Tarih Öğretimini Çarpıtmanın Meşru Gerekçeleri Olabilir Mi?

Öz

Günümüzde tarih öğretimi, bugünün politikalarına bir tür gerekçe bulmak ve haklılık kazandırmak için de çarpıtılabilmektedir. İlk bakışta tarih öğretimi, geçmişle ilgili bir alan olarak görülse de bugünle çok sıkı bir bağ içindedir. Türkiye özelinde düşünüldüğünde de benzer bir durum varlığından söz edilebilir. Zira Cumhuriyet’in kuruluş yıllarından günümüze kadar üst-anlatıların, tarihsel söylemlerin iktidar odağına göre şekillendiği görülmektedir. Öğretmen adaylarının, tarihin kötüye kullanımına dair görüşlerinin incelendiği bu çalışmada, nitel araştırma desenlerinden durum çalışması kullanılmıştır. Tarih öğretmen adaylarına göre tarih öğretimini çarpıtmanın meşru sebeplerinin olup olmadığının araştırıldığı bu çalışma, Wirth'in (1999) altı başlık altında sınıflandırdığı tarihin istismar biçimlerine dayanmaktadır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu Türkiye'de iki farklı üniversitede görev yapan toplam 72 tarih ve sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplamak için beş farklı sorudan oluşan görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Görüşmeler sırasında elde edilen verileri incelemek için içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, çoğu katılımcının inkar, sabitleme, tembellik ve cahillik yoluyla tarihin kötüye kullanılmasına karşı çıktığı ortaya koyulmuş; ayrıca katılımcı yanıtları, tarihin atlama yoluyla kötüye kullanılması açısından eşit olarak dağıtılmıştır. Buna ek olarak, birçok katılımcı tarihin tahrifat yoluyla suistimal edilmesini kabul edilebilir bulmuştur. Bu çalışmanın katılımcılarının, yakın geleceğin tarih öğretmenleri olduğu göz önünde bulundurulursa, tarihin kötüye kullanımı konusunun, gelecekte de tarih öğretiminin önemli bir sorunu olacağı anlaşılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• tarihin kötüye kullanımı,
• çarpıtma
• resmi tarih
• tarih öğretimi

Could There Be Legitimate Reasons for Abuse of Teaching History?

Abstract

This study, which examines if there are legitimate reasons for distorting the teaching of history according to preservice history teachers, is based on the abuse forms of history, which Wirth (1999) categorized under six headings. The study group of the research consisted of a total of 72 preservice history and social studies teachers at two different universities in Turkey. An interview form, consisting of five different questions, was used for data collection. Content analysis was conducted to study the data obtained during the interviews. The research results reveal that most participants oppose the abuse of history via denial, fixation, and laziness and ignorance; further, participant responses were evenly distributed in terms of the abuse of history by omission. In addition, many participants consider the abuse of history by falsification as acceptable.

Keywords

• abuse of history
• official history
• teaching history
• teaching history in turkey

References

1. Akman, Ş. T. (2011). The ideological and political characters of the formal historiography of the early Republican period in the context of the Turkish History Thesis. Journal of Hacettepe Faculty of Law, 1(1), 80–109.
2. Akyıldız, K., ve Karacasu, B. (1999). Blue Anatolia: a partnership attempt with literary canon and Kemalism. Society and Science, 81, 26-43.
3. Alaca, E. (2016). The change of political power and the narrative of padishahs in the secondary education history textbooks. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 11(14), 1-16. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.
4. Alaca, E. (2017). An evaluation of high school history textbooks in the republic period. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2017, 9 (4), 988 -1007.
5. Alaslan, F. ve Şimşek, A. (2014). The history textbooks in Turkey from nationalist history to national history and from controversial education to peaceful education. Journal of Academic Perspective, 40, 206.-224.
6. Alkan, M. Ö. (2001). An Essay on the Birth and Evolution of Official Ideology. Political Thought in Modern Turkey: Thought Heritage, Administrative and Constitutional Accumulation Transferred to the Republic. M. Ö. Alkan (Ed.). İstanbul: Communication, 377- 407.
7. Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso Books.
8. Armağan, M. (2017, 22 Ocak). The same old history in “the new history curriculum.”.www.yenisafak.com.

