High Dive Teaching

A regular at SHP is the HMI national adviser for History – what would we do without him? He’s very generous with his time and always shares useful and insightful things. I fear I never spell his name correctly, though.

It turns out Michael is a fan of the 18th century, having taught it at ks3, o level and a level.

We look at some political cartoons to begin with and consider the way historical figures have been characterised in them.

Michael’s slides will be available on the SHP website and it’s all about history in schools. It’s a very mixed bag. In primary, history is better taught when taught discretely. Knowledge is episodic and chronological understanding is shaky. H shares an example from a primary school who are attempting an enquiry based system, showing real willingness to engage with the pedagogy, and pleads with is to develop closer links with feeder schools, which is timely because we are off to a feeder school on Tuesday afternoon to teach a master class to year 6.

At secondary level, history is a success story: well taught and well led. Attainment is high and entries are rising.

I do love this graph and it is always worth looking at again. The 2013 data will show an even greater increase. The picture is the same for A level. Something is definitely going well, no matter what the headlines say.

But, issues. Non-specialist teaching – 28% with no relevant degree. Change to two year key stage three, or competencies. Reduction in teaching time. Insufficient emphasis on analytical and discursive writing development: too much descriptive and creative writing. Poor planning for progression – tying in nicely with Ian and Richard’s session from earlier. Misuse of levels of attainment. The failure of some subject leaders to provide a rationale (ditto). History has become marginalised; standards are too variable and progress is not fast enough.

We critique a two year key stage three program of study. Someone comments that the chronology is all over the place – do people really think that teaching units in chronological order helps them to understand chronology better? I don’t.

Michael talks about all/most/some and says it is a huge cop out in terms of differentiation, and his colleagues in other subjects agree. This is partly because it creates homogenised groups; the associated descriptors are often trite.

Re: one year GCSE – apparently heads get students to take both history and geography in one year and take the best grade for ebacc. Horrifying! We whizz through our GCSE course to be ready for revision by January of year 11 but I don’t think we could go any quicker.

Onto highly effective teaching. Good subject expertise, rigorous enquiry, good historical thinking and understanding, solid assessment. Michael bypasses the skills vs knowledge debate with barely a raised eyebrow in its direction. Developing historical thinking: Michael uses an example from a primary school where they study Samuel Pepys and are able to develop an understanding of that uncertainty in history (case studies available on Ofsted website when they have finished being reviewed, along with all other documentation, to check they don’t promulgate a particular teaching style, in line with Wilshaw’s wishes).

I’m a bit distracted by this news for a moment and by the time I get back to concentrating we are considering data which shows GCSE outcomes for SEN, ethnic groups and FSM, as well as breaking down entries by area – there are more in the east of England than anywhere else, for example. Links are expressed between history and English, and the importance of better literacy.

What can the inspectorate do for you?
There’s a dedicated subject page on the Ofsted website. There are lots of case studies there, and a training resource to use in subject meetings with some helpful questions to ask.

The new key stage three offers lots of opportunities. Can you sign up to the spirit of it? – even if you don’t agree with the way the content or aims are expressed.

Some ideas about challenges. A movement away from what we teach but instead how we teach it – we need to plug into modern scholarship much more.

We are invited to email Michael with answers to this question by Easter, so he can use the information anonymously in his session at the HA in May.

Michael shows us the seven myths of Ofsted’s view on history teaching to finish, and a clip from Horrible Histories – Born to Rule by the Four Georges.

Diana Laffin presenting on A level teaching, using a study of Lloyd George. Diana sets us a starter task of look at a statue of him being unveiled by Prince Charles in Parliament Square and asking us to guess when it was unveiled. Turns out it was in 2007 and it’s an interesting interpretations exercise to consider what other statues there are in Parliament Square and when they were put there.

Is Lloyd George Britain’s best PM? He had a lot of impact on normal people. He made a great speech when he said that the cost of running a duke is equivalent to two dreadnoughts. He had a film made about him during his lifetime – the first one.
Why did it take so long for him to get a statue, then?

