Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History [1 ed.] 9781443884730, 9781443880923

Citation preview

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History Edited by

Hilary Cooper and Jon Nichol

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History Edited by Hilary Cooper and Jon Nichol This book first published 2015 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2015 by Hilary Cooper, Jon Nichol and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-8092-2 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-8092-3

History is not only concerned with change. It is also the subject of change. Everyday history books are remaindered… new editions released…journal articles removed from ‘current tenses’ data bases and web sites cached. History changes. —Marnie-Hughes Warrington Revisionist Histories (2013) London: Routledge

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments ...................................................................................... xi List of Illustrations .................................................................................... xii List of Tables ............................................................................................ xiii Preface ....................................................................................................... xv Setting the Scene Jon Nichol and Hilary Cooper Part I: History and Identity Chapter One ................................................................................................. 2 A Question of Identity? Purpose, Policy and Practice in the Teaching of History in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland Alan McCully and Fionnuala Waldron Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 25 Searching for an Identity: Moral and National Education as an Independent Subject in Contemporary Hong Kong Zardas Shuk-Man Lee, Phoebe Y.H.Tang and Carol C.L. Tsang Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 40 Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books Manuel Pousa and Ramon Lopez Facal Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 58 A ‘Game’ of Identities: Debates over History in Greek Cypriot Education Lukas N. Perikleous Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 81 History Written on Walls: A Study of Quebec High School Students’ Historical Consciousness Jean Pierre-Charland, Marc-Andre Éthier and Jean-Francois Cardin

viii

Table of Contents

Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 124 “Thinking Each Other’s History”: Can Facing the Past Contribute to Education for Human Rights and Democracy? Gail Weldon Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 139 Scarcely an Immaculate Conception: New Professionalism Encounters Old Politics in the Formation of the Australian National History Curriculum Tony Taylor Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 156 Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness: A Dialogue with Brazilian Curricular Proposals Maria Auxiliadora Schmidt Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 178 The Challenges of History Education in Iceland Susanna Margret Gestsdottir Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 200 The Israeli History Curriculum and the Conservative-Liberal Pendulum Tsafrir Goldberg and David Gerwin Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 222 History in Malta’s New National Curriculum Framework Yosanne Vella Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 240 Learning to Think Historically through Course Work: A New Zealand Case Study Mark Sheehan Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 254 History Teaching in the Republic of Korea: Curriculum and Practice Sun Joo Kang Chapter Fourteen ..................................................................................... 272 Current History Teaching in Turkey: Debates and Issues Gukcin Dilek and Dursun Dilek

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

ix

Part II: The Traumatic Past and Sensitive Issues Chapter Fifteen ........................................................................................ 294 Greek Society’s Confrontation with Traumas caused by National Socialism: The Case of the Distromo Massacre (June 10th 1944)— History Text Books and Memory Politics of the Local Community George Kokkinos, Panayotis Kimourtzis, Eleni Stefanou, Panagiotis Gatsotis and Zeta Papandreou Chapter Sixteen ....................................................................................... 328 The Difficult Relationship between the History of the Present and School History in Greece: Cinema as a “Deus ex Machina”? Results Arising from a Research Programme with Students George Kokkinos, Panayotis Kimourtzis, Elli Lemonidou, Panayotis Gatsotis and Petros Trantas Chapter Seventeen ................................................................................... 364 High School Students’ Understanding of Personal Betrayal in a SocioHistorical Context of Ethnic Conflict: Implications for Teaching History Michelle J. Bellino and Robert L. Selman Chapter Eighteen ..................................................................................... 394 Teaching History through Drama: The ‘Armenian Deportation’ Erinc Erdal and Ruken Akar Vural Part III: Controversial Issues Chapter Nineteen ..................................................................................... 422 Arabs and Muslims in Hungarian History Text Books and History Teaching Csaba Fazekas Chapter Twenty ....................................................................................... 448 Well-behaved Women Rarely Make History: Gendered Teaching and Learning in and about History Linda S. Levstik Chapter Twenty-One ............................................................................... 473 “We, Them and the Others”: Historical Thinking and Intercultural Ideas of Portuguese Students Julia Castro

x

Table of Contents

Chapter Twenty-Two............................................................................... 486 “A Giant with Clay Feet”: Quebec Students and their Historical Consciousness of the Nation Stephane Levesque, Jocelyn Letourneau and Raphael Gani Contributors ............................................................................................. 514 Index of Chapter Keywords ..................................................................... 525

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The editors wish to acknowledge their appreciation of the seminal contribution that Dr. Robert Guyver has made to the publication of this book. A number of the chapters were initially published in Volume 11 Issue 2 of the International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research (May 2013), which focused on National Curricula and concepts of identity. As editor of this issue Dr. Guyver worked proactively and assiduously with the authors of the following chapters: chapter one, on issues related to teaching history in Northern Ireland, chapter two which discusses teaching history in Hong Kong, chapter four on the Cypriot history curriculum, chapter seven on the Australian National Curriculum, chapter eight on history teaching in Brazil, chapter nine on the challenges of history education in Iceland, chapter ten on the Israeli Curriculum, chapter eleven on the National Curriculum in Malta, chapter twelve, New Zealand case study, chapter thirteen on history in South Korea, chapter eighteen, which debates the Turkish history curriculum, chapter twentytwo, focusing on Quebec.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure i A Matrix for Mapping Master Narratives Figure 6-1 adapted from Gibson, shows how the sessions enabled teachers to interact at a deeper level Figure 16-1 Responses to Annex 1 question 13 (in relation to the movie The Pianist): “The Pianist, the basic hero of the so-called movie, disposed a courageous, militant character”. Figure 16-2 Figure 16.2 Responses to Annex 1 question 16 (in relation to the movie The Pianist): “The Jews resisted their arrest and displacement by the Nazi”. Figure 16-3 Figure 16-3 Responses to Annex 1 question 24 (in relation to the movie The Last Metro): “In the film The Last Metro we don’t see any anti-Semite French”. Figure 16-4 Figure 16-4 Responses to Annex 1 question 25 (in relation to the movie The Last Metro): “In the film The Last Metro the French people who collaborated with the Germans are presentes as “a few exceptional cases”. Figure 17-1 Percent of student explanations offered for Tanja’s actions Figure 17-2 Explanations by number of students demonstrating partial and adequate degrees of comprehension Figure 17-3Showing students’ explanations by comprehension

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5-1 The Mural: list of key persons by period Table 5-2 Origins of students from francophone background, by gender Table 5-3 Assessment of mural’s representativeness by students from francophone background, by gender Table 5-4 Mural’s elements appreciation of students from a francophone background, by gender Table 5-5 Elements students from a francophone background want to add to mural representing their society, by gender Table 5-6 Proportion of students from francophone background who want to remove elements of the past from the mural, by gender Table 5-7 Key people cited by students from francophone background, by gender Table 5-8 Principal events cited by students from francophone background, by gender Table 5-9 Principal cultural elements cited by students from francophone background, by gender Table 5-10 Attitude to duration for students from francophone backgrounds, by gender Table 5-11 Information sources cited by students from a francophone background, by gender Table 5-12 Elements of the mural appreciated by students from aboriginal background, by gender Table 16-1 Learning value of audio-visual applications in the classroom Table 17-1 A summary of the four-tiered coding scheme used to assess comprehension, explanations, judgments and contextualized reflection. Table 17-2 Inter-rater reliability calculations for Coding Group 1 (three members) and Coding Group 2 (four members) in their application of the multi-analytic coding scheme. Table 17-3 Frequency of student responses by comprehension, explanation, judgment and contextualised reflection. Table 17-4 x2 Statistics demonstrating the relationship between explicitly valenced or unresolved forms of moral judgment and number of explanations for historical agency. Table 18-1 Students’ views on two different perspectives, (Gürün’s and Akçam’s) on deportation Table 18-2 Students’ prior knowledge and opinions about deportation

xiv

List of Tables

Table 18-3 Students’ knowledge and opinion after the course, prior knowledge and opinion. Table 22-1 Categorisation of Quebec History Table 22-2 Orientations of students’ stories

PREFACE SETTING THE SCENE JON NICHOL AND HILARY COOPER

Introduction The view from the college lawn in Ambleside, England, on a July day in 2004 was a picture of peace and tranquillity as we posed for the first History Educators International Research Network [HEIRNET] conference photo. With its backdrop of the Cumbrian mountains the sun soaked lake Windermere sparkled and glistened in the distance. Yet the scene was deceptive. In geological time the region had been a centre of earthquake and volcanic activity as the earth’s tectonic plates moved, crumpled, crushed and squeezed the Cumbrian mountain chain into existence. The major focus of the 2004 HEIRNET conference was the role of History in understanding the educational implications of the political earthquakes and volcanic eruptions of the modern world. These mainly occur along the boundaries between the tectonic plates of competing beliefs, ethnicities, faith and ideologies whose sectarian tesselated surfaces are a meld of, among other elements: x capitalism, communism, fascism, liberalism x federalism, imperialism, internationalism, nationalism, regionalism and tribalism x autocracy, democracy, monarchy and republicanism x Buddhism, Catholicism, Puritanism, Islam and Zionism. At the tectonic plates’ boundaries we find arenas of conflict, sensitive and controversial issues and even trauma over historical consciousness and identity - personal, communal and national - in and between polities, i.e. nation states, countries, regions, federal states and other jurisdictions. Each arena involves a unique and often lethal cocktail of elements that have deeply entrenched and complex historical roots such as those in

xvi

Preface

Israel, the Middle East and the Ukraine. Chapter 10 on Israel’s history curriculum outlines one such multi-factorial, evolving historical context: “At sixty-four Israel is still a comparatively young nation state, just passing from the “developing” to the “developed” phase. The state was conceived and built by the Jewish national movement inspired by the Zionist ideology. Its establishment and most of the subsequent decades were accompanied by threats and wars with neighbouring Arab states. As these abated by the late 1970s, the security scene became dominated by a seemingly intractable conflict with the Palestinians. Complicating the picture is the fact that a fifth of the Israeli population consists of Arab citizens affiliated with the Palestinian people. Adding to this diversity is the fact that from the outset Israel was officially committed to the ingathering of the Jewish “exiles” or “diasporas.”

Israel’s complexity is replicated throughout the book in its analysis of History Education in over 20 countries and jurisdictions from around the world. Typically History Education in Israel occupies a significant part of a political and populist battleground between often incompatible ideologies and interpretations, each with its competing canons (master narrative and often rival, alternative minor narratives) that draws upon historical conciousness, personal, communal and national identities and public and private memories. Likewise the 2015 crisis and civil war in Ukraine epitomises a universal phenomenon, the polarisation between two extreme orientations: the ‘monistic’, i.e. mono-cultural, mono-ethnic and nationalistic and the ‘pluralistic’ i.e. multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and internationalistic. Often competing views on the nature and role of History Education mirror these poles. In the Ukraine there is: “… tension between two different models of Ukrainian statehood. One is … the “monist” view, which asserts that the country is an autochthonous [indigenous, mono-ethnic] cultural and political unity and that the challenge of independence since 1991 has been to strengthen the Ukrainian language, repudiate the tsarist and Soviet imperial legacies, reduce the political weight of Russian-speakers and move the country away from Russia towards “Europe”. The alternative “pluralist” view emphasizes the different historical and cultural experiences of Ukraine’s various regions and argues that building a modern democratic post-Soviet Ukrainian state is not just a matter of good governance and rule of law at the centre. It also requires an

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xvii

acceptance of bilingualism, mutual tolerance of different traditions, and devolution of power to the regions.” (Steele, 2015)

There is a logical, but not inevitable, congruence between ‘monism’ and a positivistic pedagogy for the transmission of the master narrative or canon as a body of uncontested, unquestioned ‘know that’ knowledge and ‘pluralism’ and its constructivist ‘know how’ pedagogy built around pupils under teacher guidance creating their own historical understanding through questioning, enquiry and working on sources and different interpretations .

The History Educators International Research Network [HEIRNET] Agenda HEIRNET’s evolving agenda since our 2004 inaugural meeting has focused on the issues that Israel and the Ukraine raise and that Identity, Trauma and Sensitive and Controversial Issues addresses in case-studies from over 20 countries and jurisdictions. The book is based on papers delivered either at the eleven annual HEIRNET conferences or published in its International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research. Collectively the chapters address history’s educational role in a world that since 1989 has witnessed: x x x x x x x x x x

the disintegration of the Soviet empire and the end of the Cold War; resurgent nationalism and the emegence of new nation states; civil war, genocide and famine; war, invasion, conquest and neo-colonialism in Afghanistan and the Middle East; the end of Apartheid; the transplantation of western liberal democractic political ideologies, constitutions and practices in Asian, African and European states and jurisdictions; the emergence of Al-Queda, the 9/11 trauma and the War on Terror; the post 2008 economic recession and its impact upon the U.S.A., Europe and the wider world; the expansion of the European Union the economic and educational rise of the BRICS countries - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa;

xviii

x

Preface

since 2010 the Arab Spring and the jihadic new Middle Eastern wars of religion that spill over into their geographical hinterlands in Africa, Europe, Asia and the Indian sub-continent.

While generalising from the particular is hazardous, the introductory section of Chapter 22 on Canada provides an overview of the major issues involved in History Education, historical consciousness, memory and identity in the polities that the book covers: “Educating the younger generations and instilling in them unifying historical representations of their country are taken very seriously by state authorities in Canada (Osborne, 2003). Yet national history and historical consciousness are hotly debated publicly. “In Canada even history divides”, once observed philosopher Charles Taylor (1993, p. 25). As might be expected, public memory often nurtures conflicting and potentially mutually exclusive stories of the nation. Interpretations of the past are not only contested but are used publicly to justify partisan decisions about the future of the Canadian nation. These conflicting narratives of nation have their origins in the bilingual nature of Canada and the coexistence of so-called “nations within”, where nation means “a historical community, more or less institutionally complete, occupying a given territory or homeland, sharing a distinct language and culture” (Kymlicka, 1995, p. 11). Whereas ethnic and previously marginalised groups have sought a more culturally inclusive narrative of the nation, national minorities pose a radically different kind of challenge to history. In the case of Québécois and aboriginal peoples, these groups were incorporated into the Canadian federation while maintaining their historical reference to a “homeland”. Not only do they seek greater recognition of their contribution but also collective identity, rights, and self-government.”

Historical Consciousness, Identity and Master and Minor Narratives The book’s twenty-two chapters draw upon a common theme reflected in its title Identity, Trauma and Sensitive and Controversial Issues in History Education: the relationship between historical consciousness and identity in nation states, countries, states or jurisdictions [polities] and their history curricula that range from the national to the parochial and often reflect secular, ethnic, religious or other vested interests. Chapter 8 on Brazil analyses the links between a polity’s political establishment and the role of history in an educational system that reflects the dominant political party’s views and interests with their cultural roots:

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xix

“the history disciplinary code is, therefore, a social tradition which characterises itself historically and which is composed of a group of ideas, values, suppositions and routines, which legitimate the educational function given to history and which regulate the order of the practice in its teaching. It contains, thus, speculation and discursive rhetoric about its educational value, the content of its teaching and the archetypes of teaching, which follow each other in [the] time and which consider themselves, inside the dominating culture, valuable and authentic.”

A community’s shared culture, language and sense of identity join together the mythical, legendary and factual vertebrae of a polity in the spinal cord of its historical canon or master narrative. Each canon or master narrative tells a coherent, causally connected and chronological historical account or story drawing upon the iconic, symbolic, legendary and significant mythical and real events, individuals, movements and developments in a community’s past. These discrete “stories” synthesise into a communal sense of identity, pride, belonging and participation. The master narrative can manifest itself in nationalism, patriotism, jingoism and xenophobia. In disaffected communities and jurisdictions their canon can underpin demands for autonomy and national independence and lead to civil controversy, conflict and even civil war as in the Ukraine. A master narrative’s roots draw sustenance from its community’s political, religious, social, sporting, cultural and economic structures, associations and organisations, each with its own minor narratives rooted in shared histories, memories, myths, legends, tales, stories and recollections where history is “gossip well told”. These bodies with often active, social lives and identities can include: o o o o o o o o o o o

business associations and bodies charities clubs cultural: e.g. museums, libraries, orchestras, art galleries, festivals familial and social networks financial and commercIal bodies government administration at all levels - the civil service and local government industrial organisations interest groups international corporations Internet & social media – facebook, twitter

o judiciary, the o media – press radio, TV o miltary, the – army, navy, air force o police, the o political parties o pressure and lobbying groups o professions, the o public meetings o publishing & brodcasting businesses and bodies o recreational organisations o religious, the o schools and colleges

Preface

xx o secret organisations. e.g. masons, cosa nostra o sectarian, the o sporting and social

o o o o

trade unions trans-national organisations tribal, ethnic, regional universities

We are surrounded with physical, iconic and symblic “signs” of historical consciousness and identity: memorials, monuments, statues, murals, named buildings, museums and historic sites. Each carries a clear, coded message about our relationship to a past that shapes our sense of belonging and the future. Society at large keeps its collective historical consciousness alive through multiple channels, including religious and secular services, feasts and dinners, weddings and funerals, memorials, demonstrations, commemorations, party political broadcasts, campaigns and manifestoes. More generally, the media channels produce a constant flood of radio and tv programmes, films, newspaper and journal articles, social media and websites that commemorate, memorialise, re-construct and celebrate specific historic events, movements, triumphs, individuals and developments. Educationally the major medium for encoding canons and master narratives has been the text book. Text books transmit messages that teachers mediate to ensure their pupils assimilate and understand the canon’s significance in their developing civic sense of national identity and patriotism. Chapter 19 on the Arab and Muslim presence in Hungarian text books notes that such texts: “are really messages about the future. As part of a curriculum they participate in no less than the organized knowledge system of society. They participate in creating what a society has recognized as legitimate and truthful. They help set the canons of truthfulness and, as such, also help recreate a major reference point for what knowledge, culture, belief and morality really are (Christian-Smith, 1991 cited in Bar-Tal and Teichman, 2005, p. 157).”

Within a polity we can map its communities’ master and minor narratives on to a three dimensional matrix with four axes. The horizontal and vertical axes are: x single ÍÎ multiple narratives x peace/reconciliation ÍÎ trauma/conflict/controversy. The diagonal axes represent the: x positivist ÍÎ constructivist polarities of pedagogy/didactics x the ‘monist ÍÎ “pluralist’ views of the curriculum

Identity, Trauuma, Sensitive and Controverssial Issues in the Teaching g of History

xxi

Figure i A Maatrix for Mappiing Master Narrratives

Historiograpphy is a backgground factor of historical cconsciousnesss. Bearing in mind thaat ‘all history is contemporary history’, the historiog graphy of narratives aand canons draw d upon th he historiograaphy of previous eras reflected in each generaation’s “conveentional wisddom” about a polity’s

xxii

Preface

identity. In developing history curricula in new polities a common feature is the clash between atavistic and for an historiographical backbone for the radical revison of all historical curricula that takes into account the female perspective, neglect of which discriminates against 50% of the population. So what view of historical consciousness does the book present? Chapter 9 on Iceland succinctly summarises its three key features as: “a complex network of (a) interpretations of the past, (b) perceptions of the present and (c) expectations of the future. History was thus seen as a mental construct, which made sense of the past in a narrative structure, while at the same time providing orientation for the lives of those passing from the past to the future.”

Chapter 5 on Quebec defines what such identity entails: “the mental state (changeable) of the subject who, be it through action or volition, is aware of his/her temporality (regardless of the duration). It is through this understanding of one’s temporality that an individual is able to judge (or willing to judge) situations based on his/her interpretation of past events.”

The Icelandic chapter’s definition of historical consciousness is mirrored in the three views of Quebec students on what an historical mural should refer to. Some: “1) thought that a mural should refer to the past and, as such, try to complement it; 2) [others] accepted the past, but would want to add the present; or 3) [the rest] would eliminate the past and simply show an illustration of the present.”

The triple perspectives of historical consciousness permeat chapters 1-14 on History and Identity.

Part I History and Identity, Chapters 1-14 The book’s first fourteen chapters examine History and Identity within the wide range of contexts that we can map on to the Matrix For Mapping Master Narratives (Figure i.). The chapers have multiple perspectives that cumulatively build a comprehensive picture of what is involved in the development of national history curricula based on historical consciousness, memory and identity. Chapter 1 on Northern and Southern Ireland explores how history can bring communities together through an increasingly shared past that

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxiii

developes a common identity grounded in a ‘pluralist’ orientation that contrasts sharply with their countries divided ‘monist’ pasts. These pasts resulted in civil war in the 1920s and from 1970 over 20 years of internecine armed struggle that led to some 3000 deaths in Norther Ireland. The chapter: “… concludes by demonstrating that in a post-modern, increasingly globalised world, shared educational ideas and political aspirations emerging from the Irish peace process are acting to bring the respective history curricula back into symmetry and, thereby, providing opportunities for increased co-operation.”

Chapter 2 illuminates the depth and strength of feeling about a ‘monist’ history curriculum in Hong Kong that preserved and protected a Hong Kong community identity. Since 1997 when China regained control over Hong Kong the ex-British colony’s inhabitants had retained a history curriculum that reflected a canon of a shared communal past. In 2012 China introduced a new rival ‘monist’ history curriculum that replaced Hong Kong’s historical canon and identity with that of China’s. The result was public demonstrations in which, amazingly, 100,000 people took part. “The end of the September protests seemingly drew debates over national education in Hong Kong to a close. However, the contestations over teaching the topic of national identity have existed in society since the colonial era. Although teaching national identity was sometimes debated even during the colonial era, after Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty, teaching the topic of national identity has become an increasingly important issue that defines Hong Kong’s relations with China as well as Hong Kong’s future.”

The focus of Chapter 3 on Spanish text books is in marked contrast, focusing on the factors that influence text book representation of a canon of national identity. It argues that current Spanish text books present colonialism from a contemporary, euro-centric, sanitised perspective that reinforces simplistic stereotypes of imperialism as being benign, non controversial and positive. The text books draw upon a “naïve, Eurocentric historiography that uses the nation state and the myth of continued progress as the sole framework for explanation”, ignoring the realities of massacre, genocide, racism and brutal exploitation. Analysis of the text books shows: “the persistence of a ‘rosy tradition’ sustaining certain continuity with the old colonial propaganda, for instance minimising or ignoring colonial

xxiv

Preface

violence; treating colonised territories and metropolis asymmetrically, disregarding non-European history; conveying a stereotypical image of colonised and colonisers through pictures, and resorting to maps with a colonial perspective.”

Cyprus, the subject of Chapter 4, is a classic case study of competing master narratives or canons that enshrine diametrically opposed views of the country’s past so as to shape its future. Since the Turkish invasion and occupation of the northern part of the island in 1974 it has been divided between the southern Greek and northern Turkish communities. The heated debates within the southern Greek Cypriot state are between a ‘monist’ Hellenocentric position that argues that the history curriculum should be based on Greek history, culture, identity and links to Greece and the diametrically different ‘pluralist’ Cyprocentric approach that promotes the reunification of Cyprus with shared identity developing from a history curriculum based on peace and reconciliation between the two communities, rooted in a shared heritage. The depth of feeling was shown when the editors of this book were invited to Cyprus to participate in a history conference on reunification: the tangential involvement of the Cypriot government led to public demands for the minister of education’s resignation! Chapter 5 addresses the key issue of what forms the historical thinking and historical consciousness of two groups of French Canadian and First Nation [aboriginal / native American] students take in Quebec. The chapter examines in detail the theoretical background to their sense of identity in the context of the Quebec curriculum for Citizenship and History. It reports research on the two groups’ perceptions and understanding of their own historical consciousness in relation to a visual, iconic representation of the Quebec master narrative or canon: The Mural of Québeckers. It is a huge trompe-l’oeil whose inscription reads: “The Québeckers’ Mural tells the history of Québec and incorporates numerous characters specific to the capital”. The researchers interviewed students about the relationship between the mural and their views of their own sense of national identity and what they would like to include in a mural that represented their view of Quebec society. Pre and post apartheid South Africa, Chapter 6, starkly reveals the problem of moving from a ‘monist’ curriculum grounded in the apartheid regime’s racist ideology of white supremacist identity and its official historiography to a diametrically different ‘pluralist’ curriculum. The post apartheid curriculum was based upon the Mandela government’s ideological commitment to a multi-ethnic and cultural rainbow nation with

Identity, Trauuma, Sensitive and Controverssial Issues in the Teaching g of History

xxv

its related beeliefs and histtorical conscio ousness. Thesse incorporated modern historical sccholarship’s revisionist r intterpretation off South Africca’s past. However, thhe new curricuulum had no supporting s peedagogy, educcation and training of teeachers to impplement it: “Teacherss, who had juust emerged frrom Christian National Educcation, fundamenntal pedagogiccs and a hig ghly authoritarrian and stru uctured educationnal framework, were left with h a constructiviist curriculum and a no guiding fr framework at alll.”

We address this issue beelow in the preface’s finall section on pedagogy. p The chapter reports a piloot project, Faccing the Past, aimed to transform the orientation oof teachers thaat would undeerpin an approopriate way off teaching the new currriculum – a traansformation elegantly sum mmarised in fig gure 6-1. Figure 6-1

Apartheid experiences

‡˜˜‡Žƒ–‹‘•‹ †‘……—‡–•‘ˆƒ’ƒ ƒ”–Š‡‹† ‡š’ ’‡”‹‡…‡•

•‡ ‹ƒ”

”‘—’•Š Šƒ”‡ ‡š’‡”‹‡ …‡•

Beliefs about South Africans off other races



‘‰‹–‹˜‡ †‹••‘ƒ…‡ ‡ ƒ†‹–‹‰ƒ ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ…‘‰‹–‹˜‡ †‘‰ƒ–‹• 

‡™„‡Ž‹‡ˆˆ• ƒ„‘—–‘—––Š ˆ”‹…ƒ•‘ˆˆ –Š‡””ƒ…‡ ‡•

Nationall history curriccula can invollve negotiationn and compro omise that involve recconciling disccordant politiical interests that, as in Northern Ireland, Hoong Kong andd Cyprus, caan reflect a rrange of regiional and factional intterests. Nowhhere is this mo ore clearly illuustrated in Ch hapter 7, an insider view of this grrim reality fro om Tony Tayllor, a key exp pert figure in the creatiion of the Ausstralian natio onal history cuurriculum in 2010. 2 The curriculum w was subject too the whims, fancies f and vaacillation of competing national andd eight federral jurisdictions’ politicianns pursuing their own parochial innterests and aggendas. Tony’s account is a roller coastter of the nightmare thhat the proceess involved, with a picturre emerging of o him as

xxvi

Preface

ringmaster trying to control eight feral, fighting lions. In places the chapter reads like a transcript from a reality TV programme. Tony judiciously sums this up: “The author argues that these interventions which have been both political and educational, together with the well-intentioned process of consultation has led to unfortunate design changes and to politically-motivated delays in curriculum implementation which could lead to its being overturned by a successor conservative coalition government.”

Chapter 8 deals with the different phases of History Education in Brazil from 1889 to the present that have reflected the radically different educational policies of successive governmental regimes. The chapter also has a detailed theoretical and epistemological section that explains the factors that underpin national history curricula, with a focus on history education being a balance betweeen what is known, substantive content, and how it is known, historical thinking - the synactic, disciplinary procedural knowledge. Such syntactic knowedge incorporates high level thinking skills, processes and disciplinary concepts that also meets the demands of education in Brazil today to be transformative: “The transformation of certain procedures and attitudes towards substantive content relevant to History Education can be understood from the perspective of previous curricular content that was impoverished, fragmented and handled unsystematically and related themes that had lost their conceptual validity and value. Such themes have become vapid words, unrelated to and ungrounded in the collective experiences of those who aim to make the history of the Brazilian people past and present to relate to the demands for the development and transformation of contemporary society.”

In Chapter 9 we find a fascinating study of developments in Iceland where Icelandic history is universally popular. The school history curriculum before 1999 was an informal canon or master narrative that reflected historical conscousness embedded in public opinion. The canon consisted of a set of causally linked topics of major developments, iconic events and symbolic individuals in Iceland’s past that cumulatively shaped Icelanders’ historical consciosness and identity. The 1999 national curriculum reflected the government’s highlighting of the role of history in the promotion of national identity: “Matters of national education such as the language, national culture and the history of the land and nation should be given special status in the

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxvii

curriculum. The prerequisite for a flourishing national culture in the face of ever-increasing foreign influence is a vibrant connection between the nation and its language, culture and history.”

Teaching is apparently conservative, with the perpetuation of a text book based pedagogic transmission model of the substantive knowledge at the history curriculum’s core. Chapter 10’s focuses on Israel’s evolution and development since 1949. The rationale of the new state’s national history curriculum was the story of Israel’s heroic survival against external and internal enemies and how that would help shape its future. The changing curriculum has developed against x the backcloth of a rapidly developing historical consciousness rooted in the biblical past and current, traumatic events; x discordant, disputatious political parties and interest groups with rival historical canons and national narratives; x the division between supporters of a ‘monist’ national curriculum for pupil assimilaton of a given uncontested canon of national history and backers of a ‘pluralist’ curriculum to develop critical historical thinking: “The pendulum swung from expressive populist ethnocentricity to critical inquiry and diversity and back. New policies are haphazardly and partially enforced until a rival coalition reaches power and debates curricula by publicizing the attempts to undo or alter them. Little attention was given to the ways teachers or students actually enacted and perceived the curriculum.”

Central to the historical dimension of Malta’s national curriculum, Chapter 11, is a pedagogy based on pupil development and evaluation of declarative, substantive ‘know that’ knowledge through the procedural, syntactic ‘know how’ knowledge that pupils working as young historians develop. Here pedagogyy takes centre stage: “Today it is no exaggeration to say that, of all school subjects history is the one which has undergone the most radical transformation as far as its pedagogy is concerned. History teaching in Malta now focuses on the learning of specific history skills and concepts, and analyses and interpretation of primary and secondary sources.”

The pedagogic focus continues in Chapter 12 on New Zealand students’ development as young historians through course work:

xxviii

Preface

“In New Zealand senior secondary school students are not required to follow a history prescription and up to a half of their courses for national qualifications are based on internally assessed course work where they enjoy a high degree of autonomy over what they choose to study. This chapter … examines the extent to which students learn how to think historically when they engage in this type of learning… Students who are successful in conducting internally assessed research projects are developing advanced understandings of how the discipline of history operates.”

History Education in the Republic of Korea [South Korea], Chapter 13, analyses the country’s populist master narrative or canon’s substantive knowledge that pupils are expected to assimilate through the teaching of the school’s history syllabi. While history educators have created a sophisticated approach to History Education based upon history as a discipline, contemporary historiography and an understanding of the role of history as the temporal dimension of citizenship, the contrast with what goes on in schools is stark: “To learn history is to learn a story: to come to know the major characters, events, and simple causal relationships of events. The interplay of social forces, for example, is likely to be sacrificed in the classroom for a simple story about dates and names. Accordingly, the practice of teachers’ giving and students’ memorizing facts has been prevalent in the history class. The assessment system constructed with multiple-choice tests strengthens the practice of accumulating knowledge.”

The final contribution to the opening section on Turkey, Chapter 14, starkly confirms the intensely political and controversial nature of the history curriculum in a country or jurisdiction facing a strategic choice over its future. The crucial Turkish questions are what history should be taught in its schools and how on the ‘monist’ to ‘pluralist’ spectrum? Should the history be national, multi-cultural or global? A quotation from 2009 highlights the Turkish government’s dilemma if it abandons a traditional, ‘monist’ nationalistic history curriculum in favour of a ‘pluralist’ multi-cultural, global version with a European orientation: “The official version of history will often express or embed within it doubts about the validity of alternative history and local historiography, and will point out the dangers involved in facing up to our own history, advocating the right to disown history, multiple identity multiculturalism, world citizenship, European consciousness, and universal history. These are seen to have the aim of breaking the power of history in constructing and maintaining the nation state and national identity. In other words, the

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxix

purpose is to denationalise the Turkish people in order to give Turkey a European identity. However, the society that wants to be given European identity has not been considered as European for 50 years by Europe. If that is so what kind of a benefit can anyone take from destroying our own identity and adopting European identity?”

Part II: The Traumatic Past and Sensitive Issues, Chapters 15-18 Chapters 1-14 focused on the nature and role of history education in polities where it becomes embroiled in often vicious, vindictive and hostile disputation that however in a physical sense remains peaceful – a History Cold War. A fundamental element in History Hot Wars involving violence is trauma from the past where a nation state, jurisdiction or community, the victim, regards itself as the physical victim of aggression. The context of such traumas is: x wars between countries and states, x conflict within them involving rival communities and jurisdictions, i.e. civil war or military occupation x the collapse of social order and the rule of law as for example in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and the Ukraine since 2001. Traumas can become iconic, symbolic events in a community’s canon, with a focus on a particular event or incident that encapsulates the victimisers treatment of the victim community. Such traumas can involve the full horror of man’s inhumanity to man, including civil war, deportation and diaspora, ethnic cleansing, execution, genocide/holocaust, interrogation, torture, murder and mass murder / slaughter, individual and mass rape, political imprisonment and suicide bombing. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Chapter 15 Greek Society’s Confrontation With Traumas Caused by National Socialism: the case of the Distomo Massacre (9 June 14th 1944) History Text Books and Memory Politics of The Local Community. The trauma of the Distomo massacre lives on in the historical consciousness of the local and national Greek communities. The authors sketch what this involves and its implications that are shared in analogous traumas that other nation states, countries and jurisdictions have suffered in the past: “Two of the most significant characteristics of post-modern societies are presentism as a dominant status of historicity and confrontation with the traumatic past, namely that of World War II. Considering Distomo as one

xxx

Preface of the cities-symbols that endured the genocidal violence of National Socialism, as one of the main loci of memory in the Greek historical martyrdom, and as a focal point in the European network of martyr cities, the aforementioned confrontation concerns firstly, the management of the event in reference to identity and historical consciousness, a choice that points towards certain politics of memory in the local society, and, secondly, the moral claim for the recognition of the city’s suffering and the undertaking of responsibilities by the German State. In the case of Distomo’s Massacre, a balance for “memory’s economy” does not exist -and should not be “constructed”. On the side of the “victimisers”, guilty oblivion, and subterfuge are prevalent (with a few exceptions). On the contrary, on the side of the victims, there is an excess of memory, if not, “hyper-memory”. The only way there could be a balance is under the condition that the re-united German State will at last recognises its responsibilities and understand its moral duty to ask for hands-on repentance for the genocidal practices of the Nazi troops.”

Chapter 16, also from the University of the Aegean, Greece, has a ‘pluralist’ focus on how to use cinema to teach about traumatic, sensitive and controversial historical issues. The authors argue that the study of contemporary history, the History of the Present requires radical changes in historiographical approaches and related pedagogy in a “proper educational environment” that in this case incorporates film: “Cinema could probably be part of this new methodology as it is considered to be a constructive teaching tool and provides wide possibilities for the teacher. The authors have carried out, as described in our paper, a research programme with Aegean University students. They identified the extent to which the participants have familiarized themselves with the ways of decoding the messages of cinema as a medium, as well as demonstrating the ability to connect these messages with the difficult issues of constructing collective memory and historical truth.”

While the research results were inconclusive, the project reinforces that History Education in the digital age should draw upon alternative modes and genres for representing and understanding the past such as film. Chapter 17 is a report of a detailed research project on how well American adolescents were able to: “understand decision-making in historical contexts of conflict, where socio-historical understanding implies ethical reflection on the part of the historical agents …ninth and tenth grade students considered why one

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxxi

friend might betray another during a period of ethnic and religious conflict in the former Yugoslavia…” “We examined the responses to one open-ended question that follows the students’ reading of the final document in the series, entitled “Jasmina and Tanja’s story” … The document tells the story of Jasmina’s teenage years, as war erupted in her hometown of Visegrad. The story’s synopsis, retold through a third-person narrative, so as not to overtly bias students with Jasmina’s perspective, centres on the lifelong friendship between the Muslim Jasmina and her best friend Tanja, a Bosnian Serb. The friendship becomes a microcosm of the country’s struggle with ethnic and religious pluralism.

The authors concluded “our findings suggest that when asked for a descriptive interpretation of human agency, a significant number of participants in this study grappled with moral agency, not only from the perspective of historical actors, but also as moral agents in the present.”

An issue of concern was why “so few students who … exhibited either partial and adequate comprehension attempted to explain Tanja’s actions,” while having had access to “a good deal of background knowledge and evidence”, something we return to in the preface’s final pedagogic section. Chapter 18 from Turkey on the 1915 Armenian massacres used drama: “… to teach 4th grade education students (ages 20-21) about the Armenian deportation (Tehcir) in 1915, … by using primary and secondary sources. The primary research questions were: • Do students revise their understanding of the Armenian deportations through learning the processes of historical enquiry? • Can the students learn to understand the Armenian deportation from different perspectives, through using primary sources? • Can they, through historical imagination, learn to empathise with the people who were deported in 1915?” The study showed: “that most of the students following the course had a comprehensive knowledge of the decision to deport, the process and the consequences of deportation”.

xxxii

Preface

Through drama and detailed use of their sources many students additionally developed a sophisticated, subtle and comprehensive understanding of the moral and ethical issues involved from the perspective of both Armenians and Turks involved in the Armenian deportation. Within the conceptual framework that chapter 17 provides, it would have been interesting to evaluate whether the American students would have more effectively developed a deeper and fuller understanding of human agency and its ethical and moral factors through learning about Jasmina’s and Tanja’s story through drama as well as working on historical sources.

Part III: Controversial Issues, Chapter 19-22 The final section draws on four contrasting studies to illuminate the range and scope of controversial issues involved in teaching history. Here History Education becomes the vital, temporal dimension of Citizenship Education. Chapter 19 on Hungary analyses the extent to which the prescribed post-Soviet ‘pluralist’ history curriculum and its text books develop pupil understanding of Islam and Muslims, i.e “of the other”. The pedagogical focus of the most widespread post-communist Hungarian text books is the reading and interpretation of sources. Text book analysis reveals tolerance in their detailed treatment of the Muslim people with an objective, unbiased approach that neutralises negative stereotypes about Arabic or Turkish nations and attitudes towards them. The text books also corrected communist regime text books’ factual mistakes and distortions, incorporating the latest results of historical research and political science. For example, they take into account among other factors: x the special features of Islamic culture and history and their nonEuropean chronology; x the significant values of Arabic culture and its impact on Europe; x the values of the Muslim religion that provides perspective in evaluating the political role of religion throughout history; x the Arabic expansion in the Middle Ages with reference to religion, the economic and social conditions of the regions concerned, thus allowing the comparative analysis of feudalism in Europe and in the Arabic countries; x a more international and less euro-centric perspective than before particularly about the history and transformation of the Ottoman Empire.

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxxiii

Chapter 20 addresses gender discrimination from an American [U.S.A.] perspective. Gender is a major, if not the most controversial area of History Education, with over 50% of the population being female. American and other research suggests that gender is only considered as relevant to the history curriculum where it feeds into a ‘monist master narrative or canon of national identity as seen through the lens of stereotypical male oriented criteria. As such, where women are present it is in a reinforcing, supportive role that does not treat gender as a dimension of the curriculum significant in its own right. The key role that history plays in providing the values, beliefs and overall orientation for informed citizenship in a diverse, ‘pluralist’ society suggests that there is need for a radical review of gender in the History curriculum that currently discriminates against 50% of the population. This affects both content and pedagogy. A possible way forward is to ground such revision in the corpus of findings from historical research on gender in history. Academic history has responded to the gender agenda of the 20th and 21st. centuries where the changed role and importance of women has become of paramount importance in societies’ developing historiography. Such revisionism now needs to be reflected in history curricula at all levels, teacher development, a stronger theoretical base for a gender-transformed curriculum and related pedagogy in different classroom settings to transform history teaching and learning. Chapter 21 focuses on controversial issues related to intercultural History Education in Portugal. It considers possible links between second order history disciplinary concepts and terms such as empathy and significance and multicultural and intercultural conceptual matrices such as difference/diversity and relationship, culture/culturality, universal/universality). The research involved 130 Portuguese adolescent students’ ideas related to this theoretical framework. They discussed two pairs of accounts on historical encounters, one within a peaceful, intercultural context in the sixteenth-century, and the other during a conflict in the nineteenth-century. The research highlighted key points about inter-culturality and children’s historical thinking from a ‘pluralist’ and constructivist perspective. The chapter’s findings are fascinating: x students operate with a set of ideas apparently related to multicultural or intercultural conceptual frameworks; x students’ historical thinking range from Restricted Understanding to Decentred and Integrative Understanding;

xxxiv

Preface

x thinking about the concept of difference is less sophisticated and more restricted than other thinking; x students’ more sophisticated historical thinking includes ideas like diversity, relationship and universality from an intercultural world view perspective; x understanding cultural dialogue than conflict situations is a bigger cognitive challenge; x there is a possible connection between the students’ historical thinking and multicultural and intercultural ideas. The book’s final Chapter 22, is on Quebec Students and their Historical Consciousness of the Nation. The chapter explores French Canadian (Québec) students’ historical consciousness of the nation through using Social Identity Theory (SIT). SIT is a powerful tool for understanding group as opposed to individual psychology. As such, SIT applies to shared group perceptions, beliefs and behaviours – including those of nationalism and xenophobia. In the chapter the authors analyse a sample of 142 Francophone Québécois students’ historical narratives. SIT theory helps explain how these students social, communal lives helped form, shape and reinforce their historical consciousness and national identity outside the school classroom. The research programme revisits and builds upon findings from previous research on the historical consciousness of young Québécois. The authors’ conclusions face head on the mismatch between a curriculum that teaches history as a syntactic, procedural way of thinking and not as a populist substantive, propositional factual body of historical knowledge about a country, nation state or jurisdiction’s story - its historical canon or master narrative. Quebec francophone students’ historical knowledge of Québécois’ history is grounded in their society and culture’s vernacular history, orally, almost osmotically mediated through social factors and influences, particularly those of their peer groups. The interactive communal life of students as “social beings” create a shared, common group identity with attitudes, beliefs, values, behaviours that draw from a core Québécois vernacular historical narrative. And, the school history curriculum has had little or no impact upon these Québécois students’ view of Quebec’s past and its history. Chapter 22 sets the stage for a factor that, like a snowball, gathered size and momentum throughout the chapters: the crucial, central role of pedagogy and didactics in creating the historical consciousness and identity in master and minor narratives that have played a huge, vital part in the transformation of the world since 1989.

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxxv

Policy and Theory into Practice: Pedagogy / Didactics Pedagogy is the backdrop to the book’s three sections on History and Identity, Traumatic and Sensitive Issues and Controversial Issues. The book reveals that governments, their agencies and regional and local government and their schools largely ignore pedagogy when creating curricula and syllabi. As such, pedagogy is the elephant in the history classroom because it is the essential medium, the conduit, for pupils to learn and understand the curriculum and assimilate its citizenship educational messages. The major, critical question of pedagogy is addressed in Chapters 8, 10-13, 16-18 and 22, a question that relates to a thread that runs throughout the book: the often diametrically opposed views of the political and administrative classes, reflecting populist public and communal opinion, who create and implement history curricula and professional history educationalists. The politicians and their public overwhelmingly support atavistic national and communal history curricula grounded in a dim and distant historiography. These history curricula are based on populist master narratives, canons, and their teaching as a positivist body of substantive knowledge, a ‘text’ of factual information and concepts blended in a narrative of connected stories for pupils “to learn, mark and inwardly digest”. Conversely, many expert history educationalists support a constructivist, disciplinary approach to pedagogy and learning. Here pupils use the syntactic, procedural knowledge of history as a discipline with its skills and processes. Accordingly, they learn to construct, evaluate and interpret their own historical substantive knowledge and understanding through questioning, investigation interacting with and processing historical sources and reaching conclusions, based upon discussion, debate and interpretation. Chapter 13 on South Korea starkly illustrates the tension between a government and its public and professional history educators: “Many History Education professionals have focused on what is meant by, and how to develop, students' understanding of the discipline of history while the lay public has been focused on what students should know about the past by the end of their school courses, i.e., a Korean master narrative and related minor narratives.”

Chapter 8 on Brazil and Chapter 10 on Israel outline the tension between the two extreme views of historical knowledge, their pedagogies and their impact upon the curriculum: the positivist and the constructivist.

xxxvi

Preface

Chapter 8 focuses on the role of the history disciplinary code embodying the views and attitudes of the political, Chapter 10 notes the tension between politicisation and academicisation of the curriculum in the debate on history curriculum and teaching: “What can we make of this tumultuous decade in Israeli history teaching? Some observations and general outlines could be discerned through the (un)settling dust. First, we can notice the overt politicisation and polarisation of the debate on the history curriculum and teaching. This politicisation escalates as actual curriculum designers strive to make curriculum less politicised and more disciplinary. It seems that even the depoliticization and academisation of such an identity-formative school subject is taken by some stakeholders as a political act and a national threat. It should be noted that some of the academics involved in designing the new curriculum were in fact aware of the potential reactions and tried to mitigate them.”

Chapter 11 on Malta substantiates the idea that without a pedagogy that matches the curricular policy and plans they can be vitiated. The Maltese government’s 2012 A National Curriculum Framework for All, (Ministry of Education and Employment), explicitly makes the link between the development of identity and historical consciousness and the pedagogy of ‘Doing History’: “Through the study of History and Geography, learners will develop the basic concepts of chronology, empathy, cause and effect, change and continuity. Through active learning and investigative and fact-finding experiences, they gain an understanding of the interrelationships between people, their cultures, contexts and land use. Through exploring and investigating their past and present, they develop observation and recording skills and gain understanding of the importance of collecting evidence. They learn to collate, examine and test data in an attempt to draw simple conclusions from it.”

The pedagogy presented for this Learning Area includes: “• fostering an enjoyment of history and developing curiosity about the past which informs understanding of the present. • developing a sense of identity through learning about the development of Malta, Europe and the world. • introducing learners to what is involved in understanding and interpreting the past.”

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxxvii

Such pedagogy cannot develop in a vacuum. In Malta a cadre of history teachers draws upon the pedagogy enshrined in the national curriculum. Since the 1980s the teachers have been: “trained in how they can teach history as a form of inquiry with a focus on history thinking skills, which school children can use to analyse and interpret historical material by themselves. The ability to demonstrate conventionally accepted historical knowledge is not the priority within the framework of this teaching paradigm” (Cassar & Vella, 2011 p.97).

What does this pedagogy mean in practice? Illuminatives is the case study in Chapter 12 on New Zealand high school students undertaking coursework in which they have considerable autonomy. Because the students have had limited or no experience or training as young historians developing understanding through historical enquiry evaluation of the students’ coursework and its production provides reliable data on their development. “disciplinary competence and expertise in history by conducting research projects because this process is central to how historians (as experts in the field) critique, interrogate and produce knowledge. While analysis is at an early stage, findings indicate that these students have developed advanced understandings of the interpretive nature of historical thinking, although the question of significance (that in the curriculum is explicitly linked with New Zealand) is proving to be a more difficult concept for students to master.”

Similarly, Chapter 16 on teaching in Greece about the traumatic and controversial events during World War II argues for the creation of a pedagogy to teach contemporary, modern history effectively through media such as film [cinema]. Such teaching: “cannot have any real results without efforts to build a proper educational environment, based on a new learning methodology. Cinema could probably be part of this new methodology as it is considered to be a constructive teaching tool and provides wide possibilities for the teacher..”

Chapter 17 on American students development of ethical, moral and historical thinking also addresses the relationship between pedagogy and pupil development of high level:

xxxviii

Preface

“ethical and historical thinking, requiring an overt expression of historical context, along with an explanation of choices and potentially … discarded choices.”

In its discussion section the chapter explores a range of ideas and approaches for students to develop such historical thinking that would enable them to understand the moral issues that their study of seven primary and secondary source documents raise in relation to the collapse of: “the lifelong friendship between Jasmina and her best friend Tanja, a Bosnian Serb. The friendship becomes a microcosm of the country’s struggle with ethnic and religious pluralism.”

A criterion of such historical understanding is the ability of students to disengage, decentre from present day beliefs, values, sensitivities and their cultural, cognitive and physical context to understand that the mentalite of historical agents is radically different from their own. It requires pupils to know that historical agents feelings, emotions, thoughts, fears, conceptualisation, understanding, decisions, actions and orientation – their mentalite and orientation – were the outcome of their situated cognition within their contemporary cultural, psychological and physical world. A relatively neglected yet major aspect of such empathetic historical understanding, i.e. getting under the skin of historical agents and inside their skulls, is engagement with their individual and collective moral and ethical issues and dilemmas though the powerful pedagogic medium of drama and simulation. Chapter 18’s pedagogy draws upon the sophisticated teaching protocols of drama in history education to do just this. It illuminates how full and active empathetic involvement of Turkish students in the moral and ethical dimension of the Armenian Massacre of 1915 through drama can develop and deepen the moral issues that chapter 17 raises. The book’s final Chapter 22 on Quebec raises a fundamental concern that a majority of the book’s authors raise: the tension of history educationalists support for a history curriculum grounded in modern historiography that pays equal attention to the ‘pluralist’ constructivist know how, syntactic dimension of history as to the ‘monist positivist know that, factual, uncontested body of knowledge in master narratives and canons that foster and feed militant nationalism and xenophobia.

Identity, Trauma, Sensitive and Controversial Issues in the Teaching of History

xxxix

Conclusion So how might we, as educators help students to actively engage with the past? They need to learn to ask and investigate significant historical questions, questions about time and change, causes and consequences, similarities and differences between periods. Questions may relate to individuals or groups, local, national, international, social, economic, political or cultural questions. To explore such questions we need to help students to make deductions and inferences about sources, any traces of the past which remain: artefacts, visual sources, statistics, writing of different kinds, not just documents. We must teach students to differentiate between making deductions about what is known and when we can only make informed inferences, because evidence is often incomplete, and so inferences may vary, but be equally valid. And students must accept that there is no single correct answer. We must teach them that accounts can change over time. History is dynamic. New evidence may be discovered, accounts reflect the times in which tey are written, who wrote them and why. Some chapters have described teaching strategies which enable students throuh discusisng dilemmas to develop these understandings, for example through film or drama. Certainly discussion is important, and if this is an unfamiliar skill students need to learn how to do this, as a class, in groups, in pairs. (When students in one country were asked by a visitor, if they would like to ask her any questions, the teacher said noone and certainly no teacher, had ever asked them such a thing before! We must not open Pandora’s box.) Text books may have to be followed, for understandable reasons, but possibly, within constraints and with confident, informed professional judgement, text books can be – enriched… Unfamiliar skills may need to be learned but this can be done at first gradually, in embryonic ways. We hope you enjoy this book, that you will feel that you can become part of sometimes problematic but vital and supportive community practice in teaching, learning and research in history education and that through dialogue between us we can make progress.

References Steele, J.(2015) ‘review of Frontline Ukraine by Richard Sakwa’, The Guardian, 22 February 2015

PART I: HISTORY AND IDENTITY

CHAPTER ONE A QUESTION OF IDENTITY? PURPOSE, POLICY AND PRACTICE IN THE TEACHING OF HISTORY IN NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND ALAN MCCULLY UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER, COLERAINE

AND FIONNUALA WALDRON ST. PATRICK’S COLLEGE, DRUMCONDRA

Abstract: This chapter traces the evolution of history education, north and south of the Irish border since the partition of the island in 1921. It begins with an historical overview of the situation common across Ireland prior to partition. Subsequent developments in history provision in elementary, primary and early secondary education are traced in each of the two jurisdictions that emerged after partition, the Irish Free State, which became the Republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland. In each case, the educational and political imperatives of each, which shaped these changes, and resulted in divergence, are identified, analysed and compared. Evidence is drawn from the dominant literature in each jurisdiction and on relevant curriculum documents. The chapter concludes by demonstrating that in a post-modern, increasingly globalised world, shared educational ideas and political aspirations emerging from the Irish peace process are acting in tandem to bring the respective history curricula back into symmetry and, thereby, providing opportunities for increased co-operation. Key Words: Education and conflict, Historical consciousness, History education, Identity, Ireland, Irish Free State, Master Narrative, Memory, Narrative, National curriculum, National identity, Nationalism, Northern Ireland

A Question of Identity?

