A special task & finish group recently reported back (pdf) to Education Minister Huw Lewis (Lab, Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney) on how, and precisely what, history is taught in the National Curriculum – in particular Welsh history.
The National Curriculum and Cwricwlwm Cymreig
The National Curriculum, established in 1988, sets out the specifics of what schoolchildren should learn, what subjects are compulsory in Welsh schools by age group and the sorts of outcomes you would expect based on pupil performance in each subject.
Even before devolution came into being there was a need for specific "opt outs" for Wales; not just obvious things like the Welsh language, but less obvious things like local history and geography. This developed over the years to become the "Cwricwlwm Cymreig" (CC) - an initiative to include a "Welsh element" in National Curriculum subjects so pupils understand the "political, social and cultural aspects of Wales as part of the world as a whole."
Obviously this is easier to do in certain subjects (like English literature, history, social sciences and geography) and much harder in others (like sciences and IT).
 |
| The Cwricwlwm Cymreig initiative is supposed to put a "Welsh element" at the heart of subjects, but there's a mixed approach to it. (Pic : Cadw) |
This history inquiry is a small part of a wider review of the National Curriculum which is due to be completed by September 2014.
The task and finish group believed the CC shouldn't be delivered through history alone, because it would be damaging to the very concept of the CC by focusing on "the past" instead of enabling future Welsh citizens to understand their place in the world in the present. They recommend that the CC be delivered across all subjects "where relevant and meaningful."
There were concerns that delivering the CC primarily through history could lead to the subject becoming "parochial", or being interpreted as "nationalist propaganda". They were also concerned that schools were taking different approaches to the CC; some give a "Welsh dimension to every subject" while others either restrict it to the arts and history alone, or bolt it on as an afterthought.
Primary schools believe that "themes" are a better way to deliver it, but this has often focused too much on Wales and the local area and not enough on Welsh links to the rest of the world. Meanwhile, it's suggested some secondary schools are reducing history lessons or combining them into a single "humanities" subject block.
The panel considered a change of name from "Cwricwlwm Cymreig" to "Wales & The World" because many people don't know the difference between Cymreig (relating to Welsh culture & nationhood) and Cymraeg (Welsh language). As we all know, a vocal minority get a bit jumpy about such things. However, they concluded that a name change "would not resolve the issue".
History in the curriculum
Prior to the creation of the National Curriculum, it's said teachers had greater freedom in the historical topics they taught, including adding "a strong element of local history in their schemes of work". But it also allowed them to completely ignore it too, leading to England-dominated "British history" being taught instead.
 | |
| The "Age of the Princes" is one key part of Welsh history said to be missing from the programme of study. (Pic : British Library) |
They suggest lessons could be learnt from
Scotland (a syllabus for Scottish Standard [GCSE] History is available here pdf p14), where Scottish history is at the heart of the curriculum,
but placed in a wider context with international influences
recognised. The panel don't believe there needs to be a whole scale
change, just Wales placed more centrally.
One of the main problems pointed out by the panel though, were a lack of resources (Welsh language resources, textbooks etc.). However, the popularity of BBC Wales' The Story of Wales and the book The New History of Wales prove there's demand for "Welsh history."
The group believes two key periods in Welsh history aren't included on the programme of study:
One of the main problems pointed out by the panel though, were a lack of resources (Welsh language resources, textbooks etc.). However, the popularity of BBC Wales' The Story of Wales and the book The New History of Wales prove there's demand for "Welsh history."
The group believes two key periods in Welsh history aren't included on the programme of study:
- The period 400AD-1000AD - the era of the Christian saints and when Wales consisted of independent principalities (underpins Welsh nationhood).
- The Methodist Revival/Nonconformism of the 18th Century (underpins 20th Century Welsh politics).
I'd add the 1960s and 70s too; including Welsh language
activism, the peak and decline of trade unionism as a political force,
second-wave feminism etc. (underpins modern Welsh
society).
The panel believes a new programme of study should be developed from the existing one, retaining important parts of British, European and World history, whilst allowing key aspects of local and Welsh history to make their way in. You could contrast Welsh language activism with civil rights movements in Northern Ireland and the United States, for example.
The history of England is said to be the "official history of Britain" as a nation-state. The panel believe this attitude still prevails - though without completely sidelining Welsh history in the curriculum - and pupils learn more about the history of England than the history of Wales. Welsh history is usually only included from a perspective of how it affects England (or if we want to be more accurate, the Norman aristocracy).
We saw an example of
that only last week via – where else – but Wales Online (c/o Blog Menai).