We begin with an art exhibition of images of Lloyd George, from which we must make inferences about him. This helps students to pose questions about him – we generate some of these and share them. Diana uses the questions to help plan the enquiry, using some of them as research homeworks.

Now, onto pants! You can choose the big safety pants: cover everything in extreme detail, fill in the blanks study packs full of exam criteria. They keep management happy and make you feel safe but will they encourage and enthuse your students? Sometimes the sexy pants have to come out to solve this problem: student-led learning, lots of random sources etc.

Most able students. Diana shares her definition of a gifted historian – this would go nicely in the front of the assessment booklet we are planning to make up for our sixth form students.

Should we bombard with past questions in case they come up? Diana says that the problem of doing this is that students might go into the exam and see a question they think they’ve done before, and regurgitate the answer, only there is a subtle difference in date or focus and they won’t do very well. So, it’s important to teach them the skills of applying the knowledge to different questions.

Diana shares some readings she gives out for homework. She differentiates readings among her students and in the next lesson the form seminar groups to discuss the learning from the articles and then come to a developed judgement at the end – not a conclusion, because there are always variations, qualifications, developments on those judgements. We discuss the different readings and come up with an answer to the question, “Why does he have a statue there and why did it take so long?”

Diana recommends moving as much knowledge acquisition as possible outside of lessons. She suggests calling it “prep” and shows us a log sheet for students to complete about their readings, which she backs up with positive reinforcement by lavishing time and interest on students who do the reading. One in three lessons is a seminar style lesson such as the one we modelled in today’s session. Think this would work especially well with the year 13 students.

We return to the question. Diana enthuses about the History of Stamps book she receives recently, which she says she did not expect to find so interesting. We look at a stamp of Lloyd George, depicting him as a young man. We return to the film, which was a huge and expensive project, directed by Maurice Elvey. Unfortunately it was rubbished by a commentator who wrote that it was made by nasty immigrants (children of Jewish refugees) so Lloyd George bought everything to do with it, at a cost of £20,000, and it wasn’t released until 1996 when a descendant came across the materials. It is very useful to watch as an interpretations exercise, although it can be a challenging process.

Supporting the rest. Encourage self review and make it clear that everyone benefits from identifying and acknowledging things they can improve. Make literacy big – key terms and vocabulary at the heart of your study. Here have been some lunchtime support sessions but they are not always popular and can put students off continuing with their study of the subject. The results of Diana’s study of what works with support showed that students like to feel supported – worksheets and readings and all that can only go so far, but it is the fluffy, supportive environment that they appreciate the most.

Ian Dawson and Richard McFahn giving us some advice for planning our new course based on the new NC. 75 minutes of gallop!

We start with the Corn Laws, which have disappeared from the draft NC (or “the February document”). We have a little role play, beginning with considering how important bread was in the 19th century. Ian likens it to electricity today and I half remember a statistic I heard, somewhere, that suggested 80% of what British people consumed was grain based at this time – bread, beer etc. French wheat is half the price of British wheat, but buying it will have a very negative impact on employment of farm labourers, who make up at least half the population at this time. British farmers voted, so British politicians made the Corn Laws, putting the price of French wheat up higher than British. Food prices went up, and in times of bad harvest this had a terrible impact on normal people, who felt angry, resentful, bitter – and hungry. But, without the vote, nothing could change – and here is the crux of it. It’s worth teaching about the Corn Laws as a lead in to explaining the emphasis put on getting the vote at this time: it was about feeding the family. We consider the impact of the various reform acts with people standing up to show increase in voters – from 1/25 in 1830 to 1.5/25 in 1832 to 2.5/25 in 1866 and 8/25 by 1884. The pace of change was extremely slow, and people were willing to fight and to die for it, because it boils down to needing to feed the family.

Don’t shy away from topics like political reform which you might consider difficult to teach. If it’s historically significant, don’t back off, but keep trying until you find the way in. If students care about the topic, eg by explaining that it was about food, they will be more engaged with things like the reform acts.

