Never mind your opinion or your point of view: what’s your argument?

1. Arthur Chapman arthur.chapman@edgehill.ac.uk Never mind your opinion or your point of view: what’s your argument? Historical Association Annual Conference Manchester May 2011

2. History and Argument

3. We can only ever know the past in mediated ways, through the ‘shaky inferential construction’ of historical argument. • (Megill, 2007, p. in Chapman, 2009, p.58)‏

4. What’s an ‘argument’?

5. “An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.” • Monty Python Argument Sketch, 1974. • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

6. So… Therefore… This shows… Etc. Subjectivity and Opinion vs Argument • I feel…. • From my point of view… • In my opinion…. • Etc. • Is impersonal…. • Privileges process (reasoning)… • Takes the listener seriously….. • Is subjective… • Privileges the speaker… • Asserts the right to be taken seriously….

7. How can we help students recognise arguments?

8. Is this an argument? Frank: “Apples are hideous!” Marcia: “Nonsense! Apples are beautiful!” Frank: “I tell you: apples are hideous!” Marcia: “Nonsense! Apples are beautiful!” This is not an argument. It is a dispute.

9. Is this an argument? Once upon a time, I was walking down the road minding my own business. I was very tired (it had been a long day at the orchard). I decided to take a nap. I lay down in the shade of a particularly inviting apple tree. The sunset flickered through the leaves of the tree. The rustle of the leaves sent me to sleep. Next thing I knew, a fat apple had landed on my nose! This is not an argument. It’s a narrative.

10. Is this an argument? Apples grow on apple trees. I like to go on holiday to Cyprus. There are no apples on the moon. I have a sister (she is called Zoe). She doesn’t like apples very much. Barack Obama is President of the USA. This is not an argument. It’s gibberish.

11. Is this an argument? Apples are hideous things that should be feared and avoided! Only the other day as I was sleeping minding my own business a great big fat apple fell out of its tree and smacked me in the face. See! Yup! An argument. At last…

12. How can we help students recognise arguments?

13. To understand an argument, you need to understand: A. What it is being claimed (the conclusion); what is offered to support the claim/s (the reasons); and The extent to which the B sustains A.

14. Watch out! There’s a polar bear behind you.

15. Therefore and because

16. If an argument works like this – X because Y – then it also works like this - Y therefore X. • Because and Therefore are (therefore) reversible. • However, this does not hold if you have misidentified the reason and the conclusion.

17. Robert Gellately • “I think the Gestapo could not have operated without the cooperation of the citizens of Germany. By that I mean it really would have been structurally impossible for them to do so. There were simply not enough Gestapo officials to go around. Somewhere between 80-90% of the crimes that were reported to the Gestapo came from ordinary citizens. The main job for the Gestapo was sorting out the denunciations. This seems to have been their preoccupation.”

18. Developing evidential argument

19. Information becomes evidence only when used in the service of an argument that seeks to show that the information in question supports or undermines some claim. (Megill, 2007, p.11)‏

20. Inference • To draw an inference is to conclude something • Drawing an inference involves using words like ‘therefore’, ‘so’ and so on. • Kids need to be taught that thinking historically means talking inferentially – the one is a necessary condition for the other.

21. Scaffolding inference • A number of scaffolds have been developed to help kids draw inferences. • For example, Riley’s ‘Layers of inference’ diagrams (1999) and Wiltshire’s ‘tell’ and ‘suggest’ strategies (2000) both of which depend on Hilary Cooper’s work (2007, 194-2002).

22. ‘Layers of Inference’ HA Transitions (2005)‏

23. Wiltshire (2000)‏

24. Hawkes’ Onion Christopher Hawkes’ Onion (1954): The Layers of Archaeological Inference (Gamble, 2008, p.89)‏

25. A dart board scaffold for developing evidential argument

26. Explaining human action involves making claims about • Actions (‘what was said or done’) • Claims about beliefs (‘what was believed’)‏ • Claims about aims (‘what was intended’)‏

28. Claims to knowledge can be: • Certain (‘Blair must have known…’)‏ • Probable (‘Blair probably knew…’) • Possible (‘Blair could have known…’)‏

32. References • Chapman, A. (2006). ‘Asses, archers and assumptions: strategies for improving thinking skills in history in Years 9 to 13’. Teaching History 123. • Chapman, A. (2009) ‘Information and evidence in a Nutshell’ Teaching History 137. • Chapman, A. (2009) ‘Making claims you can sustain: the importance of historical argument’ Teaching History 135. • Chapman, A. (2010) ‘Taking The Perspective of The Other Seriously? The Importance of Historical Argument’, Euroclio Bulletin 28, The Hague: Euroclio. • Chapman, A. (2011) ‘Times arrows? Using a dart board scaffold to understand historical action’ Teaching History 143. • Cooper, H (2007) History 3-13: A Guide for Teachers, Abingdon: David Fulton Publishers. • Gamble, C. (2008) Archaeology: The Basics. Routledge: Abingdon. • Hawkes, C. (1954) ‘Archaeological theory and method: some suggestions from the old world’ American Anthropologist 56. • Historical Association / Cambridgeshire LA (2005) History Transitions Website: http://czv.e2bn.net/e2bn/leas/c99/schools/czv/web/about%20this%20site.htm • Megill, A. (2007) Historical Knowledge, Historical Error: A Contemporary Guide to Practice, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. • Riley, C. (1999) ‘Evidential understanding, period knowledge and the development of literacy: a practical approach to ‘layers of inference’ for Key Stage 3’, Teaching History, 97. • Wiltshire, T. (2000) ‘Telling and suggesting in the Conwy Valley’, Teaching History, 100.