I always struggle with the notion that we should teach students to "think like historians."
Obviously the academic discipline of history provides the guiding framework for defining the disciplinary knowledge that comprises #historicalthinking, but.....
There is a huge gap between the practices of the academic discipline and what is justifiable & possible in school history.
Also, the discipline of history is characterized by eclecticism, hybridity, diversity, capaciousness, and a lack of overarching structure or definition.
Any attempt to reduce its complexity to a single model of historical thinking runs the risk of oversimplification, and uncritical acceptance by teachers and students as “the” approach for teaching historical thinking.
At the same time, there are ways of knowing and thinking, tools, processes, and strategies utilized in the discipline that can help students make sense of the past, orient themselves in the present, and guide ethical actions in the future.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One thing about the #abed curriculum that is not being discussed enough is that the Knowledge-Understanding-Procedures categories don't make sense and there's a total absence of concepts.
For example, it differentiates between knowledge and understanding, but I have yet to hear a coherent explanation of the difference between the two, or a justifiable reason for separating them.
As discussed by @ArthurJChapman in his new book, history educators typically organize historical knowledge and understanding into first-order (substantive knowledge i.e. know that) and second-order (procedural, disciplinary or metahistorical knowledge i.e. know how).
Given the proliferation of articles about #socialstudies teachers using racist learning resources and assignments I thought I’d write a tweet thread about selecting learning resources for teaching #socialstudies and #history
Studies provide many e.g.'s of omissions, falsehoods, mistruths, generalizations, and stereotypes in textbooks.
Increasingly, teachers are buying & selling classroom resources on for-profit educational sites that do not adequately vet their materials. slate.com/technology/202…
/2
Most #Canadian Ministries of Education no longer authorize learning resources and there is no process or system in place to vet and review learning resources for teaching #socialstudies and #history
Basically, it's up to the teacher to select learning resources
/3
My response to @jdmstewart1's op-ed in the @globeandmail today about the toppling of the statue of JAM.
For context, JDM is a history teacher at a private girls boarding school and has written a book "Being Prime Minister. Also, we disagree about almost everything.
The idea that without JAM the very existence of Canada "may be questioned" is counter-factual logic.
We don't know if Canada would've existed without JAM. Surely he played a key role in initiating Confederation, but there were many causal factors that also contributed.
What JDM fails to recognize is that the statue of JAM symbolizes the systemic racism towards Indigenous people and other groups. Making Canadians more aware of this history by tearing down a symbolic statue may in fact advance these causes.
Since 2016 I've been part of @projectDOHR, a community-based partnership that, “examines the experience of the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children as part of the history and legacy of systemic and institutionalized racism” (Province of NS, 2015a: 4) dohr.ca
/1
The opportunity to work with former residents of the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children (NSHCC), the NSHCC Restorative Inquiry, Victims of Institutional Child Exploitation Society (VOICES), educators, historians, and legal experts on this project has been transformative.
/2
Being immersed in African Nova Scotian and African Canadian history has been a tremendous learning experience and opened my eyes to events and issues in #cdnhist that I might not have known about otherwise.
/3
I am a great admirer of @samwineburg’s research and the contributions that he and @SHEG_Stanford have made to #historyed in the US and internationally cannot be understated, but there are a few conceptual issues with the #historicalthinking chart below.
HT is defined in terms of analyzing primary sources, but does not include other important 2nd order HT concepts including historical empathy, cause and consequence, continuity & change, progress & decline, historical significance, and the ethical dimension (amongst others).
/2
The chart doesn’t differentiate between written sources and visual sources such as maps, photographs, paintings, oral history that utilize many of the same questions, but also requires different questions, contextual knowledge, and methods of analysis.
/3