See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/314463947

Teaching History Master Narratives: Fostering Imagi-Nations

Chapter · January 2017

DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-52908-4_27

CITATIONS READS

35 907

1 author:

Mario Carretero
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
162 PUBLICATIONS 3,383 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mario Carretero on 09 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized online

Chapter Title Teaching History Master Narratives: Fostering Imaginations

Copyright Year 2017
Copyright Holder The Author(s)
Corresponding Author Family Name Carretero
Particle
Given Name Mario
Suffix
Division Department of Psychology
Organization/University Autonoma University
Address Madrid, Spain
Email Mario.carretero@mac.com
Abstract Carretero discusses how people in present societies represent historical master
narratives in and out of school. His argument is developed in relation to current
problems of school history teaching and learning and to citizenship issues.
Some psychological and educational approaches, such as Egan’s ideas about
narrative development, are considered. In this vein, master narratives are
analyzed in terms of five common features, which help to understand how
school master narratives contribute to imagining the own nation, following
Anderson’s classical idea of imagined communities. These features involve a
selected historical subject, an identification process, a simplified common plot,
moral vectors, and an essentialist concept of nation. Upon investigating these
features, citizens were found to develop a less nationalistic interpretation of
foundational narratives when they are not about their own nation.
 CHAPTER 27 1

Teaching History Master Narratives: 2

Fostering Imaginations 3

Mario Carretero 4

History teachers everywhere are likely to present the past through a narrative 5
format while in classrooms students work with the class contents in differ- 6
ent ways. Traditionally, students received those stories rather passively: reading 7
them in books or repeating them in different ways. Fortunately, in the last 8
decades, these traditional practices and learning activities have changed. In this 9
Handbook, the contributions of several new approaches to history learning 10
and teaching can be found that consist of inquiry-based educational practices 11
(e.g. the chapters by Van Boxtel & Van Drie, Nokes, and Seixas). 12
Most of these proposals are related to the developments of seminal initia- 13
tives proposed by either British research (Dickinson, Lee, & Rogers, 1984) 14
or innovative German approaches (Retz, 2015; Rusen, 2004; Seixas, 2004, 15
AU1 2015a, 2015b) to History Education developed in the 1980s. All are based 16
on the purpose of developing historical thinking and historical consciousness 17
in school (Chapman & Wilschut, 2015). This is to say, to develop learning 18
­activities around historical contents following the idea that History is a disci- 19
pline to think about and to reflect upon. These initiatives were partly motivated 20
by the research findings that history as a school subject was unable to capture 21
AU2 the interest of the students (Ravitch & Finn, 1988) and that students were 22
unable to understand historical contents properly (Beck & MacKeown, 1994). 23

This paper has been written with the support of Projects EDU2013-42531P and
EDU2015-65088-P from the DGICYT (Ministry of Education, Spain) and also the
Project PICT2012-1594 from the ANPCYT (Argentina) coordinated by the author.
Also this work was conducted within the framework of COST Action IS1205 “Social
psychological dynamics of historical representations in the enlarged European Union”.

M. Carretero (*)
Department of Psychology, Autonoma University, Madrid, Spain

© The Author(s) 2017 511

M. Carretero et al. (eds.), Palgrave Handbook of Research in Historical
Culture and Education, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-52908-4_27
 512 M. CARRETERO

24 Considering these and some other developments in history education around

25 the world, traditional historical narratives are not necessarily at the center of
26 history teaching innovations nowadays. Nevertheless, historical narratives still
27 play an important role in history education, as narrative is the basic format
28 chosen, even for inquiry and new historical thinking approaches within his-
29 tory education. When examining the literature on history textbook contents
30 (Foster, 2012; see also the chapters of Grindel, Millas and Maier in this vol-
31 ume), this type of research concludes that very nationalistic and very culturally
32 biased historical contents are clearly present. These contents are based mostly
33 on a narrative format. Therefore, additional and comprehensive studies are
34 needed on the importance of narratives for history education, both in and out
35 school. This chapter tries to provide some theoretical and empirical insights on
36 this issue. This chapter aims to discuss: (1) how historical narratives are rep-
37 resented and used by citizens, taking into account cognitive, educational, and
38 historiographical contributions; (2) how historical narratives are taught and
39 learned in the school context; (3) how national narratives are represented by
40 students and citizens; and (4) how narratives about the own and other nations
41 are differently represented. The specific focus on national narratives is due to
42 their enormous importance and influence all over the world. Finally, educa-
43 tional implications and future challenges and directions regarding these topics
44 will be presented.

45 Narrative Thought and Its Development

46 The construction of historical knowledge is intimately connected to the elabo-
47 ration of narrative. However, the influence of narrative extends beyond the
48 field of history and the learning of history, constituting a basic instrument of
49 human knowledge. Therefore, narration is comprised not only of a type of
50 discourse and a specific textual configuration, but also of a particularly human
51 way of organizing thought. Humans narratively interpret their own actions and
52 behaviors and those of others. Therefore, there is a predisposition for organiz-
53 ing experience using plot structures (Bruner, 1990; Zerubavel, 2003). As a
54 result, narrative thought constitutes its own universal method of thought that
55 provides characteristic ways of constructing reality. Other authors also come to
56 the defence of this universal nature of narrative thought, such as Egan (1997),
57 who maintains that “we are narrative creatures: we often give meaning to things
58 in the form of narration”. This author posited a cultural development theory of
59 mind in which language is the structure and narration is the central cognitive
60 instrument. The individual mind is considered to accumulate and recapitulate
61 society’s stages of history. This author established five progressive stages of
62 comprehension that possess interesting elements for determining how students
63 of varying ages and levels of education can approach history as a discipline and
64 how they can understand it in different ways.
65 Focusing on linguistic forms of comprehension, the first of these stages, for
66 which oral language is the instrument and the central cultural component is
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 513

