Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Unclassified English - Or. English

2 July 2019
DIRECTORATE FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS
EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE

Future of Education and Skills 2030: Curriculum analysis

Learning progression in history

This paper has been prepared by Dr. Louise Zarmati, Lecturer in Humanities and Social
Sciences, School of Education, University of Tasmania.

Miho TAGUMA, Senior Analyst, [email protected]

Meow Hwee LIM, OECD Expert, [email protected]

JT03449546
OFDE

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any
territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
2  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Table of Contents

Learning Progression in History .......................................................................................................... 3

Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 3
What is learning progression in history? ............................................................................................. 4
Historical thinking, understanding and reasoning................................................................................ 5
The processes of ‘doing’ history .......................................................................................................... 7
Learning progression in history curricula ............................................................................................ 8
England ............................................................................................................................................ 9
British Columbia (Canada) Learning Competencies for Social Studies ........................................ 10
Australia ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Europe – Malta ............................................................................................................................... 12
Asia – Singapore ............................................................................................................................ 13
Assessment of progression: challenges and possible solutions.......................................................... 14
Designing effective assessment instruments .................................................................................. 14
Formative class, grade or school assessment ................................................................................. 14
Research gaps and future directions .................................................................................................. 16
Bibliography......................................................................................................................................... 18

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2 3

Learning Progression in History

Introduction

Paul Hirst (1974) identified what he called seven “forms of knowledge” that have
distinctive methods of inquiry, such as the physical sciences, mathematics and history
(among others). He argued that the sciences crucially depend on empirical, experimental
and observational tests and mathematics depends on deductive demonstrations from certain
set axioms. He compared history and science to demonstrate that while they share
comparable “truths that are matters of empirical observation and experiment”, there are
clear distinctions between the two. Scientific method is methodologically empirical in
nature as it consists of the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the
formulation and testing of hypotheses.
According to Hirst (1974) the methodology of history is a process of developing “historical
explanation of particular events by colligation, the use of general laws and evidence from
sources”. Although both science and history use the process of inquiry or discovery
learning, each has its own distinctive heuristic. As research by the National Research
Council (2000, p. 155) in the United States concluded, “Different disciplines are organized
differently and have different approaches to inquiry.”
Denis Shemilt (1983: 2) co-founder of the British Schools Council History 13–16 Project,
emphasised that unlike science, historical facts are mutable. While an historian can cite
sources accurately or inaccurately, precision with evidence does not guarantee the veracity
of “facts” associated with evidence as it does in applied science. Martin Booth (1994: 63)
believed that the past, the object of the historian’s investigation, is different from the object
of the scientist’s investigation, and that the thought processes are equally different. “The
logic of historical thought is not a formal logic of deductive inference ... It consists neither
in inductive reasoning from the particular, nor in deductive reasoning from the general to
the particular.”
Even up to the 1980s history was being taught in many schools and universities in Western
countries as “content” or what is now called historical knowledge. It was presented as a
succession of dates and events which students were expected to memorize and regurgitate
in formal examinations. Students’ minds were seen as “empty vessels” and the role of the
teacher was to fill them with irrefutable knowledge. This narrow focus on “facts and
figures” made history tedious for many young people and it was not unusual to hear them
complain that they did not like history because they could not “remember all those boring
dates and facts”.
Of course, factual recall is an important component part of understanding history, but if
factual recall is the predominant purpose of learning history, then memorization becomes
the key skill learned, a skill that is not unique to the knowledge domain of history.
According to Seixas (2011, p. 140) “…the memorization of a catalogue of facts in clearly
inadequate, by any standards, as a meaningful goal for history education.”.
Fortunately, the study of history has changed dramatically since the 1990s. Many
jurisdictions have been influenced by research on historical thinking led by education
academics and classroom teachers from the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States,
the Netherlands and Australia. The study of history in schools, from the elementary to

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
4  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

senior years, has shifted from a focus on memorization of historical knowledge to the
ability to understand historical concepts and use historical skills.
History education has changed in many ways over the last three decades. Today, history is
characterized as a dynamic subject that constantly reshapes itself in response to changes in
research and interpretation. Lee and Ashby (2000) explain it is a “complex and
sophisticated discipline, with its own procedures and standards designed to make true
statements and valid claims about the past.”
Postmodernists remind us that historical narratives, historians, and the tools of
historiography are in themselves historically contingent and positioned (Lévesque 2011).
History has meaning and justification in “the context of the questions, procedures, and
debates in which it develops (Levstik and Barton 2001). This is because history is a
construct which is subject to the variables of time and place. For example, national histories
always vary geographically between nation states and temporally within each jurisdiction
according to which topic is considered to be historically significant at the time.
The study of history offers twenty-first century learners ways of understanding the present
as well as anticipating the future. It allows them to see connections between past and
present by understanding how past events have impacted today’s world, and to predict how
they might impact the future. As the 2017 Singapore Lower Secondary Syllabus says,
“Learning to manage the present and anticipate the future would not be possible without
knowing the past” (p. 3). Students do this by posing questions about the past in relation to
the present and drawing connections between the two.
The Future of Education and Skills 2030 report advises that learners of the future will need
to apply their knowledge in unknown and evolving circumstances, and that priority should
be given to knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that can be learned in one context and
transferred to others (OECD 2018). The study of history not only offers learners examples
from the past on which to base hypotheses, but a framework in which they can develop
practical skills of understanding, empathy and critical and creative thinking. For example,
a crucial ingredient of historiography—the study of how history is constructed—is critical
thinking.