3

Introduction This chapter examines the teaching of history in Ireland and looks at its historical and ideological development over time, from the establishment of the national school system in the 1830s to current debates relating to how history should be taught during the “decade of commemorations” (2012-2022), a period which includes the centenaries of key events and movements in the histories of the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.1 Focusing on the teaching of history during the period of compulsory education with an emphasis on elementary / primary education (i.e. from 5 years to 14 years), the chapter begins with a shared narrative from the setting up of the national school system in 1831 to partition in 1921/22.2 It then outlines developments in both jurisdictions, highlighting points of divergence and agreement between history curricula and between their underpinning ideologies and practices. The chapter concludes by discussing some critical issues that emerge in relation to the teaching of history in Ireland in the twenty-first century. The methodology used was a simple one: drawing on the dominant literature in each jurisdiction and on relevant curriculum documents, the authors separately constructed critical narratives which served to identify emerging points of convergence and divergence between the two systems. These partial critiques were then subjected to an iterative process of dialogue and redrafting until the final chapter emerged. This approach is evident in the chapter, where the voice of each section is, to some extent, determined by the nature of the available sources while the overarching framework, and the concluding arguments, are shared constructions.

A national system for all The national system of education set up in Ireland in 1831 was one of the first of its kind in Europe. Established 41 years in advance of the English system, it was multi-denominational and aimed inter alia to promote identification with the British Empire, increase governability, reduce poverty, extend state control of the education sector hitherto characterised by private denominational institutions and societies and by a network of informal, localised and potentially subversive ‘hedge schools’ (Walsh, 2012, pp. 18, 19; Coolahan, 1981; Akenson, 1975).3 The multidenominational character of this social experiment quickly fell foul of inter-religious rivalry and by 1870 the trend towards denominationalism was largely accepted (Coolahan, 1981, p.26). Overseen by a National Board, whose composition reflected key religious and economic interest

4

Chapter One

groups of the period, the system changed little in the decades leading up to 1920, when efforts by the government to introduce local control through the establishment of County Education Committees were defeated, largely as a result of the resistance from the Catholic Church (Walsh, 2012, p. 21; Akenson, 1975, p. 20). The system inherited by the Irish Free State in 1922, therefore, was both centralised and denominational. In contrast, in the new entity of Northern Ireland, central authority had to be reestablished by the fledgling Ministry of Education and, unlike its counterpart in the south, it met resistance from the Catholic hierarchy. The narrow and literary programme implemented in national schools in Ireland between 1831 and 1900 was mediated through state-sponsored textbooks, which prioritised education as a moral and socialising project (Coolahan, 1981, p. 20). Convinced that history textbooks would be inevitably partisan, the Board excluded from the curriculum “all systematic teaching of history” (Fitzpatrick, 1991, p. 171). The Revised Programme of Instruction, however, which was introduced in 1900, sought to integrate history into the programme through sanctioned texts (Walsh, 2012, p. 53). By 1908, persuaded by the idea that history could be taught in an unbiased way, a primary history curriculum had been developed, along with a range of approved textbooks focusing on both Irish and British history (Fitzpatrick, pp. 173, 174). With significantly more Irish history content than its counterpart in lower second-level education, and reflecting the progressive character of the Revised Programme, the 1908 primary provision included an emphasis on local history and the use of historical poems and ballads. The debate in relation to bias and subversion resurfaced in the aftermath of the 1916 Easter Rebellion, but the 1908 programme remained in place until partition led to the formation of two separate educational systems with divergent views on teaching history and its relationship to wider issues of identity and citizenship.

History teaching in Northern Ireland, 5-14 From its 1922 outset, the unionist Northern Ireland government was acutely aware of nationalist hostility from within and without as a threat to Northern Ireland’s existence. It moved early to re-impose central authority in education, this time from Belfast. In opposition, a third of Catholic elementary schools continued to show allegiance to Dublin until autumn 1922 when the government there terminated the payment to teachers, thus forcing the schools into the northern system (Akenson, 1970, pp. 44-45). Once initial attempts to re-assert non-denominational education had failed,

A Question of Identity?

5

largely due to mutual suspicion and the self-interest of the churches, the government was prepared to use the power that it had over finance, school structures and curriculum, in order to promote positive attitudes towards the United Kingdom and to guard against potential nationalist agitation in schools under the influence of the Catholic Church. Moreover, the fulcrum of political influence had moved eastwards. Akenson (1970, p.50) asserts that “parity with England came to dominate the social policy of the Ulster government”. Thus, after 1921, their actions “in most matters, and especially in education, diverge sharply from their southern counterparts”. The Lynn Committee was set up to establish the structures of the new education system. Reporting in 1922, its recommendations clearly pointed to the role history education might play in orientating the new state politically, when it declared that children “should acquire an elementary knowledge of the history of Great Britain, and of Ireland, especially Ulster as part of the United Kingdom” (Cited in Smith, 2005, p.112). History education was to be an option only in the final three years of elementary education, but a compulsory component of secondary provision. Smith (2005) has briefly surveyed the Stormont decades, drawing on small-scale research reports, official documents, inspection reports and anecdotal evidence. The picture that emerges of the elementary and early secondary years is one characterised by a tension in official attitudes. There was a desire to expose children to an ‘Ulster as British’ master-narrative, but also unease concerning the fact that emphasis on a local dimension might legitimise the claim from Catholic schools to teach about Ireland’s past. Consequently, a watching eye was kept on the endorsement of suitable Ulster focused textbooks and, in the primary schools, a lack of attention to history was more desirable than encouraging teaching which might be subverted by a nationalist agenda. In any case, this vigilance was probably wasted as Murray’s study of two primary schools in the mid 1970s demonstrates the power of schools from both communities, regardless of official policy, to transmit contrasting messages of identity [narratives] through the “hidden curriculum” (Murray, 1985). Hansard’s minutes of proceedings in Stormont in the 1950s and 1960s do show that, periodically, as confidence within the Catholic community was growing, and revisionism at academic level was gaining momentum, voices did speak out for a more inclusive approach to teaching Irish history (Smith, 2005, pp. 118-119). However, before any significant change took place, greater forces took charge; and in the late 1960s Northern Ireland began its descent into communal violence. Bar external senior school examination syllabi and anecdotal accounts, there is a dearth of evidence to illuminate students’ experience of the

6

Chapter One

history curriculum in the two decades prior to the Troubles. However, Magee (1970), in an influential paper drawing largely on policy documents and his own extensive educational experience, presents a snapshot of history teaching north of the border just as the violence was gaining momentum. He describes an official position which is suspicious of anything Irish and where “Irish history was taught only where it impinged in a significant way on the history of Great Britain”. In primary schools, history was treated as optional, Irish history was largely ignored and subject provision was “spasmodic, unco-ordinated and largely academic” (Magee, 1970, p.5). Surviving resources indicate that the best work frequently involved children engaging in local studies, prompted by the enthusiasm of individual teachers. As for secondary level, history was taught extensively but, Magee (1970, p.7) concludes, it was “too verbal, too intellectualised” and inaccessible and irrelevant to the majority of young people. When the Stormont parliament fell in 1972, direct rule from London prevailed and, over time, this opened up the possibility of a more constructive role for history teaching in fostering better community understanding. Thus, in the past three decades Northern Ireland has presented a casestudy on how history education might respond to conflict, first during violence and then in a society seeking transformation. Northern Ireland’s divisions are closely associated with contested national identities where historical collective memory runs deep. Contemporary political actions frequently seek justification in real or perceived grievances in the past. Initially, critical educators sought to break the destructive connection between selective historical memory, community affiliation and antipathy to the “other” (Magee, 1970). Ways were sought that would encourage young people to better understand the root causes of division and thereby challenge the history they encountered at home and in the streets. Decisions still had to be made as to what was the most appropriate curriculum framework to achieve this while still developing children’s all round historical understanding; and at what age pupils should be introduced to potentially controversial material. The decision to introduce a Northern Ireland Curriculum in the early 1990s was largely a consequence of direct rule. The Conservative led British Government’s decision to develop a National Curriculum for England was soon followed by a similar proposal for Northern Ireland. What emerged closely mirrored developments in England but also allowed recent local history initiatives to be officially endorsed (Phillips et al., 1999). The history curriculum followed a similar structure to the constructivist English model. It, too, was underpinned by the idea that a

A Question of Identity?

7

curriculum founded on sound principles of historical investigation – the formulation of interpretations being allowed for only when consistent with evidence, the sound grasp of the historical concepts of chronology, a sense of time and causation and the recognition that those who acted in the past did so from different perspectives – could then equip young people to engage with more complex historical questions as they progressed through school. In Northern Ireland, the preparation of the excellent History Guidelines for Primary Schools (NICED, 1984) had already set a precedent for an evidence based approach to teaching history in primary school classrooms. However, establishing sound enquiry principles now took on extra significance. The rationale contained intrinsic aims related to the fostering of historical thinking but also made explicit reference to the extrinsic aim of contributing to a more peaceful society (for extrinsic aims, see Slater 1995, pp.125-6). The History Working Party entrusted to draw up the new curriculum in 1990 was directed to ensure that what emerged contributed to the cross-curricular theme of Education for Mutual Understanding (EMU) (NICC, 1989; 1990, p. 89). In a society in conflict, it was deemed particularly pertinent to develop critical thinking as a pre-requisite for teaching potentially emotive and divisive historical events in a measured and open way. This premise was an important influence in the way the original history curriculum was structured across the compulsory stages of primary and secondary education. It resulted in complementary but distinctive functions for the primary (Key Stages 1 and 2) and secondary (Key Stage 3) strands of the curriculum. The role for the primary school was envisaged as one that built a foundation of historical thinking, thus equipping older students at Key Stage 3, and beyond, to critically examine the more contentious past. The History Working Party proposals advocated that teachers “should not hold back” from controversy but at the same time cautioned that sensitive materials “should be introduced at a time when pupils have sufficient maturity to possess the critical faculties to handle it appropriately” (NICC, 1990, p.6). Ideally, in the Working Party’s view, this was aged 14 and over. In turn, the cognitive model of progression adopted, together with commitment to Education For Mutual Understanding (EMU), influenced the working party’s selection of content. Most obviously, the core units of study selected were to be examined in their Irish, as well as their British and European contexts, thus ensuring for the first time that all children and young people would study aspects of Irish history. However, at primary school level this would largely be confined to social dimensions with political history reserved for Key Stage three and beyond.

8

Chapter One

At Key Stage one, as in England, the emphasis on introducing children to the concept of evidence, and to developing their sense of time and period, was to be developed by studying people and events close to the children’s own experiences, related to the history of their own families, communities and familiar celebrations; and then, more formally, on a study of the recent past. Attention was on skills and concepts rather than pupils encountering anything that might be deemed culturally and politically sensitive. At Key Stage two (aged 9-11) compulsory units of study on the themes of Early Times, the Vikings and the Victorians were prescribed but, again, the emphasis was on social history and the lives of ordinary people. Even when tackling the Victorians in the final year of primary school, political events were largely omitted from the official guidance materials. For example, when teaching the Irish Famine, teachers would cover the traumatic experiences of those who suffered through starvation, eviction and emigration but would be less likely to investigate the responsibility of the Government for people’s suffering. Thus, a legitimate argument was advanced that concentration on the familiar and the social, allied to embedding critical skills, was in line with children’s cognitive maturity and would better prepare students to engage with Ireland’s contentious past at a later age. Yet, near contemporaneous research was indicating that, even by the age of three, many children in Northern Ireland have already acquired an embryonic framework of sectarian identification (Connolly, 1998). It might be argued that the history curriculum as designed allowed primary teachers to side-step the responsibility to challenge the myths and partial understanding that younger children may have acquired from their families and communities. How far did the first Northern Ireland History Curriculum achieve its aims? No official single subject evaluation was commissioned during the period of its implementation. An NFER Cohort study tracked 3000 students across five years of schooling between 1996 and 2003. It makes few direct references to history in the primary school, but in recording views at the end of Key Stage two it found that pupils did not perceive socially orientated subjects like history to be given great importance; nor did they think that the curriculum, generally, was very relevant to their everyday lives (Harland et al., 1999). Barton (2001a, 2001b) provides the main insights into the impact of primary school history under the first Northern Ireland Curriculum. His comparative study of Northern Ireland and the United States primary school students’ understanding of history highlights significant differences between the two, some of which he attributes to the nature of the respective primary history curricula. Whereas, the strong narrative

A Question of Identity?

9

approach of American school history influenced US children into seeing history’s purpose as providing a sense of national identity, pupils in Northern Ireland thought history should help them learn about people different to themselves. Possibly, this reflects the emphasis at Key Stage two on investigating the everyday social lives of people from the more distant past. Further, Northern Ireland children were more aware of the place of evidence in historical thinking, had a more complex grasp of chronology, and sense of period, and were better able to see forces for change beyond the level of human agency. Thus, Barton argued that the primary history curriculum was achieving two of its core objectives by building a foundation for the critical evaluation of evidence and by encouraging children to acknowledge and value difference. Yet he also observed that, even in the primary classroom, children showed interest in issues of identity and ‘by keeping controversy at arm’s length, teachers may be inadvertently surrendering to influences outside the school – influences that they might be uniquely qualified to challenge, and which pupils expect them to confront’ (Barton, 2007b, p. 42). He encouraged educators to facilitate the study of events from the past, which develop a shared sense of identity, ‘one that transcends the community divide’ (Barton 2007a, p.13), as well as events illustrating difference. Key Stage three is not the major focus of this chapter but it is relevant to track the transitional impact of the original curriculum from primary to secondary education. Studies indicate how school history plays a role in helping pupils make sense of the history they encounter in classrooms and elsewhere (Barton & McCully, 2005; 2010; Bell, J., Hansson, U. and McCaffery, N. (2010). Yet, the capacity to move beyond their own cultural allegiances in order to understand the past from other perspectives proved difficult, as did establishing connections between historical events and the contested present. Young men, particularly, as they grew older, were more likely to draw selectively on their historical knowledge to support community orientated positions, perhaps, reflecting increasing politicisation with age. Several small-scale studies also suggest that teachers, while professing commitment to the rhetoric of an enquiry based, multi-perspective curriculum, may be less proficient at carrying it through in practice (Conway, 2004; Kitson, 2007). A revised curriculum introduced in 2007 has both created greater flexibility to meet student needs, and further strengthened the extrinsic aims of the Key Stage three history programme. Rather than eschewing the identity issue, as was the case previously, teachers are required to provide students with opportunities to "explore how history has affected their personal identity, culture and lifestyle." (CCEA, 2007). Time will tell as to how far the

10

Chapter One

changes will enhance history teaching’s contribution to societal transformation. With regard to the impact of revision on primary school history at Key Stages one and two, there are questions as to how far the move away from subject specific provision to an integrated World Around Us approach (embracing geography, history science and technology) has sustained the foundation for enquiry, considered important for the more challenging work in the secondary school. Great emphasis is placed on developing generic “thinking skills” but there is a danger that this will be at the expense of a wider understanding which is specifically historical. Certainly, the time spent on preparing teachers for history in initial teacher education has already been substantially reduced in response to curriculum change. Prescriptive content has been removed from statutory provision, but accompanying guidance indicates that the expectation is that the emphasis will continue to be placed on social history. However, it should be noted that a strong citizenship dimension has been embedded into the Personal Development and Mutual Understanding strand of the curriculum, which more directly addresses issues of community division than had been accomplished before. The Northern Ireland curricular story contrasts strongly with the development of History teaching in the Republic of Ireland in terms of both its nature and purpose.

History teaching in the Republic of Ireland, 5-14 The intention behind the educational policy of the newly independent Irish state from the 1920s to the 1960s was primarily one of Gaelicisation, the construction of a distinctive and singular Irish ethnic national identity and the development of the ‘Irish Ireland’ envisioned by its founders. The Irish education system in general during this period was characterised by administrative conservatism (Akenson, 1975) and by cultural nationalism in terms of its curriculum (Coolahan, 1981). The curriculum agreed by the First National Programme Conference in 1921-22 and by the Second National Programme Conference of 1926 prioritised the revival of the Irish language above all else, a policy which included the teaching of history (and other subjects) through the medium of Irish, even in areas where Irish was not children’s first language. The Irish language was seen as synonymous with Irish identity and the education system was identified as the main vehicle for its revival as the majority language. Available statistics suggest that by the 1940s, history was taught through Irish in a majority of primary schools (Doherty, 1996 p. 339, footnote 2).

A Question of Identity?

11

The teaching of history was, in essence, a state-building project, particularly in the context of primary education. Prior to the introduction of free second level education in the 1960s, the majority of children completed their compulsory schooling in national primary schools. The second-level system was largely private and denominational, and less subject to state control through inspection or through prescribed curricula. The primary sector, therefore, offered the most fertile ground for the reconstruction of Ireland’s even mythical and legendary ‘imagined community’ (Anderson, 1991; O’Callaghan, 2009, p. 19). The ideological thrust of the history programme is perhaps best articulated by this quote from the Notes for Teachers, issued in the early 1930s and which remained in use, with some modification, until 1971. “In an Irish school in which History is properly taught, the pupils will learn that they are citizens of no mean country, that they belong to a race that has a noble tradition of heroism, and persistent loyalty to ideals. In such a school no formal exhortation should be necessary to bring home to every pupil the worth of good faith, courage and endurance and the strong grounds there are for the belief that a race that has survived a millennium of grievous struggle and persecution must possess qualities that are a guarantee of a great future.”

The Notes go on to broaden the definition of a patriot to include “the ordinary people of Ireland who do their daily work faithfully” and warn against any “distortion of the facts of history” or suppression of facts “derogatory to national pride” (Department of Education, 1934). The nationalist ideology at the heart of the history curriculum, which included the implicit conflation of Irish identity with Catholicism, did not go uncontested.4 Protestant church leaders protested against the Catholic nationalist character of history textbooks and the enforcement of Irish language requirements, criticising them as inherently sectarian (Jones, 1992; Doherty, 1996). Questions of ‘nationalistic bias’ surfaced from time to time in Dáil (parliamentary) debates and in public discourse, prompting one commentator to call for the setting up of a “small committee of experts” with representation from the Department of Education, professional historians and teachers, “to examine how far this criticism is valid” (Hibernia, 1962, p. 8). As it happens, consonant with other impulses towards change, such a committee, comprising of historians and educationalists, was set up four years later by Fianna Fáil, the party then in government. It is worth noting that this occurred at a time when there was a renewed and intense focus on the Irish revolutionary period, and, in particular, the Easter Rebellion of

12

Chapter One

1916, the half-centenary of which fell in 1966. In subsequent decades, the celebratory nationalism deemed to be characteristic of the commemorations at this time became embedded in public discourse as one of the factors that contributed to ‘The Troubles’ in Northern Ireland from the late 1960s. The unreflective teaching of a narrow, nationalist school history programme was identified as another.5 However, more recent research into the history of the commemoration in 1966 of the 1916 Easter Rebellion has revealed a more complex and differentiated story, suggesting, among other things, state efforts to embed a modernising agenda into the commemorative events, rather than a backward-looking celebratory nationalism (Daly and O’Callaghan, 2007). Indeed, prompted by the growing belief of politicians that the economic future of the country was generatively tied to the quality of its education system and, in particular, to the issue of access, education itself was on the cusp of change and within five years had undergone something akin to a revolution. Charged with considering how history should best be taught across the education system, the Irish government’s Study Group on the Teaching of History in Irish Schools established in 1966, signalled a move away from the narrow and inward-looking provision characteristic of the system since the foundation of the state. The Study Group was conservative and traditional in its conceptualisation of children’s capacities. Nonetheless, its recommendations for primary level, which included a focus on historical concepts and processes, on social, economic and local history, and on the links between past and present, foreshadowed many of the changes brought forward by the 1971 Primary School Curriculum (Study Group on the Teaching of History, 1967; Department of Education, 1971a, 1971b). While the 1971 curriculum continued to draw on the rhetoric of “sublime patriotism”, it went beyond the recommendations of the Study Group, promoting engagement with historical sources, and with local, social and global history. Premised on a child-centred perspective, it supported active and experiential learning across the curriculum and espoused an integrated and constructivist approach to knowledge. History became part of a broader subject, Social and Environmental Studies, which included geography, civics and elementary science (Department of Education, 1971b, p. 87). While history could be introduced informally from first class (6/7 year olds) onwards, it began formally in the third class with a focus on early and medieval history and on ancient civilisations. In senior primary, the focus shifted to significant periods in European history and to Irish political history, particularly the key epochs, events and individuals that punctuated the overarching narrative of independence. Patch studies

A Question of Identity?

13

of life in a Norman Castle, the Great Irish Famine or the 1798 Rebellion and line of development studies on themes such as energy and transport, introduced a new vocabulary into history teaching and novel ways of organising children’s learning experiences through field trips and collaborative group work. However, while 1971 marked a watershed in curriculum at policy level, it was less successful at the level of practice. Although there was some evidence of an increase in project-based work, the teaching of history continued to be dominated by the textbook, while there was little engagement with local history or with the local environment as a site for historical learning in the majority of classrooms (Department of Education, 1983; Motherway, 1986; 1988; Irish National Teachers’ Organisation, 1996). This failure of implementation was a recurring problem within the system and evident at each stage of curriculum reform from 1900 onwards (Walsh, 2012). On the other hand, there is little dispute that from the perspective of children, the 1971 reforms in general supported a more holistic, open and “child conscious” (Sugrue, 1990, p. 11) learning environment, which made a significant difference to children’s experiences of school. If the 1971 curriculum embodied education’s response to the modernising agenda of the 1960s, the Primary History Curriculum 1999 (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, 1999) captures the tendencies towards multiplicity, deconstruction, and the critique characteristic of post-modernism and of globalisation. As an expression of the state agenda in history, it is one that no longer sees the need for school history to prioritise an agreed national story, or instill in children a privileged national identity. Influenced by inquiry-oriented curriculum developments elsewhere, particularly in the UK, and premised on a view of historical knowledge as provisional and constructed, it promotes critical and reflective engagement with the evidence of past lives and communities, and with the historical roots of present day attitudes, structures and contexts. Organised in four class bands (Infant Classes, First and Second Classes, Third and Fourth Classes and Fifth and Sixth Classes), the 1999 curriculum presents its content in strands and strand units, with an over-arching strand focusing on skills and concepts. There is gradual progression outwards from the child’s direct experience to the wider world and, premised on a spiral rather than a chronological approach to history, children visit and re-visit time periods over the course of their primary schooling in increasingly complex ways. There is a strong focus on local and social history throughout the curriculum, with political history again introduced in the

14

Chapter One

final two years (fifth and sixth classes), a characteristic feature of Irish primary level history curricula since the foundation of the state. Similar to the 1971 curriculum, it is part of an integrated subject area; Social, Environmental and Scientific Education, which it shares with geography and science. The contrast between the 1999 history curriculum and earlier curricula is striking in terms of the extent to which it embraces an open-ended, rather than a bounded conceptualisation of national identity which “seeks to imagine ‘us’ without ‘them’’’ (Tormey, 2006, p. 322). Where identity is focused on, it is in the context of multiple and nested identities – personal, local, national, European and global – while its conception of Irish identity is a plural and inclusive one which seeks to build children’s respect for, and openness to, different communities and perspectives (Waldron, 2004). Characterised by Tormey (2006) as signifying a movement away from a “post-colonial” to a “globalised” curriculum (p. 312) and by Waldron (2004) as “relentlessly post-nationalist” (p. 217), the 1999 history curriculum can also be seen as a response to the local historical context which saw the emergence of the Northern Ireland peace process after decades of conflict. Indeed, one could argue that while globalisation may have provided the ideological frame for the curriculum, the state’s need to institutionalise its educational response to the peace process provided its moral and political purpose. While its strengths are evident, the 1999 curriculum is not without its flaws. Although it endorses an investigative approach to history, it ignores to a large extent the role of historical questions in driving that investigation. This weakens its capacity to promote an inquiry-oriented approach to history and may, in practice, reduce the role of evidence to an ex post facto illustrative or motivational function, rather than seeing it as part of the process of constructing historical knowledge. While the embedding of a multi-perspectival approach across the curriculum means that the narratives of non-dominant groups can be made more visible, the curriculum fails to problematise the historical roots of structural inequalities of class, gender or ethnicity. Moreover, the low visibility of myths, stories and legends particular to Ireland may limit the future capacity of children to recognise and critique common cultural tropes and iconography and to reflect critically on their use and misuse (Waldron, 2004, p. 219). Furthermore, while the Irish primary school history curriculum holds much that is to be welcomed in terms of its engagement with identity, pluralism and diversity, its failure to engage with a broader framework of Citizenship Education leaves issues of identity in an uncertain and

A Question of Identity?

15

uncritical space. Citizenship Education within the curriculum is located within Social and Personal Health Education and, while it focuses in the main on promoting participative citizenship and the practice of democratic processes within the school community, it includes a focus on national symbols, heritage and culture with specific emphasis on emblems, flags and celebrations. Removing such aspects of citizenship from their historical context and eschewing a more critical and reflective approach in favour of a celebratory one is problematic at the best of times; in the context of the upcoming ‘decade of commemorations’, it is particularly so. It is likely that this reluctance to see history as a relevant or necessary part of Citizenship Education in the current curriculum derives, in part, from earlier debates relating to the role of school history in fueling the physical force of nationalism and a consequent reluctance to address directly its role in the construction of what it means to be an Irish citizen. Constructed, as it was, during the period of negotiations that preceded the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, some measure of avoidance or nervousness may have been inevitable. Yet, while it eschews open engagement with citizenship, it is very explicitly engaged in a future-oriented process of identity construction, which seeks to imagine Irish identity as plural, cosmopolitan and respectful of difference. While the history syllabus at lower second level has gone through a parallel process of change, its revisions do not have the same resonance in terms of identity construction. Indeed, they present themselves as gradualist and disciplinary-focused when compared with the fundamental shifts at primary level. The introduction of the Junior Certificate syllabus in 1989 (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, 2008a) represented the first reform of note in a sector characterised as academic and exam-oriented. Premised on the idea of ‘New History’, it emphasised the development of historical concepts and skills, as well as the role of evidence and interpretation in the construction of historical knowledge (Crowley, 1990). However, there is little evidence in the text of the syllabus, or in the accompanying guidelines of any commitment to student-led enquiry or, indeed, to enquiry as a paradigmatic mode of engagement with history. While there was some revision of content in 1996, the syllabus has remained largely unchanged in terms of its areas of focus. More recently, efforts by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) to ‘rebalance’ the history curriculum have been overtaken by significant reform of the Junior Cycle itself which will see a rebalanced syllabus implemented in 2017 (NCCA, 2008a). Among the more controversial aspects has been the decision to remove history as a

16

Chapter One

core subject at Junior Cycle, a status it has held for most of the second level sector since the early 1920s.6 In terms of students’ experiences, while the research base is slight, there are some evident themes that recur over time. Teaching in general at second level has been critiqued over many decades as exam-oriented, and textbook-led (Gleeson, 2012; Raftery et al., 2007), while recent research indicates that the continuing influence of terminal examinations on history teachers’ choices in terms of content and method (Raftery et al., 2007). A study of history teachers’ identities suggests that the teaching of history is also characterised by an avoidance of controversial issues and a momentum towards ideological conformity and consensus. While there is some suggestion that enquiry-oriented approaches to history are gaining ground at the second-level (DES, 2006), transmission-based, textbook-led teaching still remains a key if declining issue across the curriculum at both primary and second level in the Republic of Ireland (NCCA 2008b, 2008c; Eivers et al, 2006; Waldron et al, 2009).

Divergence and convergence: a North/South perspective Over the course of eight decades, curriculum policy in the Republic of Ireland in relation to history has evolved from one in which a nationbuilding agenda was articulated through the transmission of an agreed national story and the promotion of a privileged and exclusive national identity, to one which embraces both the constructed and provisional nature of historical knowledge and the idea of multiple perspectives. These changes have been prompted in part by the meta-discourses of modernisation, neo-liberalism and globalisation, and the resultant bonds forged between education and the economy, as well as by the growing influence of constructivism and related theories in education. More local discourses were also influential: debates about historical revisionism arising from the historiographical revolution begun in the 1930s which gained momentum with the growing unrest in Northern Ireland (see Brady, 1994); voices which challenged the role of school history in providing a context in which extreme nationalism could continue to flourish and, more recently, discourses about diversity and multi-culturalism which shattered the illusion of homogeneity implicit in earlier curricula. As for Northern Ireland, prior to ‘The Troubles’, the use of education for political purposes was less overt but no less pervasive. Yet, in trying to consolidate the state, all that educational policy achieved was deeper segregation and resistance from the minority Catholic community. Association with the rest of the United Kingdom meant that the modernist

A Question of Identity?

17

and post-colonial forces for social change which prompted the educational reform movement in Britain from the 1960s did have an impact on Northern Irish education a decade later, for example by bringing history based on disciplinary approaches to educators’ attention. Of course, by then the conflict was endemic and, to their credit, policy makers wrestled with how constructivist approaches to teaching and learning might be adapted to foster greater community understanding and trust. Expectations for education’s role in peace-building have gained momentum with the peace process and the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. The Revised Curriculum claims to be a response to 21st century change, both local and global. It places local and global Citizenship at its core and history is asked to take on stronger social utilitarian aims. Indeed, the onset of the decade of commemorations has heightened the interest of civic society in teaching history to a point were some are concerned that its disciplinary rigour in schools may be threatened (McCully, 2012, p.154). However, from whatever direction educational policy comes, the structural segregation imposed on schooling at Northern Ireland’s birth remains a constant, constraining influence. Currently, one could argue that history curricula in the Republic of Ireland and in Northern Ireland now have more in common than not, particularly at primary level. Both present a shared view of history and of the role of enquiry in the construction of historical knowledge; both emphasise social and local history and prioritise making connections between children’s environments and the historical past. Both recognise the interconnectedness of learning and support integration and interdisciplinary approaches to varying degrees. Neither puts forward a definitive or singular notion of identity but seeks to locate children within a range of communities, from local to global. If the northern curriculum has a more explicit articulation of the role of history in citizenship education, albeit that the boundary is becoming blurred, the silences within the southern curriculum in this regard are ones that are full of possibility and open to development. One significant difference between the two curricula, however, and one which has remained constant over time, is the exclusion of political history from the NI primary curriculum and its inclusion in the southern curriculum. Tormey (2006) argues that the reflexive construction of identity embedded in the ‘skills and methods’ of the Primary History Curriculum of the Republic, together with the conceptualisation of identity evident in its aims, objectives and content, amount to identity construction as “a selfconscious project” for children in primary school. Drawing on Giddens

18

Chapter One

(1991), Tormey argues that this is “not unproblematic” and suggests that both “the unbounded sense of identity and the existence of such perspectival work for young children might be thought to increase anxiety and uncertainty at a time when one might be better served building a sense of trust and certainty (p. 321)”.

Are Tormey’s reservations, justified? Is the inclusion of political history which requires the problematising and deconstruction of received identities a step too far for primary school children? From a southern perspective, it is probable that, notwithstanding the existence of dissenting voices, the consensualism inherent in the idea of a dominant national narrative meant that the political topics included in successive curricula at primary level were never conceptualised as controversial or problematic in the first place. While confining it to senior classes implies some recognition that political history is cognitively complex, up until the most recent curriculum that complexity did not extend to include issues of meaning, interpretation, perspective and identity. Even so, the southern curriculum in general endorses the Brunerian premise that complex ideas can be introduced to young children in age-appropriate ways. In Northern Ireland, Tormey’s reservations have, to date, been shared by curriculum planners who have steered teaching away from political history at primary level. This has raised its own dilemma in that there is a danger that children develop an exclusive identification with the past that is unchallenged by schooling. Perhaps Barton’s call for some emphasis on the common aspects of the past has potential in helping children to see identities as multi-faceted and not necessarily conflicting. There is a convincing argument also that, whether we like it or not, children are already constructing, deconstructing and reconstructing their ideas of identity, including community and national identity, responding to influences, negotiating contradictions, buying into old stereotypes and creating new ones every day, in school and out. Furthermore, when given the opportunity, children will recognise and critique the inconsistencies, biases and tropes embodied in their ideas of national identity and the mechanisms that shaped them in ways that are open and reflective (Waldron and Pike, 2006). In this context, the idea of childhood as a place apart where identity remains unquestioned, implicit in Tormey’s critique, may be a luxury that neither jurisdiction can afford.

A Question of Identity?

19

Conclusion From a common starting point the accounts above have illustrated that very different political and administrative regimes acted upon history teaching, north and south, in the decades which followed partition in 1921 and the creation in 1922 of the separate jurisdictions of the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland. Cultural and political forces in each jurisdiction quickly led to contrasting educational structures and this helped shape what history was taught and, to an extent, how it was taught. As demonstrated, history teaching was utilised, somewhat simplistically, both north and south, to consolidate attitudes to the respective states and to boost identity formation. The enduring contrast in approach has been the willingness in the south to promote teaching about overtly political events and personalities originally as a means of legitimising the origins of the Irish state and, more recently, in pursuit of understanding and a more inclusive approach to national identity; and in the north the official shunning of such issues, initially to contain expressions of Irishness and, more latterly, to avoid the potential to contribute to division at a young age. However, common threads can also be detected across the decades. As the 21st century proceeds, a number of influences, emanating both from within and beyond, are restoring elements of symmetry to history provision on the island. Today, influenced by ‘The Troubles’ and postconflict transformation, and by the cultural diversity brought about by immigration, the concept of identity has become more problematic in both states at a time when the political imperative has become one of reconciliation. Arguably, in response, history teaching has come to value complexity, diversity and inclusivity. This is reflected less in the content covered and more in curriculum structures and pedagogical approaches adopted, as illustrated in recent curricular revisions in both jurisdictions. Northern Ireland’s administrative ties with the UK have probably meant that progressive educational ideas arrived sooner than in the Republic but it is significant of common influences that, at their own pace, both systems now advocate evidence-based, multi-perspective aims for historical learning that are set in a wider interdisciplinary framework. Further, history teaching both north and south is more self-conscious than before of its potential to influence social attitudes; although much has yet to be done to articulate the distinct but complementary relationship with citizenship education. It would be naïve to underestimate the constraining impact that the pressures of accountability and approaches to teaching and learning have.

20

Chapter One

Yet, overall, history teaching in Ireland is in a reasonably optimistic place. There is an emerging consensus that the subject should be taught through the process of critical enquiry, and that it must be made relevant to the needs of children’s and young people’s everyday lives. Having experienced nearly a century of divergence, approaches are now moving back into line. This is timely, as the decade of commemorations rapidly advances. At a wider societal level, the series of anniversaries present both the potential for triumphalism and deep partisanship, and the opportunity to re-think the impact and significance of Ireland’s last hundred years in a way which facilitates greater mutual understanding and interconnectedness. School history is in a good position to make a contribution to the latter, not least through establishing cross-border communities of practice amongst teachers and students.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Pauric Travers and John Dredge for their advice in the preparation of this chapter.

Notes 1

2

3

4

5

The Decade of Commemorations refers to the decade 2012 to 2022 which includes the centenaries of a range of key historic events beginning with the centenary of the Ulster Covenant in 2012 and ending with the foundation of the Irish Free State in 2022. It includes events such as the 1913 Dublin Lockout, the 1916 Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme and spans the course of the First World War and the Irish Revolution. Northern Ireland (NI) was established by the Government of Ireland Act in 1921 and the Irish Free State was established by the Anglo-Irish Treaty in 1922. ‘Hedge Schools’ were unofficial schools which grew up in response to the Penal Laws, enacted in the late seventeenth century, which inter alia, included a prohibition on Catholic education. Demographically, on its foundation the southern state was overwhelmingly Catholic with a small (approx. 7%) Protestant minority. This minority decreased in size over the ensuing decades and by the 1990s represented approximately 3% of the population. More recent censuses document a growing diversity among the population. See, for example, Dáil Eireann Debate, Vol. 259 No. 2, p. 48. Downloadable at http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1972/02/23/00048.asp. Irish historiography of the period, from the 1930s onwards, was also characterised by intense debate relating to historical research, the writing of history and historical revisionism which grew in intensity from the 1970s onwards and included debate amongst

A Question of Identity?

6

21

historians around the teaching of history, as evidenced by Fitzpatrick, 1991 and Doherty, 1996. See Brady, 1994 for an account of revisionism during the period. See the website of the History Teachers Association of Ireland for an account of the debate regarding the ‘threat to history’ at http://www.htai.ie/.

References Akenson, D.H. (1970) The Irish Education Experiment. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970. —. (1973) Education and Enmity 1920-50. Newton Abbot: David and Charles. —. (1975) A Mirror to Kathleen’s Face: Education in Independent Ireland 1922-1960. London: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso. Barton, K.C. (2001a) ‘’“You’d be wanting to know about the past”: social contexts of children’s historical understanding in Northern Ireland and the United States’, Comparative Education, 37, pp. 89-106. —. (2001b) ‘A sociological perspective on children’s understanding of historical change: Comparative findings from northern Ireland and the United States’, American Educational Research Journal, 38, pp. 881913. —. (2007a) ‘Primary children’s understanding of history in Northern Ireland and the United States’, in A. McCully (ed.), Recent Research on Teaching History in Northern Ireland: Informing Curriculum change, Coleraine: UNESCO Centre, University of Ulster, pp.11-13. —. (2007b) ‘Teachers, students and history education in Northern Ireland: a commentary on the research studies’, in A. McCully (ed.), Recent Research on Teaching History in Northern Ireland: Informing Curriculum Change, Coleraine: UNESCO Centre, University of Ulster, pp. 37-42. Barton, K. C. and McCully, A. W (2005) ‘History, Identity and the School History Curriculum in Northern Ireland: An Empirical Study of Secondary Students’ Ideas and Perspectives’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(1), pp. 85-116. —. (2010) ‘“You can form your own point of view”: Internally persuasive discourse in Northern Ireland Students’ encounters with History’, Teachers’ College Record, 112(1), pp. 142-181. Bell, J., Hansson, U. and McCaffery, N. (2010) The Troubles Aren’t History Yet: Young People’s Understanding of the Past. Belfast: Community Relations Council, C. Brady, (ed.) Interpreting Irish

22

Chapter One

history: the debate on historical revisionism 1938-1994, Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Connolly, P. (1998) Early Years Anti-sectarian Television. Belfast: Community Relations Council. Council for Curriculum, Education and Assessment (2007) Environment and Society: History, CCEA, http://www.nicurriculum.org.uk/docs/key_stage_3/areas_of_learning/st atutory_requirements/ks3_history.pdf. (Accessed 6/11/12) Conway, M. (2004) ‘Identifying the past: an exploration of teaching and learning sensitive issues in history at secondary school level’, Educate, 4(2). [Online at http://www.educatejournal.org/index.php/educate/issue/view/13] (Accessed 5/11/12) Coolahan, J. (1981) Irish Education: Its History and Structure. Dublin: Institute of Public Administration. Crowley, N. (1990) ‘The history syllabus’, in T. Crooks (ed.) The Changing Curriculum: Perspectives on the Junior Certificate. Dublin: O’Brien Educational. Daly, M. and O’Callaghan, M. (eds.) (2007) 1916 in 1966: Commemorating the Easter Rising. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. Department of Education (1934) Notes for Teachers: History. Dublin: Stationery Office. Department of Education. —. (1971a) Curaclamna Bunscoile: Primary School Curriculum,1. Dublin: Stationery Office. Department of Education. —. (1971b) Curaclamna Bunscoile: Primary School Curriculum, 2. Dublin: Stationery Office. Department of Education. (1983) Social and Environmental Studies: Report on the Implementation of the Primary School Curriculum. Dublin: Stationery Office. Department of Education and Science (2006) Looking at History: Teaching & Learning History in PostPrimary Schools. Dublin: Stationery Office. Doherty, G. (1996) ‘National identity and the study of Irish history’, The English Historical Review, 111(441), pp. 324-349. Eivers, E., Shiel, G. and Cheevers, C. (2006) Implementing the Revised Junior Certificate Syllabus: What teachers said. Dublin: Department of Education and Science. Fitzpatrick, D. (1991) ‘The futility of history: A failed experiment in Irish education’, in C. Brady (ed.), Ideology and the Historians (168-186). Dublin: Lilliput Press. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and self-identity, self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity.

A Question of Identity?

23

Gleeson, J. (2012) ‘The professional knowledge base and practice of Irish post-primary teachers: what is the research evidence telling us?’ Irish Educational Studies, 31(1), pp. 1-17. Harland, J., Inder, K., Ashworth, M., Montgomery, Moor A. H. and Wilkin, A. (1999) Real Curriculum: at the End of Key Stage 2. Report One from the Northern Ireland Curriculum Cohort Study. Slough: NFER. Hibernia (1962) ‘History teaching-purpose and method’, Hibernia, 26 (4). Irish National Teachers Organisation (1996) Primary School Curriculum: An Evolutionary Process. Dublin: INTO. Jones, V. (1992) ‘The attitudes of the Church of Ireland Board of Education to textbooks in national schools’, 1922-1967, Irish Educational Studies, 11, pp.72-98. Kitson, A. (2007) ‘History Education and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland’, in E. A.Cole (ed.) Teaching the Violent Past: History Education and Reconciliation. Lanham, M.D: Rowman & Littlefield. McCully, A. (2012) ‘History teaching, conflict and the legacy of the past’, Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 7(2), pp.145-160. Motherway, A. (1986) ‘The textbook curriculum: the status and role of the textbook in the teaching of history and English at senior primary level’, Irish Educational Studies, 6(1), pp.193-203. —. (1988) ‘Developing the history curriculum in the primary school’, Educational Studies, 7(2), pp.35-46. Murray, D. (1985) Worlds Apart: Segregated Schools in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Appletree Press. Northern Ireland Council for Educational Development (1984) Guidelines for Primary Schools: History. Belfast: NICED. Northern Ireland Curriculum Council [NICC] (1989) Education for Mutual Understanding: A Cross-curricular Theme, Report of the Cross Curricular Working Group on Education for Mutual Understanding to the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Education. Belfast: NICC. —. (1990) Proposals for History in the Northern Ireland Curriculum: Report of the Ministerial History Working Group. Belfast: NICC. O’Callaghan, J. (2009) Teaching Irish Independence: History in Irish Schools, 1922-72. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (1999) Primary School Curriculum: History. Dublin: NCCA. —. (2008a) Junior Certificate History: Draft Syllabus for Consultation. Retrieved 06.11.12 from

24

Chapter One

http://www.ncca.ie/uploadedfiles/Junior%20Cycle%20Review/History _syll(2).pdf —. (2008b) Primary Curriculum Review, Phase 1: Final Report with Recommendations. Dublin: NCCA. —. (2008c) Primary Curriculum Review, Phase 2: Final Report with Recommendations. Dublin: NCCA. Phillips, R., Goalen, P., McCully, A. and Wood, S. (1999) ‘Four histories, one nation? History teaching, nationhood and a British identity’, Compare, 29(2),pp.153-169. Raftery, D., Harford, J., Valiulis, M. & Redmond, J. (2007) ‘’“What's coming up in the exam?” A survey of teachers and the delivery of a gender-balanced curriculum’, Irish Educational Studies, 26 (1), pp.107-117. Slater, J. (1995) Teaching History in the New Europe. London: Cassell. Study Group on the Teaching of History (1967) The teaching of history in Irish schools, Administration, 15, pp. 268-284. Sugrue, C. (1990) ‘Child-centred education in Ireland since 1971’, Oideas, 35, pp. 5-21. Tormey, R. (2006) ‘The construction of national identity through primary school history: the Irish case’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(3), pp. 311-324. Waldron, F. (2004). ‘Making the Irish: identity and citizenship in the primary curriculum’, in C. Sugrue (ed.) Curriculum and Ideology: Irish Experiences International Perspectives, pp. 209-238. Dublin: Liffey Press. Waldron, F. & Pike, S. (2006). ‘What does it mean to be Irish? Children's construction of national identity’, Irish Educational Studies, 25(2), 231-251. Waldron, F., Pike, S., Greenwood, R., Murphy, C. M., O’Connor, G., Dolan, A. and Kerr, K. (2009) Becoming a Teacher: Primary Student Teachers as Learners and Teachers of History, Geography and Science. Armagh: Standing Conference on Teacher Education North and South. Walsh, T. (2012) Primary Education in Ireland, 1997-1990: Curriculum and Context, Bern: Peter Lang.



CHAPTER TWO A SEARCHING FOR AN IDENTITY: MORAL AND NATIONAL EDUCATION AS AN INDEPENDENT SUBJECT IN CONTEMPORARY HONG KONG ZARDAS SHUK-MAN LEE, PHOEBE Y.H. TANG AND CAROL C.L. TSANG UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

Abstract: The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region [HKSAR] announced the introduction of Moral and National Education [MNE] as an independent and compulsory school subject in May 2011. The content of MNE’s consultation draft and the teaching material produced by government-funded organizations incited about 100,000 people to demonstrate outside the Hong Kong government headquarters for eight consecutive days in early September 2012. Protesters, including teachers, parents, students, and concerned members of the public, described MNE as ‘brainwashing’, and demanded the curriculum’s withdrawal. This chapter presents the historical development of national education in Hong Kong, the various challenges that the MNE curriculum faced, and the conflicts and negotiations between the government and the public. It first explores the background of national education reform in Hong Kong since 2000. It then examines how the government instructed local schools to teach national identity in the subjects of Chinese History and the newly proposed MNE. The next section discusses the declining importance of Chinese History education since 2000. The chapter concludes by reviewing the voices supporting and opposing MNE, the most recent development in Hong Kong’s education today. Key Words: China, Chinese history, Colonial identity [Hong Kong], Controversial issues, Curriculum – history, Historical consciousness, History, History of History Education, History teaching, Moral and



26

Chapter Two

National Education [MNE], Hong Kong, Identity ,Master Narrative, Nationalism, Orientation, Patriotism, Political consciousness, Public protest, China.

Introduction The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region [HKSAR] announced on 8 September 2012 that Moral and National Education [MNE] would no longer be a mandatory subject in primary and secondary schools. Soon after Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the Hong Kong government began to introduce elements of national education into the school curriculum. However, it was only 15 years after the Handover that the government attempted to make national education an independent and compulsory subject. The government’s attempt induced about 100,000 people to demonstrate against the MNE curriculum in early September 2012. This demonstration, widely known in Hong Kong as the “September Protests”, gathered teachers, parents, students, and concerned members of the public outside the Hong Kong government headquarters for eight days. This chapter does not focus on the events surrounding the September protests. Rather, it presents the historical development of national education in Hong Kong, the various challenges the MNE curriculum faced, and the conflicts and negotiations between the government and the public. It first explores the background of national education reform in Hong Kong since 2000. It then examines how the government instructed local schools to teach national identity in the subjects of Chinese History and the newly proposed MNE. The next section discusses the declining importance of Chinese History education since 2000. The chapter concludes by reviewing the voices supporting and opposing MNE, the most recent development in Hong Kong’s education today.

Background of national education reform The National Education Reform began in 2000 when the Hong Kong government reformed the secondary school curriculum by placing the subject of Chinese History under Personal, Social and Humanities Education [PSHE], one of the eight Key Learning Areas [KLAs] in the new syllabus (The Curriculum Development Council [CDC], 2001, pp.12). A number of larger reforms followed. In 2001, the Education and Manpower Bureau [EMB] identified Moral and Civic Education [MCE] as one of the four key tasks in Hong Kong’s curriculum reform. MCE aimed



A Searching for an Identity

27

to promote ‘positive values and attitudes’ towards China among primary and secondary school students (Primary 1 to Secondary 6) (CDC, 2011, p.ix). In 2008, the Education Bureau [EDB] expanded the content of national education and issued the Revised Moral and Civic Education Curriculum Framework. Under the direction of Donald Tsang, then Chief Executive of the HKSAR, the government proposed to introduce MNE as a formal subject in the primary curriculum in 2012/13 and in the secondary curriculum in 2013/14. The government defined MNE as a practical means to develop students’ ‘moral and national qualities’ under the ‘rapid development’ in Hong Kong and China (CDC, 2012, pp.2-3). However, the government was unaware that many schools were not ready to teach national education as a formal subject. According to the MNE curriculum consultation draft, issued in May 2011 by the Curriculum Development Council [CDC], an advisory body on the development of the local school curriculum as well as the primary developer of national education,1 both primary and secondary schools were ‘very supportive’ of MNE (CDC, 2003). The CDC (2011, p.ix) stated that local schools were well prepared to teach MNE as an individual subject, because elements of the subject were already being taught, and schools had been organizing field trips to China for over a decade. In terms of public opinion, the consultation draft did not elaborate on possible reactions from the public, but instead merely highlighted that the society ‘generally agreed’ on governmental initiative to implement national education. The reality was not as rosy, and the public was not as supportive of MNE as the government had assumed. Among the 516 primary schools in Hong Kong, only 55 (10.7 percent) of them made national education its major focus for curriculum development (Apple Daily, 2012a). These low numbers reflected the fact that the CDC was unclear about the extent to which schools were prepared for the national education reform. The anti-national education protests in July and September showed that the government had failed to grasp the opinion of the general public. The national education elements that were gradually included in the school curriculum between 1997 and 2001 did not trigger any substantial discontent in society. However the 2012 MNE curriculum differed greatly from teaching materials that had been issued previously. According to the MNE consultation draft, MNE aimed to ‘raise students’ recognition and sense of belonging towards their... nation’, and to ‘develop an affection for the country’ (CDC, 2011, pp.3-4). MNE was divided into four domains. One of them, which received the most public attention, was the national domain. This domain was further divided into four dimensions, including ‘natural resources, contemporary development, humanities and history’. In



28

Chapter Two

four key stages, namely primary 1 to 3, primary 4 to 6, secondary 1 to 3, and secondary 4 to 6, students were expected to understand ‘the national situation and explore the opportunities and challenges of the country’s development, such as achievements, difficulties, constraints and directions for improvement’ (CDC, 2012, pp.18, 21). The CDC (2011, p.ix) stated that MNE would infuse students with positive attitudes about China and foster their national identity by taking examples from ‘current issues and life events’. Teachers and students, however, did not accept teaching and learning about only the positive side of China. Mathews’, Ma’s and Tailok’s (2007, p.93) study shows that students were aware of China’s problems, and teachers believed that students should be taught to ‘think critically about their country’. The MNE teaching materials focused on China’s successes and avoided its problems. These weaknesses became the major concerns of teachers, parents, and students about the curriculum, and sparked a string of criticisms against MNE.

