This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights
 Author's personal copy

Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Linguistics and Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/linged

Chilean students learn to think historically: Construction of

historical causation through the use of evidence in writing
Rodrigo Henríquez a , Marcela Ruiz b,∗
a
Education Faculty, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, Vicuña Mackenna Avenue 4868, Macul, Santiago, Chile
b
Language and Literature Department, Alberto Hurtado University, Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins Avenue, Santiago, Chile

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 16 November 2013 This study characterizes Chilean secondary student strategies to produce written historical
explanations from the use of evidence. This research uses a qualitative design that adopts
discourse analysis to examine 57 essays by students between 12 and 17 years old. The essays
Keywords: addressed historical problems. With the help of experts in history and teaching history,
Historical literacy nine essays were analyzed according to the categories of agency, construction of a causal
Historical writing chain, and perspective on the evidence. The results identified three ways that students build
Historical explanation
historical explanation: chronicle without a historical sense; narration without a historical
sense; and narration with a historical sense. The authors conclude that in teaching and
learning historical causation and the determination of historical problems, the relationship
between the processes of reading and the analysis of evidence, as well as their organization
and transfer into writing, must be considered.
© 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The Chilean history curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2002, 2009a, 2009b, 2012) is focused mainly on the learning of
facts and historical processes chronologically ordered. It hardly mentions the development of skills required for reading
and writing historical texts. These skills are separated on the one hand into historical research skills (analysis of evidence)
and, on the other hand, reading evidence written in a variety of history texts (descriptive, explanatory, etc.). Other Chilean
curricular tools reiterate this distinction, such as the seven-level Progress Map of Learning History (Ministry of Education,
2009a). The fifth level indicates the student must demonstrate that he/she “is able to understand that different historical
interpretations can select, in various ways, the factors that explain the historical processes.” Similarly, the seventh level
indicates the student must be able to “develop original essays challenging interpretations and considering a variety of
sources” (Ministry of Education, 2009a, p. 17). Despite this inclusion, it does not specify the manner and procedures to
assess argumentative texts or the inclusion of evidence in historical texts. In addition, the standardized national assessment,
System Quality Measurement in Education (SIMCE), for history and social science focuses on the measurement of subject
matter concepts rather than the skills of historical inquiry and their relationship with reading and writing historical evidence.
Therefore, neither the Progress Map of Learning History, nor the standardized assessment (SIMCE) explicitly link the skills
required for the analysis of evidence with the role of reading and writing in these processes.
Additionally, there are no disaggregated student records of learning history, nor empirical evidence of the types of
curriculum resources employed in history classes in Chile. Teachers primarily rely on the history textbook as their learning
tool, and organize and implement its proposed activities in the classroom (Ministry of Education, 2009c). The textbook

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +56 228897725.

E-mail address: marcelaruiz.zuniga@gmail.com (M. Ruiz).

0898-5898/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2013.10.003
 Author's personal copy

146 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

holds, in this sense, a crucial role because of its influence on literacy and learning activities in the classroom. However,
Chilean textbooks – officially approved and understood as a historical genre (Coffin, 2006) – do not introduce students to the
specifics of historical discourse, such as constructing historical meaning from knowledge of perspectives about the past. As
argued by Oteíza Silva (2006) and Oteíza Silva and Pinto (2011), school textbooks present historical facts based on restricting
various voices. Linguistic devices such as the nominalization of certain facts, value judgments of approval and social sanction,
existencialization of events, and symbolic construction of time legitimize and delegitimize certain aspects of the past. Thus,
the discursive features adopted by the language used to teach history affect the development of literacy processes in the
discipline, understood as reading, reasoning, and writing (Young & Leinhardt, 1998).
Students can develop the ability to differentiate among the multiplicity of voices, intentions, and purposes of authors in
analyzed texts by reading the materials used in history classes, such as primary and secondary sources, audiovisual sources,
and others (Oteíza Silva & Pinto, 2011; Paxton, 2002). Reading produces processes of reasoning, interpretation, and analysis.
All of these skills are necessary to produce historical discourse that results in different historical genres in school, such as
description, argumentation and explanation (Coffin, 2006).
Consequently, in Chile one can see a clear dissociation among the curricular purposes of history teaching, the assess-
ment tools that measure student learning, and the curriculum resources used in the classroom. Additionally, there is little
scholarship on the relationship between language use and the learning of history by children and youth. Specifically, there
are unclear connections between teaching methods for reading and writing using historical evidence, and the evaluation
methods employed in the classroom (Henríquez, 2011). In this context, it is important to examine discursive mediation and
its implication in the process of evidence-based historical sense-making. In the construction of historical meaning, language
has constitutive roles in the formulation of historical questions, in the selection and reading of sources, as well as in the
actual writing. The characterization of this discursive mediation is relevant given the objectives of teaching and its role in
learning history.

1.1. History literacy

Interest in the theoretical and practical development of disciplinary literacy (Moje et al., 2004; Shanahan & Shanahan,
2008) has allowed the characterization of thinking, reading, and writing approaches in different disciplinary domains. In
particular, an analysis of the different methods used by historians for reading source material permits us to identify how the
evidence is evaluated and linked to give it historical significance.
The process of identifying the author’s perspective and comparing and corroborating information with other documents
(Paxton, 2002; Stahl & Shanahan, 2004; Wineburg, 1991a, 1991b) is articulated by using conceptual structures that connect
the knowledge of historical events and processes with the rhetorical content of the discipline.
For Young and Leinhardt (1998), academic literacy integrates two dimensions of disciplinary knowledge: the content
of the discipline, and the knowledge of rhetorical process of the discipline. Concepts of history, such as “proletariat” and
“bourgeoisie,” provide schemes to organize the causal chain of a historical narrative (Paxton, 2002). In turn, the rhetorical
resources structure this knowledge in a discursive way. Thus, the articulation of both dimensions is an organizational
arrangementgiving historical meaning to the story, accompanied by verbal resources as textual connectors that establish
the hierarchy of causes. Through these rhetorical resources, we can identify the author’s subjectivity or perspective and how
it affects the changes and continuities of the past.
Reading and analyzing sources used by historians involve identifying the author’s intent and corroborating the internal
consistency of the documents (and their possible links with other evidence), in order to determine their epistemological
nature (Leinhardt & Young, 1996). Thus, the historian is able to establish and connect diverse perspectives from the evidence
of the past (Monte-Sano, 2011; Paxton, 2002; Wineburg, 1998; Young & Leinhardt, 1998). Consequently, reading the evidence
is a heuristic process that operates during the interpretation of historical evidence and the contextualization of historical
writing. In this regard, it is noteworthy that “History is a language-based discipline” (Achugar & Stainton, 2010, p. 145) not
only because it uses language to make sense of the past, but also because it is built through language. The writing of history,
for example, transforms the actions on objects using nominalizations and replaces the sequence of human time for a frozen
time settings (Eggins, Wignell, & Martin, 1993).
In the school system, the development of academic language and the learning of history are deeply related; Martin (2011)
argues that one of the crucial problems of historical education corresponds to the discursive mechanisms that mediate
learning to read evidence of the past. These discursive characteristics are expressed in the oral interaction between the
teacher and student, and in the manner the history is written. This becomes important because the discursive forms adopted
represent a model for the construction of students’ historical knowledge.
The characteristics of school history texts can be grouped into two different genres: the narrative and argumentative
(Coffin, 2006). The main feature of the narrative genre is to relate specific events in a linear temporality. For this reason, this
type of text lacks the interpretive apparatus or conceptual structures that organize, connect, and orient a set of facts; the
time sequence is the axis that structures it. Autobiographical and biographical genres are within the narrative genre. In the
teaching of history, the narrative genre is one of the most widely used, summarizing historical events and inserting them
into a temporal sequence (Coffin, 2006).
The argumentative genre differs from the narrative because it incorporates causal relationships within the main time
sequence. That is to say, instead of only connecting the actions termporally, one after the other, the actions aquire roles
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 147