myth, is labeled mythic. This stage extends from 2–3 years of age, until initiat- 67
ing literacy occurs around 6–8 years of age. Its central components consist of 68
binary structures (good–bad, rich–poor) and fantasy, a category that mediates 69
opposites: for example, ghosts as a mediating category between the dead and 70
the living. Therefore, small children are capable of understanding a story or 71
concept that is expressed in binary concepts. As such, they tend to understand 72
historic knowledge in school as a “tale” of “good and bad”, and the cen- 73
tral aspects of “time” and “space” (as historiographical categories) cannot be 74
understood except in a very basic sense. 75
Egan’s second stage of comprehension, called the romantic stage, is related 76
to the beginning of alphabetization and oriented toward the development of 77
rationality and takes place approximately between ages 9 and 12. The binary 78
structures decrease to make space for a more complicated reality. This stage’s 79
characteristics are associated with knowledge of the limits of reality and identity. 80
There persists, however, a desire to go beyond these limits, a desire embodied 81
by the figure of the hero. This is a stage situated between mythos and logos, in 82
which individuals and their emotions become relevant. These narrative abili- 83
ties permit an understanding of historic knowledge closer to historiography. 84
However, several limitations remain due to the tendency toward a heroic and 85
romantic nature of this cosmovision, in which characters and individual figures 86
have great importance in the causality of historic phenomena. 87
The third stage, the philosophic, is fundamentally characterized by the 88
search for relationships and can be reached by approximately age 12–15, after 89
having accumulated the abilities from the two previous stages. It involves going 90
beyond the romantic interest in details to searching the theory, law, and general 91
models. It is precisely this search for integrating and totalizing models that 92
makes youth vulnerable to dogmatism and unconditionally defensive of vari- 93
ous “absolute truths”. A risk that characterizes this stage is the rigidity of laws 94
and concepts that sustain general models, such as ignorance of the flexibility 95
and versatility of reality. Another characteristic of this stage is the transition 96
from heroes to the appearance of complex understanding of social agents, thus 97
passing from individual deeds to an abstract representation of social processes. 98
The last stage of narrative development consists of ironic comprehension, 99
which is characteristic of adult life. It is necessary to clarify that although it 100
is considered “last”, it is not a guaranteed stage of development. Rather, it is 101
reached as long as there is adequate cultural appropriation. Ironic comprehen- 102
sion is characterized by a high level of reflection on one’s own thoughts and 103
by sensitivity toward the limited nature of conceptual resources that can be 104
employed to understand the world. Therefore, the irony consists of having a 105
mind sufficiently open to recognize the insufficient flexibility of our minds. 106
One of the principle features of this stage consists of disregarding the concept 107
of a totalizing “truth”, while at the same time developing the capacity to rec- 108
ognize the multifaceted nature of the social world. 109
Egan’s theory of understanding narrative highlights the influence of the 110
first narrations over the later adult comprehension of the world. At the same 111
 514 M. CARRETERO

112 time, this theory provides several guidelines regarding the goals that students
113 must achieve when understanding history, principally through its narrative
114 components. Therefore, as shown below, developing a vision that is critical,
115 flexible, and distanced from dogmatism, typical of the ironic stage, and also the
116 improvement of different restrictions from the mythic, romantic, and philo-
117 sophic stages, constitute cognitive achievements that can establish the base
118 of better historic literacy. But narrative and cognitive development in general
119 does not happen in a vacuum but in and educational context. The relations of
120 narrative development theories with historical contents representation will be
121 mentioned later on in this paper. For the moment, let us see some important
122 aspects of the educational context of historical narratives.

123 Narrative Mediation in Learning History

124 As several authors in the philosophy of history, such as Ricoeur (2004) and
125 White (1987), and in our field (Barton & Levstik, 2004; Wertsch, 2002) have
126 emphasized, narratives are a powerful cultural tool for understanding history,
127 even though, as is well known, the explicative and logical structure of historio-
128 graphical nature also requires fairly complex deductive and inductive elements.
129 As previously indicated, the use of narrative helps employ and manage the
130 concept of causal relationships. Narratives are not a sequence of random events;
131 rather, they are used in an attempt to shed light on how one event causes
132 another and the factors that affect these relationships (Mink, 1978; Zerubavel,
133 2003). Nevertheless, narratives do not include all of the events related to a
134 theme or all of the actors that participated in these events. Therefore, one of the
135 objectives for students must be the understanding that, inevitably, narrations
136 simplify history, tell some stories but not others, and mention some central
137 characters while neglecting others who are lesser-known and more anonymous
138 (occasionally entire social groups). Teaching that hopes to develop a histori-
139 cal literacy should invite students to avoid these biases and become aware that
140 there are alternative histories, seen from other perspectives, that reclaim other
141 protagonists and must also be taken into account.
142 Another fundamental objective that our students must achieve when work-
143 ing with narratives is the realization that they are tools for understanding his-
144 tory but are not history itself. That is to say, concrete people who determine
145 which actors take part in them, when and where the events begin, and when
146 and where they end produce narratives. It is easy to forget that they have been
147 intentionally constructed and are essentially tools that mediate our knowledge
148 of history, but that despite their abundant use and familiarity, they are not his-
149 tory (Barton, 2008).
150 There are two types of concrete narratives that appear quite often in the
151 realm of education: individual narratives and national narratives (Carretero
152 & Bermudez, 2012; Van Sledright, 2008). Alridge (2006), starting from an
153 exhaustive analysis of American textbooks, revealed that the narratives regard-
154 ing the “great” men and the events that guided United States of America
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 515