Teaching national identity In virtually every country in the world, the government uses history as a means to foster national identity. Back in Hong Kong in the 1950s, the colonial government feared that Chinese History would aid the spread of communism in Hong Kong. It thus divided the history subject into History and Chinese History, hoping to marginalise the latter. History that was taught in English entailed primarily European history and aimed to cultivate students’ critical thinking. On the contrary, Chinese History taught in Chinese emphasised the memorization of dates and events with minimal analysis. Under the government’s instruction, teachers were encouraged to take up a didactic and depoliticised perspective to teach the subject (Vickers, 2003, pp.52-53). Meanwhile, Hong Kong History, which was an anomaly in both the History and Chinese History curricula, was not taught in the colonial period (Mathews, Ma, & Lui, p.85). The lack of a strong foundation in Chinese History and Hong Kong History posed a big challenge to the HKSAR government in implementing both subjects after the Handover. In 1997, the CDC (1997, pp.4-5) issued the new curriculum for Chinese History at junior secondary levels 1 to 3, introducing Hong Kong History for the first time as an aid to learning Chinese History. The CDC noted that understanding Hong Kong History not only enhances Hong Kong students’ interest in Chinese History, but it also cultivates positive feelings for one’s country and national identity. The CDC provided teachers with a Hong Kong historical timeline and a list of Hong Kong historical events that resonated with Chinese History. It



A Searching for an Identity

29

instructed teachers to elaborate on Chinese historical events related to Hong Kong, and encouraged them to organise Hong Kong historical tours for students. The CDC specified that students’ understanding of local historical events would definitely aid the study of Chinese History. This new Chinese History curriculum is still in use today in local secondary schools. As with Hong Kong History, the government also instructed secondary school teachers to teach national identity in Chinese History. For example, the EMB provided a list of items to be taught about national identity, such as communism. However, teachers in general did not reach a consensus on how to interpret these materials. While some wished the topic of national identity would appear in examinations, some sought to teach the topic by including the discussion of tragic events in contemporary Chinese History, such as the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen Square Massacre, in class. Many strove to avoid controversy and only touched upon the cultural characteristics of China. China’s recent development and political issues, as a result, were not mentioned (Mathews, Ma & Lui, 2007, p.88). Such disagreement among teachers can be traced back to the peculiarity of Hong Kong people’s sense of national identity. Debates among anthropologists, sociologists and historians about the nature of Hong Kong identity have persisted for around three decades, long before the government revised the Chinese History curriculum and attempted to introduce MNE as an independent subject. Mathews, EMa and Tai-lok (2007, p.xiii) have argued that Hong Kong people underwent ‘conscious struggles over belonging to a nation’ and they found it difficult to fully embrace their relationship with China. While most see China as their ‘cultural home’ and have difficulty identifying with Great Britain, they fear and resent China’s political dictatorship. The Handover in 1997 provided an opportunity for Hong Kong people to reassess their national identity. However, the majority remained detached from the Chinese state, even if they accept that they ‘emotionally belong to the Chinese nation’. Public opinion surveys conducted between 1985 and 2005 reaffirmed this ambivalent sense of national identity, even though the surveys reflected their growing sense of Chinese identity over time (Mathews, Ma & Lui, 2007, p.11). A 1985 survey showed that nearly 60 percent of respondents identified themselves as Hongkongese, with only 36 percent as Chinese (Lau & Kuan, 1988, p.178). Ten years later, another survey showed that over 50 percent of respondents identified themselves as Hongkongese, over 30 percent as Chinese, and over 15 percent as both (Lau, 2000, p.259). According to the two more recent surveys conducted after the Handover, in 2001, 45 percent of the respondents identified



30

Chapter Two

themselves as Hongkongese, 26 percent as Hong Kong Chinese and 22 percent as Chinese (Hong Kong Transition Project, 2002, p.18). The one conducted in 2005 indicates that 39 percent of respondents identified themselves as Hongkongese, 29 percent as Chinese and 27 as Hong Kong Chinese (Hong Kong Transition Project, 2005, p.17). Despite Hong Kong people’s increasing acceptance of their Chinese identity, the government did not utilise this opportunity to cultivate Hong Kong people’s understanding of Chinese History through the existing curriculum.

Chinese history education in Hong Kong The extensive education reforms in 2000 weakened the independent status of Chinese History, which has been established since the 1960s. For junior secondary levels, Chinese History had become an independent subject since the 1960s. It soon became an independent subject in the public examinations in 1967. In the 1970s, Chinese History was already developed as a common core subject for junior secondary school students (Kan, 2007, pp.53, 139, 140). The reforms required every subject to be regrouped into eight KLAs. The KLAs included Chinese Language Education, English Language Education, Mathematics Education, Science Education, Technology Education, PSHE, Arts Education, and Physical Education (Education Commission, 2000, p.15). Chinese History was placed under the KLA of PSHE, along with Civic Education, Economic & Public Affairs, Geography, History, Ethical/Religious Education/Buddhist Studies, and Social Studies (CDC, 2001, pp.1-2). On the surface, Chinese History would remain as an independent and important subject in schools. The CDC’s (2001, p.23) report, Learning to Learn: The Way Forward in Curriculum Development (June 2001), stressed that the status of Chinese History as an independent subject would remain unchanged at junior and senior secondary levels. Chinese History would become the primary focus of study even if it was combined with World History to form a single subject. In 2007, a scholar of history education (Kan, 2007, p.135) in Hong Kong commented that the introduction of KLA PSHE “can in no way threaten the independent status of Chinese History in the school curriculum”. All these seemed to suggest that Chinese History would enhance its independent and important status in school curricula. However, the modes of teaching PSHE proposed by the Curriculum Development Council (CDC) resulted in the decline of Chinese History’s independent status at junior secondary levels. According to the CDC’s consultation document Learning to Learn, Key Learning Area: Personal,



A Searching for an Identity

31

Social & Humanities Education (November 2000), the CDC proposed three modes of planning KLA PSHE at junior secondary levels. The first was to keep the existing individual subjects but, at the same time, develop means to encourage inter-subject coordination. The CDC gave examples of the ways in which teachers of Chinese History, Economic & Public Affairs, History and Geography could coordinate with each other and develop the project of ‘Changes in the Rural Community of Hong Kong’ for Secondary 1 students. The second mode was to introduce ‘integrated modes of different nature’. For instance, schools could offer the subject of Integrated Humanities that contained a ‘China studies module’, or they could offer a new History curriculum that emphasised the study of Chinese history and included ‘elements’ of world history. The third mode was to combine ‘different modes in the same year or in alternate years’. For example, schools could provide an independent subject of Chinese History and Integrated Humanities in the same year. Alternatively, schools could offer independent KLA PSHE subjects from secondary 1 to 2, and then Integrated Humanities in Secondary 3. The Curriculum Development Council (CDC) encouraged schools to develop their own modes to meet their needs (CDC, 2000, pp.21-23). Along with the proposal of various modes of planning KLA PSHE, in Learning for Life, Learning Through Life: Reform Proposals for the Education System in Hong Kong (September 2000), the CDC advised eliminating ‘repetitive and unnecessary elements in the curriculum’ at primary school levels and junior secondary levels (Education Commission, 2000, p.15). Faced with these modes of planning PSHE subjects, as well as having to eradicate so-called redundant elements in the curriculum, would schools be able to retain the independent subjects while developing new subjects with elements of the former? Would schools still offer the independent subject of Chinese History while developing new subjects like History and Culture, and Integrated Humanities that contain Chinese history ‘elements’? By the 2010s, a number of schools gave up offering Chinese History as an independent subject. According to the chief curriculum development officer of PSHE in the EDB (Lee, 2008), in January 2008, 85 percent of the schools offered an independent subject of Chinese History at the junior secondary levels. Yet, only 70 percent of the schools provided Chinese History education as independent subjects from secondary 1 to 3. 6 percent of the schools offered the subject of History and Culture that contained Chinese history ‘elements’. About 7 percent of the schools integrated Chinese history ‘elements’ in the subject of Integrated Humanities. In May 2008, Education Convergence (2008, p.1), a group that monitors education policy in Hong Kong, delivered an investigative report



32

Chapter Two

on Chinese history education at junior secondary levels. Based on the Secondary School Places Allocation (SSPA) System 2007/2009 Handbook for Unrestricted School Choices published by the EDB, Education Convergence concluded that only 74 percent of the schools would offer Chinese History as an independent subject in secondary 1 in the academic year of 2009/2010. The dramatic fall in enrolment numbers for Chinese History in public examinations also showed that the status of Chinese History has declined in schools since the education reforms. Convener of Joint Action Concern Group for the Popularization of National History Education [Author’s translation], Wong Ka-leung, argued that due to the lack of Chinese History education at junior levels, the students would not choose Chinese History as their electives for the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary School Education [HKDSE] (Wong, 2010). Indeed, only 8596 students took Chinese History in the first HKDSE examination in 2012 (Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority [HKEAA], 2012, p.33). This number made a stark contrast with the number of candidates in HKCEE Chinese History from 2000 to 2010. In 2000 when the education reforms were initiated, more than 37,000 students attended the Chinese History examination. The number has declined every year since then. In 2008, less than 27,000 took the Chinese History examination. In 2009 and 2010, there were slightly more than 28,000 students who took the examination (HKEAA, 2011, p.59).

Voices supporting and opposing the MNE curriculum There had been little opposition from Hong Kong society since the HKSAR government introduced elements of national education into the school curriculum in 1997. When the government decided to turn national education into an independent and mandatory subject, the general public departed from its previous ambivalent attitude. A survey found that over 74 percent of students and over 77 percent of parents thought the government should withdraw the MNE curriculum (Lo, 2012, p.CITY3).2 Opponents of MNE protested against the curriculum. On 29 May 2011, one month after the MNE Curriculum consultation draft was issued, a group of secondary school students established ‘Scholarism’, an activist group that was originally named the Alliance Against Moral and National Education, to demand that the government withdraw the proposal. On 29 July, over 90,000 Hong Kong people participated in a protest organised by Scholarism against MNE. From 1 September to 8 September, about 100,000 anti-MNE protesters answered to The Civil Alliance Against



A Searching for an Identity

33

National Education, and gathered outside the Hong Kong government headquarters. Participants, consisting mostly of teachers, parents, and students, shouted and held up slogans such as ‘Withdraw’, ‘Freedom of Thought’, and ‘No Brainwashing’ (Apple Daily, 2012b). The public was split on the issue of MNE. Supporters of MNE wrote to newspapers arguing that the curriculum should be implemented. One supporter (Wei, 2012, p.EDT12) thought Hong Kong youngsters would not be ‘easily influenced’ or brainwashed by MNE because they were ‘capable of thinking for themselves about politics, economics, culture, education and social behaviour’. In support of MNE, another respondent (Tung, 2012, p.EDT16) asserted that, ‘Hong Kong people have been subjected to brainwashing by the West about its political system, values and Christianity for the past 100 years’. In contrast, opponents of MNE argued that the curriculum hampered students’ critical thinking, and imposed a one-sided view of contemporary Chinese history on them. Based on the MNE curriculum guide prepared by the CDC (2012, pp.21, 83, 88) in April 2012, students are expected to develop independent thinking and ‘the ability to distinguish right from wrong’ by studying the subject. From the first to second stages, MNE aims at cultivating students’ positive values, for examples, benevolence and respect, so that students would be able to build up the confidence needed to overcome challenges. In stages three and four, the students are expected to develop ‘analytical thinking’. They are supposed to learn how ‘to analyse issues and make decisions with a rational and responsible attitude’. The role of teachers was also to ‘encourage students to perform objective analysis and make rational judgements’. While these values appeared neutral and acceptable to the general public, the MNE curriculum also aimed to reinforce Hong Kong people’s identification with China (CDC, 2011, p.36). Opponents of the curriculum described such an initiative as a deterrent against developing students’ ability to think analytically and independently. Wong Kwok-kong, the Evangelical Lutheran Church’s head of education, criticised the MNE as ‘instilling of values in an irrational manner’, and added that his church ‘need[ed] to look at issues from universally accepted perspectives, such as human rights, freedom and equality’ (Chong, 2012, p.EDT1). Likewise, parents disagreed with the way MNE assessed students’ feelings towards China, such as evaluating students’ reaction in a national flag-raising ceremony (Chan & Cheng, 2012, p.CITY2). Scholarism (2011) criticised MNE for ‘brainwashing’ students and said the curriculum should be withdrawn, because it forbade students from expressing opinions other than those in textbooks. The public also worried that students would be graded based on their attitudes towards China. Chik



34

Chapter Two

(2012, p.108), an educator, asserted that students would likely lie in class under such assessment method and this would result in subverting the very purpose of education. Opponents of MNE were dissatisfied with the way MNE portrayed Chinese history. The curriculum guidelines instructed teachers to select historic events and ‘outstanding’ historic figures (the phrase ‘outstanding’ appeared in the Chinese version of the curriculum guide, but not the English one) that fit within the four frameworks of ‘continuation and inheritance’, ‘exploration and advancement’, ‘diversity and integration’, and ‘ideas and implementation’. For example, the CDC stated that students could study how people in different dynasties pioneered and explored the Silk Road in order to understand ‘continuation and inheritance’; understanding Zheng He’s exploration in the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) and his contributions to foreign relations and trade could illustrate the idea of ‘exploration and advancement’.3 Thirdly, students were expected to learn the spirit of ‘seeking common ground while allowing differences’ through studying historic events such as ‘the coexistence of various schools and theories during the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period’(770 BCE - 221 BCE). Lastly, students were supposed to ‘understand how history has developed from idea to implementation’ and to achieve the ‘unification of one’s knowledge and behaviour’. Gradually, the students would learn to collect information to ‘identify historic events’ and ‘understand the reasons why historic figures are respected’ (CDC, 2012, pp.26-62). One problem was the examples which were provided to give a concrete illustration of the way in which the abstract frameworks would be implemented. Much emphasis was placed on China’s achievements, and the examples were completely silent on events that potentially shed negative light on the country. For example, the Great Famine of 19581962 and the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989, left significant stains on the country’s modern history; but they were national tragedies and were difficult to fit with the examples in these four frameworks. With only a selection of events that match the aims of the four frameworks, students may only gain a partial understanding of the country’s past. MNE’s focus on presenting China in a positive light therefore worried parents and students. Some were concerned that the curriculum would jeopardise freedom of speech (Apple Daily, 2012c). One parent said that MNE could not properly represent national history, because it avoided the June 4th Massacre (Social Record Organization, 2012). Students were also discontent with having to sing communist “red songs” if the MNE curriculum was implemented (Apple Daily, 2012c). Instead of exploring



A Searching for an Identity

35

China through MNE, teachers, parents and students preferred to learn about the country through the subject of Chinese History. To those opposing MNE, the content of Chinese History should include the positive and negative aspects of China. Importantly, they want to revive Chinese History as an independent subject (or even a compulsory subject) at junior secondary levels. An independent Chinese History subject guarantees enough teaching and learning hours for students. It also teaches students both the positive and negative aspects of China. People opposing MNE think that history and national education are different in terms of learning objectives and approaches. The former requires critical thinking and objectivity (at secondary levels) that national education largely ignores. The replacement of Chinese History as an independent subject with MNE was a major concern of the anti-national education protesters. Chinese History was no longer a mandatory subject in junior secondary levels. Moreover, from 2000 to 2012, the number of students taking the Chinese History examination dropped significantly (HKEAA, 2011, p.47; HKEAA, 2012, p.61). Without Chinese History as a compulsory subject, MNE would become the official source of understanding with respect of contemporary China. Teachers and parents thought that MNE was not capable of replacing Chinese History as an independent subject, because it could not provide students with the basics of Chinese History. Wong (2012, p.A14), convener of Joint Action Concern Group for the Popularization of National History Education, pointed out that without mandatory Chinese History classes, the MNE curriculum was defective because it placed too much emphasis on nationalistic education, and could not provide students with basic historical knowledge. Lee Wai-kai, a Chinese History teacher, wanted the restoration of Chinese History as a compulsory subject because the curriculum’s coverage allowed students to explore China’s cultural heritage in the past 3000 years (Yeung, 2012, p.EDT4). On 8 September 2012, the Hong Kong government announced that MNE would no longer be mandatory (Chong, Tam, Lo & Franchineau, 2012, p.CITY1). Joshua Wong from Scholarism, one of the protest organisers, announced at night that protests at government headquarters would come to an end, but the struggle for an indefinite withdrawal of the policy would continue (Now TV News, 2012). In October 2012, there were more protests about national education, but they were on a smaller scale, and debates surrounding MNE gradually declined (Sing Pao, 2012, p. A06).



36

Chapter Two

Conclusion The end of the September protests seemingly drew debates over national education in Hong Kong to a close. However, the contestations over teaching the topic of national identity have existed in society since the colonial era. Although teaching national identity was sometimes debated even during the colonial era, after Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty, teaching the topic of national identity has become an increasingly important issue that defines Hong Kong’s relations with China as well as Hong Kong’s future. This thus made it extremely difficult for the government to devise a new national education curriculum that would gain the favour of both the Chinese government and the Hong Kong people. As long as some Hong Kong educators and parents perceived the introduction of MNE as a government conspiracy, it would be uncertain how the public would react if MNE were put into full practice. Situated on the edge of China, be it geographically, politically or ideologically, it is likely that Hong Kong’s future policies towards national education would be determined by the various challenges facing China today: changing political leadership, economic stagnation, diplomatic instability, and the rapid growth of social media. However, Hong Kong people’s response and participation, as reflected in the September protests, will surely be another critical determinant.

Notes 1.

2.

3.



Members of the CDC include school heads, teachers, parents, employers, academics, professionals from different sectors, representatives from the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority and Vocational Training Council of Hong Kong, and representatives from the Education Bureau. The Boys’ and Girls’ Clubs Association conducted this survey. It interviewed almost 2000 secondary school students and over 1400 primary school students’ parents. From 1405 to 1431, Zheng He, a court eunuch, was assigned by the emperors to lead seven voyages. The missions aimed to display the prowess of the Ming Dynasty to the states of South and Southeast Asia. More than 60 ships and 27,000 men were under the command of Zheng He. The fleets visited a number of places, for example, Champa, Siam, Malacca, Java, Calicut, and Ceylon. During the fourth and fifth voyages, Zheng’s fleets even reached the east coast of Africa.

A Searching for an Identity

37

References Apple Daily (2012a) ‘Xinban Xiaoxuegailan 55 xiao tui xinaoke 㕘䇰˪⮷⬠ 㤪 奥 ˫ ĶĶġ 㟉 ㍐ 㲿 儎 䥹 [In New Primary School Profiles, 55 Schools Implement Brainwashing Subject]’, Apple Daily, 6 September 2012. [Online at http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20120906/1800922 7] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2012b) ‘Fan xinao. Guanjian zai mingtian ⍵㲿儎ġ 斄挝⛐㖶⣑ [Antibrainwashing. Tomorrow is the Key]’, Apple Daily, 8 September 2012. [Online at http://hk.dv.nextmedia.com/actionnews/hit/20120908/1801 0900/20000760] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2012c) ‘Buman guominjiaoyu. Buyao huangyanteshou. 97 dai gangren tashang minzhulu ᶵ㺧⚳㮹㔁做ġ ᶵ天媲妨䈡椾ġ ˬĺĸ ẋ˭㷗Ṣ嶷ᶲ㮹 ᷣ嶗 [Not Satisfied with National Education. No Lying Chief Executive. Hong Kong People Born after 1997 to Walk the Democracy Path]’, Apple Daily, 2 July 2012. [Online at http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/ news/art/20120702/16476664] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Chan, T. and Cheng, J. (2012) ‘National Lessons Won’t Skirt the Sensitive Issues’, South China Morning Post, 11 August 2012, p.CITY2. Chik, P.S. (2012) ‘Guominjiaoyu de kecheng xianjing ⚳㮹㔁做䘬婚䦳星旙 [National Education Curriculum’s Trap]’, in Y.C. Yip (ed.) Wei xiayidai juexing 䁢ᶳᶨẋ奢愺 [Wake up for the next generation]. Hong Kong: Enrich Culture Group, pp.102-111. Chong, D. (2012) ‘Christian Schools Skip National Education’, South China Morning Post, 18 July 2012, p.EDT1. Chong, D., Tam, J., Lo, W., and Franchineau, H. (2012) ‘Thousands Boycott Classes in National Lessons Protests’, South China Morning Post, 12 September, p.CITY1. The Curriculum Development Council (1997) ‘Zhongxue kecheng gangyao Zhongguolishike zhongyizhizhongsan ᷕ⬠婚䦳䵙天ġ ᷕ⚳㬟⎚䥹ġ ᷕᶨ军ᷕᶱ [Secondary School Curriculum Document. Chinese History. Secondary 1 to Secondary 3]’, Hong Kong: The Curriculum Development Council. —. (2000) Learning to Learn: Key Learning Area - Personal, Social & Humanities Education Consultation Document. Hong Kong: The Curriculum Development Council. —. (2001) Learning to Learn: The Way Forward in Curriculum. [Online at http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?langno=1&nodeID=] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2003) Curriculum Development Council. [Online at http://cd1.edb. hkedcity.net/cd/cdc/en/page01.htm] (Accessed: 11/2/2013).



38

Chapter Two

—. (2011) Moral and National Education Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 to Primary 6) Consultation Draft. Hong Kong: The Curriculum Development Council. —. (2012) Moral and National Education Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 to Primary 6). Hong Kong: Education Commission (2000): The Curriculum Development Council Education Commission (2000) Reform Proposals for the Education System in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Education Commission. —. (2008) ‘Youguan zhongxue zai chuzhong kaishe Zhongguolishike diaochabaogao 㚱 斄 ᷕ ⬠ ⛐ ⇅ ᷕ 攳 姕 ᷕ ⚳ 㬟 ⎚ 䥹 婧 㞍 ⟙ ⏲ ġ [Report Concerning the Establishment of Chinese History in Junior Secondary School]’. [Online at http://144.214.29.180:3080/%A4%A4%BE%C7% A4%A4%A5v%AC%EC%BD%D5%ACd%B3%F8%A7i.doc] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority (2011) Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination 2011 Examination Report. [Online at http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/en/hkcee/Exam_Report/] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2012) Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education 2012 Examination Report. [Online at http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/en/hkdse/ Exam_Report/] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Hong Kong Transition Project (2002) Accountability and Article 23. [Online at http://hktp.hkbu.edu.hk/article23/article23.pdf] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2005) Hong Kong Constitutional Reform: What do the People Want? [Online at http://hktp.hkbu.edu.hk/CR/CR_Dec05.pdf] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Kan, F.L.F. (2007) Hong Kong’s Chinese History Curriculum from 1945. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Lau, S.K. (2000) ‘Hongkongese or Chinese: the Problem of Identity on the Eve of Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty over Hong Kong’, in S.K. Lau (ed.) Social Development and Political Change in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, pp.255-284. Lau, S.K. and Kuan, H.C. (1988) The Ethos of Hong Kong Chinese. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. Lee, C.H. (2008) ‘Zhongguolishi jiaoyu yushibingjin ᷕ⚳㬟⎚㔁做冯㗪᷎忚 [Chinese History Education Progresses with Time]’. [Online at http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?langno=2&nodeID=6389] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Lo, W. (2012) ‘Survey Finds Most Oppose New Subject’, South China Morning Post, 30 August 2012, p. CITY3.



A Searching for an Identity

39

Mathews, G., Ma, E.K.W., and Lui, T.L. (2008) Hong Kong, China: Learning to Belong to a Nation. London; New York: Routledge. Now TV News (2012) ‘Fanguojiaodalianmeng: xuanbu jieshu zhanlingzhengzong ⍵⚳㔁⣏倗䚇Ļġ ⭋ⶫ䳸㜇Ỽ柀㓧䷥ [The Civil Alliance Against National Education Announced the End of Protest at Government Headquarters]’. [Online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W_Go-Grqe0] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Scholarism (2011) ‘Xueminsichao 821 dayouxing. Chehui Deyujiguominjiaoyuke ⬠ 㮹 ⿅ 㼖 ġ ĹijIJ ⣏ 忲 埴 ġ 㑌 ⚆ ⽟ 做 ⍲ ⚳ 㮹 㔁 做 䥹 [Scholarism 821 Protest. Withdraw Moral and National Education Curriculum]’. [Online at http://scholarism.com/2011/08/07/%E5%AD%B8%E6%B0%91%E6% 80%9D%E6%BD%AE-821%E5%A4%A7%E9%81%8A%E8%A1% 8C-%E6%92%A4%E5%9B%9E%E5%BE%B7%E8%82%B2%E5%8 F%8A%E5%9C%8B%E6%B0%91%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E7% A7%91%EF%BC%81/] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Social Record Organization (2012) ‘13AUG2012 Fan Guominjiaoyu. Huyu jiaoxie lijiqidong bakeyouxing (jiazhangfayan) ⍵⚳㮹㔁做ġ ␤䰚㔁 ⋼䩳⌛┇≽伟婚忲埴Įġ ĩ⭞攟䘤妨Ī [Anti National Education. Call for Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union to Immediately Initiate Class Strike and Protest (Parents’ Speeches)]’. [Online at http://www. youtube.com/watch?v=LyjcdsNIzy4] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). Sing Pao (2012) ‘8000 ren zhengfuzongbu wai jihui. Fanguojiao VS chengguojiao Ĺıııġ Ṣ 㓧 ⹄ ䷥ 悐 ⢾ 普 㚫 ġ ⍵ ⚳ 㔁 ġ ŗŔġ 㐸 ⚳ 㔁 [8000 People Rallied outside Government Headquarters. Anti-National Education VS Pro-National Education]’, Sing Pao, 18 October 2012, p.A06. Tung, A.K.C. (2012) ‘HK People Brainwashed by the West’, South China Morning Post, 7 September 2012, p.EDT16. Vickers, E. (2003) In Search of an Identity: The Politics of History as a School Subject in Hong Kong, 1960s–2002. London: Routledge. Wei, P. (2012) ‘Children Can Form Their Own Opinions’, South China Morning Post, 9 August 2012, p.EDT12. Wong, K.L. (2010) ‘Guoshijiaoyu shuailuo. Guominshenfen hecun ⚳⎚㔁 做 堘 句 ġ ⚳ 㮹 幓 ấ ỽ ⬀ ŀ [National History Education Declines. What Remains of National Identity?]’. Wenweipo, 25 September 2010. [Online at http://paper.wenweipo.com/2010/09/25/PL1009250005.htm] (Accessed: 11/2/2013). —. (2012) ‘Tuixing Guominjiaoyu de guanjian ㍐埴⚳㮹㔁做䘬斄挝 [The Key to Implementing National Education]’, Hong Kong Economic Journal, 21 July 2012, p.A14. Yeung, L. (2012) ‘Schools Say No to Class Control’, South China Morning Post, 23 July 2012, p.EDT4.





CHAPTER THREE EUROCENTRIC HISTORY IN SPANISH TEXT BOOKS MANUEL POUSA IES DE MUGARDOS A CORUNA, SPAIN

AND RAMON LOPEZ FACAL UNIVERSIDADE DE SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA, SPAIN

Abstract: This chapter examines the presence of Eurocentric bias in mainstream Spanish textbooks used to teach history in secondary education. The research objective is to analyse how the relationships between Europe and colonised populations are presented in history textbooks. The research hypothesis is that Spanish textbooks have a Eurocentric bias, involving not questioning colonialism. A representative sample of six textbooks was selected, and those chapters related to imperialism, colonialism and decolonisation processes were subjected to content analysis, in three dimensions: written information, pictures and maps. The methodology involved comparing the textbooks' narratives, conveyed both through text and images, with the consensual historiography about colonisation processes. The results show the persistence of a ‘rosy tradition’ sustaining certain continuity with the old colonial propaganda - for instance x minimising or ignoring colonial violence; x treating colonised territories and metropolis asymmetrically; x disregarding non-European history; x conveying a stereotypical image of both the colonised and colonisers through pictures; x and resorting to maps with a colonial perspective. The conclusions present some proposals that could improve the teaching and learning of the history of colonialisms, in order to avoid



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

41

reinforcing the Eurocentric bias already existing among secondary students. Key Words: Acculturation, Bias, Canon – interpretation of Spanish colonialism, Colonialism, Decolonisation, Eurocentrism, Historical consciousness – pupils, Historiography, Imperialism, Identity, National identity, Nationalism, Patriotism, School textbooks, Spain, Stereotyping, Teaching history, Textbooks, Secondary education

Representations of the Age of imperialism: Background of the study The analysis of imperialist processes in the classroom allows us to better understand ethnocentrism in the teaching of history. Europe dominated a large part of the world using its military, economic and technological development, and during this process there were considerable changes to its perception of other societies and reciprocally, the perception of other societies of Europe. Studying these processes enables us to examine the contact between cultures, which, according to Berlin (1991) and Christian (2004), fosters progress and generates significant collective learning. The analysis of the circulation of knowledge regarding these processes becomes especially relevant in a globalised world in which Europe is losing weight in favour of its former colonies or semi-colonies. Textbooks are the main and sometimes sole school resource in Spanish mainstream teaching (Valls, 2007). They influence almost every activity carried out in history classes in secondary education, including oral explanations and exercises. Changing textbooks is necessary in order to change pupil orientation. And, as pointed out by Mikk (2000), much easier than changing thousands of teachers through professional development. However, research into this field is still lacking in many aspects. There are no global studies about textbook dissemination (Nicholls, 2003), nor much consensus regarding the basic principles about how to analyse them. Institutions such as the Georg Eckert Institute and the many authors who have addressed this issue, have not explicitly described their instruments of analysis. The future of textbooks is uncertain, as they may be replaced by electronic resources. These, on the other hand carry on many of the traditions, bias and shortcomings of the textbooks themselves. Furthermore, for the time being, textbooks prevail over other pedagogical materials. Colonial domination acquires relevance when analysing ethnocentrism in modern history textbooks. Conklin and Fletcher (1999) highlight the



42

Chapter Three

legacy of racism and European nationalism in textbooks. For instance, a sample of 13 French textbooks used in primary education have been analysed in a report edited by Falaize (2009), showing that, although there are more pages accorded to colonial processes, and a greater range of documents are presented, the narrative about colonialism continues to reflect the euphemisation that omits colonial violence and racism. Drawing from Ferro's (2003) notion of 'Rosy Book' in opposition to the ‘Black Book’ and ‘Black Legend’, terms used to denote historical narratives allegedly exaggerating the darker aspects of Spanish colonisation; we call this treatment of colonial violence the Rosy Tradition. This Rosy tradition is characterised by omitting or downplaying slaughter, genocide or mass deportations; by ignoring the relationship between colonialism and slavery, or the relevance of the development of weapons in the establishment of large empires in such a short period of time. According to Fernández-Armesto (2000, p. 357), historical narratives also avoid referring to violence, “slavery, environmental plunder, massacres practised as a sport or the use of terror as a form of government” whenever a given society considered itself to be more civilised than its victims. Such omissions generate a serious educational problem, given that teachers, at least in France (Falaize, 2009), do not offset this discourse: they usually emphasise the size of the empires but not the reasons for the conquest. There are few studies examining how colonialism is addressed in textbooks, one for instance that is already noted is that of Falaize (2009). Our research has the aim of bridging this gap, by examining content related to colonialism and decolonisation processes within Spanish textbooks. The Spanish case has particular relevance for these issues, due to Spain’s past as a coloniser.

Research objectives and methods This chapter is part of a piece of doctoral research on the teaching and learning of imperialism (Pousa, 2012). It consists of interviews of students and a classroom study during one academic year. The research objective is: To analyse how the relationships between Europe and colonised populations are presented in history textbooks. It has three specific objectives: 1. To analyse the written content, examining how issues related to colonialism and decolonisation are addressed, or if they are ignored.



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

43

2. To analyse how pictures represent colonisers and the colonised. 3. To analyse the representational images of colonised territories of maps. For the sample, six history textbooks for the 1st year of the Baccalaureate (16–17 year old) from five of Spain's major publishers were selected. They have the largest share of the market, with a presence in about 80% of schools (Valls, 2007). Four of the textbooks are from 2008, and two from 2002, in order to explore whether there were changes in approach. The textbooks were published by: Anaya (2008), Rodeira (2002), Santillana (2008); Grupo SM (2002; 2008) and Vicens Vives (2008). The complete references are given in the Appendix. The following acronyms are used: SM 02 and SM 08 for the textbooks by Grupo SM, VV for Vicens Vives, and the full names for the other four. The methodology involves recursive content analysis, comparing the textbooks' visual and written narrative about European colonisation processes, with consensual history about these processes in current historiography. The categories emerged from an interaction between the literature and the data. First, the chapters addressing colonisation or decolonisation processes were analysed, and a preliminary list of issues, such as violence, consequences of colonialism, non-European history, or asymmetrical treatment of Western and non-Western territories, was drawn up. Then, the textbooks were subjected to a second round of analysis, leading sometimes to a revision of categories. The results are presented in three sections, addressing respectively the objectives about written content, pictures and maps.

Eurocentric bias in written content This section discusses findings related to the first objective: to analyse the written content, examining how issues related to colonialism and decolonisation are addressed, or whether they are ignored. The findings are distributed in seven subsections, although these issues are closely intertwined.

Addressing violence: Forgotten or minimised massacres Do textbooks address the violence involved in colonisation and decolonisation processes? Textbooks ignore issues such as the lack of interest and information in the metropolis about what happened in the



44

Chapter Three

colonies, the participation in colonial expansion of ruthless characters like H.M. Stanley or killings that are key to understanding the rift between colonisers and the colonised, such as Amritsar (1919), Sétif (1945), Croke Park (1920), or Madagascar (1947). Amritsar is mentioned in one section, significantly called Beyond Europe Anaya, (2008, p. 306), presented outside the common structure in chapters, dealing with Extra-European history printed in sepia, all of which reinforces its secondary character. Sétif is quoted only as a reference (Anaya, p. 374) to 40,000 deaths in Algeria in 1945, without mentioning that it was a massacre, the name of the place, nor its occurrence on the same day that Germany surrendered to the Allies. The fact that it was triggered by the killing of around a hundred Europeans is not mentioned either. The concealment of the violence carried out by the colonised during the liberation processes is also noteworthy. Events such as the genocides of the Herero and Tasmanian peoples are forgotten, as is the attempted one on the Khoisan. The only genocide that finds its way into textbooks is the Shoah. Not knowing about such facts makes it more difficult to understand decolonisation processes and the reparations demanded by former colonies. One outstanding case of such historical misinformation lies in the references to Leopold II's Congo. The textbooks reviewed ignore the extreme cruelty of the conquest of Central Africa, and they merely mention the condition of the Congo as a territory privately controlled by the Belgian king, without explaining it. They maintain the propaganda version generated by Leopold, introducing him as a “sovereign entrepreneur”, “the world's first trader of ivory and cocoa” or they speak of the “rubber industry in French Equatorial Africa”. They declare a success in Leopold having established as personal property a territory “90 times the size of Belgium” (Anaya, p. 151) that he 'bequeathed' to his country and emphasize its title of “free state”. None of the textbooks mention the tragic destiny of the indigenous peoples; or quote the doctrine of terra nullius, [terra nullius means "land belonging to no one", which is used in international law to describe territory which has never been subject to the sovereignty of any state, or over which any prior sovereign has expressly or implicitly relinquished sovereignty] which are so important in order to explain the actions carried out by the colonisers; or how many national identities, for instance those of Argentina, Chile or Australia, were built around the opposite of Europeans concepts of civilisation, and their barbaric treatment of indigenous populations.



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

45

In summary, the textbooks adhere to a master narrative that casts colonisation as a mere 'commercial' or 'trade' issue, ignoring the violence exerted against the indigenous people. By doing so, they distort Europe's past.

Consequences of European colonialism: The fate of tribal societies Do textbooks discuss the consequences of European colonialism in the transformation and disappearance of indigenous societies? The way the consequences of European colonialism are addressed may be appreciated/understood from how empires are described in a section present in every book that merely enumerates territories and their metropolitan control. The only criticism of colonisation is formulated in the sub-sections on the consequences of Western expansion. This is done in a brief and general manner, although no ethnocentric or cultural bias is perceived. Textbooks apply the same criteria of analysis to non-European colonialisms such as Japan's. None of the textbooks mentions the failure to educate colonised populations, especially women. Tribal societies are only included in history curricula when addressing prehistory. This perpetuates the 19th-century stereotypes, basing historical explanations on theories of progress that were universally accepted. The fact that nomadic hunter-gatherer or primitive agricultural societies were displaced from the colonised territories in which they had been evolving for millennia is ignored or minimised. We interpret these findings as another way textbooks can minimise colonial violence by not addressing the consequences of colonialism for the indigenous peoples.

Internal colonisations: The United States and other American countries How are the processes of colonisations internal to nation states, and how are jurisdictions addressed in textbooks, if they are addressed at all? Internal colonisations have been common phenomena in the establishment of some nation states and jurisdictions, causing the disappearance of native cultures. Such processes are usually ignored in the teaching of history. In the textbooks examined, they are neither explained as multi-secular phenomena, nor are they identified with a form of colonialism, as Fernández-Armesto (2001) and Kaplan (2006) do. The only internal colonisation described is that of the United States, which merely enumerates events, emphasizing ‘expansion’ and excluding events which



46

Chapter Three

damage the image of white Americans as the Trail of Tears. There is no mention of the 378 treaties breached by the white American colonists nor that, even in 1987, the justification for the expropriation of native lands in the US was based on the ‘right of conquest’, ignoring that there had been no declaration of war nor any peace treaties to justify it (Wilmer, 1993). In the explanation of the birth of the United States, the perspective adopted is that of American colonists seeking emancipation from Great Britain, ignoring the fate of indigenous societies. The revolutionary character of the American Revolution is highlighted. However, the fact that this led to the construction of an empire is omitted, and the American War of Independence is never related to similar movements that later took place in the rest of the continent. There is no room either for similar events that happened in Canada or Brazil, nor for the wars against the Indians in Patagonia and El Chaco. However, some textbooks address the great migrations of Europeans starting towards the end of the 19th century to the 'new' territories, stating that they brought opportunities for progress. Such a viewpoint implicitly justifies the extermination or at least the dispossession inflicted on native peoples.

Empire, stereotype and propaganda Do myths, stereotypes and propaganda justifying colonisation persist, or are they questioned? Conflicts originated during the invasion processes and defeats suffered by Europeans are omitted. Knowledge about them would facilitate dismantling the myth of the military inability of conquered societies. This colonial legend (Ferro, 1994) still prevails as the explanation in the cases where there have been no anti-colonial rebellions, and it is extended to decolonisation processes. Not much relevance is attributed to the feelings of national humiliation in the decisions to create and maintain the empires. This ‘rosy tradition’ also incorporates Romantic and Orientalist elements created by imperial propaganda. For instance, all books analysed mention the crowning of Queen Victoria as Empress of India and the description of India as the “jewel in the crown” in the words of Victoria’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli. Textbooks implicitly assume Western exceptionalism. As Wolf (1982) puts it, promoting this historical interpretation is based on the myth of a chain of progress linking Ur to New York, an evolutionary line that leads to the presence of Western supremacy through omitting historical periods that disprove Western exceptionalism. A significant example could be the



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

47

section on the ‘Triumph of Europe’ in the book by GROUP SM 02 (p. 106), which includes a text entitled “Europe, Queen of the World”. The asymmetry in the presentation of colonial history may be appreciated in the limitation of the time frame for colonialism to the conquest phase. There is no mention either that the role of Europe in the history of the world prior to the Age of Imperialism was but secondary, or that only the Industrial Revolution granted Europe supremacy. The West is identified with the idea of progress and freedom, as noted for instance in lesson 22 in the Rodeira (2002) book, and it is connected to the Enlightenment, the American Declaration of Independence, the British Bill of Rights of 1689 and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, overlooking the struggles elsewhere on the planet against European domination, slavery or extermination. Furthermore, the Enlightenment may also be related to the origins of the prejudice of white supremacy (Bowden, 2009; Todorov, 2006), and the 19th century educational ideals of Ferry and Sarmiento that are directly related to extermination and colonial domination. European aggression is also sometimes concealed under bizarre justifications. For example, when discussing the Opium Wars, it is stated that “opium and tea were products especially valued by Westerners and were at the origin of various confrontations” (Anaya, p. 132; bold type in original). No party is singled out as being responsible for such “confrontations” and by using bold type the drug trade is equated to that of a soft, invigorating drink. In summary, textbooks do not question old colonial mythical and stereotypical representations of colonialism, reproducing propaganda versions of colonisation.

Asymmetrical treatment: Images of non-Western countries associated with poverty and opposition to progress Is there symmetrical or asymmetrical treatment of colonisers and colonised societies? How are non-Western countries, formerly colonised, presented and which associations are established between them and analytical dimensions as wealth-poverty or progress-backwardness? In the textbooks, the colonies are located in the modern Third World, either when addressing the Age of Imperialism or the decolonisation process, - a fact that we interpret as a manifestation of cultural bias. Thus, current underdevelopment in post-colonial countries is presented as an unsolvable, apparently eternal problem, omitting the evolution of countries such as South Korea, Taiwan, Brazil, India or China. Textbooks do not mention modernisation processes in non-Western societies, with the



48

Chapter Three

exception of Japan. There are no references to high achieving, iconic figures such as Li Hongzhang, Prince Gong or King Mongkut while the Ottoman Tanzimat is only mentioned in one textbook (Anaya, p. 136). The image the textbooks usually transmit is one of societies that were reluctant to change and modernise and which only changed in response to external, often violent, colonial pressure. Textbooks use five dimensions, a-e), to treat colonised societies and territories in an unequal and asymmetric way compared with Western ones: a) Borders: The artificial nature of the borders in those areas subjected to colonial domination is highlighted, overlooking the fact that borders of the metropolis are artificial too. b) Traditional cultures: No parallelism is established between the disappearance of the traditional cultures in Europe (Weber, 1993) and those of the colonies. c) Bourgeoisie and nationalism: There is no mention of the parallelism between the development of the bourgeoisie and nationalism in the colonies and in the metropolis. d) Forced labour laws: The similarity between metropolitan legislation, such as the British Poor Laws, and other legislation that forced colonised peoples to undertake forced or underpaid labour is overlooked (Fieldhouse, 1981). e) Conquests versus colonies: Different terms are used for similar situations, such as referring to European territories as conquests and non-European territories as colonies. In summary, the textbooks deal in an asymmetrical way with Western colonisers, associated with freedom and progress, and colonised people, associated with poverty and backwardness.

Colonialism and non-European history How do textbooks deal with the non-European history of colonised and non-colonised countries? There is no room in textbooks for the history of non-European countries that were not colonised. This means students cannot adequately comprehend the causes and consequences of the independence or conquest of one territory or another. When addressing Africa, the clichés of tribalism and Africa's immense natural wealth are overstated; and when approaching India's past the caste system is stressed, a stereotype linked to the idea of the immutability of



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

49

non-Western societies, despite their being dynamic before the onset of the British Raj (Bayly, 1993). The absence of any mention of pre-colonial African history is partly due to the predominantly oral nature of the sources (Flint, 1994), which historians have treated with major reservations/mistrust. Eurocentric views are also perceived in the treatment given to religious beliefs. The emphasis is almost exclusively on the role of Christianity, and often only that of Catholicism. The role of missionaries as active agents of colonialism is minimised, whereas their influence in the decolonisation processes is overstated. In summary, textbooks adopt an ethnocentric perspective that implies a major disregard for the history of non-European civilisations and countries.

Relationships between colonisation, science and technology Are the connections among imperial expansions and scientific and technological development adequately addressed? The history of science and technology is used to further enhance Europe's image. Advances and discoveries are presented in isolation. They are usually limited to a couple of sections enumerating scientists, theories, inventions and dates. A perspective prevails in the historiography that is hardly concerned about technological factors (Headrick, 1981). The importance of technical progress in imperialist expansion is ignored. For the textbooks, technology only equates to material progress. None of the textbooks relates the Industrial Revolution to imperialist expansion, despite the fact that historiography usually considers it, together with nationalism, to be one of its major causal factors (Doyle, 1986; Cain and Hopkins, 1993). There are no more than mentions of the origin of a supposedly scientific type of racism, popularised as a distortion of Darwin's theories (the so-called Social Darwinism). Racist theories were part of mainstream science until the 1940's, a major factor in colonialism that is largely ignored (Puig and Jiménez-Aleixandre, 2011). During the 19th century, changes to armaments and military organisation influenced European politics and societies (McNeill, 1993) contributing to European expansion (Hobsbawm 2005; Akehurst, 1970). However, none of the textbooks mention the evolution of weaponry that supported the idea of a superior race by turning war into a 'sport' (Fernández-Armesto, 2000; Ferguson, 2001; Lindqvist, 1996; Wilmer, 1993). In summary, in all the dimensions examined, the representations of different aspects of colonialism are combined in an image that downplays or disregards the violent impact of colonialism on the colonised peoples.



50

Chapter Three

This bias is supported in an asymmetric representation that casts Western colonisers as the embodiment of freedom and progress, while colonised peoples are represented as having no history and lacking the will to resist foreign conquest or rebel when colonised. Such prejudices may hinder an appropriate student comprehension of the historical dimension of colonialism. The ethnocentric perspective may also induce students to establish hierarchies among societies based exclusively on their relative levels of wealth and power. It also creates an underestimation of the achievements and contributions of non-Western societies.

Ethno-centrism in the pictures in textbooks This section discusses findings related to the second objective: To analyse how pictures represent colonisers and the colonised. These paratextual elements are often considered secondary, but their role, especially that of images, is highly relevant for their immediacy and impact. We will discuss first how the colonised are pictured, then the images of the colonisers.

Images of the colonised: portraits The analysis shows that the same biases found in written texts are also present in images. In the images related to decolonisation there is a dominance of political portraits, with the image of Gandhi being the most frequent one: his picture is in every single textbook. His portrait is always one from his later years, wearing a dhoti, conveying a highly misleading image of a peaceful Third World that omits his personal development since his youth: from being a student in Great Britain to a young lawyer who finds his roots in the anti-colonial movement. This is a common feature of many pro-independence, anti-colonial leaders. Gandhi's cliché image may induce viewers installed in the prejudices of Western culture to agree with the description by Churchill, who allegedly referred to him as a “half-naked fakir” (Metcalf and Metcalf, 2002). We have confirmed this stereotype in classroom research when several students identified the antiBritish leader in the film Gunga Din, directed by George Stevens in 1939, for wearing glasses and a suit in an image that may be associated with that of an intellectual. The most common pictures related to colonialism are photographs of natives performing physical tasks or reiterating stereotypes of poverty or exoticism. Their function is not clear, as native labour is neither an issue that is especially addressed in the text nor a concept so difficult to



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

51

understand that it requires visual reinforcement. However, it is remarkable how little attention is directed to plantations, which could be easily attributed to colonialism, as well as the absence of harsher, well known images, such as the severed hands from Leopold's Congo, or the human zoos, which raised students' interest during the research carried out in the classroom. There is only one photograph representing the degrading treatment suffered by colonised populations, with an expressive caption, “Australian aborigines tied with cattle chains, in 1901.” (Rodeira, 2002 p. 114). Despite its interest, the picture is small (5x5 cm), located in a sidebar, and it is not mentioned in the text discourse, only beneath it in a little box about “The colonisation of Oceania”. This is one of the few mentions of a genocide derived from European colonialism: “…it meant the extermination of almost the whole of the aboriginal population and the implantation of a European socio-political organisation.”

Many pictures reproduce negative clichés that present natives as childish or mentally retarded adults, ridiculed in their reactions to technology and the customs of the ‘civilised’ man. Because these images have been produced in colonial times for an audience that assumed the superiority of white man, if they are not subjected to a critical reading, they may end up reinforcing the stereotypes that students may have.

Images of the colonisers: explorers and missionaries There is a prevalence of images of missionaries, in their role of educators, and of explorers, and very few of metropolitan politicians or of the military. The images are of figures that transmit dignity and positive values: authority, culture, power or goodness. Many of the drawings have been taken uncritically from colonial propaganda. In a typical example, the most frequent image in textbooks of the birth of the United States of America represents the triumph of liberalism: John Trumbull's painting about the draft of the Declaration of Independence. There are very few pictures, however, addressing the expansion towards the West, or portraying events such as the battle of Little Big Horn or the meeting at Promontory Point. The latter is not even located on any map. There are some images with an anti-colonial perspective when addressing colonialism. However, they are almost non-existent concerning the decolonisation processes. One interesting exception in one textbook shows a picture of a Japanese propaganda poster during World War II in



52

Chapter Three

which the British appear as ridiculous characters who are humiliated by the Indians (Vicens Vives 2008 p. 246). It is an unusual representation for several reasons: for being rare, for the use of a non-formal work of art and for the message it conveys, i.e. caption: Japanese propaganda poster against the British in India, 1944 - task: Describe the poster and analyse its intentions. (Vicens Vives p. 246).

Images of colonised territories in maps This section discusses findings related to the third objective: to analyse the images of colonised territories as represented in maps. The analysis of maps shows that they reproduce similar stereotypes: little attention is paid to continental empires and even less to non-European ones. ‘The Rosy’ tradition is expressed by the absence of battles, killings and forced displacement of populations. European migratory movements towards the colonies have little relative importance. Maps convey thus an aseptic image that misrepresents history. Africa is the focus of most colonial world maps, while colonisation of other continents is almost absent from them. The most frequent maps of Africa depict the colonial partition. They show which territories belonged to each empire, and include many place names that are unknown to students. It is the representation of a fait accompli, a triumph. There is no room for the social and human consequences. Only four of the maps of Africa show the situation prior to the conquest, and out of these only in two are there mentions of the main ethnic groups and political entities such as the Mandinga, Ashanti or Zulú Empires. In all books, the number of maps of Africa does not correspond to the extent of the text: there are many maps of Africa, contrasted with very little information about it. This can lead students to connect colonialism mainly to the representation of the African continent in maps that reflect euro-centric attitudes and beliefs. In some of the maps of Africa, and also of the US, colonial conquest /imperialism is connected to the presence of raw materials and the search for wealth, for example as being characteristic of Fascist Italy (Atkinson, 1995). This economic idea is reasserted in the written discourse. It also reflects the concept of ‘terra nullius’ that justified the ‘Conquest of the Desert’ in Argentinian historiography: no man's land waiting for someone to come along and occupy it to exploit its wealth. Some maps of the US take recourse to euphemism, such as mentioning each territory that 'joins' the Union, the use of the term ‘expansion’; thus not representing the grim reality of the process of conquest as represented in the Indian Wars. Anaya (2008 p. 613) illustrates the economic resources of Africa, and Carjaval



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

53

(2008 p. 349) also has a map of Africa titled “Africa as a rich land, full of raw materials which originate conflicts”. In the most extreme cases further data is added in the margin of the main text or in the map’s captions.

Conclusions and educational implications This chapter analyses how the relationships between Europe and colonised populations are presented in Spanish history textbooks. Our findings point out some deficiencies and omissions in history school textbooks. There is an ethnocentric bias found in written text, pictures and maps that, by minimising or ignoring colonial violence, dealing asymmetrically with colonised territories and metropolis, or through disregarding non-European history, combine to draw a view of colonisation and decolonisation processes at odds with current historiography. In general, representations of colonialism correspond to a naïve, Eurocentric historiography model that uses the Nation-state and the myth of continued progress (Citron, 1984) as the sole framework for explanation. Textbooks also include models and approaches about colonialism which contradict the very democratic values that they formally proclaim (López-Facal, 2000). They have not incorporated elements from historiographical developments and conclusions from the 1970s, such as the so-called New Cultural History. This opened up new perspectives: for example, giving voice to groups such as the colonised peoples. By pointing out such deficiencies, our aim is not to demand more content, but to reveal the paradigm reflected in them. Some educational implications that we bring forward may be able to offer a different perspective: one developing a critical education of history. To this purpose, other viewpoints would have to be incorporated and conflicting or controversial issues addressed. Reformulating the content and activities relating to colonialism could take into account issues such as the following: a) Relating the metropolis and colonies and not addressing them as separate topics. Relating some forced homogenisation process in a nation state to the indirect debate of assimilation-domination that is typical of the colonial mentality. Discuss similarities between anticolonial and European resistance to conquest. It is also important to relate colonialism and decolonization and to explain the effects of colonialism in the changes of mentality, both in the metropolis and in the colonies.



54

Chapter Three

b) Discussing the consequences of colonialism in the present. For instance, relating colonial domination to the dissemination of racial prejudice and show the perception towards Western societies in the formerly dominated countries. On the other hand, explaining the effects of colonialism in the change of mentality, both in the metropolis as in the colonies. c) Including content from the pre-colonial history of the dominated societies. d) Discussing the birth, development and decline of some powers, going from being a dominant to a dominated country. e) Explaining the relationship between scientific discoveries, technological innovation and imperialist policies. f) Highlighting the relationship of imperialisms to the processes of miscegenation and multiculturalism. g) Questioning the interpretation of decolonisation as the failure of the 'civiliser ideal' in formerly colonised societies. Analysing and comparing colonial and anti-colonialist propaganda. h) Revisiting cartography associating the creation of infrastructures, migratory movements and exploitation of wealth with its human and environmental costs; reflecting the consequences of the conquests and using original place names and not westernized ones. A teaching sequence incorporating this approach has been implemented in the classroom, as part of the doctoral dissertation of the first author.

Acknowledgements This chapter is a part of the project: Estrategias de argumentación y desarrollo de competencias básicas en la enseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales de la ESO, funded by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness of Spain, code EDU2012-37909-C03-01.





Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

55

References Akehurst, M.B. (1970) A modern introduction to international law. New York, Atherton Press. Atkinson, D. (1995) “Geopolitics, cartography and geographical knowledge: envisioning Africa from fascist Italy”, in M. Bell, R. A. Butlin, and M. Heffernan (eds.) Geography and Imperialism. 18201940, Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1995, pp. 265–297. Bayly, C.A. (1993) Indian society and the making of the British Empire, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bowden, B. (2009) The Empire of Civilisation. The evolution of an imperial idea. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Berlin, I. (1991) The crooked timber of humanity: chapters in the history of ideas, New York: Knopf. Cain, P. J. and Hopkins, A. G. (1993) British Imperialism, London: Longman. Citron, S. (1984) Enseigner l’histoire aujourd’hui, Paris: Les Éditions Ouvrières. Conklin, A. and Fletcher, I. C. (eds.) (1999) European Imperialism 18301930. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Christian, D. (2004) Maps of time: an introduction to big history, Berkeley California: University of California Press. Doyle, M. W. (1986) Empires, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Falaize, B. (ed.) (2009) La colonisation et les décolonisations dans les apprentissages scolaires de l’école primaire, Lyon: Institut National de Recherche Pedagogique (INRP). Ferguson, N. (2001) The Cash Nexus: Money and Power in the Modern World, 1700-2000. London: Allen Lane. —. (2000) Civilisations, London: MacMillan. —. (2001) Food: a history, London, Macmillan. Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, F. (2000) Civilisations, Macmillan Ferro, M. (1994) Histoire des colonisations. Des conquêtes aux indépendances. XIIIe-XXe siècle. Paris, Seuil. —. (ed.) (2003) Le livre noir du colonialisme. XVIe-XXIe siècle: de l'extermination à la repentance. Paris. Robert Laffont. Fieldhouse, D. K. (1981) Colonialism: 1870-1945. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. Flint. J. E. (ed.) (1994) The Cambridge history of Africa, Vol. V: From c. 1790 to c. 187. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hobsbawm, E. (2005) The age of empire : 1875-1914. London: Folio Society.



56

Chapter Three

Headrick, D. R. (1981) The Tools of Empire. Technology and European Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kaplan, R. D. (2006) Imperial Grunts: On the Ground with the American Military, from Mongolia to the Philippines to Iraq and Beyond, New York: Knopf. Lindqvist, S. (1996) Exterminate all the brutes, New York: New Press. Lopez-Facal, R. (2000) Pensar históricamente: una reflexión crítica sobre la enseñanza de la historia, Iber 24, pp. 46--57. Metcalf, B. and Metcalf, T. (2002) A Concise History of India, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McNeill, W. H. (1993) The Age of Gunpowder Empires, 1450-1800 in M. Adas, R. M. Eaton, J. Tucker; J. Lippman, W. H. Abu-Lughod, A. W. McNeill, P. D. Crosby, P. N. Curtin, L. A. Stearns and M. Strobel (eds.), Islamic & European expansion. The forging of a global order, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 103-139. Mikk, J. (2000) Textbook: Research And Writing, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Nicholls, J. (2003) ‘Methods in School Textbook Research’, International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research, 3 (2), pp. 117. Pousa, M. (2012) O ensino-aprendizaxe do imperialismo, unpublished PhD. Thesis, Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Puig, B. and Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2011) Different music to the same score: Teaching about genes, environment and human performances, in T. SADLER (ed.) Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research, Dordrech: Springer, pp. 201-238. Todorov, T. (2006) L'esprit des Lumières. Paris: Robert Laffont. Valls, R. (2007) Historiografía escolar española: siglos XIX y XX. Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia (UNED). Weber, E. J. (1993) Peasants into Frenchmen: the modernisation of rural France 1870-1914, Stanford: CA, Stanford University. Wilmer, F. (1993) The indigenous voice in world politics: Since times immemorial, Newbury Park: CA, SAGE. Wolf, E. R. (1982) Europe and the People Without History, Berkeley/ L.A: University of California Press.



Eurocentric History in Spanish Text Books

57

Appendix: list of textbooks examined Anaya: Prats, J.; Castelló, J.E, Forcadell, García C., María C. Izuzquiza, I. and Loste, M. A. (2008) Historia do Mundo Contemporáneo, Getafe (Madrid) Anaya. Rodeira: González Fernández, X. (2002) Historia do mundo contemporáneo, Coruña: Rodeira-Edebé. Santillana: Fernández Ros, J.M., González Salcedo, J., and Ramírez Aledón, G. (2008) Historia do Mundo Contemporáneo, Santiago de Compostela: Obradoiro/Santillana. GROUP SM- SM02: Tussell, J., Sepúlveda, I., Tussell, S., Sueiro, S. and Mateos, A. (2002) Historia del mundo contemporáneo, Madrid: SM. GROUP SM- SM08: Otero Carvajal, L.E., Fernández Bulete, V. and Gómez Bravo, G. (2008) Historia do Mundo Contemporáneo, Madrid: SM. Vicens Vives: Aróstegui, J.; García, S., Gatell Arimont, M., Palafox Gamir, J. and Risques Corbella, M. (2008) Historia do Mundo Contemporáneo. Barcelona: Vicens Vives.

 





CHAPTER FOUR A ‘GAME’ OF IDENTITIES: DEBATES OVER HISTORY IN GREEK CYPRIOT EDUCATION LUKAS N. PERIKLEOUS UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS, NICOSIA

Abstract: This chapter discusses the ways in which the battle between the Hellenocentric and Cyprocentric interpretations of Cypriot history were mostly about which version of the past that should be taught to students. The debates over the selection of the national story to be taught were essentially disputes over the identity that should be promoted through history education. On one hand, the supporters of a Hellenocentric orientation argued in favour of promoting a Greek national identity, while the supporters of a Cyprocentric orientation supported the idea of promoting a Cypriot civic identity common for Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. The dominance of the Hellenocentric approach during the 20th century has been challenged by the Cyprocentric version since the beginning of the new millennium. At the same time, a new disciplinary approach in history education has emerged. Although at the moment, this is wrongly associated by many with the Cyprocentric one, it is essentially radically different from both traditional approaches. While during the last 4 years, history education has not been at the centre of attention, political agendas and the current implementation of the New Curriculum 2010 for history education can produce new debates. Key Words: Canon, Civic identity, Cyprus, Cyprocentric, Debates over History Education, Disciplinary approach to History Education, Greece, Greek Cypriot education, Hellenocentric, Historical thinking, History Education, Identity, Interpretation, Master narratives, Monist, National identity, Nationalism, Patriotism, Pluralist, Turkey, Turkish Cypriots



A ‘Game’ of Identities

59

Introduction Although most debates over history education within the GreekCypriot educational system took place during the last decade, their roots can be traced in debates over Greek Cypriot education dating back to the late 19th century1. Since then, the issue of the ideological orientation of Greek Cypriot education has been a divisive one. In the 1890s, the issue of the establishment of the first comprehensive secondary school for Greek Cypriots (Pancyprian Gymnasium) became the arena for two opposing views battling for the character of Greek Cypriot education. On one hand there were those who claimed that such a school should be identical with the ones in Greece; with an emphasis on classical education. On the other hand there were those who argued that the school should be a vocational one which would provide its graduates with the professional qualifications and skills needed to make a living in Cyprus. This was not merely a confrontation between classical and vocational education, but more importantly a confrontation about the orientation of Greek Cypriot education in relation to Greece. At a more general level, this was essentially a collision between the idea of Cyprus as part of Greece and the one of Cyprus as a distinct entity.2 Debates over education within the Greek Cypriot educational system continued through the 20th century. In most of these the main rivals were a) those who favoured a close relationship with the Greek educational system and a Hellenocentric orientation of Greek Cypriot education and b) those who claimed that the Greek Cypriot educational system can and should prosper on its own; hence the orientation of education should be a Cyprocentric one. The former were usually the Church of Cyprus and groups and individuals who politically and ideologically supported close relations with Greece which, according to this point of view, was considered the motherland for Greek Cypriots. One would expect these to be mainly right-wing groups and individuals. The same perspective, however, was, in many cases, shared by the centre-right and democraticsocialist parties in Cyprus. This shows the great influence that the Hellenocentric approach had and has in Greek Cypriot education and society in general. The supporters of a Cyprus oriented education were usually left-wing groups and individuals who favoured a loose relationship with Greece and, after 1974, reconciliation with the Turkish Cypriot community on the island. Obviously such debates were also related to the issue of national identity. Historically, national identity was the foundation on which nation states were built, hence, as Smith (1991, p.11) points out, nations needed:



60

Chapter Four “…a measure of common culture and civic ideology, a set of common understandings and aspirations, sentiments and ideas that bind population together in their homeland”.

The case of Cyprus is not an exception to an international phenomenon, the relationship between history education and students’ development of a sense of personal and national identity. Thus the issue of Greek Cypriots’ identity has always been at the core of these debates. The supporters of a Hellenocentric approach favoured the promotion of a Greek national identity. The advocates of a Cyprocentric approach essentially rejected the idea of a Greek national identity and instead argued for the promotion of a Cypriot civic identity, a common Cypriot citizenship that binds Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots together. Although for many decades the Hellenocentric approach dominated Greek Cypriot education, during the second half of the 20th century (and especially after 1974) the orientation of Greek Cypriot education shifted from a completely Hellenocentric one (in the sense of essentially copying the Greek educational system) towards a Cyprocentric one (in the sense of Greek Cypriots implementing their own educational policy). In terms of the kind of identity promoted by education, however, the dominance of the Hellenocentric ideological orientation had been relatively undisrupted until the beginning of the 21th century (Koutselini- Ioannidou, 1997; Perikleous, 2010; Persianis, 2010; Philippou, 2009).3 This chapter attempts to discuss how these opposing views of the ideological orientation of Greek Cypriot education manifested itself in debates over history education in the 20th and 21st centuries.

The debate over the 1935 curriculum for primary education In 1935, the changes in educational legislation that gave full control of primary education to the British Governor of the island caused the first conflict over history education in Cyprus.4 The main issue was the substantial reduction of Greek history in the substantive content prescribed by the 1935 curriculum for primary education. According to the British authorities this was necessary in order to; a) address the problem of history being distorted by either Greek or Turkish teachers and



A ‘Game’ of Identities

61

b) give the proper attention to the history of Cyprus through the ‘correct’ perspective of the island’s past (Palmer, 1936 cited in Persianis, 2010; Cullen, 1936 cited in Polydorou, 1995). Yiangou (2004) argues that, unlike the British educational policy in other colonies, in which British history was compulsory in order to challenge local nationalism, in the case of Cyprus, the teaching of the island’s history was encouraged to suppress Greek Cypriot nationalism. This was because while in other colonies local nationalism reinforced demands for independence, in the case of Cyprus, Greek Cypriot nationalism reinforced the demand for union with Greece. These changes caused much reaction. The Church of Cyprus claimed that the new curriculum was an attempt by the colonial government to corrupt the national consciousness of Greek Cypriot children by abolishing Greek history and geography (Myrianthopoulos, 1946; Persianis, 2010). The Greek Cypriot members of the Board of Education also protested claiming that the teaching of Ancient Greek history in only 2-3 lessons is an insult to ‘the history of the country which produced the most glorious civilisation’ (Polydorou, 1995, p. 95). The Greek Cypriot teachers’ trade union also reacted and demanded the reinstatement of Greek history. Despite these reactions the British colonial government was unwilling to negotiate. Particularly in the case of the Church of Cyprus, it responded by rejecting the Church’s role in secular education (Persianis, 2010). This attitude was in contrast with British educational policy in Cyprus during the previous decades. Until the 1930s, the British colonial government was quite tolerant towards the Hellenocentric orientation of Greek Cypriot education and allowed a considerable degree of autonomy to the Greek and Turkish communities in terms of handling their own educational affairs (Persianis, 2010; Polydorou, 1995). This change though can be explained by the general change in the British colonial policy in Cyprus which became extremely strict and intolerant to any signs of nationalism after the 1931 uprising of the Greek Cypriots.5 British educational policy changed once more with the 1949 curriculum in which Greek history was reinstated as a distinct subject (Polydorou, 1995). This again coincided with a new phase of colonial policy in Cyprus after the end of WWII whereas the British partly abandoned the strict policy enforced after 1931 and also attempted to negotiate a new constitution with increased self-administration for Cypriots. According to Kelling (1990, cited in Faustmann, 1999) this was due to the realisation that Cyprus could not be ruled in the dictatorial manner of the previous year’s anymore. Greek Cypriots expected that



62

Chapter Four

union with Greece would be awarded to them after their contribution during the war. The Soviet Union’s increasing influence among Cypriots was an additional element, which increased anti British incidents and the possibility of a revolt. Therefore “loyalty through development and political reform” (Faustmann, 1999, p. 75) became the new goal for British policy on the island. As Soysal and Schissler (2005) observe, historically, “subjects were transformed into citizens through the teaching of history, geography, and the language of the nation” (p. 1). Therefore, one would expect that history education would be a central issue in debates over education after the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960. Interestingly, within the Greek Cypriot educational system, after the conflict with the British administration in 1935, history education was not a serious issue of debate again before 2004.6 This was not because history’s role had been underestimated. On the contrary this is an example of the dominance of the Hellenocentric approach during the 20th century which did not allow the emergence of alternative perspectives of teaching history. In fact, even during periods when the leftist party was in a politically privileged position no discussions about changing the ethnocentric approach in which history was taught took place. As a result history teaching in Greek Cypriot education during the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st was an example of what Seixas (2000) calls a ‘best story’ approach; the transmission of a single definite master narrative (the best story of the past) which reinforces the sense of belonging and promotes the dominant values of the society. In the case of Greek Cypriot education, this was the story of Greeks and Greek Cypriots who either civilise the world or fight for freedom. It was the story of mainly political and military events in which the only agents were Greek (and much less frequently Greek Cypriot) male politicians and soldiers. This story taught Greek Cypriot students that they are Greeks and that their duty as future citizens is to serve their country (Cyprus) and nation (Greece).7

The debate over the report of Educational Reform Committee in 2004 At the dawn of the new millennium, history became the epicentre of many debates over Greek Cypriot education. In 2003, the Ministry of Education and Culture (under a centre-right president who was also supported by the left wing and the democratic socialist parties) appointed an Educational Reform Committee (ERC) to prepare a report for a



A ‘Game’ of Identities

63

comprehensive reform of Greek Cypriot education. Among others, in its report titled Democratic and Humanistic Education in the Euro-Cypriot State, the ERC argued in favour of a) abandoning the Hellenocentric (ethnocentric) orientation of Greek Cypriot education, b) promoting interculturalism and multiculturalism and c) acknowledging the existence of the Turkish Cypriot community (Educational Reform Commitee, 2004). In its references to history education, the committee criticised the import of textbooks from Greece and suggested the introduction of new history textbooks written by Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot experts. It also argued for the need of a ‘more systematic teaching of history through programs and textbooks which are in accordance with the contemporary European standards (peaceful coexistence, multiculturalism, respect of difference and abolition of chauvinism, intolerance and interracial hatred)’ (Educational Reform Commitee, 2004, p. 157).8 In addition, the ERC emphasised the need for ‘multiperspectivity’ in history education as a means to promote rapprochement between the two communities on the island (Educational Reform Commitee, 2004). The report was supported by the political parties of the coalition government and groups and individuals who favoured a Cyprocentric approach and rapprochement. However, only the left wing party and those who traditionally supported reconciliation on the island explicitly agreed with the committee’s claims for a change of ideological orientation and an approach to history education which would promote peaceful coexistence and rapprochement with the Turkish Cypriot community (United Democratic Youth Organisation, 2007).9 The Church of Cyprus, rightwing groups and individuals and those who traditionally rejected any possibility of reconciliation and favoured an ideological identification with Greece, although they acknowledged the need for educational reform, argued that the manifesto proposed a reform which would essentially deHellenise Greek Cypriots. Arguments voiced during this debate from both sides were mostly ideological ones. The first group argued that history education can and must contribute to reconciliation with Turkish Cypriots and abandon ethnocentric approaches which promote chauvinism and nationalism (Educational Reform Commitee, 2004; Iakovides, 2008; United Democratic Youth Organisation, 2007). The second group argued that the kind of history education proposed by the committee would lead to the abolition of national identity, which would endanger the Greek Cypriot’s existence on the island. Furthermore, they considered the ERC’s suggestions for history education as the unfortunate result of the



64

Chapter Four

ideological pressure exercised by globalisation and foreign powers (Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus, n.d.; Iakovides, 2008; Pastelas, 2009).

The debate over Year 6 history textbooks The next history battle that took place both in Cyprus and Greece was about the introduction, in 2006, of a new textbook for Year 6 history.10 This new textbook included a narrative radically different from the one of the previous textbook. The old textbook contained a predominantly ethnocentric narrative that emphasised the hardships that the Greeks suffered during the Ottoman rule, Greek heroism and Turkish brutality. The new textbook painted a much more positive picture of the Ottoman rule with less emphasis on Greek heroism and Turkish brutality. The central issue of debate was the degree to which this new textbook presented historical events in the appropriate way and with the ‘correct’ interpretation. The textbook’s critics claimed that it essentially distorted the history of Greece, while its supporters argued that its presentation of Greek history was a long due change that provided a more balanced interpretation of the past. The intense public reactions against the new textbook that came from even some leftist groups led to its withdrawal and the decision to reprint the old one.11 The final blow was inflicted by the Academy of Athens that argued that the new textbook downgraded and even distorted scientific truth and did not serve education’s goal of promoting national consciousness (Academy of Athens, 2007).12

The debates over educational reform After the debates of 2004 over educational reform, the issue did not receive serious attention for 4 years. In 2008 the government, under a newly elected left-wing president, announced the beginning of a curricular reform.13 History education was at the epicentre of disputes once more. As in the past, the main issue was the kind of identity that history education should promote. Should history teaching: “…promote the Greek national identity and maintain the desire for liberation of the semi-occupied island or... promote a common Cypriot identity and the reunification of the island through the reconciliation with the Turkish Cypriots?” (Perikleous, 2010, p. 321).

Besides the rehearsal of the theoretical arguments about the role of history in the formation of Greek Cypriot students’ identity, the debate



A ‘Game’ of Identities

65

was also about the interpretation of specific events of Cyprus’ recent history (especially the 1955-59 and 1963–1974 periods). The same period also marked the emergence of voices that argued for a disciplinary approach in history education. According to this new point of view, history teaching should not aim to promote social values or any kind of identity. Advocates of this approach claimed that history education should primarily aim to develop students’ understanding of the methods and logic of the discipline, as a way to understand the social world beyond the confines of ideological doctrines and pre-defined values (Association for Historical Dialogue and Research, 2009; Perikleous, 2008).14 It should be stressed, however, that such an approach does not reject the idea of values and neither does it deny the existence of identities. What distinguishes it from the approaches described earlier, however, is that its goal is to develop understanding of the social world instead of “social engineering” (Shemilt, 2011).15 In the case of values: “Whilst a disciplinary approach does not guarantee the promotion of particular social values, in many cases, one can argue, it does incorporate them in practice as an intrinsic component of disciplinary learning. An example is the case of democracy. The discipline of history shares common values with democracy since thinking historically involves a commitment to open argument, to the public examination of evidence, and also a commitment to debate” (Chapman and Perikleous, 2011, p. 9).

Also, although a disciplinary approach cannot promote a specific kind of identity, it does aim to help students understand why and in what ways the past (ours and the one of others; individual and collective) influences the way people (including us) define their selves and the way others define them. As Shemilt (2011p.103) puts it, such an approach: “requires students to look at ‘identities’ from the outside and to understand them as constructs that can arise from the grassroots or be manufactured and imposed from above, that can persist through millennia or prove as evanescent as celebrity”

Finally, regarding the political situation in Cyprus, the advocates of the disciplinary approach claimed that although history should not be used as a means to overturn one ideological agenda (promotion of Hellenocentric orientation) in favour of another (promotion of Cyprocentric orientation and reconciliation of the two communities), it could promote understanding and mutual respect (AHDR, 2009; Perikleous, 2008). The latter was not a reference to a superficial approach of merely acknowledging equal responsibilities of past injustices and celebrating the two communities’



66

Chapter Four

common past. Instead, it referred to an effort to promote sophisticated understanding of each other’s behaviour in the past. This demands knowledge and understanding of the different ideas and beliefs held by each group, their different situation and how each group sees its own situation. At that moment, these views did not receive much public attention mainly because they were not part of the discourse of any of the two traditional rivals. An additional reason was that such views are in many cases misunderstood as being the same with the ones advocating for cooperation and peaceful coexistence. In this sense, it is likely that the advocates of the Hellenocentric approach did not attack these views because they considered them as merely a by-product of the Cyprocentric approach, while the advocates of promoting a Cypriot identity considered the disciplinary approach to be an ally.

The issue of the relationship with the Turkish Cypriot community In August 2008, a circular by the Ministry of Education and Culture declared that the central aim for the upcoming school year would be the: “Cultivation of a culture of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect and cooperation between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, with the purpose of the ending the occupation and the reunification of our and country and our people” (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2008, p. 1).16

In the same circular, the Ministry of Education stressed that ‘Greek Cypriot education will remain Greek since the cultivation of the Greek language, traditions and cultural attributes which identify us as Greek Cypriots will continue’ (ibid., p. 2). Although this circular did not explicitly refer to history education, it argued that the past should be approached in ways which support the aim for peaceful coexistence; mutual recognition of each other’s injustices in the past and emphasis on the aspects of the past that unite the two communities (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2008). This circular essentially marked a radical change in the way that Greek Cypriot education officially handled the issue of the relationship between the two communities on the island. Although during the 20th century the relationship between the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot communities was the main political issue on the island, it was essentially not an issue for Greek Cypriot education.17 The principal approach,



A ‘Game’ of Identities

67

especially after the division of the island, was one in which the existence of Turkish Cypriots was not acknowledged. The dominant narrative in Greek Cypriot education treated the Turks as the rivals of the Greeks and Greek Cypriots, and the reason for all the suffering that was brought to Cyprus in 1974. Furthermore, it did not distinguish between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot community, and included no references to the Turkish Cypriot community’s existence on the island beyond the one about the existence of a pseudo-state on the northern part. The circular, although it did not reject the idea of education’s Hellenocentric orientation, essentially introduced strong elements of a Cyprocentric one by prioritising the aim for rapprochement with the other Cypriot community. Although the left-wing political administration was a decisive factor for this change, it would be naïve, and in fact unhistorical, to conclude that it was the only one. The removal of travel restrictions in 2003 which allowed contact between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots for the first time since 1974, the debates over the 2004 referendum for the solution of the political problem which allowed claims in favour of reconciliation and coexistence to be voiced, and the phenomenon of nationalism being challenged globally, contributed to the creation of a climate that allowed for a decision which was essentially a political one. The main argument for this radical approach was that cultivating positive feelings towards the other community is a necessary condition for a) the success of the efforts for a political solution and the reunification of Cyprus and its people and b) the sustainability of such a solution (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2008). Its supporters argued that this was a legitimate aim because educational systems should attempt to prepare students to overcome the crisis caused by nationalistic approaches (Achniotis, n.d.). They also emphasised that the aim for peaceful coexistence did not contradict the aim for ending the occupation of the northern part of Cyprus, but instead contributed to it (Fragkos, 2009).18 On the other hand those opposing the ministry’s aim argued that this would essentially lead to the de-Hellenization of Greek Cypriots (Chrysostomos II, 2009; Papastylianou, 2008).19 In addition, although they did not explicitly reject the aim for peaceful coexistence, they claimed that this cannot and should not be discussed before a solution of the political problem is achieved and before the occupation of the northern part of Cyprus is ended (Aggelidou, 2009). Furthermore, they claimed that such an aim would potentially undermine the aim for the ending of the occupation (Fragkos, 2009). Despite these strong objections, the aim remained and in fact reappeared in the respective circulars for the following school years (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2009; 2010;



68

Chapter Four

2011). In practice, however, it was up to each school’s administration and personnel to decide whether and how this aim would be pursued. This was the latest ‘big battle’ over Greek Cypriot education in the sense that it was the most recent occasion in which education was the issue of a public debate widely covered by the media with the fierce involvement of politicians and public figures. Although different in content from the debate, which took place more than a century ago, it was fundamentally the collision of the same opposing approaches to Greek Cypriot education. On one hand the advocates of the Hellenocentric orientation of education argued for the protection of the Greek national identity of the Greek Cypriots, while on the other hand those who favoured a Cyprocentric education argued for the need to reunite all Cypriots (Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots). More importantly, this last debate showed that although the Hellenocentric approach is still a very powerful one within education, it is being seriously and officially challenged by the Cyprocentric one.

‘Private’ debates over the new history curricula Moving with its intention for curricular reform, the Ministry of Education and Culture formed academic committees for each subject to propose new curricula. The formation of the committee for history education took much more time than the rest of the other subjects and it was the result of the consensus of all political parties (Perikleous, 2010; Persianis, 2010). It consisted of five academic historians (three Greeks and two Greek Cypriots). Unlike most subjects, the committee for history education did not include any academic experts in education. As in the case of other subjects, a working group of teachers was formed to cooperate with the academic committee for the design of the new history curriculum. The process of designing the proposal for the new history curriculum was not without tensions, albeit that these remained away from the public spotlight. Based on rather outdated ideas about children’s cognitive abilities, the academic historians claimed that younger children cannot think historically; therefore the main aim of primary history education should be the acquisition of substantive historical knowledge. This also suggested that historical thinking was not a priority for the academics for secondary education. Their idea of history education in secondary education was again essentially one of accumulating substantive historical knowledge. Naturally, the members of the teachers’ working group reacted to this point of view arguing that the academic’s claims underestimate



A ‘Game’ of Identities

69

younger children’s abilities and that educational research during the last four decades shows that historical thinking is not confined in secondary education ages.20 Despite the exchange of arguments, and despite the repeatedly expressed academics’ appreciation of teachers’ expertise, productive dialogue was essentially absent. This was mainly because academics were not willing to discuss these different views in depth. Disagreements were also present within the academic historians’ committee. These stemmed from the very different perspectives of the past that were held by its members. This was a natural consequence of the fact that the committee was formed to reflect the different points of view which existed among political parties. These disagreements combined with the academics’ approach to history education, which ultimately demanded the selection of a single master narrative to be taught (the ‘best story’), made any consensus between the members of the committee an impossible task. As a result, two of the members of the committee (the left-wing ones) left and decided to submit their own separate proposal which was never published. The proposal for a new history education curriculum, which was submitted with great delay, was signed only by the three members of the committee who remained and who were supporters of a Hellenocentric approach. This proposal, with no substantial amendments, has become the New History Curriculum. Although the official position is that this is not the final version, this is what stands as the current curriculum. The New History Curriculum, although it includes general references to historical thinking, multiperspectivity, the use of sources and an understanding of change and continuity, does not decisively move away from the previous curriculum’s traditional approach. This is evident in its focus on promoting national identity and social values and the mainly ethnocentric (Hellenocentric) single narrative, prescribed in terms of content to be taught. The latter remains essentially the same as the one prescribed by the previous one (Curriculum 1994), albeit less explicit in terms of its Hellenocentric orientation.21 This is possibly the reason why, unlike the announcement for reform in history education, the publication of the New Curriculum went unnoticed by the media and politicians. Those who feared national identity would be undermined feel safe with a story which is still largely about Greece. The fact that this story is not as Hellenocentric as the one on the Curriculum 1994 makes the advocates of a less Greek dominated and less divisive version of the past feel comfortable too. To claim that the New Curriculum has settled the issue, however, would be a rather premature conclusion. The current lack of reactions does not preclude the possibility of future



70

Chapter Four

turmoil; when certain groups and individuals (mainly politicians) will believe that such a debate can be useful in terms of reaping political benefits or if the ministry decides on changes in the current version of the curriculum. The experience of the history curriculum reform was another example of the age-old collision between the Hellenocentric and Cyprocentric approaches in Greek Cypriot education. It proves that the Hellenocentric approach within the Greek Cypriot educational system remains a powerful one. It also provides strong evidence that in the 21st century it will be seriously challenged not only by its traditional rival, but also (in the case of history education) by a new approach; the disciplinary one. The latter has already become evident during the implementation phase of the new history curriculum in primary education. Implementation for primary history focuses on developing historical literacy through the parallel development of both substantive and disciplinary knowledge, and seems to abandon the ethnocentric narrative of the curriculum. In fact, the way the new curriculum is implemented through the production of teaching material and in-service training for history teachers in primary education is clearly adopting a disciplinary approach. In other words, unlike the New Curriculum its implementation challenges the established approach in history teaching within the Greek Cypriot educational system and suggests new ways of helping students to learn about the past. Anecdotal evidence (mainly from teachers’ feedback) suggests that this approach appeals both to teachers and students. Although, obviously this needs to be substantiated with research evidence, research findings from other educational systems seem to support the claim for such an approach being what teachers and students demand in order for history to become more relevant and interesting (Clark, 2009). One would expect that this diversion from what was described earlier as a curriculum which makes the advocates of both traditional approaches feel safe would have caused reactions. This did not happen though and it could be explained by the fact that so far the implementation takes place only in Year 3 during which students study mostly prehistory. This is not part of the ethnocentric narrative that is being used to promote Greek national identity and pride. Also the ‘enemies’ of the Greek nation are not ‘here’ yet. In other words, the tentative nature of historical knowledge, the freedom to reach out to different interpretations of the past and the inclusion of accounts that challenge the established narratives are manifest in terms of exploring ‘harmless’ issues that do not threaten anyone’s view of the present. There is no guarantee, though, that everybody will feel



A ‘Game’ of Identities

71

equally safe if this approach is implemented in the teaching of other topics end especially 20th century history.

Conclusion Debates over history education in the Greek Cypriot educational system so far are essentially the same game of identities played on different occasions. As in the case of many other educational systems around the world, the rivals in this ‘game’ share the same idea about history’s role in education.22 This is the idea of history as a means to promote values and prepare students to become citizens who will abide by a specific moral framework through a specific version of the past which proves the importance of these values and the necessity for this moral framework. Within Greek Cypriot education, the prevalence of this assumption makes the selection of the story to be told the main issue of dispute. Those who wish Greek Cypriot students to feel Greek argue in favour of history that tells the story of our ‘glorious’ past as part of the Greek nation and the hardships that we have suffered from our enemies, especially the Turks. Those who aspire to create students who feel primarily Cypriot, prefer a story of our island being at the crossroads of civilisations; a phenomenon which at some point brought Turkish Cypriots onto the island and with whom we lived peacefully for centuries. This explains why the substantive factual historical content to be taught (prescribed in curricula or textbooks) is the issue that attracts public attention and causes public debates, while issues of pedagogy and methodology are neglected. In the substantive approach, historical learning is merely the acquisition of factual knowledge that does not necessitate something more than finding ways to make students remember the version of the past decided for them by the ruling authorities. An additional reason for methodological issues not being discussed is the involvement of people outside education (mainly politicians and public figures), which for obvious reasons attracts the attention of the media and public opinion. Furthermore, until now, the lack of an active community of history education experts and researchers also contributed to this phenomenon. During the 20th century, this ‘game’ of identities was dominated by the Hellenocentric approach in history education that promoted a Greek national identity. The Cyprocentric approach became a serious contender at the beginning of the 21st century; a development that shows that the ideological orientation of Greek Cypriot education cannot be considered as settled. It also shows that, as in the case of other educational systems,



72

Chapter Four

changes and debates in history education are closely related to wider changes and debates in education and society.23 The fact that since 2008 history education stayed out of the spotlight of public debates should not be considered to be the result of a compromise, but rather as an interval before the next battle. Issues such as; a) the implementation of the New Curriculum which at some point will have to take the form of specific suggestions in terms of the content to be taught, and b) the way in which the issue of the lack of textbooks for Cyprus history for some year groups will be dealt with could possibly be the subject of future debates. The emergence of the disciplinary approach adds a new element. It is radically different from the two traditional ones in the sense that it treats history not as a means to cultivate identities, but as an opportunity to transform students’ view of the world through the teaching of the logic and methods of the discipline. Through this transformation, it aims to “…change how we see political or social opportunities and constraints, our own or others’ identity, our sense of the wounds and burdens we inherit, and the adequacy of explanations of major features of our world” (Lee, 2011, p.130).

So far this approach is not considered as a distinct one, and it is usually wrongly associated with the Cyprocentric one. This is mainly because the latter challenges the so far dominant Hellenocentric narrative. Depending on how this new approach will be understood and implemented in Greek Cypriot education, it could potentially become a serious alternative for both of them. In this case, it is highly possible to be part of future debates.24 Despite the nature of future debates, what is imperative for the Greek Cypriot educational community (educational authorities, teachers, academics etc.) is to discuss the rationale of school history and its aims and purposes in terms of pedagogy. This is not a simple matter since different perspectives of pedagogy, the past, history and history education exist also within the educational community. Therefore the pedagogical nature of the discussion cannot be considered as a guarantee for a consensus. It can, however, be a shield for protecting history from being abused for the sake of political and ideological agendas. Such a discussion should aim, primarily, to answer a crucial question; should history education teach a specific version of the past to cultivate a specific kind of future citizen, or should it develop students’ understanding of the past and



A ‘Game’ of Identities

73

present world, hoping that this will help them prosper in the unknown future one?

Notes 1

2 3

4



For the better part of the 19th century, Cyprus was part of the Ottoman Empire. In 1878, the Ottomans gave control of the island to Britain which declared Cyprus a Crown Colony in 1925. Following a 4 year anti-colonial struggle, Cyprus became an independent state in 1960. At that time 82% of the population identified themselves as Greek Cypriots and 18% as Turkish Cypriots. In 1963 inter-communal conflicts broke out and continued sporadically until 1967. In 1974 a military coup staged by Greek Cypriot (GC) right-wing extremists led to an invasion by Turkey which divided the island and caused population displacements. In 1983, the Turkish Cypriot (TC) authorities declared the establishment of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), which has since remained internationally unrecognised except by Turkey. Contact between the two communities did not exist until 2003 when the TC authorities decided to allow transportation through specific checkpoints. Despite the fact that this allowed contacts between GC and TC after three decades, the political division between the two communities remains until today. For more about this first debate see Persianis (1994; 2010). An example of the dominance of the Hellenocentric approach in education is the case of textbooks. During the British rule the Church of Cyprus and other groups and individuals with the same ideas on education insisted that only textbooks from Greece should be used (Persianis, 2010; Polydorou, 1995). Books written by Cypriots were usually considered inferior to the ones written in Greece (Educational Board of Ethnarchy, 1951 cited in Polydorou, 1995). During this period reading-books were imported from Greece and they were the same ones used in Greek primary schools. In 1948, an attempt by the British colonial government to introduce new reading-books, written by Greek Cypriot educators, failed due to the intense reactions caused by this decision (Polydorou, 1995). History textbooks were written and published in Cyprus until 1956 when they were replaced by ones imported from Greece too (ibid.). Even though during the last decades the textbooks for most of the school subjects are being published by the Greek Cypriot educational authorities, textbooks for Greek language and history are still imported from Greece. This shows that during the whole duration of the 20th century the Hellenocentric approach has been a dominant one in the subjects that essentially mattered (language and history) in terms of forming the Greek Cypriot students’ identity. Until the 1930’s, Greek Cypriot education was modeled on the Greek one, both in primary and secondary education, and consequently its character was a Hellenocentric one. This did not mean merely following the Greek example of education, but a much more close relationship, especially in secondary

74

5

6

7

8

9

10

11



Chapter Four education. Greek Cypriot secondary schools were recognised by the Greek government as equivalent to the ones in Greece and they were inspected by the educational authorities of Greece (Persianis, 1981). A dispute between the colonial government and the Greek Cypriot members of the Legislative Council over taxation, which was imposed against the council’s opposing vote, led to a revolt in October 1931 during which the protesters burned down the Government House. Although this begun as a protest against the imposition of new taxes it developed to riots during which the protesters demanded union with Greece. Debates over education during the 20th century were mostly about a) the relationship of the Greek Cypriot educational system with the Greek one, b) the balance between classical and vocational education and c) the establishment of a Cypriot state university and its character (Persianis, 2010). For a detailed discussion of history education within the Greek Cypriot context at the beginning of the 21st century see (Perikleous, 2010). The influence of the Council of Europe’s guidelines for history education (Commitee of Ministers, 2001) is obvious in what the ERC described as the ‘contemporary European standards’. The fact that the ERC’s references to the ideological orientation of Greek Cypriot education did not represent the ideas of all the coalition government parties is also evident by the fact that in 2007, after the left-wing party’s withdrawn, the government (which remained a coalition of the centre- right and democratic- socialist parties) published a new plan for educational reform titled Strategic Design for Education. Although this new document included many of the suggestions of the ERC’s report, it did not include any references to its claims for ideological re-orientation of education (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2007). The Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) provides the schools with official textbooks for all subjects. Most of these are written and published by the MoEC. Until now, in the case of primary history for Year 3 and 4, textbooks from Greece were used for the teaching of Greek history (from prehistory to Hellenistic period) and mythology, while others, published in Cyprus, were used for the teaching of the history of Cyprus. With the current educational reform (which is currently being implemented in Year 3), although textbooks are not completely abandoned, they are not the main educational material. In Years 5 and 6 (from Roman period to the present) teachers use mainly the textbooks for Greek history (imported from Greece). Although there is a textbook for Cyprus history this has been written almost forty years ago and even its own author recognised at some point that it is not suitable for history teaching anymore. Consequently the teaching of Cyprus history in the last two years of primary school is seriously neglected. The Greek Communist Party accused the textbook for an attempt to impose an imperialist view of revisionism in the teaching of history (Greek Communist Party, 2007). This example, and also the Greek Cypriot democratic- socialist’s support of the Hellenocentric approach, supports Kitromilides’ (1979) claim

A ‘Game’ of Identities

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21



75

that the identification of nationalism with the political right is an oversimplified approach of the phenomenon. Although the discussion of Greek and Greek Cypriot historiography is not within the scope of this chapter, it can be claimed that the arguments used by the Academy of Athens reveal a rather traditional approach to the discipline of history and its role within society. The new government was led by a left-wing president who was elected with the support of the same coalition who won the 2003 elections This approach emerged in the UK in the 1970’s and gained prominence mainly through the work of the School Council History Project (Shemilt, 1980). For a discussion of the role of disciplinary understanding in history teaching see Lee (2011) and Shemilt (2011). In the words of Denis Shemilt this is a ‘model in which specific lessons from the past are taught with the intention of shaping students’ attitudes and behaviours in the lived present’ (2011, p.70). The use of the term ‘occupation’ refers to the fact that since 1974 Turkish troops have the military control of northern Cyprus. During the British rule, education for Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots was separate and educational issues were considered as internal affairs of each community. The same situation continued even after the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960. The new state did not have a central ministry of education and educational issues were handled separately by each community through two separate bodies called Communal Champers. Consequently the two educational systems developed completely independently. The division of the island, which begun in 1963 and became permanent in 1974, was obviously an additional reason for the lack of any kind of relations between the two educational systems. The supporters of this new aim were, as in the case of the ERC’s claim for ideological re- orientation, mainly left-wing groups and individuals and also groups and individuals (mainly political activists) who for decades supported the rapprochement of the two communities and reconciliation. The critics of the aim were mainly right wing and centre-right groups and individuals, the Church of Cyprus and the main Greek Cypriot democraticsocialist party. The reactions came from the primary education teachers while the secondary education teachers were more concerned about the amount of prescribed content and how this could be handled in terms of exams. This does not support any claims that primary education teachers were a homogenous group which supported a disciplinary approach in history teaching. Different ideas of history’s role in education existed within this group too. They all agreed though, at least verbally, on the idea that younger children can think critically and historically. One could claim that this is in contrast with the picture of the committee painted earlier by the author. This though could be explained by the fact that at some point the committee it is likely to have compromised in order to avoid reactions. The inclusion of references to aspects of historical thinking which

76

22

23

24

Chapter Four were absent in the committee’ s views (as expressed during the meetings with the teachers’ working group) it is more likely to be due to the adoption of the rhetoric of the teachers’ working group proposal than a substantial shift of the academics’ view of history education. These, of course, are speculations based on a) the author’s experience of attending the committees’ meeting with the teachers’ working group, b) the fact that the final proposal was submitted almost a year later than the ones for the other subjects and c) the fact that despite the dominance of Hellenocentric approach within the committee the proposal was submitted to a left-wing government. Nevertheless the phenomenon necessitates a more detailed investigation which is beyond the scope of this chapter. For examples of debates over history education in other educational systems see Nakou and Barca (2010), Taylor and Guyver (2011), Lakshmi (2000), Ogawa and Field (2006), Foster (1998), Dunn (2000). For the relation between history education debates and changes and broader ones within societies see for example Dunn (2000) and Taylor (2004). The case of history education in England is an existing example of a disciplinary approach being the main rival of an ethnocentric one. See for example Dunn (2000), Foster (1998) and Ashby and Edwards (2010).

References Academy of Athens (2007) KrƯtikés paratƯríseis sto vivlio tƯs Istorías gia tƯn éktƯ dƯmotikoý [Critical comments on the Year 6 history textbook]. [Online]. Available at: http://www.academyofathens.gr/ecportal.asp?id=1002&nt=18 [Last accessed 5 November 2012]. Achniotis, C. (n.d.) SOS, kindynévei Ư ellƯnikótƯtá mas [SOS, our greekness is in danger]. [Online]. Available at: http://platformaenomenikipros.blogspot.com/200-02_01_archive.html. [Last accessed 1 November 2012]. Aggelidou, K. (2009) Ʈ poreía epílysƯs tou Kypriakoý Provlímatos kai oi kíndynoi gia Kýpro kai Elláda [The road to the solution of the Cyprus Problem and the dangers for Cyprus and Greece]. [Online] Available at: http://greekamericannews.blogspot.com/2009/01/blog-post_15.html. [Last accessed 1 November 2012]. Ashby, R. and Edwards, C. (2010) ‘Contemporary Public Debates Over History Education’, in I. Nakou & I. Barca (eds.), Contemporary Public Debates Over History Education (pp. 27-46). Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Association for Historical Dialogue and Research (2009) Proposal by the Association for Historical Dialogue and Research (ADHR) on the reform of history education [Online] Available at:



A ‘Game’ of Identities

77

http://www.ahdr.info/ckfinder/userfiles/files/AHDR_REFORM_PROP OSAL_ENGLISH(1).pdf. [Last accessed 9 November ]. Chapman, A. and Perikleous, L. (2011)’ Developing Historical Thinking: Theory and Research’, in A. Chapman (ed.), Thinking Historically about Missing Persons: A Guide for Teachers (pp. 4-27) Nicosia: AHDR. Chrysostomos II. (2009) Chairetismós tou makariotátou archiepiskópou tƯs Kýprou Chrysostómou II [Opening remarks by the archbishop of the Church of Cyprus Chrysostomos II] in A. Pastelas (ed.), Ekpaideftiki "metarrithmisi" kai ethniki allotriosi [Educational "reform" and national alienation] Nicosia: Society for the study of Greek issues. Clark, A. (2009) ‘Teaching the nation’s story: Comparing public debates and classroom perspectives of history education in Australia and Canada’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41 (6), pp.745-762. Commitee of Ministers (2001) Recommendation Rec (2001)15 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on history teaching in twentyfirst-century Europe. [Online]. Available at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=234237. [Last accessed 1 November 2012]. Dunn, R. E. (2000) ‘The making of a national curriculum: the British case’, The History Teacher 33 (3), pp.395-398. Educational Reform Commitee (2004) DƯmokratikí kai anthrópinƯ paideía stƯn Evrokypriakí politeía [Democratic and Humanistic Education in the Euro- Cypriot state] [Online] Available at: http://www.paideia.org.cy/upload/ekthesi_epitropis.pdf. [Last accessed 5 November]. Faustmann, H. (1999) Divide and Quit? The History of British Colonial Rule in Cyprus 1878-1960 Including a Special Survey of the Transitional Period February 1959-August 1960, Unpublished PhD. Thesis, Universität Mannheim, Mannheim. Foster, S. J. (1998) ‘Politics, parallels and perennial curriculum questions: the battle over school history in England and the United States’, Curriculum Journal 9 (2), pp.153-164. Fragkos, G. (2009) Koultoýra eirƯnikís symvíosƯs (Culture of peaceful coexistance) Phileleftheros, 8 March. Greek Communist Party (2007) To vivlío Istorías tƯs St’ dƯmotikoý kai Ư antiparáthesƯ ethnikismoý- kosmopolitismoý [The Year 6 history textbook and the collision between nationalism and cosmopolitanism]. [Online]. Available at: http://www.kke.gr/Koinvnia/Paideia/Anakoin/vivlioIstorias.html. [Last accessed 24 March].



78

Chapter Four

Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus (n.d.) Holy Synod’s comments on the Educational Reform Commitee’s report. [Online]. Available at: http://www.paideia.org.cy/index.php?option=com_content&task=view &id=17&Itemid=49. [Last accessed 5 November 2012]. Iakovides, S. (16 November, 2008) Pós eksynchronízetai Ư Istoría? [How history is being modernised?] Simerini. Kitromilides, P. M. (1979) ‘The Dialectic of Intolerance: Ideological Dimensions of Ethnic Conflict’, in P. Worseley and P. Kitromilides (eds.) Small States in the Modern World: The Conditions of Survival, Nicosia. Koutselini-Ioannidou, M. (1997) ‘Curriculum as political text: the case of Cyprus (1935- 90)’, History of Education: Journal of the History of Education Society 26 (4), pp.395-407. Lakshmi, R. (2000) ‘Hindu rewriting of history textbooks splits India’, International Herald Tribune, 15 October 2012. Lee, P. (2011) ‘Historical literacy and transformative history’, in L. Perikleous and D. Shemilt (eds.) The Future of the Past: Why history Education Matters (pp. 129-168) Nicosia: Association for Historical Dialogue and Research. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2007) StratƯgikós schediasmós gia tƯn paideía [Strategic design for education] [Online] Available at: http://www.paideia.org.cy/upload/Arthrografia/17_1_2008_stratigikos _shediasmos_anatheorimenos.pdf. [Last accessed 1 November 2012]. Ministry of Education and Culture (2008) Stóchoi scholikís chroniás 20082009 [Aims for the 2008- 2009 school year] [Online] Available at: http://egkyklioi.moec.gov.cy/Data/dde1480a.pdf. [Last accessed 1 November]. Myrianthopoulos, K. (1946) Ʈ paideía en Kýpro epi Anglokratías [Education in Cyprus during the Agglocracy] Limassol. Naku, I. & Barca, I. (eds.) (2010) Contemporary Public Debates Over History Education. Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Ogawa, M. and Field, S. (2006) ‘Causation, controversy and contrition: recent developments in the Japanese history textbook content and selection process’, in J. Nicholls (ed.) School history textbooks across cultures: international perspectives and debates, Oxford: Symposium Books. Papastylianou, C. (2008) ‘Antidráseis ekpaideftikón gia néa keímena pou diastrevlónoun tƯn istoría’ [Teachers reactions against new texts which distort history]. Simerini, 24 October.



A ‘Game’ of Identities

79

Pastelas, A. (ed.) (2009) Ekpaideftikí "metarrýthmisƯ" kai ethnikí allotroíosƯ [Educational "reform" and national alienation], Nicosia: Society for the study of Greek issues. Perikleous, L. (2008) ‘Mýthoi kai paranoíseis gia to máthƯma tƯs Istorías’ [Myths and missconceptions about history teaching] Haravgi, 12 November 2012. —. (2010) ‘At a crossroad between memory and thinking: the case of primary history education in the Greek Cypriot educational system’, Education 3–13, 38 (3), pp. 315-328. Persianis, P. (1981) The political and economic factors as the main determinants of educational policy in independent Cyprus (19601970) Nicosia: Pedagogical Institute of Cyprus. —. (1994) Ptychés tƯs ekpaídefsƯs tƯs Kýprou katá to télous tou 19ou kai tis archés tou 20y aióna [Aspects of Cyprus education at the end of the 19th and the beggining of the 20th century] Nicosia: Pedagogical Institute. —. (2010) Ta politiká tƯs ekpaídefsƯs stƯn Kýpro [The politics of education in Cyprus]. Nicosia: University of Nicosia Publications. Philippou, S. (2009) ‘What makes Cyprus European? Curricular responses of Greek-Cypriot civic education to “Europe”’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41 (2), pp.199-223. Polydorou, A. (1995) Ʈ anáptyxƯ tƯs dƯmotikís ekpaídefsƯs stƯn Kýpro [The development of primary education in Cyprus] Nicosia. Seixas, P. (2000) ‘‘Schweigen! die Kinder!’ or, Does Postmodern History Have a Place in the Schools?’ in P. Seixas, P. Streams and S. Wineburg (eds.) Teaching, Learning and Knowing History, New York: New York University Press. Shemilt, D. (1980) History 13-16 evaluation study, Edinburgh: Holmes McDougall. —. (2011) ‘The Gods of the Copybook Headings: Why Don’t We Learn from the Past?’, in L. Perikleous & D. Shemilt (eds.), The Future of the Past: Why history Education Matters, Nicosia: Association for Historical Dialogue and Research. Smith, A. D. (1991) National Identity, Reno NV: University of Nevada Press. Soysal, Y. & Schissler, H. (2005) ‘Introduction: teaching beyond the national narrative’, in H. S. a. Y. Soysal (ed.), The nation, Europe and the world: textbooks and curricula in transition, Oxford: Berghahn. [Online]. Available at: http://feleki.wordpress.com/2012/05/20. [Last accessed 2 November 2012].



80

Chapter Four

Taylor, T. (2004) ‘Disputed territory: the politics of historical consciousness in Australia’, in P. Seixas (ed.), Theorising historical consciousness, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Taylor, T. and Guyver, R. (eds.) (2011) History Wars and the Classroom: Global Perspectives, Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Inc. United Democratic Youth Organisation (2007) 15o pagkýprio synédrio EDON: politikí apófasƯ [15th Pancyprian conference: political decision]. [Online]. Available at: http://www.edon.org.cy/index.php/pagkypria-synedria/15/politikiapofasi-15o/. [Last accessed 2 November 2012]. Yiangou, M. S. (2004) Colonial Classrooms in Cyprus: Teachers, Schools and National Identity, unpublished PhD thesis.

  





CHAPTER FIVE HISTORY WRITTEN ON WALLS: A STUDY OF QUEBEC HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ HISTORICAL CONSCIOUSNESS JEAN-PIERRE CHARLAND, UNIVERSITY OF MONTREAL, CANADA

MARC-ANDRE ÉTHIER UNIVERSITY OF MONTREAL, CANADA

AND JEAN-FRANCOIS CARDIN LAVAL UNIVERSITY, QUEBEC CITY, CANADA

Abstract: Can memorial landmarks be used to reveal historical consciousness? The historical mural in Québec City is a landmark that might allow such a thing. (To study it see Google Quebec City Murals (www.elusiveimage.net.)) This article provides a synthesis of two parallel studies having as their forefront this mural. They were conducted with the participation of high school students coming from five different regions of Quebec. The sample for the first study was made up of French Canadians (n=34) and the second of First Nation’s people (n=6). They consisted of interviews with individuals lasting 20 to 40 minutes. During the interviews, students were invited to talk about whether the mural’s content properly depicted Québec society or not, and therefore give reasons why. The students were then asked about how they would represent Québec society if they had the chance to create a similar work of art. The results revealed three categories of answers, namely those who: 1) thought that a mural should refer to the past and, as such, try to complement it; 2) accepted the past, but would want to add the present; or 3) would eliminate the past and simply show an illustration of the present. The answers from the two sub-samples differed significantly.



