Evidence
Gwen Wright of PBS's History Detectives discusses resources for historical research, looking particularly at primary sources and their importance in historical research.
Gwen Wright of PBS's History Detectives discusses resources for historical research, looking particularly at primary sources and their importance in historical research.
I need a streaming video explaining primary vs. secondary resources. Please help!
You’ve come to the right place! Here are several high-quality online videos that teach about primary and secondary sources—and historical thinking more broadly—to get you started.
Watch Teachinghistory.org's introductory video on historical thinking to learn about primary sources and strategies for analyzing them.
Historians and educators working through the University of Wisconsin, Whitewater, have created materials on teaching historical thinking, including an introductory video that explores strategies for analyzing historical evidence and learning about the past. The video shows these strategies in action in elementary and middle-school classrooms.
If you are looking for visuals or print materials, why not start by downloading Teachinghistory.org's free historical thinking poster?
Explore Teachinghistory.org for more resources, including a recent blog on Historical Thinking or resources for analyzing or teaching with primary sources.
Or try watching examples of historical thinking or Teaching in Action in classrooms around the country.
The Chicago History Project (CHP), focused on significantly increasing the depth of historical content and the integration of historical thinking skills in middle and high school American history courses. CHP promoted this scholarly approach in several ways, particularly in the Historian's Chair sessions introduced during the summer institute in the 2nd year of the project.
This aspect of the summer institute was modeled after the Author's Chair strategy used to assist in developing students' writing. The strategy required each participant to don the role of the historian and participate in "doing history." The Historian's Chair sessions emphasized developing scholarly arguments based on secondary and primary sources, applying them to a lesson for students, and then presenting the research supporting the lesson to a seminar group of fellow teachers and a historian facilitator.
The Historian's Chair sessions allowed teachers to enter into a community of inquiry and in this case the scholarly community of historians. According to Seixas (1993), being a part of such a community can enhance a teacher's understanding of historiography and the practice of history.
In these sessions, teachers learned from an experienced historian in the field as well as one another as they presented their historical arguments and received feedback from the historian-facilitator and their colleagues. In this forum, teachers received feedback on the selection of their documents and how well those documents supported the lesson. One teacher commented that these sessions "gave me insight on how to teach different eras/themes in history. The various readings refreshed my knowledge."
The consistently high ratings for the Historian's Chair sessions indicated teachers' appreciation for the focus on historical knowledge and analysis integrated with a focus on teaching history. On average, participants in the second and third years (n=45) rated the value of these sessions at 3.7 (on scale of 1 to 4 with 4 being "very valuable").
Self-reports by teachers support Barton and Levstik's (2004) assertion that in-depth experiences and projects that offer teachers an opportunity to examine the epistemology of historical knowledge may have a significant impact on their pedagogical content knowledge. Indeed the deep engagements with history through the seminars as well as developing research-based lesson plans, especially in the later cohorts, affected how CHP teachers understood history, historical research, and the teaching of history. The final survey data also showed that an overwhelming majority of teachers (96%) across the three cohorts (n=65) indicated that their involvement in CHP affected their thinking about the discipline of history, most commonly by raising the importance of primary source analysis (48%).
Teachers from all three cohorts consistently identified the use of primary sources and the integration of those sources into the teaching of history as one of the major contributions to their enhanced understanding of American history, and some teachers elaborated further on the ways CHP affected their understanding of history. They noted that the summer institute experience changed their way of thinking about historical interpretation and mentioned the need to focus on historical methods, keep up with new historical scholarship, and evaluate authors' biases. Others noted the importance of critiquing historical interpretations, examining the evidence underlying interpretations, and recognizing the tentativeness of historical interpretations.
One teacher noted that CHP "changed my views on using secondary sources in my class. I really believe that incorporating scholarly arguments into lessons is important." In responding to how CHP affected their thinking about history, one teacher stated, "[t]o not to be afraid to expect students to do more rigorous tasks and think more critically. To get them to be like historians, not just read a textbook [and] answer comprehension questions." For this teacher, the in-depth historical work of CHP translated into higher expectations and plans for deeper engagements with history for students.
Keith Barton and Linda Levstik, Teaching History for the Common Good (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004).
Peter Seixas, "The Community of Inquiry as a Basis for Knowledge and Learning: The Case of History," American Educational Research Journal 30, no. 2 (1993): 305-324.
[The readers] fundamental purpose is to understand the text, to grasp what is being said from the point of view of the person writing.
—Richard Paul
In recent blogs I have written about teaching strategies for involving students in inquiry and using primary sources, strategies that I have found engage students and help them “enter into” the content. And while we should be engaging our history students in inquiry by using primary sources, we also have textbooks that we are to use in our classes. Can we use the textbook in thoughtful active ways, ways that help the reader understand the text, or is “read these pages and do the chapter questions” part and parcel of history instruction?
