Content uploaded by David Scott
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by David Scott on Mar 23, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by David Scott
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by David Scott on Dec 19, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Volume 15.1
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
OF HISTORICAL
LEARNING TEACHING AND RESEARCH
ISSN 1472-9474
Autumn 2017
www.history.org.uk
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 1 08/12/2017 08:16:38
Autumn 2017
International Journal of Historical Learning, Teaching and
Research [IJHLTR]
IJHLTR is subject to a peer review process. The Historical Association of Great Britain publishes it twice a
year
EDITORS
Hilary Cooper, University of Cumbria, UK
Jon Nichol, The Historical Association, UK
Arthur Chapman, UCL Institute of Education, London, UK
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Katharine Burn, Oxford University Department of Education, UK
Terry Epstein, City University, New York, USA
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD:
Michelle Bellino, University of Michigan School of Education, USA
Gulcin Dilek, Sinop University, Turkey
Marc-Andre Ethier, University of Montreal
Penelope Harnett, University of the West of England, Bristol, England
Jorge Ortuno Molina, University of Murcia, Spain
Danijela Trskan, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Lukas Perikleous, University of Cyprus, Cyprus
Yosanne Vella, University of Malta, Malta
Maria Auxilliadora Schmidt, University of Curitiba, Brazil
Mark Sheehan, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
Johann Wassermann, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Editorial correspondence should be addressed to:
Hilary.cooper@sky.com and Jon Nichol at Heirnet@gmail.com; IJHLTR@gmail.com
Submission of articles
Full details of the form, layout and reverencing conventions for articles to be submitted are included
at the end of this edition. Articles should be submitted to IJHLTR@gmail.com and copied to
Hilary.cooper@sky.com and Jon Nichol at Heirnet@gmail.com
Copyright
Authors have copyright of their original papers published in IJHLTR as an automatic right.
Advertising
Full page/half page enquires to – telephone : [+44] 020 7820 5985
Principles of transparency
The editors of IJHTLR recognise and employ the principles of transparency in scholarly publishing set out
in the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA).
Ethical Standards
The editors follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPES) guidelines and take reasonable steps to
identify and prevent publication of research where misconduct has occurred including plagiarism.
Back Issues
These are posted on the Historical Association website www.history.org.uk and are downloadable for
Historical Association members. Delegates to the History Educators International Research Network
[HEIRNET] can download a complimentary copy of the journal for 2015 from the conference website
downloads section at www.HEIRNET2016.com
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 2 08/12/2017 08:16:38
3
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
CONTENTS
Editorial pp. 5–7
Editorial: Identity, Nationalism And Thinking Historically
France pp. 8–23
Anna Zadora, University of Strasbourg, France
History Teaching In Belarus: Between Europe And Asia
Brazil pp. 24–33
Maria Auxiliadora Schmidt, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
The History Of Afro-Brazilian People: A Theme Of The Burdening History Of Brazil
Canada pp. 34–48
Raphaël Gani, University of Ottawa, Canada
David Scott, University of Calgary, Canada
Social Studies Teachers’ Resistance To Teaching Francophone Perspectives In Alberta
Spain pp. 49–64
Cosme J. Gómez Carrasco, University of Murcia, Spain
Ramón López Facal, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Jorge Sáiz Serrano, University of Valencia, Spain
Narrating “Histories Of Spain”. Students Teachers and the Construction Of
National Narratives
Greece pp. 65–79
Eleni Apostolidou, University of Ioannina, Greece
The Past, The Present And The Future Of The Economic Crisis, Through Greek
Students’ Accounts Of Their History
Greece pp. 80–92
Kostas Kaviskis, University of Western Macedonia, Greece
“They Ought To Understand The Achievements Of The Ancient Greeks”:
The Views Of Greek Prospective Teachers On The Educational Role Of Archaeology
Greece pp. 93–102
Ioannis Nioutsikos, Institute of International Relations, Athens, Greece
The Effect Of Prior Knowledge On Teaching International History:
An Empirical Case Study In UK Higher Education
Sweden pp. 103–117
Stefan Ekecrantz, Stockholm University, Sweden
Academic Critical Thinking, Research Literacy And Undergraduate History
Australia pp. 118–136
Deborah Henderson, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Australia
It’s More Complex Than I Assumed’: Examining Pre-Service Teacher Reflections
On Preparing To Teach History In The Australian Curriculum In Years 7-10
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 3 08/12/2017 08:16:38
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
4
Malta pp. 137–159
Yosanne Vella, University of Malta, Malta
Kimberly Caruana, University of Malta, Malta
An Investigation Into Finding Effective Ways Of Presenting A Written Source
To Students
England – UK pp. 160–172
James William Percival, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom
Investigating Narrative Forms Of History Pedagogy In Primary Initial Teacher
Education In England
IJHLTR Information And Instructions For Authors pp. 173–176
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 4 08/12/2017 08:16:38
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
34
SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHERS’ RESISTANCE TO TEACHING FRANCOPHONE
PERSPECTIVES IN ALBERTA
Raphaël Gani, University of Ottawa, Canada
David Scott, University of Calgary, Canada
Abstract
It is increasingly common for social studies programs to call for the teaching of multiple perspectives
on past and current issues. Within the Canadian context, the province of Alberta’s social studies
program mandates all K–12 teachers to help students see contemporary issues and topics through
the lenses of multiple perspectives, including those of Francophone and Aboriginal communities.
Examining a range of data sources collected during the pre- (1999–2004) and post- (2005–2015)
implementation phases of the program has demonstrated that this curricular mandate is impeded
by teachers’ structural resistance. This article reports on the first broad overview of this body of
research as it relates to Francophone perspectives in particular. As part of this process, we identify
a typology of resistance expressed by teachers towards teaching Francophone perspectives.
Additionally, we trace the origins and sources of this structural resistance by drawing on a diverse
body of literature in the learning sciences (Sears, 2014), memory studies (Létourneau, 2007),
as well as critical (den Heyer & Abbott, 2011; Stanley, 2007) and Indigenous insights into social
studies and history education (Donald, 2009a, 2009b).
