Advertisement

Social Studies Teachers’ Perspectives on the Differences Between Disciplinary History and School History

  • Kaya YilmazEmail author
Chapter
  • 112 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate secondary school social studies teachers’ perspectives on the differences between disciplinary history and school history. A purposeful sampling procedure was employed to recruit participants for the study. Social studies teachers were selected as the participants of the study. The method of data collection was in-depth, semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions. Descriptive qualitative data analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts. The research findings showed that the teachers see differences between the two types of history in terms of their orientations, the ways they are presented, the context in which history is taught and learned, including institutional constraints that affect history education, and resources used. These categories of teachers’ responses are not mutually exclusive but overlapping. Generally suspicious of textbooks, the teachers have a negative view of textbooks because of their detrimental effects on history education. They also see differences in academic history books and school history textbooks in terms of the perspective, the ownership of the perspective, the style of presentation, the quality of presentation, the sources of information, the treatment of controversial issues, the external influences on publication, the goals of publication, and the ways they are used. From the teachers’ responses, academic historians differ from history teachers in terms of their professional orientations, pedagogical skills and practices, specialization or level of expertise, type of instruction, treatment of subject matters, type of student population in both settings, the nature of relationship with students, and the context or working conditions. Because these findings are not documented in previous studies, they not only contribute to our understanding of how social studies teachers differentiate between two types of history, but also guide upcoming research studies in the field.