toward an ideal of progress and civilization continue to be the prototypical way 155
through which many historians and textbooks disseminate knowledge. This 156
observation demonstrates the predominate presence of these types of narratives 157
in the teaching of history. An analysis of its characteristics and its influence over 158
the students’ abilities when learning history can provide clues about some of 159
the skills those students need in this regard. 160
The individual narratives are those focused around the personal lives of rel- 161
evant historic figures, in comparison with those in which the focus is on more 162
abstract entities and events such as nations, economic systems, social change, 163
civilizations, and impersonal concepts of this nature. Frequently, these figures 164
are on the sidelines of other events and individuals that comprise the histori- 165
cal context, and the most controversial aspects of their lives are generally not 166
shown (Alridge, 2006). However, in the informal ambit, these narratives begin 167
to join other more anonymous narratives, above all those from novels and 168
movies. 169
The use of this type of individual narrative is justified, in part, due to the fact 170
that the more abstract accounts are identified as likely more difficult to under- 171
stand and as motivating students to a lesser degree. As Barton and Levstik 172
(2004) indicate, these individual narratives have the power to humanize his- 173
tory. Students may identify with these characters and put themselves in their 174
place in order to gain an idea of the feelings that guided them and even to 175
imagine how they might have acted in those situations. Through these nar- 176
ratives, students also learn to value the role that one individual can play in a 177
society and contemplate the possible impact of one individual. 178
Nevertheless, although these last narratives can be a highly motivating com- 179
ponent and more easily understood by students, they also produce a series of 180
characteristic biases that complicate the acquisition of a historic literacy. For 181
example, when narratives are exclusively for individual and personal use, there 182
is an absence of causal explanations of a structural nature based on social, polit- 183
ical, or economic factors. At the same time, the impact produced by collective 184
action is unknown. 185
In any case, there are negative effects for the type of causal explanations 186
that students employ when understanding history. When students face more 187
abstract texts that are more difficult for them to understand, they attempt to 188
use individual narratives as a tool for comprehension in order to give meaning 189
to the narration. From there, they search for individual motives or reasons that 190
will allow them to understand what occurred. As noted by Halldén (1986), in 191
an analysis of the explanations given by students about certain historical events, 192
these explanations focus on the actions and intentions of individuals. For these 193
students, the object of study in history is persons or personified phenomena. 194
To Halldén this personification of historical explanations can arise in various 195
aspects: 196
One aspect of personalization is connected with the view that the course 197
of history is directed by Great Men (Grever, 2009; Smith, 1998). A sec- 198
ond aspect concerns the personification of the state, political institutions, 199
 516 M. CARRETERO

200 and other ­organizations. A third has to do with the tendency of students
201 to ­transform structural explanations into the kind of explanation where the
202 actions or needs of the people constitute the explanations (Halldén, 2000).
203 Riviere et al. in an interesting study (2000) showed similar results.
204 Therefore, a predominant use of these individual narratives can foster the
205 emergence of these biases in historical explanations, while they develop a vision
206 of history as a fragmented series of stories about celebrities. It seems evident
207 that the predominant use of these narratives can complicate students’ learning
208 of a contextualized history, in which there is space for important aspects such
209 as social, political, and economic factors and the role of different social groups.
210 History should provide these students with knowledge of the complexities,
211 contradictions, and nuances of that history, while this type of narrative pres-
212 ents simplistic and one-dimensional portraits (Alridge, 2006). This is to say, in
213 terms of Egan’s views these individual narratives and this personified under-
214 standing would prevent an understanding closer to philosophical and ironic
215 ways of narrative representations.

216 Historical Narratives as Imaginations

217 Another type of narrative that is often found in both the realm of education
218 and that of daily life is the national narrative. In the educational ambit of each
219 country, the study of history typically does not center on random narratives
220 from any part of the globe or necessarily from the geographical area in which
221 the student lives (e.g. Europe, Latin America, or Asia). However, there is one
222 theme present in practically all countries when teaching history: narratives
223 that make reference to “our country’s history” (Berger, Eriksonas, & Mycock,
224 2008; Carretero, 2010) (See also chapters by Van der Vlies and Karrouche, this AU3
225 Handbook).
226 This is not surprising if we take into account that the teaching of history
227 that emerged at the end of the nineteenth century was conducted with marked
228 identity purposes, connected to the nations’ building, and therefore with
229 the purpose of decisively contributing to reaching the aforementioned goals
230 (Berger, 2012; Carretero, 2011). This type of narrative substantially influences
231 the way in which students understand and analyze information about the past
232 (Grever & Stuurman, 2007; Van Sledright, 2008). One of the principal dif-
233 ficulties that they face is that which pertains to considering another’s point of
234 view. One of the fundamental components of historic literacy must be exactly
235 that: taking different versions of history into account, including other points
236 of view, and making space for “unofficial” histories. Nevertheless, as Wertsch
237 (2002) (see also Penuel & Wertsch, 2000) indicated in his study of stories from
238 U.S. history, few subjects introduce irony into these stories or comments that
239 account for conflict between interpretations; the majority has appropriated the
240 official version of history and reproduces it almost without nuance. Thus, one
241 of the implications an elevated degree of appropriation of the official narra-
242 tive might have is fostering an epistemological vision of history as something
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 517

closed, unique, and true (Van Sledright, 2008). At this point, it is important to 243
take into account the ironic stage mentioned above by Egan´s ideas about the 244
development of narratives. 245
This type of narrative, however, not only diminishes the importance of 246
these “other histories”, but also influences the type of causal explanations stu- 247
dents give to specific historic events. Taking the term used by Wertsch (1998) 248
these national narratives become a kind of schematic narrative template –more 249
abstract and generic narratives that are socially shared—which influence is 250
fundamental when building specific historical narratives. For example, in the 251
case of the U.S., there are two present schematic narrative templates in the 252
vast majority of national narratives, the concept of progress and that of lib- 253
erty. Therefore, students use these schematic narrative templates to explain 254
past events. Consequently, the resistance of Native Americans facing waves of 255
European colonists is seen as an obstacle in achieving progress and the Vietnam 256
War is justified by the need to bring freedom to that country. Students, due 257
to excessive use of these national narratives, do not have access to the most 258
controversial aspects of history, complicating the development of a more criti- 259
cal perspective that will allow them to consider the difficulties, dilemmas, and, 260
in short, the reality of the democratic realities in which they live (Carretero & 261
Kriger, 2011; Epstein, 2009; Grever & Stuurman, 2007). 262
Interestingly enough Social Psychology studies have shown that national 263
narratives representations are not only mental states but they can be trans- 264
lated into political actions (Barreiro, Castorina and Van Alphen, this Hanbook; 265
Smeekes, 2014). For example, let us see some of our results in the present and 266
very complicated Greek context of both economic crisis and immigration. The 267
following cases come from data collected from the large pool of comments 268
published in the online forum created by the Greek Ministry of Internal Affairs 269
(http://www.opengov.gr/ypes/?p=327) following the announcement of the 270
legislation: “Current provisions for Greek citizenship, the political participa- 271
tion of repatriated Greeks and lawfully resident immigrants and other provi- 272
sions” (see Kadianaki, Andreouli, & Carretero, 2016 for details). Therefore, 273
they represent not just answers to a research questionnaire, but a real and 274
everyday use of historical ideas developed as political attempts to influence new 275
immigration regulations. More specifically, ideas about the past used with the 276
purpose of defending a particular view on citizenship. Thus, one of our com- 277
mentators says, 278

