Monday, November 21, 2011
Chapter 2: Introducing Historical Thinking-Due December 4, 2011
The author, Mr. Lesh, has selected "Nat Turner's Rebellion of 1831" to formalize, through discussion of the design, implementation, and evaluation of this lesson the skills needed to shift the focus of history instruction. Evaluate this process and voice your opinion as to how this process can also be seen in other subjects.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What struck me most about Lesh’s teaching of this lesson was the moves away from a teacher centered lesson, to more of a student driven lessen. He gives students the tools they need to think for themselves and share their ideas with others in small group settings. There also may not be a true “right answer”. For example, was Nat Turner a hero, or a “terrorist” (p. 35)? Can both answers be justified? Lesh would argue that either answer can be justified by looking at the various source materials, and the underlying context that they may take.
ReplyDeleteAs Lesh points out there needs to be a “shift” of the “focus of history instruction away from simply memory and toward engaging the past” (28). This same statement can be translated across content area by simply replacing “history” with whatever content is being taught. In English II, we having been working on offering pictorial accounts of events and time to go along with the written word. We recently showed a slide series of works from Jacob Lawrence’s “Great Migration” set to period music in order to tie into our reading of an excerpt from Richard Wright’s “Black Boy”. The goal was to tie together multiple perspectives of similar experiences. A lesson such as this would have been a perfect one to “team up” with US History with and basically share a lesson. The English side could have taken the reading of Richard Wright, and the US History side could bring in the primary and secondary sources.
Overall, by providing our students the tools to become true independent historians and thinkers, we are setting them up for the success needed not only across curriculum, but in their future college and career choices.
Lesh mentions that engaging students in historical thinking can be a difficult task because students have been trained to memorize information. He says we must “focus on skills necessary to shift instruction from memory” to actually engaging the students in the process (p. 28).
ReplyDeleteLesh uses visual images to kick off his lesson. He found these images useful in stimulating student conversations. I agree images can be much more powerful than lectures. I previously taught World Civ. During our Industrial Revolution unit, I did one section without the traditional PowerPoint notes. Instead, I opted for a PowerPoint of pictures depicting child labor issues, working conditions, environmental issues, etc. The students were always engaged and the content knowledge really seemed to sink in. I too, knew the lesson worked because the students could still answer the questions on the test without being told the “right” answer. Lesh points out other disciplines don’t just give the answers to lab reports, etc. Our history students should not expect that in our classes.
I was glad to see that Lesh pointed out that introducing historical thinking in the classroom isn’t always going to be well-received by all students. He states “for some students this is empowering, whereas for others it is extremely disconcerting” (p.38). My students often shut down when I try methods that are new to them. Lesh points out that students will eventually gain confidence once they learn to trust their own analytical skills and not rely on finding the “right” answer. Lesh ends the chapter by encouraging teachers to be persistent in regards to teaching historical thinking (p. 51). In order for it to be valuable, you must do more than one lesson.
In chapter 2, Lesh introduced us to the idea of discipline-based instruction with a sample lesson about Nat Turner (p.28). This was a great scenario from history to show how one person could be viewed from many perspectives. Students were presented with a variety of images of Nat Turner, then asked to interpret his personality and emotional state (p.31). This allowed students to focus on the source of the image, not just the content of the story, just as they might do in an English class when studying a certain author (p. 33).
ReplyDeleteStudents were given the assignment to take the interpretations of Turner and create a historical marker to tell about his rebellion (p.33). The students moved toward the realization that history is based on interpretations of "data" just as a scientific conclusion would be based on the outcome of an experiment (p. 34).
Thinking historically requires students to realize that they might not get to a "right answer", but various opinions from differing sources (p. 39). This concept can lead students to a better understanding of social groups, other cultures and a deeper understanding of the world around them. Students will begin to realize that their own products and presentations are biased to a degree and rarely contain "just the facts" (p. 44).
Lesh acknowledges that history teachers must "cover content" and that this is often the greatest barrier to discovery learning (p. 47). This idea of content coverage is also a factor for other disciplines. All subjects have a core content that must be taught. It is how we choose to teach that content that makes the difference.