that cause the occurrence of subsequent events (Coffin, 2006). This category includes the history report (whose function is
to describe the temporal sequence of the causal antecedents of historical facts) and the “explanation-consequential essay”,
which seeks to explain past events by linking their structural consequences over the long term. The explanation-consequence
essay form is characterized by the presence of nominalizations. Nominalizations allow the transformation of actions into
entities and in this way make the historical experience more abstract.
However, these features of narrative and argumentative genres do not match with the definitions used in history. The
narrative genre is linked to the story (which recounts events organized around a temporal development), and the argumen-
tative genre is associated with the history (explaining the actions by using historical concepts). This clear division does not
operate in history. The historical narrative mixes story and explanation because the historical explanation is supposed to
chronologically develop the reasons that generate an event (Megill, 1989; Megill, Shepard, & Honenberger, 2007). Thus, the
narrative construction not only integrates multiple historical factors (interests, conditions, motivations and facts) tempo-
rally coordinated, but also meta-historical dimensions that provide explanatory matrices from social and historiography
theories.
As noted by Oteíza, Silva & Pinto
the task before us, then, is to ‘alphabetize’ our students so that they can have access to language resources that
build value perspectives, and can also recognize and reflect on history as an interpretive discourse that transmits the
dominant ideologies of our culture (2011, p. 167).
In short, given the relevance that discursive mediation has in learning the language of history, it is necessary to challenge
teaching methodologies and prepare teachers to teach historical thinking (Monte-Sano, 2011). This process requires that
that they first teach the heuristic and epistemic processes of this discipline, and secondly, they teach how these processes
are configured within the oral and written discourse.

1.2. Historical thinking and the construction of causality

As mentioned, the analysis and interpretation of evidence is a process in historical discourse characterized by ways of
thinking typical to the discipline. Learning this process enables students to construct historical knowledge. Specifically,
historical thinking is a particular form of reasoning that guides and gives meaning to temporality by understanding the
evidence of the past (Barton & Levstik, 2004; Lee & Ashby, 2000; Stearns, Wineburg, & Seixas, 2000; Wineburg, 2001). For
Peck & Seixas (2008), there are six distinctive elements of historical thinking: the construction of historical meaning; the
use of primary and secondary historical evidence; the identification of continuity and change; the analysis of cause and
consequence; the adoption of a historical perspective; and finally, the understanding of the ethical dimensions of history.
From these elements, this study focuses on the analysis of the causality construction processes through reading evidence
and through writing.
The educational proposals developed around historical thinking have focused mainly on the process of reading and the
critical examination of historical evidence (Stahl & Shanahan, 2004; Wineburg, 1991a, 1991b). Subsequently, interest has
spread from the reading and analysis of evidence to the processes involved in the production of texts written by students
(De La Paz, 2005; De La Paz & Felton, 2010; Monte-Sano, 2011; Reisman, 2012; Young & Leinhardt, 1998). However, both
perspectives have paid less attention to the formulation of the historical problem. Understanding how the historic problem
is formulated is relevant for the construction of historical meaning from the evidence. Without the presence of a historical
problem, it is not possible to link cause and effect in complex ways conforming to a historical orientation. For example,
regarding argumentative writing on historical topics, De La Paz and Felton (2010) encourage students to adopt the role of
the protagonist, to take a position and support it:
Your task is to take the role of a historian and develop a written argument about what happened before the start of
the Spanish-American War. If you were living at the time the Spanish-American War unfolded, would you have sided
with the expansionists or the anti-imperialists? (p. 178).
On the other hand, Reisman (2012, p. 242) proposes a question based on causality – “Why did the Homestead Strike of
1892 turn violent?” – to guide the students’ analysis of the evidence. Whereas the proposal by Wineburg (1991a, 1991b,
1998, 2001) presents historical problems associated with moral issues without contradictions or epistemological dilemmas
such as those raised by historians.
In short, the formulation of these problems on the one hand involves taking the role of a historical agent, or promoting
empathy as a starting point to develop a historical narrative and causal chain in a context that lacks opposing positions. On
the other hand, requiring the generation of a causal, sequential explanation (Coffin, 2006) does not mean operating with two
divergent perspectives. Unlike these, authentic historical problems propose a question about contradictory or ambiguous
situations generated after a review of the historical background of the topic. Although Reisman (2012) seeks the elaboration
of a response to a causal question, this lacks a conflict that guides the connection of the evidence and the asigning of its
historical significance. Indeed, the development of historical thinking is not only displayed based on reading the evidence
and writing explanations or arguments, but also based on an authentic historical problem that acts as a pivot and gives
meaning to the heuristic process involved in the analysis of evidence, as in the case of Lee and Ashby (2000).
 Author's personal copy

148 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

They structured their research starting from the formulation of historical problems and use of evidence to produce an
imbalance in the students’ own knowledge. The evidence was processed and classified by epistemic type: reasons, enabling
conditions, and causal antecedents (events). Similarly, Paxton (2002) provided primary and secondary evidence representing
different perspectives for students to respond to a problem centered on the assassination of Caesar. These sources included
recent and classical historians, primary sources, and a work of fiction, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by Shakespeare. All this
was done with the goal of characterizing the historical reasoning deployed in these sources through the point of view of the
authors.
The students’ written texts were examined using the following categories: (a) macrostructures, (b) use of text, (c) staff
agency, (d) taking a position, and (e) awareness of multiple perspectives. Macrostructures, as claimed by Young and Leinhardt
(1998), provide the causal pattern that allows linking antecedents and consequences. The references and the use of text helped
identify the ability of students to reformulate evidence. Additionally, the identification of personal agency, taking a position
on the sources, and the inclusion of multiple perspectives reveal the interpretive processes underlying the construction of
historical knowledge from causal linkages between facts and historical processes. As will be developed below, this research
uses a model for selecting the evidence according to its causal power in the construction of historical significance. The
characterization of human intentionality and meaning is relevant to constructing causal historical explanations because it
allows understanding the role of agency over time, and links the degree of force from different causes to the appearance (or
not) of historical effects.
However, we still do not have results about learning historical thinking that allow us to assess whether curriculum
changes developed in Chile promote historical learning, or that indicate how these factors can be studied more indepth.
As noted, the changes in Chile’s history curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2002, 2009a, 2009b, 2012) include producing
argumentative genres. These should be elaborated upon, starting with the use and interpretation of evidence with the
objective of building their historical significance. However, the link has not been made between the development of these
distinctive heuristic processes of history literacy, and the role of the discursive mediation in them – in particular, the writing
of historical texts. Therefore, it is of interest to analyze and characterize the strategies used by Chilean students to produce
historical explanations by using evidence.
After more than 20 years of education reforms, it is important to ask whether the goals of history education are sup-
ported by evidence of history learning outcomes in different genres (narrative, argumentative) and with different degrees of
complexity. Certainly, the Chilean curriculum reformers have not yet considered this point. This study’s results offer some
proposals to consider different ways of assessment that characterize, beyond standardized tests, the scope and difficul-
ties involved in learning and teaching history. Similarly, this research provides information about the connection between
writing and the development of historical inquiry skills.