Even in ancient Athens at the time when it was an exemplar city-state (that we use 279
constantly as an example) there was a clear distinction between Athenian citizens 280
and those who came from other cities but concentrated in it [Athens], in order to 281
enjoy [its] glamour and economic development. The metrics as they called them, did 282
not originate from there [ancient Athens], they lived within the borders of the city-­ 283
state but they usually had limited or no political rights. Political rights in Athens 284
were given only in special circumstances but even in those cases they could become 285
PEOPLE WITH EQUAL DUTIES-, but not CITIZENS. This was the protection 286
 518 M. CARRETERO

287 of the system, since the foreigner could not participate in the decisions of the City
288 Council or claim some sort of political power. With regards to financial assistance
289 on the part of the Athenian democracy towards non-citizens it was probably non-­
290 existent, since they were not entitled to a wage. On the contrary, there existed eco-
291 nomic duties of the metics towards the city, like the metikion [type of taxation specific
292 to metics], which was part of the official revenues of the state or the theorika [type of
293 taxation], for the wealthy metics. And all this applied to Greeks of other cities, every-
294 one else was simply… “barbarian” (Filakismenos).

295 Through the analysis of several comments as this one, we identified four
296 themes in the ways that national history is represented to formulate argu-
297 ments about citizenship rights and boundaries in our data: (1) continuity of
298 the nation; (2) idealization of the past; (3) moral obligation toward the past;
299 (4) homogeneity or heterogeneity of the nation.
300 As Van Alphen and Carretero (2015) note, idealization of the past leads to
301 perceiving the past as a moral example to follow in the present. Thus, ideas
302 about idealization are complemented by ideas of moral obligation that we sub-
303 sequently examine. Thus morality is a recognized feature of historical narra-
304 tives. Gergen (2005) has suggested that historical narratives construct a moral
305 status for the actors involved in the story. Studies on history “consumption”
306 reveal that students’ historical narratives contain a positive moral judgment and
307 legitimization of the national group actions (Lopez, Carretero, & Rodriguez-­
308 Moneo, 2015a). Interestingly enough in our previous studies, our coincident
309 results were found with high school and university students in both Spain
310 and Argentina (Carretero & Kriger, 2011; Carretero & Van Alphen, 2014).
311 Therefore, it looks like there is a clear coincidence between formal schooling
312 and informal uses and representations of history among citizens.

313 Dimensions of National Historical Narratives

314 Our empirical work has tried also to distinguish not only themes but which
315 specific dimensions can be found in the schematic template of national nar-
316 ratives (Carretero & Bermudez, 2012; Carretero & Van Alphen, 2014). We
317 have selected national master narratives as main tasks of our work carried out in
318 relation to national foundational processes of both Greece and Spain. In all the
319 cases, we have worked with qualitative interviews. In general terms, we have
320 developed a theoretical framework based on five dimensions that characterized
321 citizens narrative representations of national history. That is to say:

322 1. As is the case in the above example about Greek citizens internet com-
323 ments on Citizenship regulations, the historical subject is established in
324 terms of inclusion and exclusion, radically opposing it to others as a coher-
325 ent and homogeneous group. See above the distinction between the
326 “metekos” and the “Greek” where an imagined homogeneity of the
327 nation is defended and conceived as having very clear historical roots.
328 Therefore the establishment of the nation is based on a pre-existent and
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 519

everlasting historical subject. Of course this determines the main voice of 329
the narrative. As is well known, any narrative strongly depends on who its 330
subject is. Another important feature of this dimension is precisely that the 331
establishment of the narrative subject follows a nonhistorical process. This 332
is to say the historical subject is not seen as a result of a number of changes 333
across different times but as something prior to those historical transfor- 334
mations. This is to say this “historical subject” is in fact an “essentialist and 335
nonhistorical subject” based on a process of continuity between the past 336
and the present. Also besides this continuity citizens tend to see the his- 337
torical subject as homogenous instead of heterogeneous. This is to say all 338
the members of this imagined national community (Anderson, 1983) is 339
seen as a prototypical part of if instead of considering the possibility of 340
different and heterogeneous groups of nationals. As it can be easily seen 341
this is a very idealized conception of the nationals of any community. 342
2. The historical subject is referred to in the first person plural “us,” often 343
logically opposed to “them,” and valued more positively. The presence of 344
an identification process with the mentioned historical subject and its 345
political unit. Identification processes are at work in the narrative, attach- 346
ing personal affect and value judgments to the unification and opposition 347
mentioned above. A shared identity—a timeless national identity— 348
between the present storyteller and the past historical subject is estab- 349
lished. Of course the continuity feature mentioned earlier is also related 350
to this identification feature is adding very influential emotional ties. This 351
implies that the person not only has a historical misconception about her 352
national origin but also feels this misconception as an emotional content. 353
This process would be responsible for establishing the origins of the per- 354
sons (as nationals) who are learning the concept. These (national) origins 355
would be considered ontological instead of constructed through pre- 356
cisely a historical process. 357
3. The historical events are simplified around one common narrative 358
theme, such as the search for freedom or territory. This simplification is 359
based on rather simple causal relations. Basically it is a monocausal expla- 360
nation instead of being multicausal as most of sophisticated historical 361
explanations. In relation to previous two dimensions, this explanation 362
only considers the freedom of a specific group: the freedom of the his- 363
torical subject. The narrative tends to minimize, and avoids mentioning, 364
the right to freedom of additional and possible subjects, such as natives, 365
slaves, or women. Also, this particular freedom is considered in a teleo- 366
logical way, as the pre-established outcome of the historical processes. 367
The existence of a natural territory belonging “since ever” to the nation, 368
instead of a conception of the correspondence of nations and their ter- 369
ritories as the result of different complex political, social, and historical 370
processes. Needless to say this historical territory is precisely the same 371
territory than the present one. This is to say the present territory is con- 372
sidered as an ontological a priori. 373
 520 M. CARRETERO

