Historical thinking online: An analysis of expert and non-expert readings of historical websites

被引:1
|
作者
Goulding, James [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sydney Sch Educ & Social Work, 3 Bruce St, Springwood, NSW 2777, Australia
关键词
CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENT; SENSE; WIKIPEDIA; STUDENTS; SCHOOL; TEXTS;
D O I
10.1080/10508406.2020.1834396
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background This paper outlines the findings of a sociocultural study that examined how digital contexts shape historical thinking. It was assumed that the tools used to engage with historical information mediate thinking, and that when evaluating historical information online, participants would draw upon heuristics associated with Historical Thinking (Wineburg, 1991) and website evaluation. Method The study involved qualitative interviews with historians and university students who evaluated three historical websites using a think-aloud protocol followed by semi-structured questioning. Findings While sourcing, corroboration and contextualization remain the basis of disciplinary inquiry, the specific nature of each heuristic shifted when being used to evaluate online material, and a new category of intertextual 'hybrid' heuristics was formed as participants adapted general digital heuristics to evaluate historical information. Furthermore, these 'hybrid heuristics' had divergent effects on participants: for the students it appeared to inhibit critical historical thinking, whereas for the historians it formed the basis of their deep critical appraisal. Contribution The findings have implications for research on historical thinking, history education and critical website evaluation.
引用
收藏
页码:204 / 239
页数:36
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] PROCESS ANALYSIS OF EXPERT AND NON-EXPERT ENGINEER IN QUARTZ GLASS
    Suda, Masamichi
    Qiu, Peng
    Takahashi, Toru
    Hattori, Akio
    Yang, Yuqiu
    Goto, Akihiko
    Hamada, Hiroyuki
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CONGRESS AND EXPOSITION, 2014, VOL 2A, 2014,
  • [2] Negotiating the context of online in-service training: 'expert' and 'non-expert' footings
    Nilsen, Mona
    [J]. STUDIES IN CONTINUING EDUCATION, 2010, 32 (03) : 235 - 250
  • [3] CASE FOR THE NON-EXPERT
    PERDUE, JM
    [J]. TRIAL, 1969, 5 (04): : 2 - 2
  • [4] A Non-Expert Response
    Coates, Norm
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POPULAR MUSIC STUDIES, 2023, 35 (04) : 125 - 129
  • [5] Non-expert nation
    不详
    [J]. NATURE, 2016, 534 (7609) : 589 - 589
  • [6] Price competition between an expert and a non-expert
    Bouckaert, J
    Degryse, H
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION, 2000, 18 (06) : 901 - 923
  • [7] Expert and non-expert knowledge in medical practice
    Ingemar Nordin
    [J]. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2000, 3 (3) : 295 - 302
  • [8] Image quality assessment by expert and non-expert viewers
    Heynderickx, I
    Bech, S
    [J]. HUMAN VISION AND ELECTRONIC IMAGING VII, 2002, 4662 : 129 - 137
  • [9] Process Analysis of Expert and Non-expert Engineers in Quartz Glass Bending Process
    Suda, Masamichi
    Takahashi, Toru
    Hattori, Akio
    Goto, Akihiko
    Hamada, Hiroyuki
    [J]. Digital Human Modeling: Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management, 2016, 9745 : 191 - 200
  • [10] Expert and Non-expert Opinion About Technological Unemployment
    Toby Walsh
    [J]. International Journal of Automation and Computing, 2018, (05) : 637 - 642