2. Methodology

2.1. Research design

The research is based on a qualitative design that employs discourse analysis. This perspective considers the text as a
genre that fulfills a social purpose in a particular context, which is part of disciplinary, institutional, or procedural practices
shared by group members (Bhatia, 2004). Specifically, it emphasizes the use of language in the genres associated with the
demonstration, dissemination, and construction of knowledge in contexts and academic activities. A person’s particular use
of language in certain contexts leaves textual markers. These markers become the object of analysis because they function
as indicators of interaction with the social environment (Arnoux, 2006; Calsamiglia & Tusón, 1999). Thus, academic writing
depends on the dominance (accepted by individuals) of the epistemic conventions of the discipline, such as the ability to
determine evidence and appropriate arguments in the disciplinary field (Hyland, 2009).

2.2. Participants

The participants were 57 students from the 8th grade in elementary education, and from the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd levels
of secondary education (equivalent to grades 9, 10, and 11 in the U.S. system; hereafter, the U.S. equivalent grades will be
used) in two schools with mixed funding (public and private). The schools were located in Puente Alto, a low-income urban
neighborhood in the southern part of Santiago, Chile. The participants (49% male and 51% female) were between 13 and 17
years old, with 15 students in the 10th grade and 14 students each in 8th, 9th, and 11th grades. During 2011, they were
regular students in history, geography, and social science courses, whose academic program is governed by the national
curriculum. In both schools, the courses were taught by their regular teachers during the March to December 2011 research
period.

2.3. Procedures

The first phase consisted of posing preliminary historical problems to students, as shown in Table 1, which required
an explanation based on the use of six pieces of historical evidence given to them by their teachers. The content of the
historical problems was determined by the academic schedules of each course and the national curriculum. The teachers of
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 149

Table 1
Formulation of Preliminary Historical Problems.

Course Preliminary historical problems

7th grade (elementary In ancient Greece, there was a cultural community formed by the various city-states of the Greek peninsula that
education) shared values and traditions such as language, religion, and a common history. This common identity allowed the
poleis of Athens and Sparta to fight together against the Persian Empire. However, despite this collaboration, within a
short period Sparta and Athens faced each other in the Peloponnesian War.
Why did these poleis transform so quickly from being allies to becoming enemies?
8th grade (elementary During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, various voyages of exploration were initiated. In this period, the
education) Netherlands and England were the most advanced countries, with better technology to be able to conquer the world’s
continents. However, less developed Spain and Portugal achieved the discovery of America.
Why did these monarchies succeed in forming the exploration enterprises that discovered America?
9th grade (secondary The USSR and the U.S. were allies during World War II.
education) Why did they become rival powers after the end of this conflict?
10th grade (secondary At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Latin America was a Spanish colony. When the King of Spain was taken
education) prisoner by the French, Creoles (the second generation Spaniards born in South America) remained loyal to the
monarch, and formed a governing council in the hope that he would be released.
So, why did the Creoles, who were initially loyal to the king, go on to lead the independence process of the
American colonies?

the respective courses also contributed to the formulation of the problems and the selection of historical evidence during
meetings with the university researchers.
Each piece of evidence provided to students was classified according to its explanatory potential in one of the following
historical factors: motivation, conditions, and facts (Lee & Ashby, 2000). The teachers of each course gave the historical
problem with the evidence to the students during the regular school day. Table 1 presents the formulation of the preliminary
historical problems.
Preliminary results indicated that the construction of historical explanations required more time for reading, analysis, and
integration of the diverse evidence to answer a historical problem. For this reason, a teaching sequence was implemented
with the goal to create a classroom sequence to use evidence to construct historical causation. The sequence consisted of
6 h of instruction, equivalent to eight class sessions of 45 min for each course participant. Its implementation included the
following steps: 1. Contextualization, 2. Presentation of the historical problem, 3. Presentation and reading of the evidence
(identification, in-depth reading, connection of the sources), 4. Organization of the evidentiary information, 5. Selection of
information from the evidence, 6. Hierarchy of evidentiary information, 7. Planning the written explanation, and 8. Elabora-
tion and development of the explanation. In each course, the respective teachers administered the sequences. Table 2 shows
the historical problems used in the teaching sequence.
To achieve this goal of using evidence to construct historical causation, students were given a set that contained 10–11
fragments of primary or secondary evidence classified as Historical–epistemological and Argumentative. The first is related
to the triggering power contained in various factors of historical explanation: motivations (intentions), conditions, and
facts (consequent). Their articulation allows the development of historically plausible causal chains. The second shows the
argumentative nature of the evidence. On one hand, there is comprehensive inferential evidence: it only indicates a posture

Table 2
Formulation of the historical problems for the teaching sequence.

Course Historical problems

8th grade (elementary Why did the Spanish arrival in 1492 revolutionize European and American societies?
education)
9th grade (secondary The USSR and the U.S. were allies during World War II.
education) Why did they become rival powers after the end of this conflict?
10th grade (secondary During the period of conquest and colonization of Chile and Latin America there were numerous confrontations – at
education) times even armed conflict – between the Spanish and Indigenous people. For this reason, one could think that there
was no interest in sharing cultural, social, and religious customs. However, if we pay attention to our Chilean and Latin
American identity, we can see cultural elements remain from both the Indigenous and Spanish.
How is it possible that despite the confrontation between these two cultures, today we have aspects of both?
11th grade (secondary Territorial expansion and military power made Rome a great city during a long period of the Republic. During this
education) period, Rome possessed very stable institutions, such as the Senate, which already had functioned for more than four
centuries.
Why did the Roman Republic fall and devolve into an Empire, which had institutions very distinct from the
previous ones?
During the 3rd century, Christianity transformed into the official religion of the Western Roman Empire. However, at
the end of the century, this empire fell and was violently invaded by various foreign peoples and pagans called Goths.
If the Romans, who were already Christians, fought hard against the Goths, who were pagans – and the latter won –
why during the Middle Ages were cultural elements of both merged?
What consequences did this cultural fusion have on medieval Europe?
 Author's personal copy

150 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

Table 3
Classification of evidence by historical factor.

Evidence + Didactic sequence number Letter Type of historical factor

Evidence + N◦ H Facts
Evidence + N◦ HC Facts-conditions
Evidence + N◦ M Motivation
Evidence + N◦ C Condition

or position about an issue, or indicates an event or manifestation of the problem to explain. Generally, these are found in
primary sources such as speeches, images, maps, propaganda, etc. On the other hand, there is causal analytical evidence: it
presents informed positions of the enunciators so that one can balance the epistemic weight of its approach. Within the
framework of this research, argumentative evidence corresponds to the secondary sources. These express a vision and develop
arguments that can be evaluated by the reader according to their potential to consistently support the author’s position, as
well as their relevance to responding to the question.

