Brokers of Multiperspectivity in History Education in Post-Conflict Societies

• In Event: Intervening to Tackle Polarization in and Through Education: What Paradigms, What Merits?

Abstract

Objectives

In post-conflict societies marked by unstable political contexts, teaching about conflicting historical narratives has become a matter of educational urgency. Conversely, a framework for effective teacher training that prepares teachers to facilitate the exchange of multiple perspectives has yet to be identified. This qualitative and exploratory research aims to answer two questions. What boundaries do expert teacher trainers believe that teachers in post-conflict societies encounter when teaching multiperspectivity in the classroom? Which teaching or training methods can teacher trainers use to help reduce the impact of these boundaries?

Theoretical framework

Multiperspectivity in history education is rooted in the epistemological understanding that history is subjective, acknowledging that multiple perspectives can coexist around a “historical topic” (Wansink et al. 2018). Teaching history from multiple perspectives is a known challenge for teachers, especially in post-conflict societies. Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecological Systems Theory can help as an analytical lens to gain insight into the relationship between teachers’ environments and their willingness to tolerate, teach, or learn about multiple perspectives in post conflict societies. By examining each level of Bronfenbrenner’s system, common personal, environmental, or systemic boundaries to activating multiperspectivity in post-conflict classrooms can be identified.

Methods

Experts associated with the European Association of History Educators (EuroClio) were selected and invited to participate in this study for their extensive experience in teaching history, teacher training, or educational consulting. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted, and the expert’s statements were openly and axially coded according to Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecological Systems Theory. For each system level we first analyzed what prevents teachers from teaching history from multiple perspectives. Secondly, which teaching methods were mentioned by the experts to successfully overcome these boundaries.

Results

Ten personal and environmental boundaries to brokering multiperspectivity were identified and categorized according to their position in the post-conflict system and their impact on the teacher (Figure 1). In relation to the Exosystem, teachers can be hindered by the curriculum, the politicization of history education, or the media. For the Mesosystem, community related factors such as parents or religious institutions can constrain teachers through their impact on the Microsystem. The Microsystem is composed of fellow colleagues and students, whose negative reactions to multiperspectivity can directly impact a teacher’s capacity and willingness to activate multiperspectivity in the classroom. Finally, on a personal level, for history teachers to successfully teach multiperspectivity they may need to learn how to cope with emotional discomfort, grow their tolerance for ambiguity or develop a critical understanding of history as a science. Based on our interviews we distinguished two main teacher training approaches to help teachers to overcome these boundaries: Project-based and Inquiry-based Learning. In both approaches our identified boundaries must be actively addressed.

Scientific or scholarly significance of the study

This study provides actionable recommendations for educators, non-governmental organizations, and educational scientists. The model proposed in this study can be used to evaluate a post-conflict system’s readiness for multiperspectivity or a road map for planning effective teacher trainings that target all levels of the teachers’ system.

Authors

• Devon Abbey, Groningen Institute for Educational Research

• Björn Wansink, Utrecht University