Balancing content coverage and in-depth analysis/historical thinking can be a struggle. Providing students with skills that will transfer to other disciplines and the rest of their lives is more valuable than memorizing facts (p. 50).
I completely agree with Lesh's statement that shaking students out of their history comfort zone is the only way that we can get them to start to think like historians.(30-31) However, Like Lesh, I've also met with some resistance from students when I try to get them do this in my classroom. (43-44) For some students the idea that history is something that can be questioned and challenged is appealing, for others it causes panic. They are uncomfortable with the idea that all aspects of history are not set in stone. For these kids this process of evaluating and questioning is a bit more challenging. However, we see the process of analyzing, questioning, and evaluating used in science classes all the time and students do not seem to be bothered by it in that discipline. Most likely, this is directly related to how students have been taught to view history throughout their school career, and as other teachers have commented, they tend to resist, at least at first, when they are asked to look at something in a different way. I have found this to be particularly true when you ask them to think critically. They want an easy way out. They want to be able to read a paragraph and find the answer or they want me to tell them what it is much like Lesh describes. (38)
ReplyDeleteI think this activity is a great way to ease them into the discipline of historical investigation as well as ease them into the reality that history is based on interpretation. Images are also a great way to accomplish this. (33) Lesh also argues that short narratives work best with students because they are so visual. (33) I’ve also found this to be true. Anytime students are given much more than a few paragraphs they begin to shut down and stop reading. Lesh’s point that this type of student engagement energized him also resonated with me. (45-46) Although this type of lesson is very student driven, it also still requires, at least initially during its development, a large commitment on the part of the teacher. It will be necessary for the instructor to be familiar with the historiography of the topic. It will also take some time to pull together the primary sources needed. So by developing and using this type of lesson not only are we teaching our students to think and act more like historians, but we’re teaching ourselves as well. This type of teaching means that it is no longer enough for a history teacher to just know facts and dates. It requires the teacher to also think critically and act like a historian.
I find it really interesting how the author discussed making lessons from teacher center to student centered. He is encouraging the students to think like historians, examine the evidence and images presented and make a judgment for themselves. In discussing the Nat Turner rebellion, he directs his students to ask the question why and why it matters. Why is the most powerful word in the English dictionary, especially for historians. He also shows an example of long ago history being relevant to more recent events, on page 35 he says that since the 9-11 attacks, some of his students have said that Nat Turner was a terrorist. This to me is an example of making students think like historians. I really like how Mr. Lesh asks his students “what sources informed their interpretation” (pg. 38). He goes on to say that students very seldom question the backgrounds of the places they get information; which is very disconcerting to me. What propaganda is and how it used is taught in nearly all history classes. Mr. Lesh discusses how the stories of the past are generally told by the interpretation of the people telling it at the time. He discusses how a teacher from Columbia University taught that Reconstruction was a failure, I think, for example, in thinking along Mr. Lesh’s lines, we should pose the question “If Reconstruction was a failure, why do we still have a U.S.A.?” Teachers need to have a balance in teaching, give facts but also question authority. This approach can be used in other subjects, especially science and English. Science is much like history, it is a very much alive. English literature is very open to interpretation. This approach is not valid in math, which is either has a right or wrong answer.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lesh’s statement that we have to get students out of their comfort zones for them to think like historians (pp.30-31). It seems that this is sometimes a difficult task. Many of my students seem to be afraid to tackle the job of a historian. My upper level classes jump on the Idea however my lower level students (the ones we need to reach) fear taking the steps other that memorizing the facts. . Many of them want to just search for the answer in the book and go on much like the author states. . (p. 38)
ReplyDeleteLooking at the Nat Turner activity I think this would be a good way to move them forward. I look forward to trying this with my Honors World Civ. classes when I discuss the Enlightenment and French Revolution. I can see where the Word Why is important for instance; why did this happen at this particular time in history? I think that this will be a way to keep them from just reading. By giving the students contrasting views like Mr. Lesh did with the Nat Turner pp. 40-42) students will be able to learn to make judgment calls.
I can see this as something that could be used in all disciplines. It is an Activity that will cause students to discover the answers not just write and answer down. This will work for Math, Science, and English as well as Social Studies I can definitely see where is can balance the content. (p. 50)