Cultural heritage and iconic elements for history education: a study with primary education prospective teachers in Spain
Attending to the research questions that were previously presented, results were grouped in three specific subsections. The first one focuses on examining those iconic cultural elements that pre-service educators considered the most relevant, their typology and specific features. The second one explores potential regional differences. After that, the last section is focused on analysing the sources of information about said elements, inquiring about the role of formal and non-formal leaning.
Analysis of the iconic cultural elements selected by pre-service teachers
After the analysis of the 2498 responses provided by participants, a total of 109 individual or grouped iconic cultural elements were detected. Attending to the number of citations received, most of the iconic elements that were mentioned by the participants were identified as having enough relevance to merit an individual category, for instance, specific monuments, festivities or works of art. Some of the less frequently-mentioned iconic elements, on the other hand, were grouped attending to their close relation to a particular subject, for example, the legacy of a particular artist or historical figure.
Very specific iconic elements concentrated a very elevated number of responses: only 12 iconic elements of very distinct typologies grouped 50.3% of the selections. According to the data collected (Table 3), the most frequently-cited iconic elements were the Alhambra palace in Granada (193 mentions, a 7.7% of the total responses), the Aqueduct of Segovia (130 mentions, 5.2%) and the Holy Week in Spain (127 mentions, 5.1%), followed by the Giralda bell tower and the cathedral in Sevilla (118 mentions, 4.7%), as well as Picasso’s Guernica (113 mentions, 4.5%).
Of the five main themes that were used to group said iconic elements, the category that concentrated the majority of the responses was that of architectonic constructions (33.8% of them). Traditions, festivities, and socialising spaces grouped 23.1% of the responses, while 16.6% gathered answers connected to artistic works, authors and cultural institutions. Finally, other icons were linked to the legacy of historical figures or historical events (13%) or gastronomy (10.6%). These themes were able to successfully incorporate 97.2% of the responses, although the remaining 2.8% were unique or idiosyncratic, making it not possible to group them in said categories. This ranking, however, changes when analysing each region, something that will be covered later.
Attending to the nature of the iconic elements that were selected, 54.8% of the selections were connected to tangible heritage (that is, physical manifestations of culture), while 40.5% were part of intangible heritage (usually conceived as a non-tangible expression of a particular culture). The remaining responses (4.7%) could not be categorised according to this typology due to their specificity (for instance, some particular references connected to the legacy of events and historical agents).
In addition, 762 of the 2498 responses (30.5%) were found to be references to elements inscribed as World Heritage Sites by UNESCO, such as the Alhambra, but also the cave of Altamira, the Aqueduct of Segovia, the Cathedral in Burgos, Gaudi´s artistic works, Atapuerca, the Way of Saint James, Doñana, etc. Focusing, instead, on the elements included in UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage list, the vast majority of the elements that were referenced by participants went beyond those contained in the list, showing a broad conception of cultural heritage, which include multiple festivities, typical gastronomic dishes, dances, etc. (Fig. 1).
The figure shows the percentage of responses that selected each type of iconic element, as well as their nature (tangible or intangible).
A balanced presence of tangible and intangible heritage was also visible when the iconic elements were analysed on the basis of the historical period in which they were first created, which could be contrasted with results obtained when examining the function of said elements at their creation (Fig. 2). Results indicated that 959 (40.6%) of the iconic elements mentioned had their origin in the Middle Ages (most of them related to architectural elements or large constructions, but also to festivities and traditions), and were similarly split between tangible and intangible elements. Conversely, those periods in which intangible heritage were less represented –both Prehistory and Ancient History- were also those in which the overall number of elements was lower: only 48 (2%) and 225 (9.5%), respectively. Items related to the Modern Era represented 17.9%, with 424 iconic elements, while those connected to history since the 19th century accounted for 662 elements, representing 28% of total mentions.
The figure shows the distribution of the responses that were selected, differentiating between tangible or intangible elements.
