AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE: HISTORY
This page is a work in progress...
CLASS ACTIVITY i: WHAT HISTORIANS DO
Begin by asking volunteer students to read the Howard Zinn and Arthur Marwick quotes. Mention to the class that Zinn is famous for a life of civil rights and anti-war activism; and his revisionist A People's History of the United States. Marwick was a respected Brit historian who introduced the notion of "witting vs. unwitting testimony." It is worth asking students to reflect for a moment on why Marwick made this distinction when weighing historical evidence.
For further reading here is a printable pdf of a succinct introduction to the nature of History by Marwick.
Continue in similar vein with readings of the following pair of official distillations of the nature of history from the International Baccalaureate Organization itself. Ask the class to reflect on how much these these lofty descriptions have at aligned with their actual experience in school history classes.
CLASS ACTIVITY II: COMPARING HISTORY TO SCIENCE
Place students in groups of three. Allow a strictly timed six minutes to freely brainstorm a comparison of history and science. Tell students to write down bullet points under two simple headings: "differences" and "similarities."
Next combine trios to make groups of six. Tell them to nominate a facilitator and scribe. Next allow a timed four minutes to distill a single master list. They should add a third heading: "probably wrong or very controversial" to capture any wild ideas for later discussion.
Finally provide groups with several copies of the following table (so that they can produce several drafts and a final clean copy.) The task is to take their similarity and differences bullet points and arrange them according to the official TOK Areas of Knowledge Framework. Lively debate should ensue. The teacher should circulate between the groups to provide clarity on the full intention of the 5 categories. Printable pdf.
When the task has exhausted itself, ask that all six participants to sign the final clean copy. Collect them. Before the next class meeting the teacher should produce a distillation of the efforts of the entire class for review and some whole class meta-discussion about the two Areas of Knowledge and our methodology itself.
If all goes well there should be ample evidence of the power of collective thinking--including the value of allowing some opportunity for free brainstorming, followed by a systematic reining in.
CLASS ACTIVITY III: NAPOLEONIC INTERLUDE
This activity provides an encounter with some seven famous oil paintings depicting the rise and fall of Napoleon Bonaparte. It will be immediately obvious to students that certain artworks seem to be vivid and direct, non-textual, historic documents. As seductive and evocative as artworks can initially appear; critical examination reveals a more complicated and more interesting relationship between high art and history.
Here for reference is list of the artworks.
1. Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres (1806) Napoleon I on his Imperial Throne. Oil on canvas. Musée de l'Armée, Hôtel des Invalides, Paris.
2. Jacques-Louis David (1801) Napoleon Crossing the Alps. Oil on canvas. Château de Malmaison, Rueil-Malmaison.
3. Horace Vernet (1826) Napoleon Bonaparte leading his troops over the bridge of Arcole. Oil on canvas. Christie’s London.
4. Illarion Pryanischnikow (1874) French retreat from Moscow in 1812. Oil on canvas. Location unknown.
5. Paul Delaroche (1850) Bonaparte Crossing the Alps. Oil on canvas. St James's Palace, London
6. Paul Delaroche (1850) Napoleon at Fontainbleau 1814. Oil on canvas. Musée de l'Armée, Hôtel des Invalides, Paris.
7. Jean Baptiste Mauzaisse (1843) Napoleon on Deathbed 1821. Musee Nat. du Chateau de Malmaison
CLASS ACTIVITY IV: TROTSKY AIR-BRUSHED
A few students may be familiar with these iconic images that are often presented in Higher Level world history courses. The TOK class can be asked to “spot the difference,” determine approximate time and place, identify the key players and attempt to explain why photographs like these were altered by Stalin's darkroom technicians.
Are photographs reliable historical sources? Why?
Would images like these be successful propaganda today?
What recent technological advances have further debased the notion that “the camera cannot lie”?
How should we approach academic history written under the auspices a totalitarian regime?