JOURNAL

Recommendations

Info

PAULSON and Stammer 2013; Torsti 2009). Studies often provide no further detail as to how textbook analysis was undertaken. The limits of textbook analysis as a research method have been convincingly argued and mean this approach tells us little about how history education actually happens for teachers and students (e.g., Worden 2014). Nonetheless, textbooks, especially those that are state issued, offer a window into the official national narrative and enable authors to explore the ways presentations of self and other have changed, or how conflict events are narrated. Other common research methods used in the studies reviewed include interviews (with experts, students, and teachers), small surveys (of teachers and students), observation, other ethnographic methods, and policy analysis. Connected to the reliance on textbook analysis, research in this area does not give a clear or detailed picture of how decisions about curricular change are taken or of how (and if) consensus is reached about the narratives presented in textbooks. Exceptions include studies that connect politics and textbook development (e.g., Bekerman and Zembylas 2013; King 2010; Papadakis 2008; Paulson 2010a; Weldon 2010) and those that explore the composition of the bodies that make decisions about curriculum and textbooks (Al-Haj 2005; Sanchez Meertens 2013; Torsti 2009). Finally, having highlighted some weaknesses in research in this area, a major strength should be mentioned. Research in EiE has been criticized for being “detached from larger discussions on discourse and social change” (Sanchez Meertens 2013, 254), of relying on “problem-solving theory” (Novelli and Lopes Cardozo 2008), and of avoiding theory all together (Paulson and Rappleye 2007). By and large, the research reviewed here is theoretically grounded, and it is informed by and contributes to wider debates. A BACKGROUND TO HISTORY EDUCATION A nationalist approach to teaching history has predominated since the rise of the nation state. This approach is concerned with instilling a linear narrative made up of key episodes and peopled by key figures, thereby creating a “natural” and distinct nation of which students can feel a part (Carretero 2011). While this approach to history education is certainly still in evidence, in recent years there has been considerable debate and change. Debates have centered around the purpose of history education and the kind of subject or citizen that it should produce. From these debates (at least) three trends have emerged. First, as Bellino (2014a, 4) explains, the traditional purpose of history education as a transmitter 20 Journal on Education in Emergencies
HISTORY EDUCATION ABOUT RECENT AND ONGOING CONFLICT of collective memory has shifted, at least in part, “from indoctrination to inspiration.” The linear master narrative persists, but it creates engaged rather than obedient citizens. It is assumed that the “right” narrative will be able to forge a shared identity across difference and will lead to desirable outcomes in terms of the civic dispositions and attitudes of young people. While history education still transmits a national narrative, this shift means that its pedagogy and inspiration expand to include more democratic teaching methods, a concern with social and economic history, and with the inclusion of marginalized histories. Second, the single-narrative model of history education has been challenged by an approach grounded in the historical method. Under this “enquiry-based, multi-perspective approach” (McCully 2012, 146), students learn to understand history by developing the disciplinary skills of historians. They are encouraged to become comfortable with contradictory sources, alternative perspectives, and the constructed nature of historical knowledge. Along with developing historical knowledge, outcomes of the process include perspective-taking, independent thinking, and evaluating primary and secondary evidence. Finally, globalization has “de-nationalized” history education (Hansen 2012). In many education systems, history is no longer a subject taught in its own right; it is instead included in subjects like social studies or civics. This “socialsciencization” (Hymans in Cole 2007, 132) focuses on contemporary history and society more than on the nation state. National history, therefore, is often now taught alongside local, regional, and global history, thus expanding the notion of the communities students are to imagine themselves to be part of. Given these changes in history education as a subject, I first investigated which of the three approaches described above—national narrative, disciplinary, globalized—were evident in the cases reviewed. FINDINGS Research Question 1: Approaching History Education McCully (2012, 164) posits that there is “a prevailing view” among international agencies that the disciplinary approach offers the “most effective way for history teaching to contribute to postconflict understanding.” Within the research reviewed here, however, only Northern Ireland and Northern Cyprus have adopted this approach (Barton and McCully 2010, 2005; Kitson 2007; McCully 2012; Papadakis 2008). Northern Irish history curriculum uses “an October 2015 21