What is learning progression in history?

Learning progression is a continuum that measures advances in learning by tracking

development from early learning to more sophisticated levels of mastery. Mathematics
relies on an understanding of empirical knowledge and concepts in a hierarchical sequence;
students need to understand (or master) one mathematical concept before they can proceed
to the next. In comparison, progress of understanding in history does not necessarily need
to be hierarchical because it is based on mastery of concepts and skills rather than historical
knowledge which is geographically and temporally variable.
With history, it is not necessary to progress sequentially from one concept in order to
comprehend another; learning is measured by mastery of levels of complexity within each
skill or understanding and mastery can be concurrent and interrelated.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2 5

Lomas (1993) offers a comprehensive definition of progression in history in which students

are able to
 Utilize greater amounts of historical knowledge with which to substantiate
statements and judgements
 Categorize, see patterns, summarize and generalize, and grasp essentials from a
mass of details
 Make connections and links between issues across periods and focus upon
significant issues in the past, as well as the ability to understand the relevance of
the topic and its wider significance
 Move from concrete to abstract concepts
 Explain and substantiate things rather than just describe, and offer precise and
accurate explanations
 Develop an independence of thought, the capacity to pose questions, hypothesize
and devise ways of finding answers
 Acquire an informed scepticism about the past, as well as an inclination to quality
statements with elements of uncertainty, yet still be able to reach conclusions
(Lomas 1993, cited in Phillips 2002, p.102).
Grosvenor and Watts (1995, p. 25) define progression in history more simply as the
capacity of students to:
 Expand knowledge and understanding of the past
 Increase understanding of terminology and concepts
 Increase ability to use more complex historical sources
 Understand how and why people interpret history in different ways
 Improve investigative, organisational and communication skills.
The essential characteristic of progression in history is that students are able to demonstrate
an increase in their cognitive ability to think analytically and critically.

Historical thinking, understanding and reasoning

Van Drie and van Boxtel point out that different terms have been used over the years to
describe the concepts involved in learning history, for example: “historical thinking”
(Booth 1994; Wineburg 2001; Lévesque 2008; Seixas and Morton 2013); “historical
understanding” (Seixas 1993; Australian Curriculum 2018); “historical literacy” (Taylor
and Young, 2003; Lee 2005); and “historical reasoning” (van Boxtel and van Drie 2004).
Each of these terms emphasises the importance given to the analysis of historical concepts
or ideas (Parkes and Donnelly 2014) and all represent a range of ways of “doing
history”. According to Lee and Ashby (2000, p. 199) “[i]t is these ideas that provide our
understanding of history as a discipline or form of knowledge”.
According to Wineburg (2001) historical thinking is an ‘unnatural act’ that does not come
easily but must be learned. It is best understood as a movement away from everyday
unreflective views of the past towards understanding built upon the investigation of primary
sources embedded in their context. Likewise, Booth (1994: 64) explains that, “[t]o think

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
6  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

historically is to make disciplined use of head and heart tempered by a proper consideration
of the available evidence and a due regard to the constraints of time and place”.
Seixas (1994, 2006) described historical thinking as the ability to determine historical
significance, engage with and critique evidence, understand change over time,
acknowledge that history encompasses decline as much as progress, empathise with the
past and its inhabitants and embrace complex notions of causation. More recently, Seixas
and Morton developed the “The Big Six Historical Thinking Concepts” (2013) as a
classroom guide for Canadian teachers which consist of historical significance, evidence,
continuity and change, cause and consequence, historical perspectives, and the ethical
dimension.
Van Drie and van Boxtel (2008, p. 88) explain that “the term historical reasoning
emphasizes the activity of students and the fact that when learning history, students not
only acquire knowledge of the past, but also use this knowledge for interpreting phenomena
from the past and the present.”

Table A. Comparison of different versions of historical concepts that have been implemented
in school curricula

Canada Canada Netherlands England National Australian Malta

(Seixas and (Lévesque) (van Drie and van Curriculum Curriculum Curriculum
Morton) Boxtel)
Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical
thinking thinking reasoning concepts concepts for concepts
understanding
Significance Significance Significance Significance
Evidence Evidence Using sources Evidence Use of Evidence Use of sources
Continuity and Continuity and Continuity and Continuity and Change and
change change change change continuity
Cause and Progress and Cause and Cause and effect Causes and
consequence decline consequence consequences
Perspectives Perspective Perspectives
Empathy Empathy Empathy
The ethical
dimension
Argumentation Contestability
Chronology Time and
chronology
Terms
Similarity and Similarity and
difference difference
Asking questions
Contextualization
Using substantive
concepts*
Using meta-
concepts*

School students think historically when they use primary sources as evidence about
historical people and events. They demonstrate their ability to understand different
interpretations of the past and, ultimately, use historical evidence to develop their own
interpretations. It is a student’s ability to demonstrate that they can “think historically” that
is measured as evidence of learning progression in history. In order to understand
progression in history it is important to distinguish between substantive and procedural
knowledge in the process of historical thinking.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2 7

Table A shows that there are more similarities than differences between the ways different
history education researchers express historical concepts. Within each concept is a
hierarchy of complexity and difficulty and examples are provided below. It is also generally
accepted that the ability to think critically and develop a rational, well-supported argument
are the most cognitively challenging historical concepts. For example, ‘contestability’ and
‘argumentation’ are usually achieved by students at secondary rather than primary level.

