ABSTRACT
In the 1990s considerable attention focused on two aspects of potential and practice in history education: Establishing the components of “historical thinking” and developing content and assessment standards. Components ascribed to historical thinking varied considerably, depending on assumptions about and descriptions of the practices of academic historians. The National Center for History in the Schools offered up five overlapping and ultimately confusing dimensions of historical understanding: Chronological thinking, historical comprehension, historical analysis and interpretation, historical research capabilities, and historical issues-analysis and decision-making. The initial study of children’s perceptions of historical significance represents a continuation of work with chronology. While most of the teachers seem to use the tasks as interesting teaching or learning activities, teachers tell they are useful assessment tools, providing opportunities to better assess their students’ historical thinking without losing valuable instruction time.