2.4. Categories of discursive analysis of the explanations

Using the judgment of experts, the 57 student writing samples were put into three categories (low, median, high) that
represented distinct levels of performance observed in the historical explanations, and three representative writing samples
from each category (n = 9) were selected.
In conceptual terms, the study made the distinction between the historical record and the historical account (Megill,
1989; Megill et al., 2007; Ricoeur & Neira, 2000). Instead of using the approach of Coffin (2004, 2006) on narrative and
argumentative genres, the study employed a historiographical perspective, because it is relevant to consider the rhetorical
organization coordinated with the historical content. In this sense, we understand the concept of the historical record as the
construction of a story in which the facts and the development of actions are organized chronologically, but which lacks
conceptual structures that give it historical significance. However, the story within the historical account or narrative is
developed considering conceptual structures that are the basis of building an explanation of the historical significance of
certain facts.
The aim of discourse analysis was to identify how the evidence, classified as historical factors (motivations, conditions,
and events), was reformulated and integrated into the written explanation, as well as to determine the textual cohesion
marks present in its construction (Adam, 1999; Bronckart, Salvador, & Carrión, 2004; Calsamiglia & Tusón, 1999). In other
words, the characterization discourse on how historical factors are used in producing a historical explanation, assumes that
each piece of evidence has a degree of potential to generate historical effects. Therefore, every piece of evidence, whether
it is historical–epistemological or argumentative, has the ability to trigger historical effects according to their nature of
motivation, condition, or historical fact.
Table 3 shows the classification of the evidence given to students. The following letters indicate the type of historical factor
associated with the evidence: H corresponds to facts; M indicates motivation; C refers to condition, and HC corresponds to
facts that provide information about the condition. Finally, the symbol Ø indicates that the text written by the student is
not associated with particular evidence, but is derived from its use. Additionally, every piece of evidence contains a unique
number.
The analysis of the discursive features of historical explanations was performed using the following categories: agency,
construction of the causal chain, and perspective on the evidence. These were selected because they account for the
way that establishing historical significance is done through the use of evidence. Specifically, agency corresponds to the
characters, concepts, or entities that generate actions or processes which are the object of explanation. Noun phrases
(nouns, adjectives, complements, and prepositional phrases) and verbs are discursive markers that characterize this category.
Double underline indicates the word markers in the texts that belong to agency.
The construction of the causal chain seeks to associate the role of antecedent or consequent to a historical factor (fact,
condition, motivation) used in the preparation of the explanation. Connectors (consecutive, causal), conceptual anaphors,
and verbs are some of the discursive marks that identify this category. Bold identifies the verbal resources associated with
the construction of the causal chain. This causal chain is set in historical time, which is projected into indicators such as
evidence, tenses, prepositional phrases and verbal modes, among others. These timing markers are identified by the color
gray.
Finally, the perspective on the evidence refers to the position taken by the student regarding the nature of the evidence;
that is to say if it is interpreted as fact, motivation, or condition. It also allows us to recognize the source of the evidence, whose
marks are of the referred discourse (verbs of communication, use of quotation marks) that allow the attribution of the origin
of the historical factors. Finally, the degree of value or importance that the student gives to the historical factors is considered.
This is evidenced through the use of adjectives, nouns, verb forms, and others.
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 151

Table 4
Summary of the discursive features of historical explanation.

Agency Construction of the causal chain Perspective on the evidence

Chronicle without
historical sense
Narration without
historical sense
The actors are characters and
entities with emotional and mental
states.
The actors are characters and social
groups with mental and emotional
states that have different interests
and purposes.
Historical factors are linked by
temporal succession. This temporal
succession acts like an axis.
Timing marks correspond to the
time of narration and lack
chronology.
Historical factors are linked by the
temporal sequence of events
starting from a conflict with a
vague chronology.
The historical factors are linked in
a unicausal form.
The evidence is literally copied.
The evidence is reformulated
altering its referential
acceptability.
The evidence is synthesized
without altering its referential
acceptability.
The origin of the evidence is
recognized, but its importance is
not determined.

Historical factors have an

Narration with Actors are social groups,
historical sense socio-political entities, and
conceptual structures with
different interests, motivations and
purposes.
equivalent power trigger. Can work
both as cause and effect.
The link between the historical
factors is multicausal and the
chronology has a limited historical
significance.
Historical factors are identified and
ranked according to their power
trigger, in this way the historical
effects are the facts and the
precedents that provoke them
correspond to the motivations and
the conditions.
The evidence is synthesized
according to the degree of
relevance to answer to the
historical problem.
The source of the evidence is
recognized and inter-textual links
are established between them;
they also are assigned a valuation
grade.

3. Results

3.1. Discursive characterization of the historical explanations

According to the categories of agency, construction of the causal chain, and perspective on the evidence, there are three
ways to build historical explanation: 1. Chronicle without a historical sense; 2. Narration without a historical sense, and
3. Narration with a historical sense. Each of these three levels is grouped according to its complexity in relation to the
discursive configuration of these historical categories present in the explanations produced by the students about the use
of the evidence provided. Table 4 summarizes the main characteristics of the explanatory types mentioned.

3.2. Historical explanation as a chronicle without historical meaning

In the chronicle without historical meaning explanation form, agency is attributed to entities like countries and persons,
whose subjectivity has the precipitating power of the historical explanation. In other words, the progression of historical
narration is affected by individual will and mental conditions. In 309-8th grade (all numbers associated with grade levels
indicate individual students) the presence of verbs associated with individual will and the mental condition of the agents,
such as “to want,” “to know,” “to decide, ” and “to think,” can be seen in Table 5.
Regarding the construction of causality, the transition from the motivational or conditional antecedent to the historical
effect is realized through the sucession of actions. This chain lacks the explicitation of the nexus that supports the capacity
of the antecedent to cause a particular effect. This feature is observed in 309-8th grade; in 3M the reasons for the economic
motivation of Spain and Portugal are not explained, and actions are linked through the continuity of actions using connectors
(because, thus), without providing the reasons for the succession. Similarly in the same text, the reason that allow connecting
1C with Ø is nonexistent and only used the word thus as a connector that allows a consequence. In 62-10th grade, the
construction of the causal chain is reiterated through the juxtaposition of actions using connectors (because, thus, then).
It is also distinguished by the lack of perspective and appreciation of the evidence, as well as the lack of acceptable
references. On one hand, the historical-causal factors are copied literally as with 219-8th grade, or a synthesis is developed
as occurs in 309-8th grade. On the other hand, the reference is replaced by the fictional representation of historical actions
as seen in Ø of 309-8th grade (both countries were saying “eeehhh! Finally we are in India, we do our business, yeah!).
Also, the use of the historical factors in the story lacks an anchor in historical temporality. In 309-8th grade the historical
time remains chronologically indeterminate. In its place emerges the time of the chronicle, whose timeline is structured
in the margins of the story itself–for example in “In these times” (3 M), “about this time it was thought” (Ø). In short, the
 Author's personal copy

152 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

Table 5
The historical explanation as a chronicle without historical meaning.