Keywords:
Francophone perspectives, social studies, resistance, teacher, Alberta
Historically, social studies and history education in Canada (A. Clark, 2009; Gereluk & Scott,
2014) and the U.S. (Banks, 2004; VanSledright, 2008) have been linked to nation-building projects
seeking to create and reproduce a shared national identity among largely eclectic groups of
people. As part of this process, dominant national groups – including elite descendants of settlers
from the British Isles – have worked to make their language, literature, and historical memory “the
‘national’ language, literature and history” (Kymlicka, 2007, p. 63). Influenced by the realities of
immigration and research on multicultural education (Banks, 1989; Ladson-Billings, 1992; Mckay
& Gibson, 1999), particularly since the 1980s, educational jurisdictions in North America started
introducing curricular initiatives that seek to make the curriculum more responsive and relevant to
the culture and perspectives of minority groups.
As part of this process, curriculum reforms have been introduced to help students better
appreciate the perspectives of groups who have been traditionally marginalized or excluded from
curriculum documents, textbooks, and classroom instruction. The U.S. National Council for the
Social Studies (1994), for instance, published an influential report calling for teachers to help
students develop a “pluralist perspective based on diversity . . . [involving] respect for differences
of opinion and preference; of race, religion, and gender; of class and ethnicity; and of culture in
general” (p. 27).
Within the Canadian context, where education is controlled at the provincial level, many social
studies program documents have focussed on helping students appreciate multiple perspectives
on historical and contemporary issues (P. Clark, 2004). Accordingly, during the 1990s the Alberta
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 34 08/12/2017 08:16:40
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
35
Ministry of Education worked with other western provinces and territories1 to create a common
social studies program. This program was unique in that it specifically named the perspectives that
teachers and students were asked to engage – namely, perspectives emerging from Aboriginal
and Francophone peoples and communities (Alberta Education, 2005; Western Canadian Protocol
for Collaboration in Basic Education [WCP], 2002). This approach was partially in response to the
lobbying efforts of leaders within both Francophone and Aboriginal communities to be recognized
in these documents (Pashby, 2013).
The Province of Alberta went on to incorporate key elements of this document into a new social
studies program of study (POS) introduced incrementally from 2005 to 2010 (Alberta Education,
2005). The POS directed all K–12 teachers to help students “appreciate and respect how
multiple perspectives, including Aboriginal and Francophone, shape Canada’s political, socio-
economic, linguistic and cultural realities” (Alberta Education, 2005, p. 2). Based on historical
and constitutional reasons, the Alberta POS argued that an understanding of Canada requires
an understanding of Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives and diverse experiences (Alberta
Education, 2005, p. 4). At the core of the POS rests the mission of positively affirming both the
identities and culture of Francophone and Aboriginal students in Alberta.
The historical and constitutional reasons for justifying why the perspectives of Francophone and
Aboriginal peoples were specifically named in this POS are reflected in the difference between
what Kymlicka (2007) referred to as substate national minorities and Indigenous peoples versus
“immigrant groups” (p. 71) who have chosen to settle in a new country. National minorities (e.g.,
the Scots and Welsh in Britain, and the Quebecois in Canada) and Indigenous peoples have
demanded constitutionally guaranteed rights that give them greater autonomy within their historic
territories (Kymlicka, 2007, p. 68).
As has been well noted in the curriculum studies literature, however, introducing an innovative
curricular mandate does not necessarily mean it will be embraced or meaningfully carried out by
teachers in the field as “the relationship between [curriculum] documents and what transpires in
actual practice is tenuous at best” (Smith, 1999, p. 94). Reflecting this reality, a growing body
of research suggests that educators in Alberta feel a great deal of ambivalence, and at times
resistance, towards the directive to teach both Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives (e.g.,
Abbott, 2014; den Heyer & Abbott, 2011; Scott, 2013).
Key scholars in Alberta, including den Heyer (2009) and Donald (2009a, 2009b), have spent
considerable time theorizing and researching why educators are resistant to engaging with multiple
perspectives, and in particular Aboriginal perspectives. The emphasis on Aboriginal perspectives
is understandable given how historical legacies of colonialism, along with contemporary issues
such as ongoing land claims, bring forth difficult emotions in classrooms and are front and centre
in present-day Canadian policy deliberations. However, although Canada is officially a bilingual
country, little attention has been paid to teachers’ perceptions of Francophone perspectives. As
den Heyer (2009) noted, most stakeholders express anxiety in relation to teaching Aboriginal
perspectives but “Francophone perspectives are rarely mentioned as a concern” (p. 344). The
purpose of this article is to challenge this claim through asking the research question, “How do
social studies teachers and educational stakeholders in Alberta interpret and understand the
curriculum directive to engage social studies from Francophone perspectives?”
1 This included British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Yukon Territory, the Northwest Territories, and
Nunavut.
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 35 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
36
Results from our analysis reveal that den Heyer’s (2009) assertion underestimates the widespread
resistance teachers in Alberta have toward teaching the perspectives of Francophone peoples,
who make up approximately 23% of the population of Canada (Statistics Canada, 2015).2 In the
first section of this article, we outline three key arguments teachers make as to why they have
difficulties teaching Francophone perspectives: (a) no perspectives can be identified due to the
diverse nature of Francophone people and communities in Canada; (b) only educators who are
Francophone can authentically offer insights into or teach Francophone perspectives; and (c)
Francophone perspectives should not be given special attention, as all cultural perspectives in
Canada should be given equal treatment. After outlining each of these arguments, drawing on a
diverse body of literature, we point out the limitations for understanding Francophone perspectives
in particular ways. In the concluding discussion section, we argue that the resistance teachers
have toward engaging with Francophone perspectives can be explained by deeply rooted and
widely diffused issues of identity, collective memory, and preconceptions about Francophone
peoples, and in particular Quebecois, that circulate in Alberta and within English-speaking Canada
more generally. In making this argument, we support our assertions with key insights from the
learning sciences (Sears, 2014) and memory studies (Létourneau, 2007), as well as critical (den
Heyer & Abbott, 2011; Stanley, 2007) and Indigenous insights into social studies and history
education (Donald, 2009a, 2009b).