The processes of ‘doing’ history

In the 1970s and ‘80s, British researchers Lee, Ashby and Dickinson (1996; 2000; 2005)
undertook the study, “Concepts of History and Teaching Approaches (CHATA)” which
examined students’ (aged 7 to 14 years) understanding of history. They separated the
learning of history into two distinct areas:
a) Substantive or “first-order” knowledge and understanding, which incorporates
knowledge of names, dates, people, events, places, as well as substantive concepts
such as peasant, revolution or ideology; this is knowing about history. Associated
with this are substantive concepts such as kingship, society, liberty and feudalism,
the meaning of which can change according to time and place (Ayres 2015, 2).
b) Procedural or “second-order” knowledge, such as evidence, change or cause,
which are used to make sense of the substance of the past, or knowing how to do
history. Lee and Ashby (2000) describe procedural knowledge as, “ideas that
provide our understanding of history as a discipline or form of knowledge… they
shape the way we go about doing history” (Lee & Ashby 2000: 199–200).
Historical knowledge is geographically and temporally specific and can differ within
nations, states and local regions, depending on what is deemed significant at the time. On
the other hand, procedural knowledge is universal. This is evidenced in Tables B, C, D, E,
F of this report which demonstrate that many countries are using the same, or similar,
historical concepts and skills as measures of learning progression. Substantive (first-order)
and procedural (second-order) knowledge should not be considered in isolation; they build
on each other and should function together.
Substantive knowledge may precede procedural knowledge and is not necessarily simpler.
Most importantly, it is mutually supportive and continuing (Ayres 2015, p.3). Lévesque
(2011, p. 30) advises that, “it is important not to misconstrue the distinction and transition
from substantive to structural knowledge as the simplistic dichotomy of content versus
skills, as too often happens in school history. It is impossible for students to understand or
make use of procedural knowledge if they have no knowledge of the substance of the past.”
Historical inquiry evolved in the last thirty years as the heuristic specific to the subject of
history and is the method most commonly used by educators to teach history. History is
problematized as a dilemma, conflict, mystery or contradiction that is laid out to be
analysed, dissected and interpreted. Fundamental to historical inquiry is the interrogation
and critical evaluation of primary sources, which can be written, visual or archaeological.
Students analyse written primary sources such as eyewitness accounts, diaries and
newspaper reports, and images such as photographs, postcards and paintings. They can also
examine artefacts such as pottery, weapons, statues, coins and jewellery, and old or ancient
objects of everyday life. During the process of historical inquiry, students can do the same
sort of work as academic and professional historians (without the same sophistication and
complexity): they can ask historical questions, identify contradictions and conflicts, and
develop interpretations supported by historical evidence.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
8  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Students also learn to critically evaluate secondary sources, which are sources created after
the historical event by someone who did not participate in or experience the event first-
hand. Scholarly books, textbooks, research articles and documentaries are examples of
secondary sources.
Lee and Ashby’s pioneering research demonstrated that children’s understanding of
second-order concepts can become increasingly sophisticated; that “[t]he acquisition of
more powerful procedural or second-order ideas is one way – perhaps the best – of giving
sense to the notion of progression in history” (Lee and Ashby 2000, p. 200). One core tenet
of progression is that students should be engaged in a process of historical inquiry
throughout their learning (Byrom 2013). The question is, how do teachers measure
students’ progression in history?

Learning progression in history curricula

Curriculum documents, such as syllabuses and teachers’ planning programs, are places
where learning progression is described within the context of a student’s sequenced
movement through an educational system. These documents describe what students should
be able to do once they have completed the learning for a particular year, grade, level or
stage. Learning outcomes or standards provide teachers with guidance on how to develop
teaching and learning activities and assessments that will achieve designated outcomes.
Improvements in learning are articulated as a continuum over time. For example, in the
Australian Curriculum (ACARA 2018) learning of historical knowledge and skills is
expressed as yearly Achievement Standards that recommend mastery of skills in the order
that most students will acquire them; in the English National Curriculum (2013) they are
called “Attainment Targets”. These standards, or levels, are based on age (or age ranges,
such as 8 to 10 years) and are to be achieved by most students by the end of each grade.
The following examples from England, Canada (British Columbia), Australia, Malta, and
Singapore demonstrate different ways of articulating learning progression in history within
the curriculum context. These are developed to be useful frameworks that teachers and
assessment authorities can use to design teaching and learning programs and assessments.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2 9

England

English National Curriculum (2013) Attainment Targets for History

Table B. National Curriculum (England) attainment targets for history for children ages 5 to 14

