Summary of HTEN Events
HTEN half day conference keynote 24th March 2022
Susanna Margret Gestsdottir offered the members of HTEN a deeply engaging and thought-provoking contribution in March 2022. She began by asking us what we valued in history education. In particular, she asked us to consider aspects of historical thinking and reasoning (HTR) that we might want young people to experience in history lessons. Participants identified substantive knowledge; disciplinary concepts such as interpretation; processes such as evidential thinking and worldbuilding, and dispositions including tolerance.
She challenged us to consider what we look for, as teacher educators, when we observe in the classroom of a new History teacher. In the past, in England for example, we have graded lessons, and have been encouraged to look for evidence of the impact of our curriculum on the work of the new teacher. Is this what we should be doing?
The research carried out by Gestdottir, working within the HTR approach developed by van Boxtel and van Drie in the Netherlands, offers another path. If we want young people to experience an historical education that enables them to make meaning, to argue, and to reason historically, then we need to pay close attention what happens in the classrooms of new teachers.
A new approach to observation is explored by Gestdottir, van Boxtel and van Drie in their paper, Teaching historical thinking and reasoning: Construction of an observation instrument in 2018. Gestdottir and colleagues piloted an observation instrument focused on seven key aspects of historical reasoning. Susanna explained that ‘The instrument can help identify concrete examples of teaching historical thinking and reasoning and points for development, which makes it a promising instrument for professional development’ (Gestdottir, van Boxtel and van Drie 2018:960).
It holds promise because ‘Classroom observation instruments can be useful tools to facilitate the transition from theory to practice, supporting professional development... A domain-specific observation instrument may help teachers answer the question of to what extent and in which ways they teach historical thinking and reasoning’ (Gestdottir, van Boxtel and van Drie 2018:961). This is especially important because observation instruments are rarely subject-specific, and so as observers, we may not notice what is missing. As an example, Gestdottir and colleagues noted that: ‘Although several studies found positive effects of explicit teaching of HTR strategies (e.g., Nokes et al., 2007; Reisman, 2012; Stoelet al., 2017), in the lessons that we observed, hardly any teacher demonstrated this behaviour.’
Harris (2021: 99) has shown that we assume ‘a disciplinary approach is widespread’ in England, when it is not. As teacher educators, we have an opportunity to learn from the work Susanna has done. We could discuss this work with mentor colleagues. We could choose to look for the items identified as ‘explicit instruction’ in HTR. If we notice that ‘the teacher does not do any of this’ (Gestdottir, van Boxtel and van Drie 2018:981), then together, we need to discuss this with the new teacher, to show them what might be possible, and to encourage them to make sense of the research that suggests HTR is not just what we want, but what young people need.
Ali Messer June 2022
HTEN half day conference 29th November 2022
In memory of Peter Seixas
~
When Peter Seixas died earlier this year there were a number of wonderful tributes published. Not least a photo montage posted by one of his many students, Lindsay Gibson that made me smile. (https://twitter.com/ls_gibson/status/1582371725685428224) Lindsay also informed of a moment of silence that was observed at the Annual General Meeting for Thinking Historically for Canada’s Future – a moment of silence to reflect on the life of one of the giants of History Education.
These tributes all attest to a life well lived – integrity, dignity and strong moral values are all mentioned on numerous occasions (and especially relate to the courageous ways he fought a long battle against cancer). These tributes also draw attention to the wonderful legacy of publications, scholarship and highlight the numerous academics that Peter trained and influenced.
I cannot come close in this brief message to the deeply moving letter to Peter written by our friend and colleague Arthur Chapman and I will quote from this letter in just a little while. BUT please do read this wonderful tribute in full on Arthur’s blog page, The Camel’s Back. (https://thecamelsback.org/blog/)
Like many of us Peter began his working life in the classroom teaching social studies. In 1990, he became an assistant professor at the Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, with responsibilities for history and social studies education. Ten years later he became the Faculty’s first Canada Research Chair and he went on to establish the Centre for the Study of Historical Consciousness, and the pan-Canadian Historical Thinking Project. His many contributions were recognized when he was elected to a fellowship of the Royal Society of Canada. He was also the recipient of numerous research and teaching awards – to many to list.
There are two reasons why I wanted to add to what has been said - they both have a personal element.
Firstly, unlike Arthur I was lucky enough to meet Peter when he gave a paper at an AERA conference. This was fairly early on in my career and because I was in awe of him and other in the audience I didn’t ask a question at the end of the paper - I just hung around at the end of the session and fortuitously I did get an opportunity to ask my question. He said it would take far too long to answer – I thought I was being ‘dismissed’ BUT no, as this statement was followed by – lets discuss this over something to eat. There was a real generosity of spirit.
Secondly, I wanted to comment on the deep wisdom and the very profound nature of what Peter said and what he wrote. There have been many of his papers, chapters and books that have profoundly affected the ways that I have thought about history education - not just once but time and time again he has challenged me. His work has come close to answering fundamental questions – why history education matters and what does progression look like in terms of historical understanding - what does it mean to get better at history/or studying history. Recently, I re- read Peter’s chapter in Joined-Up History – entitled Looking for History. It will blow your socks off and make you really think about many ethical considerations in our work.
Finally, as promised I return to Arthur’s tribute – he concludes about Peter’s life and work
You will continue to be a beacon, inspiration, and model for us all as we try to move forward in uncertain times. I will continue to think with you – I hope – as long as I continue to think.
I hope this is true of all of us.
Rest in peace Peter and thank you.
Gary Mills