Identification Historical- Student Text

causal
factor

309-8th grade (elementary 3M In this period Spain and Portugal wanted to trade with the Orient (the East) because they
education) knew they could make a lot of money with spices, fabrics, etc. For this reason,
both countries decided to do business with it (the Orient).
1C Spain and Portugal had good geographic locations (both countries were “on the sea”)
Ø Thus, they decided to go by sea to the Orient, but there was a problem; at that time it was
thought that the earth was flat and they could fall off it. There was another problem: near
the coast were the Vikings, so they decided to go for “the middle of the sea.”
Both countries were merrily making their journey until they found land, when both said
“eeehhh!, Finally we are in India, we can do our business, yeah! Spain and Portugal
complete their business, and then return using the same route they had used to go
(Spain went to Spain y Portugal went to Portugal).
62-10th grade (secondary Ø Because of this they did not have the obligation to depend on any other country and they
education) could do things for themselves. They were loyal to the King because Chile depended on
him, while they themselves were not dependent, and after the conflicts occurred they led
the process of independence of the American colonies
219-8th grade (elementary 1C Because Spain and Portugal had an advantageous geographical location, nautical
education) knowledge reflected in the construction of ships, use the compass and the astrolabe,

2C the Portuguese had very good commercial and maritime experience, their ships carried
out trade from the sea and European cities,
3M the trade with the East made large earnings for the merchants, Spain and Portugal saw the
possibility of obtaining these riches, trading with the countries of Orient.

explanations indicate difficulties to extract the relevant meaning of the evidence with respect to the problem, to synthesize
the key concepts, and to weight the value of the evidence according to the historical explanation.

3.3. Historical explanation as narrative without historical meaning

Unlike the previous level, agency is constructed incorporating more political-institutional entities and/or social sectors
that form a wide social space, where group conflicts emerge and initiate the historical narration. For example, in Table 6,
73-10th grade 1H, the mentioned institutions are the Spanish government, Spanish crown, governing boards, and Creoles;
while in 65-11th grade, both cultures, Goth and Roman peoples, are presented. Nevertheless, the explanation coexists with
the attribution of mental and emotional states that constitute a trigger of the actions. In 35-10th grade, the trigger is
indicated by the words, complain, feel more attached, and desire; while in 73–10th grade the highlighted triggers are:
they wanted, they know, they realized.
Unlike the chronicle without historical meaning, the narrative begins with a conflict and a process, which are the object
of the explanation. In 35-10th grade, the historical problem is focused on the causes of independence in Latin American
colonies (2C), which is marked with although. Similarly, in 71-10th grade (in 1H) we can see the historical conflict from the
demands of a social group. This is evidenced through the use of despite. Regarding the historical process that arises from
the encounter between two cultures in antiquity, in 65-11th grade one can observe the formulation of a historical problem.
The explanation of this problem triesto show the emergence of a historical effect in 1H (the elements between them slowly
were uniting).
In the story, a single point establishes a causal chain with one thread and link between antecedent and historical effect.
In 65-11th grade the cultural exchange is the axis that articulates all the historical evidence. Thus, in the construction of
the story, the historical factors 10H and 11M are connected by this aspect. For example, in 11M (the elements involved a
cultural fusion, and thus began to emerge more unifications, which prevailed) the historical factors are credited with the
ability to trigger a cultural effect with temporal transcendency and historical significance to the extent that it is projected
to continue. Similarly, the temporal connection associated with a central cause is observed in 73-10th grade. In 3C the
causal chain progresses chronologically (Then, when, then it, began) about the presence of Fernando VII. While in 5H, the
historical effects proceed from the same cause as in 3C and the actions are triggered sequencially (They started to, until)
culminating with a historic event, as it was with the declaration of independence of Chile on February 12, 1818.
Regarding the perspective on the evidence, a synthesis maintains the fundamental meanings of historical factors without
altering its referential acceptability, which occurs in the chronicle without historical meaning. However, the epistemic
nature of the historical factors is transformed; the ability to produce historical effects from motivation is transferred to the
conditions or facts. In 4M of 35-10th grade, the experience of the governing boards provoked the desire for independence,
and not the reverse, historically accepted relationship that the ideas of independence contributed to the formation of the
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 153

Table 6
The historical explanation as narration without historical sense.

Identification Historical- Student text

causal
factor

35-10th grade (secondary 2C The Creoles were loyal to the king, in spite of the fact that they complained about the
education) Spanish government and his administration, in which the Creoles were excluded
4M Now the Creoles, developed improvement projects in the
colonies via governing boards, which deepened their feelings for Chile and made them
wish for independence in order to be included in the organization of the government
3C Also when Fernando VII returned to power, the Creoles suffered repression,
which put them in opposition to the monarchy.
73-10th grade (secondary 1H In spite of the fact that initially they were loyal to the Spanish crown while the king was a
education) prisoner, they wanted to be governed only by the king and not by viceroys chosen in
Spain. And so they started the governing boards, but at first it was only until the king
returned to his throne
6M but then they realized that they could govern themselves and be independent and
through the government boards they tried to make the colony better since they knew
what was best for themselves
3C Then, when the king returned to the throne, the Creoles already had projects and were
starting to organize so they did not want to be ruled;
upon seeing this the King Fernando VII began then a repression against them and they
were not valued
5H And this way they realized that they could not continue under the reign of Spain but they
had to become independent and started spreading this idea of independence until they
succeeded on February 12, 1818.
65-11th grade (secondary 1H because, in the course of every invasion and war, the elements between both, little by
education) little they would be uniting,
10H this union little by little began to prosper in the daily life of these people, like the legal
union of the mixed marriage between Roman and Goth people; here is where we can see
that gradually these two cultures were uniting.
11M Among the elements that are part of a cultural fusion one finds: religion, Christianity as
the principal one that unified both cultures, and thus began to emerge more unifications
such as politics, art, language (Latin), beliefs, among others. Those who prevailed.
Ø in conclusion, both cultures, after having many differences, were gradually joining their
differences which created in the end a joining of their cultures.

government boards. Similarly, historical facts are attributed the capacity to generate other facts, as in case of 11M in 65-
11th grade. It considered Christianity the principal effect of cultural fusion, to which is attributed the ability to produce new
effects (and thus began to emerge more unifications) in the political, artistic, and linguistic areas, among others.
In the narrative without historical meaning, the reformulation of the evidence is based on a coherent historical sum-
mary; however, its causal chain is incorrect. In other words, the capacity of motivation and conditions to trigger historical
facts is reversed, so that facts trigger motivations and conditions. This inversion of causality therefore affects the historical
acceptability of the explanation. The explanation of the initial question is organized from the facts to what are incorrectly
considered to be the predominant antecedents. Similarly, the facts are attributed a causal nature.
Similarly, we can see discursive markers (here it is where we can see that) that indicate the author has been able to
distance himself from the evidence. This is exemplified by the case 10H in 65-11th grade.
The narration is set in a timeframe that incorporates a historical chronology of the story. The evidence is located in a vague
historical timeframe, like in case 3C in 73-10th grade, when Fernando VII returned to power, and in 1H with meanwhile the
king was prisoner; and in 3C: when the king returned to the throne of 35-10th grade.

3.4. The historical explanation as narrative with historical meaning

In the explanation as a narrative with historical meaning, agency is distinguished by the presence of significant socio-
political entities and conceptual structures, such as nation-states, social groups, ideologies that perform actions driven by
causes (motivations, interests, needs, intentions and purposes) more complex than mental states, emotion, or subjective
will. This feature is present in Table 7. For example, see 200-10th grade, with the lists in 4H that correspond to social processes
(conflicts between these cultures, improved coexistence and relations between Spanish and indigenous, the mixing of food
of their cultures), and Ø from 284-9th grade (the rivalry of these countries) which corresponds to an abstraction of the
characterization of the relationship between two nations.
 Author's personal copy

154 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

Table 7
The historical explanation as narrative with historical meaning.

Identification Historical-causal
Student text
factor

284-9th grade 1C–9C They became rivals because of their difference of ideas
2H ,this began at the Yalta Conference because they wanted to separate Germany, as both sides wanted to leave a
different government in Germany began the struggle
8M After this, they began to attack each other through the media, thus making it public, one can cite the
“Truman Doctrine” in which Harry T. makes clear (in his view) that American life is better than life in the USSR
5M , also Churchill’s speech
6M which is opposed by Stalin
10H As both parties searched to convert more countries to followers, they made more countries change their history, as
in Korea
11C , later started the arms race, that was a competition which stupidly wasted a lot of money on military power.
Ø Thus began the rivalry between these countries, which remains today.
200-10th grade 4H Despite the clashes between these cultures, there were certain agreements, such as the Agreement of Negrete, after
which people began to see natives as human beings and not animals. With this agreement, there were
improved coexistence and relations between Spanish and natives.
5C Another way we have aspects of both cultures, is in genetics, travels to America were made by few Spanish women,
and a majority of single men who satiated their needs with native women, as shown in the source No. 5.
6M As shown in the source No. 6, the native uprising of 1723, and to a lesser extent in 1766, the Spanish stopped
expanding the territory to the south, and there was a large miscegenation, which provided cheap labor.

8HC The mixing of food from its culture took place, due to the fact that the natives were planting food of its culture on
the Spanish lands, which later was served to the Spanish settlements, this causes the combination of new flavors in
the Spanish food, coming from the natives.
Ø Also a religious syncretism takes place, for example the tirana; this dance is an homage to the virgin.
10HC This occurs due to wanting to implement beliefs of the Spanish in the indigenous, for this reason it produced a
combination of both cultures in the religious aspect.
73 b-11th grade 1H First, Roman - Goth elements were fused, because every person needed the culture from the other one to progress,
since they had to obtain more territory and wealth, and it was easier to accept the culture of the town they were
invading.
2M To this is added the evangelical expansion, which began after the invasions and was promoted by Rome.
4M Which, to be better accepted took sacred elements from pagan cultures and altered them to make them Christian,
and therefore these people did not feel so strange within Christianity.
4M This Roman-Goth-Christian fusion is reflected in the mythology of that time, where
elements and practices of each culture were brought together.
6H There even arrived a moment in which King Clovis of France decides to become a Christian and a myth says that
God showed him his support through a dove.
8M And from that point on all coronations were due to the power God conferred upon the kings.
9C All this reaches such a point that in the actual invasions they respected or feared the Christian God and they
pardoned the lives of those who were within the churches, that is one of the first consequences of the
great fusion Christian-Roman-Goth.
10H Others were the acceptance of the marriages of Goths and Romans, whenever they were free people,
11M The conversion of other cultures to Christianity, in which Latin became the only language, the political unity, and
finally the social fusion that resulted in a new Roman-Goth society.
89-11th grade 1H Goth and Roman elements fused starting with the conquest of Roman towns and kingdoms. Inevitably this
synthesis was going to happen, in spite of the fact that these civilizations were until this moment enemies.
2M The Roman Empire imposed Christianity, and despite that at the same time it was becoming important it also had a
decadence, it accomplished evangelizing the entire population.
9C In the Goth invasions of the Romans one can see how this imposed religion was respected, because in spite of the
fact that the barbarians did not practice Christianity, they respected it, in fact, in one of their plunderings
they didn’t kill the people who were found inside the churches, it shows us that they knew Christianity and
possibly more than a few of them practiced this religion.
8M Moreover, the manner in which kings ruled also changed, because the governed by the order imposed by God.
10H Also marriages were allowed between the Goths and the Romans, which already speaks of a great advance of this
cultural fusion.
Ø Finally the fusion of both already was very large, with some consequences
such as religion, language, and political unity, which were the major factors which drove this major fusion.
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 155

The narrative opens with a conflict in 284-9th grade 1C–9C, with exposure to the divergent positions of the agents
and their cause. Also, in 89-11th grade 1H the historical effect of a conflict between civilizations emerges, but it is not
related to the Middle Ages. However, at 200-10th grade 4H, (with starting from this, he is seen as a human being and not
an animal; with this parliament, there were improved coexistence and relations between Spanish and indigenous) we can
see consequences derived from a period. It formulates a response with incipient historical significance; the historical effects
become part of a narrative that goes beyond the timeframe in which the actions narrated occurred.
The causal chain is generally formed by the combination of the historical-causal factors organized into a hierarchy accord-
ing to their ability to produce historical effects. The motivations operate as the trigger factor. The condition providing the
context and the actions correspond to the effects derived from joining the previous factors. For example, in 73b-11th grade,
1H, 2M, 4M, 4M, 6H, 8M, 9C, and 10H are connected, where the motivations and the conditions are used to explain the histor-
ical fact (1H and 10H). In 89-11th grade 1H, 2M, 9C, 8M, and 10H are linked, and one sees again a hierarchical organization
of the historical factors according their ability to trigger events.
However, in this area we can see that the greatest challenge lies in conferring to the motivation a priority place in the
construction of causality, making it an essential antecedent explaining the fact as a historical consequence. For this reason,
one attributes to the conditions a power to trigger events in a way similar to the motivations, without affecting either the
causal chain or the historical acceptability.
Nevertheless, understanding the event as the motivator affects the acceptability of the explanation. This is manifest in
2H (this began at the Yalta Conference) of 284-9th grade, which has two values: on one hand, it starts a temporal process,
and at the same time is seen as one cause of the rivalry of the powers.
The progression of the causal chain presents a guiding thread and the relation between the historical-causal factors is
plural; two or more historical factors are coordinated to provide an account of one fact. For example, in 284-9th grade,
8M, 5M and 6M allow us to explain the conflict between the USA and USSR during the cold war. In 200-10th grade, the
connecting of 5C, 6M, and 8HC provides various antecedents to explain the rivalry between these powers. With regard to
the perspective on the evidence, the author’s point of view manifests not only in the narration, but also about the narration
that explains the transformation of the historical actions. In 200-10th grade in 5C (Another way to see how we have . . . as
shown in the source No. 5), it indicates its function and the autorial source of the evidence used. On the other hand, in the
explanation significant data are selected and synthesized to develop the explanation. In this regard, we note the absence
of the ability to critically evaluate the point of view and the grounds used by the authors in the evidence; nevertheless, an
incipient capacity emerges to give value to the historical factors.
For example, in 83-11th grade in 1H (Goth and Roman elements fused starting with the conquest of Roman towns and
kingdoms. Inevitably this synthesis was going to happen, in spite of the fact that these civilizations were until this moment
enemies.) it shows how necessity became the consequence resulting from the Goth invasions of the Roman Empire. Also in
11C (later started the arms race, that was a competition which stupidly wasted a lot of money on military power.) of 284-9th
grade, the author gives a valuation of the conditions of the cold war. Furthermore, the narration incorporates temporality
through a chronology and historically situated frames of reference, as in 284-9th grade in 2H (at the Yalta Conference) and
89-11th grade in 9C (In the Goth invasions). Both cases reflect the presence of a historical time anchored in periods.