Oystermouth Castle in the Mumbles:
It would be completely wrong to portray the Welsh during this period as noble freedom-fighters - the actual history is like something out of Game of Thrones (more on that from A Medievalist Errant) - but the "official history" does us a disservice too. The Welsh in Wales - until the Laws in Wales Acts when we became "English" and easily ignored - are often portrayed as pirates, bandits and a general nuisance.
The panel believe Welsh history should be at the heart of history courses at any level in Wales, saying – rather poetically – that "a map of their (Welsh children's) past should be as familiar to them as the way home from school."
Nice going, Newport.
When was Wales?
One of history's great strengths
as a subject – and why it's in the curriculum in the first place –
is that it compliments subjects like English (or Welsh) and the
social sciences by teaching pupils about interpretation and
comprehension of events, evidence and bias.
So how history is taught, and its themes, shouldn't be determined by politicians. I was tickled by claims that changes in Wales could be interpreted as "nationalist propaganda" when nobody bats an eyelid at what's happening in the English curriculum, where there's been a regression to rote-learning facts about Britain's "glorious past".
There's quite a lot of Welsh and local history taught and I have first-hand experience of it. We were taught the Norman conquest, Llywelyn ap Gruffydd & Owain Glyndwr's rebellions, the origin of the Tudors, the Welsh role in the English Civil War and the Industrial Revolution.
Though I never took the subject beyond 14, in my opinion perhaps too much time was spent on that and not enough on world history (with obvious exceptions like the world wars).
It's right to expect a healthy amount of Welsh history in the curriculum. You can still teach broad stroke subjects like the Second World War without neglecting our "Blitzs" in Swansea and Cardiff, or the role the Bridgend Arsenal and Bevin Boys played, for example.
Having said that, it would be a crying shame if the subject becomes parochial just to tick a box. It has to have meaning and context, and it has to be done sensitively enough so wider issues and events aren't glossed over.
The panel believes a new programme of study should be developed from the existing one, retaining important parts of British, European and World history, whilst allowing key aspects of local and Welsh history to make their way in. You could contrast Welsh language activism with civil rights movements in Northern Ireland and the United States, for example.
The history of England is said to be the "official history of Britain" as a nation-state. The panel believe this attitude still prevails - though without completely sidelining Welsh history in the curriculum - and pupils learn more about the history of England than the history of Wales. Welsh history is usually only included from a perspective of how it affects England (or if we want to be more accurate, the Norman aristocracy).
 |
| "History is written by the victors", and it seems Welsh schoolchildren and Welsh society still has to live with that centuries on. (Pic : BBC Wales) |
Oystermouth Castle in the Mumbles:
"It was twice burnt down by Welsh rebels but later became a kind of "Camelot" for the Lords of Gower who used it as a site for meetings and festivals."That's like describing the Falkland Islanders as "rebels" in 1982, or Channel Islanders as "rebels" against the Germans between 1940-1945.
It would be completely wrong to portray the Welsh during this period as noble freedom-fighters - the actual history is like something out of Game of Thrones (more on that from A Medievalist Errant) - but the "official history" does us a disservice too. The Welsh in Wales - until the Laws in Wales Acts when we became "English" and easily ignored - are often portrayed as pirates, bandits and a general nuisance.
The panel believe Welsh history should be at the heart of history courses at any level in Wales, saying – rather poetically – that "a map of their (Welsh children's) past should be as familiar to them as the way home from school."
Nice going, Newport.
When was Wales?
 |
| Let's hope that in the chase for more Welsh history on the school curriculum we don't lose sight of the bigger stories Wales played a role in. (Pic : mametzwood.com) |
So how history is taught, and its themes, shouldn't be determined by politicians. I was tickled by claims that changes in Wales could be interpreted as "nationalist propaganda" when nobody bats an eyelid at what's happening in the English curriculum, where there's been a regression to rote-learning facts about Britain's "glorious past".
There's quite a lot of Welsh and local history taught and I have first-hand experience of it. We were taught the Norman conquest, Llywelyn ap Gruffydd & Owain Glyndwr's rebellions, the origin of the Tudors, the Welsh role in the English Civil War and the Industrial Revolution.
Though I never took the subject beyond 14, in my opinion perhaps too much time was spent on that and not enough on world history (with obvious exceptions like the world wars).
It's right to expect a healthy amount of Welsh history in the curriculum. You can still teach broad stroke subjects like the Second World War without neglecting our "Blitzs" in Swansea and Cardiff, or the role the Bridgend Arsenal and Bevin Boys played, for example.
Having said that, it would be a crying shame if the subject becomes parochial just to tick a box. It has to have meaning and context, and it has to be done sensitively enough so wider issues and events aren't glossed over.
0 comments:
Post a Comment