Knowing and Doing History: A Conceptual Framework and Pedagogy for Teaching Historical Contextualisation

Abstract

Knowing and doing history are two major approaches in teaching history. Although widely recognized as important, the integration of both remains difficult for teachers and students.In this article we propose a conceptual framework for combining the two in a pedagogy focused on the teaching of historical contextualisation. The framework describes the relationship between students' epistemological stance about history and elements involved in knowing and doing history. This relationship shifts from a copier stance looking for one correct copy of the past, in which both knowing and doing history are fixed, into a criterialist stance, where elements of knowing and doing history are both debatable components of the task of establishing a historical context.Based on this framework, three major design principles are identified for combining knowing and doing history in teaching historical contextualisation: challenge historical knowledge by creating a cognitive incongruity; stimulate substantiated considerations and scaffold students' learning. It is argued that these principles, specified in a larger set of sub principles, can help students to develop their epistemic beliefs and the integration of knowing and doing history. Suggestions are made for an on-going design study on a pedagogy of Active Historical Thinking.

Teaching historical thinking and reasoning: Construction of an observation instrument

“…Reasoning about change and continuity, or causes and consequences, requires the use of substantive historical concepts (van Boxtel & van Drie, 2018). The distinction between historical knowledge and skills has been referred to as 'a distracting dichotomy' in Britain (Counsell, 2000(Counsell, , 2011 and a balanced combination of the two approaches is recommended (Lee, 2005;VanSledright, 2011;Havekes et al, 2012). The strong links between the elements put forward by all of the above make it possible to envisage what a specific teacher behaviour looks like in the classroom, whether the teacher engages students in specific tasks or not.…”

Testing elementary and secondary school students’ ability to perform historical perspective taking: the constructing of valid and reliable measure instruments

“…Based on a review of the literature, we distilled three elements necessary for performing HPT successfully. First, the ability to perform historical contextualisation was identified (e.g., Britt and Aglinskas 2002;Doppen 2000;Havekes et al 2012;Leinhardt and McCarthy Young 1996;Nokes et al 2007;Rouet et al 1997;Van Boxtel and Van Drie 2012;Wineburg 1998). Historical contextualisation refers to building a context of circumstances or facts that surround the particular historical phenomenon to describe, compare, explain, or evaluate it (Van Drie and Van Boxtel 2008;Wineburg 1991).…”

Teaching historical contextualization: the construction of a reliable observation instrument

“…In history education, it is possible to contextualize historical sources and phenomena, including persons, events, and developments (Havekes et al 2012). Historical contextualization is the ability to situate a historical phenomenon or person in a temporal, spatial, and social context to describe, explain, compare, or evaluate it (Van Boxtel and Van Drie 2012).…”

“…The chronological frame includes knowledge of time and period, significant events, and developments (Dawson 2009;Wilschut 2012). The spatial frame focuses on knowledge of (geographical) locations and scale (Havekes et al 2012). The social frame includes not only knowledge of human behavior and the social conditions of life but also knowledge of socioeconomic, socio-cultural, and socio-political developments (Van Boxtel and Van Drie 2004).…”