Historical Encounters: A Journal of Historical Consciousness, Historical Cultures, and History Education, 2017
In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking ... more In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking in a classroom discussion. We focus on three challenges for the teacher: a) exploring several possible answers; b) stimulating the use of specialized language; c) thinking about the quality of answers. We analysed the prompts of the teachers on general guiding (such as problematizing the remarks of the student) and on guiding historical thinking, to which we refer as components of knowing and doing history. We identify that teachers use three strategies: (1) broadening student thinking by focusing on knowing history; (2) deepening student thinking by focusing on doing history; (3) enhancing student thinking by integrating knowing and doing history. We show that teachers do not stick with one of these strategies but that they choose a strategy that gives students the best chance of taking the next step in historical thinking.
In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking ... more In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking in a classroom discussion. We focus on three challenges for the teacher: a) exploring several possible answers; b) stimulating the use of specialized language; c) thinking about the quality of answers. We analysed the prompts of the teachers on general guiding (such as problematizing the remarks of the student) and on guiding historical thinking, to which we refer as components of knowing and doing history. We identify that teachers use three strategies: (1) broadening student thinking by focusing on knowing history; (2) deepening student thinking by focusing on doing history; (3) enhancing student thinking by integrating knowing and doing history. We show that teachers do not stick with one of these strategies but that they choose a strategy that gives students the best chance of taking the next step in historical thinking.
This study investigates how a collaborative learning task in history, designed to trigger domains... more This study investigates how a collaborative learning task in history, designed to trigger domainspecific thinking, can stimulate high quality student talk and answers and how the task, student talk and student answers are related. We developed a collaborative task that was tested in two cycles. Students worked in pairs on an odd-one-out task with additional questions in which they had to construct a historical context. Our analysis of the student talk of 65 dyads, focusing on the collaborative nature of the talk and the discussion of multiple perspectives, gave insight in how the students constructed a historical context. Our analysis of the written answers, focusing on the use of domain-related concepts and the construction of relationships, made it possible to describe what kind of historical context the students constructed. Chi-square tests gave insight into the relationships between the task, the talk and the written answers. The results show that specific stimuli in the task can lead to different kind of student talk and can help to construct high quality answers. Results also indicate that students have problems with the specialized language of the domain and that the epistemological stance of the students remains problematic, mainly because students do not seem to be aware of the multiple perspectives needed to construct a historical context
Historical Encounters: A Journal of Historical Consciousness, Historical Cultures, and History Education, 2017
In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking ... more In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking in a classroom discussion. We focus on three challenges for the teacher: a) exploring several possible answers; b) stimulating the use of specialized language; c) thinking about the quality of answers. We analysed the prompts of the teachers on general guiding (such as problematizing the remarks of the student) and on guiding historical thinking, to which we refer as components of knowing and doing history. We identify that teachers use three strategies: (1) broadening student thinking by focusing on knowing history; (2) deepening student thinking by focusing on doing history; (3) enhancing student thinking by integrating knowing and doing history. We show that teachers do not stick with one of these strategies but that they choose a strategy that gives students the best chance of taking the next step in historical thinking.
In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking ... more In this article we describe strategies history teachers use to guide student historical thinking in a classroom discussion. We focus on three challenges for the teacher: a) exploring several possible answers; b) stimulating the use of specialized language; c) thinking about the quality of answers. We analysed the prompts of the teachers on general guiding (such as problematizing the remarks of the student) and on guiding historical thinking, to which we refer as components of knowing and doing history. We identify that teachers use three strategies: (1) broadening student thinking by focusing on knowing history; (2) deepening student thinking by focusing on doing history; (3) enhancing student thinking by integrating knowing and doing history. We show that teachers do not stick with one of these strategies but that they choose a strategy that gives students the best chance of taking the next step in historical thinking.
This study investigates how a collaborative learning task in history, designed to trigger domains... more This study investigates how a collaborative learning task in history, designed to trigger domainspecific thinking, can stimulate high quality student talk and answers and how the task, student talk and student answers are related. We developed a collaborative task that was tested in two cycles. Students worked in pairs on an odd-one-out task with additional questions in which they had to construct a historical context. Our analysis of the student talk of 65 dyads, focusing on the collaborative nature of the talk and the discussion of multiple perspectives, gave insight in how the students constructed a historical context. Our analysis of the written answers, focusing on the use of domain-related concepts and the construction of relationships, made it possible to describe what kind of historical context the students constructed. Chi-square tests gave insight into the relationships between the task, the talk and the written answers. The results show that specific stimuli in the task can lead to different kind of student talk and can help to construct high quality answers. Results also indicate that students have problems with the specialized language of the domain and that the epistemological stance of the students remains problematic, mainly because students do not seem to be aware of the multiple perspectives needed to construct a historical context
Uploads
Papers by Harry Havekes
thinking, can stimulate high quality student talk and answers and how the task, student
talk and student answers are related. We developed a collaborative task that was tested in two
cycles. Students worked in pairs on an odd-one-out task with additional questions in which they
had to construct a historical context. Our analysis of the student talk of 65 dyads, focusing on
the collaborative nature of the talk and the discussion of multiple perspectives, gave insight in
how the students constructed a historical context. Our analysis of the written answers, focusing
on the use of domain-related concepts and the construction of relationships, made it possible to
describe what kind of historical context the students constructed. Chi-square tests gave insight
into the relationships between the task, the talk and the written answers.
The results show that specific stimuli in the task can lead to different kind of student talk and
can help to construct high quality answers. Results also indicate that students have problems
with the specialized language of the domain and that the epistemological stance of the students
remains problematic, mainly because students do not seem to be aware of the multiple
perspectives needed to construct a historical context
Books by Harry Havekes
thinking, can stimulate high quality student talk and answers and how the task, student
talk and student answers are related. We developed a collaborative task that was tested in two
cycles. Students worked in pairs on an odd-one-out task with additional questions in which they
had to construct a historical context. Our analysis of the student talk of 65 dyads, focusing on
the collaborative nature of the talk and the discussion of multiple perspectives, gave insight in
how the students constructed a historical context. Our analysis of the written answers, focusing
on the use of domain-related concepts and the construction of relationships, made it possible to
describe what kind of historical context the students constructed. Chi-square tests gave insight
into the relationships between the task, the talk and the written answers.
The results show that specific stimuli in the task can lead to different kind of student talk and
can help to construct high quality answers. Results also indicate that students have problems
with the specialized language of the domain and that the epistemological stance of the students
remains problematic, mainly because students do not seem to be aware of the multiple
perspectives needed to construct a historical context