Key Stage 1 Key Stage 2 Key Stage 3

Ages 5 to 7 Ages 7 to 11 Ages 11 to 14
Develop an awareness of the past, using Continue to develop a chronologically Extend and deepen chronologically secure
common words and phrases relating to the secure knowledge and understanding of knowledge and understanding of British,
passing of time. British, local and world history, establishing local and world history, so that it provides a
clear narratives within and across the periods well-informed context for wider learning.
they study.
Know where the people and events they Note connections, contrasts and trends Identify significant events, make
study fit within a chronological framework over time and develop the appropriate use connections, draw contrasts, and analyse
and identify similarities and differences of historical terms. trends within periods and over long arcs of
between ways of life in different periods. time.
Use a wide vocabulary of everyday Regularly address and sometimes devise Use historical terms and concepts in
historical terms. historically valid questions about change, increasingly sophisticated ways.
cause, similarity and difference, and
significance.
Ask and answer questions, choosing and Construct informed responses that involve Pursue historically valid enquiries including
using parts of stories and other sources to thoughtful selection and organisation of some they have framed themselves, and
show that they know and understand key relevant historical information. create relevant, structured and evidentially
features of events. supported accounts in response.
Understand some of the ways in which we Understand how our knowledge of the past is Understand how different types of historical
find out about the past and identify different constructed from a range of sources. sources are used rigorously to make
ways in which it is represented. historical claims and discern how and why
contrasting arguments and interpretations
of the past have been constructed.

Commentary – National Curriculum in England: History programmes of study

www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-history-
programmes-of-study
All state-funded schools in England are required to follow the National Curriculum.
Academies and private schools are not required to; they can develop their own curriculum
provided it is “broad and balanced”. There are 4 “Key Stages” which are organised
according to 2-year age groupings with national testing at the end of each. Progression in
history is tracked according to development of understanding of procedural concepts.
(Substantive knowledge is prescribed in other documents according to Key Stages). The
most sophisticated development comes at the end of Key Stage 3 when students aged 11 to
14 years should be capable of understanding more complex historiographical concepts such
as how history is constructed and that interpretations of history are contested. Progression
in history is measured both within schools by formative assessment (Ayres 2015), and by
external examinations at the end of each of the 4 Key Stages.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
10  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

British Columbia (Canada) Learning Competencies for Social Studies

Table C. British Columbia (Canada) learning competencies based on six historical thinking
concepts

Use Social Studies inquiry processes and skills to ask questions; gather, interpret, and analyse ideas; and communicate findings and decisions
Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9
 Assess the significance of people, places,  Assess the significance of people,  Assess the significance of people, places,
Significance

events, or developments at particular times places, events, or developments at events, or developments, and compare
and places. particular times and places. varying perspectives on their historical
 Identify what the creators of accounts,  Identify what the creators of accounts, significance at particular times and places,
narratives, maps, or texts have determined narratives, maps, or texts have and from group to group.
is significant. determined is significant.
 Assess the credibility of multiple sources  Assess the credibility of multiple  Assess the justification for competing
Evidence

and the adequacy of evidence used to sources and the adequacy of evidence historical accounts after investigating points
justify conclusions. used to justify conclusions. of contention, reliability of sources, and
adequacy of evidence.
 Characterize different time periods in  Characterize different time periods in  Compare and contrast continuities and
Continuity &

history, including periods of progress and history, including periods of progress changes for different groups at the same
Change

decline, and identify key turning points that and decline, and identify key turning time period.
marked periods of change. points that mark periods of change.

 Determine which causes most influenced  Determine which causes most  Assess how prevailing conditions and the
Consequence

particular decisions, actions, or events, and influenced particular decisions, actions, actions of individuals or groups affect
Cause &

assess their short- and long-term or events, and assess their short-and events, decisions, or developments.
consequences. long-term consequences.

 Explain different perspectives on past or  Explain different perspectives on past  Explain and infer different perspectives on
Perspective

present people, places, issues, or events, or present people, places, issues, or past or present people, places, issues, or
and compare the values, worldviews, and events, and compare the values, events by considering prevailing norms,
beliefs of human cultures and societies in worldviews, and beliefs of human values, worldviews, and beliefs.
different times and places. cultures and societies in different times
and places.
 Make ethical judgments about past  Make ethical judgments about past  Recognize implicit and explicit ethical
events, decisions, or actions, and assess events, decisions, or actions, and judgments in a variety of sources.
judgment
Ethical

the limitations of drawing direct lessons assess the limitations of drawing direct  Make reasoned ethical judgments about
from the past. lessons from the past. actions in the past and present and
determine appropriate ways to remember
and respond.

Commentary – British Columbia Curriculum: Social Studies

https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/sites/curriculum.gov.bc.ca/files/curriculum/social-
studies/en_social-studies_k-9_elab.pdf
Education is the jurisdiction of provinces and territories in Canada. In the province of
British Columbia curriculum is organised according to grade groupings. History is
embedded in the learning area of Social Studies and uses Core Competencies which are
arranged hierarchically. The Social Studies curriculum document uses active verbs such as
identify, explain and assess to describe what students should be able to do at the end of the
learning period (grade). It uses the process of inquiry learning and emphasises the
development of thinking skills through six major thinking concepts: significance, evidence,
continuity and change, cause and consequence, perspective, and ethical
judgement. The curriculum Rationale explains that the six thinking concepts can be applied
to “information about virtually any topic from sources around the globe” which students
will use to “to solve problems, make decisions, and communicate their ideas effectively.”
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/social-studies/core/goals-and-rationale.
This approach aligns with the recommendation of the OECD that twenty-first century
students should be learning transferrable skills (OECD 2015).

