A Study on the Student Activities Using Historical Sources in World History Textbooks for Contemporary History Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 154 ◽  
pp. 159-190
Author(s):  
Jeong-Bun Kim
Epohi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yulia Simeonova ◽  
◽  
◽  

During the last few years, an attempt has been made in Bulgarian society to impose the con-tention that the Ottoman period is represented in the school history and civilizations textbooks through the definition “Ottoman Presence”. The present article seeks to provide a scientifically grounded review of the educational documentation concerning school history education, and in particular the history textbooks, to ascertain whether such a definition is present or absent.


2012 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-112
Author(s):  
Martin Alm

This article studies U.S. views of the historical relationship between the U.S. and Europe as conceived during the 20th century. This is examined through U.S. World history text books dating from 1921 to 2001. The textbooks view relations within a general teleological narrative of progress through democracy and technology. Generally, the textbooks stress the significan ce of the English heritage to American society. From the American Revolution onwards, however, the U.S. stands as an example to Europe. Beginning with the two world wars, it also intervenes directly in Europe in order to save democracy. In the Cold War, the U.S. finally acknowledges the lea ding role it has been assigned in the world. Through its democratic ideals, the U.S. historically has a spe cial relationship with Great Britain and, by the 20th century, Western Europe in general. An American identity is established both in conjunction with Western Europe, by emphasizing their common democratic tradition, and in opposition to it, by stressing how the Americans have developed this tradition better than the Europeans, creating a more egalitarian and libertarian society. There is a need for Europe to become more like the U.S., and a Europe that does not follow the American lead is viewed with suspicion.


Epohi ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Svetozar Petrov ◽  

The article shows the vast majority of didactic differences between history textbooks for 10th grade students. It analyzes three units in three contemporary textbooks for the same grade, centered around the following topic: Changes in Bulgaria between 1944 and 1947. The approach is both qualitative and quantitative. The paper also compares the textbooks’ main and additional texts, primary historical sources, images, and questions at the end. The results reveal significant differences between the studied units, and highlight the need to think towards a better formulation of the didactic standards for history textbooks.


2010 ◽  
Vol 112 (9) ◽  
pp. 2471-2495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Thornton ◽  
Keith C. Barton

Background/Context Over the past quarter-century, many historians, politicians, and educators have argued for an increase in the amount of history taught in schools, for a clear separation of history and social studies, and for an emphasis on disciplinary structures and norms as the proper focus for the subject. Unfortunately, discussions of history education too often rest on the problematic belief that the academic discipline can provide direction for the nature of the subject in general education. Description of Prior Research Throughout much of the 20th century, U.S. history educators made common cause with other social educators to promote principled and critical understandings of society. Both groups stood in opposition to calls for more nationalist views of history education. In the mid-1980s, however, this situation began to change, as a coalition of historians, educational researchers, and political pressure groups promoted history as a subject distinct from and independent of the larger realm of the social studies. This new coalition has been unable to avoid conflicts over the selection of content, however, and approaches favored by nationalists often clash with the more critical and inclusive perspectives of historians. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study In this article, we trace the relationship between historians and other social educators during the 20th century and explore how the forces favoring a realignment of history and social studies coalesced in the mid-1980s. We argue that this coalition has led to an unproductive emphasis on history as a “separate subject” and a resulting lack of attention to the goals of history in general education. Research Design This analytic essay draws on curriculum theory, historical sources, and contemporary cognitive research to outline the changing relationships between historians and other social educators and to examine the limitations of a purportedly disciplinary curriculum. Conclusions/Recommendations The academic discipline of history cannot, by itself, provide guidance for content selection because educators face restrictions of time and coverage that are not relevant in the context of academic historical research. In addition, educators must concern themselves with developing students’ conceptual understanding, and this necessarily requires drawing on other social science disciplines. If students are to develop the insights that historians have most often promoted for the subject, historians must return to their place within the conversation of social studies education.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document