Page 195 - Balancing between the present and the past
P. 195

                                that 40 items are too many to score during one lesson. A larger generalizability study, including a decision study that focuses on how many items are necessary to achieve reliability, could provide these insights. Furthermore, the FAT-HC was only tested when observing videotaped lessons and not when observing live lessons. The Rasch methodology could also provide more information on the instrument’s reliability and item difficulty as perceived by the history teachers (Fischer & Molenaar, 1995). Combining the use of the FAT-HC with other methods, such as teachers’ self-reports and students’ questionnaires, could also provide more insight into how historical contextualization is promoted in classrooms. When a reliable and valid observation system is established, research can focus on differences between teachers (e.g., novices versus experts; history teachers trained in contextualization versus non- trained history teachers). A reliable instrument also opens the way for cross-sectional research, longitudinal studies, and international comparisons.
The samples of teachers, students, and lessons used in the different studies are a third important limitation. Most studies were explorative in nature. Therefore, more teachers, students, and lessons should be included to confirm the findings of the different studies. What differences occur in reasoning between younger and older students when asked to create historical contexts? Are students less engaged in historical contextualization processes during history lessons? Which individual design principle best promotes historical contextualization?
8.3 Three directions for future research
Three possible directions for future research can be formulated based on the findings 8 and limitations of this thesis. First, the field of history education research needs more
valid and reliable instruments that can examine students’ ability to perform historical
reasoning competencies in more detail. As shown in this thesis, the development of
such instruments is a complex process. It is a hopeful development that different studies have recently been published on this topic (Ercikan & Seixas, 2015; Reich, 2009; VanSledright, 2013). In addition, various initiatives have been launched such as Beyond the Bubble project of the Stanford History Education Group and the Historical Thinking Competencies in History project of Trautwein et al. (2017). International collaboration is needed to further develop and test such instruments in different contexts. Other important questions that also need to be answered are: how can
General conclusions and discussion
 193


























































































   193   194   195   196   197