Why Historical Narrative Matters?

Was macht historische Narrative bedeutsam? | Quelle est l’importance des récits historiques?

 

Abstract: Imagine you are in school and asked to write down, in a page or two, the history of your country, your nation or your homeland (patria) as you know it. While this task may sound trivial, it tells us some important facets of people’s ability to use knowledge of the past for constructing a meaningful historical narrative.
DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1515/phw-2015-3819.
Languages: English, Deutsch, Français



Imagine you are in school and asked to write down, in a page or two, the history of your country, your nation or your homeland (patria) as you know it. While this task may sound trivial, it tells us some important facets of people’s ability to use knowledge of the past for constructing a meaningful historical narrative.[1]

A bunch of “stuff” that needs to be remembered

From a practical, pedagogical standpoint, historical narratives matter for at least three reasons:

– Historical narratives represent the linguistic and structural form with which it becomes possible for people to organize the “course of time” in a coherent way, thus giving everyday life a temporal frame and matrix of historical orientation.
– Historical narratives serve to establish the identity of their authors and their audience. Whether the historical narrative is from the family, the school or the community, it comprises a continuous temporal experience, from the past to the present, making it possible for people to situate themselves – individually and collectively – in reference to others in the course of time.
– Historical narratives give people reasons for action. Although a historical narrative is primarily aimed at making sense of past realities, its purpose is to orient life in time in a way which confers upon past actualities a possible future perspective. As such, historical narratives serve to define an imaginable course of actions for individuals and groups guided by the agency of historical knowledge and memory.[2]

This narrative approach to history departs significantly from what typically captures media headlines in my country: “Canada’s failing history.” For the most past, studies in the field of history education have traditionally been concerned with what students know (or don’t know) about the past in relation to canonical knowledge and prescribed curriculum expectations. Annual exams and recurring surveys of young people’s historical knowledge dominate public debate and fuel “history wars.” Unfortunately, These “tests” tell us very little about the significant aspects and specific realities of the past that students acquire, internalize, and use to orient their life and make sense of their world. Years of schoolings and standardized testing have conditioned students – and adults – to believe that history is about a bunch of “stuff” that needs to be remembered or alternatively retrieved instantly from the Internet.

Historical narrative and consciousness

But historical narratives are more complex than aggregated bits of “stuff” and do not emerge spontaneously. They are developed gradually over the course of time as a result of an internalization process by which “individuals acquire beliefs, attitudes, or behavioral regulations from external sources”[3] and progressively transform those external regulations into their personal “historical consciousness.” First devised by German scholars decades ago, and still relatively new to North American scholarship, the concept of historical consciousness goes beyond the accumulation of historical knowledge in memory. It takes into account the mental reconstruction and appropriation of historical information and experiences – acquired at home, in the community, in school, and in popular culture – that are brought into the mental household of an individual.[4] This concept involves a complex process of combining the past, the present, and the envisioned future into meaningful and sense-bearing time. For German historian Jörn Rüsen, historical consciousness serves the reflexive and practical function of orienting our life in time, thus offering narrative visions – big pictures – to guide our contemporary actions and moral behaviors in reference to a usable past.[5]

Students’ history knowledge

If, as French philosopher Paul Ricoeur contends, “time becomes human time to the extent that it is organized after the manner of a narrative,”[6] then we have to be far more attentive to the various narratives that students acquire and tell. Studies, and including our ones, suggest that young people tend to develop “simplified narratives” of the past which, in the words of Denis Shemilt, are “event-space” changes separated by long periods of quiescence in which nothing happens.[7] Students typically compress the collective past into a limited series of historical happenings as if history was like a volcano “occasionally convulsed by random explosions.”[8] These narrative simplifications of the collective past often develop very early in life and can prove to be very robust because they act as “heuristics” and mental frameworks for structuring new learning. So unless these simplified narratives are problematized in school, young people’s historical consciousness is unlikely to be transformed by formal history education alone.
In fact, in their intergenerational study assessing young Americans’ historical consciousness, Wineburg et al. discovered that by restricting our notions of history to the official knowledge of the state-sponsored curriculum, we completely escape the powerful external forces that permeate the historical narratives acquired by today’s youth. In their view, this “cultural Curriculum” can prove to be “more powerful in shaping young people’s ideas about the past than the mountains of textbooks that continue to occupy historians’ and educators’ attention.”[9]