This blog will examine a teaching strategy, and some variations, that I have found make reading text material a more engaging, interactive, and thoughtful learning experience for my students. The strategy is known as GIST.
Generating Interactions between Schemata and Texts is a rather imposing name, but my 7th graders have no difficulty grasping this acronym. I learned this strategy this past summer in a workshop put on by two of my district’s ELL staff, but soon found that it benefitted all of my students. I often use this strategy when using the textbook, and have also adapted it for DVD clips and use with primary sources.
When using GIST your students read a passage in a text, and then discuss the section. During the review they find and note a small number (four or five depending upon the size of the reading) of key concepts or terms that they consider most important to understanding that reading. Finally, using their own words, students write a summary of the reading which uses those key terms. Those terms are underlined or highlighted in their summary.
When first using the strategy, it is important to model it. My students are in groups and so I give each group a paragraph about a topic we are studying. They read through it together, and, when the reading is complete, underline/highlight what they feel are the key terms.
I have the same paragraph written on my Smartboard. We talk it through in class, and use the highlighting function to make note of their key terms (volunteers come up and do the highlighting). Finally we write a summary in class that includes the highlighted terms.
As an example, take these paragraphs from Joy Hakim’s A History of Us: War, Terrible War, 1855-1865. In this section, Ms. Hakim writes about President Lincoln’s address at Gettysburg. She begins with a few words about the main speaker of the occasion, Edward Everett:
He talks for almost two hours, without notes, in a voice deep and rich. Later no one seems to remember what he said, but they knew he said it well. There are prayers and other speeches, and the 15,000 listeners who sit or stand in the afternoon sun are hot and tired when the president finally rises, puts on his steel-rimmed glasses, and reads his few remarks. His is a country voice, and it sounds dull after the polished tones of an orator.
The speech was a failure; so Lincoln tells his friends, and so he believes. But he is wrong. The presidency has changed Lincoln. He has grown in greatness. He had learned to use words as a poet uses them—with great care and precision. He has been an able country lawyer with a good mind and a taste for jokes. Now he is much more than that. The deaths and the burdens of war are making him noble, and thoughtful, and understanding, and sad.
After students have read the passage, individually, in pairs, or small groups, I ask them to go back and choose the key terms and ideas that they feel are most important to understanding the passage. In this passage, for example, they might choose speech, failure, Lincoln, grown, noble.
Their final task is to rewrite the two paragraphs in a few sentences, using their own words, and including many, or perhaps all, of the key terms that they have listed. The key terms must be underlined or highlighted in their paragraph.
For instance, a student might write:
At Gettysburg President Lincoln spoke after Edward Everett, a famous speaker of the time. President Lincoln spoke briefly, and felt his speech was a failure. But he had grown from a small town lawyer to a noble president, and his speech reflected that growth.
Although I only learned the GIST strategy this summer, it has become one of my go-to strategies for reading. Because work in my class is interactive, be it in pairs or small groups, students do at least part of the GIST reading assignment with others.
The basic ideas behind this strategy can be used with primary source readings by having students read the quotation, write the key words, and than summarize in their own words. Finally, it also works well with DVD clips. Set up the section for students to view, and then have them think about the section, decide on key terms, and write their summary.
The next blog will deal with my go-to strategy for using DVD or video clips in the classroom.
Give GIST a try, adapt the strategy, and make it your own.
Our Research Brief "Learning From History and Social Studies Textbooks" suggests other ways to strengthen textbook readings, while Teaching with Textbooks rounds up more entries on engaging with texts.
In Beyond the Textbook, historians take common points in textbooks' narratives, such as the Civil Rights Movement or the causes of the Civil War, and model opening them up with primary sources.
The Virginia Experiment Teaching Fellows Program was featured as a keynote panel presentation at the Teaching American History Project Directors' Seminar. Andy Mink, Chris Bunin, and Scott Nesbit present a session to a national audience of project directors, curriculum experts, and educators, considering how historians and educators look at primary and secondary sources and how those perspectives can overlap.
Smithsonian National Museum of American History curators share secrets of how they develop the individual stories presented in exhibitions such as "America on the Move." They then help students who are creating their own family stories by analyzing objects, documents, and other resources. This presentation continues from the presentation "America on the Move, Part One: Migrations, Immigrations, and How We Got Here."
To view this electronic field trip, select "America on the Move, Part Two: Creating Stories" under the heading "Electronic Field Trips."
In this seminar, participants will read three pieces that either take new approaches to Civil War history, or reflect critically on the ways that historians are addressing the period. Participants will be interested in exploring the innovative methodologies or theoretical approaches used by scholars to ask and answer new questions. Of particular concern for these readings will be issues of gender, memory-construction, and the persistent interest of scholars in the event.