شبكة المعلومات العربية التربوية

This paper reports findings from a case study on Greek-Cypriot secondary students’ constructions of historical conflicting accounts. This research was conducted as a pilot study for the purposes of the researcher’s MPhil/PhD, which was initiated at the Institute of Education, University of London. Thus, the findings reported at this stage are only indicative and in no way suggest any kind of generalization. The study was conducted at a semi-urban school of Nicosia, the capital of the Republic of Cyprus, in October of 2010. Seventeen students of 17-18 year old participated. The research was carried in three stages with the means of questionnaires, two sets of conflicting accounts and group interviews. Facilitating grounded theory, three thematic clusters emerged: 1) Views on history; 2) Handling of the accounts; 3) ‘Truthfulness’. Notably, a first general finding was on students’ (constructive) engagement with history. The suggestion that “everyone knows what history is, until he starts thinking about it” (Griffin cited in Barton & Levstik, 2004, p.4) could perfectly describe the general feeling that came out of the pilot study. Within the first thematic cluster and views on history, students argued strongly on the (traditional) use of history. In relation to the second cluster, and the handling of the conflicting accounts, there was a general reluctance in articulating how and why accounts might differ. The findings suggested that students often believe that different accounts might be narrating the same things but in different ways/words, or that different narrations exist due to (deliberate) bias. In relation to the third thematic cluster on ‘truthfulness’, whereas findings from the questionnaires demonstrated a general affirmation of history’s positivist use, moving through the three stages, students did not show confidence in the growth of historical knowledge and its capacity on reaching truthfulness. The findings in their total suggest a strong association between students’ ontological beliefs and their research background, raising a series of challenges for further research and suggesting that it should be possible to develop historical understanding by adopting a systematic and vigilant pedagogical approach. (Author’s Abstract)