| Abstract |
The reason for writing this essay was the open debate, which was caused by the
teaching of the new history textbook of the sixth grade of primary school in the school
year 2006-2007. This specific book was withdrawn from schools the next school year
after having received severe criticism.
This specific essay investigates this book from a scientific aspect. The criteria
come from the modern historiography. To be more specific, they come from what is
called ‘the new history’. According to this view, history is a social science. This new
history rejects the ‘traditional’ historiography, which was related to the mere narration
and restoration of the bare facts.
The main supposition is whether the new history book (by Repousis’s author team)
indeed attempted radical changes in the school historiography compared with the old
model of the historical narration and teaching, which marked the previous book. If we
verify this suposition, then we can suppose that the mentioned radical change
provoked partly the strong dissatisfaction this new book caused.
The main supposition is analyzed in smaller questions, which are, at the same time,
the criteria for this comparative study of the two textbooks:
- Do the two author teams adopt the principles and the views of the new historiography
as well as their teaching methods?
- Are they taken away from the model of the nationcentral history, which cultivates the
national moral towards a social history, which makes you think and cultivates the
criticism?
- Are they presented as active collective subjects such as women?
- Is the past approached by aspects, which allow the women’s or other nations’ point of
view to be seen?
The investigation of the above questions is done with the methods of Context
Analysis and Discourse Analysis.
7
In the first unit we compare the school curriculum, on which these textbooks are
based. In the second unit we are searching for differentiations in the structure and in
the teaching method, which is affected by the structure of each of the two books.
Finally, in the third unit we are investigating the content of the two books.
The results of the investigation showed that as for the first unit, the new curriculum
is taken away from the nationcentral speech of the old in order to approach new goals
such as the development of the critical ability.
The conclusions that come up from the investigation of the content of the books
show that in the new book the most important thing is the movement from the
homogeneous national entity to the splintering off into social, professional or racial
groups national entity.
Our investigation as far as the structure of the books and their teaching method,
showed that the old textbook is mainly based on a factual, nationcentral narration
which alsu critisize. On the contrary, the new book bases its teaching on the
methodical elaboration of the historical sources. This is a modern method, which aims
to the development of the historical thinking. The structure and the view for history,
which the old book brings, is better served from a passive for the student, central
narrative teaching. On the other hand, the new book demands active participation
from the students throughout a teaching period. A teaching period, which is directed
towards the scientific research.
|
Η σχολική ιστοριογραφία 'παρασοδιακών΄ και σύγχρονων΄ αντιλήψεων και δικακτικων πρακτικών : συγκριτική μελέτη των δυο πρόσφατων εγχειριδίων ιστορίας της ΣΤ' δημοτικού
