C a pi t a, L a u r a , Coo p er, Hil a ry a n d M o g o s, Iosif (2 0 0 0) Hi s t o ry, c hil d r e n ' s t hi n ki n g a n d c r e a tivity in t h e cl a s s r o o m : E n glis h a n d Ro m a ni a n p e r s p e c tiv e s. In t e r n a tio n al Jou r n al of Hi s t o ric al Le a r ni n g, Te a c hi n g a n d R e s e a r c h (IJHLTR), 1 (1). p p. 1 4-1 8. Do w nlo a d e d fro m: h t t p://i n si g h t. c u m b ri a. a c. u k/i d/ e p ri n t/ 9 2/ U s a g e o f a n y i t e m s f r o m t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f C u m b r i a' s i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e p o s i t o r y 'I n s i g h t' m u s t c o n f o r m t o t h e f o l l o w i n g f a i r u s a g e g u i d e l i n e s .

No abstract

The paper explores the answer formulated by Romanian High School students to a questionnaire aimed at measuring the interest in studying History. The instrument was developed within the framework of a European research, coordinated by the Groningen University and which includes five countries. We analyzed the answers of the Romanian students starting from the working hypothesis that a potential corelation between the answers and the training profile of the specific High School in which they learn (in our case, theoretical and vocational) can be identified. Starting from the initial research instrument, students' answers were organized in eight categories within three clusters, organized around their perception of the utility and interest of studying History for their professional life, for general learning, and for their personal development. In more technical terms, three testlets were developed in order to better pinpoint their attitudes towards History as a subject. The comparative analysis is useful in the context of the debate concerning the training profiles provided by High Schools (as specific stage in their compulsory education), and over the ways in which the History curriculum might be better developed. The null hypothesis, that is, there are no significant differences within the target group, will enable a debate concerning the relevance of training profiles for High Schools in relation to student motivation.

The paper focuses on the concept of curriculum implementation as part of a wider process of curriculum development. In Romania, the general practice of policy implementation is focused on top down approaches; by this, educational authorities orient the curriculum implementation by means of official documents (such as Ministry Orders, recommendations), the result being a text driven reform. Although it has its advantages, especially in terms of duration of implementation, the approach limits the opportunities that schools have in order to propose localised and/or customised perspectives for curriculum. The starting point is a small research conducted in four schools in Romania. The research seems to demonstrate the existence of a number of common practices that occur in schools when implementing the national curriculum. For example, curriculum design activities can be transformed in opportunities for professional dialogue and peer learning. These commonalities can be consolidated as formal internal indicators to be used by schools in the process of self-evaluation.