New Approaches to Teaching the History of the British Empire

大英帝国历史教学的新方法

• 批准号: ES/Y007948/1
• 负责人: Abigail Branford
• 金额: $ 15.4万
• 依托单位: University of Oxford
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2023
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2023 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FY007948%2F1
• 关键词: New; Approaches; Teaching; History; British

How colonial history should be taught in schools has been the subject of significant public debate in England, a debate which has intensified since the 2020 summer of Black Lives Matter. Traditionally this topic has been taught by listing the 'pros and cons' of the British Empire, a method called 'the balance sheet'. During a period of intense public discussion about the legacy of the British Empire and the polarised opinions this generated, continuing in this tradition was seen as a way of fairly reflecting divided public opinion on an emotive topic. My doctoral research investigated the consequences of this teaching method through surveys and focus groups with students and observing months of history lessons. Splitting colonialism into 'pros' and 'cons' encouraged students to see different aspects of a complex process as entirely separate from each other. For example, students described 'education' as a 'pro' and 'suppressing indigenous cultures' as a 'con'. However, beliefs about which cultures were superior and which cultures should be supressed drove the growth of Western education systems in the British Empire, justified the racial segregation of schools and shaped the content of what students learnt in these schools. A framing of 'pros and cons' prevents students from seeing these interconnections between 'pros' and 'cons'. The balance sheet approach also puts the question of what effects did the British have on other people at the centre of lessons. The only people with agency in that framework are British, while Africans, Asians, Irish and Indigenous peoples of Oceania and the Americas can only appear as victims or beneficiaries of British actions. Lastly, these activities of sorting events into 'pros' and 'cons' also - as one teacher expressing her discomfort put it - "do not compare like with like." For example, worksheets which put 'spread cricket and rugby' as a 'pro' alongside 'the transatlantic slave trade' as a 'con' trivialises a very painful history.I developed a set of recommendations for productive alternatives to balance sheet approaches, e.g. a stronger regional focus would enable greater detail of specific pre- and post-colonial histories, allowing for a wider range of groups to be recognised as shaping the history of these regions. I also describe ways in which using the stories of 'ordinary' individuals can show the interconnections made invisible in balance sheet approaches. An ESRC Postdoctoral Fellowship would enable me to publish my research and recommendations in scholarly journals as well as to present my work to teachers (online and offline) with the aim of stimulating change in teaching practice.England has certainly not been alone in wrestling with questions about how to teach difficult histories of a complex colonial past. An ESRC Postdoctoral Fellowship would enable me to submit well-developed applications to fund a multi-year project which investigates these themes in three further contexts. Different political pressures in Kenya, South Africa and the US have led to policymakers taking action to restructure history curricula and are set to implement these changes within the next two years. However, teachers' voices have not been prioritised in public discussions of these changes and many teachers fear speaking publicly about them, particularly in the US. These forthcoming applications would propose to investigate the origins of these policy changes and their effects as understood by (anonymised) history teachers. I will also draw out their relevance for debates in the English context. Policymakers in England have resisted calls for compulsory changes to history curricula and emphasised the importance of teachers having relative autonomy in how they interpret the national curriculum. A nuanced understanding of how policy interventions in this space have been received by teachers elsewhere can helpfully inform both the DfE and civil society organisations engaged in these debates.

在英格兰，应该如何在学校传授殖民历史，这是一场辩论，这一辩论已经加强了2020年夏天的黑人生活问题。传统上，这个话题是通过列出大英帝国的“利弊”来讲授的，这种方法称为“资产负债表”。在关于大英帝国遗产以及这一产生的两极分化的观点的激烈讨论中，这种传统被视为一种对情感主题进行公众舆论的反映方式。我的博士研究通过与学生的调查和焦点小组一起调查了这种教学方法的后果，并观察了几个月的历史课程。将殖民主义分为“优点”和“缺点”，鼓励学生看到复杂过程的不同方面，完全彼此分开。例如，学生将“教育”描述为“职业”和“抑制土著文化”为“骗局”。但是，关于哪些文化是卓越的信念，以及应予以抑制的文化促进了大英帝国的西方教育体系的发展，证明了学校的种族隔离并塑造了学生在这些学校中学到的知识的内容。 “优点和缺点”的框架使学生无法看到“优点”和“缺点”之间的这些互连。资产负债表的方法还提出了一个问题，即英国人对其他人的中心有什么影响。该框架中唯一具有代理机构的人是英国人，而大洋洲和美洲的非洲人，亚洲人，爱尔兰人和土著人民只能以英国行动的受害者或受益者出现。最后，这些将事件分解为“优点”和“缺点”的活动 - 正如一位表达她不适的老师所说的那样 - “不要像喜欢的那样比较。”例如，将“将板球和橄榄球传播为“ pro”的工作表与“跨大西洋奴隶贸易”并驾齐驱，因为“ con”是一个非常痛苦的历史。更强的区域重点将使特定的殖民历史和后殖民历史更加细节，从而使更广泛的群体被认为塑造了这些地区的历史。我还描述了使用“普通”个人的故事可以显示在资产负债表方法中变得不可见的互连的方式。 ESRC博士后奖学金将使我能够在学术期刊上发表我的研究和建议，并将我的工作介绍给教师（在线和离线），目的是刺激教学实践的变化。England当然并不是一个人曾独自与有关如何教授复杂殖民时期的困难历史的问题。 ESRC博士后奖学金将使我能够提交成熟的申请，以资助一个多年的项目，该项目在三个其他情况下调查了这些主题。肯尼亚，南非和美国的不同政治压力导致决策者采取行动来重组历史课程，并将在未来两年内实施这些变化。但是，在公开讨论这些变化时，教师的声音尚未优先考虑，许多老师害怕公开谈论它们，尤其是在美国。这些即将到来的应用程序将建议研究这些政策变化的起源及其影响（匿名）历史老师所理解的效果。我还将在英语背景下汲取他们与辩论的相关性。英格兰的政策制定者拒绝呼吁对历史课程的强制性改变，并强调教师在解释国家课程方面具有相对自主权的重要性。对其他地方的教师如何收到该领域的政策干预措施的细微了解可以帮助您介绍参与这些辩论的DFE和民间社会组织。