374 4. The application of moral features that legitimize the actions of the
375 nation and the nationals. Especially in relation to national territory
376 and all the actions related to its developments and changes. These
377 moral judgments provide a tautological legitimization for the nation’s
378 main acts. National historical narratives, both in and out school, play
379 an important role as moral vectors, because they are designed with
380 that goal in mind. This purpose is accomplished in at least two ways:
381 First, the master narrative establishes the distinction between “good”
382 and “bad” options, people, and decisions. Typically, the first one is
383 associated with the national “we”, and the second one is related to
384 “they”. Also master narratives offer living examples of civic virtue,
385 ­particularly of loyalty. As it can be easily inferred, this loyalty func-
386 tion was essential in the construction of the nation, and it can still be
387 found in many symbolic forms out of the school like sports for
388 example.
389 5. Essentialist concept of the nation and nationals. They are both pre-
390 sented as entities that predate the processes that led to their creation,
391 independent of historical development. Our empirical studies show that
392 historical concepts (e.g. nation, revolution, and independence) are
393 expressed within the framework of the general structures provided by
394 master narratives. Adolescents use a concept to construct a narrative and,
395 at the same time, that narrative expresses the concept itself. Therefore,
396 concepts play a double role in historical narratives. On a level of analysis,
397 they are tools for building narratives, giving them meaning and direc-
398 tion. At the same time, the characteristics of the concepts are defined
399 through the narratives, which contextualize and particularize them
400 (Carretero, Castorina, & Levinas, 2013).

401 Let us present some examples which illustrate these dimensions. In the case of
402 Spain, the selected task has been about the so called “Reconquest—a period AU4
403 in which the Spanish nation did not exist—began in 718 and ended in 1492
404 with the expulsion of Muslims from the Iberian Peninsula. This process was
405 reinterpreted through romantic historiography and became a master national
406 narrative based on the loss of Spain to the Muslims and its subsequent recovery.
407 Spanish national identity has been built upon this one (Alvarez Junco, 2011).
408 However as Ríos Saloma (2005) pointed out, the very term “Reconquest” just
409 appears in the late eighteenth century. In this sense, we can say that the very
410 idea of the Reconquest is an “invented” concept if we apply the essential idea
411 of Hobsbawm and Ranger (1983) that national traditions are invented solely
412 to give legitimacy to the national past. Similarly, one could also say that “the
413 Reconquest” is an “imagined” concept because it helps to imagine the nation,
414 as Anderson states (1983). However, the empirical facts of the 800 years of
415 Muslim presence on the Iberian Peninsula and the fighting between Christians
416 and Muslims during that time should instead be defined as successive con-
417 quests by different sides. Importantly, there was not a single struggle between
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 521

Christians and Muslims, but over 800 years, alliances varied among certain 418
Christian and Muslim factions, and there was also infighting among factions of 419
the same religion. 420
One important objective of our studies has been to comparatively look at 421
citizens’ representations about a similar narrative of another nation. Through 422
using a foreign historical event, we aim to analyze the student’s view on 423
national narratives once their identity connection and emotional link with the 424
content is minimized. For this reason, we presented Spanish university students 425
a task about the history of Greece. The period analyzed refers to the so-called 426
“Ottoman occupation of Greece” (1492–1850) and the nation’s subsequent 427
independence. Therefore, in both cases, students faced a historical task where 428
either Muslims or Turks remained several centuries in a country, which cur- 429
rently is a national state (Spain and Greece). As our students were Spanish we 430
hypothesized that they’d demonstrate different historical interpretations for 431
these two similar historical scenarios. This is to say, we predicted that the previ- 432
ously mentioned dimensions would be much more present in the task about 433
Spain than in the task about Greece (Lopez, Carretero, & Rodriguez-Moneo, 434
2015a, 2015b). In general terms, this was indeed the case. Let us see some 435
examples. 436
In both cases, the interview was very similar and focused on each period in 437
chronological order. For each period the participant was asked about: (1) who 438
the inhabitants of either the Iberian peninsula or the Balkan Peninsula at that 439
time were, (2) the legitimacy of the actions of one group against the other, and 440
(3) whether these were carried out by the inhabitants for the gain of territory. 441
Let us compare these two interview fragments. The first belongs to an inter- 442
view about the so-called Spanish Reconquest and the second to an interview 443
on the Greek independence process. 444

[And whom do you think that territory belonged to?] Well, at that moment it is 445
true that it would be dominated by Arabs, but it was still of the Spaniards…Even 446
though it had been taken by force, but sooner or later they had to expel the Arabs. 447
(…) [The conquests you have drawn (making reference to the further 448
Christian conquests in the year 1212), do you think they were legitimate?] 449
Conquests in the opposite way, to throw them out? Well, they seem to me more legiti- 450
mate. A bit more legitimate yes, because they are like recovering what was taken 451
from them. Well, wars are not alright, but I do think it could be slightly justified. 452
To recover their territory and customs and whatever they were not allowed to do by 453
the Arabs. (Sara, 22 years old). 454
[Does it seem to you that it legitimately belongs to (the Byzantines) at that 455
time?] Well, at that time, they had won it, right? So to speak. However, I also don’t 456
think that a territory belongs to anyone concretely … (…) it is not attached to 457
­anyone. (…) [In that sense, does it seem to you that the territory (in the period 458
of the Ottoman Empire) legitimately belongs to the Ottomans or not?] No, as 459
with the Byzantines, it is a matter of ambition to have more territories but I do not 460
see that it has to belong to anyone as I said with the Byzantines… (…). It does not 461
belong permanently to anyone. (…) [In the period of Greek independence, does 462
 522 M. CARRETERO

463 it seem to you that the territory legitimately belongs to the Greeks?] No, not to
464 them either. [Why?] Well, what I have said before, the territories are there, and an
465 empire that wants to have more territories, well they are going to conquer them, but
466 I don’t think that because of this it always owns this territory and that the territory
467 has always belonged to it, because it is not so. It is not going to be like this forever
468 (Belen, 17 years old).

