears & I. Wright (Eds.), Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies (pp. 109–117). Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press.Google Scholar
  33. Sherlock, T. (2007). History and myth in the Soviet Empire and the Russian Republic. In E. A. Cole (Ed.), Teaching the violent past: History education and reconciliation (pp. 205–248). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  34. Stearns, P. N. (1998). Goals in history teaching. In J. F. Voss & M. Carretero (Eds.), International review of history education. Vol. 2. Learning and reasoning in history (pp. 281–293). London: Woburn.Google Scholar
  35. Stow, W., & Terry, H. (2000). Issues in the teaching of chronology. In J. Arthur & R. Phillips (Eds.), Issues in history teaching (pp. 83–97). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Van Drie, J., & Van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analyzing students’ reasoning about the past. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Von Borries, B. (1994). (Re-)constructing history and moral judgment: On relationships between interpretations of the past and perceptions of the present. In M. Carretero & J. F. Voss (Eds.), Cognitive and instructional processes in history and the social sciences (pp. 339–355). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Wang, Z. (2009). Old wounds, new narratives: Joint history textbook writing and peace building in East Asia. History & Memory, 21(1), 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wertsch, J. (2002). Voices of collective remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. White, H. (1987). The content of the form: Narrative discourse and historical representation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Wineburg, S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yogev, E. (2010). History curriculum with multiple narratives. In C. C. Carter & R. Kumar (Eds.), Peace philosophy in action (pp. 79–104). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Yogev, E. (2012a). Clio has a problem. How to develop active historical consciousness to counter the crisis in history teaching. Online International Journal of Arts and Humanities, 1(2), 13–22.Google Scholar
  44. Yogev, E. (2012b). The pedagogy of subversion in history education in conflict-ridden areas. Journal of Peace Education, 10(1), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Young, F. A. (1999). The shoemaker and the tea party: Memory and the American revolution. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Kibbutzim College of EducationTel-AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options