After an examination of the iconic elements that were selected, in this occasion regarding their particular function at the moment they were created, it was possible to identify, on the one hand, a predominance of the political (36.4% of the total responses) and religious (24.6%) functions. Both functions, and in particular the former, were mostly represented by tangible heritage (Fig. 2), such as architectural constructions (including palaces, cathedrals or defensive walls) throughout the Spanish geography, as well as sculptures and paintings. On the other hand, intangible heritage was more representative in elements related to the cultural or artistic/sports sphere, as well as basic needs, usually connected to gastronomy. For these last categories, intangible heritage represented a much more predominant weight (amounting up to 10.9% of the total responses just in the basic needs category), in contrast with other functions. Economic functions were found to be less frequently mentioned (representing just 9.5% of the iconic elements that were selected, most of them linked to tangible heritage), while those iconic elements connected to social interaction and socialisation (most related to intangible heritage, such as some festivities) were the least represented: 4.2% of the responses.
Examining differences between regions in Spain
Due to the cultural diversity traditionally associated with Spain and its different regions, as well as the intrinsic connection between cultural heritage and political, social and national identities, a comparison was made between those participants in different regions with the aim of pinpointing similarities and potential contrasts. Different categories were considered, including the main themes that were selected, the historical periods connected to the iconic elements, as well as the specificities and most noticeable absences in each of the regions in connection to the rest.
Focusing on the main themes, some important differences were found. Although those iconic elements linked to traditions, festivities, and spaces for socialisation and to artistic works, authors and cultural institutions remained in second and third position in each region, contrasts were found in other themes (Fig. 3). While architectonical constructions were prominently selected by Andalusian participants (41.6%), as well as in the Region of Murcia (33%) and in Castile and Leon (31.8%), it was not the case in Catalonia. There, only 14.2% of the responses corresponded to this them, lower than others such as figures and/or political processes and their legacy, which amounted for 25.7% of the responses. This last theme was less prominent in other regions, including Castile and Leon (11.9%), where the category was placed below gastronomy (12.9%). This last theme was found to be especially significant also for participants in Catalonia, with responses amount to 14.2% of the total, as much as the category architectonical constructions.
The figure indicates which themes and periods associated with the iconic elements were prominent in each Spanish region.
Regarding the historical period that was most prominent in each case, participants in Andalusia mentioned much more frequently iconic elements from the Middle Ages (59.3% of their responses) when compared with the average from the rest of the regions (31.8%). Iconic elements connected with the 19th and 20th centuries were, on the other hand, more prominent in Catalonia, with 49.7% of the total responses, in contrast to the rest of the regions, where the average was found to be 26.4%.
The presence and absences of specific iconic elements were also examined with the aim of determining whether noticeable differences could be detected. A greater dispersion of icons was identified in Castile and Leon and in Catalonia, and a greater concentration in Murcia and especially in Andalusia, where eight specific icons accounted for slightly more than 50% of the mentions. The analysis revealed that some of the icons that were found to be in the top ten in the general ranking position (GRP) moved to inferior position in the regional ranking of responses (RRP), sometimes with barely any mention (Table 4). That was the case for the Alhambra, the most-widely referenced iconic element in the GRP, which was barely mentioned in Catalonia (0.6% of the regional answers) despite the high presence of families of Andalusian origin in this region. On the other hand, results indicated that this element seemed more relevant for participants in Murcia over Andalusia, which placed the Alhambra at the top of their ranking of most cited icons (5.0% of the regional responses).
Some iconic elements were perceived as especially relevant in all territories: Holy Week in Spain (Semana Santa), the Guernica by Picasso, the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona and Las Meninas and other works by Velázquez were found to be part of the ten most-cited icons in all regions. While the Holy Week was one of the most frequently mentioned elements in Andalusia (in second place, with 8.1% of mentions) and in the Region of Murcia (in third place, with 6.3%), it was the in tenth position in Catalonia and Castile and Leon despite the artistic and cultural value in this last region.