4. Discussion

The results of this investigation allow us to characterize the strategies used by these students to construct historical
explanations and provide insights into the discursive configuration of historical thinking. Operationally, we define historical
explanation as a discursive organization composed of three categories: agency, construction of the causal chain, and perspec-
tive on the evidence. This organization enables one to provide historical meaning to a problem or question about the past.
The construction of historical meaning depends, in large part, on the way in which the evidence is understood, integrated,
and utilized to develop a causal chain. In this manner, the historical meaning is predicated on the capacity ascribed to the
evidence – the facts, conditions, and/or motivations – to catalyze the change and the continuity in the history. In the discur-
sive organization of explanation, we observe a transition in agency from the origin of the motivation in the emotions of the
historical characters, toward attaching the motivation to prominent figures, entities and conceptual structures. Regarding
the construction of a causal chain, the results indicate that there is a progression from the construction of a chronicle linked
temporally, to the construction of a narrative in which the antecedents are ranked according to their “triggering” power.
Finally, regarding the perspective about the evidence, we see a transition from the literal copying of the evidence and the
alteration of its acceptability, toward its reformulation and the establishment of intertextual links among the evidence.
These results concur with those on history literacy in highlighting the importance of the ability to recognize and weigh
the explanatory factors while reading evidence, and the transfer of these factors while writing historical explanations. That
is, the distinctive reading strategies of the discipline, such as contextualization, recognition of the point of view, and the
identification of social purposes (Monte-Sano, 2011; Plá, 2005; Reisman, 2012), are tools that lead to the construction of
historical significance. However, this study considers two issues that have received less attention in previous studies (Monte-
Sano, 2011; Reisman, 2012; Stahl & Shanahan, 2004; Wineburg, 1991a, 1991b): the approach to a historical problem centered
on a transformation of state from which the explanation develops.
 Author's personal copy

156 R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157

In relation to the initial historical conflict, this frames the epistemological and discursive possibilities of the response.
Regarding the mode of historical thinking by children and adolescents, the studies have mainly emphasized the heuristic
aspects of the historiographic process. On the one hand, they have focused on describing the cognitive processes (Jacott,
Lopéz-Manjón, & Carretero, 1998; Voss, Ciarrochi, & Carretero, 1998), without taking sufficient account of the discursive
mediations present in historical learning. On the other hand, they have hardly considered the historical-epistemic aspects,
so that the research highlights the representations students have about the role of evidence and causality (Lee & Ashby,
2000; Lee & Shemilt, 2003; Shemilt, 1987; Wineburg, 2001). In particular, in Spanish speaking countries research focused
on the construction of causality have used the oral discourse of students through interviews; however, the responses were
not guided by a historical problem (Jacott et al., 1998; Voss et al., 1998). In contrast to those studies, this study integrates
the processes of historical literacy from a historical problem that guides both the reading process of evidence, as well as the
reasoning implied in constructing the historical discourse of the explanation.
The discursive construction of the response to the historical problem provides textual markers that allow us to infer the
participants’ decisions concerning the ways to approach history. This emphasis on writing allows characterizing how the
students conceive the historical work. The emphasis on writing in the construction of causality is work by Plá (2005), who
observed in text writing the transition between the historical character and the conceptual structures; however, it did not
include the historical problems that determine the purpose and historical significance of this transition. In contrast, Lee and
Ashby (2000) analyze children’s representations about history, starting from the presentation of a historical problem and
the historical factors that influence its construction across graphical representations and interviews. Nevertheless, these
authors do not consider the mediating role of the written discourse in the construction of the historical thought, an aspect
this investigation considered in the design and analysis of the results.
The discursive characterization of historical explanations by children can be approached with a linguistic emphasis, as
done by Coffin (2004, 2006), Martin and Rose (2009), and Oteíza Silva (2006). These studies use the Evaluative Discourse
Analysis to describe historical discourse genres, especially the story and history in school contexts, considering their social
purposes, structure, and the lexical-grammatical resources used. The results of this investigation on the manner in which
Chilean students elaborate explanations – chronicle without historical meaning, narrative without historical meaning, and
narrative with historical meaning – are partially compatible with the linguistic resources used in the mentioned genres.
Nevertheless, this perspective indirectly contemplates the historiographic foundations in the story and the history. Unlike
the linguistic perspective, this study integrates the formulation of a historical problem and the mediating role of written
discourse in the constitution of historical thinking. This position is shared by historians, linguists, and educational researchers
(Achugar & Stainton, 2010; Monte-Sano, 2011; Paxton, 2002; Reisman, 2012; Young & Leinhardt, 1998) who recognize the
need to link historical reasoning processes with reading and writing and vice versa. The opening to the discursive process
has been key to changing the role of reading and writing in the formation of school disciplines. In this way, it has moved
from concepts centered on “learn to read and write” to “read and write to learn,” considering the epistemic and discursive
specifications of the school knowledge – in this case, of history.

5. Conclusions

Although this investigation has brought together aspects that have not previously been approached in a connected manner
– the exposition of a historical problem, the process of interpretation of evidence and the production of discursive writing –
one of its limitations is that there was no investigation into the relationship between the reading strategies of the evidence
used by the students, and the context of the written product. Rather, the reading of evidence constitutes a kind of input
for the written product. Similarly, it does not consider the skills of students associated with the process of writing, such as
planning, editing, and revising. Reading skills were not considered separately from the textual comprehension process, but
rather they were integrated as an additional step in the production of an inquiry framework of the historical explanation. In
that step, reading skills join with previous historical knowledge, the types of evidence, the representation of the historical
problem, and the type of explanation solicited.
The criteria of discursive-historiographic characterization of historical explanation provide some principles to design
a progression model of the construction of causality starting with historical problems. This point is relevant because the
progression model that exists in Chile, Maps of Learning Progress (Ministry of Education, 2009a), is not sufficiently defined
nor supported by national or international evidence. The genres proposed in this study (chronicle without historical meaning,
narrative without historical meaning, and narrative with historical meaning) provide quality indicators of the nature of the
discursive-historical explanation. It is necessary to continue research on the learning of historical thinking in order to
generate consistent information. It could clarify the pedagogical conditions that promote learning of historical thinking
through the production of discursive genres, and it would clarify and improve the coherence between curriculum design
and evaluation of historical inquiry processes.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by The National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development, the Government of Chile,
FONDECYT No. 11090132: “Learning to think historically: acquisition and development of historical interpretation skills in
 Author's personal copy

R. Henríquez, M. Ruiz / Linguistics and Education 25 (2014) 145–157 157

students of Elementary and Secondary Education” (2009–2011). Additionally, the authors would like to thank the adminis-
trators, teachers, and students for their collaboration with this research.

