Thematic structuring concepts in history lessons

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thematic structuring concepts are forms of representation of history or patterns of narrative or didactic linking of historical objects. They form the basic elements of any past presentation and are therefore also fundamental in the conception, implementation and reflection of history lessons .

When it comes to the question of how historical objects can be presented as topics in history lessons and how they can be accessed, the methodology of history didactics contains several "thematic structuring concepts" that deal with this problem. When classifying these content-related concepts in a methodology of history teaching , as provided by Hilke Günther-Arndt , it should be pointed out more strongly that the level of teaching methodological structuring is upstream of the level that includes the content-related structuring. When deciding in favor of problem-oriented history lessons, the choice of a form of presentation of the content-related structuring concepts seems more important than the decision in favor of a form of historical cognitive methods, but this does not necessarily have to be ruled out. The official guidelines for the subject of history require that several of these concepts be applied in one school year and that at the same time the pupils should be shown their performance and limits in a reflective way. Hans-Jürgen Pandel points out that these types of representation are not an invention of history didactics, but rather basic methods of historical science that are used in history lessons. In history didactics, the division into thematic structuring concepts was done for the first time in detail by Heinz Dieter Schmid . For the few authors who have dealt with the content-related structuring, this classification has remained a key model and template for modifications made to this day. More recent work on this topic has been done by Sauer , Pandel, and Barricelli. The structuring concepts are briefly presented below. Most of the work is based on Schmid's classification.

The proceedings

The genetic-chronological procedure

The core of the genetic-chronological procedure is the actual representation of historical events in their chronological order, whereby a thematic object is examined from its origin to the corresponding final state. With this method of representation, causal relationships between the chronologically successive components of a historical object are brought into focus, whereby the interaction between cause and result can be explained. Due to the risk that this procedure could induce one to reduce the historical subject to data and facts as well as to the history of compulsive processes, without leaving enough space for problematization and questions leading to knowledge, it is emphasized that the choice of this procedure for history lessons is good should be thought through and critically reflected.

The longitudinal section

The procedure of the longitudinal section emphasizes that epochs and universal historical periods are examined for comparable characteristics with regard to a certain partial aspect. The aim here is to make it possible to experience that thematic objects can certainly be distinguished in the historical analysis by changeability in their most diverse factors. The preference of this form of representation is justified in its relation to the present. Numerous problems related to the present can be historically processed, explained and understood through the historical longitudinal section. In addition, it is emphasized that by choosing this method for teaching, large temporal dimensions of history can be bridged quickly and history can be experienced in its “depths”. The risk that individual problems or phenomena can be explained too simply by considering them in isolation from their structural contexts should be considered when choosing this method for teaching.

The structuring process

With regard to the structuring process, it is emphasized that, in contrast to the epoch cross-section, the focus is on highlighting the vertical multilayered nature of the facts. For example, an epoch can be examined from the point of view of its typical structure-forming elements, whereby the static is often in the foreground with this form of representation. In addition, this form is suitable for socially integrative as well as interdisciplinary lessons , as social science categories and questions are applied to historical phenomena. This method is suitable for group work or project-based history lessons , as several elements of a specific issue should be worked out from different aspects.

The case analysis

In this method, a historical event or a process of a thematic object is selected and examined as an exemplary case precisely and in a fine-cut manner. The case should be strictly limited temporally and regionally. This example can be used in great detail to examine special aspects and structures under the microscope. Following the case analysis, it is important to return to general aspects of the thematic subject. A content-related orientation phase should already have preceded it ("rule-example-rule" principle). The selected examples must be key events that are particularly relevant and contain as many topic and epoch-typical features as possible. When a case can be representative in its exemplary relevance, how many dimensions of the historical categories it addresses and how many can be addressed, is the fundamental question to be asked in each case. There will certainly never be a “pure case”. Another danger that is mentioned is the insistence on certain details that degenerate the accuracy of the analysis into pedantry. The best known and most widespread form of case analysis is the “local model” (e.g. industrialization or the Reformation in the city or region X), but also conflict (e.g. weaver uprising ) and event analyzes (e.g. storming the Bastille ) offer themselves as key events or epoch-typical events for case analysis.

The comparative procedure

In the comparative procedure, various aspects of the dimensions of historical perception of two historical phenomena that are located on a temporally or regionally different level are systematically compared with one another (intertemporal / interregional). Structures (family, constitution, rule, city), processes (revolutions, state formation), epochal tendencies (capitalism, socialism) but also aspects such as the treatment of minorities, educational principles, nutrition and many others are suitable for a comparison. As a procedure, the comparison does not differ from the other types of procedures, since one or more procedures must first be integrated in the preparation of the comparison, the systematic analysis of each individual historical phenomenon. The subject is worked out either according to the principle of longitudinal section, cross-section, case analysis, etc. A distinction is made between two types of comparison. Firstly, the "contrasting" should provide insight into the differences between two phenomena and, secondly, the "generalization" or "generalization" should show similarities. The procedure can help that historical dimensions of the perceptions, categories and key concepts are recognized as such and that meaningful concept, model and theories are promoted. The danger of the procedure is seen above all in a generalization that is too fast, strong and unreflected. One conclusion would thus amount to a generalization based on hypotheses. But the benefit of contrasting is also questionable if a corresponding systematic analysis is not used.

The individualizing or biographical procedures

The individualizing or biographical procedures set very different priorities in the processing of an object. So it seems necessary that these are more clearly separated from each other than sub-forms of other procedural forms.

