Historiography and Historical Research Methods - What is the Difference? CC
Summary
TLDRThis webinar distinguishes between historiography and historical research methods, crucial for graduate history students. Historiography explores the evolution of historical interpretations and the discipline's development, focusing on how historians interpret history rather than the events themselves. In contrast, historical research methods emphasize various approaches to analyzing historical sources, requiring students to design a research proposal. The webinar clarifies the unique objectives of each course to build a strong foundation for historical studies.
Takeaways
- 📚 The webinar introduces two crucial graduate history courses: historiography and historical research methods, which are foundational to the discipline.
- 🎯 Historiography is described as the 'history of history,' focusing on the evolution of historical interpretations and the role of historical metanarratives.
- 🤔 It emphasizes the importance of understanding how historians approach and interpret historical events, rather than the events themselves.
- 📖 In historiography, students are tasked with evaluating historical analyses and defending their own interpretations within a historical context.
- 👀 The course challenges students to consider different perspectives and how these have changed over time, using secondary sources as primary materials.
- 🔍 An example used is the historiographical study of Andrew Jackson, focusing on how historians have interpreted him rather than his actual life events.
- 📈 Historical research methods course explores various methodological approaches to studying, analyzing, and evaluating historical sources.
- 📝 Students in this course design a research proposal, outlining their chosen methodology and its relevance to their research question.
- 📋 The course highlights the significance of method in historical research, often referred to as 'lenses of history,' and how it shapes the study of historical topics.
- 📑 The final projects for each course are distinct, with historiography focusing on interpretation and historical research methods on methodological research proposals.
- 💡 The webinar emphasizes the importance of understanding the differences between the two courses for a strong foundation in historical studies and future career in the discipline.
Q & A
What are the two courses discussed in the webinar?
-The two courses discussed are historiography and historical research methods.
Why are these two courses considered foundational within the graduate history program?
-They are foundational because they form the basis for everything else within the program and are crucial for understanding one's work as they move into the discipline.
What does the term 'historiography' refer to in the context of the webinar?
-Historiography refers to the history of history, focusing on the study of history and historical writing, the craft and profession of history, and its relationship to society.
How does the course on historiography approach the study of historical interpretations?
-It deals with the changing nature of historical interpretations and arguments, and the role of historical metanarratives in shaping understanding and experience of history.
What is an example of a topic that would not be studied in historiography?
-In historiography, one would not study the biographical details or specific historical events of a figure like Andrew Jackson, but rather how historians have interpreted him.
What role do secondary sources play in historiography?
-Secondary sources are the primary sources in historiography, as they are the works of other historians that are being analyzed for changing interpretations.
What is the focus of the historical research methods course?
-The focus is on the various methodological approaches used in historical research, including the relationships between method, theory, and interpretation.
How does the historical research methods course differ from historiography in terms of final projects?
-In historical research methods, the final project is a research proposal where students make a case for why their research is needed and how it will differ, focusing on the methodological approach.
What is the key difference between the final projects in historiography and historical research methods?
-In historiography, the final project focuses on the interpretation of historical figures and how those interpretations have changed over time. In contrast, historical research methods require a research proposal that emphasizes the need for the research and the methodological approach to be used.
Why is it important for students to understand the differences between these two courses?
-Understanding the differences is crucial because these courses serve as the foundation for the graduate history program and the students' future work within the discipline.
What should students do if they experience confusion about the courses?
-Students should visit with their instructor or post questions in the learning community to clear up any confusion and receive assistance.
Outlines
📚 Introduction to Historiography and Historical Research Methods
The speaker begins by welcoming the audience to a webinar focused on the differences between historiography and historical research methods, emphasizing their foundational importance within the graduate history program. The webinar aims to clarify the distinction between these two crucial courses. Historiography is described as an in-depth exploration of the study of history and historical writing, focusing on the craft and profession of history and its societal relevance. It involves understanding the evolution of historical interpretations and the impact of historical metanarratives. Students are tasked with evaluating their own thinking in relation to various historical analyses and defending their preferred approach. The speaker simplifies this by stating that historiography is essentially 'the history of history,' focusing on the development of the discipline of history and how historians interpret historical events. The speaker clarifies that historiography does not involve studying historical topics or figures directly but rather how historians approach and interpret these subjects. Secondary sources become primary in historiography as students engage with the works of other historians to understand changing interpretations. An example is provided with Andrew Jackson, where the focus is on how historians have interpreted him over time, rather than on Jackson's life events.
