Some time ago, I wrote a post in support of teaching historiography in high school that laid out my own intellectual journey with it as well as entry points I have used to integrate historiography into the curriculum. I still feel strongly about those ideas.

Put simply, although historiography is often reserved for university classrooms because of its perceived complexity, it belongs in high school. When taught intentionally, it helps students understand history as a constructed and contested discipline while strengthening historical thinking skills, source literacy, and evidence-based argumentation.

If that sentence feels a little awkward, it’s because the AP teacher in me couldn’t resist a tri-partite thesis. Sorry. Let me unpack that a bit. Teaching historiography disrupts the tidy, flattened narratives students are used to encountering in textbooks that hide authorship behind sterile language. When done passionately, integrating historiography:

• Reinforces the idea that history is an interpretive act; that it is constructed, argued over, and revised, not simply consumed.
• Deepens students’ proficiency with historical thinking skills. After all, there are few better ways to learn how history works than to see skilled historians at their craft.
• Pushes students to ask why a historian is making a particular argument, not just how the argument is structured, which in turn strengthens source literacy and student argumentation.
• Helps students see that historical debate is not about identifying the correct answer, but about evidence, interpretation, and framing. Disagreement among historians is normal, and often productive.
• Makes clear that historians are shaped by their own contexts without reducing historical arguments to cynicism or relativism. History is not politically neutral, but neither is it an excuse for nihilism.
• Reframes historians as participants in an ongoing conversation rather than distant, unquestionable authorities. This is a conversation that students can, and should, enter.
• Offers an approach that is accessible to all students while still providing enough complexity and depth to meaningfully challenge high achievers.
• Encourages a mindset rooted in humility and empathy, helping students avoid presentism and better understand why past historians thought differently than their contemporary peers.

Historiography Project in AP European History

My AP Euro class is made up of junior and senior “all-stars” who have already taken AP World History. As a result, they entered the course with a high level of proficiency in the AP historical thinking skills. This allows me to shift some of the time I would normally spend on scaffolding those skills to more complex content and historiography.

Although the Course and Exam Description does not require explicit engagement with historiography, I think it matters in an upper-level history course that students do more than simply be exposed to it in passing. With that in mind, my AP Euro students will complete a historiography project that is part research paper and part hands-on interpretation. I hope it ends up being a creative way to get them thinking deeper about the discipline.

The project outline/directions and rubric are below. There are plenty of ways to customize this based on any particular course or group of students. A word doc link as at the bottom of the post.

Essential Question: How do different schools of historical thought interpret the same evidence in different ways, and what does this reveal about history as a discipline?

Part I: Topic & Source Set Selection

Students must choose a topic between 1815 and 1914 that:

• Has social, political, and economic dimensions
• Allows for multiple interpretations
• Connects clearly to 19th-century intellectual movements
• Is historically significant

You will write a brief intro to why you chose this topic and how it meets the criteria above.

Primary Source Set (6 – 8 total) – Must include a mix of:

• Written (laws, letters, speeches, memoirs)
• Visual (political cartoons, posters, illustrations)
• Statistical or institutional (factory reports, census data)

Part II: Historical Context Section

The purpose of historical context is to ground the reader historically before interpretation begins. This section should be descriptive, not interpretive. No historiography yet.

Required Elements:

• Key background events
• The event’s placement in the timeline/chronology (why this moment matters)
• Social and economic conditions
• Political structures and tensions

Part III: Historiographical Frameworks

You must select three historiographical schools, at least two of which must have clear roots in the 19th century. You will address each school-of-thought individually.

Each section includes:

1. Explanation of the school
2. Why it emerged (historical/intellectual context)
3. What kinds of questions it prioritizes

Approved Historiographical Schools:

• Marxist/Materialist Historiography
• Liberal/Political Historiography
• Whig History
• Nationalist Historiography
• Social History
• Cultural/Intellectual History
• Feminist & Gender History

Part IV: Interpreting the Sources (Core of the Project)

For each historiographical school, analyze your primary sources as a historian from that school would. You should not rewrite the sources in each section but reinterpret them. I will provide an example on canvas of what this could look like.

Each section must answer:

1. What does this school emphasize in the sources?
2. What evidence becomes most important?
3. What historical argument emerges?

Part V: Comparative Synthesis

You will compare your selected schools-of-thought after your interpretations:

• Which interpretations conflict?
• Which interpretations overlap?
• What does each school ignore or minimize?

Part VI: Reflection on Historical Thinking

Consider the questions below to reflect on the process that you have gone through in completing this project.

• Which interpretation did you find most convincing, and why?
• How did the historian’s priorities shape their conclusions?
• Did your own thinking change during this process?
• What does this project suggest about whether history is “objective”?

Technical Requirements

• 12 pt. font
• Double spaced
• 6-8 pages, not including bibliography
• Formatting according to CMS (Chicago Manual of Style)
• Organized by clearly labeled sections
  • Introduction & Research Focus
  • Historical Context
  • Historiographical Frameworks
  • Primary Source Set
  • Interpretative Analyses
  • Comparative Synthesis
  • Bibliography

Rubric Category	Proficient Descriptor
Historical Context & Accuracy	– Accurately situates the topic within the 1815–1914 European context – Clearly explains relevant political, social, and economic conditions – Demonstrates strong command of factual content without major errors – Provides context that meaningfully supports later interpretation
Understanding of Historiographical Schools	– Clearly explains three historiographical schools – Accurately describes each school’s core assumptions and priorities – Demonstrates clear connections between historiography and 19th-century intellectual developments – Uses historiographical terminology correctly and purposefully
Primary Source Analysis & Interpretation	– Analyzes the same primary source set through each historiographical lens – Moves beyond description to interpretation – Explains how different schools emphasize different evidence – Constructs plausible, historically grounded arguments from the sources
Comparative & Methodological Thinking	– Clearly compares interpretations across historiographical schools – Identifies meaningful similarities and differences in conclusions – Explains how methodological priorities shape historical arguments – Demonstrates understanding that historical interpretation is shaped by perspective
Reflection on Historical Thinking	– Thoughtfully reflects on how historiography influenced interpretation – Demonstrates awareness of the historian’s role in shaping narratives – Explains how the project deepened understanding of history as a discipline – Reflection is specific, analytical, and connected to the project work
Organization, Evidence Use, & Academic Practice	– Paper is clearly organized with logical structure and labeled sections – Sources are properly cited using a consistent citation style – Evidence is integrated smoothly and purposefully – Writing is clear, academic, and coherent

Project Link – Word Doc