Key Terms and Methodology
In this paper, we use the term resistance to categorize various arguments teachers make to
legitimize their lack of engagement with, disagreement about, or criticism of the inclusion of
Francophone perspectives in the Alberta social studies POS (Alberta Education, 2005). Aligned
with the work of Carson (2009), for the purposes of this article we understand teachers’ resistance
not “as something needing to be overcome” but as “a necessary part of learning when the new
knowledge offered provokes a crisis in the self” (p. 220). As we will contend, Alberta teachers,
most of whom are of non-Francophone origins, face the difficult task of learning from and about
perspectives that have been positioned within the Western Canadian sociopolitical landscape as
an ongoing threat to Canadian national unity (Francis, 1997; Osborne, 1997; Thompson, 2004).
As for a definition of perspective, for us, perspectives are shared by groups of people who inhabit
a common societal space and therefore are not a point of view expressed by individuals. Rather,
they are discourses that act as interpretative frameworks to understand and make sense of the
world. Although this definition of a perspective informed our understanding, neither perspective
nor Francophone perspectives are defined in the Alberta POS (Alberta Education, 2005), which
only adds to teacher confusion about what they are supposed to be doing in relation to this
curricular mandate. Therefore, we have adopted a bottom-up approach to investigate the plurality
of meanings that these concepts offer.
In order to offer an overview of the empirical data documenting teacher resistance toward
Francophone perspectives in Alberta, we initiated a rigorous and systematic search of publically
available academic and professional scholarship, including unpublished doctoral dissertations,
surveys, and policy documents, that highlighted teacher discourse in relation to the mandate
to teach Francophone perspectives. Using search terms such as Francophone, Francophone
perspectives, and Alberta Social Studies Program, we employed a number of strategies to
access these data, including electronic searches on the following databases: Academic Search
Complete, ERIC, Google Scholar, Education Research Complete, and ProQuest Dissertation.
2 According to this census data, 7.3 million people in Canada speak French as their mother tongue.
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 36 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
37
The data we collected subsequently came from two key curricular moments: the pre- (1999–
2004) and post- (2005–2015) implementation phases of the Alberta POS.
This article provides an original contribution to the research literature on teaching multiple
perspectives by connecting the data from these two implementation phases for the first time. Our
findings revealed that teachers’ resistance to teaching Francophone perspectives was structural:
common arguments were expressed by a variety of education stakeholders, not only teachers,
both at the start of the curriculum development process in 1999 and in the post-implementation
phase. Making this connection allowed us to argue that this structural resistance is rooted in deeply
embedded, long-standing discourses and preconceptions that act to deflect the responsibility of
educators from having to take up the teaching of Francophone perspectives in their social studies
classroom.
Resistances to Teaching Francophone Perspectives in Alberta
Francophone Perspectives Do Not Exist
One of the significant reasons teachers are resistant to teaching Francophone perspectives is
based on an argument that such a perspective is impossible to identify. Within this logic, French-
speaking communities in Canada, including the Quebecois, Acadians, and Franco-Albertans, are
so heterogeneous that providing one uniform perspective is impossible (Abbott, 2014; den Heyer
& Abbott, 2011; Scott, 2013; Stewart, 2002).
In 1999, the Alberta Ministry of Education held a large public consultation process on a draft
curriculum document that included the mandate to engage with Francophone perspectives. In-
depth interviews with participants in this consultation offered insights into early manifestations of
resistance to teaching Francophone perspectives (Stewart, 2002). Many teachers expressed their
lack of understanding of the nature of Francophone perspectives. One participant commented, for
example, “I’m not sure what is meant by Francophones in the context of the western provinces”
(as cited in Stewart, 2002, p. 96; see also Brown, 2004, p. 167). Another participant asserted that
Francophone peoples or communities could not hold a single perspective because they were a
diverse group: “Francophone from the Maritimes, Francophone from Quebec, Francophone from
Alberta, Métis Francophone are all different from each other. How can we get a common thread
for all these different groups?” (as cited in Stewart, 2002, p. 98).
Similar comments questioning the very existence of Francophone perspectives were echoed
after the implementation of the Alberta POS (Alberta Education, 2005) had taken place. In a
study examining the ways in which five experienced social studies educators engaged Aboriginal
and Francophone perspectives within Alberta Education’s (2007) grade 10 course focusing on
globalization, several teachers questioned the feasibility of presenting students with Francophone
perspectives on contemporary topics (Scott, 2013). One teacher, after noting that he does not
take up Francophone perspectives in his classroom, stated: “Even if there was a way, . . . what
is the Franco-Albertan perspective on the World Trade Organization?” (as cited in Scott, 2013, p.
38). This belief was additionally apparent in a study by den Heyer and Abbott (2011) that invited
preservice teachers to produce a narrative of Canada’s past that deviated from the dominant
White Anglo-Saxon perspective. When asked what challenges were encountered during the task,
one preservice teacher noted that “the Quebecois . . . are huge groups of people of all economic,
social and political backgrounds, with varying beliefs. To lump them in a group and give their
collective perspective seems to diminish their individual complexities” (as cited in den Heyer &
Abbott, 2011, p. 627).
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 37 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
38
In both the pre- and post-implementation phases of the Alberta social studies POS (Alberta
Education, 2005), educators pointed to the danger of reducing the various perspectives of a
diverse group of people under the umbrella of a perspective. However, the view that Francophone
peoples are so diverse that no unique set of perspectives can be identified forecloses alternative
possibilities for understanding a perspective as being, by nature, multiple or polysemic (i.e.,
possessing multiple meanings). In looking more closely at this resistance, we note that the
Alberta program, along with the various pre-implementation curriculum drafts (Alberta Learning,
2002; WNCP, 1999), calls for the teaching of historical events and contemporary issues from
multiple perspectives, rather than from a Francophone perspective. This can additionally be seen
at the grade 10 level (Alberta Education, 2007), for instance, where teachers are not directed
to consider a Francophone perspective, or a Franco-Albertan perspective more specifically, on
the World Trade Organization. Rather, teachers are asked to engage with “multiple perspectives
[that] will allow students to examine the effects of globalization on peoples in Canada and other
locations, including the impact on . . . Francophone communities” (Alberta Education, 2007, p. 27).
This current curricular outcome provides ample possibilities for teachers to take up Francophone
perspectives with their students.