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2  11

Australia

Table D. Years 7 and 8 progression in history in the Australian Curriculum uses a hierarchy
of concepts and skills
By the end of Year 7 (age 13) a student will be able to: By the end of Year 8 (age 14) a student will be able to:
 suggest reasons for change and continuity over time  recognise and explain patterns of change and continuity over
time
 describe the effects of change on societies, individuals and  explain the causes and effects of events and developments
groups
 describe events and developments from the perspective of  identify the motives and actions of people at the time
different people who lived at the time
 explain the role of groups and the significance of particular  explain the significance of individuals and groups and how they
individuals in society were influenced by the beliefs and values of their society
 identify past events and developments that have been  describe different interpretations of the past
interpreted in different ways
 sequence events and developments within a chronological  sequence events and developments within a chronological
framework, using dating conventions to represent and measure framework with reference to periods of time
time
 develop questions to frame a historical inquiry when researching  develop questions to frame a historical inquiry when
researching
 identify and select a range of sources and locate, compare and  analyse, select and organise information from primary and
use information to answer inquiry questions secondary sources and use it as evidence to answer inquiry
questions
 examine sources to explain points of view  identify and explain different points of view in sources
 identify their origin and purpose when interpreting sources  identify their origin and purpose and distinguish between fact
and opinion when interpreting sources
 use historical terms and concepts, incorporate relevant sources,  use historical terms and concepts, evidence identified in
and acknowledge their sources of information in developing texts sources, and acknowledge their sources of information when
and organising and presenting their findings organising and presenting their findings

Commentary - Australian Curriculum: Humanities and Social Sciences learning area

http://australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/humanities-and-social-sciences/
In the primary years (ages 5 to 12), history is integrated into the Australian Curriculum
learning area of Humanities and Social Sciences with geography, civics and citizenship,
and economics and business. In the secondary years (ages 12 to 16) history is taught as a
stand-alone, compulsory subject and is organised into two interrelated strands: historical
knowledge and understanding (substantive knowledge) and historical inquiry and skills
(procedural knowledge). There are seven historical concepts for developing historical
understanding: evidence; continuity and change; cause and effect; significance;
perspectives; empathy and contestability. The historical inquiry and skills strand promotes
the use of seven skills in the process of historical inquiry: chronology; terms and concepts;
historical questions and research; analysis and use of sources; perspectives and
interpretations; explanation and communication. Within this strand there is increasing
emphasis on historical interpretation and the use of evidence.
Historical inquiry processes and skills are described in bands of schooling at two-year
intervals. The two strands are integrated in the development of a teaching and learning
program. The historical knowledge and understanding strand provides the contexts through
which particular skills are to be developed. In each grade progression is articulated by
applying the skills to increasingly complex concepts. The Australian Curriculum uses
active verbs such as identify, explain, assess to differentiate what students should be able
to do at the end of the learning period.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
12  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Europe – Malta

Table E. Levels 7, 8, 9 and 10 history syllabus in Malta shows progression in working with
historical sources

Commentary – Malta: History Syllabus

https://curriculum.gov.mt/en/syllabi_as_from_sept_2018/Documents/Year_07/History_L
earning_Outcomes_Levels_7_to_10_Sept_2018.pdf
As a relatively small nation state of the European Union with a population of almost
500,000 people Malta has a national curriculum. History is taught as a stand-alone subject
from Years 7 to Year 10 but is not explicitly taught in the primary years. Learning outcomes
in the curriculum describe what students should be able to do. This sample (C: Working
with historical sources) is from the suite of 5 historical concepts and skills that demonstrate
students’ learning progression, or “attainment”, from Level 7 to Level 10, which is
considered to be at “gifted and talented” level (DLAP 2018). These levels are aligned to
age/year levels, i.e. Level 7 corresponds to Year 7 and so on.
Syllabus documents are very detailed in their descriptions of what students should be able
to do as well as the historical knowledge they should know. At Level 7, students “…can
identify and explain changes in values and beliefs of people from the past to those of today
(for example, slavery was accepted in the Classical Period but considered illegal today)”.
The syllabus includes “Teaching Objectives” which provide teachers with instructions on
what they should do, for example, “The teacher will train students how to define, explain
and use historical concepts and terminology in the right context.” Descriptors are arranged
according to historical concepts and skills and are written in the first person from the
student’s perspective, for example, “Time and chronology in history – I can understand and
use historical time periods, dating systems, scale of time, sequence and chronology.” The

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2  13

details of the syllabus documents provide teachers with guidance on how to design
formative assessment items and prescribe what will be included in external assessments.

