Formal Learning About the Past in Schools in England

Formal Learning About the Past in Schools in England Mike Corbishley, University College London Institute of Archaeology, London, UK E-mail: RESEARCH Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress (Ó 2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-019-09365-8 Sarah Dhanjal, University College London Institute of Archaeology, London, UK ABSTRACT ________________________________________________________________ This paper explains how archaeology has been used to teach history to children in English schools, museums and heritage sites. We describe six successful schools-linked projects then focuses on the Young Archaeologists’ Club, which has over the past 40 years nurtured many members of today’s archaeology professionals. Finally, we consider how archaeology education practitioners can use what has been learnt in those projects to plan for a sustainable future. ________________________________________________________________ Résumé: Cet article explique comment en Angleterre l’archéologie sert à enseigner l’histoire dans les écoles, les musées et les sites du patrimoine. Il décrit six projets, puis se concentre sur le Club des Jeunes Archéologues, qui depuis quarante ans a formé des élèves qui exercent maintenant la profession d’archéologue. La conclusion tire de ces projets quelques leçons pour l’avenir. ________________________________________________________________ Resumen: Este artı́culo explica cómo en Inglaterra la arqueologı́a se usa para enseñar historia en escuelas, museos y sitios del patrimonio. Describe seis proyectos y luego se enfoca en el Young Archaeologists Club, que durante cuarenta años ha capacitado a estudiantes que ahora practican arqueologı́a. La conclusión extrae de estos proyectos algunas lecciones para el futuro. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Archaeology, Education, School curriculum, Informal learning, Evidence, Excavation, Objects _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ó 2019 The Author(s) ARCHAEOLOGIES KEY WORDS MIKE CORBISHLEY, SARAH DHANJAL Introduction One of the most significant indicators of the place of archaeology in education is the position it is assigned by the government in the school curriculum. Archaeology has become an accepted part of studying history in English schools since 1988 with the introduction of a National Curriculum. Museums, art galleries and archives responded quickly to the new opportunities and started by addressing the needs of families and pre-school children. The Museum of London’s Our Londinium project, for example, enabled young people to co-curate displays with objects, films and poems they created (Museum of London 2017). The museum worked with organisations such as an adolescent mental health unit, a young offenders’ unit and a group working with unemployed young people. Between 2012 and 2015 over 150 young people, aged 16–21, took part in this project. Background In 1972 the Schools History Project was created to provide courses for schools with textbooks and packs of source material for use in English classrooms. The project ‘‘challenged the view of history as a ‘received subject’ which had dominated since 1900. Pupils were ‘to do’ history, not merely to receive it’’ (Sylvester, 1994: 16). Archaeological and heritage organisations, such as the Council for British Archaeology and English Heritage followed with their own programs, projects and resources (Corbishley 2011: 83–94). The National Curriculum of 1988 The stimulus for using primary source material in schools was the introduction of a statutory National Curriculum with the passing of the Education Reform Act of 1988. However, there was some delay in publication because of controversy over the recommendations of the working groups; history was the most controversial and the statutory Order for History was only published in 1991. This long process saw fierce criticism, bullying and interference by politicians, pressure groups and the press (Graham and Tytler 1993; Corbishley 1999, 2011, Cannadine et al. 2011). There was also criticism from teachers. All of this brought about revisions in 1994, 1999, 2007 and 2013 which largely meant ‘‘slimming down’’. Despite the controversies, the National Curriculum brought about many changes in the way in which teachers, in both primary and secondary schools, set about providing opportunities for their pupils for ‘‘doing’’ his- Formal Learning About the Past in Schools tory in school, in the museum, and at monuments and historic buildings. The 1999 history curriculum had two sections. The first, called ‘‘Knowledge, skills and understanding’’, had five areas specifying what had to be taught at each stage in school: 1. ‘‘Chronological understanding’’—that is, putting events, people, places in periods, using dates and correct terminology; 2. ‘‘Knowledge and understanding of events, people and changes in the past’’—that is, features of different periods and societies, changes over time; 3. ‘‘Historical interpretation’’—that is, recognising the different ways the past has been and is being interpreted; 4. ‘‘Historical enquiry’’—that is, using a range of sources to enquire about the past, asking questions, selecting and recording information, including using objects and visits outside the classroom; 5. ‘‘Organisation and communication’’—that is, organising historical information, using historical vocabulary and communicating in a variety of ways. The second part, called ‘‘Breadth of study’’, specified which periods of history should be studied, covering British history, both local and national, from the coming of the Romans to the twentieth century. There were also some requirements to study European and World cultures (DfEE/QCA 1999, 2004). The New National Curriculum of 2013 The loudest and longest protests about the National Curriculum came from serving school teachers who felt overburdened by paperwork, testing pupils, and the imposition of government regulations, which got in the way of what the curriculum was supposed to be about—pupils being given the opportunity to learn about subjects rather than teachers just teaching them. Archaeologists, and museum and heritage educators felt that the frequent revisions from 1999 to 2007 simply watered down the evidencebased learning about the past. They deeply resented the fact that the prehistory of Britain was not included in England’s original National Curriculum History, while it remained an important part of history curricula elsewhere in the United Kingdom (in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland). In 2013 the curriculum was revised again and it now begins at primary level with prehistoric Britain and finishes with the post-World War II period for secondary schools (DfE 2013). Local history and world history MIKE CORBISHLE (...truncated)