82

Chapter Five

Key Words: Aboriginals-Canada, Canada, Canadians-French, Citizenship education, Consciousness - historical, Historical consciousness, Historical memory, Historical thinking, History-disciplinary structure, History education, Identity, Identity Memorials, Historical consciousness, Identity, Memory, Memorials, Narratives-historical, Narratives-master-narratives, Nation, Québec, Research-quantitative, Research-qualitative

Introduction History is replete with controversial questions and politically sensitive interpretive debates. Historical narratives often extol the emotions of numerous people regarding important issues and complex topics, upon which it is impossible to rule based only on an examination of facts or experience (Berg, Graeffe & Holden, 2003; Éthier, Lantheaume & Lefrançois, 2008; Evans & Saxony, 2007; Wellington, 1986). In Québec, as elsewhere, these controversies are echoed in the history classroom (Bouvier, 2008; Cardin, 2007; Éthier, 2007) which provides to the researcher a vast field of investigation. In fact, efforts made by various groups to contribute their respective versions of the past in official master narratives and various historical memorials—whether those variations were induced by differences in school systems, location, period or even era, social class, ethnicity or student gender—have all been well documented (Audet, 2006; Barton, 2001ab, 2005; Barton & Levstik, 1998, 2004; Dalongeville, 2001; Epstein, 1997, 2000; Éthier, 2006; Ferro, 2004; Julien, 2005; Laville, 2000, 2002; Lee, Ashby & Dickinson, 2001; Levstik, 2000, 2001; McCully & Barton, 2003; Osborne, 2003; Sandwell, 2006; Seixas, 1994, 1997; Rozenzweig & Thelen, 1998; Tutiaux-Guillon & Infant, 2003; Tutiaux-Guillon & Mousseau, 1998; V. Wertsch, 1999, 2002; Wineburg, 2001; Zimmerman, 2002). Fewer studies have been done on the links between these debates and historical thinking or students’ historical consciousness. Generally, however, social sciences programs, and history programs in particular, often claim legitimacy by applying intellectual tools that could possibly be used to produce or evaluate historical interpretations (Barton, 2005; Chilcoat & Ligon, 2004; Coron, 1997; Seixas, 1993ab, 2000). Some of the existing studies on historical consciousness undertaken in Québec (Caouette, 2000; Charland, 2003; Déry, 2007; Létourneau, 2006; Moisan, 2002), were carried out on small groups or took on a survey format. As such, they exposed themselves in part to criticism similar to that of Kansteiner (2002, pp. 185-190) or Wineburg, Mosborg, Porat & Duncan (2007). To dig into these issues in qualitative and quantitative



History Written on Walls

83

terms, we conducted in-depth interviews of a sample of a more significant size and with a more diverse geographical and ethnic composition. The first part of this chapter describes the context that inspired this research and the method selected, highlighting a description of the procedure and the data collection instruments. The second and third parts summarize the results of two descriptive studies conducted on two subsamples, using the same methods. The discussion in the fourth part covers the results of the two studies.

Context This first part is divided into two sections. First we shall present an outline of the theoretical background behind the question of historical thinking and historical consciousness. Next, we will expose the elements of the history curriculum gradually introduced since 1999 in Québec’s school system. Following this, are the research questions placed within this context and to which the two studies described had to answer. In the second section, we will present relevant elements of the research design. After a brief description of the overall data collection selected from a following series of pre-inquiries undertook previously in 2003 and 2004 (Éthier, Cardin & Charland, 2006), we shall provide a detailed description of the start-up procedure and tasks proposed to the subjects, and then we will present the main elements composing the interview.

Practical and Theoretical Context By using as a pretext, the new Educational Program being set up for Québec schools (PFQ), which, on the one hand, grants considerable weight to Citizenship Education, and, on the other hand, confers a central role to history, we would like to further document the role of schools in citizenship education. We are especially interested in the contribution made by history classes in defining the historical consciousness of high school students. How does this schooling affect students’ use of the knowledge and the mental functions associated with the discipline of history? How do they rely on it, if need be, when the time comes to solve a problem linked to civic activities? More precisely, what are their perceptions, or even the social representations, of their political identities? We endeavour here to examine the relations that the experimental subjects establish between their respective identities and history. This chapter does not, therefore, address our results concerning historical



84

Chapter Five

thinking, but only those related to elements of historical consciousness, and only for the subjects who, within our sample, form two distinct groups. The growing body of educational publications in the fields of historical thinking and historical consciousness continues to add to the complexity of these two concepts (Levesque, 2008; Lukács, 1968; Rüsen, 2004; Seixas, 2004; White, 2007; Wineburg et al., 2007). However, for the purposes of this chapter, and at the risk of limiting ourselves, we shall define these two concepts as two sides of a single coin, inseparable and complementary, but also opposites. Both depend on the conditions and contexts in which they are developed, as they are oriented through social interactions, even if they serve different purposes. We are also focusing on the concept of memory, associated with the first two, and its extensive scholarly literature. Nonetheless, the limited scope of this chapter prevents us from taking an in-depth look1 at these questions. Finally, we describe the links between historical consciousness and the Québec schools (PFQ).

Historical thinking Some authors have defined historical thinking using a speculative method: Martineau (2000), for example, on the basis of an analysis of the different writings by major historians on their respective work or on history, compiled a list of 13 thinking operations—grouped under three headings: attitude, method and historical language—without the presence of which, historical thinking is, according to Martineau, impossible. For our part, we define historical thinking as a function of the mental activity concerning a social subject which uses data gathering and interpretation methods similar to those used by historians, in order to generate or judge interpretations concerning an (alleged) past element or the origins of a current phenomenon. Historical thinking can even be seen as having a role in the decision making process intended to clarify these interpretations (Barton & Levstik, 2004; Chowen, 2006; Éthier, 2004; Gregg & Leinhardt, 2002 ; Kohlmeier, 2005; Lee & Shemilt, 2004; Maggioni, Alexander & Vansledright, 2004; Stoskopf, 2001; Wineburg, 2001; Yeager, Foster & Greer, 2002).

Historical consciousness Unlike historical thinking, historical consciousness corresponds to the mental state (changeable) of the subject who, be it through action or volition, is aware of his/her temporality (regardless of the duration). It is



History Written on Walls

85

through this understanding of one’s temporality that an individual is able to judge (or willing to judge) situations2 based on his/her interpretation of past events. In short, historical thinking would be the ‘process’ pole and historical consciousness, the ‘intent,’ ‘tool’ or ‘product’ pole, depending on the case. Indeed, thinking may operate on the content—semantic and/or formal—of historical consciousness and, in turn, historical consciousness can consume narratives resulting from heuristic criticism, such as that of historians, but neither one nor the other is necessary; just as historical thinking may be reified or be critical (Lukács, 1922/1960; Leeuw-Roord, 2000; Seixas, 2006). But, regardless of the content on which historical consciousness operates, and whatever the methods it uses to do so - in a discrete or continuous manner – it remains voluntarily (at least in part) a reflective, conscious, objectified manner. Unlike many models, and in agreement with others, ours does not separate historical thinking and historical consciousness with an impervious wall, but rather sees it as complementary, despite its irreducibility.

Historical memory Laville (2002, 2004) defines historical memory as a social construct produced using tools which are, like languages, social constructs. Individuals, who interact with the groups to which they are affiliated, are understood to construct an historical memory that draws its meaning from these interactions. While Laville stresses that historical memories remain multiple, polymorphic and fluid, despite attempts to control them, he also shows that historians wish to distinguish themselves by means of their heuristics. Similarly, for Dagenais and Laville (2007), these practices proceed: “[…] with a rational operation intended to clarify the past, while the memory rather notices the affect. It only retains those elements of the past that serve to maintain memory as it is” (p. 527)2.

This applies, even though conventions governing university practices in history are historical (i.e., both contingent and determined) and even if it is an individual located in time, space and society who manufactures or sanctions narration-regardless of the medium chosen-which results from social practices. Ultimately, although memory and historical narration are both portrayals of the past, and although one or the other can be used, for



86

Chapter Five

example, to legitimize propaganda, they are nevertheless almost in opposition by essence. Indeed, memory gives the illusion of replicating the past as it was, without any mediation, while the narrative is simply being transmitted by a witness. The greater the distance (verfremdungseffect, in German), the less the memory. Conversely, the more that scholarly history admits (and obviously tries to control) its arbitrariness and its facticity, the more it is true to its essence (Éthier, 2001). Far from declining to claim its mediated character, it loses on the contrary its scientific nature by making no claims. Pomian even grounds the legitimacy of this academic field on the claim made by scholarly history authors to allow (generally by means of a critical apparatus citing and explaining the choice and treatment of its sources) all readers to discuss the robustness of their interpretations and the biases induced by their presuppositions (Pomian, 1999, in Éthier, 2001, pp. 16-17). In summary, in a way, historical memory is the opposite of historical thinking and historical consciousness, in that it would be unconsidered, as a sort of historical unconsciousness shared by a group. These definitions do not deplete the sources of disagreements faced by the various schools involved in discussions on these three concepts, i.e. historical thinking, historical consciousness and historical memory, but, at the very least, they do have the advantage of revealing the essential references behind the model used for our research. These definitions also have the advantage of helping to clarify the relations among some of the models most cited since 1990, particularly in English language literature concerning history didactics.

Historical consciousness in Québec’s history curriculum These concepts (and especially historical consciousness) are often linked to citizenship. Among others, this is shown in the Educational Program for Québec schools (PFQ) 612 pages (Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec [MÉQ], 2004). Lefrançois & Éthier (2008) showed that in the PFQ’s pages there are 247 occurrences of the base word citizen or its derivatives (citizens, citizenship, etc.). Of this number, 43% (105 words) are encountered in the 39 pages devoted to history courses (now called History and Citizenship Education, HCE), not counting 22 (9%) appearing elsewhere in the PFQ, which refers to HCE. Similarly, the entire PFQ (MÉQ, 2004) mentions democracy 21 times (including 14 in the HCE chapter, or 66%), civil rights seven times (all in the HCE chapter), identity 126 times (including 24 in the HCE chapter, or 19%, but 100% of the seven appearances of the term social identity), participation (social or community life) 13 times (including eight



History Written on Walls

87

in the HCE chapter, or 61%) and critical (thinking, meaning, mind or reflection) 73 times (including five in the HCE chapter, or 7%). Moreover, these frequencies correspond well to the qualitative importance of the Educational Program for Québec schools (PFQ) as a whole, and the history course more specifically—grant to participatory citizenship and to the rejection of an inculcation project regarding any preestablished national identity. This is why the history curriculum is now called History and Citizenship Education. In fact, according to the PFQ, one of the obligations that the school should carry out is the training of autonomous people who have developed skills enabling them to define their own social identity (p. 6) and behave as committed and critical citizens (p. 4). This, above all, is the duty of the History and Citizenship Education course (p. 21, 337). To paraphrase the programme, schools are committed to teaching students to take part in discussions around social issues, and doing so by thinking in an organized manner (MÉQ, 2004, pp. 337, 348). This allows us to define the goal of the history course as the development of these three skills altogether (pp. 338, 343). From a historical perspective, the first skill consists of questioning mandatory historiographical constructs (p. 344), the “social phenomena.” This concept includes the cultural, economic, political, territorial and social aspects of a group of human beings (p. 337) for a specified epoch, such as the “American and French revolutions” (p. 361). The integration of this social reality within this program is justified by “[…] its potential for conceptual and methodological reinvestment and its contribution to understanding the Western world today” (p. 350). The object of interrogation consists of (p. 352) either a social reality exclusively in the present (p. 365), or a reality from the past and another from the present (pp. 353-364). The status of both the past to be evoked, and the declarative knowledge to be learnt, are thus changing in nature when compared to their previous nature found in traditional or positivist history curriculum. For one, the past to be evoked, becomes a syntactic based product that students must analyze and synthesize in order to learn to “[…] ask their own questions, rather than simply answer those of others” (p. 344). For the other, learnt and structured declarative knowledge, is now presented more as forming the precipitate (p. 337) in a liquid in which it is also the solution, in that one needs to mobilize and organize topical data to skilfully interpret social phenomenon (p. 347). The second skill from a historic perspective is entitled “Interpreting social realities using the historical perspective” (MEQ, 2004, p. 346). This involves investigation in order to establish the facts: gather documents,



88

Chapter Five

examine and classify them, analyze and evaluate relevant information, compare the various points of view and interests of the actors, witnesses and historians (p. 347). The third skill consists of “constructing his/her consciousness with the help of history” (p. 348). Its development is directly linked to taking part in discussions in the form of a free exchange based on reasoning: “To develop their skills, students must learn to base their reasoning on facts and to justify their interpretation through argumentation” (p. 346). As seen here, the program encourages students to develop their thinking and awareness of the world around them. The status of both the past to be evoked, and the declarative knowledge to be learnt, are thus changing in nature when compared to their previous form as found in traditional or positivist history curricula. The current Quebec programme encourages students to develop their thinking and awareness of the world around them. Moreover, we have shown in another article that previous Québec history curricula shared the same goals, although they were not as successful as desired (Cardin, 2007; Éthier, 2007; Éthier & Lefrançois, 2007). In this context and in order to better gauge the discrepancy between the initial situation (students current consciousness) and the final result (desired consciousness), it is suitable to outline, using the protocol below, a quick portrait of Québec students’ current historical consciousness and its links with their respective identities. Thus, one remains torn between two history courses as the development of these three skills altogether (p. 338, 343). The focus of the research programme was The Mural of Quebecers, using general procedure and experimental conditions.

General Characteristics of the trigger stimulus: The Mural of Québeckers The Mural of Québeckers is a mural that consists of a trompe-l’oeil work measuring 420 m2, produced by the Commission de la capitale nationale3 and SODEC4. It was completed in 1999 by the Société de la création5, a French firm. Works of this kind are quite popular, and there are a dozen of these in the Québec City region alone6. The latter is particularly well placed, just to the left of Côte-de-la-Montagne connecting the Basse-Ville with the Haute-Ville, near Place Royale. It is popular tourist attraction and is photographed a great deal. A large portion of the work features ambiguities, due to the concept of Québecers it conveys. Are we talking here about the inhabitants of Québec City, the province of Québec or French Canadians? The official



History Written on Walls

89

description says: “The Québecers’ Mural tells the history of Québec and incorporates numerous characters specific to the capital.” Still, any examination of the work and the identity of its sponsors should be done with greater caution. Admittedly, the context is that of the city, or more precisely the Côte-de-la-Montagne just next to it. Moreover, the authors have chosen to represent people whose stay in Québec City was shortlived, and of national rather than local “importance.” Thus, one remains torn between two interpretations: either the authors are primarily talking about the nation, or they are talking about the city, associating it with visitors passing through, and whose reputations go beyond its borders. This ambiguity provided the mural with additional interest while the students were searching for its social representations. At first glance, what do Québec students recognize: the city, the province (or country), or the nation? The official goal of the mural was to represent numerous key people from the city and pay particular tribute to seventeen individuals who had marked its history. In this respect, those characters associated with the French Regime form the lion’s share, including eight key figures, hardly justified by this period’s duration (1608-1763) and the population size7. The British Regime (1763-1867) includes five of them8, while the most recent period (1867-1999) has only four. This perhaps expresses the idea that the distant past is more typical of history, regardless of the period: the older it is, the more historical. This view may also have something to do with the myth of paradise lost, the original idealized society, due to its Franco Catholic homogeneity (wrongly attributed to it). This was the view found in schools before the 1960s, while the curricula and textbooks for “History of Canada” as this course was then called reserved a special place for the New France period. This vision is often associated with an historical school headed by Canon Groulx, in the second third of the 20th century. Table 5-1 The Mural: list of key persons by period Regime People

French Jacques Cartier (1491-1557) Samuel de Champlain (1570-1635)



British Louis-Joseph Papineau (17861871) François-Xavier Garneau (18091866)

Canadian Félix Leclerc (1914-1988) Frederick Dufferin (1826-1902)

Chapter Five

90

Louis de Buade de Frontenac (1622-1698) Marie Guyart (1599-1672

Marcelle Mallet (1805-1871)

Louis Jolliet (1645-1700) Jean Talon (1626-1694) François de Laval (16231708) Catherine de Longpré (16321668)

Octave Crémazie (1827-1879)

Marie Fitzbach (1806-1885)

Alphonse Desjardins (18541920) Thaïs LacosteFrémont (18861963)

Does this casting reflect an ethnocentric and misogynist bias? We cannot say with certainty, but we do, nonetheless, note that only one Anglophone (Dufferin) is represented, and similarly that Aboriginals are entirely absent9. Finally and more striking still, it shows only five women, only one of whom is secular (Lacoste-Frémont). Incidentally, there are five religious (Catholic) figures (one man and four women). Other questions regarding the mural’s nature could most certainly be asked. If one wants to represent Québec City, why are Papineau, Desjardins and Leclerc there? The first was speaker of the Québec legislature, while it sat in Québec City, and yet his home was in Montréal. The second can clearly be identified in connection with Lévis. As for the third, several other municipalities can lay claim to his presence more credibly than the provincial capital. Just as the designers excluded certain categories of citizens, they also excluded certain appropriate icons. It is therefore a very broad view of Québec City, and this help to feed the ambiguity mentioned earlier: Québec City, the Province of Quebec, or the nation of Quebecers. It should be pointed out that members of other cultural communities are represented, although discreetly, by one of the mural’s elements. Three children are playing hockey, the national sport, on the pavement, and one of them seems to look Asian10. Similarly, the lower classes are very discrete, and only two anonymous workers are represented, though almost invisible on the side-lines of the who’s who gathering. Other key people evoke the present, giving the impression that in this city the streets are always haunted by the ghosts of famous people. Finally, just like pious



History Written on Walls

91

Renaissance patrons, sometimes members of the Commission de la capitale nationale and SODEC have been included in the mural, appearing as shopkeepers.

General Research Procedure and Experimental Conditions In our efforts to highlight students’ historical consciousness in the mural’s context, part of our inspiration came from the research conducted by Seixas and Clark (2004). Through individual interviews of varying duration (20 to 40 minutes), conducted between November 2006 and May 2007, we presented a mural to students fifteen years of age: 40 from Québec City and four from other regions in Québec. We asked them whether it properly represented Québec society and why. The question did not explicitly refer to the past, but to their community. However, as meetings were held on the side-lines of the national history course, an implicit link was likely made with the past and with the passing of time. Then we asked them how they would represent Québec society if they had to create a work of this kind on their own. Finally, we proceeded to conduct a semi-structured interview, as described in detail below. Generally, the students were very quick to express their views on the issue (in a few seconds). They explained themselves when required, gradually justifying their answers and little by little modifying their initial position. They qualified their remarks, adding new elements and removing others they deemed superfluous or insignificant. This allowed us to obtain a glimpse of what they had before their eyes: an evocation of the past, illustrated by a dozen or so key people that appeared in their history textbook, and others (nuns, Dufferin) that might be considered as representative of general and abstract social categories. In so doing, we would open a window on their historical consciousness.

Interview Procedure After asking the students whether they felt this mural properly represented Québec society, we conducted individual semi-controlled interviews (using an interview notebook). We then proceeded to question them about the various sources of information used to respond to the initial question, about their sociodemographic characteristics, and about their civic involvement11.



Chapter Five

92

Study 1 Participants Study I was conducted on students (N=34), 15 years of age. It involved a random sample of students recruited from national history courses given by Francophone school boards in public schools (n=29) and in private schools in the same districts (n=5). The majority of students from Francophone backgrounds were of French-Canadian culture11. The sample consisted of two immigrant children (1 boy, 1 girl)12 and 32 FrenchCanadian children (19 girls, 13 boys) or 20 girls and 14 boys. They all lived in Francophone environments. Most of the students came from small urban communities (Beauce, Sherbrooke, Baie-Comeau and Québec City), where there was very little diversity in their origins, and a minority lived in Montréal. In general, the tables presented in this article do not distinguish the two immigrant children from others, because their small number would give these statistics little significance, but any clarification to this effect will be made as needed when interpreting the data. In most tables, we separated students according to gender. The total is expressed in absolute numbers and includes populations from Francophone backgrounds, while in two studies the percentages express the relationship between Francophone backgrounds and total population, thus facilitating comparison between Study 1 and Study 2. When citing elements from the data set, we used the code Q to refer to interviewers and the codes J1, S1, M1, etc., for students interviewed. They were distributed randomly in order to preserve the anonymity of subjects. Table 5-2 Origins of students from francophone background, by gender



Regions

Boys

Girls

Total

%

Beauce Sherbrooke BaieCourneau Montreal Quebec City Total

6 2 5

9 1 6

15 3 11

37.5 7.5 27.5

1 0

2 2

3 2

7.5 5

14

20

34

85

History Written on Walls

93

Among the students from Francophone backgrounds, 58% were girls. These formed the majority of groups from all regions except for one (the Sherbrooke region), but in most cases samples were fairly balanced (except for Beauce and Québec City). In total, 85% of the students participating in both studies were from Francophone backgrounds.

Results Eleven students out of 34 from Francophone backgrounds thought that the mural represented Québec society, but 23 respondents thought that this work represented it poorly. The results show that the students interviewed generally thought that the mural was not representative. Among those who questioned its representativeness, through various arguments five of them pointed out that it depicts the city, rather than the entire community. Table 5-3 Assessment of mural’s representativeness by students from francophone background, by gender Representativeness

Boys

Girls

Total

%

Is representative Is not representative

5 9

6 14

11 23

35 65

Elements of work supported by students Students who found that the work was not very representative of society willingly pointed out that certain elements deserved being preserved, while those who found it appropriate justified their opinion by pointing out relevant parts. Students could cite more than one element. For the students, the nuns seemed adequate as witnesses of Québec’s religious past, yet no student associated this phenomenon with the present. Accordingly those who felt that a mural should grant more place to the present wanted to see the nuns disappear from the mural: J1: “The nuns, there were some at the time. You know. Today, there are fewer of them. We see them a lot less. But at the time… If they [the creators] wanted to represent the past, well, that’s okay, because there were a lot of them.” M1: “Ah yes, yes because they still really did a lot of things. They taught […] then… that‘s quite important. Yes, but not… not in recent [times]. Like there, there are two nuns up above, I would remove them. […] Because they’re no longer there…”



Chapter Five

94

Table 5-4 Mural’s elements’ appreciation of students from a francophone background, by gender. Categories Vestiges of the past

Elements Religious personnel

Boys 10

Girls 7

Total 17

% 18

Shows historical evolution Founders/Origins

3

3

6

7

6

4

10

11

Representation of an old city

2

4

6

15

National Sport Future

Hockey

13

11

24

27

Children

5

2

7

8

Values

Mutual Help

2

1

3

4

Artists

Felix Leclerc

6

5

11

12

Aesthetics

She’s beautiful

5

2

7

18

52

39

91

Total

Students expressed their appreciation of how the past was represented in various ways by referring to the visibility of the founders, the antiquity of the city or by given references to various eras although a fifth of the students thought the mural poorly represented their society. The hockey players as an allegory of the collective identity was particularly appealing for both girls and boys. Concerning this matter however, hockey was not seen as a reference of the past, except for one individual who would have liked to see Maurice Richard included: S1: “However, hockey is important here. There are a lot of people who like hockey.” R1: “The little hockey players, we could keep them…”

Most students approved of the presence of children, in that they formed a proper link between past and future. Typical students’ statements went something like this:



History Written on Walls

95

Q: “Then you were telling me about the little girl, that she showed evolution. In what way?” R2: “For me, this would no longer represent the next generation.”

Some students appreciated the presence of Félix Leclerc, while others would add other singers. Similarly, the discreet presence of two workers cooperating seemed important to some. Finally, five students, especially girls, liked the mural for its aesthetic character, beyond its aptness in representing their community.

Content of a representative work It should be emphasized that a fifth of the students thought the mural poorly represented their society. This opinion can be seen as the main motive behind their desire to remove references to the past. Others wanted to add icons from their daily reality: single-family homes, an automobile, etc. In total, nearly a third of them seemed to favour elements from the present to illustrate their society. Table 5-5 Elements students from a francophone background want to add to mural representing their society, by gender

Elements Starting at present

References to past



Boys

Girls

Total

%

6

5

11

8

Elements from present Single family dwelling Automobile

5

5

10

7

4

4

8

6

Important events

10

5

15

10

Important people

4

2

6

4

Beginning of colonization (Centred on…) Better differentiation of eras

1

1

2

1

4

5

9

6

Chapter Five

96

More exclusive we

Aboriginals

5

3

8

6

Immigrants

4

2

6

4

Symbolic we

Flag or emblem

5

3

8

6

3

2

5

3

Closer we

Hockey (increased presence) Families

6

2

8

6

School

4

0

4

3

Country

12

5

17

12

Regions

6

1

7

5

Water river forest seasons Pollution

12

4

18

13

2

0

2

1

93

49

144

Less urban we

Total

One of the most obvious elements was that several events from the past were depicted. These were cited more often by boys than girls, with 12 events being included in 2 to 9 citations, while five were portrayed 10 to 18 times. Table 5-6 Proportion of students from francophone background who want to remove elements of the past from the mural, by gender Boys

Girls

Total

%

Mentioned past

5

5

10

29

Did not mention past Total

9

15

24

71

14

20

34

100

The idea of removing references of the past was clearly stated by a quarter of the students cited, but none of the immigrant students expressed this view. Proportionally, this suggestion came more often from boys than girls. In reality, the importance attached to the present is probably much



History Written on Walls

97

greater than anything that the preliminary numbers might have predicted. The present era also shows up in the interest in hockey expressed by nine people. Students recognized this sport as a unifying element for their community. The same holds true when it comes to their interest in nature or more generally in the importance of the countryside. We mostly interviewed students in small towns or rural areas. A more rural setting and the presence of a river appeared to merit a prominent place in a work that was to represent them. While they reacted against the mural’s unique urban character, one boy exceptionally did so in the name of regionalism only, but he evoked history: J 2 “We are nonetheless in Beauce, then in the picture what we see is Québec, Old Québec [… it has] nothing really to do with agriculture all that; then in Beauce we’re fairly focused on agriculture, and Québec began with agriculture” […]. 14

However, the relation their community shared with natural elements appeared to be an essential characteristic. To us, it seemed to go beyond recalling a familiar landscape, as their statements to take us back to peoples’ roles, to their values and attitudes, to nature and to a particularly difficult climate. Their appreciation of the importance given to Félix Leclerc and the desire to see other singers also reflected a desire to see a mural in which the present would cover the entire wall. Several students would have liked to see allusions made to the nuclear family, something they have not necessarily experienced for themselves at home nor, for that matter, at school. Q: “What would be missing?’’ V1: “Well, entire families. [..] In any case, I do not see one complete family.” Q: “Why would an entire family be interesting? “ V1: “Well, because… like there, they all seem to be alone … You see, everybody walks around as a family, at that time they didn’t take walks all alone.”

Others welcomed the presence of children. The immediate community seemed worthy of appearing on the walls of Québec City. A few in the same frame of mind as the present, just over one fifth of all students, would appreciate seeing a flag or a symbolic animal representing Québec. Those, nearly a third, who thought that references to the past properly illustrated their society, would have added more. They would have gone both ways: the most outstanding eras and references to events. The mural



98

Chapter Five

shows characters somewhat out of context. If some can be recognized, it is only due to the fact that their costumes and characteristics seem to be appropriate for them. They were most often inspired by illustrations found in school textbooks. This reflects a familiarity with these texts, rather than with the past. Among the students, 27% wanted the context to be better represented, while 30% of them were leaning somewhat in the same direction, and asking for references to events. However, one should note that the mural follows no particular chronological order: characters appear in a fairly disorganized manner. Instead of having famous ‘whites’ on a grey wall background, they would like to see a sort of timeline13, profiling scenes of the past, from the founding of Québec to the two World Wars. The illustration of events would set up a narrative with respect to their community’s past. However, when questioned about which events to add, students were embarrassed. Very few of them were able to identify events worthy of appearing on the mural. Most events mentioned were conflicts, such as The Conquest, rebellions and the two World Wars. They kept, however, to following a chronological progression: R1: […] “You show a little, a bit from that time … Let’s say you start from the beginning with the founding of Québec City then you go up to the present … […] Yes, over time, it would be clearer … You would see stages in the development of Québec… Like you, when you look at that one, you don’t see anything very inspiring…” M2: “Well, first of all, I would base myself on the steps that Québec City has gone through, such as the arrival of the French before the beginning and all throughout its evolution.”

About one-third of the students would also like to see absent individuals show up, such as immigrants and Aboriginals. People of French-Canadian descent would more likely favour the presence of the latter than the former. Note that almost all lived in environments having uniform ethnicity, and it would be interesting to see whether young people from Montréal would have the same attitude: C1: “Yes. The only thing I can find to say is that in a society such as ours, I would perhaps add people of other colours, another nationality.” E1: “Blacks… People of all sorts of colours…” Q: “Why would you put them there?” E1: “Because, you know there are those who have prejudices against those people …” Q: “Hmm, hmm.” E1: “But they are still with us…”



History Written on Walls

99

E1: “You know, I would put like in the Far North and all, Indians… I would put in Indians…” J3: “You know, sure there are Anglophones, but… after that? (pause) Maybe an immigrant some place there, but you know, this might be more… […] You know, that would represent, well, everyone… at least, we would know some of them are here also.”

This young girl from Baie-Comeau lived fairly close to the Aboriginals. However, only timidly did she think that some room should be made for them on a mural: M3: “The Ind…, the Indians >i.e. the Aboriginals@, they were there before us.” Q: “Okay.” M3: “Perhaps they could…” Q: “They would be part of society?” M3: “Well, yes. Well… a little.” Q: “Okay.” M3: “Not too.” Q “Explain it to me. Would it be important for them to be there, and for what reason?” M3: “Well, they were there before us, then… Well, they are in the same… they are part of our everyday life a bit.” Q: “Okay.” M3: “We took a few of their customs and they took some of our customs, our customs a bit.” Q: “There has been like an exchange.” M3: “Yes.” Q: “So for you it would be important that they be up there too?” M3: “Yes.”

Elements of students’ historical awareness Twelve students of French-Canadian origin (a third of the sample) evoked 35 different key people in all. Only one person cited other characters not included in table.



Chapter Five

100

Table 5-7 Key people cited by students from francophone background, by gender Important people

Girls

Boys

Total

Jacques Cartier

3

3

6

Samuel de Champlain Maurice Richard

1

5

6

0

2

2

Felix Leclerc

2

3

5

Christopher Columbus Total

2

2

4

8

15

23

Three of the five people listed above were included in the mural: Cartier, Champlain and Leclerc. Among the key characters on the mural, one who was least often recognized by students was singer Félix Leclerc, who died in 1928’. Maurice Richard was a popular French Canadian hockey player in the forties and fifties. Among the students of FrenchCanadian origin, precise references to Québec’s past were much more numerous and diverse: 11 of them referred to 17 events. Five of them were mentioned more than once and they only represented 42% of the occurrences. The table below only cites five of these events. Table 5-8 Principal events cited by students from francophone background, by gender



Events

Girls

Boys

Total

%

English Conquest

3

3

6

15

Industrialisation

1

2

3

10

1837-8 Rebellions

0

3

3

10

World Wars

2

1

3

7

Total

6

9

15

42

History Written on Walls

101

Remember that nearly a third of students pointed out that a mural representing their society should portray historical events. For the record, note the other events were only evoked by one person: Iroquois wars, October Crisis, Quiet Revolution, privatization of electricity, fur trade and referendum. Most touched on the national affirmation of French Canadians. Incidentally, note that boys were more likely to refer to key people or historical events Table 5-9 Principal cultural elements cited by students from francophone background, by gender Cultural elements

Girls

Boys

Total

%

French language

3

0

3

7

Catholic religion

4

3

7

18

Ancestral lifestyle

1

2

3

7

Total

8

5

13

32

Three cultural elements were named. Together, they represented 32% of the occurrences. The element most often mentioned to characterize the past was the Catholic religion and the presence of the clergy, quite visible on the mural. One student referred to the presence of other religions on the territory: J2: “In Québec, there are several religions…we could certainly remove it [reference to Catholicism] or leave it there, because There are Buddhists, but them, it doesn’t interest them, the Catholic religion, but for sure Québec really got started with the Catholic religion, then the Protestants and the English; but you can still leave it there because it’s really part of our history.”

However, one must remember that when reviewing the key people presented, half the respondents recalled the importance of religion in the past, recognizing the nuns. Indirectly they referred to a cultural characteristic. The occurrence of French language came far behind, only mentioned three times, all expressed by girls. They claimed, however, to be committed to it, with vehemence. Note that the third category,



102

Chapter Five

“ancestral way of life”, is a construct in which we group fairly disparate elements, such as folklore and the traditional division of roles between men and women, which were each mentioned once. Students attending a private school, a minority in our sample, were far more likely to refer to key people and events. More precise and explicit information came to mind more quickly. Aspects of Québeckers’ ancestral culture were most often mentioned by youth from public schools.

Representation of ‘we’ We asked the students what should be included on a mural representing Québec society, and their first reaction was to ask for a definition of society. Very quickly, however, they came up with certain elements that define the society in which they grew up even if they could not provide us with a thoughtful and coherent definition. Several students provided certain observable features going beyond their immediate, observable background. However, their vision was very focused on the present. For these youths, Québec history seemed rather absent. Several students recognized Cartier, Champlain and Leclerc on the mural. They also wanted to see people from the twentieth century included, such as Maurice Richard (hockey) and René Lévesque (politics). Four events were mentioned most frequently by students: the Conquest, industrialization, rebellions and the two World Wars. They deplored the fact that none were illustrated, and they would have added them. Except for industrialization, students favoured the representation of armed conflicts. The “backwardlooking” person in the current content visibly annoyed the majority of them. The cultural elements mentioned by the students were mainly French language and the Catholic religion. For some of them, the first should be included. Students who mentioned the importance of French said they were very committed to this characteristic of Québec society. Students identified the representation of Catholic religion as embodied by several religious people. They justified its presence on the wall because of its previous importance in Québec society. Most of them, however, specified that Catholicism is not part of the present. One student mentioned the presence of other religions on the territory. Since most came from culturally homogeneous backgrounds, the diversity that characterizes Québec today often eluded them to a certain extent. They depicted a sort of community broken in two, that of the Montréal region, generally familiar with the population’s heterogeneity, and the rest of the province, a phenomenon mostly foreign to them. As the



History Written on Walls

103

Bouchard-Taylor Commission on “reasonable accommodation”14 seemed to show, this feature was not unique to our sample. Of course, all did not share this view. Five French Canadians were aware of the growing diversity, and believed it essential that this be represented on a mural. The case of one student was exemplary in this regard: O1: “We are in a country … where there are many immigrants. Then I think it does our culture a lot of good. I don’t know if you listen to the show Pure Laine.” O1: “That’s interesting.” Q: “Yes, that’s interesting.” O1: “It uses this theme.” Q: “Why do you think that if there are many ethnic groups, they bring a lot to Québec?” O1: “They have different visions of the world. “ Q: … O1: “Different ways of perceiving things, different ways of working. It’s a way of looking at things that’s different from ours. In being confined to only one vision, we cannot have a… I don’t think you can have an opinion very, very… not constructive.”

We already mentioned that relations between the French speaking majority and the Aboriginal community are troubling. There were very few French Canadians (8/32) who spontaneously suggested giving them a place in a representation of their society. It is noteworthy to point that students living near the Aboriginals, such as those in Baie-Comeau, did not mention the latter any more than students in other regions. It was the students from Beauce who most often mentioned the presence of Aboriginals as an essential community in the province of Québec. The few students from Francophone backgrounds who wanted to add Aboriginals hoped to have a mural representative of Québec society’s historical evolution. Most often, they were located in the time of contact between Europeans and Aboriginals, but never do they include them in a representation of contemporary society. This is probably a result of their being ignored by the news media, except in criminal cases or spectacular claim actions, but this is also due—if not more so—to the education received and the textbooks used, and they in turn reflect the history program in effect at the time.15 These students state that Aboriginals should be given an early representation… as in Module 1 of the history programme, then be absent afterwards… just as in the curriculum! Students, in their own way, create a distance between themselves and the Aboriginals, but the distance is temporal rather than architectural.



104

Chapter Five

Native population are not placed on a different mural, but in a different era. Their presence in society is not up to date: C2: […] “I would represent, say, how they [the Aboriginals] lived. After, in the second module, the others. Each with a really detailed part.” J2: “I know that just about everyone in Québec are [sic] descendants of the Indians, the French and the English. As shown in the photo, we see that not one looks Indian, and yet it was to them that Québec belonged before.” Q: “Should it be added?” D2: “We could add them.”

Looking good Certain students also understood that the mural is a means of referring to the ‘us’ to the ‘them’. The mural we presented is located in Québec City, a place commonly visited by tourists. The desire to make a ‘good impression’ was not missed by some and this led them to express certain unexpected views: A1: “Because, overall, I think it [the mural] represents everything… you know, it’s beautiful, there’s, there’s nothing… I think it… Reality as it happened, then …conditions in the city were really difficult. But at the same time, I don’t know if the world would appreciate seeing that now, they weren’t there, but you know it was… They said the conditions were really difficult… They came here [into the city] but they were paid really minimal wages and their working conditions were really difficult … Would people be ready to see that again?” C2: “Because it’s too cheerful, but, you know, at the same time if we started to paint things such as poverty … on the streets of Québec City, it… it wouldn’t make any sense, because if we want to make Québec City a more cheerful and more open place, it shouldn’t be degraded by a mural that chokes [debases] Québec.” J4: “The poor districts?” Q: “Yes?” D4: “I don’t think so.” Q: “Why?” D4: “Because it wouldn’t be a good representation, you know, we need… when you do something, it has to look good.” Q: “What would you put instead?” J4: “The rich.” [Laughter] Q: “You’d put the rich on the mural …” J4: “You wouldn’t put something dilapidated there.” Q: “Because the mural, it must look good anyway?” J4: “Yes, you know. If you do a mural and then you put everything that’s



History Written on Walls

105

poor on it, everything that’s ugly, they’ll say: ‘Hey, they’re… they have no class there.’ Q: “Why don’t they have any class?” J4: “Well, there, someone who’s not… who is poorly dressed, then that, I don’t know, you know, housing before that… as we see, it was shitty and all. …It didn’t look good.” Q: “You still want to make something beautiful? Even if you say…” J4: “Well, yes. It’s like when you see someone who has greasy hair and everything, that doesn’t seem too clean, well, you don’t get a good… a good impression.” Q: “Okay.” J4: “But if… people, when they see the mural they must get a good impression.” J2: “Well, for sure there were two world wars that had a great impact on Québec, but I wouldn’t put that on the wall because it is a bad example of Québec, because there … it depicts a happy Québec, then if we put [sic] a big field full of crosses of Canadians who died, it would not be very cheerful.”

Relation with passing time In general, students recognized the elements from the past, but they did not link them to their definition of Québec’s society, as if these events had no meaning or importance in this regard. Certain students only cited things from the present; others suggested removing elements referring to the past; others suggested adding elements from the present; while some answers coming from other students showed that they were interested in the past or could not be classified. The table below cites only the first three categories, but the last column can be used to locate the occurrences of these three categories within the overall relevant citations. While few of the students’ responses related only to the present, nearly a third of them wanted to diminish the proportion of elements in the mural associated with the past. Some seemed to be at ease with concepts of past, present and future. A few knew how to discourse on Québec’s past. For example, they were able to describe the main development stages in Québec society, focusing on the consequences of certain events that defined the collective identity. Obviously, these students were not all at the same level and only one student seemed to be sufficiently at ease with Québec’s past to refer to it and handle it easily. Two young girls of French-Canadian origin were able to symbolize the passage of time (children and adolescents, symbols of the future; the elderly, symbols of previous times). Still, temporal references made by these students had to do with generations and not really anything more.



Chapter Five

106

Table 5-10 Attitude to duration for students from francophone backgrounds by gender

Type of relation

Girls

Boys

Total

%

See only present

4

1

5

8

Suggest removing all elements referring to the past Suggest adding elements from present Total

5

5

10

15

6

4

10

15

15

10

25

66

Sources of information After having suggested to students that they voice their opinion on The Mural of Québeckers and tell us how their society could be better illustrated, we asked them from which sources they drew their information. Obviously, since we were doing interviews with students recruited from the compulsory course on Québec’s national history, the experimental context likely encouraged them to evoke their classes. Students could, however, cite more than one source of information. A large majority of students thought their history course was useful for taking a stand. Eighty-three percent (83%) of students admitted taking information from their courses. Few girls (less than 20%) and one boy (less than 8%) from Francophone backgrounds did not consider the history course to be of any help. Two people said nothing on this issue. Some students recognized that the illustrations of certain key people were identical to those in their history textbook, and referred to their text as a source of information. Of course, other sources were put to use, with nearly half of them talking about the mass media. At the age of 15, almost half of the students interviewed admitted to relying on knowledge and experience gleaned throughout their lives. Nearly one-fifth of them took advantage of the wisdom gained from their parents or other family members. Far behind were films and books, cited by one-eighth of the sample. Finally, two students declared they had made use of the Internet to obtain knowledge about the past.



History Written on Walls

107

Table 5-11 Information sources cited by students from a francophone background, by gender Categories National History Course Other sources of information

Response Yes

Girls 15

Boys 12

% 83

No

4

1

13

Film

2

1

13

Radio/television/newspapers

9

8

48

Internet

0

2

5

Parents/family

4

2

15

9

8

46

2

2

13

Personal knowledge experience Books and reading

and

Beyond historical knowledge in itself, the media, the students’ family and acquaintances or personal experiences were all considered as sources of information. These were sometimes identified spontaneously, before the question was asked. This involved knowledge, opinions or viewpoints that students reaped from these sources and which mainly formed a part of their collective memory, as we previously defined. Their vision of Québec and of Québec society mainly came from conversations with their parents, movies they had seen and experiences in their lives.16 Some accompanied their beliefs with assessments developed with the aid of various media (along with advice from readings, films, radio or TV programs, intended for interviewers). Only one student said that anything linked to history, regardless of the media, must be done within a critical perspective, an ingredient inherent to historical consciousness, as we have said. Students who relied mainly on their personal knowledge and experience were also the ones who described Québec society in the present tense. For them, the course on history was not very useful, although it did prove useful for identifying certain customs, key people or events.



108

Chapter Five

Study 2 Participants For the second study, the population consisted of 6 students originating from Betsiamites (Pessiamiulnu): 3 boys, 3 girls. They identified themselves as Aboriginal people (Innu). These students live on an Aboriginal reserve and go to a school intended exclusively for them. They made up 15% of the sample, and given their small number, we systematically made less use of tables.

Results Aboriginal students have divided opinions regarding the mural’s representativeness: half (3/6) thought it was representative; the other half did not. A higher proportion of girls thought the mural was representative (2/3), whereas, for boys, the opposite was true (1/3).

Elements of work that received students’ approval The following very long excerpt introduces a young Aboriginal who noticed the absence of Aboriginals, and also immigrants, on the wall. His opinion was fairly representative of the apparent conviction held by young Aboriginals that they are not a part of Québec society. This student would thus add Aboriginals, but on a different, parallel wall. Several Aboriginal students suggested placing a certain physical distance between the ‘social groups’. This Innu would do the same for other ethnic groups in Québec. His vision of Québec society is complex, with ethnic belongingness, or even linguistic divisions, being irreparable. Lastly, the extract below also shows the students’ assumptions regarding the absence of Aboriginals on the original mural: Q: “Then the Aboriginals told me that you’d put up another display.” P1: “Yes. But that’s, that’s correct.” [pointing to the mural]. Q: “That’s correct?” P1: “For Québec’s Francophone society. But I said there would be… other displays for each ethnic group.” Q: “Ok, there would be a display for each ethnic group.” P1: “Yes.” Q: “Then for that, why do you find that it’s okay for Québec society?” P1: “This is your life, this is how you live; you live in Québec City.” Q: […] “When you asked me the question “why didn’t they include other



History Written on Walls

109

races, eh?” P1: “Yes?” Q: “Would you be able to come up with an answer to this question?” P1: “They have forgotten us.” Q: “Okay do you know why they’ve forgotten you?” P1: “don’t know, they… they must not like dark skins. I really don’t know.” Q: “They’re the ones who would know, in a racist sense?” P1: “Well, that’s right. I can’t say they are racists. They may have forgotten. It… it does happen.” […] Q: “But you, you… when you say they’ve forgotten, do you find that happens often?” P1: “Well…” Q: “Hum, hum.” P1: “Yes and no.” Q: “Okay.” P1: “When they forget us there…” Q: Hum, hum? P1: “I don’t know, but ... there’s too much history there, that bothers people.” Q: “Okay” P1: “I don’t know. Because I can’t say, at the end of the line they’ve forgotten us a bit too much.” Q: “Okay” P1: “Then after that they are thinking of us”. Q: “Okay.” P1: “Then they have forgotten us. It’s a bit, I find, I don’t know.”

The Aboriginal students suggested adding more Aboriginals, using the argument that they were there before the Europeans. However, their words are not necessarily associated with a vision of the historical evolution of Québec society. As we mentioned earlier, a priori, few Aboriginal people do consider themselves as a part of Québec society. Only after a moment of reflection to they think of being added to the wall and in a manner already specified: on the side-lines: D1: “What would I put?” Q: “Yes, In order to represent society.” D1: “All, all, all, the entire society”. Q: “Québec society.” D1: “Well, I would put the same thing, but we [we…] would be added”. Q: “You would include yourself in there?” D1: “Yes. Because… we’re missing from there”. Q: “Then what would you do to add yourselves?” D1: “Well… more forest”.



Chapter Five

110

Q: “Why the forest?” D1: “Well, because Indians love doing that.” […] Q: “It would be important to be right beside [the painting], but not inside.” D1: “Yes. Although not inside, we need to be put there … so that we … Yes.” Q: “Given that, otherwise, when we’re together, well, that causes more problems?” D1: “Yes, that’s right. Yes.”

The Aboriginals made certain references to important people (Louis Riel, Pontiac, Samuel de Champlain and Jacques Cartier), but not in the same way as students from Francophone backgrounds. An Aboriginal referred to certain events such as the creation of reservations, industrialization and the Métis revolt, two of which related very specifically to their own community.

Content of a representative work The Aboriginal students that we met, following the non-Aboriginals, said they appreciated the presence of religious references and hockey, while references to the European founders, the old part of Québec City or the theme of mutual help seemed to attract their attention in a lesser way, see Table 5-12. Table 5-12 Elements of the mural appreciated by students from aboriginal background, by gender Categories

Elements

Boys

Girls

Total

Vestiges of past

Religious personnel

2

2

4

Shows historical evolution Founders/origins Representation of an old city Hockey

2

0

2

0 0

1 0

1 0

1

3

4

National sport



History Written on Walls

111

Future

Children

1

1

2

Values Artists

Mutual help Felix Leclerc

0 0

0 1

0 1

Aesthetics

She’s beautiful

1

1

2

Elements Starting today

Reference to past

More exclusive we Symbolic we

Close up of we Less urban we

Boys

Girls

Total

Elements of present

0

0

0

Single family dwelling Automobile Important events

1 1 1

1 1 1

2 2 2

Important people Beginning of colonisation (centred on) Better differentiation of eras Aboriginals

1 0

0 0

1 0

1

0

1

2

2

4

Immigrants Flag or emblem

1 0

0 1

1 1

Hockey (increased presence) Families

0

1

1

0

0

0

School Country

1 0

0 1

1 1

Regions Water, rivers, forest, seasons Pollution

0 1

0 2

0 3

0

0

0

No student of Aboriginal background suggested removing the past elements from the mural.



112

Chapter Five

Historical consciousness of students Four key people were cited by the six students from Aboriginal backgrounds: Jacques Cartier, Samuel de Champlain, Louis Riel and Pontiac. French-Canadian students in the sample had added Maurice Richard, Félix Leclerc, René Lévesque, and so on. Industrialization was the only event cited, and this by only one student from an Aboriginal background. None of the cultural elements cited by students from a French-Canadian background (such as the French language, the Catholic religion and the ancestral style of living) was cited by the students of Aboriginal background. The reference to the forest, for example, talks about the present, not the past.

Representation of ‘we’ It was disconcerting to us that the Aboriginals [Innu] themselves, after centuries of exclusion, did not demand to be included on a mural depicting Québec society. The young Innu recognized that the Mural of Québecers represents the community of the majority, the young Innu were able to suggest additions to make it more representative of Québecers, but they specified that it is not their the society. They looked at their representation as being foreign, and this is why they ‘added themselves’ on the side-lines of the representation of the majority, if not squarely on another mural. D1, an Innu, expressed the ambiguous relationship of his nation with that of the majority, with as much confusion as insight: D1: “I do not think… I do not think that… I do not think they… they [the Aboriginals] live there [the representation of Québec City].” Q: “Why?” D1: […]” If they were included, in there, they would not be used to such large things. Then these others [the Whites] there… well, them there, they were already accustomed.” Q: “The whites were already accustomed.” D1: “Yes. That is they [the Aboriginals] put something like … they should be allowed to look, we’ll remove that [a portion of the mural] […] then put the forest, then here […] we would be there”. Q: “You’d be there.” D1: “Yes.” Q: “You’d do it at that level, you’d take away the building with the blue roof…” D1: “Yes.” […] D1: “It [does] not work. Well, the Aboriginal population there, but



History Written on Walls

113

without…” Q: “But could you tell me why it would not work?” D1: “Well, I don’t know. I don’t know how to say it. I do [not] really know how to explain it…” Q: “What does it [the painting] not represent for you?” D1: “Yes, I don’t know. Well, like this: Yes, we were already there when they came”. Q: “Okay.” D1: “The man in green there.” [Champlain]. Q: “Yes.” D1: “Yes, these others, the men who are there. But we were… I do not know how to say it, we were already there”.

Oddly enough, at the end of the interview, the three young Aboriginals reported readings of a historical nature, even if they did not think that these readings helped them in their task. There was a strange feeling: the proposed exercise did not allow students to deliver everything they knew from the past. This vein could not be explored in this and other interviews. Also we did not have any assumptions about what they knew and this did not reveal itself during our conversations with them.

Relationship with duration No Aboriginal student expressed any relation that could have been identified to duration: none of them suggested removal elements of the past or the addition of elements of the present.

Sources cited by students from an Aboriginal background All students from Aboriginal backgrounds (three boys, three girls) found their history course useful. One girl and one boy cited films, and all cited the mass media. Two boys, but no girls, referred to their knowledge or personal experience. None relied on the Internet or their relatives.

Discussion Based on the above, students interviewed seem to have identified certain categories related to the past. 1) Those who thought that a mural must refer to the past and, as such, try to supplement it and 2) Those who accepted the past, but wanted to add the present, and



114

Chapter Five

3) Those that would eliminate the past, sticking to an illustration of the present. Students that are keen on the present are interested in illustrating that which is close at hand, referring to a familiar background composed of houses, cars and nature. Among them, some also wanted to include a vision of the future embodied in the presence of children and families. Some, one-third of our sample, thought that a specific reference to the past would represent the community to which they belong. They wanted to add such a representation, although a better organized and less static presentation of key characters in the windows; regardless of the chronology and activities arbitrarily considered as founding events. It appears, however, that the historical knowledge of these young people is better than the image projected by the media. When these students refer to the past, they cite three types of information: names of key historical characters they recognize or want to see on the mural, historical events and finally cultural elements referring to their heritage. Boys are more likely to refer to key characters and events while girls are more inclined to refer to elements regarding ‘culture’. None of the students from an immigrant background clearly referred to Québec’s past. Similarly, the characteristic features of Québec’s cultural heritage are never mentioned by aboriginals or by immigrant children. Indeed, 12 French-Canadian students requested that seven characteristics of the past be included in a representation. We also noted that the presence of Columbus was granted a naturalized status by a few students, and one of them even specifically referred to him as a Québecker! Furthermore, those revealing specific elements from the past or from Québec culture were mostly students of French-Canadian origin. As such, there are indeed two representations of the population: the ‘we’ and the “them,” and they do not overlap in students’ discourse. While we did not find a construct shaped by gender or social class when analysing the material used by students to assemble their respective identities, we could, however, infer the presence of another type of conceptual scaffolding: ethnicity. This corroborates the view that the history class provides cognitive tools that can especially be used to set up an emotional mechanism, similar mechanically to memory. In the first case, these tools are more helpful to students when confirming their historical identities (thus contingent, but determined by previous events). Their understanding of their identity is limited to an attribute (such as ethnic group or other, but also a given gender, language, pigmentation, etc.), coming from the abundant resources



History Written on Walls

115

that humans may possess. These tools can be recuperated in a manner that makes history an instrument of socialization “for the benefit of the dominant ideology and power—to the advantage of the dominating power” (Laville, 1984, p. 78), a team which shares this attribute. In the second scenario, the history class serves to further develop historical thinking (or consciousness), thus enriching students’ ability to understand the historical agents and contexts in which they find themselves, and to become aware of the great distance that separates them, as historical proto-searchers, from those events they are in the process of investigating. Laville stated twenty-five years ago that there is a need to break with school history that induces “... a mental attitude: that of consumer knowledge, and a model of thinking, that of belief: in the revealed and exclusive truth” (1984, p. 80). It seems that students in the two research cohorts had more opportunities and incentives to handle those tools used to confirm historical memory rather than criticize it. Finally, it would be useful to look at the limits of this work. With respect to gender, the two samples were more or less in line with the national distribution. For the French-Canadian population, the number of experimental subjects was among the largest to date. Given the random nature of sampling and the student base to which we had access, these results are, however, limited. Moreover, even with a probability sample, the sampling error (induced by the segmentation by gender and selfreported ethnicity, and the correspondent sample size) prohibits a plethora of statistical tests.