Questioning the very existence of Francophone perspectives additionally occludes the fact that
large groups of Francophone peoples do share a perspective on the past and present, regardless
of their age, gender, or location in Canada. Within the Quebec, Ontario, and Acadia contexts,
for example, recent empirical studies have documented the ways large number of Francophone
adolescents and adults possess particular understandings of the past and present that differ
from their non-Francophone counterparts in other parts of Canada (Gani, 2014; Lévesque,
Croteau, & Gani, 2015; Lévesque, Létourneau, & Gani, 2012; Robichaud, 2011). According to this
research literature, when Francophone people are asked to tell the story of their country, or their
community, the majority of participants draw on a la survivance (survival) “schematic narrative
template” (Wertsch, 2004, p. 55) recounting a “relatively linear and unhappy representation of
Francophones’ place in history” (Lévesque et al., 2012, p. 56).
Within this understanding, the British conquest of New France in 1759 or the Deportation of
Acadians by the British from New Brunswick in 1755 set off a long struggle by Francophone
peoples to preserve and protect their unique language, culture, religion, and identity against the
continual incursions of the greater Anglophone community who sought to assimilate them into
an Anglo-dominated Canadian state. Having access to both this empirically supported research
on the nature of historical perspectives among Francophones in Canada and a conceptual
understanding of a perspective as multiple or polysemic would provide teachers with many
possibilities for authentically engaging with Francophone perspectives.
The Cultural Disqualification Argument
The second kind of resistance demonstrated by teachers in Alberta revolves around the argument
that one has to be of Francophone descent to teach Francophone perspectives. Research
suggests (Abbott & Smith, 2013 den Heyer & Abbott, 2011; Scott, 2013) that this resistance
falls under what Donald (2009a) referred to as the “cultural disqualification” (p. 32) argument
predicated on a belief that teachers are qualified to teach only about cultures to which they
belong. Within this frame, cultural difference becomes an imposing rift that allows educators to
retreat behind a shelter of ignorance because only those deemed culturally authentic are able to
speak from a particular group’s perspective (Donald, 2009a).
Cultural disqualification arguments were expressed from the beginning of the Alberta POS
development phase. In 1999, representatives from the Alberta Ministry of Education asked a
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 38 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
39
variety of stakeholders, including teachers, to discuss a draft social studies program document
that included the then-new mandate to appreciate Francophone perspectives. Many participants
mentioned that they “did not want to comment” on this mandate because they did not hold enough
knowledge on the topic, adding that, instead, Francophone should comment” (Alberta Learning,
1999, p. 56). In a subsequent focus group, one participant said that the inclusion of Francophone
and Aboriginal perspectives in the curriculum implies that only members of those groups would
be authorized to authentically teach these perspectives. This belief is reflected in the following
comment: “You would have to be a French-speaking Métis to teach this curriculum” (as cited in
Stewart, 2002, p. 101).
The cultural disqualification argument additionally re-emerged in the post-implementation phase
of the social studies POS (Alberta Education, 2005). In a study by Abbott and Smith (2013)
investigating the efforts of preservice teachers to digitally express Alberta social studies program
content through the lenses of both Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives, one participant
stated, “Every time I tried to speak directly from a Francophone perspective I felt like a fraud.
How could I purport to speak for the people I knew nothing about, whose language I did not even
understand?” (p. 13).
This resistance towards teaching Francophone perspectives is interesting in a number of respects.
Claims that only Francophone people can represent Francophone perspectives belies the easy
availability of many resources that offer insights into Francophone perspectives and historical
experiences, including newspaper articles, videos, books, and community leaders available on
Alberta Education’s Learn Alberta (2012) teacher resource support website. Alberta’s curricular
mandate thus provides an opportunity to draw on a wealth of resources that honours the voice of
people within a particular cultural community – in this case Francophone. If taken up in this way,
the role of the teacher is not to speak on behalf of, or for, particular people and communities,
but to provide students with opportunities “to learn from” (Donald, 2009a, p. 29) the voices of
people and communities who have been historically constructed as “Other.” This possibility is well
articulated by Britzman (1998):
Whereas learning about an event or experience focuses upon the acquisition of qualities,
attributes, and facts, so that it presupposes a distance (or, one might say, a detachment)
between the learner and what is to be learned, learning from an event or experience is of a
different order, that of insight. (p. 117)
Within this line of thinking, the real work of teaching and learning multiple perspectives does
not reside in learning about the “Other,” but in the insights that could be gained from such an
encounter.
It should be noted that research on teacher resistance to engaging Francophone perspectives
framed around a cultural disqualification argument has considerable convergence with research
highlighting teacher resistance to Aboriginal perspectives. However, there are a number of notable
differences. Teachers justified their nonengagement with Aboriginal perspectives on the basis that
these communities speak from epistemological understandings that they did not have access to
(e.g., nonlinear notions of time; elders as authoritative sources of wisdom). Accordingly, in studies
such as the one by Donald (2009a), educators claimed that the experiences and traditions of
Aboriginal peoples are inherently unknowable and incomprehensible (p. 36). Calls to engage with
Aboriginal perspectives additionally brought forth emotions, such as collective guilt, that were not
observed in arguments about Francophone perspectives. These differences suggest that many
teachers feel they share the same epistemological frameworks as those of Francophone peoples
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 39 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
40
and do not possess a sense of guilt towards the historical treatment of Francophone peoples in
Canada.
No One Perspective Should Be Privileged in a Multicultural Canadian Society
The final argument as to why educators feel they cannot engage with Francophone perspectives
is connected to an assertion related to the multicultural nature of Canadian society. Many
educators, including scholars in the field, have argued that given the diverse nature of Canadian
society, Francophone and Aboriginal perspectives should not be privileged over other cultural
groups (Richardson, 2002) or gender identities (Bradford, 2008).
