Curriculum in Context

Throughout his teaching career, Paul has been interested not only in history, but also “in how to teach it so that it appeals to students.” When he came to teach at the University of Ottawa, he realized that teaching methods hadn’t really changed in 30 years. The institutional context in which he teaches is therefore what has had the most impact on shaping these teaching practices: “I started exploring ideas around historical thinking and the ways in which it has the potential to change the way we teach history in our schools.”

From Theory to Practice: Curricular Goals in Action

In his practice, Paul used to teach students historical thinking explicitly. For example, by asking students to apply a concept from historical thinking to their lesson. However, he found that the application was often very superficial. Future teachers are not to blame, however: “How can we expect them to know much about this subject when they’re usually seeing these concepts for the first time, when they’re at university, in the faculty of education? It’s not something they’ve experienced as students. And quite often, their associate teachers didn’t know much about it either.”

Faced with this reality, he is now orienting his approach towards a cognitive pedagogy centered on guided practice. Rather than focusing on the theoretical acquisition of knowledge, he favors concrete teaching situations, followed by critical discussion. “Pre-service teachers really need more practice, more action, rather than knowledge. And we still don’t stress this point enough.”

Effective teaching practices are rooted in the principles of practice, trial and error, and observation. He therefore seeks to create contexts where students can teach historical thinking, and then reflect together on what has been observed. The aim is to develop an understanding rooted in action: identifying what works, adjusting according to the results, learning from experience. Rather than telling them what historical thinking is, he encourages them to actively explore it, to discover its meaning through practice. Paul’s teaching may take the following form: the expert models for the student, then goes through a series of supervised stages where the student begins to practice certain aspects of historical thinking. Then, as they practice, there’s feedback given to them after they’ve practiced.

A promising tool for this would be the integration of a video analysis and annotation system. This would enable short teaching sequences – for example, a lesson on historical significance – to be recorded and then commented on in a structured way with the student. This method would offer feedback based on concrete evidence, facilitating a precise discussion of what worked well and what could be improved.

Finally, for Paul, teaching is how you learn to teach – and it’s in action that the foundations of historical thinking really come to life.

Navigating the Complexities of Teacher Preparation

Given the above, then, one of the main obstacles mentioned by Paul concerns the gap between the theoretical understanding of historical thinking and its application in the classroom. While he acknowledges the existence of a sound intellectual framework for historical thinking, McGuire points out that there is “very little research into how it is applied in the classroom.” This lack of empirical basis raises the question of whether current efforts enhance real student learning or merely serve as abstract exercises.

To address these challenges, Paul proposes a more systematic, evidence-based approach to teacher education. Drawing on the cognitive learning model, he envisions collaborative mentoring teams – including methods teachers, practicum supervisors and associate teachers – working closely with a single teacher candidate. Central to this model is the use of video evidence: recording segments of classroom teaching (for example, a 10-minute clip on historical significance), annotating them with structured feedback and using these recordings as the basis for professional dialogue. This enables mentors and candidates to reflect on specific practices with the help of concrete evidence. 

Co-created by Paul McGuire and Arianne Dufour