Investigating Teachers’ Beliefs About Presentism

• In Event: Civic Histories: Learning the Past, Understanding the Present, Possibilizing the Future

Abstract

Purpose
In aligning our work with “unforgetting histories,” we contend that history education researchers must use their expertise to inquire into how teachers make sense of the relationship between past and present. To further this understanding, we investigated history teachers’ beliefs about presentism: whether and how we should apply present-day values, attitudes, and methods to understand the past. Through an exploration of teachers’ beliefs about presentism we aim to shape new approaches to history education better suited for addressing the present and future.

Theoretical Framework
This paper uses Maggioni et al.’s (2009) theoretical framework of three epistemological orientations to history. First, an objectivist stance, in which the past can objectively be known based on evidence found in historical sources. Second, a subjectivist stance, in which history is always an interpretation of the inquirer and is deeply influenced by their context, positionality, and preferences. Third, a criterialist stance in which history is the product of shared methods of inquiry, peer review and the interpretative frameworks of historians.

Methods
This mixed-method study used three procedures. First, we used a survey instrument based in part on Maggioni et al.’s (2009) measures of epistemic cognition, tested and validated in other studies (Elmserjö & Zanazanian, 2024; Stoel et al., 2017). We added survey items developed to identify beliefs about presentism, using a typology developed by Armitage (2023). Second, we used a think aloud protocol (TAP) (Ericsson & Simon, 1998). Participants were asked to ‘think aloud’ in response to a task involving seven documents on a historical controversy. Third, we conducted follow up semi-structured interviews (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009) to triangulate and explore tensions between survey data and TAP data. Survey participants included 139 history and social studies teachers in Canada. 11 of these teachers participated in the TAP and follow up interviews. The three epistemic stances towards history were used as an analytical framework.

Findings
The first finding is that teachers strongly aligned themselves with a criterialist orientation. The teacher participants agreed that history is a critical inquiry into the and that any interpretation produced by this process is contingent and requires evaluation by a community of inquiry using shared standards. A second finding is there is much disagreement among teachers on whether presentism is a problem in historical understanding. This disagreement was focused on analytical presentism, or the practice of using “present-centered” methods, theories, and concepts. The findings reveal a contradiction at the heart of this issue in that teachers demonstrated nuanced beliefs about presentism, yet disagreed strongly about the place and role of presentism in history education

Significance
This research provides insight into the ongoing challenge of presentism in history education. As debates about presentism continue, this research provides evidence-based findings on how teachers are navigating this issue. Findings from this research may be used to support teachers and educational researchers develop more nuanced and complex approaches to historical thinking that respond to critiques of history education as being too focused on disciplinary practices, and not on contemporary problems.

Authors

• James Miles, University of Alberta

• Lindsay S. Gibson, University of British Columbia