ANSWERS TO FORUM DISCUSSION 3: CONTENT AND PEDAGOGY IN HISTORY TEACHING AND LEARNING

1. Discuss how Lee teaches what he calls second order concepts in history. These include the historical time, change, empathy, cause, evidence and accounts.

According to Lee (p. 41), the concept of time is central to history. Lee mentioned that time in the teaching of history is measured through a conventional system of dates. Dates of events, eras, tragedies, significant accounts and occurrences amongst others are equally important to students for them to develop a chronological understanding of the events that took place in history.

Lee also mentioned that teachers at the elementary level often say that their students have no concept of time (p.41). He cited an example among first graders and it showed that that historical distinction between long ago and now had been assimilated into the common-sense distinctions of old versus young and old versus new. It means that students particularly those at the basic level find difficulty understanding the concept of time given that we are now living in a different era and rapidly changing environment whereas, some factors such as proliferation of media and technology have had affected the perspectives of these young students in distinguishing the old from the new.

He reiterated that a sense of period is a sort of difficult achievement for students and it is a fact that it requires a good deal of knowledge (p. 42). A profound understanding of how the historians accounted past events is deemed needed by the students, along with the underlying themes that they used as basis of their thinking to construct historical facts.

The concept of change was viewed by Lee as a notion whereas everything gets better and that the past can be viewed in terms of deficits. Such deficits are present in the past due to lack or non-presence of materials, non-existence of new ideas amongst others. But things may improve and get better by means of rational decisions. The concept of change is related to progress (see the examples cited at p. 44-45). For example, chalk and whiteboard are the usual visual aids used in teaching before, but educators taught of new ideas to improve the teaching-learning process by means of

educational technology- using technological applications in teaching. This breakthrough raised the bar of classroom instruction and showed progress in the field of education. Lee discussed the context of empathy in history as an understanding of the past institutions, social practices or actions as making sense in light of the way people saw things (p. 46). It was also mentioned in his discussion that people in the past did not share our way of looking at the world. That there is a gulf between our own age and previous ages, and to understand the past we have to appreciate the values and attitudes of that time. And as Collingwood (1946) argued that all history was history of the mind; in other words to make sense of the past we have to make sense of people's mentalities in the past. Empathy allows the historian to obtain a more fully informed appreciation of the past, through a closer examination of the motivation of individuals. As mentioned in Lees discussion about empathy, we often want to explain something happened that no one intended (p. 49). Actions have unintended consequences or simply fail to achieve their purposes. It means that people particularly students are usually curious why a certain thing or event happened, what are the reasons why it happened and how did it happened. This is where the term causes comes in. In historical terms, every event has a cause, and is itself the cause of subsequent events, which may therefore be considered its effect or consequences.

It was also argued in his discussion that causes as special kinds of events are viewed as discrete entities, acting independently from each other (p. 52). In other words, the presence of enough causes will more likely cause something to happen. For instance, civil conflicts among countries caused worldwide outrage as World War II surfaced. Whereas, the war between the East (Japan and its allies) and the West (U.S. and its allies) caused the pitfall of dictator leaders and led to the freedom of some countries (from a country ruled by invaders or dictators to a free, democratic country like the Philippines). All the conflicts, warfare, amongst others served as a number of causes that brought the Second World War as significant part of our history. The concept of evidence is central to history because it is only through the use of evidence that history becomes possible (Lee, p. 54). Evidence is the foundation of all history papers.

In a study of high school level instructional approaches to teaching history, Kobrin (1992) found that students who were asked to use historical evidence, artifacts and primary documents to produce their own historical accounts developed a more thorough understanding of history. Kobrin, in Its My Country, Too: A Proposal for a Student Historians History of the United States, maintains that studying the past the way historians do can also nurture the sense of pride and integrity that makes for a whole person. A suggested way for introducing this to students is to set the stage by capturing the students interests. Establishing the time frame for completion of the unit, selecting the appropriate primary sources and the order the sources are to be used, and having the students work collaboratively make it easier for the students to be historians. It was also cited in Lees discussion that common sense dictates that claims must be backed up, so students understandably look for evidence that does this: the more, the better. This means that students tend to look and use more pieces of evidence to gain understanding in a given historical event or thing.

Finally, Lee discussed that accounts are related to that of evidence and more concerned with how students view historical narratives or representations of whole passages of the past (p. 59). Lee presented several preconceptions of students in learning historical accounts (p. 60). Firstly, history (historical accounts) is compared to an arena of opinionated statements, whereas if accounts are not clearly true or untrue, then they must be matters of opinion. This is due to the student views that true statements do not guarantee acceptable historical accounts by using concepts employed in everyday life. Secondly, students think that a true account is a copy of the past rather than something more like of a picture or a theory. Thirdly, students think alternative historical accounts are created when people deliberately distort the truth. These preconceptions of history cause difficulties for students on how they view and know the past.