Bibliography

  1. Alleman, Janet, and Jere Brophy. 1999. The Changing Nature and Purpose of Assessment in the Social Studies Classroom. Social Education 63 (6): 334–337.Google Scholar
  2. Charmaz, Kathy C. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Clark, Christopher M., and Penelope L. Peterson. 1986. Teachers’ Thought Processes. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. Merlin C. Wittrock, 255–296. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Donnelly, James H. 1999. Interpreting Differences: The Educational Aims of Teachers of Science and History, and Their Implications. Journal of Curriculum Studies 31 (1): 17–41.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, Ronald W. 1988. Lessons from History: Teacher and Student Conceptions of the Meaning of History. Theory and Research in Social Education 16 (3): 203–225.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1989. Teacher Conception of History. Theory and Research in Social Education 17 (3): 210–240.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 1990. Teachers’ Conceptions of History Revisited: Ideology, Curriculum and Student Belief. Theory and Research in Social Education 18 (2): 101–138.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2004. The Social Studies Wars: What Should We Teach the Children? New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  9. Fang, Zhihui. 1996. A Review of Research on Teacher Beliefs and Practices. Educational Research 38 (1): 47–65.Google Scholar
  10. Fischer, Fritz. 2006. Preparation of Future History Teachers: The History Departments’ Role. Perspectives 44 (9). Retrieved from, https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2006/preparation-of-future-history-teachersthe-history-departments-role
  11. Grossman, Pamela, Suanne M. Wilson, and Lee S. Shulman. 1989. Teachers of Substance: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching. In Knowledge Base for the Beginning Teacher, ed. Maynard C. Reynolds, 23–36. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hancock, Elizabeth S., and Alejandro J. Gallard. 2004. Preservice Science Teachers’ Beliefs About Teaching and Learning: The Influence of K-12 Field Experiences. Journal of Science Teacher Education 15 (4): 281–291.Google Scholar
  13. Hartzler-Miller, Cynthia. 2001. Making Sense of the “Best Practice” in Teaching History. Theory and Research in Social Education 29 (4): 672–695.Google Scholar
  14. Hicks, David. 2001. Examining Preservice Teachers Conceptions and Approaches to the Teaching of History in England and America. Paper Presented at the International Assembly Annual Conference of NCSS, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  15. Hoefferle, Caroline. 2007. Teaching Historiography to High School and Undergraduate Students. OAH Magazine of History 21: 40–44.Google Scholar
  16. Lee, Peter J. 1983. History Teaching and Philosophy of History. History and Theory 22 (4): 19–49.Google Scholar
  17. Madaus, George F. 1988. The Influence of Testing on the Curriculum. In Critical Issues in Curriculum, ed. Laurel Tanner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Marshall, Catherine, and Gretchen B. Rossman. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Mathison, Sandra. 2001. Assessment in Social Studies: Moving Toward Authenticity. In The Social Studies Curriculum: Purposes, Problems, and Possibilities, ed. E. Wayne Ross, 217–234. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  20. McDiarmid, G. Williamson, and Peter Vinten-Johansen. 2000. A Catwalk Across the Great Divide: Redesigning the History Teaching Methods Course. In Knowing, Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives, ed. Peter N. Stearns, Peter Seixas, and Sam Wineburg, 156–177. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  21. McNeil, Linda M. 1988. Contradictions of Control: School Structure and School Knowledge. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Miles, Matthew B., and Michael A. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). 1991. NCSS Position Statement on Testing and Evaluation of Social Studies Students. Position Statement and Guidelines. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED340645.Google Scholar
  24. National Research Council. 2005. How Students Learn History in the Classroom. In Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, ed. M. Suzanne Donovan and John D. Bransford. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  25. Nichol, Jon, and Robert Malcolm Guyver. 2004. From Novice to Effective Teacher: A Study of Postgraduate Training and History Pedagogy. International Journal of Historical Learning Teaching and Research 4 (8): 76–126. Retrieved from, www.ex.ac.uk/historyresource
  26. Pajares, Mikel F. 1992. Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning Up a Messy Construct. Review of Educational Research 62 (3): 307–332.Google Scholar
  27. Patton, Michael Quinn. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Pratt, Daniel D., et al. 1998. Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult and Higher Education. Malabar: Krieger Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Seixas, Peter. 2001. Review of Research on Social Studies. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. Virginia Richardson, 545–565. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  30. Shemilt, Denis. 2011. The Gods of the Copybook Headings: Why Don’t We Learn from the Past? In The Future of the Past: Why History Education Matters, ed. Lukas Perikleous and Denis Shemilt. Nicosia: Association for Historical Dialogue and Research.Google Scholar
  31. Shulman, Lee S. 1993. Teaching as Community Property: Putting an End to Pedagogical Solitude. Change 25 (6): 6–7.Google Scholar
  32. Stearns, Peter N. 1998. Putting Learning Research to Work: The Next Step in History Teaching. Issues in Education 4 (2): 237–243.Google Scholar
  33. Thompson, Alba G. 1992. Teachers’ Beliefs and Conceptions: A Synthesis of the Research. In Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, ed. Douglas A. Grouws, 127–146. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  34. Thornton, Stephen J. 1991. Teachers as Curricular-Instructional Gatekeeper in Social Studies. In Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning: A Project of the National Council for the Social Studies, ed. James P. Shaver, 197–209. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  35. ———. 1992. How Do Elementary Teachers Decide What to Teach in Social Studies? In Teacher Personal Theorizing: Connecting Curriculum Practice, Theory and Research, ed. E. Wayne Ross, J.W. Cornett, and G. McCatcheon, 83–95. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  36. Trigwell, Keith, Michael Prosser, and Fiona Waterhouse. 1999. Relations Between Teachers’ Approaches to Teaching and Students’ Approaches to Learning. Higher Education 37: 57–70.Google Scholar
  37. VanSledright, Bruce A. 1996. Closing the Gap Between School and Disciplinary History?: Historian as High School History Teacher. Advances in Research on Teaching 6: 257–289.Google Scholar
  38. ———. 1998. Historical Study, the Heritage Curriculum, and Educational Research. Issues in Education 4 (2): 243–250.Google Scholar
  39. Virta, Arja. 2001. Student Teachers’ Conceptions of History. International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research 2 (1). Retrieved from, http://www.ex.ac.uk/historyresource/journal3/journalstart.htm
  40. Wilson, Suzanne M. 2001. Research on History Teaching. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. V. Richardson, 527–544. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  41. Wilson, Suzanne M., and Samuel S. Wineburg. 1988. Peering at History Through Different Lenses: The Role of Disciplinary Perspectives in Teaching History. Teachers College Record 89 (4): 525–539.Google Scholar
  42. Wineburg, Samuel S. 1991a. Historical Problem Solving. A Study of the Cognitive Processes Used in the Evaluation of Documentary and Pictorial Evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology 83 (1991a): 73–87.Google Scholar
  43. ———. 1991b. On the Reading of Historical Texts: Notes on the Breach Between School and Academy. American Educational Research Journal 28: 495–519.Google Scholar
  44. ———. 1996. The Psychology of Learning and Teaching History. In Handbook of Educational Psychology, ed. David C. Berliner and Robert C. Calfee, 423–437. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  45. Yeager, Elizabeth Anne, and O.L. Davis Jr. 1995. Between Campus and Classroom: Secondary Student-Teachers’ Thinking About Historical Texts. Journal of Research and Development in Education 29 (1): 1–8.Google Scholar
  46. Yilmaz, Kaya. 2007. Historical Empathy and Its Implications for Classroom Practices in Schools. History Teacher 40: 331–337.Google Scholar
  47. ———. 2010. Postmodernism and Its Challenge to the Discipline of History: Implications for History Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory 42 (7): 779–795.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marmara UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations