Controversially uncontroversial? Swedish pre-service history teachers’ relations to their national pasts

Abstract

Abstract
 This article presents a study of how Swedish pre-service history teachers narrated their nation’s past. Previous research on national history education has generally focused on the treatment of conflicts in national history and what challenges that poses for history education. The present study seeks to complement and broaden this research through its focus on a country where national history is generally perceived as uncontroversial and the debate on national history is generally characterised by consensus, and on what strategies future history teachers use when recounting the national history of Sweden. Using a qualitative approach, we asked our respondents to “Tell us the history of Sweden in your own words” in writing. The study finds that the vast majority of the respondents approach their national history in a way that reinforces a traditional view of Swedish national history. These narratives are generally presented in a way that does not engage with or show how perspective and position affects our rendering of history, which has often been regarded as problematic in history educational research. At the same time, these results also show that our respondents are well familiar with the dominant way of perceiving the Swedish past, something that could also be argued to be valuable in history education, depending on how we choose to approach national history.
 Keywords: national history, history education, historical consciousness, uses of history
 
 Kontroversiellt okontroversiellt? Om svenska historielärarstudenters relation till deras nationella förflutna
 Sammandrag
 Artikeln presenterar en studie av hur svenska historielärarstudenter skildrade Sveriges historia. Tidigare forskning om nationell historieundervisning har främst närmat sig ämnet från ett konfliktperspektiv och undersökt vilka utmaningar detta innebär för historieundervisningen. Föreliggande studie söker att komplementera tidigare forskning genom att fokusera på ett land vars nationella historia generellt uppfattas som okontro­versiell och där debatten om den nationella historieskrivningen i stor utsträckning präglas av konsensus, samt på vilka strategier historielärarstudenter använder när de skildrar Sveriges historia. Genom en kvalitativ forskningsansats bad vi våra respond­enter att skriftligen”Berätta Sveriges historia med dina egna ord”. Studien visar att majoriteten av respondenterna skildrar den svenska historien på ett sätt som återger en traditionell syn på Sveriges historia. Dessa narrativ är generellt skrivna på ett sådant sätt att de inte visar hur perspektiv och positionering påverkar hur vi skildrar det förflutna, något som ofta ansetts vara problematiskt i historiedidaktisk forskning. Samtidigt visar studiens resultat att respondenterna är välbekanta med det dominerande sättet att skildra den svenska historien, något som även kan vara värdefullt för historieundervisningen, beroende på hur vi väljer att närma oss den nationella historien.
 Nyckelord: nationell historia, historiedidaktik, historiemedvetande, historiebruk

Realising Roma rights through a high-stakes history test: Secondary school students narrating the Swedish Roma past, present and future

“…Although students express dismay over the past in general, and the nation state's actions in particular, the prevailing image of the nation state is that of a country defending cultural rights, human rights and democracy (see Osler, 2015). In relation to this finding, one can sense the move towards a shared line of reasoning, in that 120 students use the first-person pronoun 'we' in the construction of their narratives of the past (see Samuelsson, 2017;Thorp and Vinterek, 2020). The use of 'we' signals a certain closeness to the past and affinity with the majority: 'we' should be ashamed of 'our country' and 'our past'.…”

“…It is evident that the analysis of agency indicates a strong alignment with the distribution of agents of change. What is common for all these accounts is that the students play an active role in disseminating Roma history by explicitly sharing their standpoints (visible in 430 unique references), rather than producing neutral narratives (see Thorp and Vinterek, 2020). Pertaining to agency, the analysis reveals a conflation of historical agents, wherein the state and the individual become intertwined.…”

“…It should therefore be seen in light of the described change approach and intercultural dimensions of history education. With regard to this notion, it should be pointed out that for a long time Swedish history education has aimed to create social cohesion, a sense of national identity and a shared line of reasoning (Halldén, 1994;Samuelsson, 2017;Thorp and Vinterek, 2020). It has been argued that this focus may make history appear to be closed to different interpretations, and may thus impede multiperspectivity (Wendell, 2018).…”

Untitled

“…awareness of historicity (Gadamer, 1975;Jeismann, 1979;Thorp, 2017), we can see that the traditional and critical narratological uses of history do not indicate historical consciousness, while the genetic narratological use of history does. In regards to promoting an inclusive historical culture, it could thus be argued that a fostering of historical consciousness is indispensable in order to promote a complex reflexive understanding of history that takes perspective and context into consideration (Körber & Pearce, 2021;Thorp & Vinterek, 2020).…”

Kontroversielle aspekter i historieundervisningen

“…Disse forholder sig til laerebøger som tekstanalyse og ikke til, hvordan laeremidler fortolkes som fortaellinger, når de indgår i undervisningen. Thorp og Vinterek (2020) har undersøgt laererstuderendes opfattelse af svensk nationalhistorie, og de konkluderer på baggrund heraf, at i nationer som Sverige (og Danmark), hvor den nationale fortaelling baseres på en konsensusopfattelse, så udlaegges fortaellinger om nationen ofte lineaert og ukompliceret og bliver dermed kontroversielt ukontroversielle (Thorp & Vinterek 2020). I det naeste diskuteres eksempler fra empirien på positioner, der ikke tages i fortaellingerne om nationen og demokratiet som destination og endemål.…”