Notes 1

2

3



For the same reason, neither did we examine these concepts in relation to those of historical fiction, myth or dogma, nor did we try to make the same allusion to multi-secular discussions on the definition or the validity of concepts relative to events, facts, truth or real history, although the various authors cited are interested in these questions. Locating a subject in time refers to its presence in the world and thus, its existence (as it is felt) and the general concrete relations that, at a given moment, link them (as individuals or part of a group) with the background and circumstances in which they must live and act. AN ACT RESPECTING THE NATIONAL CAPITAL COMMISSION (RSQ, c. C-33.1) [...] CONSIDERING that Québec is the national capital of Québec, [...] Chapter II: MISSION AND POWERS: 14. The Commission shall see to the planning and development of the capital so as to ensure the enhancement of its attributes as a centre of political and administrative governance and as a national symbol of assembly for all the citizens of Québec. It shall also see to promotion of the capital. To that end, the Commission may, in the territory of

116

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11



Chapter Five the Communauté Métropolitaine de Québec, in particular; 1. contribute to the planning of and improvement to the major buildings and equipment which characterize a capital; 2. establish squares, parks and gardens and promenades and erect monuments and works of art; 3. support the improvement of the quality of architecture and the landscape, [...] Article 18 of Act 17. The Society’s objectives are to promote and support in all regions of Québec, to establish and develop cultural undertakings, including the media, and to help increase the quality of products and services and competitiveness of these in Québec, in the rest of Canada and abroad. As can be read on the Society’s site: “City of Creation has given its name to more than 380 monumental works showing the city colours in Lyon, Barcelona, Mexico City, Angouleme, Mulhouse, Biarritz, Marseille, Brest, Paris, Leipzig, Carcassonne, Lisbon, Porto, Namur, Jerusalem, Québec, etc.” Fresque de la découverte du cap Rouge; Fresque Desjardins de Lévis; Fresque Desjardins de Beauport; Fresque du Centre Horizon; Fresque: Nous le monde ordinaire; Fresque de la bibliothèque Gabrielle-Roy; Fresque de l’Hôtel-Dieu de Québec; Fresque du Petit Champlain; Les fresques des piliers; Fresque de la bibliothèque Lauréat-Vallière. La fresque peut être vue à cet URL: Murals include: Discovery of Cap Rouge; Desjardins de Lévis; Desjardins in Beauport; Centre Horizon: We the Ordinary World; Gabrielle-Roy library; Hôtel-Dieu Hospital in Québec City, Petit Champlain; The Pillars; The Lauréat-Vallière library,. The mural can be seen at this URL: http://www.sodec.gouv.qc.ca/patrimoine_fresque.php The period during which these seven key characters played an active part in the life of Québec was from 1608 to 1700, less than a hundred years. Cartier was the exception; he came to New France three times between 1534 and 1542, yet his total stay was no longer than two years. In 1760, the population had not yet reached 70,000. This ranking is still a little delicate: we placed the people according to the period in which their activities took place in relation to Québec City. As such, Cartier is represented, but not his Amerindian host, Donnacona. This omission does not provide any awareness of the Amerindian abductions resulting from this first contact, an event that indicates the tenor of relations that the settlers wanted to establish with the Natives. Each person is wearing a different sweater, and these happen to be the uniforms of three professional hockey teams: the Aces, the Nordiques and the Canadiens. The first disappeared in 1971, the second moved to Denver and was renamed the Avalanche in 1995. The third still exists. The Aces and the Nordiques are still local teams, while the Canadiens are playing in Montréal. Throughout this text, we used the term French-Canadian to designate individuals belonging to groups unified by a common language and culture (dual membership can sometimes be traced over ten generations). We prefer this term to Québecers and Francophones. The first refers to all the inhabitants of the territory of Québec. The second indicates the language used rather than

History Written on Walls

12

13 14

15

16

117

the individual’s culture. One of them was the child of Southeast Asian parents, the other of Central American parents. The timeline is a tool regularly used in history courses. In 2006, the management of a Montréal gym agreed to frost the windows of an exercise room, upon a request from and at the expense of a Hassidic Jewish group. They wanted to prevent their young boys from seeing women in gym clothing. The management subsequently changed its mind, out of respect for women’s right to equality. This nevertheless triggered a debate about immigration in all regions of Québec, a debate that has increasingly taken on xenophobic and racist tones (especially anti-Muslim). The media focused their attention on isolated (often distorted) incidents of this nature, and certain politicians even blamed emigration for a hypothetical extinction of Québecers of French-Canadian culture. Against the pre-election backdrop, the party in power in Québec at the time (PLQ) deferred the issue in February 2007 to a committee chaired by two established academics (Bouchard and Taylor). In 2008 they were entrusted to lead public consultations and submit a report on the place that accommodation should be given in the public arena, and on practices related to cultural differences, including reasonable accommodation, the arrangement related to jurisprudence that was intended to relax the application of a standards in favour of persons threatened with discrimination on the grounds of an individual particularities accorded protection by the law. Experts hired by the committee described as racist or negative, one-sixth of the 1,000 interventions attributed to the French Canadians, as heard by the commission in public hearings held across the province (Éthier, Lantheaume and Lefrançois, 2008). The studied curriculum (History and Citizenship Education, 2nd cycle) which, since September 2008, has replaced the History of Québec and Canada, a prescriptive program in Grade 10 (Secondary IV) somewhat increased the role played by First Nations following their contact. The fictional film New France was mentioned a few times; as well as the Patriot, along with a critique on the propagandist nature of this Hollywood movie.

Acknowledgement This article is part of a research program funded by the Council of Social Sciences and Humanities Research (SSHRC), from 2005 to 2008. It is interested in both the historical thought and the historical consciousness of young Canadians, especially the links between social representations that Francophone Quebec students from Grade 10 (Secondary IV) put forward with respect to political issues, and also the learning they acquired in their history courses.



118

Chapter Five

References Audet, F. (2006) Mémoire du Québec, conscience historique et conscience politique chez les jeunes Québécois de niveau collégial, mémoire inédit (M.A. histoire). Sainte-Foy: Université Laval, p. 143. Baillargeon, S. (2007). Ce qu’il reste de nous. Le Devoir (15 décembre), p. B3. Barton, K. C. (2001a) ‘“You’d Be Wanting to Know about the Past”: Social Contexts of Children’s Historical Understanding in Northern Ireland and the USA’, Comparative Education, 37(1), pp. 89-106. —. (2001b) ‘A Sociocultural Perspective of Children’s Understanding of Historical Change: Comparative Findings from Northern Ireland and the United States’’, American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), pp. 881-913. —. (2004) ‘Research on Students’ Historical Thinking and Learning’’’, Perspectives,42(7). http://www.historians.org/Perspectives/Issues/2004/0410/0410tea1.cfm —. (2005) ‘Teaching History: Primary Sources In History: Breaking Through the Myths’, Phi Delta Kappan, 86, pp. 745-751 Barton, K. C. and Levstik L. S. (1998) ‘“It Wasn’t a Good Part of History”: National Identity and Students’ Explanations of Historical Significance’, Teachers College Record, 99 (3), pp. 478-513. Barton, K. C. and Levstik L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 288. Berg, W., L. Graeffe & C. Holden (2003). ‘Teaching controversial issues: A European perspective’, London: Children’s Identity & Citizenship in Europe, p. 13. Bouvier, F. (2008) Bilan du débat relatif au programme histoire et éducation à la citoyenneté du deuxième cycle de l’ordre d’enseignement secondaire qui a eu cours au Québec en 2006-2007. Québec: Montréal, p. 20 http://www.accommodements.qc.ca/documentation/rapports/rapport13-bouvier-felix.pdf Caouette, J. (2000) Les représentations des élèves de quatrième secondaire de la Polyvalente Le Carrefour de Val-D’Or concernant l’histoire, mémoire inédit (M.Ed.). Rouyn-Noranda: Universite de Quebec en Antibi-Quemis Temiscamingue (UQAT) p. 147. Cardin J.F. (2007) ‘L’oeuvre de destruction de l’identité nationale se poursuit: quelques commentaires d’un didacticien dans la foulée des réactions au projet de programmes d’histoire nationale au secondaire’, Bulletin d’histoire politique, 15 (2), pp. 67-81. Charland, J.P. (2003) Les élèves, l’histoire et la citoyenneté. Sainte-Foy:



History Written on Walls

119

PUL, p. 333. Chilcoat, G. W. & J. A. Ligon (2004) ‘Issues-Centred Instruction in the Social Studies Classroom: The Richard E. Gross Problem-Solving Approach Model’, Social Studies Review, 32(3), pp. 374-381. Chowen, B. W. (2006) Teaching Historical Thinking: What Happened in a Secondary School World History Classroom? Thèse de doctorat inédite, Université du Texas, Austin, p. 222. Coron, M. (1997) L’infusion de l’Éducation dans une perspective planétaire au primaire, in M. Hrimech and F. Jutras (Dir.), Défis et enjeux de l’Éducation dans une perspective planétaire. Sherbrooke: CRP, pp. 75-93. Dagenais, M. and C. Laville (2007). ‘Le naufrage du projet de programme d’histoire « nationale' »’, Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française, 60 (4), pp. 517-550. Dalongueville, A. (2001) L’image du barbare dans l’enseignement de l’histoire. Paris: L’Harmattan, p. 304. Darrent, B. & P. Clark (2006) ‘Historical Empathy and Canada: A People’s History’, Revue Canadienne d’éducation, 29(4), pp. 10391064. Dery, C. (2007) Études des conditions du transfert, du contexte scolaire au contexte extra scolaire, d’un mode de pensée d’inspiration historienne chez les élèves du 3e cycle du primaire, Thèse inédite (Ed.D.). Montréal: Universite de Quebec a Montreal (UQÀM) p. 368 Epstein, T. (1997) ‘Sociocultural Approaches to Young People’s Historical Understanding’, Social Education, 61, pp. 28-31. —. (2000). ‘Adolescents’ Perspectives on Racial Diversity in US History: Case Studies from an Urban Classroom’, American Educational Research Journal, 37 (1), pp. 185-214. Éthier, M.-A. (2007) ‘Apprendre à exercer sa citoyenneté à l’aide de l’Histoire’, Bulletin d’histoire politique, 15 (2), hiver, pp. 53-58. —. (2006). ‘Les manuels d’histoire et la citoyenneté’, Revue canadienne des sciences de l’éducation, 29 (3), pp. 650-683. —. (2004). ‘Réflexivité en histoire et éducation à la citoyenneté’, in Pallascio, R. (dir.), Pensée et réflexivité. Montréal: PUQ, pp. 53-69. —. (2001). ‘Apologie pour une histoire frelatée’, Traces, 38(4), novembre, pp. 14-17. Ethier M.A., J.F. Cardin and J.P. Charland (2006) « L’enseignement de l’histoire et la conscience citoyenne des élèves au Québec », LISA, III (2) http://www.unicaen.fr/mrsh/anglais/lisa/francais/tableMatieres.php Ethier M.A. and D. Lefrançois (2007) ‘Éduquer à la citoyenneté délibérative: le défi d’exercer un leadership sociopolitique pour



120

Chapter Five

rectifier les inégalités à l’école et en démocratie’, Revue des sciences de l’éducation de McGill, 42 (3), pp. 355-391. Éthier, M.A., F. Lantheaume & D. Lefrançois (2008 ‘L’enseignement au Québec et en France des questions controversées en histoire: tensions entre politique du passé et politique de la reconnaissance dans les curricula’, Éducation et francophonie, 36 (1), pp. 65-85. Evans, R. W. and Saxony D. W. (2007) Handbook on Teaching Social Issues, Greenwich, Conn.: Information Age Publishing, p. 416. Ferro, M. (2004) Comment on raconte l’histoire aux enfants à travers le monde, Paris: Payot, p. 640 Gregg, M. & G. Leinhardt (2002) ‘Learning from the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute’, American Educational Research Journal, 39 (2), pp. 553-87. Julien, M.-L. (2005) La mémoire collective: récits de cégépiens concernant les représentations du parcours historique franco-québécois, mémoire inédit (M.A. sociologie), Montréal: UQÀM, p. 113. Kohlmeier, J. (2005) ‘A Three-Step Approach to Historical Significance in High School World History’, International Journal of Social Education, 20 (1), pp. 64-75. Kansteiner, W. (2002) Finding Meaning in Memory: A Methodological Critique of Collective Memory Studies’, History and Theory, 41 (2), 179–197. Laville, C. (2000) ‘À l’assaut de la mémoire collective’, Traces, 38 (4), pp. 18-26. —. (2002) ‘Que (re)viendrait faire la mémoire dans l’enseignement de l’histoire?’, Encounters on Education, 3 (Fall), pp. 5–25. —. (2004) ‘Historical Consciousness and History Education’, dans P. Seixas (Dir.), Theorizing Historical Consciousness, Buffalo, N.Y.: University of Toronto Press, pp. 165-182. —. (1984). Le manuel d’histoire pour en finir avec la version de l’équipe gagnante, in Moniot, H. (dir.), Enseigner l’histoire. Des manuels à la mémoire, Berne, Peter Lang, pp. 77-91. Lee, P. & D. Shemilt (2004) ‘Progression in Understanding about Historical Accounts’, Teaching History, 117, pp. 25-31. Lee, P., R. Ashby & A. Dickinson (2001) ‘Children’s ideas about historical explanation’, in A. Dickinson, P. Gordon & P. Lee (dir.) Raising standards in history education, International Review of History Education, 3, London, Woburn Press, pp. 97-115. Leeuw-Roord, J. (2000) ‘Working with History: Developing European Consciousness’, in MacDonald, Approches to European Conciousness, Hambourg, Körber-Stiftung , pp. 114-124.



History Written on Walls

121

Lefrancois, D. & M.-A. Éthier (2008) ‘Éducation à la citoyenneté et démocratie délibérative en classe d’histoire: dangers et précautions’, Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 34(2), Letourneau, J. (2006)’ Mythistoire du loser: introduction au roman national des Québécois d’héritage canadien-français’, Histoire Sociale 39 (77), pp. 157-180. Levesque, S. (2008) Thinking Historically: Educating Students in the 21st Century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, p. 240 Levstik, L. S. (2001). ‘Crossing the Empty Spaces: New Zealand adolescents’ conceptions of perspective taking and historical significance’, in O. L. Davis, Elizabeth A. Yeager, & Stuart J. Foster (dir.). Historical Empathy and Perspective Taking in the Social Studies, Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 69-96. —. (2000). ‘Articulating the silences: Teachers’ and adolescents’ conceptions of historical significance’, in P. Stearns, P. Seixas & S. Wineburg (dir.), Knowing, Teaching, & Learning History, NYU Press, pp. 284-305. Lukacs, G. (1919-1922/1960) Histoire et conscience de classe. Essais de dialectique marxiste, Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit, p. 383. Lukacs, J. (1968). Historical Consciousness; or, The Remembered Past, New York: Harper and Row, p. 373. Maggioni, L, P. Alexander & B. Vansledright (2004) The Development of Epistemological Beliefs and Historical Thinking, European Journal of School Psychology, 2, pp. 169-197. Martineau, R. (2000) ‘La pensée historique… une alternative réflexive précieuse pour l’éducation du citoyen’, in R. Palascio and L. Lafortune, Pour une pensée réflexive en éducation, Sainte-Foy: PUQ, pp. 282-309. McCully, A. W. and K Barton. C. (2003) ‘History, Identity, and the school curriculum in Northern Ireland: An empirical study of secondary students’ ideas and perspectives’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37 (1), pp. 85-116. Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2004) Programme de formation de l’école québécoise, Enseignement secondaire, 1er cycle, Québec City: Gouvernement du Québec, p. 612. Moison, S. (2002) Mémoire historique de l’aventure française québécoise chez les jeunes franco-québécois d’héritage canadien-français. Coup de sonde et analyse des résultats, mémoire inédit (M.A. histoire). SainteFoy: Université Laval, p. 153. Novack, G. (1971) Democracy and Revolution, New York: Pathfinder, p. 344 Ochoa-Becker, A. S. (2007) Education for Social Studies: An Issues-



122

Chapter Five

Centred Decision Making Curriculum, Greenwich, Conn.: IAPInformation Age Pub. p. 347. Osborne K. (2003) ‘Teaching History in Schools: A Canadian Debate’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35 (5), pp. 585-626. Rosenzweig, R. & D. Thelen (1998) The Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in American Life, New York: Columbia University Press, p. 291. Rüsen, J. (2004). ‘Historical Consciousness: Narrative Structure, Moral Function, and Ontogenetic Development, pp. 66-67’, in P. Seixas, Theorizing Historical Consciousness, University of Toronto Press. Sandwell, R. (Dir.) (2006) To the Past: History Education, Public Memory & Citizenship in Canada, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, p. 120. Seixas, P. and P. Clark (2004) ‘Murals as Monuments: Students’ Ideas about Depictions of Civilization in British Columbia’, American Journal of Education, 110 (2): pp. 146-171. —. Seixas, P. (dir.) (2004) Theorizing Historical Consciousness, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, p. 255 —. (2000). ‘Schweigen! Die Kinder! or Does postmodern history have a place in the schools?’, in P. Stearns, P. Seixas and S. S. Wineburg (eds.), Knowing, Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives, New York: New York University Press. —. (1997) ‘Mapping the terrain of historical significance’, Social Education, 61 (1), pp. 22-27. —. (1994) ‘Historical understanding among adolescents in a multicultural setting’, Curriculum Inquiry, 23 (3), pp. 301-327. —. (1993a) ‘The community of inquiry as a basis for knowledge and learning: The case of history’, American Educational Research Journal, 30 (2), pp. 305-324. —. (1993b) ‘Parallel crises: History and the social studies curriculum in the USA’, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25, pp. 235–250. Stoskopf, A. (2001) Reviving Clio: Inspired History Teaching and Learning (without high-stake tests), Phi Delta Kappan, 82 (1). Tutiaux-Guillon, N. and D. Nourrisson (dir.) (2003) Identités, mémoires, conscience historique, Saint-Étienne: Presses de l université de SaintÉtienne, p. 220. Tutiaux-Guillon, N. and M.-J. Mousseau (1998) ‘Les jeunes et l’histoire: identités, valeurs, conscience historique: enquête européenne’, Youth and History, Paris: Institut Nationale de Recherche Pedagogique (INRP) p. 173. Wellington, J. (1986) ‘Controversial Issues in the Curriculum, England’, Basil Blackwell, p. 192, sited by Berg W., L. Graeffe and C. Holden, C.



History Written on Walls

123

(2003), Teaching controversial issues: A European perspective, London: Children’s Identity & Citizenship in Europe. Wertsch, J. V. (1999) ‘Revising Russian history’, Written Communication, 16 (3), pp. 267-295. —. (2002) Voices of Collective Remembering, New-York: Cambridge University Press, p. 208. White, H. (2007) ‘Guilty of History ? The Longue Durée of Paul Ricoeur’, History and Theory 46 (May), pp. 233-251. Wineburg, S. (2001) Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, p. 255. —. Wineburg, S., Mosborg, S., Porat, D. and Duncan A. (2007) ‘Common Belief and the Cultural Curriculum: An Intergenerational Study of Historical Consciousness’, American Educational Research Journal, 44 (1), pp. 40-76. Yeager, E. A., Foster S. J. and Greer J. (2002) ‘Activities for Strengthening the Meaning of Democracy for Elementary School Children’, Social Studies, 93 (1), pp. 18-22. Zimmerman, J. (2002). Whose America? Culture wars in the public schools, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 28.





CHAPTER SIX “THINKING EACH OTHER’S HISTORY”: CAN FACING THE PAST CONTRIBUTE TO EDUCATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY? GAIL WELDON FORMERLY OF WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE DEPARTMENT, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA

Abstract: At the core of curriculum reform in post-apartheid South Africa has been the desire to transform both education and society. In the introduction to the Revised National Curriculum Statements adopted in 2002, the stated aim is to ensure that “a national South African identity is built on values very different from those that underpinned apartheid education.” It is hoped that learners will be inspired by these values and will “act in the interests of a society based on respect for democracy, equality, human dignity and social justice”. The overall aim is for schools to be transformed into sites where learners live out the negotiated values of the South African Constitution and the Bill of Rights. History has been identified as a particularly appropriate carrier subject for fulfilling these aims. However, little attention has been paid to the attitudes and values of teachers, which will impact on implementation. All South Africans who lived under apartheid have been conditioned in varying degrees to the attitudes and the prejudices of the apartheid society. If we are to embrace this values-driven curriculum and develop in learners a respect for human dignity, equality and social justice, then teachers need to develop these same values first and use them to transform their classrooms and teaching. This paper discusses a pilot project, Facing the Past – Transforming the Future which aimed to support teachers and learners in education for human rights, and democracy through history, with Nazi Germany and



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

125

apartheid South Africa as case studies. Grade 9 teachers from 12 diverse schools in Cape Town are participating in the project. Key Words: Apartheid, Attitudes of teachers, Beliefs, Cape Town, Curriculum reform, Curriculum 2005, Democracy, Facing the Past project, Human rights, Identity, Nazi Germany, South Africa, Professional Development, Pedagogy, Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Teacher education, Transformation Curriculum, Values of teachers

Introduction Since 1994 South Africa has been on a virtual roller coaster of curriculum reform. With the demise of apartheid, the development of a new curriculum received high priority. The apartheid education system, based on Christian National ideology and fundamental pedagogics, created enormous inequalities in education for South Africans. Teacher education stressed Christian National values and many white Afrikaner classrooms became virtual mission fields as white South African children were groomed to become members of the ruling elite and black South African children educated to the level of labour. The challenge for any new curriculum in this context would be to redress the inequalities of the past while at the same time, delivering quality education for all.

Curriculum Development – 1996-2005 Late in 1996, a number of working groups made up largely of stakeholder representatives, began work on the General Education and Training (Grades R-9) Band of a new national curriculum. The resultant Curriculum 2005 (the target date for final implementation) introduced a “transformational” outcomes-based curriculum, which dissolved all subject boundaries, creating 8 Learning Areas. History all but disappeared within the Learning Area for Human and Social Sciences Learning. The impact on teaching and learning was profound. In the desire to move away from what Foucault terms the “regime of truth” that apartheid education forced on South Africans, the curriculum pendulum swung too far the other way. Teachers, who had just emerged from Christian National Education, fundamental pedagogics and a highly authoritarian and structured educational framework, were left with a constructivist curriculum and no guiding framework at all. Teachers were expected to write their own learning programmes, create their own resources and become facilitators of learning.



126

Chapter Six

The use of textbooks was actively discouraged. As a result, teachers felt disempowered rather than freed from the shackles of the past system. In 2000, the newly appointed Minister of Education, Prof. Kader Asmal, launched a process of revision of Curriculum 2005 (C2005). In 2002, the Revised National Curriculum Statements (RNCS) became policy. Those driving the revision of curriculum C2005 mobilised the “language of democracy” (Apple, 2003) and all Learning Areas writing groups were required to infuse issues of human rights and social justice into the curriculum’s Learning Areas.

Issues and Principles Representatives from the Human Rights Commission reviewed the work in progress, making comments and recommendations. The overarching values framing the curriculum are those of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The preamble to the South African Constitution highlights the importance of “recognising the injustices of our past” and “healing the divisions of the past” while establishing “a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights”. President Mandela, when he addressed the Constitutional Assembly on the occasion of the adoption of the new Constitution in Cape Town on 8 May 1996, said: “This is our national soul, our compact with one another as citizens…Our pledge is: Never and never again shall the laws of our land rend our people apart or legalise their oppression and repression.”

Within the framework of the Revised National Curriculum Statements (RNCS), it was hoped that schools would become places that would help to construct democratic principles and where learners would be guided towards developing democratic values. The introduction to the Revised National Curriculum Statement (2002) stated: “The promotion of values is important not only for the sake of personal development, but also to ensure that a national South African identity is built on values very different from those that underpinned apartheid education. [We want to develop] learners who will be inspired by these values, and who will act in the interests of a society based on respect for democracy, equality, human dignity, life and social justice.”

The RNCS also brought back a much stronger subject base into the learning areas, and a Social Sciences working group was given a directive to make a clear distinction between History and Geography, and to



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

127

highlight issues of social and environmental justice. From being a “none” subject in Curriculum 2005, History in the RNCS was allocated a particular role as a vehicle for education for human rights and democracy.

History, Values and National Identity The Report of the Working Group on Values in Education (2000) stated that “the teaching of history is central to the promotion of all human values…History is one of the many memory systems that shape our values and morality…” History is also considered to be central to the construction of a national identity, building a collective memory based on the recognition of our past histories and the development of a critically responsible citizenry, ready to participate in a democracy at all levels. This raises a number of questions. Can the study of history engender in learners the democratic values and critical skills required for active participation in a democracy? And can it, in the words of Mandela, ensure that “never and never again” will the past repeat itself? Can facing a past of gross human rights abuses help us to transform? It is within this context and for the purpose of trying to find answers to these questions, that the pilot project, Facing the Past - Transforming our Future was set up. Facing the Past was a six-month pilot project that explored strategies for education for human rights and democracy in the context of History, Visual Art and Life Orientation within the Revised National Curriculum Statement. It was a partnership between the Western Cape Education Department (WCED), the Cape Town Holocaust Centre (CTHC) and Facing History and Ourselves Organisation in Boston (FHAO). Forty Grade 9 teachers from twelve schools representing all of the ex-Education Departments of the Western Cape attended the launch seminar. It was of utmost importance to the project that we had a representative group of teachers. Giroux (1988) believes that if we ask history no questions it will remain silent and that under cover of such silences, history can be revisited with the injustices and inhumanity that have, in the past, placed the world in peril. He views history as possibility, tomorrow as not necessarily something that will be a repetition of today. The histories questioned in this project were Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, and apartheid South Africa; both content areas for Grade 9 History in the Revised National Curriculum Statements (RNCS). Visual Art plays an important role in that the language of art is a non-verbal text, the use of which is crucial in understanding visual sources and the critical way in which art reflects and interprets society. Powerful visual images played a key role in Nazi



128

Chapter Six

Germany and in resistance politics in apartheid South Africa. Life Orientation is a new Learning Area with a strong focus on human rights.

Professional Development & Pedagogy – Issues and Concerns The project has two other key aspects: supporting teachers in introducing the methodological changes required by the RNCS and exploring on-line support for teaching and learning. Combining methodological changes and online support with Education for Human Rights and Democracy moves away from the technicist training for the introduction of the new curriculum that has up to now characterised In Service Training (INSET) run by the Education Departments. Wally Morrow, in a paper delivered at Values in Education Conference convened in Cape Town in 2001, said: “It is fashionable to think of education in terms of the ‘development of competencies, but there are limitations to this view. Nazi leaders were not in general lacking in competence…High degrees of competence are compatible with moral degeneracy. Most teacher-education programmes focus [too] sharply on the development of competence and not enough on professional commitment.”

The starting point for any project exploring strategies for Education for Human Rights and Democracy in a South African context has to be educators confronting their own past. The majority of educators (teachers, advisers, policy makers) after ten years following the establishment of democracy, are still the generation of perpetrators and victims – we are the products of apartheid with all our prejudices, racism, hurt, anger, and guilt. Bloke Modisane, author and exile, wrote in his book Blame me on History, in 1963: “All of us in South Africa have been conditioned to the attitudes and the prejudices of our society. We are educated into an acceptance that racially we are different, that the white man has advanced to such a high degree of civilisation that it will take the Native 2000 years to attain that degree. This single fact exists as a premise in the minds of people who may otherwise not themselves be necessarily prejudiced…[we] are all products – and perhaps victims – of the attitudes of our society.”



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

129

Truth and Reconciliation Commission As in post-Nazi Germany, the civil service, including teachers, in postapartheid South Africa has continued uninterrupted. There is, however, a major difference – the hearings of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) has made it far more difficult for South Africans to ignore or to deny our past. What the TRC did not engage with was the role of Christian National Education (CNE) as the tool of white hegemony in South Africa, which was based on the denial of human rights in education to the majority of South Africans. Engaging with the legacy of CNE in professional development is just as important as engaging with the political and human rights abuses of the apartheid system, as many are in denial about the extent of that legacy.

History, memory and society The Report of the History and Archaeology Panel to the Minister of Education (2000) stated that the study of history “is deliberately about the crucial role of memory in society. In a country like South Africa, which has a fractured national memory, the development of common historical memories…can play an integrative role in our culture and polity”. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) played an important role in beginning the process of constructing a collective memory for South Africans. A collective memory can be regarded as an accepted version of the truth about a country’s past (Gibson 2003). By establishing a collective memory, it becomes difficult for people to deny that certain activities took place, thereby “reducing the number of lies that can be circulated unchallenged in public discourse” (Ignatieff 1996) Though the TRC has had its critics, the uncovering of abuses committed by both sides during the TRC hearings contributed to a collective memory and, through this, to the process of reconciliation in South Africa.

Facing the Past – Curricular Principles into Practice The four-day teacher seminar held to launch Facing the Past became, as one participant remarked, like a mini Truth Commission. Facilitators were from Facing History and Ourselves, the Western Cape Education Department, and the person appointed in a full time capacity by the Cape Town Holocaust Centre and Facing History to run the project. For the first time, teachers from across the spectrum of schools who had never had the opportunity to really get to know one another, worked together intensively.



130

Chapter Six

This was a powerful experience and led to the creation of a safe space for sharing, and for contributing to their own collective memory. It also opened the way for the participating teachers to begin the process of reclaiming their professionalism as they discussed and negotiated with each other in the sessions. The seminar followed two important tenets: that teacher professionalism and personal development should go hand in hand to avoid professional development becoming a technicist exercise. The first sessions explored personal and group identities. The failure of democracy in Weimar Germany and key issues in Nazi Germany followed. Connections were made with South Africa if appropriate. The second half of the seminar was spent working with sources from apartheid South Africa.

Impact – sessions on theatre and silent comment and conversation There is only space in this chapter to discuss two key sessions. The first was called “Using theatre techniques to explore difficult issues”. The participants were divided into groups, and all groups were given the same text. They had to read and discuss the meaning of the text and then pick key words which they felt would best convey that meaning. The group then had to negotiate and reach consensus on the words. Finally they had to give a dramatic presentation of the words in a ‘round-robin’ situation – in the centre of a large circle made by the rest of the teachers. The presentations were accompanied by the beat of an African drum. The group discussions and presentations involved negotiation, dramatisation, emotion and a physical contact and closeness that is rare in our divided society and it contributed in a very real way to changing perceptions of one other. The presentations were diverse and imaginative. One teacher, who is also a praise singer, made use of the opportunity to use his skills in an educational context. This was culturally significant because such teachers rarely feel free to bring personal knowledge and skills into the teaching environment. Possibly the most powerful session was a silent comment and conversation session, using a set of extracts containing the personal experiences of ordinary people from different race groups that were living under apartheid. The extracts were placed on sheets of newsprint and a group was accordingly allocated to an extract to start the process of reading and commenting in writing on the newsprint. The groups moved around in silence, reading, writing comments and engaging in silent “conversation” with each other’s comments. The session was drawn



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

131

together first by group discussions of the comments, and then in a plenary session. There was a wide variety of responses. Some comments revealed the depth of pain that many had suffered during apartheid.

Personal feelings and experiences “My father once wanted to take us to a beach “whites only”. We got there. The police stood at the turn-off. They would allow my father to go in, but not the “maid (domestic worker/servant) and her kids”. All of us, including my father, cried all the way home.”

Others wrote of the continuing impact of apartheid: “We still feel very much inferior to whites…Sometimes when you do something perfectly they call you umlumgu (white man) as if a white man is capable of doing only good things” or “I get angry with myself when my child’s invited to his “white friend” and we feel honoured!”

From a white participant: “I was too often a bystander. I felt powerless and afraid.”

A comment recognising currently held prejudices: “Albino in African language is inkawu (monkey) and they are not treated the same as others. Criticised, feel isolated, will die soon.”

The impact of apartheid: “Apartheid worked effectively. Education facilitated this.”

Thoughts on trying to come to grips with the influence of apartheid: “to ‘unlearn’ behaviour is very difficult after so many years of [successful] indoctrination for all South Africans.”

More personal stories were shared during the plenary. One of the teachers told of her sadness when she recently found out that her family is “coloured”, not “white” as she had thought. She felt that she had been cheated of half of her family and identity as a result of apartheid ideologies. These sessions led to teachers questioning their own assumptions about race and roles in apartheid South Africa. They opened the way for



Chapterr Six

132

interacting oon a deeper level with each other, perhapps reflecting Foucault’s F later ideas oof parrhesia or truth-tellin ng as an eduucational activ vity. In a sense, the chhanges in the group also refflected the chaanges in the way w many South Africaans began to think t about eaach other brouught about by the Truth and Reconciiliation Comm mission, by, in n the words off James Gibso on (2003), “creating coognitive dissonnance and by mitigating m coggnitive dogmaatism”. This led to new belieffs about each other. o “Personallly the seminarr has made me again reflect onn my own prejjudices and weakknesses. We need to deal with h the issues at a personal leveel first, before wee attempt to brooach the subjectt with our learneers.” “The sem minar challengedd personal preco onceptions and provoked deep p thoughts aand a consideraation of importaant issues. Profe fessionally it creeated new oppoortunities/alternnatives/new paraadigm shift.”

Figure 6-1 adapted froom Gibson, illlustrates this pprocess. Apartheidd experiencces

‡˜˜‡Žƒ–‹‘•‹ †‘……—‡–•‘ˆƒ’ƒ ƒ”–Š‡‹† ‡š’ ’‡”‹‡…‡•

•‡ ‹ƒ”

”‘—’•Š Šƒ”‡ ‡š’‡”‹‡ …‡•

Beliefs about South Africans off other races

‘‰‹–‹˜‡ †‹••‘ƒ…‡ ‡ ƒ†‹–‹‰ƒ ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ…‘‰‹–‹˜‡ †‘‰ƒ–‹• 

‡™„‡Ž‹‡ˆˆ• ƒ„‘—–‘—––Š ˆ”‹…ƒ•‘ˆˆ –Š‡””ƒ…‡ ‡•

“As a perrson the seminaar taught me to forgive and doo away with hattred of other racees. Professionaally it taught me m not to invollve my emotion ns that may triggger hatred of whhites by my learrners when dealling with the paast.” “Personallly it made me challenge the assumptions I had about otheers and myself; itt was wonderfuul to spend so much m time withh other educatorrs. The experiencce enriched me m professionallly in terms oof methodolog gy and because iit had helped me m see myself in the context of my country y more clearly.”



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

133

Classroom Implementation 2004 Classroom implementation began in January 2004. Teachers were faced with transferring their new knowledge and understanding to the classroom. This had its own challenges. According to sociologist Aslam Fataar (2003), the world of schooling in South Africa is characterised by a mismatch between the world of young peoples “identities and values”, and the teachers’ “identities and values”. Teachers are the apartheid generation and grew up with racism and the abuse of human rights as fundamental organising principles of every aspect of their lives. Young peoples’ identities are currently shaped by consumption. Youth consumption, choices about music, clothes and sexual activities are all influenced by images brought into our homes by television and the Internet. Consumption culture is powerful in influencing choice, more so than issues of race. Race as a crude form is not visible, although race continues to be an underlying influence in school culture and surfaces dramatically from time to time. Three teachers on the project were from a former ‘white’ Cape Town school that had just had a highly publicised racially motivated incident occur in the school playground. Young people also have to face the fact that their parents may have been perpetrators or victims or one of the many bystanders who benefited from the apartheid system. German author Bernard Schlink (2003) has said that the lessons his generation drew from the past were more moral than institutional. “We accused our parents, teachers, professors and politicians of blindness, cowardice, opportunism, ambition, ruthless careerism and lack of civil courage. These accusations criticised individual moral failure, and they came with a moral obligation to behave differently. To us, that was the lesson of the past. It was necessary to practice individual moral courage. It was necessary to stop things before they started, when courage had a better chance…”

According to Schlink, the past is less present for the third and fourth generation who no longer feel guilty. In South Africa, young people, the first generation, do not want to learn about apartheid and parents tend not to discuss it. Learning about apartheid inevitably means confronting the racism that is being submerged by the consumer culture that currently prevails. Not engaging in or creating a collective memory makes it easier to deny the past with much less guilt and enables many young people to avoid choices other than those of consumerism. Fataar argues that apparent ignorance about racism and apartheid may be part of their strategic



134

Chapter Six

decisions–a way of circumventing racialised pain. But, as Apple (2003) pointed out in a different context, race matters. Continual denial may well come back to haunt us. There was a further consideration for the project in putting together the school programme. Annegret Ehrmann (2001), a Holocaust historian in Germany, has shown that although there is a general belief that Holocaust education will immunise young people against racism, intolerance, bigotry and hate, there are no empirical surveys on the effects of Holocaust education to back up this belief. She maintains that there is nothing to support the assertion that knowledge about atrocities suffered by Holocaust victims, will bring about desirable behaviour in young people in a contemporary context. If that is the case, then it seems reasonable to suppose that the same will be true of teaching about the abuses and racism of apartheid South Africa. This had implications for the approach we followed for Facing the Past. Gibson (2003) has suggested that what made the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) influential was that the South African media focused overwhelmingly on the human-interest side of the TRC’s activities. South Africans learned of the suffering of ordinary people. The information typically had no conspicuous ideological content; no obvious message was being sold. Consequently, reports on the TRC did not necessarily raise the sort of defensive alarms that often make new information impotent in terms of bringing about attitude changes. Much of what the TRC put before the South African people was simple and subtle; it had to do with bad guys hurting good guys. While the ‘good guy/bad guy’ dichotomy was too stark for our purposes, we wanted to bring the voices of ordinary people to the teachers and learners. When looking for classroom resources we tried to find sources with experiences that, in the words of John Fines, would “speak” to the learners. When working with the stories the focus was on the choices people made, the significance and consequences of those choices, and also the context in which the choices were made. The aim of the project was not to create a generation of young people who, as Schlink experienced, accuse their parents and other members of society. While being quite clear about the moral implications of what happened in the past, learners need to explore the grey zones of choice and accommodation within an increasingly totalitarian context. The project was also about education for prevention, so the values and attitudes necessary for citizens prepared to actively support democracy both at community and national levels are integral to the ‘lessons’ we need to learn from the past. The pilot, or first phase, of the project ended in June 2004. At the final



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

135

reflection session, apart from the formal evaluation forms, teachers wrote comments on newsprint put up around the room. Just two of the comments are quoted below: “The whole process challenged me to rethink my practices; not just to view as information to be ‘taught’ but really to bring back ‘humanity’ into History teaching. I had to confront my own prejudices about the learners, not assume. To embrace all.” “This approach to History teaching is more ‘human’ and places importance on each individual learner in the group (class). It has made me more open, more process orientated and more creative in how I approach my subject(s). There is more of a partnership between myself and the learners since their perspective becomes what is most important to me in understanding how they think and learn.”

The last comment is significant in that in South Africa, History has been regarded as a ‘swot’ subject, with content to be regurgitated, often in the form of ‘model answers’ given to learners by teachers. It was not analysed on the human level. In fact, even with the broadening of the official curriculum in 1996 in Grade 12 to include apartheid and a resistance, the emphasis is on the actions of organisations and political parties rather than on individual actions and choices. This makes it easier to distance oneself from the moral implications of human agency. What constraints have we faced in this pilot? A major constraint has been the frightening success of the impact of CNE (Christian National Education) and fundamental pedagogics on teachers’ thinking and classroom practice, within the context of the legacy of the inequalities of apartheid teacher training. For all state teachers, the ‘collective memory’ of education in this country is that it was authoritarian, delivered and heavily content-based, and there is a general resistance to change (though, as studies have shown, this is not just a South African phenomenon). These are the ‘standards’ that many teachers and parents hanker after as the rollout of outcome-based education continues. Although the majority of those who believe that ‘standards’ are dropping are white South Africans, there is a growing perception across the spectrum of teachers and parents, that education ‘then’ was better than now. Even some 1980s antiapartheid activists are saying that ‘Gutter education was better than what we have now.’ This is partly a reflection of the disempowerment felt with the introduction of the original Curriculum 2005, but partly the ‘colonisation of the mind’ by Curriculum National Education. An important indicator of the positive impact of this project is that this cohort was also exposed to the possibilities that changing their classroom practice



136

Chapter Six

would bring to their teaching. During the mass action in the mid to late 1980s schools were sites of struggle against apartheid, CNE and fundamental pedagogics. Many of these schools have been unable to redirect their energies and remain dysfunctional. Within a curriculum context, the internalisation of the “official narrative” has been thorough and many teachers struggle to deal with interpretations and alternative points of view. They often do not have the confidence to challenge that narrative. The comment quoted earlier after the silent conversation session is telling: “We still feel very much inferior to whites…” Schools are situated within particular contexts and we have had to be realistic about the roles that teachers can play in transforming schools and society. Although teachers can and must play a productive role, it is unrealistic to expect schools to take on the whole burden of changing society. Any education for human rights and democracy needs to forge links between schools and their surrounding communities. We have schools located in the heart of coastal poaching communities and gangridden communities. The highest aspirations of some of the young people in these schools are to become gangsters or poachers, or a gangster or poacher’s ‘girl’. Apartheid has trapped us in a particular understanding about each other. Unless we can “think each other’s history”, that is, understand and give dignity to each other’s diverse histories, we will find it difficult to create a common memory that can be appropriated for a positive future. Fataar suggests that the most important pedagogical principle to counter the impact of apartheid and racism in our lives is the pedagogy of recognition, the capacity to recognise racial forms and to enter into continual dialogue. But this is difficult when learners (and many teachers) are in denial or think that learning about the apartheid past will cause further division and conflict. The majority of schools in South Africa are not democratically run and teachers, enthused by participating in programmes such as Facing the Past, find it difficult to sustain the energy, enthusiasm and innovation within the school environment. A significant number of the Facing the Past teachers found it difficult to bring colleagues on board, often because teachers who had not participated in the seminars felt threatened and preferred to cling to their old content approach. The fact that a core cohort of 25 teachers participated fully in all aspects of Facing the Past is good, given the current very stressful situation of changing curriculum and the huge demands on teachers that this brings. It is so easy to revert to old methods and perceptions in this context. As we emerge from our divided



“Thinking Each Other’s History”

137

society we need to facilitate the creation of communities of teachers. It was the experience of the four-day launch seminar which created the cognitive dissonance which in turn opened the way for new perceptions and understandings. The follow-up workshops and the online support helped to develop and sustain the emerging community. What we are trying to do is to bring teachers back into the professional development equation.

Reflection and Conclusion Facing the Past began to hold workshops and seminars throughout the country that used human behavior and the actions and decisions of individuals as a lens for exploring South Africa’s past. The program developed resources that helped educators address apartheid in the classroom and created a teachers group that provided mentor support for teachers and curriculum advisors across the country. Ten years later, Facing the Past is still here and has had a profound impact. Since that first year we have trained over 373 teachers and reached more than one million students in over 180 schools. We have also trained over 650 pre-service teachers and work with students taking part in leadership programs developed by Shikaya, the organization that today manages Facing the Past.

Postscript – Editorial Note An indication of Facing the Past’s role comes from an extract from Wikipedia’s 2014 entry on the project: “To help support educators implement this new curriculum, History and Ourselves partnered with the Western Cape Education Department and the Cape Town Holocaust Centre in 2003 to form Facing the Past – Transforming our Future, an initiative to provide professional development and resources to South African teachers as they incorporated this new curriculum into their classrooms, and to help South African educators and students better understand their own history and how their own choices could impact the future of their new democracy.”



138

Chapter Six

References Apple, M. (2003) ‘Educational Reform and the Middle Class’, review of Ball, Stephen (2003) Class strategies and the Education Market: The Middle Classes and Social Advantage” London & New York, Routledge Falmer. Ehrman, A., ‘Learning from History: Seminars on the Nazi Era and the Holocaust for professionals’, in Roth, J. K & Maxwell, E. (eds) (2001) Remembering for the Future, The Holocaust in an Age of Genocide, Education, Palgrave, Macmillan’s global academic publishing. Fataar, A. (2003) Notes from a talk given to Facing the Past teachers in December at the seminar to launch the project. Gibson, J.L. (2003) ‘Overcoming apartheid: Can truth reconcile a divided nation?’ (Version 2.5), research supported by the Law and Social Sciences Program of the National Science Foundation, United States, p. 46. Giroux, H.A. (1988) Teachers as Intellectuals, Towards a critical pedagogy of learning Massachusetts, Bergin & Garvey publishers, Inc. Ignatieff, M. (1996) ‘Articles of Faith’, Index on Censorship 25:5, pp. 110-122. Modisane, B. (1963) Blame me on History AD Donker, paperback edition 1983, p. 93. Morrow, W. (2001) Cultivating Humanity in the Contemporary World, paper delivered at the Saamtrek Conference, Cape Town. Peters, M.A. (2003) ‘Truth-telling as an Educational Practice of the Self: Foucault’, (2003) Parrhesia and the ethics of subjectivity, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 29, No. 2, Schlink, Bernard (2003) The Presence of the Past, lecture delivered at the Cape Town Holocaust Centre, p. 6.

Policies and official reports Revised National Curriculum Statement Grades R-9 (Schools): Social Sciences Department of Education, Pretoria, 2002. Report of the History & Archaeology Panel to the Minister of Education (2000) Department of Education, Pretoria, p. 7. Values, Education and Democracy: Report of the Working Group on Values in Education, Department of Education, Pretoria, 2000, p. 23.





CHAPTER SEVEN SCARCELY AN IMMACULATE CONCEPTION: NEW PROFESSIONALISM ENCOUNTERS OLD POLITICS IN THE FORMATION OF THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL HISTORY CURRICULUM TONY TAYLOR AUSTRALIAN CENTRE FOR PUBLIC HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SYDNEY

Abstract: This chapter deals with the political and educational background to the formation of the Australian national history curriculum, first under the auspices of a newly-formed National Curriculum Board (2008-2009) and then under the auspices of the Australian Curriculum and Assessment Authority during the period 2008-2010. The author describes and analyses the political and educational circumstances that have led to interventions in the curriculum design process that may well vitiate the original intentions of the curriculum designers. The process of curriculum design began in 2008 with the formation of a professionally-based History Advisory Group of which the author was a member (2008-2012). The author outlines the activities and contribution of the History Advisory Group and its sometimes fraught relations with the Australian Curriculum and Assessment Authority. The author argues that these interventions, which have been both political and educational, together with the well-intentioned process of consultation, has led to unfortunate design changes and to politically-motivated delays in curriculum implementation which could lead to its being overturned by a successor conservative coalition government. Key Words: Australia, Catholicism, Consultative process, Educational reform, Ethnicity, Federalism, History curriculum, Localism, Narratives – master-narrative and minor-narratives, National identity, Political interference,



140

Chapter Seven

Professionalism, Protestantism, Regionalism – states and territories

Prologue On December 8th 2010, Peter Garrett, Commonwealth Minister for School Education, former lead singer in Midnight Oil and onetime environmental activist, announced that the draft national curriculum in English, mathematics, science and history had been unanimously endorsed by the states and territories and would be subject to final agreement in October 2011. Additional drafts would emerge from the Australian Assessment, Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and agreement on the other curriculum subjects was expected to follow in due course. In a memorable TV news clip of the occasion, the gangling, shavenheaded and smiling Garrett gazed down at his flock of eight grinning state and territory education ministers who were clustering around him in an apparent show of solidarity. Garrett was smiling because, as a politician under pressure, his federal department had come up with consensus agreement on December 8th, just before a revised pre-Christmas deadline. The state and territory ministers were grinning because they had bought time to carry on blocking, ducking and weaving until the nascent Australian curriculum was shaped to suit their own localised interests, a position that would especially be the case when it came to the national history curriculum. As it happens, December 8th is the Feast of the Immaculate Conception in the Catholic liturgy. What had happened prior to Garret’s announcement however was far from immaculate in conception. The proposed history curriculum was the consequence of a combination of diligent and unprecedented curriculum planning by ACARA professionals, whimsical interference by ACARA board members and, most importantly of all, political interference by the states and territories.

Australian Assessment, Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and the new professionalism Previous attempts to devise a national curriculum in Australia stretched as far back as the 1830s when Governor Bourke, progressive Whig governor of the then colony of New South Wales, attempted to introduce the non-denominational Irish National System into the new colony. In a battle that will be very familiar to students of English history, the local Anglican hierarchy blocked the move on the grounds that Anglican



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

141

taxpayers should not be expected to subsidise a controversial system that supported even limited cross-denominational religious instruction in schools [1]. It was 137 years before another attempt to develop a national approach to education when, in 1973, the reformist Australian Labor Party (ALP) government led by its charismatic leader Gough Whitlam, set up the Canberra-based Curriculum Development Centre (CDC), a small agency whose job it was to provide, on a permissive basis, model curriculum materials for the eight states and territories. However, budget cuts during the subsequent 1975-1983 Malcolm Fraser-led conservative Liberal/National Party coalition (LNP) diminished the CDC’s operations and it was finally closed down in 1984 during the early years of the Hawke 1983 -1991 ALP administration. Between 1991 and 2006, there was very little mention of the national curriculum, that is until early in 2006 when the LNP government led by John Howard, a prime minister who took a personal interest in history education, proposed a national approach to the teaching and learning of Australian history – as a precursor to adding in English, mathematics and science as the other ‘core’ subjects. This solipsistic 2006 initiative foundered when Howard was defeated in a late 2007 general election, to be replaced as prime minister by (Blair clone) Kevin Rudd. What had characterised that period of national curriculum development in school history 1973-2007 therefore, was the curious combination of tentative, haphazard and sporadic materials provision such as the highly regarded, but Victorian schools-only, Social Education Materials Project (SEMP) and the key 2006-7 direct personal interventions in curriculum construction by Prime Minister Howard. This latter event saw Howard’s office attempting to guide closely and firmly the detailed design of Australian history education in ways that satisfied the then prime minister [2]. In contrast, what characterised national curriculum development during the Rudd government years (2007-2010) [3] was first, a coordinated approach to comprehensive national curriculum that involved all states and territories as partners; second, a publicly announced schedule of national development, consultation and implementation; and third, the 2008 creation of an apolitical arm’s length curriculum agency, the National Curriculum Board, to be retitled the Australian Curriculum and Assessment Agency in 2009. The National Curriculum Board/ACARA combined board had full representation of states and territories as well as of non-government education systems. In the space of one year, the federal approach to national curriculum had changed from the ad hoc nonconsultative improvisation and personal intervention LNP approach to the



142

Chapter Seven

systematic and consultative policy-framing and professional ALP approach. In the new curriculum formulation, school history was to be a core subject, with English, mathematics and science in Years Foundation-10 (age 5 through ages 15/16). Furthermore the Australian Assessment, Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) would develop national senior (Years 11 and 12) curriculum frameworks in ancient and modern history. The year 10 Foundation History Curriculum was to be implemented in 2011 and two senior history frameworks (Years 11 and 12 Modern and Ancient) were set for implementation in 2014 as complementary offerings to already established local courses at that level.

Framing the Australian Curriculum in History Briefly, the construction of the Australian Curriculum in history began its public life in late 2008 when it was announced that eminent historian and president of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia, Professor Stuart Macintyre, was appointed as Lead Writer “to draft a Framing Paper” which would outline the proposed aims, principles and structure of Australian Assessment, Curriculum And Reporting Authority’s (ACARA) history curriculum F-10. Working with the author and other colleagues, Macintyre drew up a concise but comprehensive document that was published for consultation in November 2008 [4]. In the National Curriculum Board’s Framing Paper, Macintyre made it quite plain that the F-10 program would be based on a world history perspective, that students would develop discipline-based historical Knowledge, Skills and Understandings through inquiry-based learning and that Overviews linked to Studies in Depth were to form an essential part of the secondary (Years 7-10) curriculum. ‘Knowledge’ and ‘Understandings’ were to be linked together in a single category and key ‘Understandings’ were to be discipline-specific. What follows is an edited version of the proposed Understandings: x Historical significance: the principles behind the selection of what should be remembered, investigated, taught and learned. x Evidence: how to find, select and interpret historical evidence. This involves understanding the nature of a primary source, locating its provenance and context. x Continuity and change: dealing with the complexity of the past. This involves the capacity to understand the sequence of events, to



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

x x x x

143

make connections by means of organising concepts including periodization. Cause and consequence: the interplay of human agency and conditions. This involves an appreciation of motivation and contestation. Historical perspectives: the cognitive act of understanding the different social, cultural and intellectual contexts that shaped people’s lives and actions in the past. Historical empathy and moral judgement: the capacity to enter into the world of the past with an informed imagination and ethical responsibility. Contestation and contestability: dealing with alternative accounts of the past. History is a form of knowledge that shapes popular sentiment and frequently enters into public debate.