Challenging students’ historical narratives

Today, most teachers are aware of the theory of constructivism and the need to consider the learner’s prior knowledge. But students are rarely assessed on their own historical narratives of the collective past. Rather, teachers typically designed assessment tools meant to gather information on the various learning expectations of the curriculum that students are supposed to master. As a result, students in countries like Canada have no pedagogically-structured opportunity in school to express and confront their pre-conceived knowledge and simplified stories acquired from the “real-life” cultural curriculum and that they bring to formal classroom learning.

As a history educator, I consider it important that we challenge students’ own historical narratives. If school is to play a significant role in shaping the education of young citizens, I believe it must find new ways to engage and make more complex their narrative visions of the past – to provide them with multifaceted “big Pictures” of the past. One way to do so is precisely to invite them to write their own stories of the past, as they know it. Failing to do so will deprive educators of one of the most fundamental means that people use to make sense of the past for contemporary meaning-making.[10]

_____________________

Further Reading

  • Bruner, Jerome, ‘Narrative and paradigmatic modes of thought,’ in Elliot Eisner (ed.), ‘Learning and Teaching the ways of knowing,’ Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1985, p. 97-115.
  • Carr, David, ‘Time, narrative and history,’ Indiana: Indiana University Press 1986.
  • Ricoeur, Paul, ‘Time and narrative,’ 2 vols, Chicago: Univerity of Chicago Press 1984.

Web Resources

  • Centre for the Study of Historical Consciousness. The University of British Columbia: http://www.cshc.ubc.ca (last accessed 30.03.2015).
  • Historical Encounters, Journal of historical consciousness, historical culture and history education: http://hej.hermes-history.net (last accessed 30.03.2015).

____________________
[1] The author would like to thank doctoral student Raphaël Gani (rgani011@uottawa.ca) for his insightful comments and feedback on drafts of this article.
[2] J. H. Liu, & D. J. Hilton, “How the Past Weighs on the Present: Social Representations of History and Their Role in Identity Politics,” The British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(2005), 537–556.
[3] W. Grolnick, E. Deci and R. Ryan, “Internalization within the family: The self-determination theory perspective” as quoted in James Wertsch, Voices of collective remembering (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 121.
[4] See P. Seixas (ed.), “Theorizing historical consciousness” (Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2004); J. Rüsen, “History: Narration, interpretation, orientation” (New York, NY: Berghahn Books, 2005); and J. Létourneau, Je me souviens ? Le passé du Québec dans la conscience de sa jeunesse (Montréal, QC: Fides 2014).
[5] Rüsen, History: Narration, interpretation, orientation, 25.
[6] Ricoeur, Time and Narrative, 3.
[7] See B. VanSledright and J. Brophy, “Storytelling, imagination, and fanciful elaboration in children’s historical reconstructions,” American Educational Research Journal, 29 (1992), 837-859; K. Barton, “Narrative simplifications in elementary students’ historical thinking,” in J. Brophy (ed.), “Advances in Research on Teaching,” vol. 6 (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1996), 51-84; D. Shemilt, “The Caliph’s Coin: The currency of narrative frameworks in history teaching,” in P. Seixas, P. Stearns, and S. Wineburg (eds.), “Knowing and teaching history: National and international perspectives” (New York, NY: New York University Press, 2000), 83-101; S. Lévesque, J. Létourneau, and R. Gani. “A Giant with Clay Feet: Québec Students and Their Historical Consciousness of the Nation.” International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and Research 11, 2 (2013); M. Robichaud, “L’histoire de l’Acadie telle que racontée par les jeunes francophones du Nouveau-Brunswick : construction et déconstruction d’un récit historique,” Acadiensis 40, 2 (2011): 33-69 ; and J. Létourneau and S. Moisan, “Mémoire et récit de l’aventure historique du Québec chez les jeunes Québécois d’héritage canadien-français: coup de sonde, amorce d’analyse des résultats, questionnement,” Canadian Historical Review 84, 2 (2004): 325-357.
[8] D. Shemilt, “History 13-16: Evaluation Study” (Edinburgh, UK: Holmes McDougall, 1980), 35.
[9] S. Wineburg, S. Mosborg, D. Porat, and A. Duncan, “Forrest Gump and the future of teaching history,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 2007), 176.
[10] On the importance of the narrative structure for the mind and history, see, for example, B. Hardy, “Narrative as a primary act of mind,” in M. Meek, A. Warlow, and G. Barton, The Cool Web: The pattern of children’s reading (London, UK: Bodley Hean, 1977), 135-141; P. Ricoeur, Time and Narrative, vol. I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983); D. Carr, Time, Narrative and History (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986); and J. Bruner, “Narratives and paradigmatic modes of thought,” in E. Eisner (ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1985), 97-115.

