历史教科书在南非课堂上促进历史思维的作用

Daniel Ramoroka, A. Engelbrecht
{"title":"历史教科书在南非课堂上促进历史思维的作用","authors":"Daniel Ramoroka, A. Engelbrecht","doi":"10.17159/2223-0386/2015/N14A5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on the analysis of three textbooks that are based on the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), a revised curriculum from the National Curriculum Statement which was implemented in 2008. The article uses one element of a historical thinking framework, the analysis of primary sources, to evaluate the textbooks. In the analysis of primary sources the three heuristics distilled by Wineburg (2001) such as sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing are used to evaluate the utilisation of the primary sources in the three textbooks. According to the findings of this article, the writing of the three textbooks is still framed in an outdated mode of textbooks’ writing in a dominant narrative style, influenced by Ranke’s scientific paradigm or realism. The three textbooks have many primary sources that are poorly contextualized and which inhibit the implementation of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Although, some primary sources are contextualized, source-based questions are not reflecting most of the elements of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Instead, they are mostly focused on the information on the source which is influenced by the authors’ conventional epistemological beliefs about school history as a compendium of facts. This poor contextualization of sources impacted negatively on the analysis of primary sources by learners as part and parcel of “doing history” in the classroom.","PeriodicalId":190311,"journal":{"name":"Yesterday and Today","volume":"181 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of History textbooks in promoting historical thinking in South African classrooms\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Ramoroka, A. Engelbrecht\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/2223-0386/2015/N14A5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article focuses on the analysis of three textbooks that are based on the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), a revised curriculum from the National Curriculum Statement which was implemented in 2008. The article uses one element of a historical thinking framework, the analysis of primary sources, to evaluate the textbooks. In the analysis of primary sources the three heuristics distilled by Wineburg (2001) such as sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing are used to evaluate the utilisation of the primary sources in the three textbooks. According to the findings of this article, the writing of the three textbooks is still framed in an outdated mode of textbooks’ writing in a dominant narrative style, influenced by Ranke’s scientific paradigm or realism. The three textbooks have many primary sources that are poorly contextualized and which inhibit the implementation of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Although, some primary sources are contextualized, source-based questions are not reflecting most of the elements of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Instead, they are mostly focused on the information on the source which is influenced by the authors’ conventional epistemological beliefs about school history as a compendium of facts. This poor contextualization of sources impacted negatively on the analysis of primary sources by learners as part and parcel of “doing history” in the classroom.\",\"PeriodicalId\":190311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Yesterday and Today\",\"volume\":\"181 \",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Yesterday and Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/2223-0386/2015/N14A5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yesterday and Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2223-0386/2015/N14A5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文重点分析了三种基于《课程与评价政策声明》(CAPS)的教科书,CAPS是2008年实施的《国家课程声明》的修订课程。本文运用历史思维框架的一个要素——原始资料分析来评价教科书。在主要来源的分析中,Wineburg(2001)提炼的三种启发式方法,如来源,确证和语境化,用于评估三本教科书中主要来源的利用情况。根据本文的研究发现,受兰克的科学范式或现实主义的影响,这三种教科书的写作仍然是一种过时的教科书写作模式,以叙事风格为主。这三本教科书有许多主要来源,这些来源的语境化程度很差,阻碍了来源、确证和语境化启发式的实施。虽然,一些主要来源是情境化的,但基于来源的问题并没有反映出来源、确证和情境化启发式的大多数元素。相反,他们主要关注来源的信息,这些信息受到作者关于学校历史是事实汇编的传统认识论信念的影响。这种贫乏的资料背景化对学习者在课堂上“研究历史”时对第一手资料的分析产生了负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of History textbooks in promoting historical thinking in South African classrooms
This article focuses on the analysis of three textbooks that are based on the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS), a revised curriculum from the National Curriculum Statement which was implemented in 2008. The article uses one element of a historical thinking framework, the analysis of primary sources, to evaluate the textbooks. In the analysis of primary sources the three heuristics distilled by Wineburg (2001) such as sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing are used to evaluate the utilisation of the primary sources in the three textbooks. According to the findings of this article, the writing of the three textbooks is still framed in an outdated mode of textbooks’ writing in a dominant narrative style, influenced by Ranke’s scientific paradigm or realism. The three textbooks have many primary sources that are poorly contextualized and which inhibit the implementation of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Although, some primary sources are contextualized, source-based questions are not reflecting most of the elements of sourcing, corroborating and contextualizing heuristics. Instead, they are mostly focused on the information on the source which is influenced by the authors’ conventional epistemological beliefs about school history as a compendium of facts. This poor contextualization of sources impacted negatively on the analysis of primary sources by learners as part and parcel of “doing history” in the classroom.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信