Richard McFahn now talks about longer term considerations. We discuss possible themes for reorganising the curriculum, and he suggests ideas and beliefs, power, people’s lives and warfare and empire. Like this idea because it could be the framework on which we tie each of the units we teach across key stage three and allow students to make links between them. Richard points out that we need to think about how we are going to ensure our students get better at historical thinking, or planning for progression in their conceptual understanding. Richard shares some work with Hants history teachers on progression in interpretation:

These were then planned into the key stage three curriculum to show when skills will be revisited and introduced (italics show a revisit)

We consider knowledge takeaways from key stage three studies, thinking about the key things that we want students to take away with them to help them think about the patterns that emerge from individual events. This is vital and can also help to take the pressure off history teachers to teach certain events in too much detail. Richard shares some documents suggesting content from each time period that might fit into the themes that he has suggested.

Ian comes back with heaven, hell and purgatory. He reminds us that in the 1300s people saw purgatory as a very real place. He references Helen Castor’s recent series on BBC4 which covered birth, marriage and death. We look at the various ways that people could shorten their time in purgatory and consider what various people might have done based on their experiences. A lot of townspeople left money for civic improvements – Dick Whittington, for example, bequeathed the money for a 200 seater toilet to be built in London after his death. The focus is on getting across the idea that most people would get to heaven but the time it took to get there varied depending on wealth, class, devoutness etc. Every Rose Has Its Thorn, after all. What impact did this have on society – were they more selfish, or more caring and sharing? This sort of role play helps students to care more about the topics.

Richard’s back to remind us of the importance of sticking to our principals as history teachers. He goes back over the SHP principals and invites us to consider the rationale of our course planning. This will vary from context to context. We discuss a variety of statements about planning the curriculum to help us come up with our rationale for doing this. SHP advocates an enquiry based approach, only partly because that is the advice from Michael Madison, History HMI. Richard goes through the stages:
1. Create curiosity. Perhaps get students to think about being on an archaeological dig and what they might want to ask about their findings (use a picture to show the dig) dripping in bits of background knowledge to help them consider what’s happening. Students then try to come up with their own enquiry question and this leads to…
2. Suggest a hypothesis. In this case we consider why 50,000 skeletons were found buried under Charterhouse Square. The first suggestion is Plague, though they were buried in neat rows so I’m not sure about this. Richard suggests a line of certainty, asking students to place themselves somewhere along it to show how sure they are. We look at some clues which indicate it was indeed the Black Death, but that doesn’t explain why there are so many of them. Tis generates another question and then the cycle begins again.

Ian reminds us that in history, it’s ok the be uncertain, but this is not a natural state for children so it needs to be reinforced. Ian then talks us through doing an overview of 1547-1700. Catholics on the left, Puritans on the right, “normal” people in the middle. What do they all fear? Purgatory again! He suggests a living happiness graph where students react to changes that took place in the church over the time period. There’d be very little information, because the idea is to give an overview. It’s not necessarily achievable to expect children, at the age of 12, to take away a great deal of detail about the religious reforms in the 16th century.

We begin with a welcome from Ria, at the British Library, and details of the Georgians exhibition currently taking place here: Georgians Revealed: Life, Style and the Making of Modern Britain.

She hands over to Michael Riley who explains that the theme of the conference is Changing School History and that there are 130 delegates here today, including 40 trainee teachers and a number of primary colleagues preparing to teach the new NC. He talks about the importance of the 18th century, and the big changes that took place in that century, and how it’s quite exciting that its being taught again, as a preface to Alison Kitson’s keynote on this topic. Having been reading about the growth of the British Empire, particularly in the 17th and 19th century, this is very timely because I have been wondering what fits into the gap.

Alison’s title is Manners, Morality and the Middling Sort: why it’s valuable AND fun to teach about the 18th century in schools.

1. Why study the eighteenth century?
We begin with a quote from Amanda Vickery, considering the features of the 18th century that she is trying to express.

