Classroom Teachers' Thinking about Historical Texts: An Exploratory Study

History Teachers’ Knowledge of Inquiry Methods

“…The finding that less than half of the teachers within the sample used each of these cognitive processes during an inquiry task provides additional evidence for the claim that not all history teachers may be competent in historical inquiry (Bohan & Davis, 1998;Yeager & Davis, 1996). Three distinct approaches were identified, which indicate that differences in teachers' performance during an inquiry are not simply a matter of more or less historical thinking in general, but rather of the cognitive processes that they do or do not use.…”

“…Using the same design in a study with 15 secondary school teachers, Yeager and Davis (1996) were able to confirm this supposition, and reported three distinct approaches toward an inquiry: (1) history as a construction of meaning, the most historian-like approach, involved a review of source information, comparison of different accounts, and a search for sub-text and missing information, while (2) history as entertainment reflected a narrow understanding of inquiry as a process of information gathering that was mainly determined by readability and interest. In between lay (3) history as a search for accuracy, representing cases in which an account was solely judged by its preciseness and the extent to which it was corroborated by others, without taking other criteria into account.…”

Pay It Forward: Teacher Candidates’ Use of Historical Artifacts to Invigorate K-12 History Instruction

“…Research on teaching children history strongly supports theories of constructivism (Brophy & VanSledright, 1997;Levstik & Barton, 2005; National Center for History in the Schools, 1996; National Council for History Education, 2007;National Council for Social Studies, 1994). This construction of knowledge is a focus point of robust history and social studies teaching and learning (Barton & Levstik, 2004;Grant & Gradwell, 2005 As advocates of engaging students in historical inquiry and of the use of primary sources to aid in this inquiry, we support the claims of numerous student benefits, such as learning to detect bias, appreciating the interpretive nature of historical thinking, and the drawing of conclusions based on judgments about evidence (Fehn & Koeppen, 1998;Haeussler Bohan & Davis, 1998;Seixas 1998;Yeager & Davis, 1996). However, classroom teachers may not use artifacts and primary sources for various reasons, including their beliefs about their students' developmental immaturity, feeling such materials are time-consuming and not getting enough bang for the buck, having difficulty creating appropriate lessons, or simply lacking a sufficient understanding of history themselves (Levstik & Barton, 2005).…”

“…

AbstractAs advocates of engaging students in historical inquiry and of the use of primary sources to aid in this inquiry, we support the claims of numerous student benefits, such as learning to detect bias, appreciating the interpretive nature of historical thinking, and the drawing of conclusions based on judgments about evidence (Fehn & Koeppen, 1998;Haeussler Bohan & Davis, 1998;Seixas 1998;Yeager & Davis, 1996). We developed a unit of study for our history and social studies teacher candidates that would address several issues: (a) motivate and inspire future teachers to use inquiry as a tool to build K-12 students' historical understanding and facilitate purposeful utilization of artifacts with ease; (b) help future teachers increase their knowledge of local history; and (c) present a unit that could be easily used in a secondary history course and, with some modifications, could be adapted for elementary and middle school history classrooms.

…”

Les programmes québécois d’histoire nationale (1982-2007) et l’apprentissage de la pensée historique : vers l’identification d’un problème de conceptualisation

“…Non pas que l'approche britannique ne reconnaisse pas les savoirs procéduraux, mais elle apparaît plus prudente en ce qui concerne la dissociabilité des savoirs substantifs et procéduraux (Lee, 2005). Ces savoirs procéduraux sont la critique des sources, la construction de modèles, la contextualisation, la production d'arguments fondés sur des preuves et des récits (Yeager et Davis, 1996) ; ils peuvent également être associés aux heuristiques formulées par Wineburg (2001), à savoir la critique des sources, la corroboration et la contextualisation. Leur apprentissage se réaliserait par répétition, et il s'achèverait avec leur automatisation, c'est-à-dire lorsque leur usage se ferait de manière systématique et nonconsciente (Martineau, 1997).…”