Teaching History in the Digital Age

The image of academic historians dropping like lemmings into an abyss, futilely piling on top of each other in their efforts to translate their craft into classroom lessons is an amusing metaphor. But it is precisely the implication of the language employed in some of this week’s readings.

David Pace hopes to “to bridge the chasm” that he sees between “knowledge of the subject matter, and knowledge of how it may be taught and learned,” while Robert B. Bain examines the problematic pitfall itself in “Into the Breach.” The similarity in usage is likely coincidental, but the authors are clear in identifying the problems they see facing those who both practice and teach history: that while their exists a vast literature about and ample training for the research and production of history, their are not commensurate tools available for translating their knowledge into valuable classroom experiences for their students.

The starting point of these exercises is to encourage educators to think about their role in the classroom. This seems in some ways a tough proposition is some ways for those who both practice and teach history. Often historians teach for a variety of reasons, not all of which are centered around creating the most valuable experience for their students. These can range from economic concerns to a willingness to share research discoveries. However, being a practicing historian can often consume immense amounts of time devoted to research, writing, and professional commitments. As such, the classroom can quickly be displaced from the historian’s focus.

However, there are quite a number of historians who prefer the classroom, and find it an integral part of their professional role. For these people the concerns raised by those examining the processes of teaching and learning history are an important contribution. Moreover, this research stands to benefit even those historians for whom teaching is not a primary focus. By employing the techniques and methods proposed by the scholars we have looked at, they can maximize the impact of the time they spend preparing for and teaching class, even if they are unable or unwilling to increase the time and effort they apply to pedagogical concerns.

An interesting example of something which can easily be implemented to bridge the gap was present in both the essay by Bain and the case study of the Sourcer’s Apprentice. Both articles highlight the importance that student writing can play in encouraging and refining critical thinking. Bain relays how unstructured journal writing, when used in conjunction with guidance on historical analysis and collaborative peer review, can “embed” principles and methods of critical thinking into student activity. Pertinent to our study here, the essay concerning the Sourcer’s Apprentice evaluate the impact that digital mediums can have on this process. The facilitation of document reading and note taking seemed to improve the use of primary sources, an encouraging sign that this was not simply the failed transplantation of expert activity to a novice group of participants that Bain warns against. The recent proliferation of sharing technologies (like this blog!) would seem to further tools like The Sourcer’s Apprentice to encourage critical analysis in a collaborative atmosphere (along Bain’s findings).