References

Achugar, M., & Stainton, C. (2010). Learning history and learning language: Focusing on language in historical explanations to support english language
learners. In M. Stein, & L. Kucan (Eds.), Instructional explanations in the disciplines (pp. 145–169). New York: Springer.
Adam, J. (1999). Linguistique textuelle: Des genres de discours aux textes. Paris: Nathan.
Arnoux, E. (2006). Análisis del discurso: modos de abordar materiales de archivo. Buenos Aires: Santiago Arcos Editor.
Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Ass.
Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse. London, New York: Continuum.
Bronckart, J., Salvador, V., & Carrión, M. (2004). Actividad verbal textos y discursos: Por un interaccionismo socio-discursivo. Madrid: Fundación Infancia y
Aprendizaje.
Calsamiglia, H., & Tusón, A. (1999). Las cosas del decir: Manual del análisis del discurso. Barcelona: Ariel.
Coffin, C. (2004). Learning to write history: The role of causality. Written Communication, 21, 261–289.
Coffin, C. (2006). Historical discourse: The language of time cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.
De La Paz, S. (2005). Effects of historical reasoning instruction and writing strategy mastery in culturally and academically diverse middle school classrooms.
Journal of Educational Psychology Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 139–156.
De La Paz, S., & Felton, M. K. (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average
high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 174–192.
Eggins, S., Wignell, P., & Martin, J. (1993). The discourse of history: Distancing the recoverable past. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and
practice (pp. 79–101). London, New York: Pinter Publishers.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse. In K. Hyland (Ed.), Teaching and researching writing. London: Longman.
Henríquez, R. (2011). Un balance provisional de la investigación en enseñanza y aprendizaje de la historia en Chile en los últimos 30 años. Clio & Asociados.
La historia enseñada, 15(11), 9–26.
Jacott, L., Lopéz-Manjón, & Carretero, M. (1998). Generating explanations in history. Paper presented at the Learning and reasoning in history. London, New
York.
Lee, P., & Ashby, R. (2000). Progression in historical understanding among students ages 7–14. In P. N. Stearns, P. C. Seixas, & S. S. Wineburg (Eds.), Knowing,
teaching, and learning history: National and international perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 199–223). New York: New York University Press.
Lee, P., & Shemilt, D. (2003). A scaffold, not a cage: Progression and progression models in history. Teaching History – London, 113, 13–23.
Leinhardt, G., & Young, K. M. (1996). Two texts, three readers: Distance and expertise in reading history. Cognition and Instruction, 14(4), 441–486.
Martin, J. (2011). Prólogo. In T. Oteíza Silva, & D. R. Pinto (Eds.), En (re)construcción: Discurso, identidad y nación en los manuales escolares de historia y de
ciencias sociales (pp. 11–17). Santiago, [Chile]: Editorial Cuarto Propio.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2009). Genre relations: Mapping culture. London, Oakville: Equinox.
Megill, A. (1989). Recounting the Past: “Description,” explanation, and narrative in historiography. The American Historical Review, 94(3), 627–653.
Megill, A., Shepard, S., & Honenberger, P. (2007). Historical knowledge, historical error: A contemporary guide to practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ministerio de Educación, Chile. (2002). Curriculum. Objetivos fundamentales y contenidos mínimos obligatorios de la Educacióin Básica y Media. Actualización
2002. Santiago: Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio de Educación.
Ministerio de Educación, Chile. (2009a). Mapas de progreso del aprendizaje: Sector historia, geografía y ciencias sociales, mapa de progreso de sociedad en
perspectiva histórica. Santiago, Chile: Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio de Educación.
Ministerio de Educación, Chile. (2009b). Marco Curricular de la Educación Básica. Objetivos Fundamentales y Contenidos Mínimos Obligatorios
de la Educación Básica. Actualización 2009. Santiago: Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio de Educación. Retrieved from http://www.mineduc.cl/
index5 int.php?id portal=47&id contenido=17116&id seccion=3264&c=1
Ministerio de Educación, Chile. (2009c). Seminario Internacional de Textos Escolares de Historia y Ciencas Sociales Santiago de Chile 2008. Santiago de Chile:
Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio de Educación.
Ministerio de Educación, Chile. (2012). Bases Curriculares de la Educación Básica. Historia y Geografía y Ciencias Sociales. Santiago: Gobierno de Chile. Ministerio
de Educación. Retrieved from http://www.mineduc.cl/index5 int.php?id portal=47&id contenido=17116&id seccion=3264&c=1
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination
of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70.
Monte-Sano, C. (2011). Beyond reading comprehension and summary: Learning to read and write in history by focusing on evidence, perspective, and
interpretation. Curriculum Inquiry, 41(2), 212–249.
Oteíza Silva, T. (2006). El discurso pedagógico de la historia: Un analisis lingüístico sobre la construcción ideológica de la historia de Chile (1970–2001). Santiago
de Chile: Frasis.
Oteíza Silva, T., & Pinto, D. R. (2011). En (re)construcción: Discurso, identidad y nación en los manuales escolares de historia y de ciencias sociales. Santiago:
Editorial Cuarto Propio.
Paxton, R. J. (2002). The influence of author visibility on high school students solving a historical problem. Cognition and Instruction, 20(2), 197–248.
Peck, C., & Seixas, P. (2008). Benchmarks of historical thinking: First steps. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 1015–1038.
Plá, S. (2005). Aprender a pensar históricamente: La escritura de la historia en el bachillerato. México, D.F.; Madrid; México, D.F.: Plaza y Valdés; Colegio Madrid.
Reisman, A. (2012). Reading like a historian: A document-based history curriculum intervention in urban high schools. Cognition and Instruction, 30(1),
86–112.
Ricoeur, P., & Neira, A. (2000). Tiempo y narración. Configuración del tiempo en el relato histórico 1 (3rd ed.). México, D.F.: Siglo XXI.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1),
40–59.
Shemilt, D. (1987). Adolescent ideas about evidence and methodology in history. In C. Portal (Ed.), The history curriculum for teachers (pp. 39–61). London,
New York: Falmer Press.
Stahl, S., & Shanahan, C. (2004). Learning to think like a historian. Disciplinary knowledge through critical analysis of multiple documents. In T. L. Jetton, &
J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 94–115). New York: Guilford Press.
Stearns, P., Wineburg, S., & Seixas, P. (2000). Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives. New York: New York University
Press.
Voss, J., Ciarrochi, J., & Carretero, M. (1998). Causality in history: On ‘intuitive’ understanding of the concepts od sufficiency and necesity. In M. Carretero,
& J. F. Voss (Eds.), Learning and reasoning in history (pp. 294–306). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Wineburg, S. (1991a). Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal
of Educational Psychology Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 73–87.
Wineburg, S. (1991b). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy\\. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3),
495–519.
Wineburg, S. (1998). Reading Abraham Lincoln: An expert/expert study in the interpretation of historical texts. Cognitive Science, 22(3), 319–346.
Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Young, K. M., & Leinhardt, G. (1998). Writing from primary documents: A way of knowing in history. Written Communication, 15(1), 25–68.