| You are here: Home > learning > Teaching History with sources and teaching students to think |
Jun
10Teaching History with sources and teaching students to think
Posted By: Amran on June 10, 2009 at 9:21 am
“Students can read a typical high-school “history” book from cover to cover without learning that real history emerges from the examination of evidence and the exercise of reason. Students can read a typical book from cover to cover without learning that the construction of real history involves a lot of detective work — e.g., the appraisal of claims and counterclaims, the separation of supportable assertions from superstitions and folklore, the scrutinizing of documents and other kinds of evidence, the detection of counterfeit documents and artifacts, the resolution of conflicting interpretations of evidence, the rejection of unjustified inferences, and the demolition of unwarranted generalizations”
- from “Good Stuff for History Teachers” by William J. Bennetta
There is a need to take another look at the teaching of History in Singapore. This is because most of the time the teaching of History is very much textbook-bound. Teachers tend to just explain what is already in the textbooks and get students to refer to the textbook as almost the undisputed master of information and opinion on historical events. What is of greater concern in Singapore is that while there is a shift in emphasis in the History paper for the high stakes examinations in recent years, the shift in the manner that History is taught has been far from revolutionary.
While there has been an emphasis on the higher order thinking skills and the need to interpret historical sources in the examinations, the way that History is taught in Singapore schools seems to be very disconnected from the way the students are assessed. While the current History syllabus in Singapore requires students to demonstrate an ability to think, and perhaps to think like a Historian would, teachers in Singapore do not teach students to think for this purpose.
Usually any thinking skill teaching done in a typical Singapore school History class is done only to teach students how to answer the examination questions which have been set to ensure that students demonstrate thinking skills. In other words, in the course of the lessons, thinking skills is not emphasized. Teachers would still dish out their notes or just “cover” what is said in the textbooks. What is said in the textbook are “givens”. They are taken to be facts.
Teachers only go through the thinking process with their students only because it is a requirement of the examination paper. Even then the manner that it is done will be very mechanical and little thought will be given to the need for the transfer of those skills to other situations other then through some invisible osmotic process. In other words, thinking is taught but with a spirit which is contrary to the whole purpose as to why these thinking skills were introduced into the syllabus in the first place.
This happens mainly because of the heavy examination orientation of the Singapore “education” system. Teachers know that, in Singapore, only the examination grades matter despite some recent pronouncements from up high to move away from that.The content heavy syllabus, which is based on the examinations requirements, has seen numerous reductions over the years but it is still a lot to cover. This has led to teachers still teaching rapidly to “cover” the content. There is little time for serious teaching for understanding. Very rarely will you see a teacher who actually uses mainly primary or secondary sources to teach History so that students have a more profound understanding of the learning of History as a process of learning that involves “the examination of evidence and the exercise of reason”. Little is done to show that History is:
“the appraisal of claims and counterclaims, the separation of supportable assertions from superstitions and folklore, the scrutinizing of documents and other kinds of evidence, the detection of counterfeit documents and artifacts, the resolution of conflicting interpretations of evidence, the rejection of unjustified inferences, and the demolition of unwarranted generalizations.”
If some of the above skills or processes is done in Singapore schools, it is done only when the teachers teach their students to answer the so-called source-based questions for the high stakes examinations. What this leads to is a cynical inculcation of thinking skills. The approach only teaches students to think that the thinking skills only makes their life harder and see no other application of the skills in the rest of their lives. Worse, it does little justice to a very interesting subject and students will continue to believe that History is nothing more than the learning and regurgitation of facts. Unfortunately, for too many in Singapore’s education system, it does not matter because students still ace their examinations.
| Filed Under: learning , teaching , Thinking skills Tagged with high stakes examinations, history, learning, pemikiran, schools, Singapore, teaching, thinking, Thinking skills |
Recommend Related Products



sad, but so very true. i give history tuition to secondary school students and most of the time, they are shocked that history is so much more than what they learn from their textbook… especially when they realise that what their textbook says isn’t the “absolute truth”. having undergone the singapore education system myself, i daresay it is indeed implorable.
Thank you for your comment, gatekeeper. I wonder sometimes if the way History is taught in Singapore is a reflection of the paternalistic manner in which Singapore is run. There is always one correct view defined by someone in authority. No alternatives are entertained.