Asia – Singapore

Table F. Comparison of progression in history from ages 12 to 17 years in the Singapore

national curriculum
Lower Secondary Upper Secondary
Express + Normal (Academic) Courses (12 to 14 years) Express + Normal (Academic) Courses (15 to 17 years)
Objective 1: Students should be able to: Objective 1: Candidates should be able to:
Deploying  recall, select, organise and use their knowledge Deploy  recall, select, organise and use historical
Knowledge and understanding of history in context Knowledge knowledge in context
 demonstrate knowledge of the historical inquiry
process (formulating questions, gathering evidence,
exercising reasoning and reflective thinking)
Objective 2: Students should be able to demonstrate: Objective 2: Candidates should be able to demonstrate:
Communicating  their understanding of the past by identifying, Construct  their understanding of the past through
Historical describing and explaining: Explanation explanation and analysis of:
Knowledge and  key concepts: causation, consequence, continuity, and – key concepts: causation, consequence,
Constructing change and significance within a historical context Communicate continuity, change and significance within a
Descriptions /  key features and characteristics of the periods Historical historical context
Explanations studied and the relationship between them Knowledge – key features and characteristics of the periods
 their ability to evaluate causation and historical studied and the relationship between them
significance to arrive at a reasoned conclusion (for  their ability to evaluate causation and historical
Sec 2 Express students only) significance to arrive at a reasoned conclusion
Objective 3: In using source materials, students should be able to Objective 3: Using source materials, candidates should be able to
Interpreting and understand, examine and evaluate: Interpreting understand, analyse and evaluate:
Evaluating  a range of source materials as part of an historical and  a range of source materials as part of an
Source inquiry Evaluating historical inquiry
Materials  how aspects of the past have been interpreted and Source  how aspects of the past have been interpreted
represented in different ways as part of an Materials and represented in different ways as part of an
historical inquiry by: historical inquiry by:
o comprehending and extracting relevant o comprehending and extracting relevant
information information
o drawing inferences from given information o drawing inferences from given information
o comparing and contrasting different views o comparing and contrasting different views
o distinguishing between fact, opinion and
judgement
o recognising values and detecting bias
o establishing utility of given information
o drawing conclusions based on a reasoned
consideration of evidence and arguments

Commentary – Singapore: History Syllabus

www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/humanities/
With a population close to 6 million people, Singapore has a national curriculum.
Singaporean syllabuses emphasise the importance of engaging learners actively in
historical inquiry, acquiring knowledge and understanding of various eras and
understanding different representations of the past (Singapore Ministry of Education,
2013). In the primary years history is coupled with geography within the subject of Social
Studies. In the secondary years History is taught as a stand-alone subject within
Humanities, along with China Studies in English, commerce, economics and geography.
History (Modern) is also taught at senior secondary level.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
14  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Table F shows that it is expected cognitive progression will be achieved in the historical
skill “Objective 3: Interpreting and Evaluating Source Materials” somewhere between the
ages of 14 to 17 years. The syllabus recommends that students should develop higher-order
critical thinking skills of
 distinguishing between fact, opinion and judgement
 recognising values and detecting bias
 establishing utility of given information
 drawing conclusions based on a reasoned consideration of evidence and arguments.
In her analysis of the Singaporean curriculum, Bertram (2016) observed progression of
procedural knowledge can be best seen in the learning outcomes of the upper secondary
and pre-university years (ages 17 and 18). At this level, substantive concepts move from
local to regional to national to international history, eventually becoming more universal
and abstract. These concepts were “taken up a further level” to a more universal,
decontextualised level. For example, the concept of “government” in junior secondary was
extended to the broader concept of “European imperialism” in the senior secondary years.
Bertram concluded “… that there is some attempt to describe progression in the
development of procedural knowledge across the years. However, the curricula which
embrace procedural knowledge do not make clear how these historical thinking skills
should be sequenced across grades.”

Assessment of progression: challenges and possible solutions

Designing effective assessment instruments

Although curriculum documents provide teachers with guidelines and descriptors of
learning progression at different stages in a continuum of learning, measuring a student’s
progression in history is not necessarily an easy task. This is usually achieved by using
some form of assessment and then reporting the results. Unfortunately, there is no single
magic bullet for assessment. The challenge is for educators to design appropriate
assessment instruments that effectively measure and report on students’ learning.

Formative class, grade or school assessment

If the overall aim of learning is for students to “get better”, then the purpose of assessment
should be diagnosis for improvement rather than simply reporting. The teacher should be
able to identify strengths and weaknesses so that learners can improve and progress
(Phillips 2002, p. 111). Several researchers advise that diagnosis is best achieved through
formative assessment which allows teachers to not only assess students’ learning, but most
importantly, assess the effectiveness of their teaching (see William 2011; Carr and Counsell
2014; Fletcher-Wood 2015). Assessment should not conflate attainment (or achievement)
and progress; it should provide students and teachers with meaningful information on how
they both can improve. There are many suggested formative assessment strategies online
to help teachers check for understanding (see D.C. Everest Area Schools, n.d.).