One of the first concerns expressed by education stakeholders during the curriculum development
phase of the Alberta POS revolved around the ways both Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives
were privileged and specifically named in this document (Alberta Learning, 1999, 2002). Several
comments collected during the 1999 consultation process centered on this theme. One group
of participants asserted, for instance, that there was “too much emphasis on Aboriginal and
Francophone perspectives while ignoring or at the expense of others and Canadianism as a whole”
(as cited in Alberta Learning, 1999, p. 26). Highlighting attachment to the multicultural nature of
Canada, another group of participants argued, “Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives should
be included in the multicultural identity” (as cited in Alberta Learning, 1999, p. 30). In a thesis by
Brown (2004) focused on the role of “culture” in the current Alberta social studies curriculum, one
teacher expressed concerns during an interview about privileging named perspectives over other
groups:
What’s so dominant in this new curriculum is the identification of Aboriginal and Francophone,
so blatantly through the entire curriculum as being groups that really require very . . . careful
examination of their histories and their contribution. I’m not sure what I think, and that
everybody else is other. (p. 165)
This stance can additionally be found within the scholarly literature in the pre-implementation
phase work of Richardson (2002), who was very critical of how the social studies program gave
Francophone peoples and communities “the legitimizing sanction of being named” (p. 34),
while non-Anglophone and non-Francophone ethnic groups were left unnamed, and therefore
symbolically positioned on the margins of Canadian society. These comments point to ongoing
resistance around how naming specific cultural perspectives can lead to unfair treatment of other
perspectives in a multicultural Canadian society.
We found similar sentiments expressed within a recent large-scale survey by the Alberta
Teachers’ Association (2016) of 496 social studies teachers from across Alberta. Although no
questions were asked on Francophone perspectives in the published survey results (which is
telling in and of itself), within an open-ended questions section published on the Alberta Teachers’
Association (2015) social studies website, three teachers provided insights into their views on
Francophone perspectives: “The constant concern about teaching multiple perspectives and the
need to incorporate Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives on every topic. Sometimes it’s
inauthentic, and the students know it!” (line 64); “Over emphasis on Canada including too much
aboriginal and francophone emphasis” (line 218); and “too much Francophone and Aboriginal
stuff” (line 250). These assertions were also present in a study by Donald (2009a) on preservice
teacher responses to the introduction of Aboriginal perspectives in the curriculum. In Donald’s
(2009a) study, one participant stated, “My students come from many backgrounds and I don’t
think it would be fair to teach one perspective if we can’t teach them all” (p. 34).
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 40 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
41
The belief that there is an overemphasis on Aboriginal and Francophone perspectives reflects a
problematic ahistorical discourse of equality. As noted by Kymlicka (2007), and restated in the
rationale of the social studies POS (Alberta Education, 2005), Francophone peoples, in contrast to
immigrant minorities, are historically and culturally distinct members of a bilingual Canadian state
whose perspectives should be engaged and considered due to their position as national minorities
who possess collective rights enshrined in the Canadian constitution.3 This understanding
is reflected in the Alberta POS argument that “pluralism builds upon Canada’s historical and
constitutional foundations, which reflect the country’s bilingual nature and multicultural realities”
(Alberta Education, 2005, p. 1, emphasis added).
By recognizing the distinct status of the French language, and by extension Francophone peoples
within the Canadian federation, as well as the inherently multicultural nature of Canadian society,
the Alberta POS (Alberta Education, 2005) acknowledges that different cultural communities in
Canada can possess distinct levels of recognition. Therefore, not all perspectives are positioned
equally in the POS. However, asking teachers to engage with Francophone perspectives does
not require, as implied within the responses of some teachers, that they need to ignore all other
perspectives. The mandate within the POS to teach multiple perspectives provides clear sanction
for teachers to engage with “Other” cultural perspectives.
Discussion
By synthesizing data from peer-reviewed research, official government documents, survey
results, and unpublished theses, we have been able to illustrate the many facets of teachers’
resistance to teaching Francophone perspectives. Before proceeding, it should be noted that
within our review of empirical data we found many teachers who agreed with the inclusion of
Francophone perspectives in the Alberta POS (Alberta Education, 2005). However, support of this
program mandate was rather thin in some respects. Few educators would invoke the rationale,
for example, that this mandate is needed because it is important to recognize the constitutionally
enshrined collective rights of Francophone peoples in Canada. In contrast, resistance towards
the inclusion of Francophone perspectives is more fully articulated and precise, and ultimately
seems to have a broader influence on teachers’ practice. This assertion is supported by the fact
that in the post-implementation phase, no clear empirical evidence exists that teachers actively
engage with Francophone perspectives in their classrooms.
Our analysis demonstrates that teachers’ resistance was structural in nature due to the fact that it
was present in both the pre- and post-implementation phases of the curriculum. All the arguments
teachers presented effectively discharged them from having to engage with Francophone
perspectives in their classrooms. Along these lines, particular arguments were formulated as
dead-ends for engaging this mandate, and were thus absent of alternative possible avenues to
honour Francophone perspectives. For example, teachers who argued that only Francophone
people can speak on behalf of Francophone perspectives did not acknowledge the existence
of a rich variety of resources that would allow them to introduce Francophone perspectives in
authentic ways to their students.
3 In order to preserve and protect Francophone groups in Canada, the Official Languages Act, introduced in
1969, made Canada a fully bilingual country whereby French was given equal status to English in all federal
institutions. In addition, when the Canadian Charter and Rights and Freedoms was introduced in 1982, Section
23 afforded all Francophone citizens, regardless of where they reside in Canada, the right to have their children
receive publicly funded primary and secondary schooling in French, where “the number of citizens who have such
a right is sufficient”.
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 41 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
42
A review of the literature suggests that this structural resistance can be explained in a number of
ways. One body of research proposes that the dynamics we outlined above could be a result of
teacher resistance toward pedagogical innovation (Gitlin & Margonis, 1995; Knight, 2009). This
is certainly a possibility, as past Alberta social studies programs have not included perspective as
a conceptual tool, in any sustained way, nor did they give prominence to Francophone peoples
and communities (Findlay, 2010; von Heyking, 2006). However, as we will elaborate upon, our
reading of the empirical data suggests that the arguments we have identified are surface level
manifestations of deeper structural challenges rooted in issues of collective memory, identity, and
human cognition.