9. Aydın, S. (2002). Turkish historiography among enlightenment and historical problems: A case of feudalism. Society and Science, Winter, 39-80.
10. Aylar, E. (2018). How should the curriculum change be evaluated? Matter, Dialectics, and Society, 1, 33- 39.
11. Barca, I., & Nakou, I. (Eds.). (2010). Contemporary public debates over history education. IAP.
12. Barton, K. C. (2001). A sociocultural perspective on children’s understanding of historical change: Comparative findings from Northern Ireland and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 881-913.
13. Barton, K. C., & McCully, A. W. (2010). You can form your own point of view”: Internally persuasive discourse in Northern Ireland students’ encounters with history. Teachers College Record, 112(1), 142-181.
14. Benlisoy, F. ve Benlisoy, S. (2001). Nationalist historiography and “awareness of underdevelopment”: Past perceptions in Greek historiography. Society and Science, 91, 242-279.
15. Bilgin, N. (1995). Formal history as a search for identity. S.Özbaran (Ed.), History Teaching and Textbooks: 1994 Buca Symposium (ss. 107-122). İstanbul: History Foundation Publishing.
16. Bilgin, N. (2013). History and collective memory. İstanbul: Bağlam Publications.
17. Bilim Akademisi (2017). Towards a new curriculum program. https://bilimakademisi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bilim-akademisi-mufredat-raporu-2017-ekim.pdf. Access Date: 17.12.2021
18. Bolay, S. H. (1981). The role of religion in the formation of the Turkish people and society. Nationalists Grand Science Congress - III (1978): Education and Religious Life: Papers, Explanations, and Negotiations. İstanbul: Boğaziçi Publishing.
19. Buckley-Zistel, S. (2009). Nation, narration, unification? The politics of history teaching after the Rwandan genocide. Journal of Genocide Research, 11(1), 31-53. doi:10.1080/14623520802703608
20. Carr, E. H. (1990). What is history. Penguin Books, UK.
21. Carretero, M. (2011). Constructing patriotism: Teaching history and memories in global worlds. IAP.
22. Carretero, M., & Bermudez, A. (2012). Constructing histories. In J. Valsiner, Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (s. 625-646). New York: Oxford University Press.
23. Carretero, M., Asensio, M., & Rodríguez Moneo, M. (2013). History education and the construction of national identities. IAP. Clark, A. (2010). Politicians using history. Australian Journal of Politics & History, 56(1), 120-131.
24. Copeaux, E. (1998). Topography and Chronography of Turkish Identity Discourse. History Education and the “Other” Problem in History: 2nd International History Congress (8-10 June 1995, İstanbul). O. Köymen (Ed.). İstanbul: Turkey Economic and Social History Foundation Publications, 70-85.
25. Copeaux, E. (2006). In History Textbooks (1931-1993): From Turkish History Thesis to Turkish-Islamic Synthesis. İstanbul: İletisim Publishing.
26. Council of Europe. (1996). Recommendation 1283 on history and the learning of history in Europe
27. Çiçek, R. (2009). Controversial subjects history teaching. IV. Social Sciences Education Congress Papers Book Volume 2 in 7-9 October 2009, Istanbul: United. 151- 157.
28. De Baets, A. (2013). A theory of the abuse of History. Revista Brasileira de Historia, 33(65), 17-60.
29. Demircioğlu, İ. H. (2007). Student centered approach in history teaching. Ankara: Anı Publishing.
30. Demircioğlu, İ. H. (2016). Use of controversial topics in history lessons: opinions of Turkish history teachers. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24(1), 147-162.
31. Dilek, D. (2007). Learning and thought development in teaching history. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
32. Eğitim-Sen (2017). Education curriculum changes and draft curriculum report. (http://egitimsen.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/M%C3%BCfredat-Raporu.pdf). Access date: 17.12.2021
33. Erinç Erdal, A. (2012). History and education in the Inönü Era: Changes an continuties on perceptions of history and its reflections on educational practices. PHD thesis. Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
34. Ersanlı, B. (1995). History teaching and Turkish world. History Teaching and Textbooks, Özbaran (Ed.), Buca Symposium 29 September-1 October 1994, İstanbul: History Foundation Publishing.
35. Ersanlı, B. (2006). Power and History, “Official History” Thesis Formation in Turkey (1929-1937). İstanbul: İletisim Publishing.
36. Ferro, M. (1984). The use and abuse of history: Or how the past is taught to children. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
37. Freedman, S. W., Weinstein, H. M., Murphy, K., & Longman, T. (2008). Teaching history after identity-based conflicts: The Rwanda experience. Comparative Education Review, 52(4), 663-690.
38. Gellner, E. (2006). Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
39. Gutek, G. L. (2013). Philosophical, ideological, and theoretical perspectives on education (2nd Edition). Pearson Pub. Güvenç, B., Şaylan, G., Tekeli, İ., & Turan, Ş. (1994). Turkish-Islamic Synthesis. İstanbul: Sarmal Publishing.