2. What are the common student assumptions about how we know of the past according to Lee? How should a teacher resolve thinking problems brought about by these assumptions?

The common student assumptions about how we know of the past are hereunder enumerated: a) Its an information problem. Where do we find the stuff? b) Its a problem about access to the past. We cant know because we werent thee. We didnt see it. c) Its a problem about finding true reports. We can know about what happened but only if we can find something where someone told it like it was. They would probably have had to see it happen. d) Its a problem about trusting true reports. We cant really know if someone did tell the truth, and anyway things get changed as they are passed down. People tell lies and exaggerate. Some are biased. e) Its a problem about working things out using evidence. We dont depend on people telling us what happened. We can work it out from clues we have, even if no one told us what happened. We can ask questions of a source that it wasnt intended to answer.

The common student assumptions presented above might affect the thinking skills and understanding of students about history. The study of history has often been criticized as being just the presentation of dead facts. Indeed for quite a long time history used to be presented as a package of stories and events of the past. Many had become accustomed to think of the historical past in terms of narratives, sequences and dates. Such teaching however did little to build up the concepts which are fundamental to understand the past and what the work of the historian really entails.

Students' assumptions are not a jumble of random ideas, however. It is possible to identify levels of progression. For instance, students responses to historical problems could be categorized along a continuum of less to more powerful ideas. In the understanding of evidence, those levels of understanding seem be (going from less to more sophisticated understandings): treating potential evidence as though it offers an exact replica of the past; seeing the past as fixed and treating potential evidence as information which is either correct or incorrect; treating potential evidence as testimony, where conflicts are resolved by trying to find the best report available; taking a cut and paste approach by piecing together a version of the truth by picking out the 'true'

statements from different reports of the past; inferring ideas about the past from pieces of evidence in isolation; inferring ideas about the past from sources of evidence seen in context.

It is true that on the whole older children have the more depth to their understanding. But students who are taught the second order concepts of history through the study of different substantive topics demonstrate a more sophisticated understanding of history as a form of knowledge than their peers who are taught in a more didactic tradition where the memorizing of set facts about people and events in history was the norm.

3. What is his (Lee) opinion on breadth versus depth of content? What do you think about covering all the contents of a course? What do you think about selecting and increasing the amount of time thinking or discussing that content? Lees opinion is focused on the depth of content in teaching history. In my own viewpoint, to teach all students according to todays standards, teachers need to understand subject matter deeply and flexibly so they can help students create useful cognitive maps, relate one idea to another, and address misconceptions. Teachers need to see how ideas connect across fields and to everyday life. More so, covering all the contents contained in a given course in history is deemed vital and necessary to attain the objectives set, given that teachers are taught the know-how of subject preparations, thus, it is expected that as professionals, teachers are expected to observe the guidelines, standard protocols and other requirements in preparing a course/subject.

4. How do you balance teaching historical facts with teaching the second order concepts? Historical facts and second order concepts are indispensable in attaining the objectives of teaching history as a subject. In my own viewpoint, I will balance both by means of comprehension. To teach is to first understand purposes, subject matter structures, and ideas within and outside the discipline. Teachers need to understand what they teach and, when possible, to understand it in several ways. The first challenge that teachers face in teaching is to decide what to teach. The solution when teaching history seems to be that while they should not neglect the substance of history, teaching

needs also to address the development of the conceptual framework that children need to be able to make sense of them. That is to say, teaching second order concepts is important and should form the basis of the aims of both individual and a series of lessons.

ADDITIONAL ACTIVITY

Bain (2005) identified the several dangers that might affect teachers teaching history, namely: a) assuming or trying to make students think like historians when they actually think differently from historians; b) engaging students in some legitimate disciplinary activity without restructuring the social interaction or challenging the presuppositions will yield only ritualistic understanding; and c) engaging students in more complicated work than they could perform on their own.

Social studies teachers are responsible for teaching students the citizenship skills that are required as people living in a democracy. Educating students on the importance of citizen involvement is the first step in creating a better society. On the other hand, social scientists job involves studying society. This not only includes events in a societys past, but also behavior and relationships. These scientists strive to learn how individuals and groups make decisions to gain insight into their behavior patterns. They gather and analyze data and draw conclusions about the manner in which human beings develop socially, culturally, and even physically. Social scientists also use their studies to figure out how human activities and behaviors relate to the environment in which people live.

References: Bain, R.B. (2005). They thought the world was flat? Applying the principles of how people learn in teaching high school history. In M.S. Donovan, & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn history in the classroom. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, pp. 179-214

Collingwood, R.G. (1946) The Idea of History London, Oxford University Press.

Lee, P.J. (2005). Putting principles into practice: Understanding history. In M.S. Donovan, & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn history in the classroom. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, pp. 31-77. Kobrin, David (1992). "Its My Country, Too: A Proposal for a Student Historians History of the United States." Teachers College Record.