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2  15

Meaningful assessment descriptors should articulate the knowledge, conceptual

understandings and skills that are typical for a learner to achieve at each level. These can
be articulated in assessments in the following ways:
1. Benchmarks or standards which are measurable criteria against which learning
can be evaluated. These are often developed at a macro level by state or national assessment
authorities. Benchmarks might be set for the level at which concepts or skills must be
mastered in each grade. They might also be used to determine where a particular student,
class, or school ranks in comparison to others. Meyer and Land (2006) call this point of
mastery “threshold concepts” which are determined to be central to a subject, and when
understood by students, allow them to “cross the threshold” of their understanding of that
subject. Similarly, Fletcher-Wood (2013) calls this the “hinge point”.
2. Learning outcomes, objectives, goals which are clear descriptions of what a
learner is expected to be able to do, know about and/or value at the completion of learning.
They describe the substance of learning and how its attainment will be demonstrated. They
are often developed at the micro level, in schools, grades or classes for lessons or sequences
of lessons. “Threshold concepts” or “hinge-points” are also valid measures of progression
at the micro levels of class/grade/school.
Progression levels can vary greatly within a class because individual students have different
learning abilities and therefore progress at different rates; they may not necessarily neatly
align with year groups or chronological age. Therefore, the challenge is for teachers to
develop progression models that that clearly define levels of proficiency that reflect an
individual’s level of achievement and the complexity of their learning.
The example in Table G was developed by British history education academic Alex Ford
(2016) and is based on six second-order concepts and the process of historical inquiry. The
concepts are deepened and strengthened by continuous revisiting, and students work
towards mastery of each concept, which he describes as a series of “signposts”.
Ford’s progression model allows progression to take place according to the individual
student’s abilities rather than at prescribed age or stage levels. He emphasises that second-
order, or procedural concepts should never be stand-alone marking criteria; they should be
inherently tied to specific historical knowledge and contexts in order to develop an holistic
awareness of students’ understanding. The model should be used to inform teaching and
assessment but not used as a standalone set of targets. The concepts outlined should be
revised by students throughout their historical studies, to strengthen and build upon
historical knowledge and skills in parallel (2016, p. 10).

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
16  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Table G. Overview of Second Order Concepts in History

Source: Sample from Alex Ford’s progression model from “Progression in historical thinking: An overview of
key aspects of the mastery of historical thinking and practice”, published at www.andallthat.co.uk.

Research gaps and future directions

The OECD Learning Framework 2030 offers a vision and underpinning principles for the
future of education systems at a global level. It advises that the three most important
challenges that will be faced by young people in the next decade are environmental,
economic and social (2018, p. 3-4). However, although all three challenges pose serious
threats to the future, they are not new; humans have faced these challenges many times
before and have responded in many different ways.
The study of history at a global level offers young people opportunities to learn about how
humans have tackled these challenges in the past—what worked, what didn’t work and
why—and how they might use these examples from the past to inform future actions. The
lessons of history can offer young people useful advice, cautionary tales and visions of
future possibilities.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2  17

The Singapore history syllabus outlines the benefits of learning that focuses on broad,
transferrable knowledge and critical thinking skills to prepare students to become active
and informed citizens of the future:
“Disciplinary knowledge will continue to be important, as the raw material from
which new knowledge is developed, together with the capacity to think across the
boundaries of disciplines and ‘connect the dots’. Epistemic knowledge, or
knowledge about the disciplines, such as knowing how to think like a
mathematician, historian or scientist, will also be significant, enabling students to
extend their disciplinary knowledge. Procedural knowledge is acquired by
understanding how something is done or made – the series of steps or actions taken
to accomplish a goal. Some procedural knowledge is domain-specific, some
transferable across domains. It typically develops through practical problem-
solving, such as through design thinking and systems thinking.” (Ministry of
Education Singapore 2016, p. 5).
At present, research on students’ progression in history is being undertaken at local and
national levels rather than from a broader global, human perspective. The OECD 2030
Learning Framework provides educators and researchers with several suggestions on how
they might extend their work to make it more relevant to twenty-first century learners.
Curriculum and assessment developers could work collaboratively to develop criteria for
measuring students’ progression in history, and education researchers could gather data on
the impact and effectiveness of teaching on students’ ability to progress in history. Both
actions could be taken transnationally and internationally so that educators—not only
students—think across boundaries and “connect the dots”.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
18  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Bibliography

