History and Social Studies

Hilary Bourdillon, Hilary Bourdillon

• Editore: Routledge
• Anno: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781351440509
• Edizione: 1
• Argomento: Business
• Categoria: Governo e imprese

First published in 1992. This volume includes reports, papers and discussion from a September 1990 educational research workshop on textbook analysis in history and social studies. Some 20 European countries are represented.

Part 1
Report and Commisioned Papers

1.1

Report

John Slater

Rapporteur Général

This report does not attempt to summarise the Workshop. Rather is it a commentary based on plenary and group discussions, the seven papers presented formally to the Workshop and the others distributed by the delegates during the proceedings (see chapter 4.4). Inevitably, it is a selective and subjective report. Although it is not value-free, it attempts to be consistent with the evidence. The questions it poses should not be seen as concealing confident assertions, but rather as tentative suggestions for a possible agenda which might be useful on future occasions.

The terms of reference of the Workshop focused on textbooks and their analysis; the remit given to, and the recommendation, from the three groups reflect this. However, discussion and many of the papers interpreted the agenda very flexibly and considered textbooks in their curricular, economic, pedagogical and political contexts. In some other respects, however, the Workshop narrowed the terms of the declared agenda, which referred to history, geography and social studies textbooks. Most of the contributions, either explicitly or implicitly focused on history textbooks. One paper only was concerned specifically with geography. No definition of social studies was sought or given so it remained, perhaps inevitably, a somewhat shadowy presence, without significantly contributing either to the cooking or the consumption of the rich banquet we all enjoyed. Of course, history and geography enjoy some generally understood shared assumptions about their substantive content and procedures, which provided a ready made framework for practical discussion. Although, history played a leading part, many of the issues raised and recommendations were applicable to geography and social studies textbooks.

1.1.1 WHAT IS A TEXTBOOK?

It was generally assumed by the Workshop that a textbook is specifically written for use in schools to support a course or syllabus. In other words, the Workshop was not concerned with books written for other audiences but frequently used in schools, or for books written specifically for schools concerned with particular topics or individual lives. Textbooks do not necessarily consist predominantly of continuous prose divided into chapters. Professor Weinbrenner suggested that some would have been written by authors for use by young people in schools, others might be seen more like collections of resources, while others might be seen as pupils' workbooks. Textbooks are physical objects, bound within covers and so, unlike resource packs or materials contained in files or folders, not easily or cheaply adaptable to meet unanticipated changes in society, or recognise local, social and ethnic diversities between, and indeed within, regions. Textbooks are one particular resource among an increasingly wide and diverse range of other resources, in and outside the schools, which influence the knowledge and understanding that young people have of their past and environment. Reference was made, for example, to research done in England on the historical knowledge and understanding of pupils aged approximately 7 – 9. An estimate was made that perhaps some 85 per cent of their knowledge of the past came from outside the school and from sources other than their teachers. Such considerations also reminded the Workshop of how limited its terms of reference were. Nevertheless, a number of Workshop papers and some contributors to discussion assumed rather than challenged the centrality and status of textbooks and saw their flaws as incidental rather than fundamental. Although their centrality and their future role was challenged on occasions during the Workshop, for example, in papers submitted by the Spanish and Danish delegates, the general view remained that dependence on textbooks in some form or other was likely to remain an important element in the learning of history, geography and social studies.

1.1.2 TEXTBOOK ANALYSIS

Professor Weinbrenner helpfully placed in context the present state of textbook analysis in his paper on its methodologies. It defined not only the strengths but the weaknesses and gaps in current procedures. In particular, it reminded the Workshop that there was, as yet, no universally recognised “theory of the textbook”, that empirically, very little was known about how and when teachers and pupils used textbooks, and that we still lacked reliable methods and instruments in the field of textbook research.

But who are the textbook analysts? For whom are they analysing? And when an analysis has been made, what is it for? National experiences are different. In some countries, there was no great tradition of research into textbooks and their analysis. In others, analyses were seen as a form of research performed by full-time professional researchers working in universities. Sometimes, but by no means invariably, practising teachers were seen as active partners in the process of analysis, while elsewhere understanding of their practical experience of teaching in real classrooms was seen as a necessary prior condition before the process of analysis began. A defined role for the student or pupil as analyst seemed only rarely to be part of recognised procedures, a group whose role however was identified in a paper submitted from Czechoslovakia.

So for whom are textbooks analysed? The potential audience is wide and diverse but it needs to be defined. Fellow researchers, publishers, textbook authors, reviewers, teachers and school students could all benefit, particularly if the analysis leads to defining criteria which could, variously, support the publishing, writing and using of textbooks. It is not always clear whether different audiences require different methods of analysis or merely different modes of describing and disseminating its result.

But what is it all for? Clearly, analysis can be an important part of pure research and none the worse for that. It was, of course, pointed out that given the diversity of resources, and influences within and outside schools, research limited to textbooks produced limited answers and was not likely to say anything very useful about their effect on the historical and geographical understanding of young people. The thrust of the Workshop clearly saw one important, perhaps central, function of analysis as much more instrumental and practical, giving clear and jargon-free guidelines to publishers and authors and above all, to teachers, who with limited resources, might well welcome some practical guidelines to help select one book over another. However, it was pointed out at the function of textbook analysis is not simply to produce a consumer guide with one text nominated as a ‘best buy’ but rather to define more precisely the complementary strengths and wealmesses of several. For this reason, some teachers, rather than invest resources in purchasing thirty copies of one title, may prefer to purchase six copies of five. It is a strategy with pedagogical advantages but which may be less appealing to authors and publishers.

