Page 71 - Balancing between the present and the past

Only four students (Jim, Ashley, Ben, and Kim) referenced Hannes’ position or
his family’s position in society in their reasoning. For example, Jim reasoned that
Hannes’ family was wealthy and respected, and therefore, he might have voted for
the NSDAP if this party could ensure the prestige of Hannes’ family. However, no
student reasoned that Hannes’ family might be part of the bourgeoisie and, thus,
might long for the German Empire period (1871–1918) when most of these families
had far greater political influence. In addition to making affective connections and
considering the role of the historical agent, the protocols revealed yet another type of 3 historical empathy. In particular, one student (Stella) used her knowledge of current
values and beliefs of different places in the world. Stella reasoned that in other parts of the world that had a one-party political system, there could be economic welfare and people could be satisfied:
3.5.2.3
Yeah, but maybe he does not feel the need to take part in political decision making. Why would you take part in decision making if you think the government makes wise and good decisions? Decisions that are also good for you. The only thing I then could say every 4 years when there are elections: You are doing a great job, keep up the good work. You still see this in parts of Asia, where people think that they do not need political influence because it is going very well within their own country. (Stella, reasoning about Item 2)
Reconstructing the historical context
The protocols further revealed that the 36 students used different types of knowledge to reconstruct the historical context as they engaged in HPT. Most references were made to socio-political knowledge, with a total of 279 references, followed by 183 references to socio-economic knowledge, and 154 references to chronological knowledge. Far fewer references were made to socio-cultural knowledge (n = 81) and spatial knowledge (n = 5). See Table 10 for detailed information. The protocols revealed that 32 students made references to chronological knowledge. Four students (Emma, Mark, Sophie, and Bas) did not display any form of adequate chronological knowledge. Three of these students obtained mean HPT scores ≤ 3.00, while one student (Emma) obtained a mean HPT score of 3.33. Two of these students (Mark and Sophie) also viewed the past from a present-oriented perspective. Only five students made references to spatial knowledge. Of these five, one student had a mean HPT score of 3.78 (Nina), three students (Tom, Emma, and Ben) had mean HPT scores of 3.33, and one student (Anna) had a mean HPT score of 3.00. These students, for
Contextualizing historical agents’ actions
69