What counts for knowledge?

What counts as historical knowledge is controlled by powerful forces. In establishing a new national curriculum for history, Michael Gove, education secretary in David Cameron’s Conservative government between 2010 and 2014 (Paton, 2010), favoured a broadly chronological account of Britain’s story, with children being taught about Britain’s impact on the world. This was a response to critiques by the political Right, who wanted a set of ‘facts’ about Britain to be taught, rather than the historical skills that enabled children to understand their own place in history.

The Better History Group (a short-lived, right-wing group of teachers) argued in 2010 that: ‘we believe that the teaching of British history has been allowed to deteriorate, to such an extent that substantial numbers of young people do not have that basic grasp of this country’s history that they need in order to function as informed and active adult citizens’ (Paton, 2010). The phrase ‘this country’s history’ was considered unproblematic – an account of what constitutes knowledge being related to the history of great men and the occasional great woman, rather than connecting to ordinary people’s lives.

After some pressure, campaigners secured the inclusion of Mary Seacole, the Jamaican-born Black woman, who nursed British soldiers in the Crimean War (1853-56) in the list of topics for history teaching on the national curriculum (Rawlinson, 2013). This success marked an important point in understanding ethnic diversity in British history and recognising that ordinary people wanted a say in what counts as historical knowledge. But history teaching often relies on what happens in universities. In academic history, traditionally, historians study the past as ‘lone scholars’, as individual historians who formulate research questions, conduct research in libraries and archives and then write sole-authored academic outputs. Therefore, what usually counts for knowledge is single-authored books and journal articles produced by professional historians. Historians in universities then privilege writing by other historians in universities as they develop their thinking about the past.

This study of history writing is called ‘historiography’, and it forms the basis of what university students are taught on their degree programmes. The problem with this process is that it is quite exclusive.