The origins of these ‘Understandings’ lay in the 2003 Australian historical literacy framework (twelve elements) devised by the author (with Carmel Young) in 2003[5] and the post 2006 Peter Seixas led Canadian project on historical thinking (six elements) [6]. For example, ‘Contestability’ is an Australian inclusion, and ‘Perspectives’ a Canadian equivalent. Interestingly, empathy, which had been dying a slow death in the UK’s various versions of a national history curriculum, was still regarded as a key component in the National Curriculum Board paper. This was arguably because in Australia, empathy, as a concept, had none of the Thatcher-era political baggage it had acquired in the UK. As for Contestability, evidence gleaned by the author in his work as director of the Australian National History Centre 2001-2007 clearly showed that school students from Year 5 onwards could engage with and benefit from an examination and discussion of varying views and representations of the past. It was at that time, in late 2008 and early 2009 that the then National Curriculum Board set up a history Advisory Group (AG) that consisted of Stuart Macintyre, Paul Kiem (president of the History Teachers’ Association Australia) and the author. A highly capable National Curriculum Board project officer, a former history/geography teacher, was assigned to the AG to assist with drafting and liaison. The AG was told that the curriculum design would be based on 40 hours per annum at the primary school level (Years F-6 within an integrated curriculum) and 80 hours at the secondary level (Years 7-10). On that basis, the AG began its work.



Chapter Seven

144

The Shape Paper – a scope and sequence document As the Framing Paper went out for national consultation-over the Christmas (summer) holiday period, unfortunately the AG worked with two writing teams and with National Curriculum Board (NCB) officials in devising the next key NCB document, the draft Shape Paper, a ‘scope and sequence’ document in the parlance of Australian education systems. The draft Shape Paper, published in May 2009 under the aegis of the NCB’s replacement, the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA – headquarters by now moved from Melbourne to Sydney), was to form a consultation guide for teachers and other interested parties who were to respond throughout the rest of that year prior to the publication of the close-to-final draft curriculum document in 2010. The Shape Paper added the more generic skill of problem solving to its Understandings; an idea that was later dropped. What then followed was, in effect, an F-10 syllabus. Years F-6 were to be based on four focus questions: x x x x

What do we know about the past? How did Australians live in the past? How did people live in other places? How has the past influenced the present?

Ideas and themes that would underlie the F-6 course were to be: x capacity to move from local to regional, national and global contexts x a focus on Australian social history x an opportunity to study North American, European and AsiaPacific topics In essence, F-6 was laid out as a predominantly Australian set of themes, with the opportunity to develop global contexts. As for Years 710, four major (year-by-year) topics were scheduled for development. These were to be: x History from the time of the earliest human communities to the end of the Ancient period (c. 60,000 BC–c. 500 AD) x History from the end of the Ancient period to the beginning of the Modern period (c. 500–1750)



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

145

x The Modern World and Australia (1750–1901) x Australia in the Modern World (1901–present) Within that framework, key themes to be explored were: x movement of peoples x human transformation of the environment x characteristics of civilisations — early forms of government, religion, society and culture x rise and fall of large empires x heritage nature of history, role and methodologies of the historian Important problems that needed to be dealt with here were those of content overload, repetition of primary level Australian topics, Australian exceptionalism and challenging levels of abstract thinking implied in the Years 9 and 10 themes and topics. Once published, the Shape Paper received, as anticipated, mixed reviews; and the consultation process led to refinements in the proposed course of study; throughout 2009 and 2010 the AG worked with ACARA project officials in attempting to refine the document and provide the basis for a fully-fledged F-10 curriculum framework in time for the pre-Christmas 2010 deadline. It was at this stage that the AG realised that these refinements were seemingly arrived at in a whimsical way within ACARA itself. Meanwhile, there was informed and constructive feedback from the professional education community together with some uninformed and unconstructive commentary from the press, politicos and from fringe think tanks, the contributions of the former were treated seriously and the fulminations of the latter were noted and largely ignored.

Capricious interference During that process of refinement in 2009, it became clear to members of the Advisory Group (AG) (Macintyre, Kiem and the author) that there were other, anonymous drafting and redrafting hands at work beyond the confines of the small, known and highly capable Australian Assessment, Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) writing teams. Over that year, numerous primary and secondary drafts were despatched to the ACARA for comment. All too frequently, these AG-endorsed drafts that had been sent on for ACARA approval were returned with major changes that were unexplained and seemed (to the AG and to the writers at least) arbitrary in nature. Over the course of the year, members of the AG and



146

Chapter Seven

successive writing teams [7] became increasingly frustrated at this unattributed form of intervention, so much so that the AG queried the lack of transparency and confusion about ownership – which is when the AG discovered for the first time that the ACARA had set up a Curriculum Committee whose job it was to oversee the drafts and, where necessary, redraft for further work. It was explained to the AG and to the writers that several members of the anonymous Curriculum Committee had an interest or background in history [8]. A brief example of the kind of problem the AG faced was the deletion of topics and themes and replacement of these deletions with new, out-ofthe-blue alternatives. A good case in point was the initial inclusion of the Vikings in the primary curriculum as topic that had exploration/expansion elements, beliefs and values aspects and gender perspectives as well as being an area of study that had a long track record in fostering student engagement. Submitted to the National Curriculum Board in an early 2009 draft, the document returned with the usual quota of lesser modifications but with Vikings now deleted and replaced by the Celts. There was no explanation for such a significant change. Not only that but a Year 7 ‘What is History?’ introductory Depth Study had also vanished without trace. This latter unit of work was intended to provide a common disciplinary starting point for students beginning high school with a wide variety of primary school historical experiences, allowing for the states that began secondary education at Year 8–in which case the unit was to be a common end-of-primary experience. The AG’s response was first that there were serious historical issues with the Celts as a topic at this Year 8 stage, not least the debate about whether or not the Celts actually existed as a self-identified group. A second reaction was general consternation about what had happened to the ‘What is History?’ unit. At this time, another problem arose. The original figures of 80 hours of history per annum for secondary schools and 40 hours for primary, were modified down to a notional 70 hours for secondary and then revamped to a lower figure of 60 hours. Eventually, formal mentions of indicative figures for either sector were dropped altogether. The AG’s conclusion regarding this lowering of timetabled expectations for history as a core subject was that the state and territory representatives on the ACARA Board were reluctant to give any kind of commitment to history time slots because this would put pressure in existing and established subject areas that were considered to be more important. These were the other core subjects English, mathematics and science, as well as the timetable heavy subjects such as the arts and



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

147

physical education. By the time this whole process finished in late 2010, the figure for primary schools had disappeared altogether and the secondary school figure had dropped to an unofficial 50 hours, but with nothing stated in the curriculum documentation. This slow abandonment of NCB/ACARA’s commitment to establishing a clear space in the timetable for history was regarded by members of the AG as a betrayal of the NCB’s original intentions and as an invitation to schools to bury the subject in a corner of their timetables. As it happens, in its trial of the new curriculum, a government high school situated close to both of the authors has allocated 20 hours per annum to History, Geography, Economics and Civics Education. By this time (early 2010), the AG was becoming increasingly exasperated with this kind of arbitrary intervention, so much so that the author spent a weekend drafting his own version of what an F-10 curriculum might look like which he then distributed to the AG, the writers and to the relevant ACARA officials. This illustrative (not pre-emptive) initiative provoked an immediate response. ACARA officials flew down to Melbourne from their new headquarters in Sydney and convened what could only be called a crisis meeting. During that meeting, the AG forcefully made the point that the curriculum design process was being inappropriately and adversely affected by absence of process, nonconsultative decision-making and a lack of transparency. Assurances were given but the interventions and lack of transparency continued on into 2010, so much so that in May 2010, Stuart Macintyre spoke out publicly in The Australian, a Murdoch paper not normally eager to provide a platform for Macintyre’s thoughts: “Professor Macintyre told The Australian the consultation process set up by the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority had become derailed by capricious “decisions made to change the course without reference to the expert advisory groups or the writers.””

Some of the changes appeared out of nowhere and were difficult to deal with, he said. There would be no consultation or explanation, and we didn’t have a chance to explain why we did things a certain way [9]. It was at this stage a new senior manager responsible for history and science was appointed and more transparent processes were immediately set up, a frankness regarding decision-making processes came into play and status/ownership of drafts became more negotiable. Under this new regime, the AG quickly began to gain more confidence that its work and the work of several newly appointed writers was being taken seriously by ACARA. Throughout that whole period of uncertainty and exasperation in



148

Chapter Seven

2009 and early 2010, it is important to point out that the AG’s project officer had earned and retained the unqualified support and respect of the AG and of the history writers. In retrospect, the NCB/ACARA bedding-down period 2008-2010 was bound to produce problems. NCB/ACARA, newly-formed national body that was recruiting from eight different jurisdictions each with its own organisational culture, was also trying to hire experienced staff in midcareer, staff who might be reluctant to abandon their own career routes and their homes for what could turn out to be a short term and domestically expensive diversion from their established work and life trajectories. Having said that the AG was very fortunate in the NCB’s initial selection of its project officer and in ACARA’s 2010 appointment of its senior curriculum manager. It did however take a year and a half to settle the accumulating issues that Stuart Macintyre finally felt compelled to raise publicly in May 2010.

New federalism, old rivalries If we look more closely at the political interference issue, Garrett was very much a junior minister in a Kevin Rudd Australian Labor Party (ALP) government that had, in late 2007, defeated the Liberal National Party (LNP) coalition led by Prime Minister John Howard. When novice prime minister Rudd came to power, he promised a new approach to federal politics that would eschew the customary blame game in which jurisdictions condemned federal policies for their own difficulties, and vice versa and used their local claims as blockers to force concessions out of Canberra. In this game, much local political capital can be made out of being parochially stubborn. Yet, at the same time, the jurisdictions have a history of being only too happy to receive annual federal grants from Canberra, a phenomenon that provoked the frequently acerbic ALP former federal treasurer (later prime minister) Paul Keating into famously remarking that it was unwise to stand between a state premier and a bucket of money [10]. In Yes Minister style, the political rhetoric applied in these circumstances follows a familiar pattern. An unwelcome (initially, that is) federal intervention may attract one or more of the following parochial positioning descriptors. It can go too far; it doesn’t go far enough; it is too soon; it is too late; it doesn’t provide enough funding; it provides unequal funding to the different jurisdictions; it is heading in the wrong direction – and, finally, it does not meet the high standards required of our world’s best



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

149

practice operations [11]. Unless, of course, much larger buckets of money are sent down the highway from Canberra. Of the state premiers, it is the leader of New South Wales (NSW) who normally carries most political clout. NSW is the most populous state in Australia, was the nation’s oldest colony and is a jurisdiction with a reputation for brashness, sharp practice and for playing hardball politics. So wary are Canberra governments, of whatever political stripe, when dealing with NSW that, whenever some major, national policy issue is under consideration, almost the first question asked in the Canberra planning period is “How will NSW take it?” And so dominant in national education decision-making is NSW that the obstructionist comment, “We don’t do that in NSW” has become a standing joke with educators in the other states and territories [12]. In education matters, NSW has a reputation for being conservative. For example, NSW is the only jurisdiction to retain the title ‘inspector’ for its curriculum officials, was the last state to retain public examinations at Year 10 (until 2011) and retains a high stakes examination regime at Year 12 known as the High School Certificate (HSC). Not only that but NSW has, on several occasions refused to join in federal initiatives, almost invariably using the rationale that federal policy, even that of a politicallyaligned national government, would adversely affect NSW’s ‘world class’ education system [13]. As far as the national curriculum is concerned, this approach was adopted by the then ALP state premier Maurice Iemma as early as 2008. Three years later, a characteristic example of the continuing nature of the ‘world class’ discourse was offered by conservative coalition education minister Adrian Piccoli from this debate in the NSW Legislative Assembly (lower house) on 9th August 2011: [14] “This [by now conservative coalition] Government remains committed to a national curriculum but wants it to be done properly. New South Wales has a world-class education system and a world-class curriculum. What replaces the existing New South Wales curriculum has to be at least as good as what is presently in place and the Government is not confident that what is currently on the table meets that very high standard.”

At the time of writing (September 2012), while all the other jurisdictions have agreed on an implementation schedule, NSW has just committed itself formally to a full implementation of the national curriculum by the end of 2016, three years later than most other jurisdictions. As for the other jurisdictions, Victoria, the second most populous state, has, in the past, generally been regarded as a jurisdiction run by an oldmoney, conservative, establishment. At its simplest, Victoria was the



150

Chapter Seven

Protestant-Scottish state, in contrast to a Catholic-Irish NSW. Modern Victoria however is a much-changed society with its capital Melbourne an attractive and multiculturally varied city with a relatively progressive education system. In federal terms, after expressing initial doubts, Victorian governments tend to see what they can get out of Canberra’s education funding, but with minimal changes to their existing modus operandi. At the other end of the scale, the two territories (the Australian Capital Territory, or ACT, and the Northern Territory) have such small populations and so few schools that they carry very little clout in the political scheme of things. Much the same goes for South Australia and Tasmania. There are two anomalous states and these are Western Australia (WA) and Queensland. Each of these states has been the home of anti-centralist (and sometimes over heatedly secessionist) tendencies and each has had a recent history of strong-willed radical conservative leadership [15]. More recently, WA gained new authority thanks to the strength of its mining boom and has ramped up both real and confected anger about the dominance of Canberra and the eastern states (collectively referred to as “Over East”). Queensland, on the other hand, has, since demagogue John BjelkePetersen’s political demise in 1987, been more amenable to ideas from “Down South”, as long as they are accompanied by money. What this means is that federal governments have to play two games at once when dealing with the states and territories. Game One is dealing with premiers/ministers of the same political persuasion who may or may not be sympathetically disposed to Canberra’s policies. Game Two is dealing with politically hostile premiers/chief ministers, who also may, or may not be, sympathetically disposed to Canberra’s policies. In 2012, the ALP federal government faces a governance nightmare, low in popularity (thanks to its talent for serial acts of public relations incompetence) and faced by a rampant federal opposition supported by conservative premiers in the four major jurisdictions of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. When it comes to curriculum policy, the major states of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia each has a semiautonomous, state government-funded curriculum agency that oversees curriculum design, assessment and reporting. These are, respectively the NSW Board of Studies (NSW BoS), the Victorian Curriculum Assessment Authority (VCAA), the Queensland Studies Authority (QSA), the Tasmanian Qualifications Authority (TQA) and the Curriculum Council of



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

151

Western Australia (CCWA). The smaller jurisdictions, South Australia, ACT and NT have departments or sections that deal with curriculum design and implementation. Of the major curriculum agencies, the NSW BoS, until late 2010, maintained a warily cautious approach to the Australian Curriculum, the Victorians exhibited a similarly careful response, Queenslanders jumped on the national curriculum bandwagon with some eagerness and with a great deal of professionalism and WA slowly accepted the inevitability of change. Having said that, the two largest agencies, the NSW BoS and the VCAA each played an important part in blocking and revamping the history curriculum to suit their own established approach to syllabus design. Knowing that the Australian Assessment, Curriculum And Reporting Authority (ACARA) deadline for a national sign-off across all four core subjects was October 2010, in September of that year, the NSW BoS began a public campaign on 13th September to adjust the Australian Curriculum to meet its own purportedly exacting standards. This lastminute attack came with weeks to go to final agreement and notwithstanding continuing and consistent NSW official representation on the National Curriculum Board and on ACARA since 2008. As reported in the Sydney Morning Herald, the NSW BoS’s objections were as cited as follows: “[The history draft was] far too ambitious to be taught effectively. It is not possible for all students to reach high standards in deeper understandings and skills development with the current content overload….There is no scope for differentiation of curriculum to cater for the full range of student ability…excessive history content will impinge on the time needed to develop and practice foundational skills… there is an overlap of content in years 5 to 6 and years 9 to 10….The curriculum is not feasible as there is too much content for the time available, particularly in years 4 to 10.”

The timing was perfect. With only a few weeks to go until the proposed October sign-off deadline, the NSW BoS had fired a broadside claiming that it had been prevented from making any criticisms about the national curriculum before the August 2010 federal election. This latter justification was a completely disingenuous justification for this lastminute arm-twisting since, at any time from late 2008 onwards, behind the scenes haggling with the more stubborn jurisdictions had been a constant feature of NCB/ACARA tactics. In any event, as far as history was concerned, this intervention lay in a serious objection by the NSW BoS to the amount of time allowed for



152

Chapter Seven

Overviews in the 7-10 programme. Originally, the idea had been that Overviews would take up about 25% of the class time, with an equivalent amount of time for each Depth Study. The idea at this stage was that Overviews would be linked to Depth Studies but not in a simplistic mechanical way. The importance of the Overviews has been stressed by the AG in the early days of the curriculum design as a way of avoiding disjointed patch histories and also as a way of fitting in a brief look at major topics that might have been omitted through option choices. For example, in Year 7 students might choose to do Egypt as their optional ancient history Depth Study but could contextualise that choice by looking at other key Mediterranean societies such as Greece and Rome in their Overview. The major states were adamant that 25% of class time was too much for the Overviews and the recommended time should be cut to a mere 10% – this amounted to about eight lessons in a whole school year. To reinforce the point, the NSW government began to make public noises about not signing the federal document due for ratification in just over a month’s time. ACARA caved in, thus vitiating what was a key element in dealing with the depth vs. breadth dilemma. The AG was deeply dissatisfied with this outcome since it would encourage, at a national level, the inch-deep and a mile-wide survey approach to high school history that was the very opposite of the AG’s original intentions. Meanwhile, Victoria started making similar noises about Years 9 and 10. Their complaint was that there was not enough sequencing of Australian history from Years 7-10 and that World War One (a hugely popular history topic in schools and in the public domain) should be moved from Year 10 where it sat (at that stage) in an overall 20th century examination of ‘Australia and ‘’. Victorian politicians, as with their NSW counterparts began to make threatening public comments about not signing off on the draft. With what seemed like indecent haste, the World War One topic was dropped out of Year 10’s Australia and the World’ and parachuted into Year 9’s ‘The Making of the Modern World’ as a final Depth Study, bringing it more into line with the already existing Victorian curriculum framework. Not that the decision was a bad one, unlike the judgment about Overviews since it made the revamped Year 10 far less weighed down by major wars of the 20th century. The process however was a characteristic state vs. Canberra arm-twisting struggle, briefly fought and quickly conceded. On a lighter note, in early November 2010 when the AG and the writers were busy working on yet another draft, Western Australia intervened in the shape of a ministerial adviser who contacted ACARA



Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

153

and made amiable representations to the AG on behalf of his minister asking for the Celts (as well as the Saxons, the American Revolution, the French Revolution and influence of Irish political culture on Australian Federation) to be introduced at Years 9 and 10. He was politely informed that his minister could be reassured that topics such as these could be dealt with in the curriculum Elaborations (elucidations of main and complementary topics that teachers could use as a teaching guide). As things stand at present (September 2012) with Phase One (English/mathematics/science/history), the ACT has already introduced the Australian history curriculum, Queensland and Victoria are currently trialling the curriculum, Northern Territories will introduce history F-10 in September 2013, South Australia and Tasmania will introduce the national curriculum in 2013 and WA has introduced it gradually in 2012, NSW, whose car number plate slogan once was “The First State plans to bring in Phase One only in 2014 [16]. If, that is, Canberra gives NSW enough money.”

Conclusion In summary, when it comes to history in schools across the whole nation, the conventional but discipline focused primary programme may well succeed if only because history will have freed itself from the shackles of the past twenty years of the generic social education model ‘Studies of Society and Environment’, a well-meaning but misdirected curriculum concept that all but obliterated the humanities at the primary school level. As for secondary schools, essential contradictions remain. As we have seen, the final secondary school draft was designed for a minimum of 80 taught hours of history per annum. As things stand at the moment, the current lack of indicative time will seriously reduce the opportunity for authentic history teaching at this level. Further, the dropping of the original percentage allocation for secondary Overviews from 25% to 10% will compound the problem by leaving many students with a distorted and abbreviated version of what was, within an 80 hour framework, a very good, well-conceptualised and well planned program. This means that history Years 7-10 will, in many schools, effectively be turned into a Reader’s Digest ‘Condensed Version’ of the past, thus rehashing all those school level complaints of racing through the curriculum in order to cover the key events, and back to ‘history is boring’ all over again. There are however powerful survivals of this process of intervention. To begin with, history education in the national curriculum retains a powerful and professionally derived presence in schools. Second, that



154

Chapter Seven

presence has clear expectations in terms of historical understandings, the syntax of the discipline. Third, the Australian curriculum in history remains a world history programme that is investigative and open-ended, and is certainly neither celebratory nor exceptionalist. And there is hope. As one curriculum official from WA reported to the author on 17th April 2013: “At this stage I only have anecdotal evidence, but the F-10 AC seems to be rolling out fairly smoothly across the subjects. There has not been any adverse publicity in the press so I can only assume a fairly widespread acceptance. Those schools which have adopted the 7-10 History are really enthusiastic as the students and the teachers are enjoying the [Depth Study] electives”.

Notes 1

2

3

5

6

7

8

9

10



See Bourke’s entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/bourke-sir-richard-1806 [Accessed 27 May, 2013] For more details of Howard’s interventionist approach see Taylor, T. (2009) ‘Howard’s End: a narrative memoir of political contrivance, neoconservative ideology and the Australian history curriculum’, Curriculum Journal, vol. 20 no. 4 pp. 317-329. Following a period when Rudd’s government was faced by a poll-driven decline he was replaced in June 2010 by his education and employment minister Julia Gillard in what was generally regarded as a brutal and premature coup. Since that coup, the ALP’s ratings have continued to decline. 4http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Curriculum__History.pdf#xml=http://search.curriculum.edu.au/texis/search/pdfhi.txt?query =history+shape+paper&pr=www.acara.edu.au&prox=page&rorder=500&rprox =500&rdfreq=500&rwfreq=500&rlead=500&rdepth=0&sufs=0&order=r&cq= &id=502b5a6ed [Accessed 27 May, 2013] Taylor, T. & Young, C. (2003) Making History: a guide for the teaching of history in Australian schools, Curriculum Corporation, Melbourne. Seixas, P. & Morton, T. (2012) The Big Six: Historical Thinking Concepts, Pearson, Toronto. Initially there were two largeish (6 or so – it varied over time) writing teams – primary and secondary. In early 2010 the original teams were phased out and replaced with two smaller groups (2 only in each team). We never did discover who was on the Curriculum Committee and there is no sign of its presence and membership on the ACARA website. Ferrari, J. (2010) ‘Historian Stuart Macintyre slams school course’, The Australian, 25May, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/historian-slamsschool-course/story-e6frgczf-1225870764841[Accessed 27 May, 2013] Speech to a state premiers’ conference 31st October 1990. On this topic,

Scarcely an Immaculate Conception

11

12

13

14

15

16



155

Keating is frequently misquoted. What he actually said, in the context of a tax reform debate was, “One place not to be in this system is between a premier and a bucket of money.” To contextualise this remark, the total amount made available by Canberra to the states and territories in, for example, 2011-2012 was $95 billion http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/bp3/html/bp3_01 _executive_summary.htm[Accessed 27 May, 2013] See for example then education minister Verity Firth’s attack in Anna Patty’s article ‘NSW cans ‘inferior’ national curriculum’ Sydney Morning Herald 17th September 2010, http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/nsw-cans-inferiornational-curriculum-20100916-15eqw.html [Accessed 27 May, 2013] Observations based on the author’s 13 years’ experience of curriculum politics at the federal level. The term ‘world class’ is vague piece of parochial puffery frequently used by various education systems in Australia and elsewhere. See for example former ALP premier Maurice Iemma’s comments in the NSW lower house 15th May 2008, Hansard: “We are committed to ensuring that New South Wales students continue to receive a world-class education.” http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20080 515012[Accessed 27 May, 2013] Hansard: http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20110 809009[Accessed 27 May, 2013] In WA, Sir Charles Court dominated the political scene as state premier from 1974-1982 while in Queensland Sir John Bjelke-Peterson, who, in 1991, came within a whisker of being found guilty of perjury, ran the state from 1968-1987. Queensland was at that time characterised as the ‘Deep North’, an Australian version of Huey Long’s Louisiana. ‘NSW delays national curriculum until 2014 Australian Teacher Magazine 23rd September 2012, http://ozteacher.com.au/html/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id =1362:nsw-nsw-delays-national-curriculum-until2014&catid=1:news&Itemid=69 [Accessed 27 May, 2013]



CHAPTER EIGHT LEARNING AND THE FORMATION OF HISTORICAL CONSCIOUSNESS: A DIALOGUE WITH BRAZILIAN CURRICULAR PROPOSALS MARIA AUXILIADORA SCHMIDT UNIVERSITY OF CURITIBA, BRAZIL

Abstract: This is a report of research about the development of concepts of historical learning in Brazil from 1917 until 2006, but especially in the period 1931 to 2006. The aim of this investigation is to examine the learning concepts that have been behind the structure of the Brazilian curricular proposals from the Francisco de Campos (1931) reforms until the present curricular proposals. The outline proposed in this work includes an analysis of curricular documents from the National History Curricular Parameters for elementary and high schools (1997; 1998). The methodology adopted is a combination of qualitative investigation through case studies as well as documentary and bibliographic investigation. Some studies which had been undertaken to appraise the curriculum and school subjects as socially constructed (Goodson, 1997) were used as models to guide the critique. The curriculum can be seen as a visible text within the concept of the disciplinary code of history (Cuesta Fernandez, 1997; 1998). Initial results indicate the predominance of the concept of historical learning as a set of competences based on educational psychology, rather than on the academic discipline of history and its procedural/syntactic knowledge (Lee 2003; 2006). Key Words: Brazil, Brazilian Curricular Proposal, Canon, Curricular proposals, Curriculum, Disciplinary code, History – discipline of, Historical consciousness, History Education, Historical education, Historical Learning, Identity, Lee, Master narrative, Nationalism, Nationality, Orientation, Psychology – educational, Rusen, Social construction



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

157

Introduction In Brazil studies about curriculum have been undertaken by researchers and specialists across several areas of knowledge. In the area of history teaching these papers and their related findings focus mainly on specific periods or curricular reforms and the relationship with educational politics, as can be seen in the work of Fonseca (1993), Siman (1997), Reis (2001), Martins (2002), and Rocha (2002). Moreover, there have been systematised reflections on this theme, such as those of Abud (1993) and Bittencourt (1998). Moving from the analysis already completed about different history curricula, the object of study proposed in the present paper includes an analysis of Brazilian curricular documents directed to schools from the 1st to the 9th grade of elementary teaching. The focus of the section “concepts of history learning” is part of a project financed by CNPQ, the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development. This has been developed under a sub-category “Learning to write and learning to write in history” whose objective is the investigation of concepts of learning and their relationship with the teaching of history.

Theoretical and methodological presuppositions The problem being addressed in the present research results from the situation and associated demands which arose from the lack of success experienced by schools when taking part in field studies in historical education, and in particular, when planning for learning through the construction of historical consciousness. According to Mèszáros (2007:196): “the educational processes and the social processes [which are] easier for reproduction are intimately linked and a significant reformulation of education is inconceivable without the correspondent transformation of the social structure in which the educational practices of the society must perform their vital and historically important function of change”

One analysis of the educational objectives, and therefore of historical learning, is to see them as opportunities for the internalisation of historical consciousness by children and students. However, we can point out the advantages and disadvantages of different possibilities. On the one hand, the internalisation can be about keeping and maintaining an already fixed or pre-determined canon. Or we can talk about the possibility of internalisation as an independent activity, that is, internalising that is designed to lead to action by the students with a view to implementing



158

Chapter Eight

transformatory interventions in their own lives. Thus, the ways of internalising knowledge can be defined either as performing the function of maintaining certain long-standing traditions of knowledge, belief, attitudes or behaviour, or as preparing students to be agents of change, where they are empowered to challenge the dominant forms of cognition. Echoing Rüsen’s thoughts (2007:101) the formation of historical consciousness; “isn’t consequently, being able to have the use of ways of knowledge, but of forms of knowledge, of cognitive principles which determine the application of the ways of knowledge to the problems of orientation. Naturally these competences depend on the contents of knowledge. They cannot be empty of the experience of the past time, elaborated and cognitively interpreted.”

This becomes a question of cognitive competence in the temporal perspective of practical life - of the relationship of each subject to itselfs and communicating contextually with others about it. The most recent debates in the field of historical education have been about developing the role of fundamental concepts (or historical concepts) of temporal historical categories and second order, historical disciplinary concepts, such as are discussed by Lee (2001, 2003, 2006, 2011), Ashby (2003, 2006), Cooper (2006; 2012) and Schmidt and Barca (2009). Moreover, these concepts are, according to Rüsen (2007, p. 91), the linguistic resources or tools which underpin historical statements. Therefore they can be considered as fundamental in the formation of historical consciousness, i.e., in the process of internalisation that provides ways to organise and give sense to both individual and collective experiences. And these experiences are important for helping the individual to understand the trajectory of their lives and indeed of their futures. The concept of historical consciousness, according to Rüsen (2001, p. 58): “is the way through which the dynamic relation between experience of time and intention in time come true in the process of the human life”.

Thus, for Jörn Rüsen, history has a didactic function in formulating historical consciousness. This means that it can supply the elements, the building blocks, both for personal orientation and interpretation, i.e. the internal building of identity and provision of the external means for private behaviour and actions. These presuppositions relate to conceptions of learning that guide curricular proposals of history in contemporary society. These also include the axiomatic presupposition that any learning involves



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

159

self-education. As such, it is inseparable from the important practice of self-management in which children and students become the active agents of their own education. Studies about learning conceptions present in curricular proposals justify themselves through analysing and evaluating proposals for the internalisation of knowledge. They also provide (a) a reconstruction of what is historical knowledge, its epistemology, and didactic practices, pedagogy, related to history teaching and (b) an historical consideration, i.e. reconstruction, of history as a school subject. In this sense, the curriculum can be understood as having elements of school culture, its products and its producers of school knowledge. The curriculum provides ways to create and develop schooling, personal and communal, professional identities and elaborate views of the world. The curriculum consists of school knowledge, in a sense largely predetermined but nevertheless a special, particular type of knowledge. Here history is a subject to be taught as ‘formal historical knowledge’, which can be explained by the idea of a broad social tradition, invented and recreated in the ‘history disciplinary code’. According to Cuesta Fernandez (1998, pp. 8-9): “the history disciplinary code is, therefore, a social tradition which characterises itself historically and which is composed of a group of ideas, values, suppositions and routines, which legitimate the educational function given to history and which regulate the order of the practice in its teaching. It contains, thus, speculation and discursive rhetoric about its educational value, the content of its teaching and the archetypes of teaching, which follow each other in [the] time and which consider themselves, inside the dominating culture, valuable and authentic. Summing up, the disciplinary code understands what is said about the educational value of history, which is considered formally as historical knowledge and what is really taught in the school. School discourses, regulations, practices and contexts impregnate the institutionalised action of the professional subjects and their educational agents (the teachers) and of their social addressees (the students) who live and live again, in their daily action, the usage of historical education in school time and their own time. These usages are not naturally strange to the overall production and the distribution of knowledge - they are integral.”



160

Chapter Eight

The ‘history disciplinary code’ is, therefore, a social tradition that links curriculum analyses with conceptions of historical learning. These conceptions can also be considered characteristics of the history disciplinary code because they put in to relief and perspective certain key elements of this complex problem. In particular this concerns the relationship between references to the epistemological structure of academic disciplinary knowledge on the one hand and, on the other, the theoretical support and relationship originating from pedagogy and from psychology. Moreover, the curriculum, while a product of the culture, is part of the selective tradition which, according to Cuesta Fernandez (1997, p. 102), arises from actions recontextualised by several social agents. These social agents individually and collectively convert academic knowledge into authentic school knowledge and understanding. Crucially, this transforms the teacher’s previous orientation into new curricular knowledge to be taught; knowledge that includes the ‘frames’ (schema/schemata) of his or her existing pedagogic knowledge bases. In this sense, these analyses of the curriculum can elucidate aspects related to the theories of forms of knowledge, about how knowledge was intended, received, dealt with or used. As Rüsen states (2007, p. 101): “education consists not in the ability just to dispose of knowledge, but in understanding forms of knowledge, of cognitive principles which determine the application of knowledge to the problems of orientation”.

For Rüsen (2004), the cognitive principles, experience, orientation and interpretation, play the role of the differentiating function of the cognitive process of the academic discipline of history. These principles presuppose and determine the resources or materials through which historical theories are built. These resources or materials are named by the author as historical concepts and historical categories (Rüsen, 2007). In the path of these reflections, Lee (2005) establishes some principles of historical cognition, such as the fundamental substantive (or first order) factually based concepts specific to the substantive content of history, like the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution etc.; and the second order syntactic, disciplinary concepts integral to history as a discipline, irrespective of the content. These include temporal, chronological categories which designate the general temporal contexts of the particular history. According to Rüsen (2007, p. 93) the chronological concept does not refer directly to any particular condition of things. It establishes the historical dimension of temporal change and also of those related to the forms of historical understanding, for example the concepts of historical



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

161

explanation, evidence, inference and historical imagination (Lee, 2005; Topolsky, 1973; Aróstegui, 2006).

Historical perspectives At the beginning of the Brazilian republican period (1889-1930), the Decree 19.890/31, better known as the Francisco Campos Reform, was used to impose, among other decisions, that the Ministry of Education would produce programmes for the different school subjects for the country’s high schools with a centralising and unifying theme. According to Abud (1993, p. 165), the programmes were accompanied by pedagogical, methodological instructions that indicated the objectives of the school curriculum’s subjects and the pedagogy/didactics that the teachers should use. These methodological instructions, according to studies undertaken by Hollanda (1957), absorbed some pedagogical principles considered innovative at the time, particularly learning that was student centred and not teacher-centred. This perspective becomes evident when, concerning the learning of history, the pedagogical principles incorporate inappropriate kinds of guidance. For example, in the first grade of High School when pupils do not have the ability to apply themselves to more abstract and systematic concepts, history could be taught through the biography of great lives. Here episodes from these lives can illuminate key events in the history of Brazil and of the American continent. Likewise hypothetically in the second grade a focus on the more abstract concepts would receive greater emphasis alongside biographies in studying the history of Brazil and of the American Continent. The second grade history curriculum could then include the systematic study of the History of Civilisations. (As we can see in the Olympic symbols there are 5 circles which represent the 5 continents: Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania and America including North, Central and South America.) Student centred learning was supported by the Government in Brazil. In the wake of this came the project known as Escola Nova (New School), and, specifically in the teaching of history, the works of Professor Jonathan Serrano (1917; 1935) were significant as, according to Schmidt (2004), Serrano was an academic who was involved in the Francisco Campos Reform. In this development the Methodological Instructions “suggest that the teacher should develop in the students the capacity of observation, criticism and autonomous or independent work”. Furthermore, all the issues considered in the lessons should be appropriate for the mental age of the students and be accompanied by



162

Chapter Eight

activities which stimulate historical learning, but much more through the students’ eyes than through their ears. These activities would be, for example, visits to museums and exhibitions, excursions to historic places, and appreciation of monuments, which would happily replace the traditional transmission style with its didactic lecturing, very frequently used in history teaching. In 1942, eleven years after the Francisco Campos Reform, a new Organic Law of High School was enacted known as the Gustavo Capanema Reform. One of the main principles of this law was based on the concept of didactic autonomy for the teacher, a principle also defended by Jonathas Serrano, one of the writers of the law. Among his principal proposals was the recognition of each school subject as being separate, discrete elements in the overall didactic programmes and units. In this law there was no attempt, because of prevailing government attitudes at the time, to combine history and geography with or within a social science/integrated studies/humanities programe (social science had been eliminated from high schools by the Capanema Reform). Nevertheless Civil Instruction was renewed and better articulated in a broader grouping of subjects similar to the curricular Social Studies programmes of North America (Hollanda, 1957, p. 156). What is revealing is the maintenance of an emphasis on the specific content of history as a compulsory curricular component. However, this principle was gradually undermined through the development of integrated projects that would culminate in the imposition of Social Studies by the military government in 1971 This centralising principle as applied to the specific content of history was incorporated by Edict 1.045 (1951), which reformed the Brazilian High School system. Here the basic principles for the teaching of history were: x to begin with understanding the present and retrospectively study the past; x to develop an intuitive and critical style of teaching; x to focus on the students as individuals who are products and expressions of their social environment. The main aims were to develop processes of consolidation, investigation, reasoning and illustration, as well as covering schemes through different forms of knowledge representation, for example literature, investigation and discussion. Throughout consideration of values was recommended. With reference to the pedagogy of the new school system, the edict highlighted and



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

163

emphasised the importance of historical studies of the past to enable comprehension of the present. The underlying intention of this edict by MEC (Ministry of Education and Culture) reflects the philosophy of a group of measures underpinning the process of re-democratisation of Brazilian society after Getulio Vargas’s dictatorship in the Estado Novo (New State) period (1937-1945). In the educational field, one of the main investments of the Brazilian government in the period (1945-1961) was in the expansion and modernisation of the high school system (Nunes, 1980). Already in 1946, the Ministry of Education and Culture had created the Diretoria do Ensino Secundário (High School Director Board) whose objectives were, among others; x x x x x

scrutinising the way in which the laws were applied, the improvement of teaching materials and of teaching conditions, the inspection of schools, the improvement of high school teaching and its practical suitability to meet the interests and needs of the increasing urban clientele.

Due to the great volume of work, the monitoring and supporting activities had to be decentralised and different organs of public administration to do this were created. Among them, the Instituto Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos (National Institute for Pedagogical Studies) and the Campanha de Aperfeiçoamento de Difusão do Ensino Secundário, CADES (Campaign of Improvement and Diffusion of Secondary Teaching), both created in 1953, deserve to be highlighted. Among the principal actions of these organisations was the publication of periodicals and manuals intended for the continuing training and education (professional development) of Brazilian teachers. According to Nunes (1980), the Decree n. 34.638, of the Diretoria do Ensino Secundário do Ministério da Educação (Directory Board of the Secondary Teaching of the Ministry of Education) of 17 November 1953, in the period of Getulio Vargas’s second government (1951-1954), created the Campanha de Aperfeiçoamento e Difusão da Escola Secundária (CADES) (The Campaign of Improvement and Diffusion of the Secondary School), with the principal objective of raising the level of high school teaching in Brazil. Major objectives of CADES were: a) Making high school education more adjusted to the interests and potential of the students, as well as to the real conditions and



164

Chapter Eight

necessities of the environment the school meets, giving high school teaching more efficacy and social sense; b) Allowing the largest possible number of Brazilian young people to have access to high school. To reach these targets, the CADES development initiatives included; (i)

organisation of courses and training courses for the improvement of teachers and other school workers; (ii) distribution of scholarships to high school teachers for professional development in courses and training courses sponsored by national and foreign agencies; (iii) technical assistance to high school establishments; (iv) carrying out of studies of the programmes of high school courses and of the methods of teaching, in order to better adjust the teaching to the students’ interests and to the conditions and demands of the environment; (v) development of teaching resources; (vi) measures for the improvement and for making inexpensive teaching resources; (vii) development and application of evaluation of student learning; (viii) organisation of educational orientation service in high schools establishments; (ix) plan for the allowance of scholarships to both intellectually gifted and to deprived students; (x) renewal of furnishing, school workshops and laboratories; (xi) studies about the needs and possibilities of high school teaching; (xii) diffusion and publishing of experiences of interest in high schools; (xiii) promotion of national and international school exchanges; (xiv) dissemination of information for the public about the importance of a good high school. During the 1950s and 1960s, CADES was very active in promoting teacher training courses for the high school sector. This consisted of symposiums and working days for the teaching of technical staff in the schools and the production of publications for teachers’ professional development, especially the official Revista Escola Secundária (High School Magazine). This was published between 1957 and 1963 with 19 issues. To support history teaching, the Revista (Magazine) included, in all its issues, work produced by history teachers and intended for a readership of history teachers, in total 13 authors and 21 articles for each edition. For



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

165

example, in Issue 14 (September 1960), in the section Noticiário (News section), the following piece of information about seminars taking place was published, among them one for history. “The Directory board of the High School, through CADES, had organised for the months of September and October, in the auditorium of CADES, 115, 9th floor, Av. Rio Branco, mathematics, English, history and drawing seminars intended specially for teachers who had taught on the courses of Orientation sponsored by CADES, for any other high school teachers and for students of the didactics courses of the philosophy colleges” (CADES, Seminars, 1960, p. 39). The programme for the history seminar was as follows: 1. Objectives for history teaching in the high school: Prof. Guy de Hollanda (6th September); 2. Methods and processes of history teaching in the high school: Prof. Hugo Weiss (13th September); 3. History teacher education: Prof. Eremildo Luiz Vianna (w/d); 4. Motivation in history teaching: Prof. Arthur Bernardes Weiss (w/d); 5. The justification for historical learning: Prof. James Braga Vieira da Fonseca (4th October); 6. Guided study in historical learning: Prof. Vicente Tapajós (11th October); 7. Teaching material and its use in history teaching: Prof. Cláudio José de Figueiredo (18th October); 8. History in the Brazilian high school curriculum: official programmes and their interpretation: Prof. Roberto Accioli (25th October). The areas and choices are comprehensive, with an emphasis on such things as methods and processes of teaching, motivation, guided studies and teaching material. They are evidence that methodological aspects of the teaching of history, i.e. pedagogy/didactics/praxis, were valued. Thus, from the point of view of how history was to be taught at this time, the methodological perspectives are explicit. They are highlighted in the Reforma de 1931 (Reform of 1931), as well as in Jonatas Serrano’s pioneering work (Serrano,1917). During this period the publications of CADES include issues such as the theories and principles underlying history teaching, the use of museums, the use of historical documents in



166

Chapter Eight

the classroom and even the proposal to create a Bossa Nova (New Trend) in history teaching. However, during the changes of the 1960s and even as the 1971 announcement of Estudos Sociais (Social Studies) was making its presence felt, it must be stressed that, officially the CADES History Education initiatives had not been statutory. It is also important to remember that, since 1934, there had been a suggestion that Social Studies was intended for the elementary school, implementing the curricular reform of Anísio Teixeira in the former Distrito Federal (Federal District). Simultaneous with the dissemination by CADES of the ideas and proposals related to a specific vision of History Education, the other organ for disseminating the policies of the Ministério da Educação e Cultura (Ministry of Education and Culture) was the Instituto Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos (National Institute of Pedagogical Studies) (INEP). This circulated and supported specific principles for history teaching which were linked to the social studies curriculum intended for the education of elementary school teachers. These principles were intended to underpin teachers’ continuing professional development. Similarly, in 1964, the INEP published, Castro and Gaudenzi’s work (1964), Social Studies in the Elementary School. This was aimed at Escola Normal, the Teacher Training School for teachers and others who taught grades 1 to 4, previously the primary teacher training course. In contrast with the training manual intended for high school teachers, this manual did not highlight any relationship between the work of historians and the work of teachers, neither did it include any references to historiography or to any official or published histories. The central perspective of this work was the Social Studies’ model, influenced by the United States of America, which took as its central idea the interdisciplinary approach for teaching history. The key concept was that the curriculum was concentric with a perspective of expanding horizons from family - to school - neighbourhood - city - region and country. This proposal was based on the principle of child centred teaching. But, history as a separate, discrete subject, was absent from the school curriculum. Furthermore, the aim of historical learning and consciousness was to place the learner in an increasingly expanding environment. As in the U.S.A. the aim was to build a sense of nationality, or national consciousness and identity, based on assimilating the legacy of knowledge created by past generations. In the path of what Cuesta Fernandez (1998) describes as código disciplinar de história no Brasil (the disciplinary code of history in Brazil), the configuration of history as a school subject was consolidated



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

167

within the boundaries of strong power relationships created by the Estado (State). These relations could be detected, mainly, in organic discourse among intellectuals whose experience had been based on the practice of teaching and on the production and diffusion of governmental educational policies of the 1950s and 1960s decades. It is worth highlighting that it is during this period that one observes the beginning of a crisis in the código disciplinar de história (history disciplinary code) in its curricular context. The conflict was made explicit by the clash between, on the one hand, the government plans related to Social Studies, and on the other, with the maintenance of history as an autonomous school subject in its own right.

The Period of Social Studies A diagnosis made by Leite (1969) can be considered an indicator of the beginning of a change in history teaching in Brazil, provoked essentially by the increased and consolidated role of Social Studies. According to Leite (1969, p. 10): “From 1960 on, it was proposed to substitute Social Studies for history and geography teaching. In the high school, the alterations were more profound: the proportion of general history teaching decreased, and the teaching of national and local history increased. Social Studies, introduced in the vocational courses in 1959, tended to spread and to be a substitute for the autonomous, [independent] history and geography teaching, complementing it with notions of economics and social science.”

It was the military dictatorship regime (1964-1984), during the Government of General Emilio Garrastazu Médici, which imposed the Law 5692 of 1971 that made the teaching of Social Studies compulsory. The government increased to eight years the former Primeiro Grau (first grade Elementary School). The Parecer 853/71 (The Opinion 853/71) imposed by Conselho Federal de Educação (Federal Council of Education), stated what was to be the compulsory national common nucleus for the curriculum of the 1st primary and 2nd secondary grades. Law 5692/71 (Curriculum) imposed Social Studies as a school subject. Content was subsumed within a curriculum that was activity-learning centred. In the 1st to 4th years subject content was fully integrated: Integração Social (Social Integration). For the 5th to 8th years of Social Studies subjects were areas of study. History as a separate subject appeared only in the secondary school curriculum. Here the teaching of history was allocated a maximum of two hours a week.



168

Chapter Eight

There was a belief that Social Studies would develop in students the notions of space and time expanding out from the studies of the school, neighbourhood, house and street to the study of the city, state and nation. It was reinforced by Social Studies’ substantive, factually based concepts such as homeland, nation, equality, liberty and the valuing of national heroes. Through controlling student education the aim was to consolidate and support the political legitimacy of the Estado (State) and of the ruling class, thus annulling the liberalisation of education and of thought (Urban, 2011, p. 10). In the Social Studies curriculum learning was based on achieving teaching and learning objectives whose reference point was Benjamin Bloom’s taxonomy. The taxonomy’s application for historical learning was based mainly on the development of cognitive objectives. Concrete forms or examples of content came from from six categories of cognitive objectives; 1. Knowing: identifying and describing the fact and the piece of historical information: who, what, when, where, how. 2. Understanding: organising and selecting historical facts and ideas, for example, under a system of schemes; 3. Applying: using rules or principles to explain a historical happening; 4. Analysing: separating, classifying historical facts; 5. Synthetising: organising groups of historical facts, comparing historical facts; 6. Evaluating: giving opinions about historical happenings. The compulsory enactment of Social Studies teaching would last the whole period of the Brazilian Military Dictatorship (1964-1984), an era when history teachers and history professionals were subject to persecution and censorship. The imposition of Social Studies was accompanied by a great resistance movement and a fight for the return of history teaching in Brazilian schools, thus configuring a new phase in the construction of history teaching in Brazil. The phase of reconstrução do código disciplinar da história (reconstruction of the history disciplinary code) can be contextualised from two main events. The first refers to the movement of resistance in the country during the period of Military Dictatorship in 1984, and the second to the movement characterised by criticism of Social Studies, a stance which had existed officially in the elementary school system (6-14) since 1971. This movement counted on the participation of history and education professionals, being specially led by Associação Nacional de



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

169

Professores de História – ANPUH (National Association of History Teachers). After the end of the Military Dictatorship, there was a growth of the movement for the called volta do ensino de história (return to history teaching) in the elementary school. In this context, one must highlight the existence of several curricular proposals, 23 in total, according to Bittencourt’s studies (1998), developed by different state and municipal education systems, and its discussion by history teachers of public [state] schools, in different Brazilian states.

The national curricular parameters and learning conceptions Next there was a defining landmark in this movement for reconstructing the history disciplinary code - the 1997 and 1998 proposal of History Curricular Parameters from the Ministry of Education’s Brazilian education professionals. The proposal contained in its structure a Thematic Axis for history teaching from the 1st to the 4th cycle [years], of fundamental teaching (i.e. covering the 6-14 year old age range). The introductory document of the Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais (PCNs) i.e. National Curricular Parameters (Secretaria de Educação Fundamental 1998a) came from the presupposition that educational failures had been indicators of the necessity to take a new concept of teaching and learning as a reference point. This would provide a greater interaction between students’ education and their preparation for the realities of life. From these presuppositions, the student: “… when learning how to solve problems and to build attitudes in relation to the targets which s/he wants to achieve in the most diverse situations of life, applies the cognitive and linguistic domains, which include forms of communication and of spatial, temporal and graphic representation”. (, PCNs, 1998, p. 73)

The document emphasises the forms/media/contexts through which young people can have access to historical knowledge, such as: living in social and family situations; significant festivities, ceremonies and events at the local, regional, national and world levels; and by means of communication such as radio and television and today the Internet/World Wide Web. It comes, still, from the presupposition that young people always take part, in their own way, in the task of constructing memory, by recreating and interpreting both time and history, thus adding to their experiences the information, explanations and values that are offered in the



170

Chapter Eight

classroom. In this way it indicates a second understanding, that pieces of information and historical questions can be significantly combined by teenagers, who associate them (and synthesise them), through relating, confronting and generalising, because what becomes significant and relevant consolidates their learning (, PCNs, 1998b, p. 38). The document also establishes the difference between the knowledge students acquire informally and another, formal knowledge which is named saber escolar (scholarly knowledge), meaning school students’ knowledge. In this perspective, there is a reaffirmation that despite: “…the appropriation of notions, methods and themes proper to historical knowledge, for the scholar’s historical knowledge, does not mean that there is an intention to make the student either a proto-historian or that s/he must be able to write research papers. The intention is that s/he develops the capacity for observation, for extracting pieces of information and interpreting some characteristics of the reality of her/his surroundings, of establishing some connections and confrontations between actual and historical pieces of information, of noting the dates and of locating her/his actions and those of other people in time and in space and, to a certain extent, being able to ask specific questions of his time relevant.” (, PCNs, 1998b, p. 40).

Here there is the appropriation of a concept of teaching and learning that, in the first place, differentiates ‘scholar/pupil’ knowledge from purely academic history, in the learning process. This does not take into account that, from the cognitive perspective history is seen as a discipline that frames the process of student’s learning. The key point is that the way through which the knowledge needs to be learnt by the student must have as its basis the student’s own historical reasoning, and the cognitive processes must be the same as the epistemology of history as a discipline. Another element to highlight in the theory of learning in the history PCNs (Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais or National Curricular Parameters) emphasises chronological understanding, as a way of temporal orientation. According to Rüsen (2004), orientation in time and about time organises/calibrates itself from cases drawn from the past and its symbiosis with the present, for example from historical categories and the information network that dates provide. Still, in relation to the third cycle of elementary teaching, the objective of historical learning is the formation of procedures and attitudes that encourage the understanding of historical themes, by means of different activities, such as investigations and studies of the environment. However what is still missing in this formulation are ways to



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

171

incorporate the cognitive processes that constitute historical learning per se. Furthermore, by describing the objectives of historical learning, the document selects some objectives, such as knowing, characterising, reflecting and using historical sources, indicating one delineation of thinking categories which indicate actions to be developed in relation to specific content. This same perspective is present in the presuppositions and objectives for the fourth cycle, in a manner that progressively expands the students’ horizons. According to Rüsen (2010), the processes of learning history need to be considered not just as driving and controllable but also as a dimension of a theory of historical learning. This theory is still under construction and needs to refer to the cognitive processes of history as both an academic discipline and as an aspect of society’s historical culture. Conceptualisation of historical learning can be enriched and developed by theoretical conceptions that have, as a main objective, the formation and development of historical consciousness. By conceptualising historical learning in this way it makes possible the creation of a more organic relationship between the overall historical culture of a society and its school culture.