🔍 Distinguishing Historiography from Historical Research Methods
The speaker transitions to discussing the second course, historical research methods, highlighting its focus on the various methodological approaches used by historians in their study, analysis, and evaluation of historical accounts and sources. The course encourages students to explore these approaches and their interplay with theory and interpretation. Students are expected to design a research proposal that demonstrates how a chosen methodology is suitable for addressing the central issues of their research. The speaker uses the Women's Rights Movement as an example to illustrate the selection of appropriate methodologies, such as women's history or gender history, based on the research focus. The speaker also addresses the final projects for each course, clarifying that while they may seem similar, they serve different purposes. In historiography, the focus is on the interpretation of historical figures over time, whereas in historical research methods, the focus is on proposing new research that fills a gap in current understanding, utilizing a specific methodological approach. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding the differences between these two courses for the success of students in their graduate history program and beyond, encouraging students to seek clarification if they have any confusion.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Historiography
💡Historical Research Methods
💡Historical Interpretations
💡Metanarratives
💡Methodology
💡Research Proposal
💡Primary Sources
💡Secondary Sources
💡Graduate History Program
💡Discipline
Highlights
Webinar introduction to historiography and historical research methods as foundational graduate history courses.
Historiography defined as the study of history and historical writing, focusing on the craft and profession of history.
Emphasis on the changing nature of historical interpretations and the role of metanarratives in historiography.
Students are tasked with positioning and evaluating their own thinking in relation to various historical analyses.
Historiography described as the history of history, focusing on how history works and why interpretations exist.
Historiography does not study historical topics or biographies but rather the interpretation and analysis by historians.
Secondary sources are primary in historiography as they deal with the work of other historians.
Example of historiography: Analyzing how historians have interpreted Andrew Jackson over time.
Historical research methods course focuses on various methodological approaches in historical research.
Students will design an initial research proposal in historical research methods.
Emphasis on the method in historical research methods, including how to approach a historical topic.
Example of historical research methods: Using women's history and gender history lenses for the Women's Rights Movement.
Distinct final projects for historiography and historical research methods to display competency in covered material.
Historiography final project focuses on interpretation, not the history of an event.
Historical research methods final project involves a research proposal arguing the need for and the novelty of the research.
The importance of understanding the differences between the two courses for a strong foundation in the graduate history program.
Encouragement for students to seek clarification from instructors or post questions in the learning community.
Transcripts
SPEAKER: Well, hello.
And I'd like to welcome you to our webinar
to discuss the differences between historiography
and historical research methods.
These are two very important courses
within the graduate history program,
as they are foundational to everything else
that you will do within the program.
While they are ultimately extremely important in having
an understanding of your work as you move out
into the discipline, it is within these two courses
in which everything else that you will ultimately
do, both now and beyond, is built upon.
Which means they are extremely important to have
an understanding of both courses and also the difference
that is present between each course.
So as we begin, I thought it would be best
to take a look at the course description of each course.
And we'll start with historiography,
discuss what it is, and then move
to historical research methods.
Historiography provides a deep level exploration
into the study of history and historical writing,
focusing on the craft and profession
of history and its relationship to society.
The course contends with the changing nature
of historical interpretations and arguments
and the role of historical metanarratives
in shaping one's understanding and experience of history.
Students are asked to position and evaluate
their own thinking in relation to various historical analysis,
defending a preferred approach to a relevant area of interest.
So I can sum all that up by stating historiography
is the history of history.
What do I mean when I say the history of history?
Well, if we look at that course description,
we focus on ideas such as the deep-level exploration
into the study of history, evaluating your own thinking
in relation to various historical analysis,
and even defending a preferred approach.
That is a focus on the history of history.
In other words, we focus on how history
works and, ultimately, why we have the interpretations that
will do.
And when we say this idea of studying
the history of history, it also relates
to studying how the discipline of history has developed.
One key element to focus on within historiography
is the fact that, in historiography, we
do not study historical topics or biographies of great people
in history.
In other words, we are not focused on the topic
as it relates to what happened.
And I'll provide an example of this in a second.
But we are focusing more on how historians do history.
What is the interpretation?
What is the analysis?
And why have they changed?
And if we put this in perspective with an example,
in historiography we can focus on that idea
and interpretations.
How has it been presented throughout history?
Why have interpretations changed over time?
And why is it important to note?
We also, in historiography, draw connections
between different historical interpretations.
For, example what one author and what a historian might
have stated on the topic differs from another historian
on the same topic.
Why is that?
What is different as it relates to the work of both,
and why is their interpretation different?
Also in historiography, secondary sources
are your primary sources.
As you're dealing with the work of other historians
that have written on the topic, you
are utilizing primary sources.
This allows us to focus on those changing interpretations
and explaining why they are significant.
Now, as I mentioned, we'd have an example.