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2018). Accessed 5 October
2018 at http://australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/humanities-and-social-sciences/
Ayres, S. (2015), “Progression and assessment in history”, Leicester: Association of School and College.
Accessed 7 October 2018 at
file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/guidance_paper_good_prctice_in_progression_jan_2016_web%20(1
).pdf
Bertram, C. (2016), “Recontextualising principles for the selection, sequencing and progression history
knowledge in four school curricula.” Journal of Education, 64, pp. 27-53.
Booth, M. (1994), “Cognition in history: a British perspective”, Educational Psychologist, 29(2), pp. 61–
9.
Byrom, J., (2013), “Alive and kicking? Some personal reflections on the revised National Curriculum
(2014) and what we might do with it.” Teaching history: Curriculum evolution. The Historical
Association curriculum supplement, pp. 6-14.
Carr, E. and Counsell, C. (2014), “Using time-lines in assessment”, Teaching History 157, December.
The Historical Association, pp. 54-62.
D.C. Everest Area Schools, Weston, Wisconsin (n.d.), “What have I learned today? Formative
assessment in social studies: Easy ways to check for understanding”. Accessed 19 March 2019 at
https://nau.edu/uploadedFiles/Academic/CAL/History/History-
Social_Studies_Education/Formative%20Assessment%20in%20Social%20Studies.pdf
Department of Education (UK) (2013), National Curriculum in England: History programmes of study.
Accessed 3 March 2019 at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-
england-history-programmes-of-study
Dickinson, A.K., A. Gard and P.J. Lee (1978), “Evidence in history and the classroom”, in A.K.
Dickinson and P.J. Lee (eds), History teaching and historical understanding, 1st ed., London:
Heinemann, pp. 1–20.
Dickinson, A.K. and P.J. Lee, (eds), (1978), History teaching and historical understanding, 1st ed.,
London: Heinemann.
Directorate for Learning and Assessment Programs (DLAP) Malta, History Department (2018), Learning
outcomes: History Levels 7-10. Accessed 6 October 2018 at
https://curriculum.gov.mt/en/syllabi_as_from_sept_2018/Documents/Year_07/History_Learning_Out
comes_Levels_7_to_10_Sept_2018.pdf
Fletcher-Wood, H. (2015), “Do they understand this well enough to move on? Introducing hinge
questions”. Accessed 19 March 2019 at http://improvingteaching.co.uk/2013/08/17/do-they-
understand-this-well-enough-to-move-on-introducing-hinge-questions/
Ford, A. (2016), “Progress and progression in history”, pp. 1-19. Accessed 18 March 2019 at
www.andallthat.co.uk
Grosvenor, I. and R. Watts (1995) Crossing the key stages of history: Effective history teaching 5-16 and
beyond. London: David Fulton.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
 EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2  19

Hirst, P.H. (1974), Knowledge and the curriculum: a collection of philosophical papers, International
library of the philosophy of education, London; Boston: Routledge and K. Paul.
Lee, P.J., R. Ashby and A.K. Dickinson (1996), “Progression in children’s ideas about history”, in M.
Hughes (ed.), Progression in learning. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters, pp. 51-81.
Lee, P.J. and R. Ashby (2000), “Progression in historical understanding among students ages 7-14”, in
Stearns, P.N., P. Seixas and S. Wineburg (eds), in Knowing, Teaching, and Learning History, New
York; London: New York University Press, pp. 192-222.
Lee, P.J. (2005), “Historical literacy: Theory and Research”. International Journal of Historical
Learning, Teaching and Research, 5(1).
Lévesque, S. (2008), Thinking historically: Educating students for the twenty-first century”, Toronto,
Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press.
Lévesque, S. (2011), “What it means to think historically”, in Clark, P. (Ed.), New Possibilities for the
Past: Shaping History Education in Canada. Vancouver: UCB Press, pp. 115-138.
Levstik, L., and K. Barton (2001), Doing history: Investigating with children in elementary and middle
schools. Mawah, N.J.: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
Lomas, T. (1993), Teaching and assessing historical understanding. London: Historical Association.
Meyer, J. and Land, R. (2006), Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and
Troublesome Knowledge. New York: Routledge.
Ministry of Education Singapore (2016), History Syllabus: Lower Secondary, Curriculum Planning and
Development Division.
National Research Council (2000), How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Committee
on Developments in the Science of Learning and Committee on Learning, Research and Educational
Practice. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.I., and A.L. and R.R Cocking, (eds), Board on Testing and
Assessment, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
OECD (2018), “The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2020”. Accessed on 3 March 2019 at
http://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf.
Parkes, R. and D. Donnelly (2014), “Changing conceptions of historical thinking in History education:
an Australian case study”. Revista Tempo e Argumento, Florianópolis, 6(11), pp. 113‐136.
Seixas, P. (1993), “Historical understanding among adolescents in a multicultural setting”. Curriculum
Inquiry, 23(3), pp. 301-327.
Seixas, P. (1994), “When psychologists discuss historical thinking: a historian’s perspective”,
Educational Psychologist, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 107–9.
Seixas, P. (2006), Theorizing historical consciousness, Toronto; Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.
Seixas, P. (2011), “Assessment of historical thinking”, in Clark, P. (Ed.), New Possibilities for the Past:
Shaping History Education in Canada. Vancouver: UCB Press, pp. 139-153.
Seixas, P. and T. Morton (2013), The big six: Historical thinking concepts. Toronto: Nelson Education.
Shemilt, D. (1983), “The devil’s locomotive”, History and Theory, 22(4), Beiheft 22: The Philosophy of
History Teaching, pp. 1–18.
Stearns, P.N., P. Seixas and S. Wineburg (eds), (2000), Knowing, Teaching, and Learning History, New
York and London: New York University Press.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified
20  EDU/EDPC(2018)44/ANN2

Taylor, T. and C. Young (2003), Making history: A guide for the teaching of history in Australian
schools. Carlton South, Vic: Curriculum Corporation.
van Boxtel, C. and J. van Drie (2004), “Historical reasoning: A comparison of how experts and novices
contextualise historial sources”. International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and
Research, 4(2), pp.89-97.
van Boxtel, C. and J. van Drie (2008), “Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analyzing
students’ reasoning about the past”. Educational Psychology Review, 20, pp.87-110.
William, D. (2011), Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press.
Wineburg, S. (2001), Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: charting the future of teaching the
past, Critical perspectives on the past, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

FUTURE OF EDUCATION AND SKILLS 2030: CURRICULUM ANALYSIS

Unclassified