469 As it can be seen in the case of the interview about Spain, the Spanish student
470 clearly legitimizes the actions of the Spaniards against the Arabs, applying
471 some of the dimensions presented above. But it is not the case for the Spanish
472 student interviewed about the presence of the Ottomans in Greek territory.
473 In both cases, the participants are university students, and therefore, their
474 historical knowledge in general is rather high. Considering this, the more
475 plausible explanation for the difference encountered would be based on the
476 relation of the interview’s main topic with the participant’s national identity.
477 Interestingly, this difference disappears when the interview deals with the
478 establishment of the historical subject.
479 But let us compare two more examples. The first is related to the Spanish
480 Reconquest and the second to the Greeks and the Ottomans. These examples
481 will show that there are also some similarities. In this case about the establish-
482 ment of the historical subject of the narratives.

483 The Arabs invade a territory, which is not theirs. During more than seven centuries
484 they keep trying to conquer what is the entire Spanish territory and, the Spaniards,
485 when it in fact was in essence their territory before the Arabs came in, hey recon-
486 quered it again to make it once again their own. (Juan, 25 years old).
487 [How long could the feeling of belonging to the Greek nation have been
488 present?]
489 I think since forever. (…) If we forget history … there has always been a feeling of
490 saying I belong to Greece, to ancient Greece (…). And then came a moment in which
491 you say, “So far and so further!” One after another spreads the word; (…) they create
492 that feeling until they say: “We have been invaded by the Romans, the Byzantines,
493 the Ottomans; now is our moment.” (…) “Now is the time for us to rebel and become
494 independent as Greeks” (Maria, 21 years old).

495 As it can be seen in both cases, the two Spanish students establish a rather
496 essentialist historical subject. Thus in both cases this historical subjects are
497 fundamentally based on present national subjects and not on historical
498 changes and developments. As mentioned above, Spain and Spaniards do
499 not exist properly speaking until the sixteenth century. The Kingdoms of
500 Castile, Aragon and other similar political entities of the Iberian Peninsula
501 carried out the fights against the Arabs. Similar arguments could be applied
502 to the Greek case. Therefore, it can be concluded that analyzing the nar-
503 ratives about these two topics as a whole a more historiographical view on
504 historical narratives is easier to apply when they have to do with nations
505 that are not our own. Nevertheless, a number of difficulties remain, like the
506 concept related to the establishment of the historical subject. This is likely
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 523

to be related to the issue of the possible origins of the dimensions described 507
above. This issue of origins is also related to the educational implications of 508
our research. 509

National Historical Narratives Origins 510

and Educational Implications 511

We could think of two possible origins for these dimensions of national nar- 512
ratives: cognitive, educational, and sociocultural. Firstly, in terms of cognitive 513
development, it is easy to see how the dimensions we have described are very 514
much related to the romantic stage studied by Egan and mentioned above. 515
Therefore, it seems that the features of the philosophical and ironic stages 516
are difficult to achieve. On the other hand, from an educational point of view 517
within both formal and informal contexts, as museums and similar environ- 518
ments, traditional instruction still dominates, with explicit or implicit con- 519
tent that is closer to the romantic ideals than to the renovated aims of history 520
education. Also, history, as an academic discipline, still has advocates for the 521
romantic approach (see Berger, this volume, about national historiographical 522
writings) and many school textbooks and programs (Seixas, 2010)—mainly 523
through master national narratives—emphasize that banal nationalism that 524
Billig (1995) described. 525
In addition, banal nationalism is still present on a day-to-day basis in most 526
nations, particularly in the informal context, through national celebrations 527
and rites, movies, novels, or mass media communication (Carretero, 2011; 528
Wineburg, Mosborg, Porat, & Duncan, 2007). All of these mechanisms are 529
related to the process of the production of a narrative around the concept of 530
the nation. This process has been postulated as one of the most influential in 531
the social sciences nowadays, and much theoretical work has been developed 532
about how nations are imagined (Anderson, 1983; Hobsbawm & Ranger, 533
1983). Also, as signaled by Billig, when nations are granted a monopoly over 534
the right to violence within their territory, historical conflicts become nation- 535
alized. These conflicts evolve into wars among nations instead of counties, 536
nobles, or royal lineages. This phenomenon undoubtedly is reflected in the 537
history of many nations today that nationalize territorial conflicts from epochs 538
much earlier than the birth of the nation itself. Thus, national narratives fol- 539
lowing the same general scheme of the so-called reconquest can be found in 540
many a nation’s interpretation of history (Carretero, 2011; Wertsch, 2002). As 541
a matter of fact, many more examples can be found all over the world (see for 542
example chapters by Millas and Maier in this Handbook). 543
Let’s just consider the changes in European territories and nations during 544
the so-called short century (Hobsbawm, 1990). This is to say, the First and 545
Second World Wars, plus the collapse of the Soviet Union, introducing fre- 546
quent and dramatic changes on the political map of the European continent. 547
It would be interesting to investigate whether students are able to understand 548
that those changes in the nations’ territories not only constitute geopolitical 549
 524 M. CARRETERO

550 and historical consequences but also imply that nations are not essential and
551 immutable political entities. Thus, the possible cognitive origins of the studied
552 conceptions, we think, have to do with how the learning and teaching process
553 takes place. For this reason, these cognitive origins are considered in the con-
554 text of specific suggestions to improve those processes.
555 For example, teachers could emphasize that the concept of nation is embed-
556 ded in a particular national narrative, and this narrative usually has a histori-
557 cal subject, but that other possible subjects could also be taken into account.
558 Even though these new subjects could change the meaning of the narrative,
559 presenting alternative historical versions of the past could be a fruitful learn-
560 ing strategy. Concerning the second dimension discussed in this chapter, stu-
561 dents could learn the important distinction between the past and the present
562 in relation to possible identification, that is, to understand that the historical
563 “we” is not the same as the current “we.” In this research, we have found that
564 university students tend to confound the two “we’s,” but at younger ages this
565 tendency could be much greater. This teaching endeavor would likely need not
566 only specific contents but also a good deal of metacognitive ability which is a
567 related aspect of historical consciousness (Straub, 2005).
568 In relation to the territorial dimension of the concept of nation, we would
569 like to emphasize the need for and the convenience of introducing historical
570 maps to school teaching activities. This is because our studies show university
571 students tend to consider the present map both Spain and Portugal as the
572 map that better describes historical changes over the centuries on the Iberian
573 Peninsula. But definitely it is not the case because Spain and Portugal just
574 existed as political entities since fifteenth-sixteenth century. Therefore, histori-
575 cal maps are an essential part of historical literacy and research, because they
576 provide a clear and precise representation of how territories and nations have
577 changed over centuries. As mentioned above, they are probably the clearest
578 proof that nations are not essential entities. But some students might tend
579 to consider the present maps as either immutable or as cognitive anchors for
580 representing historical events and political changes. In relation to this, recent
581 historiographical research has showed that the so-called historical rights are
582 based on rather invented knowledge about historical boundaries (Herzog, this
583 Handbook). This is to say, many of the ancient historical limits never existed as
584 very precise borders. Therefore, it would be unjustified to use them to main-
585 tain territorial rights based on supposed past evidence. No doubt these findings
586 have clear implications for history teaching and learning.

