History teaching

University Degree Education and Teaching

According to R, Phillips history teaching in the early part of the twentieth century was not really a controversial issue. Indeed it reflected a ‘homogenous, patriarchal and stratified society.’ It’s content was mainly made up of British Political History. However, in the 1960s the conventional symbols of history was challenged by a range of groups who argued that the curriculum had focused too much on England and that it was out dated. An alternative curriculum known as the ‘new history’ was offered in the 1970s and 1980s, but the New Right criticised it arguing that there was too much emphasis on skills and not enough historical content . In 1991 the National Curriculum was introduced but it was not without problems. In it’s early stage some teachers referred to the system of assessment as ‘daft, mad and crazy.’

Reforms were made in the mid-90s, which led to statements of attainment being replaced by a more formative approach of ‘best fit’ descriptions, which is the present system.

Clearly the history curriculum has undergone many changes. Does this now mean in the twenty-first century we are blessed with a curriculum that can satisfy teachers, pupils, parents, employers and the wider community’s needs? This is perhaps unrealistic. There are limitations, and of course it would depend on one’s point of view and political stance.

At a glance the Breadth of study at Key Stage 3 appears to provide a diverse multicultural history of regional, national and international events. ‘Pupils are taught three British studies, a European and two world studies.’ The current National Curriculum stresses the need for pupils to be taught about social, cultural, religious, and ethnic diversity of the societies studied, in Britain and the wider world. Yet when put into practice many academics have regarded it’s content as Anglo-centric. From 1066 -1750 the content is very much about England. The development of the monarchy, political, social and religious changes bare witness to this with only limited links to other countries. Indeed Grosvenor, 2000 argues that “traditional textbooks tell the narrative history of the Crusades from the perspective of western Christendom, thus reinforcing the moral right of the Crusades in contrast to the ‘infidel’ Muslims.” (1)

Even when these links are made (1750 onwards) it is purely out of self-interest. For example when England captures a foreign land (colonisation and expansion of trade) or when it amalgamates with another country. There is not much reference to black history and the achievements that were made in Britain and the rest of the world. Pankhania argues that there has always been a ‘black presence’ in Britain since Roman times’. Yet the history curriculum implies that multiculturalism only really existed in Britain after the Second World War. (2)

Gardner, 2001 maintains that teachers should promote world figures such as Ghandi, Martin Luther King and Mandella as well as seeking out other ethnic presence from the British past. For example; the growth of multiethnic London in the Tudor period or the history of immigration and emigration. (3)

Looking back on my recent teaching practice I taught ten one hour lessons to Year 8 pupils on the Black Peoples of the Americas. The History Department made some attempt to recognise the history of black people. Pupils were able to engage in a debate about, for example whether the abolition of slavery has brought about equality in today’s society. This linked very well with citizenship and proved to be a very interesting series of lessons. Also the classroom walls were covered with a mix of heroic individuals, which included Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

Perhaps the history curriculum should be a little less flexible and certain topics that have been neglected should be made compulsory. Certainly the Breadth of study does include world study before 1900 and therefore provides teachers with a selection of multicultural topics to choose from. But the danger here is to what extent will it promote non-western achievements.

However we must tread carefully and take note of Deuchar, attack on the New Right discources 1989 who states that:

“School history had tried to deny to British children the legitimate pride in themselves and their cultural heritage which is their birthright and that our civilization is threatened not only by cultures with different attitudes and values, but by destructive tendencies within ourselves.” (4)

Tate’s article in the TES 1994 supports Deuchar viewpoint by suggesting that the curriculum should be a vehicle for a common cultural heritage, and his desire to link history teaching with the creation ...