Reflections upon historical thinking in schools

I believe that “Historical Thinking” is in large part about developing an increasingly complex understanding of the processes and nature of history; a continual process of redevelopment and refinement. Because of this it is not only, or even principally, something fixed or rote to be learnt; it is a mode of thinking to be developed throughout a child’s time in education and hopefully beyond.

In this reflective journal entry I will discuss what I believe to be the key elements of “historical thinking”, acknowledging the now somewhat old framework of “New History”, and the way that it can be supported through using Bloom’s Taxonomy. I will then discuss how children can start to develop their knowledge and understanding of these concepts.

Historical thinking is firstly about understanding the two-fold nature of the subject, as a body of knowledge and as a form of knowledge, and also about learning how to “do history”. To me, history is more about the latter of these.  I would closely link it to wider possible educational aims, such as being able to think and challenge ideas, concepts and structures in a logical and thoughtful manner. However, I acknowledge that in order to develop historical thinking, children must have something, some evidence, if that is the correct word to use, to use their process-based knowledge against; both primary and secondary sources from history, and also a backdrop against which to place them. Not only this, the body of history that pupils learn about must include some knowledge of the order in which events have occurred in the past, and which events out of those, we as a society see as important, what is termed chronology. It is important, to maintain the development of historical thinking, that the body of knowledge that is taught is always contestable and subject to debate (historical interpretation), that the body of knowledge chosen to be studied has been selected (essentially, understanding historical significance). Children must also understanding the often chaotic (but at times stable) nature of the past, as can be expressed, when teaching children, through the overarching framework of “change and continuity”, and relate what is occurring at one stage in the past to another to show the pace and forms of change, through the framework of “compare and contrast”. In addition, history must be understood in terms of things continually impacting upon one another, the concept of “cause and consequence” is useful here. All of these aspects of historical thinking are brought together within pieces of historical thinking; historical enquiry.

These key elements of historical thinking are highly complicated, especially when interlinked. If children can learn historical thinking from an early age, as Bruner would suggest with the concept of the “Spiral Curriculum”, then the elements of historical thinking that are studied must be taught to pupils at their level of cognitive ability. Thinking about this, some of the above concepts may be easier for children with lower cognitive ability; comparing and contrasting seems to be easier than, for example, grasping historical significance. These concepts can be supported by Bloom’s Taxonomy, giving an even greater sense of critical understanding. Using this, a child may be able to describe how an event is important, rather than evaluating the differences and similarities (the comparing and contrasting skill) between two events. This is all complicated stuff, and I would suggest that in order to learn it pupils must want to learn it. This means that teachers have to employ a wide range of strategies, from different sources (pictorial, video, physical historical artefacts and text) to having some activities where pupils can employ different learning styles, from writing to moving around. Pupils should participate in activities which involve working in different size groups (individual, in pairs and larger groups) such as role-play or creating a wiki. Pupils will not learn in a systematic way at all times, partly due to the chaotic nature of history. When studying some events in history children may find it easier to evaluate rather than describe, or find discussing causes and consequences more challenging than significance. As long as all the various history specific and more general Bloom’s concepts are continually involved in a pupil’s history education in a way which meets the cognitive level of the children, and which children positively engage with, historical thinking will hopefully occur.

At the end of the first phase of his PGCE, Tom Wedge-Roberts reflects upon teaching and learning historical thinking.  Tom is a York University PGCE student, 2013-14