One of the bodies of literature that we believe is helpful in better appreciating the deeper origins
and sources of teacher resistance to engaging Francophone perspectives can be found in
research examining the dynamic interplay among collective memory and identity formations in
the present (den Heyer & Abbott, 2011; Donald, 2009a; Létourneau, 2007). This body of work
suggests that teachers may feel unable to engage with Francophone perspectives because they
are positioned as outsiders or as “Other” to an Anglo-Canadian identity position. This assertion
is supported by the work of den Heyer and Abbott (2011), whose study noted that although many
preservice Albertan teachers found it difficult to represent the perspectives of Francophone and
Aboriginal peoples, they expressed no such difficulties with people and groups that populate
mainstream Canadian historical narratives. This included Gaelic-speaking Scots immigrating to
Canada in the 19th century, for example, even though this group is as culturally and temporally
distant to students as both past and present Francophone peoples and communities (den Heyer
& Abbott, 2011, pp. 631–632). This finding suggests that preservice teachers’ identifications with
an Anglo-Canadian identity position enabled them to speak on behalf Gaelic-speaking Scots;
however, this identity position became a constraint when being asked to speak on behalf of
Francophones.
The origins of this dynamic of not being able to speak on behalf of another perspective is explained
through work in memory studies that points to the role of national narratives students have been
taught for generations (Donald, 2009b; Létourneau, 2007; Stanley, 2007; VanSledright, 2008).
According to Létourneau (2007), such narratives carry with them reference points including
binary notions of insiders and outsiders, stereotypes, and other representations that “act a basic
matrix of understanding, a simple way of comprehending the complexity of the past (and the
present as well)” (p. 79). Within the Canadian context, Stanley’s (2007) work has surfaced the
ways the officially sanctioned Anglo-Canadian grand narrative creates an architecture of insiders
and outsiders where some are positioned as part of the “imagined community” (Anderson, 1983,
p. 6) of the nation, while others are not (p. 33). Research supporting this assertion has found that
the historical narratives that circulate in public and educational spaces within English-speaking
Canada have historically positioned Francophone peoples as outside the story of the nation
(Francis, 1997; Osborne, 1997; Thompson, 2004). Drawing insights from Donald (2009b), this
exclusion has arguably worked to make educators unable to comprehend the historic and ongoing
“presence and participation” (p. 10) of Francophone people and communities within Canadian
society, even though they make up around 25% of the population4 (Statistics Canada, 2015).
The ways the Anglo-Canadian grand narrative (Stanley, 2007) might preclude teachers from
acknowledging the need to engage Francophone perspectives is supported by a quote from a
female Alberta social studies teacher interviewed by Brown (2004) during the pre-implementation
4 It should be noted that the Francophone population in Alberta is about 2% of the total population (Statistics
Canada, 2015).
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 42 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
43
phase of the curriculum. The research participant noted that the then-new program will ask
teachers to
appreciate them as an integral part of Canada identity, them being . . . Francophone presence
in Canada. It states [in the program] “an appreciation of how their presence and influence
contribute to Canada’s foundation and identity.” But . . . I don’t know what it is that we’re
supposed to appreciate them about? (p. 167)
In a similar vein, a male social studies teacher in Brown’s (2004) study stated: “People that you
never thought of before all of a sudden have a very special place and that’s shaking some folks,
you know” (p. 162). This assertion, along with the statement that I don’t know what it is that we’re
supposed to appreciate about them, speak to how Francophone peoples and communities have
been positioned as outsiders and beyond the need for recognition and engagement within an
Anglo-Canadian identity formation.
This theorizing around the root causes of the resistance to teaching Francophone perspectives is
supported by a growing body of research in the learning sciences that suggests that the conceptual
frameworks people bring with them to any new learning situation fundamentally work to filter and
shape new learning (Sears, 2014). When presented with information that challenges established
matrixes of understanding, “learners will often distort or discard presented information rather
than doing the difficult work necessary to restructure their frameworks” (Sears, 2014, p. 16). This
insight highlights a phenomenon we saw in our synthesis of teachers’ resistance to teaching
Francophone perspectives. Teachers may have wilfully, or unconsciously, misinterpreted this
curriculum mandate so they would not have to do the difficult work of restructuring frameworks
of understanding that would be needed to authentically engage with Francophone perspectives.
However, as Carson (2009) has pointed out, this resistance does not necessarily imply a wholesale
rejection of this mandate; it is actually a natural and necessary part of the learning process.
Research literature on prior knowledge (Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; McKeown, Beck, Sinatra, &
Loxterman, 1992) additionally points to how learners encounter an “Other” perspective not
as blank slates, but with already established and at times deeply entrenched preconceptions.
Preconceptions about Francophone people and communities that circulate within Alberta’s
contemporary sociopolitical landscape may explain why teachers resist engaging with this group’s
perspectives. Particularly since the early 1980s with the beginning of the sovereignty movement
in Quebec, political speeches, editorials, and op-ed letters in the English language media have
continually positioned Francophone peoples, and particularly Quebecois, as antagonists to
Alberta’s interests and as threats to the unity of the greater Canadian nation (Boily & Eperson,
2014).
Evidence that these discourses have shaped how people in Alberta think about Francophone
people, and in particular Quebecois, can be found within recent empirical research, modelled on
the pioneering work of Létourneau (2007), that asked 2,450 Canadians from across the country
the following question: “If you had to summarize the history of Canada up until the present day
in a short paragraph, what would you write?” (Gani, 2014). The responses of more than 200
randomly chosen adults from Alberta who participated in the online survey revealed that Albertans
possess distinct stories of Canada. When Quebecois and Francophone people were mentioned,
many respondents represented the story of Canada in terms of a perpetual antagonism between
Francophone Quebec and the rest of Canada. Within this matrix of understanding, Francophone
peoples, including Quebecois, are not acknowledged as worthy of appreciation, but instead are
portrayed as “whiners” and a threat to national unity. Prototypical examples of these opinions are
expressed as follows (Léger Marketing, 2011):
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 43 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
44
[Canada’s history is] An ethnic melting pot we should be proud of. Therefore we should not
give Quebec extra recognition or privileges. (line 2817)
We’ve become a melting pot of nationalities. Quebec needs to get over themselves. French
should be a choice. (line 628)
There has always been a great divide in this country between Anglophones and Francophones.
It has been a very divisive relationship – like an us versus them situation. I think this has
prevented Canada from being the great country that it should be. We are still fighting on the
Plains of Abraham. (line 2020)
The nature of this discourse was described by Boily and Epperson (2014) as a hostage thesis,
where Quebec, and to an extent Francophone people more generally, are positioned as holding
Canada and the other provinces captive through their threat to separate from the country. This
perception may in turn explain the deeper origins as to why teachers in Alberta are so resistant to
engage with Francophone perspectives. Simply put, educators in Alberta do not want to be held
hostage to a group of people who are always demanding perceived special rights and privileges.
