2,642 research outputs found
Intervention de Terry Haydn
No full textIntervention de Terry Haydn (School of Education and Lifelong Learning, University of East Anglia), intitulé History education in a post-truth world – A view from the UK du 20 novembre 2020. Présentation Power Point de Terry Haydn Communication de Terry Haydn
Terry Underwood
No full textDate:1948Terry Underwood arrived in the Northern Territory in 1968 and with her new husband moved to a new home at Riveren. Home consisted of a caravan, a bough shed, camp stove and a tent as the master bedroom. Together they transformed Riveren into a thriving cattle station.
Over a span of 30 years she has been involved in many projects which have included: producer/director of plays, talent quests and documentaries, along with appearances on TV and radio. She is also a patron to the Australian Outback Tourism Association and Northern Territory Fashion Awards. In 2005 Underwood was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia in the General Division in Queen's Birthday 2005 Honours List for "service to the community, particularly through business and in promotional and cattle industry roles". In her autobiography 'In the middle of nowhere' Underwood captures the essence of her life "Riveren has captured our bodies, hearts and spirits. It lies within the heart of Australia. How privileged we are to call it home. Riveren is where I belong. I know it would not have worked anywhere else with anyone else. In the middle of nowhere has become my everywhere." (Underwood, 1998: 276).
Source: In the middle of nowhere. Terry Underwood. Moorebank, NSW : Transworld, 1998.NurseAuthorPhotographerCattle Woma
Recommended from our members
Pupils' enjoyment of history: what lessons can teachers learn from their pupils?
No full textThe paper explores pupil attitudes towards history as a school subject in England, with a view to developing a better understanding of the factors which influence disaffection or engagement with the subject. The study attempts to identify what pupils like and dislike about how they are taught and what they are taught in history lessons. The study was carried out in 12 secondary schools with pupils aged 11-14. Questionnaires were returned from 1740 pupils and 160 of these were involved in focus group interviews. The findings show that how pupils are taught appears to matter more than what they are taught and identifies teaching approaches that pupils considered to be particularly effective, and teaching approaches that appear to contribute to pupil disaffection and disengagement from the subject. The study also provides insights into the extent to which pupils find history enjoyable compared to other school subjects. Although the study is primarily of interest to history teachers, it may also be of interest to teachers of other subjects who have a concern for the degree of pupil engagement with their subject
Recommended from our members
Pupil perspectives on the purposes and benefits of studying history in high school: a view from the UK
No full textDrawing on data from 1,740 pupil questionnaires and 160 pupils in focus group interviews, the paper explores pupils’ views on why they study history in high school. Although many pupils reported that they did consider the study of history to be useful, their views on why history is part of the school curriculum bore little relation to those given in curriculum specifications and in academic discourse about the purposes and benefits of studying history in school. The study provides insight into pupils’ ideas about why they study history at school and considers the implications of these ideas for history teachers and history teacher educators. In addition to suggesting that many pupils have very vague and inchoate ideas about the purposes of school history, the data also revealed a clear ‘school effect’ on pupils’ views about history. In some schools, quite a high proportion of pupils were able to articulate the benefits of studying history in terms which bore some correlation to the case for school history identified in official curriculum documentation, whereas in other schools, far fewer pupils were able to do this.It seems possible that many history teachers may be making assumptions about pupils’ understanding of the rationale for studying history in school. The variations between schools suggested that there are things that teachers can do to explain the purposes and benefits of school history to their pupils. The outcomes of the study also indicate that there is a case for history teachers devoting more time and thought to helping pupils to understand the purposes and benefits of studying history in high school in order to improve the motivation and engagement of their pupils<br/
Recommended from our members
Children’s ideas about what it means ‘to get better’ at history: a view from the United Kingdom