The socio-biographical procedure

The socio-biographical procedure is a form of exemplary case analysis in which an individual or a group is placed in the center of attention. On the basis of a biography it should be possible to draw generalizable conclusions about social structures in society. Basic time-typical and class-specific habitus, political positions and life situations should be recognizable in the example. Advantages and disadvantages coincide with those of case analysis (depth, concreteness / pedantry, “pure case”) and comparison (creation of categories, generalization / generalization). In addition, the empathy of the students is specifically addressed. The “personifying” procedure, which was developed by Klaus Bergmann , is a special form of the socio-biographical procedure in which no real personalities are used, but extracts and aspects of invented biographies. This use of fictitious biographies is used because no biographies and text sources have survived, especially from underprivileged strata of different epochs.

The personalizing process

The personalizing procedure is also a form of the biographical procedure and case analysis, but is very close to the genetic-chronological procedure in terms of an event-historical perspective. The actions of the observed person or group are closely related to their importance for the “course” of history as a whole and are the focus here. The process was considered frowned upon for a long time, since since the 1960s the set of actions and its structures had moved into the focus of historical studies and history didactics, thus distancing oneself from personalizing historiography. Increasingly, however, attempts are being made again to regard the importance of individual persons and their actions as a “quantity” in historical studies and to place them in a balanced relation and weighting to contextual interdependencies and structural conditions.

The perspective-ideology-critical procedure

This procedure aims at a critically reflective examination of the representation of history. The focus here is not on sources that are contemporary and original to the historical object, but on forms of representation that take on the object retrospectively and remembering. Mostly these are written representations such as newspapers, school books or speeches, but also others such as pictures and monuments. These representations then become the actual sources for the pupils, from which they should recognize possible ideological and political tints and intentions of the author, which shape his view of history, taking into account known and in-depth methods of historical knowledge processes. The quality and "objectivity" of the representations should be better recognized in the specific case and, above all, in the future, but also possible limits to the establishment of truth in historical studies should be outlined.

literature

  • Michele Barricelli: Thematic Structuring Concepts . In: Hilke Günther-Arndt (Hrsg.): Geschichtsmethodik. Handbook for secondary level I and II . Berlin 2007, pp. 46-62.
  • Hilke Günther-Arndt : Methodology of History Lessons. In: Hilke Günther-Arndt (Hrsg.): Geschichtsdidaktik. Practical handbook for secondary level I and II . Berlin 2003, pp. 151-196.
  • Hans-Jürgen Pandel : Didactic presentation principles. An old fact in a new light. In: Markus Bernhardt u. a. (Ed.): Images - Perceptions - Constructions. Reflections on history and historical learning . Schwalbach 2006, pp. 152-168.
  • Michael Sauer : Teaching History. An introduction to didactics and methodology . Seelze 2006.
  • Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. In: Joachim Rohlfes, Karl-Ernst Jeismann (Hrsg.): History lessons. Content and goals . Stuttgart 1974, pp. 53-64.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. The terminology for this procedure comes from Michele Barricelli. Different terms are used by other authors. In the following, Barricelli's term will be used because it seems clearer and more appropriate to describe the procedure. The following outline of the individual procedures in the main part is based on the terminology of Heinz Dieter Schmid.
  2. Hilke Günther-Arndt : Methodology of History Lessons . In the same (ed.): Geschichtsdidaktik. Practical handbook for secondary level I and II . Berlin 2003, p. 158.
  3. Hilke Günther-Arndt : Methodology of History Lessons . In the same (ed.): Geschichtsdidaktik. Practical handbook for secondary level I and II . Berlin 2003, p. 159.
  4. Hans-Jürgen Pandel : Didactic presentation principles. An old fact in a new light. In: Markus Bernhardt u. a. (Ed.): Images - Perceptions - Constructions. Reflections on history and historical learning . Schwalbach 2006, p. 153.
  5. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. In: Joachim Rohlfes, Karl-Ernst Jeismann (Hrsg.): History lessons. Content and goals . Stuttgart 1974, pp. 53-64.
  6. Michael Sauer : Teaching history. An introduction to didactics and methodology . Seelze 2006.
  7. Hans-Jürgen Pandel : Didactic presentation principles. Pp. 152-168.
  8. ^ Michele Barricelli: Thematic Structuring Concepts . In: Hilke Günther-Arndt (Hrsg.): Geschichtsmethodik. Handbook for secondary level I and II . Berlin 2007, pp. 46-62.
  9. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. Pp. 53-54.
  10. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 54.
  11. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. Pp. 54-55.
  12. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 55.
  13. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P.56.
  14. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. Pp. 56-57.
  15. ^ A b Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 57.
  16. a b c Hilke Günther-Arndt : Methodology of history teaching. P. 162.
  17. a b c d e Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 58.
  18. a b Hans-Jürgen Pandel : Didactic presentation principles. P. 164.
  19. Hans-Jürgen Pandel : Didactic presentation principles. P. 163.
  20. Hilke Günther-Arndt : Methodology of History Lessons. P. 166.
  21. ^ Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 59f.
  22. ^ Michele Barricelli: Thematic Structuring Concepts . P. 61.
  23. ^ Michele Barricelli: Thematic Structuring Concepts . P. 60.
  24. ^ Michele Barricelli: Thematic Structuring Concepts . P. 60 f.
  25. ^ A b c Heinz Dieter Schmid : Procedures in history lessons. P. 60.