Page 1 and 2: VOLUME 1 NUMBER 1 OCTOBER 2015 JOUR
Page 3: JOURNAL ON EDUCATION IN EMERGENCIES
Page 6 and 7: BURDE power to guarantee the right
Page 8 and 9: BURDE ISSUES AND CONTENTS The journ
Page 10 and 11: BURDE Since the late 1990s, IRC has
Page 12 and 13: BURDE The authors note that working
Page 14 and 15: “WHETHER AND HOW?” HISTORY EDUC
Page 16 and 17: PAULSON children should be taught t
Page 18 and 19: PAULSON I conducted English languag
Page 22 and 23: PAULSON enquiry-based approach to t
Page 24 and 25: PAULSON The history of recent confl
Page 26 and 27: PAULSON (2004) explain that “pain
Page 28 and 29: PAULSON internal conflict in contem
Page 30 and 31: PAULSON context” (King 2014, 137)
Page 32 and 33: PAULSON In Israel, new history text
Page 34 and 35: PAULSON In addition to these positi
Page 36 and 37: PAULSON Controversy, Protest, and P
Page 38 and 39: PAULSON APPENDIX Analysis Author(s)
Page 40 and 41: PAULSON REFERENCES Ahonen, Sirkka.
Page 42 and 43: PAULSON Freedman, Sarah Warshauer,
Page 44 and 45: PAULSON Murphy, Karen, and Tony Gal
Page 46 and 47: PAULSON Stover, Eric, and Harvey M.
Page 48 and 49: IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF SCHOOL INT
Page 50 and 51: TORRENTE ET AL. Improving the quali
Page 52 and 53: TORRENTE ET AL. postconflict Guatem
Page 54 and 55: TORRENTE ET AL. Only a handful of r
Page 56 and 57: TORRENTE ET AL. Africa. Teachers li
Page 58 and 59: TORRENTE ET AL. The integrated reso
Page 60 and 61: TORRENTE ET AL. strategy, whereby s
Page 62 and 63: TORRENTE ET AL. Student Sample Stud
Page 64 and 65: TORRENTE ET AL. for children from f
Page 66 and 67: TORRENTE ET AL. subsequently added
Page 68 and 69: TORRENTE ET AL. Characteristics at
Page 70 and 71:
TORRENTE ET AL. of students’ gend
Page 72 and 73:
TORRENTE ET AL. Table 3: Multilevel
Page 74 and 75:
TORRENTE ET AL. Table 4: Three Leve
Page 76 and 77:
TORRENTE ET AL. Mental Health Probl
Page 78 and 79:
TORRENTE ET AL. Impacts on the Qual
Page 80 and 81:
TORRENTE ET AL. Overall, these resu
Page 82 and 83:
TORRENTE ET AL. et al. 2012). Colle
Page 84 and 85:
TORRENTE ET AL. Burde, Dana, Amy Ka
Page 86 and 87:
TORRENTE ET AL. Hagelskamp, Carolin
Page 88 and 89:
TORRENTE ET AL. Miller, Kenneth E.
Page 90 and 91:
TORRENTE ET AL. Tol, Wietse A., Cor
Page 92 and 93:
QUALITY EDUCATION FOR REFUGEES IN K
Page 94 and 95:
MENDENHALL ET AL. northwestern Keny
Page 96 and 97:
MENDENHALL ET AL. Second, the langu
Page 98 and 99:
MENDENHALL ET AL. colleagues, who i
Page 100 and 101:
MENDENHALL ET AL. These principles
Page 102 and 103:
MENDENHALL ET AL. attend schools se
Page 104 and 105:
MENDENHALL ET AL. First, we selecte
Page 106 and 107:
MENDENHALL ET AL. science teacher a
Page 108 and 109:
MENDENHALL ET AL. There are many ty
Page 110 and 111:
MENDENHALL ET AL. at Sud Academy, a
Page 112 and 113:
MENDENHALL ET AL. Notably, the teac
Page 114 and 115:
MENDENHALL ET AL. The confluence of
Page 116 and 117:
MENDENHALL ET AL. New teachers ofte
Page 118 and 119:
MENDENHALL ET AL. In our analysis,
Page 120 and 121:
MENDENHALL ET AL. The head teacher
Page 122 and 123:
MENDENHALL ET AL. particularly in c
Page 124 and 125:
MENDENHALL ET AL. Government of Ken
Page 126 and 127:
MENDENHALL ET AL. Sieff, Kevin. 201
Page 128 and 129:
MENDENHALL ET AL. APPENDIX 1 List o
Page 130 and 131:
MENDENHALL ET AL. 4.2 Teacher used
Page 132 and 133:
REISMAN AND JANKE INTRODUCTION Usin
Page 134 and 135:
REISMAN AND JANKE New challenges ar
Page 136 and 137:
REISMAN AND JANKE youth aged 15 to
Page 138 and 139:
REISMAN AND JANKE This improved acc
Page 140 and 141:
REISMAN AND JANKE According to the
Page 142 and 143:
REISMAN AND JANKE • Renovated or
Page 144 and 145:
REISMAN AND JANKE To address these
Page 146 and 147:
REISMAN AND JANKE • Accelerate im
Page 148 and 149:
REISMAN AND JANKE takes place; anal
Page 150 and 151:
REISMAN AND JANKE simply does not m
Page 152 and 153:
REISMAN AND JANKE to 9-12 weeks per
Page 154 and 155:
REISMAN AND JANKE Domain 4, Standar
Page 156 and 157:
REISMAN AND JANKE In cases where go
Page 158 and 159:
REISMAN AND JANKE • the costs of
Page 160 and 161:
REISMAN AND JANKE • Where there i
Page 162 and 163:
REISMAN AND JANKE To be useful in t
Page 164 and 165:
REISMAN AND JANKE for what CSE can
Page 166 and 167:
REISMAN AND JANKE Government of Sou
Page 168 and 169:
BOOK REVIEW But King’s third mess
Page 170 and 171:
BOOK REVIEW (Bickmore 1999). The re
Page 172 and 173:
CONTRIBUTORS J. LAWRENCE ABER (la39
Page 174 and 175:
CONTRIBUTORS research has shown tha
Page 176:
CONTRIBUTORS Homelessness; and she
Page 179 and 180:
development and application of tool
show all

JOURNAL

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?