587 Conclusion
588 Finally, the issue of legitimizing the pursuit of the national territory, as
589 an imagined entity through the master narrative, in its different historical
590 moments could be approached along the lines already described. This is to
591 say, students could be taught that historical events indeed have moral con-
592 notations but that these can only be properly understood in the context of
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 525

the historiographical understanding of that specific period. One of the most 593
common misconceptions in history learning is presentism, in the sense of 594
projecting the nation to earlier periods. These examples will allow to illus- 595
trate a very strong tendency in its moral form. Any teaching development 596
oriented at promoting historical thinking should try to improve this through 597
the modern representation of the concept of nation embedded in historical 598
narratives. A concept not associated with the need of legitimizing the actions 599
of present subjects is definitely different from legitimizing past historical 600
subjects’ actions. 601
Thus, students might benefit from the combination of these suggested 602
strategies in order to take into account this complexity. Elsewhere (Carretero 603
& Lee, 2014) we have pointed out how, on numerous occasions, learning to 604
think historically entails navigating counterintuitive ideas (Wineburg, 2001). 605
For this purpose, we believe that future investigations are necessary to delve 606
deeper into this concept, whose adequate understanding would prepare stu- 607
dents for understanding the past and present complexity of the societies in 608
which they live. Also, we would like to emphasize that, as present citizens of 609
a world experiencing an intense globalization process, clearly our learning 610
needs to be closer to a flexible and nuanced narrative of the nation. Migration 611
processes will be even more intense in the future, and as this is having an enor- 612
mous cultural impact, the learning of history in and out of school, particularly 613
when it concerns the nation, has to keep up. 614

References 615

Alridge, D. P. (2006). The Limits of Master Narratives in History Textbooks: An 616

Analysis of Representations of Martin Luther King, Jr. Teachers College Record, 108, 617
662–686. 618
Álvarez Junco, J. (2011). Spanish Identity in the Age of Nations. Manchester: Manchester 619
University Press. 620
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of 621
Nationalism (p. 1991). London: Verso. Revised edition. 622
Barton, K. C. (2008). Research on Students’ Ideas About History. In L. Levstik & 623
C. A. Thyson (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Social Studies Education (pp. 239–258). 624
New York: Routledge. 625
Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching History for the Common Good. Mahwah, 626
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 627
Beck, I. L., & MacKeown, M. G. (1994). Outcomes of History Instruction: Paste-Up 628
Accounts. In M. Carretero & J. F. Voss (Eds.), Cognitive and Instructional on 629
History and Social Sciences (pp. 237–255). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 630
Berger, S. (2012). De-nationalizing History Teaching and Nationalizing It Differently! 631
Some Reflections on How to Defuse the Negative Potential of National(ist) History 632
Teaching. In M. Carretero, M. Asensio, & M. Rodriguez-Moneo (Eds.), History 633
Education and the Construction of National Identities (pp. 33–47). Charlotte, NC: 634
Information Age Publishing. 635
Berger, S., Eriksonas, L., & Mycock, A. (Eds.). (2008). Narrating the Nation: 636
Representations in History, Media and the Arts. New York: Berghahn Books. 637
 526 M. CARRETERO

638 Billig, M. (1995). Banal Nationalism. London: Sage.

639 Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
640 Carretero, M. (2011). Constructing Patriotism. Teaching History and Memories in
641 Global Worlds. Charlotte, CT: Information Age Publishing.
642 Carretero, M., & Bermudez, A. (2012). Constructing Histories. In J. Valsiner (Ed.),
643 Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology (pp. 625–646). Oxford: Oxford
644 University Press.
645 Carretero, M., Castorina, J. A., & Levinas, M. L. (2013). Conceptual Change and
646 Historical Narratives About the Nation. A Theoretical and Empirical Approach.
647 In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change
648 (2 ed., pp. 269–287). New York: Routledge.
649 Carretero, M., & Kriger, M. (2011). Historical Representations and Conflicts About
650 Indigenous People as National Identities. Culture and Psychology., 17(2), 177–195.
651 Carretero, M., & Lee, P. (2014). Learning Historical Concepts. In K. Sawyer (Ed.),
652 Handbook of Learning Sciences (Second ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
653 Carretero, M., & Van Alphen, F. (2014). Do Master Narratives Change Among High
654 School Students? A Characterization of How National History Is Represented.
655 Cognition and Instruction, 32(3), 290–312. doi:10.1080/07370008.2014.919298.
656 Chapman, A., & Wilschut, A. (Eds.). (2015). Joined-Up History: New Directions in
657 History Education Research. Charlotte, CT: Information Age Publishing.
658 Dickinson, A. K., Lee, P. J., & Rogers, P. J. (Eds.). (1984). Learning History. London:
659 Heinemann.
660 Egan, K. (1997). The Educated Mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
661 Epstein, T. (2009). Interpreting National History. In Race, Identity, and Pedagogy in
662 Classrooms and Communities. New York: Routledge.
663 Foster, S. (2012). Re-Thinking Historical Textbooks in a Globalized World. In
664 M. Carretero, M. Asensio, & M. Rodríguez-Moneo (Eds.), History Education and
665 the Construction of National Identities (pp. 49–62). Charlotte, CT: Information Age
666 Publishing.
667 Gergen, K. (2005). Narrative, Moral Identity and Historical Consciousness: A Social
668 Constructionist Account. In J. Straub (Ed.), Narration, Identity, and Historical
669 Consciousness (pp. 99–119). New York: Berghahn Books.
670 Grever, M. (2009). Fear of Plurality. Historical Culture and Historiographical
671 Canonization in Western Europe. In A. Epple & A. Schaser (Eds.), Gendering
672 Historiography: Beyond National Canons (pp. 45–62). Frankfurt/New York: Campus
673 Verlag.
674 Grever, M., & Stuurman, S. (2007). Beyond the Canon: History for the Twenty-First
675 Century. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
676 Halldén, O. (1986). Learning History. Oxford Review of Education, 12, 53–66.
677 Halldén, O. (2000). On Reasoning in History. In J. F. Voss & M. Carretero (Eds.),
678 Learning and Reasoning in History (pp. 272–278). New York: Routledge.
679 Hobsbawm, E. (1990). Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth,
680 Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
681 Hobsbawm, E., & Ranger, T. (Eds.). (1983). The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge:
682 Cambridge University Press.
683 Kadianaki, I., Andreouli, E., & Carretero, M. (2016). Using National History to AU5
684 Construct the Boundaries of Citizenship: An Analysis of Greek Citizens’ Discourse
685 About Immigrants’ Rights. Qualitative Psychology (in press).
 TEACHING HISTORY MASTER NARRATIVES: FOSTERING IMAGINATIONS 527

