In my article I investigate how history education research in Canada has changed over time. In particular I examine three prominent nation-wide studies published in 1923, 1953 and 1968, respectively. By looking at these historical case studies, I aim to shed light on what assumptions and aims have guided past researchers, what research methods have been used, and how socio-cultural factors have driven and shaped past history education research in Canada. I also wanted to understand what educational philosophies have influenced past research and how these philosophies shaped researchers’ assessments of Canada’s history classrooms. I believe this research has relevance at this moment as the Thinking Historically for Canada’s Future research project, led by Dr. Carla Peck at the University of Alberta and involving over 30 researchers across the country, continues to map the terrain of K-12 history education in Canada, carrying out the first comprehensive national study since 1968.

This article was inspired, in part, by a HERJ call for papers. I was delighted to see HERJ was organizing a special issue on history education in historical perspective which argued that the field of history education ironically too often fails to investigate its own past. I believe this contention is also true in Canada. As historian and history educator Ken Osborne argued in 2012 “one of the stranger characteristics of history education seems to be its lack of historical memory” (p. 132). I argue in this article that researchers would better understand ongoing debates about progressive pedagogies, knowledge-rich curriculum, and arguments over the inclusion or exclusion of certain historical topics, by considering how these issues have been debated over time. In my article I discuss how all three of the historical reports I analyzed offered stinging critiques of history teaching in Canada. The reports’ authors also suggested that there was a strong and persistent disconnect between what they imagined to be effective and meaningful history education and what was actually unfolding in Canada’s classrooms.

I also make the case that there is a significant and revealing relationship between periods of heightened political and social debates over national identity and moments of intensified research into history education. This is true now for researchers in Canada as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has, in Michael Marker’s (2019) words “prompted a national conversation that has pulled history out of the past and placed it center stage for a discomfiting panoply of inquiries regarding Canadian identity” (p. 186). While focused on Canada, I believe this article offers insights for history education researchers internationally, who might benefit from considering a longer historical perspective on the nature and impact of research in their national contexts.

Researching history education in Canada: plus ça change? by James Miles (University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada) is part of the HERJ Special Series, History education in historical perspective and published in History Education Research Journal, volume 22.

James Miles is an Assistant Professor of social studies education at the University of Alberta. He is also a co-investigator on the Thinking Historically for Canada’s Future SSHRC partnership grant. His research focuses on historical thinking, historical justice and teaching and learning difficult histories. He previously taught social studies and history in British Columbia for 10 years.

Canadian history education history of history education Canadian curricular reform history education research What Culture? What Heritage?