[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-597731-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-597731-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","canadian-social-studies-volume-39-number-2-winter-2005-special-issue-new-approaches-to-teaching-history","Canadian Social Studies - Volume 39 Number 2 - Winter 2005 - Special Issue: New Approaches to Teaching History","","Schools often deliver answers to questions students rarely—or never—are asked. This article explains content and assessment practices that animate and organize teaching around inquiry. It describes animating questions that restore intellectual excitement and throughline questions that clarify course purpose, then develops “dangerous teaching” as a critical pedagogy linking classroom learning to political debates about what is worth knowing and why.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/canadian-social-studies-volume-39-number-2-winter-2005-special-issue-new-approaches-to-teaching-history/597731/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/canadian-social-studies-volume-39-number-2-winter-2005-special-issue-new-approaches-to-teaching-history/597731.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"SANS","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What problem does the article highlight about typical schooling practices?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Schools often convey answers to questions students are rarely or never encouraged to ask. The piece argues that teaching should centralize questions rather than only deliver responses.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What are animating questions and throughline questions used for?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Animating questions return teachers and students to intellectual mysteries that create excitement. Throughline questions are provocative and give course content an apparent purpose by connecting it to deeper inquiry.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What does the article mean by “dangerous teaching”?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Dangerous teaching helps students connect what they learn to politically charged debates over what is worth knowing. It is described as challenging for teachers and discouraged by the system, yet necessary.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},597731,1792211056,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":115,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962090760505,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","CANADIAN SOCIAL STUDIES  \nVOLUME 39 NUMBER 2, WINTER 2005  \n[www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css](www.quasar.ualberta.ca/css)  \nSpecial Issue: New Approaches to Teaching History  \nTo what questions are schools answers? And what of our  \ncourses?  \nAnimating throughline questions to promote students'  \nquestabilities.  \nKent den Heyer  \nKent State University  \nReturn to Articles  \nAbstract  \nSchools are too often places in which answers are conveyed to questions students are rarely, if ever, asked. This article offers, therefore, some examples of content animating and throughline questions and assessment practices that centralize questions rather than answers. While animating questions return teachers to the mysteries that excite us as intellectuals (excitement that is  \ncrucial to share with students), they also spark throughline questions  \nprovocative questions that give the content of our courses apparent purpose.  \nUsing a notion of dangerous teaching, I argue that such practices serve to  \ndisrupt the ahistorical stance of much of social studies and history teaching that offers students little opportunity to connect what they learn in schools to political charged debates over what and how they should be taught.  \nRather than a seemingly ubiquitous appeal to best practices, S.G Grant (2003) describes and calls for \"ambitious teaching.\" Grant argues that ambitious teaching and learning occurs when\"smart teachers, curious students, and powerful ideas come together\" (p. 187) . Ambitious teachers display several characteristics. First, they know their subject and they believe in the capacities of students who they spend time getting to know. Ambitious teachers create space for themselves and for their students to explore important questions, issues, or problems in a schooling context that rarely validates the vitality of such work Finally, ambitious teachers also know when to support, praise, and prod students and push them to realize \"that learning consists of struggle as much triumph\" (p. 211) . In ambitious teaching, Grant offers a worthwhile goal and description. But is it ambitious enough?  \nLike Grant, I wish here to signal parameters of possible middle and high school practices as much as prescriptions. Perhaps, rather than teaching described as ambitious, in what ways might we as teachers engage in dangerous teaching? I use the term dangerous teaching to  \ndescribe teaching that helps students connect what they learn in schools to politically charged debates over what is worth knowing. Such inquiry is dangerous because it is for teachers personally challenging, professionally frowned upon, and systemically discouraged. Yet, it is necessary. Such teaching supports disadvantaged students and those less so by questioning whether their school success or failures should rest on their shoulders alone. It does so by helping students to identify the class, gender, cultural, and political biases that are manifest in the content and practices of schooling. In this regard, dangerous teaching constitutes a critical pedagogy:  \nCritical pedagogy constitutes a set of practices that uncovers the  \nways in which the process of schooling represses the  \ncontingency of its own selection of values and the means  \nthrough which educational goals are subtended by  \nmacrostructures of power and privilege (McLaren, 1995, p. 50;  \nFor a critical theory more directly related to history and social  \nstudies, also see Segall, 1999) .  \nDespite the challenges, such teaching is necessary for the health of schools as sites of critical thought. It is disingenuous that students have no opportunity to think deeply about the struggles over what history and whose perspectives we offer them to make sense of their personal identities and social commitments (e.g., disagreements about whether to offer sex education, books depicting homosexuality positively, debates over the insufficient attention to women in history textbooks) . Yet, that seems to be the case. There","cbCaipTUteit2tPT","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaipTUteit2tPT","pdf",282154,"English","# Special Issue: New Approaches to Teaching History\n## Animating throughline questions to centralize inquiry\n## Dangerous teaching and critical pedagogy\n## Challenges of connecting schooling to political debates\n## Case vignette from a high school history classroom","[{\"question\":\"What problem does the article highlight about typical schooling practices?\",\"answer\":\"Schools often convey answers to questions students are rarely or never encouraged to ask. The piece argues that teaching should centralize questions rather than only deliver responses.\"},{\"question\":\"What are animating questions and throughline questions used for?\",\"answer\":\"Animating questions return teachers and students to intellectual mysteries that create excitement. Throughline questions are provocative and give course content an apparent purpose by connecting it to deeper inquiry.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the article mean by “dangerous teaching”?\",\"answer\":\"Dangerous teaching helps students connect what they learn to politically charged debates over what is worth knowing. It is described as challenging for teachers and discouraged by the system, yet necessary.\"}]","Canadian Social Studies - Volume 39 Number 2 - Winter 2005 - Special Issue: New Approaches to Teaching History | PDF",1792085594,23]