Volume11.2 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING TEACHING AND RESEARCH May 2013 www.history.org.uk May 2013 International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research EDITORS Hilary Cooper, University of Cumbria, UK Jon Nichol,TheHistorical Association, UK Robert Guyver, Universityof St.Mark and St.John, Plymouth, UK ASSOCIATE EDITORS TerryEpstein, CityUniversity, New York,USA KatherineBurn, Institute of Education, London,UK ArthurChapman, Edge Hill University,UK EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD The revised membership of the Editorial Advisory Board will bepublished in the next edition, IJHLTR 12.1. International Journal of Historical Learning,Teaching and Research issubject to a peer review process and is published twice a year: May/June and October/December. Editorial correspondence should be addressed to: [email protected] and [email protected] Submission of articles Full details of theform, layout and referencing conventions for articles to be submitted are included at the end of this edition. Advertising Fullpage/halfpage:enquiriesto-telephone:[+44]02078205985 AnnualInstitutionalsubscription This will be for individual institutions.In 2013 the Historical Association will publish detailsofinstitutional membershipfor its on-line educational journals and related resources,including IJHLTR. Annualpersonalsubscription PeInterrnastioonanalJoul rnasulofbHistocrriciaptlLeiaorninng ,t Toeathchieng aHndiRsestoearcrihc al Associatio nincludesaccess to IJHLTR current and previous editions.To join th2 e Historical Association please go to: http://www.history.org.uk/member/register.php Backissues These are posted on the Historical Association website www.history.ork.uk and are downloadable for Historical Association members. Delegatestothe History Educators International Research Network [HEIRNET] annual conference receive a complementary downloadable copy of the journal. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING TEACHING AND RESEARCH VOL 11(2) CONTENTS Editorial History teaching, pedagogy, curriculum and politics: dialogues and debates in regional, national, transnational, international and supranational settings Robert Guyver, University of St Mark & St John, Plymouth, UK pp. 3-10 Australia Scarcely an Immaculate Conception: new professionalism encounters old politics in the formation of the Australian National History Curriculum Tony Taylor, Monash University, Gippsland Campus, Victoria, Australia pp. 11-20 Brazil Learning and the formation of historical consciousness – a dialogue with Brazilian curricular proposals Maria Auxiliadora Schmidt, University of Curitiba, Brazil pp.21-32 Catalonia Teaching the history of Catalonia: past, present and "futures‖ Antoni Santisteban Fernández Universitat Autònomade Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain pp. 34-43 Cyprus A game of Identities: debates over history in Greek Cypriot education Lukas N. Perikleous, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus pp. 45-58 England Landmarks with questions – England‘s school history wars 1967-2010 and 2010-2013 Robert Guyver, University of St Mark & St John, Plymouth, UK pp. 59-86 Hong Kong Searching for an identity: debates over Moral and National Education as an independent subject in contemporary Hong Kong Zardas Shuk-man Lee, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Phoebe Y. H. Tang, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Carol C. L. Tsang, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong pp. 88-97 Iceland The challenges of history education in Iceland Súsanna Margrét Gestsdóttir, University of Iceland, Reykjavík pp. 98-110 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING TEACHING AND RESEARCH Vol 11.2 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH Vol 11.2 Israel Israeli history curriculum and the conservative - liberal pendulum Tsafrir Goldberg, Haifa University, Israel & David Gerwin, Queens College, The City University of New York (CUNY) pp. 111-124 Malta History in Malta‘s New National Curriculum Framework Yosanne Vella, University of Malta, Msida, Malta pp. 125-135 New Zealand Learning to think historically through course work: A New Zealand case study Mark Sheehan, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand pp. 136-144 Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland A question of identity? Purpose, policy and practice in the teaching of history in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland Alan McCully, University of Ulster Coleraine, Northern Ireland & pp. 145-158 Fionnuala Waldron, St Patrick‘s College Drumcondra, Dublin, Republic of Ireland Québec ‗A giant with clay feet‘: Québec students and their historical consciousness of the nation Stéphane Lévesque, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada pp. 159-175 Jocelyn Létourneau, Laval University, Québec city, Canada & Raphaël Gani, Laval University, Québec city, Canada Slovenia The influence of the disintegration of Yugoslavia on Slovene curricula for history Danijela Trškan, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia pp. 176-191 The Republic of Korea (South Korea) History teaching in the Republic of Korea: curriculum and practice Sun Joo Kang, Gyeongin National University of Education, The Republic of Korea pp. 192-201 Turkey Current history teaching in Turkey: curricula, debates and issues Gülçin Dilek & Dursun Dilek pp. 202-215 Faculty of Education, Sinop University, Sinop, Turkey INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH Vol 11.2. 