Lopez., C., Carretero, M., & Rodriguez-Moneo, M. (2015a). Conquest or Reconquest? 686
Students’ Conceptions of Nation Embedded in a Historical Narrative. Journal of 687
the Learning Sciences, 24(2), 252–285. 688
Lopez, C., Carretero, M., & Rodríguez-Moneo, M. (2015b). Telling a National 689
Narrative That Is Not Your Own. Does It Enable Disciplinary Historical 690
Consumption? Culture & Psychology., 4, 547–571. 691
Mink, L. O. (1978). Narrative Form as a Cognitive Instrument. Historical 692
Understanding, 182–203, 197–198. 693
Penuel, W. R., & Wertsch, J. V. (2000). Historical Representation as Mediated Action: 694
Official History as a Tool. In J. F. Voss & M. Carretero (Eds.), Learning and 695
Reasoning in History (pp. 39–60). New York: Routledge. 696
Ravitch, D., & Finn Jr., C. E. F. (1988). What Do Our 17-Year Olds Know? A Report 697
on the First National Assessment of History and Literature. New York: Harper & Row. 698
AU6 Retz, T. (2015). At the Interface: Academic History, School History and the Philosophy 699
of History. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 700
Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, History, Forgetting. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago 701
Press. (Original work published 2003). 702
Rios Saloma, M. F. (2005). From the Restoration to the Reconquest: The Construction 703
of a National Myth (An Historiographical Review. 16th–19th Centuries). En la 704
España medieval [In medieval Spain], 28, 379–414. 705
Rivière, A., Nuñez, M., Barquero, B., & Fontela, F. (2000). Influence of Intentional 706
and Personal Factors in Recalling Historical Text. In J. F. Voss & M. Carretero 707
(Eds.), Learning and Reasoning in History. International Review of History 708
Education (Vol. 2, pp. 214–226). New York: Routledge. 709
Rüsen, J. (2004). Historical Consciousness: Narrative Structure, Moral Function, and 710
Ontogenetic Development. In P. Seixas (Ed.), Theorizing Historical Consciousness 711
(pp. 63–85). Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press. 712
Seixas, P. (Ed.). (2004). Theorizing Historical Consciousness. Toronto, Canada: 713
University of Toronto Press. 714
Seixas, P. (2010). National History and Beyond. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(6), 715
719–722. 716
Seixas, P. (2015a). A Model of Historical Thinking. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 717
doi:10.1080/00131857.2015.1101363. 718
AU7 Seixas, P. (2015b). Translation and Its Discontents: Key Concepts in English and 719
German History Education. Journal of Curriculum Studies 47(6) (October). 720
Smeekes, A.N. (2014). The Presence of the Past. Historical Rooting of National Identity 721
and Current Group Dynamics. Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University. 722
Smith, B. G. (1998). The Gender of History. Men, Women, and Historical Practice. 723
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 724
Straub, J. (Ed.). (2005). Narration, Identity, and Historical Consciousness. New York: 725
Berghahn Books. 726
Van Alphen, F., & Carretero, M. (2015). The Construction of the Relation Between 727
National Past and Present in the Appropriation of Historical Master Narratives. 728
Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 49(3), 512–530. 729
Van Sledright, B. (2008). Narratives of Nation-State, Historical Knowledge and School 730
History Education. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 109–146. 731
Wertsch, J. (1998). Mind as Action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 732
Wertsch, J. V. (2002). Voices of Collective Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge 733
University Press. 734
 528 M. CARRETERO

735 Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts. Philadelphia:
736 Temple University Press.
737 Wineburg, S., Mosborg, S., Porat, D., & Duncan, A. (2007). Common Belief and the
738 Cultural Curriculum: An Intergenerational Study of Historical Consciousness.
739 American Educational Research Journal, 44, 40–76.
740 White, H. (1987). The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical
741 Representation. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
742 Zerubavel, E. (2003). Time Maps: Collective Memory and the Social Shape of the Past.
743 Chicago: Chicago University Press.
 Author Queries
Chapter No.: 27 0002829103

Queries Details Required Author’s Response

AU1 Reference Seixas (2016) has been changed into Seixas (2004)
as per reference list. Please check and confirm.
AU2 Reference Ravitch & Fitch (1988) has been changed to Ravitch
& Finn (1988) as per reference list. Please check and confirm.
AU3 Reference “Carretero (2010)” is cited in text but not given in
the reference list. Please provide details in the list or delete the
citation from the text.
AU4 Please provide the matching closing quotes.
AU5 Please update the full details of reference “Kadianaki et al.
(2016)”.
AU6 Please update the full details of reference “Retz (2015)”.
AU7 Please update the full details of reference “Seixas (2015a,
2015b)”.

View publication stats