The Treatment of the Munich Agreement in British and German Textbooks: Content Analysis and Comparison

IF 0.1 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Denisa Labischová
{"title":"The Treatment of the Munich Agreement in British and German Textbooks: Content Analysis and Comparison","authors":"Denisa Labischová","doi":"10.5817/cphpj-2020-009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the results of a qualitative content analysis and comparison of British and German history textbooks for secondary schools, focusing on the textbooks’ treatment of the Munich Agreement. The research explored the overall concept applied to the treatment of this subject, the length of the text, the selection of factual data, the use of historical sources (including iconographic sources), types of learning tasks, the use of various didactic elements (cartograms, diagrams, timelines), and topics for problem-based and project-based teaching. The results of the analysis show that the topic of the Munich Agreement is treated much more thoroughly in the British textbooks – in terms of the quantity of information, the use of didactic resources stimulating critical thinking and argumentation skills, problem-based teaching, creative activities and inquiry-based activities; the controversial policy of appeasement lies at the centre of attention. By contrast, the German textbooks mostly restrict themselves to brief factual information, with only a limited number of educational activities.","PeriodicalId":40146,"journal":{"name":"Czech-Polish Historical and Pedagogical Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":"91-107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Czech-Polish Historical and Pedagogical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/cphpj-2020-009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a qualitative content analysis and comparison of British and German history textbooks for secondary schools, focusing on the textbooks’ treatment of the Munich Agreement. The research explored the overall concept applied to the treatment of this subject, the length of the text, the selection of factual data, the use of historical sources (including iconographic sources), types of learning tasks, the use of various didactic elements (cartograms, diagrams, timelines), and topics for problem-based and project-based teaching. The results of the analysis show that the topic of the Munich Agreement is treated much more thoroughly in the British textbooks – in terms of the quantity of information, the use of didactic resources stimulating critical thinking and argumentation skills, problem-based teaching, creative activities and inquiry-based activities; the controversial policy of appeasement lies at the centre of attention. By contrast, the German textbooks mostly restrict themselves to brief factual information, with only a limited number of educational activities.
英德教科书对《慕尼黑协定》的处理:内容分析与比较
本文介绍了对英国和德国中学历史教科书定性内容分析和比较的结果,重点是教科书对《慕尼黑协定》的处理。该研究探讨了应用于这一主题的整体概念,文本的长度,事实数据的选择,历史来源(包括图像来源)的使用,学习任务的类型,各种教学元素(图表,图表,时间轴)的使用,以及基于问题和基于项目的教学主题。分析结果表明,《慕尼黑协定》的主题在英国教科书中得到了更彻底的处理——在信息量方面,使用教学资源刺激批判性思维和论证技能,基于问题的教学,创造性活动和基于探究的活动;备受争议的绥靖政策是人们关注的焦点。相比之下,德国教科书大多局限于简短的事实信息,只有有限的教育活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Czech-Polish Historical and Pedagogical Journal
Czech-Polish Historical and Pedagogical Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信