‘ Interpretations of history ’ in its technical curricular sense, since 1991

‘Interpretations of history’ in its technical curricular sense, since 1991 When the main focus of students’s work is on how people in later times have reconstructed and presented the past, they are working on ‘interpretations of history’.

Enduring principlesas enshrined in1991 NC and emergent in 1993 non-statutory guidance and the McAleavy project • ‘subsequentness’ • real interpretations • range of types (including scholarship) • focus on process and context of construction • a constructive, analytic approach Only meaningful in context of curriculum as a whole.

cause and consequence; change and continuity; similarity and difference(diversity?) historical significance; evidential rules and conventions; provenance, audience, impact, role and form of interpretations. History’s ‘how’History’s ideas, structures or big concepts that shape typical historical questions and organise extended historical accounts/arguments

“interpretations” in the NC sense is a technical curricular term.. • It’s not that getting pupils to do their own interpreting is wrong! Of course it isn’t. It is just that this is ALREADY COVERED BY ALL THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE NC. Pupils areinterpreting whenever they are weaving causal explanations, arguing about change, creating narratives etc. The reference to ‘Interpretations’ (plural!!) makes an additional, specific demand…

“interpretations” in the NC sense is a technical curricular term.. • ‘InterpretationS’ was plural in 1991 and plural in 1995. It was rendered singular in 2000/2008 as a result of error (or ignorance of senior, non-history civil servants?) • It stayed plural in reality, however, both in non-statutory guidance provided by QCA/QCDA and in published research and shared practice of teachers who kept its early 1990s tradition alive.

“interpretations” in the NC sense is a technical curricular term.. • It has to be plural because the requirement is to encounter and explore contrasting interpretations by others.

Phew It looks set to be plural again in 2014.

Some enquiry questions … • Why do historians disagree about the lives of married women in the 17th Century? • Why was a statue of Cromwell so late in coming? • What is Mel Gibson trying to say (in …)? • What is Niall Ferguson trying to say? • What is this museum trying to say? • Why have views about King John changed so much over the last five hundred years? • Why did “Horrible Histories” become so popular?

Interpretations of history from presentation by J.Byrom, C.Counsell and M.Riley at an HMI/Ofsted Conference on Interpretations of History Bristol, 1 July, 2004 This was a review of practice – published and ephemeral – by history teachers in the 13 years since ‘interpretations’ first gained curricular expression. What had happened to McAleavy’s original conception during that 13 years?).

Academic Books, journals, papers by professional historians Scholarly lectures Excavation reports Educational Textbooks Museums and sites Reconstructions TV documentaries/news CDs, websites, internet discussions, podcasts, blogs Fictional/semi-fictional Novels, paintings, plays Films TV drama/comedy Popular and/or political Folk wisdom/ personal reflection Theme parks/ souvenirs Paintings of earlier periods Monuments/ceremonies/protests Advertising Magazine articles Political speeches or arguments that invoke the past in some way Interpretations – a selection commonly examined by history teachers between 1991 and 2004

What does it say/show explicitly / implicitly (Style? Tone?) (See previous slide for examples) What is it? What is it saying? What was the purpose (& intended audience). To create new knowledge? To persuade? To entertain? To inform? To commemorate? To educate? To preserve? How and why was this constructed? How has the interpretation been affected by the context in which it was created? Available sources?Methods? Theory?Ideology? Values? Nationality? Personality? Patronage? What is the relationship between the interpretation and evidence? Which parts are factual, which are points of view, which are imagined?

Learning from last 20 years: six principles for rigour and richness See also 2 handouts: • 2008 guidance • Summary principles for Cambridge trainee history teachers

Learning from last 20 years: six principles for rigour and richness • Make them curious about the construction process. • Situate any activity or new knowledge within a clear, purposeful, enquiry journey. • Interest them in the deliberateness and artistry of an interpretation. • Knowledge matters terribly (…and it comes in two kinds). • Avoid giving an impression of determinism or an ‘epistemology of voice’. • It is only a curricular entity; it doesn’t have to be taught (let alone assessed) separately.

