Steps in using primary historical sources to develop critical thinking

There are different criteria used by an historian or by a history teacher in selecting historical sources they take into account. The historian has to consider as principal criteria the historical issue he is studying, the historical paradigm he belongs to, or the intellectual product of his work (punctual study, a synthesis, or a prove for an hypothesis) The history teacher has to take into account his curriculum, (the skills he must develop to his students, the contents he has to transmit, the time he disposes of, or his students` motivation to learn history. Critical thinking represents one of the most important skills any teacher has to develop to his pupils. History teacher may reach this purpose by learning his pupils to analyze historical sources during his classroom (Ligia Sarivan, 2005, p. 113). To develop critical thinking by analyzing a primary historical source (a text, or a picture), students have to consider some of the following questions: 1. Who created it? Who is it created for? Before reading the source closely, they have to browse the item and answer to some other questions such as, was this a private communication or a published one? Is it aimed to a general public, to specialists, to a specific ethnic group ? 2. What kind of document is it? Is it a published book, is it a speech? Is it a private diary, a letter? Is it a picture or a map? 3. Where was it made, and where was it supposed to be distributed? 4. When was it made? Do you know anything else about that historical time? 5. Why was it made? To inform a single reader? To change public opinion? To persuade people ? (Michael Edmonds, 2005, p.7) Answering these questions students cover the first stage in approaching an historical source, that means the contextual analysis. Knowing these things about the document helps you understand what it says and to begin to formulate conclusions about its accuracy, completeness, biases, and point of view. After contextualizing a written source or a picture students have continue to the second phase, called internal or formal analysis. (Laura Capita, 2005, p. 136; MEC/ CNC, 2001, p. 46). That means, analyzing the picture material support for pictures and, both for pictures and written sources, identifying the elements the author wanted to show or to hide. To find out the author` s main point they have to examine different sources in specific ways: Texts or written sources:

1. Looking at the beginning, students could find that the main point was explicitly exposed, or that the author asked himself a question he intend to answer. 2. Examining the end of the document they might discover a short conclusion. 3. Paragraphs may open with a topic sentence or end with a conclusion. Chapters may have entire paragraphs that do this. 4. Ask the students to look for words that argue such as: should, must, necessarily, surely. 5. Ask them to underline words that express some causes or conclusion, like: because, consequently, therefore, in short, in sum, as a result. 6. They may also look for words that express priorities: essential, important, crucial. Different kinds of written texts may require different kinds of interpreting. With official documents it is essential to know who the writer was writing for, the context within which he was writing and the knowledge he may have about the issue. Diaries, memoirs, letters can pose some other problems. For example, we can put more faith in diaries that were not written for publication, because in such cases people are more open and honest. (Robert Stradling, 2001, p. 234). When examining a visual historical source, students have to pay attention to some other specific problems: Is there a portrait? Is there an advertisement or a poster, is there a map? They have to observe what is the largest object in the picture, what did the creator put in the middle and what has he pushed off to the edges or into the background? Identifying Underlying Assumptions, means to think about the author`s values, prejudices and biases (Strong statements that aren`t backed by explanation or evidence). Identifying Point of View (beliefs, desires, and values) usually shared by a community. Identifying a document basic point of view is important because it enables you to put it in a context. You have to pay attention to stereotypes or clichs the author may use in his written or in a visual document. (Laura Capita, 2005, p. 133, 140-142). You may also identify the author`s point of view using a well known label like as: conservative, fascist, humanist, liberal, Marxist, progressive, reactionary, scientific or utopian. Evaluating Reasoning consists in analyzing the arguments the author used to sustain his premises. Evaluating Inferences means to judge which arguments in the document are deductive (containing logical proof of their conclusion) and which arguments are inductive (intermediating links between permissions and conclusions)

Evaluating Evidence (author`s personal experience or appeal to other sources) is necessary because this way you can establish the credibility of the document. So, a history teacher`s students have to answer some of the following questions: 1. Was the author actually there? 2. How soon after the event was the evidence created? 3. How much of the event could the author have experienced, the whole thing or only a tiny part? 4. What might the author choose to omit because of his worldview? 5. What beliefs, desires, or values may have influenced the author`s perceptions or descriptions? Assessing Completeness To assess the completeness of any document, history students need to rely on their own knowledge and understanding of the subject as well as on their creativity and imagination. They have also to evaluate the omissions, depth and breadth of the document. In order to do these, they should ask: 1.How important is this missing information? 2.Does the author take into account all the complexities of the main issue, or simplify it? 3.Does the author take into account other points of view? Does he specifically talk about that viewpoint and explain why it has been rejected? The last two questions bring us to the third stage in interpreting an historical source meaning the comparison with some other sources, which implies elements from the first two stages. (Laura Capita, 2005, p. 136, 140) Analyzing and understanding texts and pictures is only the first half of critical thinking. The other half is being able to present your own thoughts about the document you analyse. To do this, you have to: prepare a short paragraph that puts the issue in context explaining who, what, where, when, and why in a very concise way (all five may not be applicable); specify the key terms and concepts used in the document and write a very brief definition of each; list the premises, including any underlying assumptions, beliefs, desires, and values you have about the issue; collect evidence in order to prove your premises are true; explain how does your conclusion follow from your premises (deductively, inductively, through inferences?)

estimate what other points of view, evidence, and conclusions might be possible on this topic. (Michael Edmonds, 2005, p. 8-22).

Bibliography 1. Berciu-Draghicescu, Adina, (2002), Arhivistica si documentaristica, University of Buchareset, from http://www.unibuc.ro/eBooks/istorie/arhivistica/2introducere.htm. 2. Capita, Laura, Capita, Carol (2005), Tendinte in didactica istoriei, Bucuresti, Editura Paralela 45. 3. Edmonds, Michael, Hull, Jennifer A., Janik, Erika L., Rylance, Keli , (2005), History and critical Thinking, Library-Archives Division, Madison, from www.winconsinhistory.org. 4. MEC/ CNC, (2001), Ghid metodologic pentru aplicarea programelor scolare din aria curriculara om si societate, invatamant liceal, Bucuresti, Editura Aramis. 5. Petre, Zoe , (2002), Scris si oral in istoria recenta, in Istoria recenta in Europa. Obiecte de studiu, surse, metode, New Europe College, p. 203-210, from http://www.nec.ro/fundatia/nec/publications/istoria.pdf. 6. Sarivan, Ligia, Tesileanu, Angela, Hora, Irina Capita, Carol, Mandrut, Octavian , (2005), Didactica ariei curriculare Om si societate, from http://www.cbg.uvt.ro/geografie/educatie/cursuri/an2004-2005/invat_rural/didactica.pdf. 7. Stradling, Robert, (2001), Teaching 20tth-century European History, Strasbourg, Council of Europe. 8. Zub, Alexandru, (2006), Clio sub semnul interogatiei, Bucuresti, Editura Polirom.