Exploring differential effects of an intervention on historical inquiry tasks: a qualitative analysis of 12th-grade students’ progress

M. Wilke, F. Depaepe, Karel Van Nieuwenhuyse
{"title":"Exploring differential effects of an intervention on historical inquiry tasks: a qualitative analysis of 12th-grade students’ progress","authors":"M. Wilke, F. Depaepe, Karel Van Nieuwenhuyse","doi":"10.14324/herj.20.1.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multiple-documents-based (inquiry) tasks are often used to examine historical thinking, as they require students to apply discipline-specific ways of reasoning and writing. Intervention studies using such tasks have often relied on principles from cognitive apprenticeship to make these discipline-specific heuristics explicit to students. While several studies have found positive results, they offer little insight into how and where exactly students’ progress on historical thinking manifests itself, nor into the differential effects of the intervention. Building on essay data gathered during an intervention study on students’ historical inquiry skills, this study explores differential effects of the intervention according to students’ initial historical inquiry ability. To this end, a purposeful sample of students was selected for whom the intervention was particularly effective. The qualitative analysis of students’ essay tasks (pretest and posttest) revealed remarkable differences between students with high and low pretest scores. Although both groups made progress on all aspects of the essay task, they differed in terms of where and how this progress manifested itself: at posttest, students with a high initial score outperformed others in evaluating sources and rebuttals. This study offers insight into patterns of progress in students’ historical inquiry skills which can inform differentiation in instructional practices.","PeriodicalId":409544,"journal":{"name":"History Education Research Journal","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Education Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/herj.20.1.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multiple-documents-based (inquiry) tasks are often used to examine historical thinking, as they require students to apply discipline-specific ways of reasoning and writing. Intervention studies using such tasks have often relied on principles from cognitive apprenticeship to make these discipline-specific heuristics explicit to students. While several studies have found positive results, they offer little insight into how and where exactly students’ progress on historical thinking manifests itself, nor into the differential effects of the intervention. Building on essay data gathered during an intervention study on students’ historical inquiry skills, this study explores differential effects of the intervention according to students’ initial historical inquiry ability. To this end, a purposeful sample of students was selected for whom the intervention was particularly effective. The qualitative analysis of students’ essay tasks (pretest and posttest) revealed remarkable differences between students with high and low pretest scores. Although both groups made progress on all aspects of the essay task, they differed in terms of where and how this progress manifested itself: at posttest, students with a high initial score outperformed others in evaluating sources and rebuttals. This study offers insight into patterns of progress in students’ historical inquiry skills which can inform differentiation in instructional practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探究干预对历史探究任务的差异效应:对12年级学生进步的定性分析
基于多个文档的(探究)任务通常用于检查历史思维,因为它们要求学生应用特定学科的推理和写作方式。使用这些任务的干预研究通常依赖于认知学徒的原则,使这些特定学科的启发式对学生明确。虽然有几项研究发现了积极的结果,但它们几乎没有深入了解学生在历史思维方面的进步是如何以及在哪里表现出来的,也没有深入了解干预的不同效果。基于对学生历史探究技能的干预研究中收集的论文数据,本研究探讨了根据学生最初的历史探究能力进行干预的不同效果。为此,我们选择了一个有目的的学生样本,对他们来说,干预特别有效。对学生作文任务(前测和后测)的定性分析显示,前测分数高的学生和后测分数低的学生之间存在显著差异。尽管两组学生在写作任务的各个方面都取得了进步,但他们在进步表现的地方和方式上有所不同:在后期测试中,初始得分高的学生在评估资料来源和反驳方面的表现优于其他学生。这项研究提供了对学生历史探究技能进步模式的洞察,这可以为教学实践中的差异化提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Designing historical empathy learning experiences: a pedagogical tool for history teachers Four design principles for student learning of substantive historical concepts – a realistic review study School trips to historical sites: students’ cognitive, affective and physical experiences from visits to Auschwitz Students’ views of historical significance – a narrative literature review The Great Irish Famine in Irish and UK history textbooks, 2010–2020
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1