What sources might Antony Kamm have used? Colour central box as follows: Artistic, sporting – pink or red Weak – yellow or orange Brutal, cruel - green Erratic, extravagant; almost certainly mad – blue or purple

Learning from last 20 years: six principles for rigour and richness • Make them curious about the construction process. • Situate any activity or new knowledge within a clear, purposeful, enquiry journey. • Interest them in the deliberateness and artistry of an interpretation. • Knowledge matters terribly (and it comes in two kinds). • Avoid giving an impression of determinism or an ‘epistemology of voice’. • It is only a curricular entity; it doesn’t have to be taught (let alone assessed) separately.

Design an enquiry question to shape a lesson sequence on Nero/Roman emperors • It must include the two things we have looked at so far: the activity speculating about Antony Kamm’s sources.. • The 2010 newspaper extract.

What does it say/show explicitly / implicitly (Style? Tone?) What kind of interpretation is it? What is the genre/type? What is it? What is it saying? What was the purpose (& intended audience). To create new knowledge? To persuade? To entertain? To inform? To commemorate? To educate? To preserve? How and why was this constructed? How has the interpretation been affected by the context in which it was created? Available sources?Methods? Theory?Ideology? Values? Nationality? Personality? Patronage? What is the relationship between the interpretation and evidence? Which parts are factual, which are points of view, which are imagined?

Design an enquiry question to shape a lesson sequence on Nero/Roman emperors • It must include the two things we have looked at so far: the activity speculating about Antony Kamm’s sources.. • The 2010 newspaper extract.

Why has Nero had such a bad press? Why have so many television programmes been made about Roman emperors? ‘Nutty Nero’: who made the myth? (caution) How was Nero made ‘Nutty’? (caution) Why did Nero interest 19th century historians? To whom does Nero seem to matter today? Why did the Mayor of Anzio unveil a statue of Nero? What drives historians, film producers, artists, politicians … to keep re-interpreting Nero?

hastily furtively pompously merrily reverently reluctantly incompetently How is the body being carried?

Wedgwood’s subordinate clauses • Charles, thinking that he was preparing to strike, said, ‘Stay for the sign’. • A boy of seventeen, standing a long way off in the throng, saw the axe fall.

Playing with a sentence • Charles, thinking that he was preparing to strike, said, ‘Stay for the sign’. • Charles, asserting his authority to the last, said, ‘Stay for the sign’. • Charles,hoping for a last look at his kingdom, said, ‘Stay for the sign’.

Playing with a sentence • A boy of seventeen, standing a long way off in the throng, saw the axe fall. • A boy of seventeen, suddenly fearing God’s wrath, saw the axe fall. • A boy of seventeen, trembling at the sight of the king’s humility, saw the axe fall. • A boy of seventeen, hurtling past on his motorbike, saw the axe fall.

What does it say/show explicitly / implicitly (Style? Tone?) (See previous slide for examples) What is it? What is it saying? What was the purpose (& intended audience). To create new knowledge? To persuade? To entertain? To inform? To commemorate? To educate? To preserve? How and why was this constructed? How has the interpretation been affected by the context in which it was created? Available sources?Methods? Theory?Ideology? Values? Nationality? Personality? Patronage? What is the relationship between the interpretation and evidence? Which parts are factual, which are points of view, which are imagined?

The many faces of King John • Tudors: John the Hero • Victorians: John the Villain (Victorian historians such as Green used medieval chronicles and monastic records; disliked John’s attitude to religion, condemned him for his affairs with rich women, judged John by own moral standards, thought Magna Carta very important – emergent Whiggism…) • 1950s and 1960s: John the Good (New studies of government records; challenged views based on monastic records; some even claimed administrative genius; allowed for John’s sheer bad luck – up against a powerful Pope and skilful King of France) • Modern historians (1980s – 2000s…) ????

Film as interpretation of native American peoples • Peter Pan 1953 • The Searchers 1956 • The Outlaw Josie Wales 1976 • Dances with Wolves 1990 • Pocahontas 1995

Enquiry questions • Why have Americans made films about Native Americans? • What does Film X tell us about 20th century American attitudes to NAs? • What kinds of things do films about NAs leave out? • What changes in American economy and society have affected films about NAs?

Enquiry questions • What changes in American economy and society have affected films about NAs? Impossible to attempt this sensibly without deep, thorough knowledge of changes in American economy and society. The study of interpretations is an exercise in knowledge building as much as in thinking. It is nothing whatsoever to do with skill.