Final considerations In general from the mid 1980s until the end of the 1990s there was an extremely fierce contest between two contrasting polarised proposals for the development of History Education in Brazil. On the one hand there were different reformist projects which embodied theoretical and methodological perspectives more pertinent to the history of social and labour movements; on the other hand there were innovative projects which suggested the adoption of new methodological conceptions like the introduction of thematic history. Some authors of the national Brazilian Annals promulgated the new methodological conceptions, for example, in the Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais, i.e. National Curricular Parameters (Secretaria de Educação Fundamental 1998b). This curricular confrontation between different ideologies related to the overall context of Brazilian society that was moving away from its recent dictatorial period and searching for appropriate new educational theories and related curricular models that would suit a new age. The construction of the Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais (National Curricular Parameters), specifically the one on history, can be seen as evidence of this confrontation. One can see this clash anticipated in the history curricular proposals for teaching the elementary age-group of 6-14



172

Chapter Eight

year olds (Bittencourt, 1998b). This document was written with the aim of providing the foundations for the development of national curricular parameters for elementary teaching. It was based on the analysis of proposals developed by the Secretarias de Educação (Education Secretaries) of several Brazilian states, between 1984 and 1995. One of the points highlighted in this document concerned the contradictions between the predominant discourses in these proposals. Understandably, it was unable to provide guidance on how to decide which approach to adopt when using a theoretical focus in certain fields of knowledge. Furthermore, the document considers that the positioning of the reforms in favour of the working class is not sufficient. The reforms do not address deficiencies in the school system, especially in terms of teachers absorbing a disciplinary approach to transform the way that history is taught and learnt. Continuing professional development is much needed in order to shape the kind of disciplinary based scholar [pupil] knowledge that should be an outcome of the reforms. As this chapter has explained, History Education is about a discourse with clear political connotations. In the discourse there is an ongoing tension involving concerted efforts to get the balance right between what is needed in the classroom and the curriculum structure being written by specialists. This analysis is reflected in some of the presuppositions that underpin the guidance for Brazilian education within the Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais (National Curricular Parameters) as a whole and, in particular, the directions suggested for history teaching. Pedagogical experts have dominated the conceptualisation and development of the history curriculum. They have supported the development of abilities and of attitudes instead of the learning of content and related limited historical cognitive competences. The transformation of certain procedures and attitudes towards substantive content relevant to History Education can be understood from the perspective of previous curricular content that was impoverished, fragmented and handled unsystematically and related themes that had lost their conceptual validity and value. Such themes have become vapid words, unrelated to and ungrounded in the collective experiences of those who aim to make the history of the Brazilian people past and present relevant to the demands for the development and transformation of contemporary society. Over time the separation between school history and academic history has contributed to the need for reform with the creation of a new history disciplinary code to meet Brazil’s the cultural, social and political needs of



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

173

its citizens. A new disciplinary code would cover the different periods of Brazilian history. This would heal the division between History Education as an element of school culture reflected in the school curriculum and its failure to provide the educational role of history that the public domain requires. From this readjustment the cognitive dimension of history teaching has begun to incorporate and reflect the political dimension of national historical culture and historical scholarship. In this process, historians have raised the key questions relating to historical learning, and, therefore, to the form and nature of History Education. Concerning educational policy and practice they have raised the issue of the mismatch between historical scholarship and culture and the history that is taught at school, both what is taught and how it is taught. The concern is that school history involves the didactive transmission of an official, unquestioned body of knowledge a canon or master narrative, for pupils to unquestioningly assimilate and thus develop a common historical consciousness and identity. This is of concern if the transmission model dominates teaching methods. However, in the 21st century, attempts to create a new history disciplinary code have occurred, not only in Brazil, but in a range of countries worldwide. Discussion, debates and curriculum development have been incorporated in to new school curricula that reflect the acceptance that History Education should incorporate the cognitive processes of ‘Doing History’ and thus link the culture of historical scholarship with the school historical culture. For students this is emancipatory and empowering, ensuring that their historical identity and consciousness is grounded in both historical knowledge and understanding.

References Abud, K. M. (1993) ‘O ensino de história como fator de coesão nacional: os programas de 1931’, [The teaching of history as a factor of national cohesion: 1931 programmes]. Revista Brasileira de História. Memória, História, Historiografia. Dossiê Ensino de História [Brazilian Journal of History. Memory, History, Historiography. Special Edition on History Teaching]. São Paulo: ANPUH/Marco Zero, v. 13, n., 25/26, set./ag. pp. 163-174. Aróstegui, J. (2006) A Pesquisa Histórica. Teoria e Método [Historical Research. Theory and Method]. Sao Paulo: Edusc. Ashby, R. (2003) ‘Conceito de evidência histórica: exigências curriculares e concepções de alunos’, [The concept of historical evidence:



174

Chapter Eight

curriculum requirements and student conceptions], in I. Barca (ed.) Educação Histórica e Museus [History Education and Museums, Braga: Uminho. —. (2006) ‘Desenvolvendo um conceito de evidência histórica: as ideias dos estudantes sobre testar afirmações factuais singulares’ [Developing a concept of historical evidence: the ideas of students on testing singular factual statements], Educar em Revista. Especial Educação Histórica [Educational Review. Historical Special Education]. Curitiba: UFPR. Bittencourt, C. (ed.) (1998) O Saber Histórico na Sala de Aula [Historical Knowledge in the Classroom]. São Paulo: Contexto. —. (ed.) (1998) O Saber Histórico na Sala de Aula [Historical Knowledge in the Classroom]. São Paulo: Contexto. Secretaria de Educação Fundamental [Department of Elementary Education] (1998a) Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais. Introdução — National Curriculum. Introduction]. Brasília: MEC/SEF. —. Secretaria de Educação Fundamental [Department of Elementary Education] (1998b) Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais: História [National Curriculum. History]. Brasília: MEC/SEF. CADES (Campanha de Aperfeiçoamento e Difusão do Ensino Secundário). Seminários [Campaign for the Improvement of Secondary Education and Dissemination. Seminars] —. (1960) Revista Escola Secundária [School Magazine]. Rio de Janeiro: MEC-Ministério da Educação e Cultura [MEC - Ministry of Education and Culture], n.14, set [September]. Cooper, H. (2006) ‘Aprendendo e ensinando sobre o passado a crianças de três a oito anos’ [Learning and teaching about the past for children three to eight years]’, in M.A. Schmidt & T.B.Garcia, T.B. (eds.) Educar em Revista: Dossiê Especial: Educação Histórica [Educational Review: Special Edition: History Education]. Curitiba : UFPR. —. (2012) Ensino de História na Educação Infantil e nos anos Iniciais[History Teaching in Early Childhood Education and in the Early Years]. Curitiba: Base. Cuesta Fernandez, R. (1997) Sociogénesis de una disciplina escolar: la historia [The Sociogenesis of a School Discipline: History]. Barcelona: Ed. Pomares-Corredor. —. (1998) Clio en las aulas. La enseñanza de la Historia en España entre Reformas, IIusiones y Ruinas [Clio in the classroom. The Teaching of History in Spain between Reforms, Illusions and Ruins]. Madrid: Akal. Fonseca, Selva Guimarães (1993) Caminhos da História Ensinada [Paths of History Taught].Sao Paulo: Papirus.



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

175

Goodson, I. E. A. (1997) A Construção Social do Currículo [The social construction of the curriculum] Lisboa: Educa. Hollanda, G. de. (1957) Um Quarto de Século de Programas e Compêndios de História para o Ensino Secundário Brasileiro. 19311956. [A Quarter Century of History Textbooks and Programmes for Secondary Education in Brazil. 1931-1956]. Rio de Janeiro: INEP. Lee, P. (2001) ‘Progressão da compreensão dos alunos em história’ [Progression of students’ understanding of history], in I. Barca, (ed.) Perspectivas em Educação Histórica. Braga : Uminho. —. (2003) ‘Nós fabricamos carros e eles tinham que andar a pé’. Compreensão da vida no passado’, [We manufacture cars and they had to walk the walk‫ۅ‬.Understanding of life in the past], in I. Barca, (ed.) Educação Histórica e Museus [History Education and Museums]. Braga : University of Minho. —. (2005) ‘Putting principles into practice: understanding history’, in J. Branford & M.S.Donovan (eds.) How Students Learn: History, Math and Science in the Classroom. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. —. (2006) ‘Em direção a um conceito de literacia histórica. Educar em Revista’ [Toward a concept of historical literacy, Educational Review]’, Dossiê Educação Histórica (Número Especial) [File on History Education (Special Edition)]. —. (2011) ‘Por que aprender História. Educar em Revista’, [Why learn history. Educational Review], Dossiê: História, Epistemologia e Ensino [Special Edition: History, Epistemology and Education] N.42, set/dez [September/December], 2011, pp. 19-42. Leite, M. M. (1969) O Ensino da História. No Primário e no Ginásio [The Teaching of History. Primary School and Gymnasium]. São Paulo: Cult. Martins, M. do C. (2002) A História Prescrita e Disciplinada nos Currículos Escolares: quem Legitima esses Saberes? [Prescribed History and Disciplined School Curricula: who Legitimes this Knowledge?] Sao Paulo: São Francisco. Mészáros, I. (2007) O Desafio e o Fardo do Tempo Histórico [The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time]. São Paulo: Boitempo. Nunes, C. (1980) Escola & Dependência. O Ensino Secundário e a Manutenção da Ordem [School & Addiction. Secondary Education and the Maintenance of Order]. Rio de Janeiro: Achiamé. Reis, C. E. dos (2001) Historia Social e Ensino. [History and Social Education].Chapeço: Argo.



176

Chapter Eight

Rocha, U. (2002) História, Currículo e Cotidiano Escolar. [History, Curriculum and School Daily Routine]. Sao Paulo: Cortez. Rüsen, J.(2001) Razão histórica [Historical Reason]. Brasília: University of Brasília. —. (2004) ‘Que esla cultura histórica?: Reflexiones sobre una nuevamanera de abordar la historia’, [What is the historical culture? Reflections on a new way to address history], translation: F. Sánchez Costa & L.B. Schumacher, in K. Füssmann, H.T.Grütter & J. Rüsen (eds.)Historiche Faszination, Geschichtskultur Heute [Historical Fascination and Historical Culture Today]. Keulen, Weimar & Wenen: Böhlau, pp. 3-26. Available in www.culturahistorica.es. [Accessed 9 October, 2. —. (2007) Reconstrução do Passado: Teoria da História II: Los Princípios da Pesquisa Histórica [Reconstruction of the Past: History Theory II: The Principles of Historical Research]. Brasília: University of Brasília. —. (2010) ‘Didática da história: passado, presente e perspectives a partir do caso alemão’, [Didactics of history: past, present and perspectives from the German case]’, in M.A.Schmidt, I. Barca, E.R. Martins, Jörn Rüsen e o Ensino de História. [Jörn Rüsen and the Teaching of History].Curitiba: Editora da UFPR [Universidade Federal do Paraná] [Publisher of the Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba]]. —. (2012) Aprendizagem Histórica: Fundamentos e Paradigmas. [Historical Learning: Paradigms and Foundations].Curitiba: W&A Editores [W&A Publishers]. Serrano, J. (1917) Metodologia da História na aula Primária [The Methodology of History in the Primary Classroom]. Rio de Janeiro: Francisco Alves. [Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Higher Studies at Laval University (Québec) for obtaining the degree of Philosophiae Doctor]) Serrano, J. (1935) Como se Ensina a História [How to Teach History]. São Paulo: Melhoramentos. Siman, L. M. (1997) Changement paradigmatique et en feux sociopolitiques en enseignement de l’histoire: le cas du programme d’histoire du Minas Gerais (Brésil) et lês réactions paradoxales des enseignants [Paradigmatic change and sociopolitical influencesin the teaching of history: the case of the Minas Gerais history program (Brazil) and the paradoxical reactions of students] (Thèse presentée à la Faculte des études superieures de l’Université Laval pour l’obtention du grade Philosophiae Doctor,[Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Higher Studies at Laval University (Québec) for obtaining the degree of Philosophiae Doctor]).



Learning and the Formation of Historical Consciousness

177

Schmidt, M. A. (2004) História com Pedagogia: a Contribuição de Jonathas Serrano na Construção do Código Disciplinar da História no Brasil.Revista Brasileira de História. Produção e divulgação de saberes históricos e pedagógicos.[History with Pedagogy: the contribution of Jonathan Serrano to the Construction of the Disciplinary Code of History in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of History. Production and dissemination of historical and pedagogical knowledge]. São Paulo: ANPUH/FAPESP. Schmidt, M.A. & Barca, I. (eds.) (2009) Aprender História. Perspectivas da Educação Histórica. [Learning History. Historical Perspectives of Education].Ijuí: Unijuí. Topolsky, J. (1973) Metodologia de la Historia [The Methodology of History]. Madrid: Cátedra. Urban, A. C. (2011) Manuais de didática de Estudos Sociais como fontes para o código disciplinar da História [Manuals for the teaching of Social Studies as sources for the disciplinary code of history], IX Encontro Nacional de Pesquisadores do Ensino de História[National Meeting of Researchers in History Teaching].Florianópolis: UFSC.







CHAPTER NINE THE CHALLENGES OF HISTORY EDUCATION IN ICELAND SÚSANNA MARGRÉT GESTSDÓTTIR UNIVERSITY OF ICELAND, REYKJAVÍK

Abstract: In this chapter the author discusses the teaching of history in Iceland, first and foremost in relation to the subject’s environment, the legislation relating to it and the curriculum. Curriculum development over the past decades is examined, in addition to changes in teaching material and the general attitudes that have influenced both of these from the time of the struggle for national independence in the first half of the twentieth century. There is a discussion of the disputes that have arisen as a result of tampering with the curriculum and teaching material in history in recent years, both when new emphases were introduced in the eighties and when history teaching in upper secondary schools was substantially reduced with the new national curriculum in 1999.Considerable attention is given to history teaching in upper secondary schools, despite there being a dearth of research at this level. There is evidence that history is popular amongst Icelandic students and the public at large. In this article, an attempt is made to analyse the state of history as a school subject in Iceland, not least in the light of the extensive freedom enjoyed by teachers in their jobs, bearing in mind that there are no standardised exams in the subject and no supervision of teaching methods. At present there is a review of the curricula at all school levels in Iceland and the future of history as a subject is therefore rather uncertain. Key Words: Canon of national history, Colonisation, Curriculum development, Educational authorities, Gender, Historical Consciousness, History Curriculum, History Teaching, Iceland, Icelandic history, National History, Nationalism, Public Debate on History Teaching, Sagas, Social studies, Teachers’ Autonomy, Text books, Upper Secondary Schools



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

179

Introduction One of the things that makes history such a magical discipline is how tangible it is and how it manages to incorporate every human activity in some way or other. So it should come as no great surprise that no less a person than Charles Dickens would be the source of inspiration for the titles of the sections in this article dealing with the teaching of history in Iceland. History teaching can be approached from at least two perspectives, the environment in which it finds itself and what in actual fact goes on within the history classroom. The author of this chapter has an interest in both, though particularly in the latter. This interest stems from the fact that I have taught history at upper secondary school level for almost two decades, as well as working with student teachers at the University of Iceland for a number of years. As a supervisor I have monitored hundreds of lessons, mostly history classes, and in addition evaluated thousands of lesson plans compiled by those doing their practical teacher training. All of this experience has raised a host of questions that I long to have answers to. However the answers must be more than the informal, subjective opinions so far expressed in the debate on history teaching in Iceland. No research is available concerning the teaching of history at upper secondary school level and much of what is known about history teaching at elementary school level comes from the Youth and History survey on historical consciousness among teenagers in the period 1994-1996. [1] This is the reason why in this article I will mainly focus on curriculum development over the past decades and the general attitudes that have shaped this, or at least to the degree that it is possible to do so. These general attitudes are really only discernible when the teaching of history in schools becomes a topic for discussion outside the confines of the academic world and several examples will be referred to in this context. An analysis of the findings of the Youth and History survey will be provided and questions raised as to whether there has been development or stagnation in the teaching of history in the decades that have followed. Finally, there will be a discussion on the state of the subject in Iceland, since the discipline is very much at a crossroads at the time of writing.

Bleak House: The Icelandic Social Science Curriculum Project First, it is necessary to mention a few facts about Iceland to put the country’s teaching of history into its historical context. The Arctic fox was the only mammal to be found here before man’s arrival. This changed in



180

Chapter Nine

the ninth century when a number of additional mammals were introduced by the first settlers coming from Scandinavia and the British Isles. These pioneers established their own system of government, but by the thirteenth century this changed and Iceland came under the Norwegian crown. In time colonial control passed to Denmark. It was not until 1944 that Iceland finally became an independent republic. During the struggle for independence the leaders of the nationalist movement tried to cast off the feeling of inferiority of a small colonised nation by harking back to a time in Icelandic history when the nation was free of foreign influence. The Medieval Age was considered a golden age where the operative word was freedom. Central to the nation’s achievements during this golden age was the writing of the Icelandic sagas. Today this literature is considered Iceland’s greatest contribution to world culture. The fundamental national myth was that Icelanders are the descendants of ancient heroes, but over the centuries Iceland has had to endure much at the hands of foreigners. Whatever the opinion one might have on this historical interpretation, it is easy to understand how it influenced the first history textbooks that were compiled for Icelandic school children at the beginning of the twentieth century. Little by little there was to be a silent agreement [a cannon, a master narrative] on what historical events were deemed important to Icelanders. Even though strident nationalism was on the wane there was a general consensus that the function of history was to help mould good Icelanders who were proud of their country, nation and language. Iceland was no exception in adopting such an attitude. A similar mentality was to be found in other countries during the period of National Romanticism in the mid 19th century, and indeed such an attitude still prevails in some countries today. It is also facts that many have the inclination to approach the discipline of history in an emotional fashion and that history is not just the concern of experts. Everybody appears keen to offer an opinion on the subject. It seems only natural therefore that when you start to tamper with history teaching you also start to meddle with people´s feelings. A case in point is what happened in Iceland in the winter of 19841985; the ensuing debate in the media and in parliament has been described as one of the most heated on the topic of public education in the twentieth century (Jóhannesson, 2008, p. 140, and Gunnarsson, 1990). Essentially what sparked this debate was that in the national curriculum for elementary schools in 1977, history, geography, sociology and regional studies were all combined into one general subject, i.e. social studies. A committee appointed by the Ministry of Education’s Schools Research



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

181

Dept. was responsible for this decision. The chairperson of this committee was Wolfgang Edelstein, later director of the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Educational Research in Berlin (Edelstein grew up in Iceland). Social studies now radically moved away from the main knowledge goals set out in the various component subjects. There was a shift from attaining a general overview of history to training students to draw conclusions from the study of various historical topics and applying them to others. Classroom material was prepared for the first four years at elementary school level and a draft proposal drawn up for what would follow. Six years later a journalist wrote an article entitled “Rewriting Icelandic History” where he questioned whether these changes would serve to increase students’ understanding, as was the intention, or whether they would result in them being frightfully ignorant (Magnússon, 1983, p. 54). The response was to be a series of articles and discussions conducted at a very emotional level and completely devoid of any attempt to set out in a sensible manner what and how people wanted Icelandic children to study history. Discussion raged about the reduction in the teaching of Icelandic history and the lack of a general overall view of history, as well as what many saw as strange or unusual teaching methods (cf. the statement, for example, that rote learning had various advantages and there was nothing to show that it had had a detrimental influence on young people up until now. (Magnússon, 1983, p. 55). In the discussion four types of viewpoints could be detected; now, almost thirty years later, one can safely say that those same characteristics are to be found when every so often education in Iceland is the source of intense public debate. The four perspectives include unsubstantiated opinions, attempts to substantiate opinions, concerted indoctrination and the viewpoint of social studies (Karlsson, 1992). The first of these characterised the extensive debate in parliament, much of which was based on a misunderstanding of the topic under discussion. However the final outcome of this drawn-out discussion was far from positive. It concluded with the group having responsibility for the changes in social studies resigning and a parliamentary committee proposal that Icelandic history teaching be increased coming to nothing. A similar situation would be repeated with the discussion of the new curriculum in 1999, as will be discussed later. But before that point was reached Iceland was fortunate as to be a participant in a large international research project, which in reality showed that historical awareness was the victim of social studies.



182

Chapter Nine

Young Oliver, Dorrit and David: Youth and History In 1995 a survey was carried out in around 30 European countries on the historical consciousness among teenagers. The findings were published two years later Youth and History. A Comparative European Survey on Historical Consciousness and Political Attitudes among Adolescents (Angvik, M. and von Borries, B. (eds.) (1997)). A short time afterwards the survey was published with findings for the Nordic countries, i.e. Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland (Ungdom og historie i Norden [Norwegian]). In the same year a special report Youth and History, The historical consciousness of Icelandic youth in a European context was published by the Icelandic experts responsible for carrying out the survey in Iceland (Guðmundsson, B. & Karlsson, G. (1999). This publication is an effective presentation of the facts and information gleaned from 14-15 year-old Icelanders and their teachers. In this article we will be especially focusing on this book. The concept of ‘historical consciousness’ is not an easy one to define and not everyone would agree on the same definition. Angvik (1997, p. 36) describes how the writing of some German authors about historical consciousness (for example Rüsen and von Borries) was met with interest and general agreement, especially in Scandinavia. History was described as a complex network of (a) interpretations of the past, (b) perceptions of the present and (c) expectations of the future. History was thus seen as a mental construct, which made sense of the past in a narrative structure, while at the same time providing orientation for the lives of those passing from the past to the future. The chapter on Iceland in Youth and History is entitled, “Icelandic Youth: Optimistic, Democratic and Patriotic”, a title that seems to quite accurately reflect the findings in Iceland. Icelandic teenagers were generally very positive towards history and they totally rejected the notion that history was something that had long ceased to have relevance for them. They were far more positive in attitude than their counterparts in the other Nordic countries, even though teaching in those countries was more diverse than in Iceland (Guðmundsson & Karlsson, 1999, p. 90). The survey revealed that history teaching at elementary school level was very uniform and mainly consisted of the teacher instructing and then supporting this with explanations from a text book (Guðmundsson & Karlsson, 1999, p. 69). One of the most interesting features emerging from the survey is the fact that students and teachers experienced the goals of the lesson in



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

183

markedly different ways. When the participants were asked for their response regarding eight stated goals, the following three topped the list among teachers: i. That history should be fascinating and fun; ii. that students learn the basic values of democracy and understand the present; iii. that students understand where development is heading. Students on the other hand interpreted the lesson’s central goal to be that they knew facts, knew of traditions and the role of the nation and society, and knew about the preservation of historical relics and old buildings. The teachers’ top-rated goal of making students aware that history is fascinating and fun was actually put in fifth place out of eight by students (Guðmundsson & Karlsson, 1999, p. 66). Judging from these findings, the planned improvements in teaching envisaged in the seventies did not result in the changes that people either hoped for or feared. The survey’s findings are important for teachers everywhere since the same discrepancies revealed themselves everywhere in Europe (in The State of History Education in Europe, published by the Körber Foundation in the wake of the survey, the question was asked, “Do teachers and students attend the same lessons?” (p. 103). Is it that teachers are not in the habit of discussing a lesson’s goal with their students, or in Iceland’s case is it perhaps the natural consequence of the stymied teaching methods common at elementary school level? But one should bear in mind that even though 70% of Icelandic history teachers had a university education at the time of the survey, only a quarter of them had specialised in history, which is far less than in other European countries (Guðmundsson & Karlsson, 1999, p. 49) and still less than in upper secondary schools in Iceland, where almost all history teachers have completed a BA degree in the subject before embarking on the programme of studies for the teaching diploma. Those of us involved in the education of teachers would be of the belief that it has a vital impact on how effective teachers will be. We also need to determine the source of the positive attitude of students towards history and whether in some way it stems from the fact that in general a rather strong interest in history prevails among Icelanders, an idea that will be touched on later. But enough said regarding the findings of the Youth and History survey. We should not forget that much has changed in Icelandic society since 1995 which no doubt would influence the response given by teenagers if the survey were repeated today. We can for example mention the large



184

Chapter Nine

increase in the number of immigrants and their offspring now attending elementary school, the increasing debate concerning Iceland´s possible membership of the European Union, and the financial collapse of the economy in the autumn of 2008. Personally, I am only aware of one study on the historical consciousness of Icelandic students in recent times and it had a much smaller cohort than the survey of 1997. The research was actually a master´s thesis submitted to Minho University in Portugal examining the ability of Icelandic, Portuguese and Italian students in the final year of elementary school to interpret historical sources (Carvalho, 2010). A knowledge of history was not meant to be of any importance in the study. However the topics presented included reference to the Romans, which clearly would be a far more familiar one to students from southern European countries than to the participating students from the Icelandic town of Kópavogur. Nevertheless, it emerged that the Icelandic students were equally as good when it came to critically analysing sources and drawing conclusions from them. They had various history abilities to hand, could apply these to new and unknown topics and so use them to gather new information. So here were skills that would have surprised many in the great “winter of discontent” debate of 1984-85.

Great Expectations: new syllabus 1999 Emphasis on Icelandic history and national culture The event that has had the greatest impact on history teaching at upper secondary school level in Iceland in the past decades is the new curriculum for elementary and upper secondary schools, which took effect in 1999. Concerning upper secondary schools, there had been little development since 1986 and so teachers had high hopes for positive changes with the introduction of the new curriculum. History teachers were among those having great expectations for their subject. Instead however they were to be greatly disappointed. History as a compulsory subject was considerably reduced and history teachers were told that they should now join in the scramble for students by offering interesting electives in their discipline. One positive outcome of the new curriculum was that it sparked a lively debate on the teaching of history and its relevance, both within and outside the academic world. But at least to begin with it all got off to a good start. [2] At the beginning of 1997 the Ministry of Education set up preparatory committees for the nine fields of study [3] and the Association of History Teachers in Iceland was asked to nominate a representative for the committee responsible for social studies. At that time the association had



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

185

been dormant for some time. However with the ministry’s request its members would answer the call to arms. The author of this article became the association’s new president and held the position for several years. Members of the committee included representatives of the various social studies subjects and the committee’s chairperson was a senior lecturer in history at the National University of Iceland. She was proposed by the minister, a person well-known for his keen interest in history. History teachers felt their interests were well represented when work on the new curriculum began and took an active part in the process. In March the Ministry of Education held a seminar on the state of social studies subjects and those wishing to make a contribution to the shaping of the new curriculum were encouraged to attend. History teachers were among the speakers at the forum and there was a lively exchange of ideas. Several informal meetings then followed between grassroots history teachers and the representative on the committee, so that he could inform them as to the ministry´s intentions for the new curriculum. The first item of thirteen read as follows [4]: “Matters of national education such as the language, national culture and the history of the land and nation should be given special status in the curriculum. The prerequisite for a flourishing national culture in the face of ever-increasing foreign influence is a vibrant connection between the nation and its language, culture and history. The Ministry of Education proposes the creation of a clearly-defined policy in this area and that these matters be given a broader scope in the curricula, both at elementary and upper secondary school levels,” (Stefnumótun [Policies], 1999).

Even though the preparatory committee had no say in the matter of certain subjects in the curriculum, history teachers interpreted the minister’s statement to mean there would be more teaching in their subject and so, little by little, proposals were made as to how this should develop. There has been a tradition in Iceland that in the upper secondary school system concluding with matriculation, there should be limited specialisation; rather it should be a broad-based, general education offering students access to almost any type of study at third level. From a history teacher’s point of view, history had a secure place in such an educational system. The reasoning behind this was that history was a general subject that one associated with a broad-based education. Consequently it should have an important place in elementary school education and be included in all branches at upper secondary school level. It was now proposed that 10 to 12 of the 140 course units needed to successfully complete senior secondary school should come from compulsory



186

Chapter Nine

courses in history. Depending on the school and the branch of study, this varyingly resulted in an increase or decrease in history teaching. [5] There were no recommendations as to how these course units should be distributed between modules that were general in content and those that were specialised. However it was proposed that Icelandic history and world history should be interwoven rather than being separate as had been the practice. While there was not total agreement, most were of the opinion that it was natural and in the best interests of Icelandic history that it be taught in the context of world history, or at least European history, which in reality is the case when teaching world history in Iceland and indeed in neighbouring countries. It soon became apparent that the new curriculum meant increased specialisation at upper secondary school level (16-20 years old). There would be a reduction in the core subjects shared and instead there would be more specialisation within the various branches. Such changes would be detrimental to the teaching of history. Now, students specialising in modern languages and the natural sciences would take only six course units in history, i.e. two general modules in Icelandic history and world history (the first one dedicated to the period before 1789 and the second one to the period from 1789 to the present). Students specialising in social sciences were however to take a module in cultural history and so have an additional three course units. On the other hand, sociology and other social studies subjects were placed within the core of all branches and a new subject had been added, Life Skills, which emphasised such themes as the rights and obligations of a student, family etc. Many history teachers felt that specialisation had been taken too far and a public debate on the matter ensued. In a newspaper interview the Minister of Education was asked for his response to the criticism that some students could now matriculate after four years of schooling with only six course units in history. The minister’s reply was that it was not the time spent that was important rather how it was used. He drew attention to the change of emphasis in history teaching, away from the theme of the struggle for independence and a Marxist interpretation (the minister had long been concerned as to the presence of the latter in the teaching material for children and teenagers). He maintained that students at elementary level received a good overall view of Icelandic history from the settlement to the present and that history should not be a hindrance for those wishing to concentrate on something else’ (Viðamikil og nákvæm námskrá [An extensive and accurate curriculum guide], 1999, p. 35). While the minister did make some relevant points, his response upset many because here was a complete rejection of the traditionally-held opinion that the teaching of



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

187

history had a necessary place within general education; instead it was now viewed as a specialised subject for those intending further study. There was a strong response including a newspaper article written by me, which reiterated the old familiar arguments of history’s value as a general source of reference, its importance and how students’ interest increased with age (Gestsdóttir, 1999). One should however keep in mind that history was an individual subject in the fifth to ninth grades at elementary school level, through it was not compulsory in tenth grade. Nevertheless, in the tenth grade 15 year-old students could choose history in most elementary schools and a new subject had been added within the field of social studies, i.e. sociology. The Association of History Teachers issued two statements objecting to the cutback in history teaching, emphasising that the radical new changes at upper secondary school level would require new teaching material that would have to be financed by the ministry and stressing that the schools themselves should decide what modules should be taught in the various branches after the compulsory modules had been completed (Ályktun fundar Félags sögukennara, 23 Jan., 1999; Ályktun fundar Félags sögukennara, 11 June, 1999). The latter will be discussed in the final section of this article. The text books for the two compulsory modules were published a year later and were the source of considerable debate, not least concerning the difficult task their authors had been set, i.e. to write an overview of Icelandic and world history, on the one hand, from the beginning to the eighteenth century and on the other hand from the eighteenth century to the turn of the twentieth century. It was hardly to be expected that these books would meet with universal approval, considering that their content was old-fashioned and little use was made of new perspectives and research in history. The authors had been given very little time to complete their work and there was no possibility to pre-test and so come with suggestions before going to print. In addition, there was no teacher handbook and certain other features caused dissatisfaction among those who felt the Ministry of Education ought to have done better, especially when one bears in mind that text books in a small society with its own language tend to be in circulation for a considerable time. Many had doubts that the description for social studies modules in the national curriculum guide justified the writing of a combined general history, at least if one considers the following: In the module history is traced chronologically from ancient times up to c. 1800: “The intention is not for an exact chronological order, rather important themes are selected. It is required to select a goal from at least three material categories with particular attention being given to range and



188

Chapter Nine diversity” (Aðalnámskrá framhaldsskóla [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Upper Secondary Schools, Social Studies Subjects], 1999, p. 84).

There was satisfaction with the fact that to accompany the book there was a website having maps and pictures. Four years later a book on cultural history was published, which is the third module students majoring in social studies need to take. It covers a number of the twelve material topics that the curriculum suggests should be selected. And so concluded the state’s initiative regarding the publication of books. In 2003 and 2006 other text books intended for the two general modules saw the light of day and so for the first time teachers had a choice of material. In addition, a detailed text book on the history of the twentieth century, a period widely taught as an elective subject, was published. This debate in the media continued until 2000. Some felt it was an incident likely to win sympathy for the teaching of history when Prime Minister Davíð Oddsson in his New Year address made reference to the fact that young people visiting the cabinet office could not identify the political leaders from former times. It is my belief that the younger generation’s knowledge of previous ages in the nation’s history is lacking and the Prime Minister, Oddsson, said that the teaching of our national history was in disarray (Oddsson, 1999, p. 47). When history teachers were asked for their response to this some replied that if the young people’s ignorance was deemed a problem then it made no sense to reduce the number of hours devoted to history teaching (Söguvitund ungmenna ábótavant? 2000 [Lack of historical consciousness among young people?], pp. 36-37). Verbal spats such as this are commonplace elsewhere, e.g. the ongoing debate in the UK after the present Minister of Education (Michael Gove) took up his post. However the Icelandic minister, Björn Bjarnason, totally refuted the claim that history teaching had been reduced, as could be seen if one compared how things had been under the previous curriculum. But the curriculum only tells half the story, the question is how are its guidelines implemented? In actual fact in most upper secondary schools students had been obliged to study more history than was stipulated in the curriculum. According to the figures, history had been reduced by anywhere between 25% to 50% under the new curriculum. How this reduction would actually be implemented remained to be seen (Þorkelsson, 2000, p. 49). Icelandic history teachers felt they had been hard done by when the new curriculum took effect in 1999. They felt their arguments had not been given proper consideration despite all the consultations, and they



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

189

strongly criticised the process for the compilation of teaching material at upper secondary school level, which had not in any way been as radical and forward-looking as had been hoped for. The fact of the matter was that nobody really knew for sure what influence the changes would have on young Icelanders in time to come.

Hard Times? The current situation As mentioned, the only one way to discuss the current situation in the teaching of history in Icelandic schools is to describe how one perceives, senses it and to make guesses about related matters. The problem is that there is a severe lack of research. One can of course see how much history is taught at upper secondary school level, what teaching material is available to teachers and possibly what is the attitude of the public to the subject. In addition, one can surmise as to trends and developments. As history teachers pointed out when the new curriculum took effect in1999, it is easy to simply advocate that there be a sufficient offering of electives in history to compensate for the loss of compulsory hours in the subject. The question is whether certain schools have the means to be able to comply with such a recommendation. This has indeed been the case. In the difficult financial environment that Icelandic senior secondary schools find themselves at the present time, it is hardly viable to offer an academic subject module unless at least 25 students choose it. In smaller schools, the type most often found in the countryside, this is almost impossible. The largest upper secondary schools are in the Greater Reykjavik Area. And while the number of compulsory modules in history is only two, or three in the case of those specialising in social studies, in one of the largest schools, one can actually find eight history modules on the school’s curriculum each year. In addition to the compulsory modules there are modules on the history of the twentieth century, film, religion, art and one even aimed at students with limited academic interest. These modules have proved to be popular among students. A similar situation is to be found in most other large schools. When the situation in smaller schools out in the country was looked at, it was found that in some places only the compulsory subjects were taught, in other institutions one or two extra modules were on offer. So in effect where you have a large body of students and well educated history teachers, there is no problem in offering extensive history teaching and a lot of students finish their upper secondary schooling with more classes in history than is stipulated in the curriculum. But in schools where the low number of students restricts that possibility, students study much less history than



190

Chapter Nine

was previously the case. When it comes to teaching material for the two compulsory modules, one covering the period before 1800, the other the period after, essentially nothing has been added to the two publications already mentioned, i.e. from 2000/2001 and 2003/2006. Nevertheless more authors have displayed an interest in becoming involved and in offering alternative viewpoints on the most common themes dealt with in history text books in Iceland. But as yet there have been no developments on this front. Publishers of school textbooks in Iceland maintain they are in a difficult financial situation. A statement on their behalf on the front page of Iceland’s largest daily newspaper in 2011claimed that the school textbook market had collapsed. They first and foremost lay the blame for this on the exchange book market, a market that allows students to sell their old text books and purchase used ones at a much lower price than new ones. A spokesperson for the publishers said that it was impossible for them to consider publishing new books; the only solution was to wait until electronic publication became widespread, something that is still some years away (Grundvöllur útgáfu hruninn [The basis of publication has collapsed], Fréttablaðið, 12 February, 2011, p. 1). Of course it is commercially challenging to be a publisher in a country having a language spoken by just over 300,000 people. However some would argue that publishers should be well satisfied with a situation guaranteeing the sale of several thousand copies of a textbook before the exchange book market would begin to diminish sales. Perhaps there is a lack of ambition and a will to think outside the box. Electronic publication is certainly a very good option and particularly when it comes to history, since every day new material becomes available, both relating to contemporary events and the publishing of new research findings and information. Authors and publishers should embrace the Internet in a more structured way than is now the case and so kill two birds with one stone, i.e. keep publishing costs to a minimum and at the same time offer up-todate material that can be easily changed and added to. Textbooks in history have been criticised for being outdated, not least when it comes to gender issues. While the subject of gender has very much been to the fore in society, it has not been included in history text books. In addition, the multi-cultural aspect of modern Icelandic society is also absent from textbooks. They are still written as though all Icelanders are the descendants of Norwegian Vikings and Celtic slaves, even though 7% of the nation fall outside this categorisation.



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

191

When the publication of teaching material is not in a good state it makes more demands on teachers in their efforts to both gather and prepare material. This is when a teacher’s education comes into play. As mentioned earlier, history teachers at senior secondary school level finish their BA degree before undertaking study for their teaching diploma. They are historians and should therefore have the skills to find proper material and use it. It is a different case when it comes to those teaching history at elementary school level, as was revealed in the Youth and History survey. At the time of the survey only a quarter of those teaching the subject had specialised in it. One can assume however that in the intervening period this has changed for the better, at the same time education of those teaching in elementary schools has improved. In the past it was not uncommon to teach various subjects at the upper levels of elementary school or upper secondary school. This called for professional support in certain subjects, including history; in addition it fits well with the discussion these past years on having a less marked division between the two school levels. Some f the educational thinking includes suggestions for transferring some of the core modules at upper secondary school level down to the upper grades in elementary school, for instance in foreign languages. In those schools where history as a subject is in a healthy state and well represented among the subjects on offer, it appears that students are very positive towards the subject and the importance of a knowledge of history in everyday life. They do not regard the history modules as being first and foremost a preparation for studying history at university, rather they appreciate the subject’s inherent general value “so that we have something to talk about in the future”, as one sixteen-year-old with little academic intentions put it. The number of students taking history at university over the past decade has increased; in fact the increase is more than the increase in students at third level over the same period. [6] Such a trend is in accordance with the public’s attitude to history in Iceland. History is extremely popular, which is reflected in the strong interest in books of a historical nature and the many active historical societies. Every week one can choose from various meetings and forums on historical topics and interest in these extends well beyond the academic community. In this context one can for example mention the Icelandic Society of Historians, which has held a series of public lectures over the winter months for years. In recent years these have taken place at lunchtime every other Tuesday in the lecture hall of the National Museum. More often than not the auditorium is packed. The lectures have also caught the attention of the media with the result that there is often a



192

Chapter Nine

follow-up public debate on issues. It was at one of the society´s meetings in 2006 that Iceland’s President, Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, a former professor of political science, gave his famous lecture on the unique national characteristics that explained why Icelanders were so successful in the world of international commerce. The response to his lecture was mixed (Gestsdóttir, 2011, pp. 141-143) and indeed the speech has since become symbolic for the type of rhetoric characteristic of the boom period just prior to the economic crash of 2008, when the nation had lost touch with reality. The teaching of history has also been a matter of discussion within the Icelandic Society of Historians. During the season of 2006-2007, the winter series of lectures was dedicated to research in history, while the spring series focused on how history mediates. In conjunction with the latter a book was published (Benediktsson & Jóhannesson, 2008). From what has been discussed it can be seen that even though Icelandic teachers, history teachers included, have reservations about the curriculum and are not at all happy with how their subjects have been affected, they still enjoy considerable freedom when it comes to what they do in the classroom. The curriculum lays down what should be done in the core modules, but both modules in history are so wide-ranging that it is impossible to cover all the material recommended. How teachers solve that problem is entirely up to them. Whether more than the core modules are offered is a matter for the individual schools. In Iceland there is no monitoring of teaching, only of a school’s financial matters. The Ministry of Education sometimes checks to see if the number of students registered as having concluded a module is more than those actually active in it; this is done to prevent schools from receiving payment for students to whom they did not provide a service (irrespective of just how much service the school actually provided before the student dropped out). There are no standardised exams at upper secondary school level, rather schools are trusted to do the job that is expected of them. The system appears to work, at least a wide ranging research study published in the spring of 2012 showed that there was no discernible difference between students from varying schools when it came to how they fared academically at university (Magnúsdóttir, 2012). It should not surprise readers that there is absolutely no supervision of teaching. In many schools there is however regular evaluation of teaching by students and in some instances the school principal will discuss the outcome of these with teachers. But there is no established rule as to the use of these surveys, and the results have a rather limited value. Whether teachers choose to professionally cooperate among themselves, e.g.



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

193

visiting each other’s classes, is entirely up to them. There is no external monitoring. One might say that this reflects the high degree of trust extended to teachers and their professionalism, which is all well and good. It also means however that teachers receive no support and encouragement, either relating to what they are doing well or what they might need assistance with, in order to do better. Last but not least, lack of supervision is the reason why so little is known about teaching methods in Icelandic classrooms. Recent research, which was limited to students in the first semester at upper secondary school, indicated that cooperative teaching methods are considerably less used than at elementary school level. According to the findings of this research, students listened to lectures, watched movies, or did a series of questions and answers during 56% of class time. Students worked together for 10% of class time, the rest was spent working alone. The conclusion drawn by the researcher was that student initiative diminishes once you enter upper secondary school. The interesting fact is that this is not the impression teachers had regarding their own classes (Dregur úr frumkvæði [Students not as pro-active as before], 2011). In my opinion this clearly underscores the need for some form of support for teachers; and after all schools should not be some type of sheltered workplace. There is no data available as to history teaching specifically, so one does not know what has resulted from the meshing of Icelandic and world history as the 1999 curriculum stipulated. However a recent interview survey would seem to indicate that the traditional emphasis on the struggle for independence is on the decline or has almost disappeared, but what paradigm should replace it is as yet undefined (Magnússon, 2012). Now there is a revision of the curricula for pre-school, elementary and senior secondary school levels. The general introductory section is now completed and work is underway on the subjects section. The dominant policy seems to be to give preference to students meeting a certain competence standard via selected content. Concrete tasks are not specified. History will not be an individual subject at elementary school, rather it will be part of social studies and each school can itself decide what subject specialisation within social studies they want to emphasise. All school activity should be based on six key elements, i.e. literacy, sustainability, democracy and human rights, equality, health and welfare and creativity. These key elements should be reflected in all subjects, whether it be the tasks undertaken or the teaching methods. In that part of the curriculum which is common to all levels, there is a chapter on the professionalism of



194

Chapter Nine

teachers and a reference both to the trust extended to them and the responsibility they must shoulder. The chapter concludes as follows: “Teachers work in cooperation with school principals towards the development of a school curriculum that takes into consideration the circumstances and the special emphases at each school level. It is the teacher’s responsibility to implement in a professional way, both in the classroom and in other school activities, the guidelines and policy set out in the national curriculum.” (Aðalnámskrá leikskóla [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Preschools], 2011, p. 12, Aðalnámskrá grunnskóla [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Compulsory Schools], 2011, p. 12, Aðalnámskrá framhaldsskóla [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Upper Secondary Schools], 2011, p. 12)

Finally History has always been very much in the public domain in Iceland. The positive side to this is that people in general are interested in history, they buy books on historical themes and are curious about archaeological reports and other historically-related matters. The down side however is that when we turn to history as a school subject most people wish to have it the way it has always been, that teaching should revolve around the textbook and that the topics should be the same as they always were. In Iceland there is no formal canon laying down what those topics should be, as is the case in some neighbouring countries, e.g. Denmark and the Netherlands, but there most definitely exists an informal canon created over the years and that includes such topics as the settlement (end of the 9th century), the age of the Sturlungs (13th century), the Reformation (1550), the struggle for independence (until 1944). This clearly revealed itself in ‘the winter of discontent’ of 1984-1985, and conservative teaching methods are discernible from the 1995 Youth and History survey. As already mentioned, the survey showed that how teachers imagined their teaching to be was in fact quite different to the reality of he pupils’ perception. This perhaps indicates a desire of teachers to do better or differently, an ambition that needs to be supported. In the new national curriculum for upper secondary schools there is only a brief reference to study and teaching methods which includes the following: “Diversity in working habits and teaching methods is one of the requirements for students attaining a range of competences. It is important to bear in mind that different standards of competence can be achieved in a variety of ways and that not all students respond in a similar fashion to the methods used. Teaching practices should not discriminate between students



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

195

on the basis of gender, residence, background, race, disability, religion, sexual orientation or social status.” (Aðalnámskrá framhaldsskóla [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Upper Secondary Schools], 2011, p. 39).

It is less complicated to discuss official changes, such as legal amendments and curricula, than it is to discuss the changes that have actually occurred within the classroom. Research has shown that the teacher matters far more than the factors previously mentioned (cf. e.g. Hattie 2003). Teachers of history in Iceland enjoy a considerable degree of freedom in their profession. There is a pressing need for a study of teaching methods in Icelandic senior secondary schools to determine whether they reflect the diversity of the modern age, meet the demands of students and stimulate the strengths of each student. My heart-felt wish is to be able to write another article on that precise topic at a later point in time.

Notes 1

2

3

4

5

6



In the Icelandic school system "grunnskóli" or elementary is used for compulsory schooling for those aged 6-16; while the term "framhaldsskóli" or upper secondary refers to the following four years which most often concludes with matriculation. An article documenting this process was published already in 2001 (Gestsdóttir, 2001). Icelandic, Life Skills, Information and Technology, Arts, Mathematics, Physical Education, Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Foreign Languages. The others are: Emphasis on scientific literacy, emphasis on technological education, international demands, general life skills, life-long education, evaluation and inspection, revision of teaching methods, enhancing longdistance learning, reduction of the number of drop-outs in upper secondary schools, studies that meet individual needs, equality, coherent studies. According to a Ministry of Education directive, there are approximately 35 student hours to every course unit (this system is currently under revision). At the beginning of 2003 the number of students registered at the University of Iceland was 8,225, of which 257 were studying history. At the beginning of 2012 the number of students registered at the University of Iceland was 14,422, of which 742 were studying history (Heildarskráning nemenda í Háskóla Íslands frá upphafi, 2012).

196

Chapter Nine

References Aðalnámskrá framhaldsskóla 2011, almennur hluti, (2012) Reykjavík, Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið. [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Upper Secondary Schools, The General Section, is available in English at http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/utgefidefni/namskrar/adalnamskra-framhaldsskola/] [Accessed 29 May, 2013]. Aðalnámskrá framhaldsskóla, samfélagsgreinar, (1999) [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Upper Secondary Schools, Social Studies] Reykjavík, Menntamálaráðuneytið [Reykjavik, Ministry of Education]. Aðalnámskrá grunnskóla 2011, almennur hluti (2012) Reykjavík, Menntaog menningarmálaráðuneytið. [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Compulsory Schools, The General Sections,Reykjavik, Ministry of Education and Culture] is available in English at http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/utgefid-efni/namskrar/ adalnamskra-grunnskola/] [Accessed 29 May, 2013]. Aðalnámskrá leikskóla 2011, almennur hluti (2012) Reykjavík, Menntaog menningarmálaráðuneytið. [The Icelandic National Curriculum Guide for Preschools is available in English at http://www.menntamalaraduneyti.is/utgefid-efni/namskrar/nr/3952] [Accessed 29 May, 2013]. Angvik, M. & Nielsen, V.O. (eds.) (1999) Ungdom og historie i Norden. [Youth and History in the North] Bergen-Sandviken: Fagbokforlaget. Angvik, M. and von Borries, B. (eds.) (1997) Youth and History. A Comparative European Survey on Historical Consciousness and Political Attitudes among Adolescents, Volume A: Description. Volume B: Documentation. Original and Combined Measures for Dimensions in Historical Consciousness containing the Database on CD-ROM. Hamburg: Körber-Stiftung. Angvik, M. (1997) ‘Youth and History – An Intercultural Comparison of Historical Consciousness’, in M. Angvik & B. von Borries (eds.) Youth and History. A Comparative European Survey on Historical Consciousness and Political Attitudes among Adolescents, Volume A: Description. Hamburg: Körber-Stiftung (pp. 19-47). Ályktun Félags sögukennara [Resolution of the History Teachers Association] (1999a) 23 January, 1999. Ályktun Félags sögukennara [Resolution of the History Teachers Association] (1999b) 11 June, 1999. Benediktsson, G. & Jóhannesson, G.T. (eds.) (2008) Hvað er sagnfræði? Rannsóknir og miðlun [What is history? Research and Communication].



The Challenges of History Education in Iceland

197

Reykjavík: Skrudda. Carvalho, M. (2010) A competênciade interpretaçãode fontes em História, em países da Europa: um estudo comalunos portugueses, islandeses e italianos no final da escolaridade básica. [The ability to interpret sources in European countries: a study of Portuguese, Icelandic and Italian pupils at the end of compulsory education] M.A. Universidade do Minho. Institutode Educação. ‘Dregur úr frumkvæði þegar nemendur koma í framhaldsskóla’ [Students not as pro-active as before when they come to Upper Secondary Schools] (2011) Skólavarðan, 11(3), pp. 24-25. Available at ‫ޒ‬http://www.ki.is/utgafa/Skolavardan_3.tbl.2011/‫[ ޓ‬Accessed 12 August, 2012]. Gestsdóttir, S.M. (1999) Sögukennsla í framhaldsskólum [History teaching in Upper Secondary Schools], Morgunblaðið, 18 Sep. p. 62 [Online]. Available at ‫ޒ‬http://timarit.is/view_page_init.jsp?issId=132103&pageId=1945817& lang=is&q=Sögukennsla í framhaldsskólum ‫[ ޓ‬Accessed 10 August, 2012]. —. (2001) ‘Aðför eða nauðsynleg endurnýjun? Sögukennsla í nýju ljósi’ [Attack or necessary renewal? Teaching of History in a new light] Saga, 39, pp. 137-168 [Online]. Available at ‫ޒ‬http://timarit.is/view_page_init.jsp?issId=334808&pageId=5282031& lang=is&q=Aðför eða nauðsynleg endurnýjun‫[ ޓ‬Accessed 12 August, 2012]. —. (2011) ‘Grundvöllur útgáfu hruninn’ [The basis of publication has collapsed] (2011) Fréttablaðið, 12 February, p. 1 [Online]. Available at http://www.visir.is/grundvollur-utgafu-hruninn/article/2011137925460 [Accessed 26 May, 2013]. —. (2012) Historiskkunskap [The Continuous Unpredictability of the Past], in P.Eliasson, K.G.Hammarlund, E.Lund, E. & C.T.Nielsen (eds.) Historiedidaktik i Norden 9 : Del 1: historiemedvetande – historiebruk. Malmö and Halmstad: Malmöhögskola och Högskolan i Halmstad, pp. 140-152[online]. Available at ‫ޒ‬hh.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:515559/FULLTEXT01‫ޓ‬ [Accessed 12 August, 2012]. Guðmundsson, B. & Karlsson, G. (1999) Æska og saga. Söguvitund íslenskra unglinga í evrópskum samanburði [Youth and History, The historical consciousness of Icelandic youth in a European context]. Reykjavík: Sagnfræðistofnun/Háskólaútgáfan. Guðmundsson, B. (1997) ‘Icelandic Youth: Optimistic, Democratic and Patriotic’, in M.Angvik & B. von Borries, B. (eds.) Youth and History.



198

Chapter Nine

A Comparative European Survey on Historical Consciousness and Political Attitudes among Adolescents, Volume A: Description. Hamburg: Körber-Stiftung (pp. 236-240). Gunnarsson, Þ. (1990) Controlling Curriculum Knowledge. A Documentary Study of the Icelandic Social Science Curriculum Project (SSCP) 1974-1984. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University. Hattie, J. (2003) Teachers Make a Difference. What is their research evidence? Australian Council for Educational Research [Online]. Available at