Conclusion
As jurisdictions of education throughout the world continue to undergo curricular reforms that
seek to recognize and help students appreciate the perspectives and experiences of groups
in society that have been traditionally positioned outside the imagined community of the nation
(Banks, 2012), the scholarly community must have a better understanding of the dynamics at play
that make such efforts difficult. Our research suggests that professional development work cannot
proceed based on a deficiency discourse that treats inservice and preservice teachers as empty
vessels lacking knowledge about the “Other.” As our case study exemplifies, educators come to
any new learning situation with already established preconceptions and matrixes of understanding
that will cause them to resist efforts to teach the perspectives of those they perceive as outside
their identity position. Having insight into the role identity plays in this process, according to
Carson (2009), challenges how educational change is generally understood. This insight shifts
attentions away from a focus on curriculum support and in-service professional development
towards an appreciation of the psychodynamic forces at play that cause teachers to resist the
teaching of an “Other” perspective.
Closely connected to this point, the interpretative frameworks educators possess that cause
resistance to teaching “Other” perspectives are rarely named, or made explicit, by teachers
themselves. In this way, teachers’ own perspectives are often thought of as normal or common
sense, rather than value-laden and parochial. Due to this reality, we stand with den Heyer (2009)
in calling for curricular encounters that attempt to implicate what educators already do and do
not know as a central part of the learning process needed to engage alternative perspectives
on historical and contemporary issues. Within this framework, teachers’ own sense making and
subjectivity would become the focus or subject of the learning. Our case study identified three
key areas of resistance that will need to be explicitly engaged, and challenged, before any new
learning can occur around teaching Francophone perspectives in Alberta.
Correspondence
Raphael Gani
rgani011@uottawa.ca
David Scott
scottd@ucalgary.ca
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 44 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
45
References
Abbott, L. (2014). Interstitial encounters with curriculum: Attending to the relationship between
teachers’ subjectivities and the language of social studies (doctoral dissertation). Edmonton, AB:
University of Alberta.
Abbott, L. & Smith, J. (2013, June). A perilous and necessary curriculum: The fraught pedagogic
challenge of mediating multiple perspective messages in social studies. Paper presented at the
41st Canadian Society for the Study of Education Annual Conference, University of Victoria, BC.
Alberta Education (2005). Social studies: Programs of study. Retrieved from https://education.
alberta.ca/teachers/program/socialstudies/programs.aspx
Alberta Education (2007). Social studies kindergarten to grade 12 [Grade 6: Democracy: Action
and participation]. Retrieved from https://education.alberta.ca /media/774369/ss6.pdf
Alberta Learning (1999). Alberta response to the draft foundation document for the development
of the Western Canadian Protocol. Edmonton, AB: Author.
Alberta Learning (2002). High school social studies needs assessment report. Edmonton, AB:
Author.
Alberta Teachers’ Association (2015). The future of social studies – The voices of Alberta teachers
[raw data]. Retrieved from https://ssc.teachers.ab.ca/_layouts/15 /WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=/
SiteCollectionDocuments/2015survey/Open-ended%20Questions.xlsx&action=default
Alberta Teachers’ Association. (2016). The future of social studies – The voices of Alberta
teachers. Retrieved from https://ssc.teachers.ab.ca /SiteCollectionDocuments/Future%20of%20
Social%20Studies/Full%20Doc%20The%20Future%20of%20Social%20Studies.pdf
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism.
London, UK: Verso Editions.
Banks, J. (1989). Integrating the curriculum with ethnic content: Approaches and guidelines. In
J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 189–207).
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Banks, J. (Ed.) (2004). Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Banks, J. (Ed.) (2012). Encyclopedia of diversity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Boily, F. & Epperson, B. (2014). Quebec and Alberta: The clash of perceptions (2003–2012).
Canadian Political Science Review, 8(2), 34–58.
Bradford, K. J. (2008). An androcentric gauge: Portrayals of gender relation in elementary social
studies knowledge (unpublished doctoral dissertation). London, ON: University of Western
Ontario.
Britzman, D. (1998). Lost subjects, contested objects. Albany, NY: State University New York
Press.
Brown, D. C. (2004). The role of “culture” in the new Alberta social studies curriculum (doctoral
dissertation). Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta.
Carson, T. R. (2009). Implementing the new curriculum in China: Rethinking curriculum change
from the place of the teacher. In T. Autio & E. Ropo (Eds.), Reframing curriculum discourses:
Subject, society and curriculum (pp. 213–224). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 45 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
46
Clark, A. (2009). Teaching the nation’s story: Comparing public debates and classroom
perspectives on history education in Australia and Canada. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(6),
745–762. doi:10.1080/00220270903139635
Clark, P. (2004). The historical context of social studies in English Canada. In A. Sears & I.
Wright (Eds.), Challenges and prospects for Canadian social studies (pp. 17–37). Vancouver, BC:
Pacific Educational Press.
den Heyer, K. (2009). Sticky points: Teacher educators re-examine their practice in light of a new
Alberta social studies program and its inclusion of Aboriginal Perspectives. Teaching Education,
20(4), 343–355. doi:10.1080/10476210903254083
den Heyer, K. & Abbott, L. (2011). Reverberating echoes: Challenging teacher candidates to
tell and learn from entwined narrations of Canadian history. Curriculum Theory, 41(5), 610–635.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2011.00567.x
Doolittle, P. & Hicks, D. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for the use of technology
in social studies. Theory & Research in Social Education, 31(1), 72–104. doi:10.1080/00933104.
2003.10473216
Donald, D. (2009a). The curricular problem of Indigenousness: Colonial frontier logics, teacher
resistances, and the acknowledgment of ethical space. In J. Nahachewsky & I. Johnston (Eds.),
Beyond presentism: Re-imagining the historical, personal, and social places of curriculum (pp.