The many faces of King John • Tudors: John the Hero • Victorians: John the Villain (Victorian historians such as Green used medieval chronicles and monastic records; disliked John’s attitude to religion, condemned him for his affairs with rich women, judged John by own moral standards, thought Magna Carta very important – emergent Whiggism…) • 1950s and 1960s: John the Good (New studies of government records; challenged views based on monastic records; some even claimed administrative genius; allowed for John’s sheer bad luck – up against a powerful Pope and skilful King of France) • Modern historians (1980s – 2000s…) ????

6. It is only a curricular entity; it doesn’t have to be taught (let alone assessed) separately. Gary Howells 2005: Causation and interpretations (TH 121) Kate Hammond 2007: Evidential thinking and interpretations (TH 128)

The future?

The future? Might we now start to see GCSE and A Level specifications taking seriously and examining in depth the work that has taken place at Key Stage 3 over the last 20 years? What to avoid? Reductive assessment born of unnecessary isolation and vain quests for decontextualised progression models resurrecting outdated notions of ‘skill’. What to develop Overview opportunities – examining how one period interprets others is the ultimate test of historical knowledge as much as historical thinking …

Your homework! Blue sheets Our Native England OR The Historical House that Jack Built Being the HISTORY OF ENGLAND MADE EASY IN FAMILIAR VERSES with FORTY-SEVEN woodcuts REVISED IN 1838

Some basic reading for a new history teacher(based on the minimum expectation of literature familiarity for a history mentor mentoring a Cambridge PGCE trainee) McAleavy, T. (1993) ‘Using the Attainment Targets in Key Stage 3: “Interpretations of history”’Teaching History,72. McAleavy (2003) 'Interpretations of history', Past Forward: A Vision for School History 2002-3, in Harris, R. and Riley, M. (eds) The Historical Association. Banham, D. and Dawson, I. (2000) King John: A study in depth John Murray. See extract photocopied for you this session. Wrenn, A. (1998) ‘Emotional response or objective enquiry? Using shared stories and a sense of place in the study of interpretations for GCSE’ in Teaching History, 91, Evidence and Interpretation Edition. Counsell, C. (2003) Cunning Plan: Who cares about Charles I? Cunning Plan for a Year 8 lesson on C.V. Wedgwood’s writing, Teaching History, 111, Reading History Edition.

Some basic reading for a new history teacher Wrenn, A. (2001) ‘“Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”’, Teaching History, 104, Teaching the Holocaust Edition. Card, J. (2004) ‘Seeing double: how one period sees another’, Teaching History 117, Dealing with Distance Edition. The "Polychronicons" in Teaching History. You will find one in every edition from Edition 112 onwards. [This is more than a scholarship update to support history teachers’ subject knowledge; it always includes a section on how you might link recent scholarship to an interpretations focus at Key Stage 3 and A Level. ] Wrenn, A. (1999) ‘Substantial sculptures or sad little plaques? Making interpretations matter to Year 9’, Teaching History, 97, Visual History Edition.

Some basic reading for a new history teacher Counsell, C. (2003) ‘The forgotten games kit: putting historical thinking first in long, medium and short-term planning’ in T. Haydn and C. Counsell (eds) History, ICT and Learning, Routledge. [This chapter explores progression in history using ICT and includes a discussion of the use of websites as interpretations. It considers progression in use of websites as interpretations across the Key Stage.] Seixas, P. (2000) ‘Schweigen! die Kinder! or, Does postmodern history have a place in schools?’ in Stearns, P.N., Seixas, P. and Wineburg S. (2000) Knowing Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives, New York University Press. (Is Seixas effectively writing about England’s ‘interpretations’ requirement? Or is it actually quite different? Discuss.) Evans, R. (1997) In Defence of History, Granta. pp 224-232. [Richard Evans is not talking about ‘interpretations’ in our specific, technical curricular sense, but it is valuable to stand back from this and to consider what an historian such as Evans considers to be the relationship between evidence and interpretation.] McCully, A. and Pilgrim, N. (2004) ‘“They took Ireland away from us and we’ve got to fight to get it back”. Using fictional characters to explore the relationship between historical interpretation and contemporary attitudes’, Teaching History, 114, Making History Personal Edition.

‘ Interpretations of history ’ in its technical curricular sense, since 1991