What do textbook analysts actually analyse? Alain Choppinʹs paper suggested that some textbook analysis was too narrowly focused on the written text. He reminded delegates of the proto-text, a term new to many, which encompasses pictures, diagrams, maps, layout, colour scheme, typography, etc. All contribute to pupil learning, some contain hidden messages, none can be separated from the written text.

However, almost all of the papers formally submitted to the Workshop and the subsequent discussion, stressed the importance of analysis and research as a means of ensuring that textbooks are ‘correct’ and up-to-date in the light of current academic research. More important and associated with much of the work of the Georg-Eckert Institute and previous Council of Europe workshops, is the analysis which defines and reveals hidden assumptions and undeclared biases, and seeks to identify and remove prejudices which may reveal themselves in the use of words, the selection or avoidance of controversial issues and in the selection or omission of substantive content.

1.1.3 APPROVAL AND LICENSING

But just whose criteria are used to define ‘correct’ content and remove prejudice? Whose value judgments select or omit substantive content? In many national systems, syllabuses are defined by an outside authority, Ministers of Education and their Inspectors, centrally–appointed groups of professional educators and teachers, or examination boards. Textbooks are approved and licensed depending on whether or not they support those syllabuses. Sometimes the approval and licensing is performed by the same people who devise the syllabus, or the task may be delegated to separate centrally–appointed bodies. Practice varies considerably, ranging from Ministry–defined syllabuses with prescribed books, even for some pupils a single book, through a prescribed list from which teachers can choose (in some cases with directed choice towards some cost-free titles. Is this curricular development by bribery?), centrally-prescribed syllabuses without approved textbooks, to systems without either central syllabuses or any approval system at all. The situation is not static. Considerable decentralisation has taken place recently in, for example, Italy, France and Spain which now are much nearer to the freer and more autonomous arrange ments in for example, Denmark, the Netherlands and, for the moment, in England. Recent political events in Central and Eastern Europe are prompting as a matter of urgency, a radical reexamination of systems of centralised syllabuses and textbook approval. Nevertheless, textbook approval remains widespread. Although it was only explicitly defended at the Workshop by delegates from Norway and Lower Saxony, there was little support from delegates for any system of official approval or licensing. It was, as one delegate said, ‘a political not an educational procedureʹ.

1.1.4 SUBJECT MATTER ADEQUACY

Professor Hinrichsʹs paper on the central issue of subject–matter adequacy, posed important questions on why and by whom some content was selected, and other omitted. Were the criteria for selection mainly political or pedagogical? Content, which often remains in textbooks because of tradition or sheer inertia, needs constantly to be weeded. Without regular monitoring and weeding, or any understood criteria for selection, textbooks tended to become longer, increasingly content–dominated or, as a delegate from Austria warned, took refuge in a written style which became more terse, abstract and inaccessible to its readers.

Selection is, of course, a value-judgment. Selection confers status in the eyes of pupils and teachers, on those lives, events, groups and nations which are selected and, implicitly of not intentionally, withholds it from those that are ignored. It seems crucial, therefore, that the criteria for selection be declared, so that the inevitable omissions and sacrifices are explicit and planned and are not covert, a result of chance, inertia, tradition, political whim or blind chance. Perhaps the most commonly understood criteria for the selection of textbook content is its support for syllabuses. However, if their criteria, if they exist at all, are unclear, those used by the publishers and authors of textbooks are likely to remain hidden, so that they may unwittingly disseminate assumptions and even prejudice. These issues were discussed in Dr. Cajaniʹs paper in which he quoted Eduardo Grendiʹs reminder that the pedagogy of history cannot be reconciled with a selective and teleological historicism.

1.1.5 PREJUDICE, HIDDEN ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA

These issues were explored in the papers of Professor Wain on “Different Perspectives of Evaluating Textbooks” and by Dr. Fritzsche on “Prejudice and Underlying Assumptions”. There is a particular concern if political rather than pedagogical interest influences the criteria in syllabus construction and textbook writing. Two working groups referred in their recommendations to criteria which respect a “country’s medium if not long term, cultural and scientific needs” and “the legitimate interest of contemporary society for the transmission of certain knowledge”. But are such phrases declaring or concealing criteria? Are they more political than pedagogical? In whose hands should their further definition rest? Wain reminded us of other criteria. Always present are those of publishers and some authors, who ask themselves “will it sell?” There are the pedagogical criteria of teachers, sometimes publicly defined, who ask, “Will it enable my students to learn?” And there are the criteria of students and pupils who ask, if given the opportunity, “Can I understand it? Does it bore me? Can I use it?” How significant and relevant and how often sought and used are their criteria? And what about parents? What criteria might they have? Are they entitled to expect that their criteria should influence the writing and use of textbooks. This last question raised a much wider issue, which was not explored during the workshop, on the level of influence of parents and taxpayers in general on the autonomous decisions of the teaching profession.

Professor Wainʹs paper prompted further questions. Who in all this is the prime actor? Who should be the prime actor in an open democratic society? The publisher, political authority, the teacher, or the forgotten cast member in the play, the student? Such questions were further identified and explored in Dr. Fritzscheʹs paper. They were a constant and underlying theme running through much of the work of the whole Workshop.

However, this discussion occasionally stumbled on the vocabulary that was used. Different words were sometimes used synonymously: “neutrality”, “i...