This paper is based on the hypothesis that the current context of multicultural classrooms, instead than simply presenting students with national master narratives, requires to enhance the didactical goal of training reflective and critical citizens of new multicultural societies (Seixas, 2017). However, despite a growing critical awareness of the need for a multicultural approach to historical culture (see Carretero, Berger and Grever 2017), empirical researches conducted in countries all over the world still show a strong opposition to the idea of eroding national frameworks of historical accounts, opposition shared not only by the public at large but also by policymakers (Carretero 2011). 48 Therefore, in spite (or perhaps because?) of the new historical condition of globalization we are living in, empirical data are showing that history teaching is still very focused on the building of an "imagi-nation" (Carretero, 2017), struggling against evidence to overlap the contemporary “we” with the historical “we”. Taken into account this tension between contemporary insurgence of the need for a multicultural historical culture and the permanence of national frameworks of historical accounts, a research question emerges. When facing the history curriculum they are presented with, as a guideline due to the policy of their governments – governments that in Western societies are expected to keep changing in time according to democratic rules –, to what extent and how may history teachers “make use of this guidelines with content-driven creativity” (Brauch 2017, 607) in order to face the contemporary insurgence of multicultural classrooms? In the framework of these new challenges for history teaching, this paper analyses the answers of 254 teachers of eight Western and European countries to open-ended questions included in a broader on-line questionnaire, focusing on their didactics devoted to historical sensitive issues. An explorative qualitative analysis conducted on these self-reflections of history teachers seems to suggest a widespread belief of teaching history as an activity depending only on teachers and students efforts and vulnerabilities, paying scarce attention to the influence of societal contexts and to the teacher ́s personal content knowledge about the issue in question. Cultural diversity in the classroom is presented as a potential threat to be coped with, while emotions are described in an ambivalent way, either as a threat or as a resource. Conclusive remarks advance some suggestions on how this study could contribute to improve pre-service teacher education at the university level.
This paper is based on the hypothesis that the current context of multicultural classrooms, instead than simply presenting students with national master narratives, requires to enhance the didactical goal of training reflective and critical citizens of new multicultural societies (Seixas, 2017). However, despite a growing critical awareness of the need for a multicultural approach to historical culture (see Carretero, Berger and Grever 2017), empirical researches conducted in countries all over the world still show a strong opposition to the idea of eroding national frameworks of historical accounts, opposition shared not only by the public at large but also by policymakers (Carretero 2011). 48 Therefore, in spite (or perhaps because?) of the new historical condition of globalization we are living in, empirical data are showing that history teaching is still very focused on the building of an "imagi-nation" (Carretero, 2017), struggling against evidence to overlap the contemporary “we” with the historical “we”. Taken into account this tension between contemporary insurgence of the need for a multicultural historical culture and the permanence of national frameworks of historical accounts, a research question emerges. When facing the history curriculum they are presented with, as a guideline due to the policy of their governments – governments that in Western societies are expected to keep changing in time according to democratic rules –, to what extent and how may history teachers “make use of this guidelines with content-driven creativity” (Brauch 2017, 607) in order to face the contemporary insurgence of multicultural classrooms? In the framework of these new challenges for history teaching, this paper analyses the answers of 254 teachers of eight Western and European countries to open-ended questions included in a broader on-line questionnaire, focusing on their didactics devoted to historical sensitive issues. An explorative qualitative analysis conducted on these self-reflections of history teachers seems to suggest a widespread belief of teaching history as an activity depending only on teachers and students efforts and vulnerabilities, paying scarce attention to the influence of societal contexts and to the teacher ́s personal content knowledge about the issue in question. Cultural diversity in the classroom is presented as a potential threat to be coped with, while emotions are described in an ambivalent way, either as a threat or as a resource. Conclusive remarks advance some suggestions on how this study could contribute to improve pre-service teacher education at the university level.
Which historical culture for multicultural classrooms? Self-reflections of teachers when recalling their lessons on sensitive issues / Leone, Giovanna. - ELETTRONICO. - (2017), pp. 48-49. (Intervento presentato al convegno The Annual Finnish Social Psychology Conference Social Psychology of History - History of Social Psychology tenutosi a Helsinki, Finland nel 17th-18th November 2017).
Which historical culture for multicultural classrooms? Self-reflections of teachers when recalling their lessons on sensitive issues.
Leone, Giovanna
2017
Abstract
This paper is based on the hypothesis that the current context of multicultural classrooms, instead than simply presenting students with national master narratives, requires to enhance the didactical goal of training reflective and critical citizens of new multicultural societies (Seixas, 2017). However, despite a growing critical awareness of the need for a multicultural approach to historical culture (see Carretero, Berger and Grever 2017), empirical researches conducted in countries all over the world still show a strong opposition to the idea of eroding national frameworks of historical accounts, opposition shared not only by the public at large but also by policymakers (Carretero 2011). 48 Therefore, in spite (or perhaps because?) of the new historical condition of globalization we are living in, empirical data are showing that history teaching is still very focused on the building of an "imagi-nation" (Carretero, 2017), struggling against evidence to overlap the contemporary “we” with the historical “we”. Taken into account this tension between contemporary insurgence of the need for a multicultural historical culture and the permanence of national frameworks of historical accounts, a research question emerges. When facing the history curriculum they are presented with, as a guideline due to the policy of their governments – governments that in Western societies are expected to keep changing in time according to democratic rules –, to what extent and how may history teachers “make use of this guidelines with content-driven creativity” (Brauch 2017, 607) in order to face the contemporary insurgence of multicultural classrooms? In the framework of these new challenges for history teaching, this paper analyses the answers of 254 teachers of eight Western and European countries to open-ended questions included in a broader on-line questionnaire, focusing on their didactics devoted to historical sensitive issues. An explorative qualitative analysis conducted on these self-reflections of history teachers seems to suggest a widespread belief of teaching history as an activity depending only on teachers and students efforts and vulnerabilities, paying scarce attention to the influence of societal contexts and to the teacher ́s personal content knowledge about the issue in question. Cultural diversity in the classroom is presented as a potential threat to be coped with, while emotions are described in an ambivalent way, either as a threat or as a resource. Conclusive remarks advance some suggestions on how this study could contribute to improve pre-service teacher education at the university level.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.