So we're going to focus on Andrew
Jackson in historiography.
We would not study Andrew Jackson, the man.
We would not look at anything that Andrew Jackson did
in his life from his time in the Battle of New Orleans,
or living in Tennessee, or in the White House, OK?
We are not focused on what he did as an individual, any
of his accomplishments, or any of the issues surrounding
Andrew Jackson, the man.
What we would look at with Andrew Jackson
in historiography is how have historians
interpreted Andrew Jackson.
So in other words, we're going to look at individuals, maybe,
such as Jon Meacham and Robert V. Remini
and other historians and authors of the written on Jackson,
and what are their interpretations of Jackson?
Are they the same?
Why has the view, if it has, of Andrew Jackson
changed over history, changed?
What's different?
Do they have differing source bases,
or are they writing from a different perspective, whatever
the case may be.
As you can see, we're focusing on the interpretation
of Jackson, not, as I referenced, Jackson, the man.
This is a research paper that you
would write in historiography as it
relates to these ideas and the overall interpretation
of your topic.
So again, historiography is focusing on the interpretation
and why the interpretation has changed,
and it's a research paper.
Now, as we move to the second course
that we're discussing tonight, which
is historical research methods.
The course description states "Historians
use a wide variety of methods and approaches
to the study, analysis, and evaluation
of historical accounts and sources.
This course offers students an opportunity
to investigate various methodological approaches
and the relationships between method, theory,
and interpretation in historical research.
Students will design an initial research proposal
and articulate how a chosen methodology positions
them appropriately to address the central issues and problems
of their research."
So when we focus on historical research methods,
we are focusing on the various methodological approaches
that are utilized in historical research.
And I, purposely, wanted to pull that statement out
of that course description to place the focus on the method.
OK?
We are looking at the method in historical research methods.
Now what do we mean when we say method?
Well, how do we want to approach a particular historical topic?
This is where the methodology comes into play.
And sometimes these are also referred
to as lenses of history.
So if we're going to use the Women's Rights
Movement as an example, we would have
to determine whether or not it was
appropriate to utilize both women's history and gender
history in your approach?
What is your focus, and why are you
making the case that your research is needed
as it relates to developing the research
proposal that we would look at in historical research methods?
Again, the focus is on the method.
Now, each course has a final project.
The purpose is to display competency
in the material covered.
And each project is very different.
And it's important to note that because sometimes students
get confused as it relates to what the projects are
and whether or not they can focus
on the same topic for both courses.
Well, it all depends.
You have to remember, in historiography,
you're focusing on that interpretation.
So in other words, of going back to our example of Andrew
Jackson, how has the interpretation of Jackson
changed over time?
In historical research methods, with that research proposal,
you are making the case for why your research is needed
and making the case for how your research will
differ as it relates to focusing on the method.
Now, the final paper, as we talked about in historiography,
does focus on interpretation, not the history of an event.
OK.
And I can't emphasize that enough because, if we think
about historiography, and if we're writing a research
paper, and again, utilizing our example Andrew Jackson,
and we're focusing on everything that Andrew Jackson did
in his life, that is not a historiographic paper.
That is a research paper.
Rather, our focus needs to be on how Andrew Jackson has been
interpreted in history and how those interpretations have
changed for historiography.
For historical research methods, this is where, as I referenced,
you're going to complete your research proposal, in which you
propose research.
Again, you make the case for why research is needed.
You make the case for how your research will differ.
And you will not complete the research.
So if we still wanted to focus on our topic of Andrew Jackson,
for example, as it relates to our research proposal,
this is where you would have to make the case for why
your research is needed.
How will your research differ?
What gap is present within current research
that your research will fill?
And what method will you utilize within your research?
So two very, very important courses
that are very distinct within their overall focus.
As I referenced, they also serve as that foundation
upon which your graduate history program is built upon
and your overall career working within the discipline
is also built on.
That is one of the things that makes them so very
important to understanding.
So it is imperative that you understand the differences
between these two courses.
If you experience confusion, please visit
with your instructor or post your questions
in the learning community soon.
It is vital that we clear up any confusion that you have,
and we do want to help you.
So if you have questions, again, don't hesitate to reach out.
We are more than happy to assist in any way that we can.
浏览更多相关视频
1.Historiography : Development in the West | Class 10 History | Chapter 1 Exercise Notes + Answers
History vs Historiography
PENGANTAR METODOLOGI SEJARAH
Readings in Philippine History: Introduction to Philippine Historiography - Sir Krippe
Tradition of Historiography and Modern Historiography | History | Standard 10 | MSBSHSE (SSC)
Metode Penelitian Sejarah
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)