_____________________

Image Credits

© Lesekreis. Wikimedia Commons (public Domain).
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ALibrary_Walk_6.JPG

Recommended Citation

Levesque, Stéphane: Why historical narrative matters? Challenging the stories of the past. In: Public History Weekly 2 (2015) 11, DOI:  dx.doi.org/10.1515/phw-2015-3819.

Copyright (c) 2015 by De Gruyter Oldenbourg and the author, all rights reserved. This work may be copied and redistributed for non-commercial, educational purposes, if permission is granted by the author and usage right holders. For permission please contact: elise.wintz (at) degruyter.com.

The assessments in this article reflect only the perspective of the author. PHW considers itself as a pluralistic debate journal, contributions to discussions are very welcome. Please note our commentary guidelines (https://public-history-weekly.degruyter.com/contribute/).


Categories: 3 (2015) 11
DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1515/phw-2015-3819

Tags: , , ,

3 replies »

  1. Great post’s!

    I agree that prior knowledge and possible alternative narratives are exactly the sweet spots for enriched educational encounters.
    If readers are interested in a way that historical narratives have and can be pedagogically applicable across the grades (in this case with social studies pre service teachers) we have been doing this here at the University of Alberta for years. See both the method and research results at the literature cited.

    References
    den Heyer, K., Abbott, L. (2011) Reverberating echoes: Challenging teacher candidates to tell and learn from entwined narrations of Canadian history Curriculum Inquiry, 41 (5), 610-635.

      1. Lucas Garske is Research Fellow at Georg-Eckert-Institut, Braunschweig (Germany).

      Stèphane, I´m following your research since you had a presentation at our institute and I love the rich research material that you are generating by giving students the appearently simple task to tell the story of their homeland. I also agree that history education can learn a lot from narrativist approaches and that it should challenge students “own” historical narratives.

      I have some considerations with regard to what you write about students typyically compressing the “collective past”: Should we really discuss this as a students issue? Can we claim it is typically compressed (which implicetly means that it can be – even if atypically – uncompressed)? I believe that whatever students do may differ quantitatively, but not qualitativey from what “professional historians” do: they select and exclude. To use Shemilts’ metaphor, students don´t act as if history was like a volcano – it is this volcano. No matter which historical narrative we look at, we will find a highly anachronical structure, full of analepses and prolepses. Of course, we can make students narratives more complex, but I believe that the only reason why we may believe that at some point we turned the volcano into coagulating lava is because it became so complex to us that we are not able to see the hollow spaces and lumps between the particles anymore. Should it be our goal to turn our students into painters of “big pictures”? Maybe. Nonetheless, not everyone’s an artist. At least some should become critics.

      • Replik

        Thank you Lucas for this very thoughtful review of my post and sorry for this long delay. To avoid any confusion here, I agree with you on both counts — that narrative form is imposed not rescued from the past and students’ ideas are no different from adults in many ways.

        What I should have said is that students tend to “oversimplify” the past in narrative. They interpret historical changes as though they involved only the actions and intentions of a few individuals rather than societal structures or collective action. Students also think of the past as taking the form of a relatively linear story (generally one of human progress), with a limited number of characters and a clear sequence of events.

        These depart significantly from what historians do and think about history in their narrative explanations. While both attempt to generate intelligible “big pictures” of the past, students’ ideas typically lack the sophistication needed to understand the complex, polythetical nature of history – and human experiences.

        This is, in my view, what history education should do …

    Pin It on Pinterest

    undefined
    undefined
    undefined
    undefined
    undefined