2 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH Vol 11.2 Editorial History teaching, pedagogy, curriculum and politics: dialogues and debates in regional, national, transnational, international and supranational settings Robert Guyver, University of St Mark & St John, Plymouth, UK Dynamic similarities in pedagogy, curriculum and research The articles collected here, in this special edition of IJHLTR (Vol. 11.2), provide evidence of some remarkable and dynamic similarities in pedagogy, curriculum and research, and in the inter-relationships of stakeholders. Examined across these contributions are not just the positive opportunities afforded by the teaching and learning of history in these settings, but also the shared problems and difficulties experienced in negotiating and reconciling curriculum research and development across the raw realities of schools and classrooms, and across the sometimes powerfully confusing pressures of central and local (macro- and micro-) politics. Indeed, in the examples given here there are often conflicting expectations among politicians, the general public, history teachers or educators, and historians, about what the purposes of history education are. The world in its broadest sense is well-represented in the fifteen articles presented here. There are two contributions from the Americas (Québec, Brazil), four from Asia (Turkey, Israel, the Republic of Korea [South Korea], and Hong Kong), two from Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), and seven from Europe (but from eight different jurisdictions) (Cyprus, Malta, Slovenia, Catalonia, England, Northern Ireland with the Republic of Ireland, and Iceland). Rather than take each situation separately, this editorial will summarise and synthesise in the contexts of the common themes that arise in the articles. Two apparently irreconcilable models of the history curriculum Behind much of the Angst reported in the papers here, is the tension between two apparently irreconcilable models of the history curriculum: on the one hand an approach which promotes knowledge of national history and national values in the interests of preserving collective memory and fostering national identity (Lukas Perikleous reminds us in the context of this same debate in Cyprus, that Peter Seixas named this, the best story approach), and on the other a model based on a disciplinary focus supported by historical thinking, where the content is not dominated by the nation but has become diversified and globalised. Barton & Levstik in Teaching History for the Common Good (Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004) describe these as two ‗stances‘: the identification stance and the analytic stance. The middle ground between these apparently irreconcilable models lies, partly at least and as will be explored below, in the discussions about criteria for the concept of ‗significance‘. Pedagogy and politics – getting the balance right between quality and quantity In their article about Turkey, Gülçin and Dursun Dilek highlight a common problem of a curriculum that is so full of content ‗to be covered‘ that opportunities for teachers to explore an innovating disciplinary approach, using aspects of historical thinking, are much reduced by the pressure to deliver along quantitative lines. In England too the current debate has involved a political commitment to return schools to a ‗back-to-basics‘ history curriculum which has within it a natural tendency to measure effectiveness by how muchis known, particularly of a two thousand year-long national narrative. This tension is also apparent in debates highlighted in Brazil by Maria Auxiliadora Schmidt, and in Australia by Tony Taylor. Indeed, Taylor describes how a ‗mile long and inch deep‘ survey approach was avoided in Australia. On the other hand, in contrast to this predominantly quantitative approach there are strong pedagogical arguments in favour of a set of underpinning qualitative principles which counterbalance a drive towards ‗mere‘coverage. These focus on different ways of understanding and different approaches to history involving active and experiential learning, including inquiry, dialogue, discussion