A history of the right: The battle for control of national curriculum history 1989–1994

Abstract

This paper explores the manner in which educational and political conservatives attempted to control the content and purposes of the history curriculum in English schools during the period 1987-1994. It focuses upon this particular coalition because, since the late 1970s, it has set the agenda for the debate and dominated the race to produce a history curriculum designed to help produce a particular kind of society. The paper argues that the New Right's claim to be engaging in an educational debate is spurious. Rather, its concern is primarily ideological and only educational in terms of its use of history education as a vehicle through which to disseminate a specific set of values and beliefs.

A Study of the Secondary School History Curriculum in Chile from Colonial Times to the Present

“…Shemilt (1987) was in charge of the evaluation of the SCHP. However, over the 1970s the impact of the approach was reduced as the number of teachers implementing it was itself reduced (Crawford (1995). Later, Cooper (1994, reported research that supported these findings.…”

“…The 'great tradition' became of concern for several groups of people in the British educational system in the 1960s and 1970s (Crawford, 1995). First, teachers and scholars were concerned about the teaching of history as an act of repetition, with excessive emphasis on factual knowledge.…”

“…They alleged that the system in general was mediocre, being characterised by underachievement and declining standards (Crawford, 1995). These came particularly from politicians.…”

“…Baker realised that to get the support of the electorate, the new curriculum content would have to be expressed in a traditional way so that it could be easily understood by the British people (Crawford, 1995). Also, he was in charge of selecting the proposals for the new History National Curriculum 5-16, developed by the History Working Group (Booth, 1996).…”

“…Also, he was in charge of selecting the proposals for the new History National Curriculum 5-16, developed by the History Working Group (Booth, 1996). One important feature that this new history curriculum was expected to include was the reinforcement of the dominant cultural hegemony (Crawford, 1995;Wilschut, 2010). This provoked heated confrontation between stakeholder groups (Ball, 1994;Hayden et al, 1997).…”