23–41). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Donald, D. (2009b). Forts, curriculum, and Indigenous Métissage: Imagining decolonization of
Aboriginal–Canadian relations in educational contexts. First Nations Perspectives: The Journal
of the Manitoba First Nations Education Resource Centre, 2(1), 1–24. Retrieved from http://www.
mfnerc.org/resources /fnp/volume-2-2009/
Francis, D. (1997). Myth, memory, and Canadian history. Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press.
Findlay, C. (2010). Transformative curriculum: Changing pedagogy and practice (master’s thesis).
Lethbridge, AB: University of Lethbridge.
Gani, R. (2014). Comment résumeriez-vous l’histoire de votre pays? Enquête auprès de Canadiens,
d’Américains, de Britanniques et de Français (master’s thesis). Quebec, QC: Université Laval.
Gereluk, D. & Scott, D. (2014). Citizenship education and the construction of identity in Canada.
In J. E. Petrovic & A. M. Kuntz (Eds.), Citizenship education around the world: Local contexts and
global possibilities (pp. 128–149). New York, NY: Routledge University Press.
Gitlin, A. & Margonis, F. (1995). The political aspect of reform: Teacher resistance as good sense.
American Journal of Education, 103(3), 377–405.
Knight, J. (2009). What can we do about teacher resistance? Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 508–513.
Kymlicka, W. (2007). Multicultural odysseys: Navigating the new international politics of diversity.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ladson-Billings, B. (1992). Reading between the lines and beyond the pages: A culturally relevant
approach to literacy teaching. Theory Into Practice, 31(4), 312–320. Retrieved from http://www.
jstor.org/stable/1476313
Léger Marketing (2011). Projet 13386-067 [Sondage Canada]. Unpublished raw data.
Learn Alberta (2012). Francophone experiences and perspectives. Edmonton, AB: Alberta
Education. Retrieved from http://www.learnalberta.ca/MyFolderWebLink.aspx?FolderID=78-
193&lang=en
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 46 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
47
Létourneau, J. (2007). Remembering our past: An examination of the historical memory of young
Québécois. In R. Sandwell (Ed.), To the past: History education, public memory & citizenship in
Canada (pp. 71–87). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Lévesque, S., Croteau, J.-P. & Gani, R. (2015). Conscience historique des jeunes francophones
d’Ottawa: Sentiment d’appartenance franco-ontarienne et récit du passé. Revue du Nouvel-
Ontario, 40, 177–229. doi:10.7202/1032587
Lévesque, S., Létourneau, J. & Gani, R. (2012, Spring). Québec students’ historical consciousness
of the nation. Canadian Issues/Thèmes Canadiens, 55–60.
Mckay, R. & Gibson, S. E. (1999). Reshaping the future of social studies: Literature/research
review. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Learning.
McKeown, M., Beck, I., Sinatra, G. & Loxterman, J. (1992). The contribution of prior knowledge
and coherent text to comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 27(1), 78-93. Retrieved from
http://www.reading.org/general/Publications /Journals/RRQ.aspx
National Council for the Social Studies (1994). National curriculum standards for social studies:
Chapter 2 – the themes of social studies. Retrieved from http://www.ncss.org/standards/
Osborne, K. (1997). Citizenship education and social studies. In I. Wright & A. Sears (Eds.),
Trends & issues in Canadian social studies (pp. 39–47). Vancouver, BC: Pacific Educational
Press.
Pashby, K. (2013). Related and conflated: A theoretical and discursive framing of multiculturalism
and global citizenship education in the Canadian context. (doctoral dissertation). Toronto, ON:
University of Toronto.
Richardson, G. H. (2002). A border within: The Western Canadian Protocol for social studies
education and the politics of national identity construction. Revista Mexicana de Estudios
Canadienses, 4, 31–46.
Robichaud, M. (2011). L’histoire de l’Acadie telle que racontée par les jeunes francophones
du Nouveau-Brunswick: construction et déconstruction d’un récit historique. Acadiensis, 40(2).
Retrieved from https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php /Acadiensis/article/view/18762
Scott, D. (2013). Teaching Aboriginal perspectives: An investigation into teacher practice amidst
curriculum change. Canadian Social Studies, 46(1), 31–43. Retrieved from http://www.educ.
ualberta.ca/css/Css_46_1/CSS-Vol-46-1-complete.pdf
Sears, A. (2014). Moving from the periphery to the core: The possibilities for professional learning
communities in history teacher education. In R. Sandwell & A. von Heyking (Eds.), Becoming a
history teacher: Sustaining practices in historical thinking and knowing (pp. 11–29). Toronto, ON:
University of Toronto Press.
Smith, D. (1999). Pedagon: Interdisciplinary essays in the human sciences, pedagogy and culture.
New York, NY: Peter Lang Inc.
Stanley, T. (2007). Whose public? Whose memory? Racisms, grand narratives, and Canadian
history. In R. M. Sandwell (Ed.), To the past: History education, public memory and citizenship in
Canada (pp. 32–49). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Statistics Canada (2015). Le français et la francophonie au Canada. Retrieved from http://www12.
statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/98-314-x/98-314-x2011003_1-fra.cfm
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 47 08/12/2017 08:16:41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL LEARNING, TEACHING AND RESEARCH
Vol. 15.1
48
Stewart, J. P. (2002). A critical conversation with curriculum development: An interpretative
inquiry into the early stage of the WCP social studies project (doctoral dissertation). Edmonton,
AB: University of Alberta.
Thompson, L. (2004). Identity and the forthcoming Alberta social studies curriculum: A postcolonial
reading. Canadian Social Studies, 38(3), 1–11. Retrieved from http:// www.educ.ualberta.ca/css/
css_38_3/ARthompson_postcolonial_reading.htm
VanSledright, B. (2008). Narratives of nation-state, historical knowledge, and school history
education. Review of Research in Education, 32, 109–146. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
stable/20185114
von Heyking, A. (2006). Fostering a provincial identity: Two eras in Alberta schooling. Canadian
Journal of Education, 29(4), 1127–1156.
Western Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Basic Education (2002). The common curriculum
framework for social studies: Kindergarten to grade 9. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Education,
Training and Youth.
Wertsch, J. (2004). Specific narratives and schematic narrative templates. In P. Seixas, (Ed.),
Theorizing historical consciousness (pp. 49–62). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
IJHLTR 15.1.indb 48 08/12/2017 08:16:41
View publication statsView publication stats