When was the 18th century? Vickery expresses it as the period between the Glorious Revolution to the Great Reform Act. Others end it in 1801 or 1789 with the French Revolution. The new NC splits it in half, still. What to call it – the Georgians? The Hanoverians? The Century of Taste? More importantly, is it modern or early modern? Alison says she thinks it’s on the cusp of modernity. Is it taught in schools? Aspects, yes – Bolton and Watt, Wilberforce, canals and turnpikes…. But not as a whole.

Alison makes a good case for why we should teach the 18th century:

Personally, other than its place in the growth of the British Empire, I’m interested in the impact of revolutions abroad. What was Britain like for John Bull before the authorities lived in terror of being overthrown? Was it the same? I tend to think of the 19th century as rife with perceived sedition and excessive reaction to political agitation, and now I wonder whether that was the same in the 18th century.

2. Engaging with subject knowledge
Alison recommends some background reading –

We consider themes from Vickery – leisure, change and continuity etc

Nuggets! We are reminded of Jamie Byrom’s advice to look in the footnotes. Alison’s 18th century nugget is their obsession with roast beef. A song, The Roast Beef of Old England, was written at this time and is still played in army mess halls today.

3. Wrestling with the enquiry
We consider possible questions.

I like number 2 and think there would be a lot one could use with this; it would also be excellent training for students to prepare for that difficult “How useful is this source?” GCSE question in really glorious detail. I also like number 8 because it ties together several things – the acquisition of India and Hong Kong for the Empire, and the Great Reform Act (I serve Earl Grey when I teach this lesson). Ian Dawson suggests adjusting 14 to read “How sick were the Georgians?”

Alison has handily picked tea drinking as her focus for today.

This is essentially a change and continuity focus.

4. Exploiting the particular
The particular here revolves around tea.

Who? We consider a painting: An English Family at Tea. Catherine Briganza (no idea of the spelling or, indeed, accuracy of that name) introduced tea to Britain in the 17th century, mainly for the wealthy. By the 18th century the middle classes were growing and they would often drink tea and did go in for the taking tea ritual as a social construct, copying the paper classes.

The Middling Sort were definitely on the rise, thanks to huge wealth growth among financiers and merchants – the Bank of England was founded, food prices fell… A tripartite class system was developing and the lower classes didn’t drink tea. Women had a role within this and this gave them some power because most of that, for women, derived from social networking. Middle class women had a few more opportunities, in jobs as diverse as plumbing and cook book writing. There was some equality within marriage but attitudes were still very sexist.

Where? The rapid growth of towns – the population of London doubles in this century, for example – brought new buildings and infrastructure, which made them pleasant places to live. To begin with tea leaves were not sold privately and so tea could only be drunk in public. We look at a Cruikshank painting of a coffee house (comparing Cruikshank with Hogarth sounds like something my year 8s would enjoy). As soon as the tea leaves became available at home the idea of “the visit” becomes important. We look at a picture of a morning tea visit which Alison got from the British Museum high-quality image service, which she recommends highly.

Love the hats! Home visiting made one’s taste in decorating, clothing and possessions really important, as well as owning one’s own home. The tea ritual gave people an opportunity to show off.

How did it get here? Clear links available here with the British Empire growth, as well as the development of transportation in England. Roads were improved which had an enormous impact on consumerism and trade. A canal system was developed as well.

Who didn’t drink tea? We look at Hogarth’s Gin Lane. Tea, and sugar, were very expensive and so people without money didn’t drink it. Although the Middling Sort were becoming much wealthier thanks to all the trade, the wealth gap was growing because the lower classes didn’t share any of this new wealth – a phenomenon which led to huge growth in memberships of friendly societies and over 300 strikes. Gin was cheaper than tea and this led to problems of alcoholism. We also look at Beer Street, and a slave trade abolitionist token. Slaves were involved with tea at a distance and slavery underpinned the increase in wealth, but did not drink tea.

Tea taste? Alison explains again that taste among the Georgians was paramount. There was a lot of paraphernalia surrounding the tea ritual – china, tea pot, kettles, tea tables…

This was great! Totally enthused.