40. Hacıibrahimoğlu Çakan, I. (2012). Perception of republic and humanism. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Culture Publishing Hobsbawm, E. (1997). On history. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
41. Kabapınar, Y. (1992). High school history textbooks as an ideological struggle field - I. History and Society, 106, 36-40.
42. Kafesoğlu, İ. (1999). Turkish-Islamic Synthesis. İstanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat.
43. Kara, S. (2004). Romantic era of national history: The first years of the Republic. Journal of Atatürk University Turkish Studies Institute, 23, 319-334.
44. Karacasu, B. (2009). “Blue Kemalism”: Turkish humanism and Anatolianism. Political Thought in Modern Turkey: Kemalism. A. İnsel (Ed.). İstanbul: Communication Publishing, p. 334- 343.
45. Koçak, K. (1998). History understanding from the Republic to today and history teaching in secondary education institutions. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Ankara: Gazi University Institute of Social Sciences.
46. Koloğlu, O. (1995). Present-day / presentism, illusions and results in history teaching. Özbaran, S. (Ed.), History Teaching and Textbooks: 1994 Buca Symposium (pp. 89-97). Istanbul: History Foundation Publishing.
47. Köken, N. (2002). Republican understanding of history and history teaching (1923-1960). Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Isparta: Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences.
48. Nussbaum, M., & Cohen, J. (2002). For love of country? A new democracy forum on the limits of patriotism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
49. Özkırımlı, U. (1999). Nationalism theories. İstanbul: Sarmal Publishing.
50. Palabiyik, M. S. (2018). Politicization of recent Turkish history:(ab) use of history as a political discourse in Turkey. Turkish studies, 19(2), 240-263. DOI:10.1080/14683849.2017.1408414.
51. Pamuk, A. (2014). Identity and history: The use of history in the construction of identity. İstanbul: Yeni İnsan Publishing.
52. Philips, I. (2009). Controversial and sensitive issues in history teaching, History and Social Studies Education for a Multicultural Europe, (Ed.) Aktekin, S., Harnett, P., Öztürk, M., Smart, D., Ankara: Harf Eğitim Publishing, p. 121-132.
53. Schlesinger, P. (1991). Media, state, and nation: political violence and collective identities. Sage Publications, London.
54. Sinanoğlu, S. (1988). Turkish humanism. Ankara: Turkish Historical Society Printing House.
55. Smith, A. D. (1991). National identity. London: Penguin Books.
56. Southgate, B. (2001). History: what and why? (Second Edition). New York: Routledge.
57. Şimşek, A. & Yazıcı, F. (2013). Past and present of history teaching in Turkey. TYB Academy, 3(8), 11-33.
58. Şimşek, A. (2012). An evaluation on “Turkish History Thesis.” Turkey Diary, 111, 85-100.
59. Şimşek, A. (2017). 2017 draft date 9-10-11, criticism of Turkish culture and history of civilization curriculum. TUHED, 6(1), 140-162.
60. Tekeli, İ. (1998). Thinking on historiography. Ankara: Dost.
61. Stradling, R. (2001). Teaching 20th Century European History. Council for Cultural Cooperation.
62. Toprak, Z. (2012). Republic and Anthropology from Darwin to Dersim. İstanbul: Doğan Book.
63. Tosh, J. (1999). The pursuit of history: aims, methods and new directions in the study of modern history. Pearson Education Ltd.
64. Turan, O. (1980). Communism sources in Turkey. İstanbul: Nakışlar Publishing.
65. VanSledright, B. (2008). Narratives of nation-state, historical knowledge, and school history education. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 109-146.
66. Wirth, L. (1999). Facing misuses of history. The misuse of history. Symposium on “Facing misuses of history” Oslo (Norway) 28-30 June, p. 23-56.
67. Yazıcı, F. & Yıldırım, T. (2018). History teaching as a nation-building tool in the early republican period in Turkey (1923–1938). Paedagogica Historica 54(4), 433-446.
68. Yazıcı, F. (2011). Historiography in Republican History Textbooks. Historiography in Turkey. Engin, V. & Şimşek, A. (Ed.). İstanbul: Yeditepe, p.197-219.
69. Yazıcı, F. (2017). History teaching in 2000s (2000-2017). History Teaching in Turkey, A. Şimşek (Ed.), pp. 369-383. İstanbul: Pegem Academy.
70. Yıldırım, T. & Şimşek, A. (2015). “The Narrative of Religion” in the high school textbooks of the early republican period in turkey. Education & Science,179, 323-340.
71. Yıldırım, T. (2014). The “others” in history textbooks: An assessment of 1930s. Journal of Turkish History Education, 3(1), 62-89. DOI: 10.17497/tuhed.185590
72. Yıldırım, T. (2016). Identity discourse in history textbooks. İstanbul: Yeni İnsan.
73. Yıldırım, T. (2018). Comparison of 2007 and 2017 history course curriculum. Journal of Kırşehir Faculty of Education (KEFAD), 19(1), 994-1019.
74. Zajda, J., & Whitehouse, J. A. (2009). Teaching history. In International handbook of research on teachers and teaching. pp. 953-965. Springer, Boston, MA.