No full textThe past three decades have seen radical changes in policymakers’, educationalists’ and history educators’ ideas about what it means ‘to get better’ in history as a school subject in the UK. Before the advent of a formal, standardised ‘National Curriculum for History’ in 1991, the idea of progression in the subject was loosely defined, not precisely articulated, and seen generally in terms of an aggregation of subject content knowledge, assessed largely through extended writing based on pupil comprehension and recall of what they had been taught. The inception of a National Curriculum for History brought about a much more clearly defined framework for progression in the subject. The introduction of formal (and quite complex) models for measuring pupils’ progress in history, and changing and contested ideas about progression in history as a school subject occasioned vigorous debate, both between politicians, historians and history teacher educators, and between teacher educators themselves.However, less attention has focused on pupils’ ideas about what it means to get better at history, and the extent of their understanding of the models of progression which have been developed in recent years. This study, funded by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), the body responsible for the ‘health’ of the school curriculum in the UK, was part of a review of history as a school subject which aimed to develop more insight into pupil perceptions of history. One strand of the enquiry asked pupils to explain in their own words what they thought it meant ‘to get better at history’. A series of focus group interviews involving 160 pupils between the ages of 11 and 14 across twelve schools in London, the South Coast and the East of England, revealed that many pupils had very little understanding of the models for progression for history which have been put in place in UK schools, and quite vague and inchoate ideas about what it means to make progress in history. Some pupils saw it as primarily a matter of the aggregation of subject content knowledge, others related it to a combination of acquiring more subject content knowledge and getting better at writing essays. Only a minority of pupils, in some of the schools involved, were able to explain progression in terms which in any way reflected the models of progression laid down in official curriculum specifications, and as expounded in adult discourse about history education.It is possible that many teachers have perhaps made assumptions about the extent to which pupils understand what they have to do to make progress in history, and that more time and thought might be invested in this aspect of history education in order to improve pupil motivation and attainment in history. <br/
Pupil and teacher perspectives on motivation and engagement in high school history: a U.K. view
No full textDrawing on data from 1,740 pupil questionnaires and 160 pupils in focus group interviews, the paper explores pupils’ views on why they study history in high school. Although many pupils reported that they did consider the study of history to be useful, their views on why history is part of the school curriculum bore little relation to those given in curriculum specifications and in academic discourse about the purposes and benefits of studying history in school. The study provides insight into pupils’ ideas about why they study history at school and considers the implications of these ideas for history teachers and history teacher educators. In addition to suggesting that many pupils have very vague and inchoate ideas about the purposes of school history, the data also revealed a clear ‘school effect’ on pupils’ views about history. In some schools, quite a high proportion of pupils were able to articulate the benefits of studying history in terms which bore some correlation to the case for school history identified in official curriculum documentation, whereas in other schools, far fewer pupils were able to do this.It seems possible that many history teachers may be making assumptions about pupils’ understanding of the rationale for studying history in school. The variations between schools suggested that there are things that teachers can do to explain the purposes and benefits of school history to their pupils. The outcomes of the study also indicate that there is a case for history teachers devoting more time and thought to helping pupils to understand the purposes and benefits of studying history in high school in order to improve the motivation and engagement of their pupils.<br/
What happens to a subject in a ‘free market’ curriculum: a study of secondary school history in the United Kingdom
No full textApproximately seven out of 10 pupils in England choose to exercise their right to drop history as a school subject as soon as they are able to do so (at the age of 13 or 14). However, this 30% overall take-up rate conceals massive variations between schools, with over 80% of pupils continuing to study the subject in some schools, and under 5% in others. The study, which was funded by the Curriculum and Qualifications Authority (QCA), sought to gain greater insight into the factors influencing post-compulsory take-up of history, with a complex range of factors emerging as influencing these figures. The findings should be of interest to those involved in history education in high schools and for those involved with other subjects that are similarly affected by the freeing up of the post-14 curriculu
Recommended from our members
'30% is not bad considering ...' Factors influencing pupil take-up of history post Key Stage 3: an exploratory enquiry
No full text- …