However, for most territories, cultural elements that were considered to be characteristic of that very specific region were mentioned more frequently by participants studying there. This was detected in Andalusia, with elements such as the Giralda and Cathedral of Seville (in the first place in the RRP, with 13.3% of the regional mentions), the Seville Fair (fourth in the RRP, 5.9%) or the Mosque in Cordoba (fifth in the RRP, 5.6%). In Castile and Leon, that was the case for the Aqueduct of Segovia (first in the RRP, 9.1%); in Catalonia for the Sagrada Familia of Barcelona (first in the RRP, 7.7%) or for the Diada (fifth in the RRP, 4.9%), and for for the local festivities in the case of Murcia (in the seventh place in the RRP, 3.3%).
Icons which had no particular connection with any of the territories analysed, were found to be perceived as particularly relevant in some regions. Supporting the analysis of the main themes and historical periods, elements connected to the 20th century (the Guernica, the Valley of the Fallen, Franco and his era, etc.) were mentioned in Murcia and Catalonia in a higher degree, particularly in the latter region, where the Spanish Civil War was in the eight place in the RRP. Other contrasts include the 1978 Constitution and democratic institutions, highly mentioned in Catalonia too (seventh place in the RRP) or the National Day of Spain (October 12), specifically present in Castile and Leon (seventh place in the RRP). Regarding gastronomy and popular traditions, regional dishes or regional dances were not necessarily connected to their own geography, with paella, for example, being widely cited in the Region of Murcia (3.3%) and in Castile and Leon (2.8%). The Spanish tortilla was, however, recognised as an essential Spanish iconic dish in all regions, ranking in the top 20 in all regional lists, and even reaching the third position in Castile and Leon and the fourth in Catalonia.
Sources of information and the role of formal and non-formal settings
Once the main iconic cultural elements and their specific features were identified, characterising the main sources of information about said iconic elements became relevant in order to comprehend the influence of school and formal educational settings, as well as non-formal settings, in educators’ conceptions and ideas.
After analysing the Likert-scale items that were provided to participants, which measured the level of agreement with a series of statements, results indicated that the sources of information about the iconic elements were diverse in nature (Table 5). History lessons at school (that is, formal education), was considered a prominent source of information by participants (M = 6.53, SD = 3.30), and the second one overall. Because quantitative information was supplemented by the analysis of the open responses provided by participants, they were able to freely indicate specific sources of information or to comment on particular ideas.
After an examination of the different responses, it was possible to highlight the way participants remembered and mentioned specific teachers in charge of the subject back when they were in school. In a total of 338 instances (14.2% of the 2372 total responses connected to this category), the role of the teacher was mentioned, occasionally with the spontaneous introduction of the names of those educators that participant recalled. In most cases, trainee teachers merely mentioned whether the particular iconic element was covered in primary or secondary education or how it was mentioned, such as, in the words of one participant: ‘my teacher talked about this specific monument’ (An.1012). On 23 occasions, they recalled specific tasks or activities, such as when one participant mentioned how ‘we prepared an art project in high school where we had to create a museum, and us students were the guides: I had to make a presentation about Las Meninas by Velázquez’ (Mu.44).
Non-formal settings were found to also be very influential, although with some notable contrasts, as it will be described below. Participants’ families and their social environment were found to be a noteworthy factor capable of influencing prospective teachers’ ideas about the different iconic cultural elements. This category was, in fact, the participants’ main source of information about the iconic elements that they had previously spontaneously selected (M = 7.35, SD = 2.79).
Attending, once more, to the specific spontaneous comments that were provided by participants, it was possible to identify the importance of the role of families, with a total of 486 explicit citations (20.5% of the 2372 total responses in this category), when recalling the origin of the information about each of the iconic element that was selected. On nearly every occasion, participants merely cited the relevance of family members in a generic way, indicating, for instance, that ‘in my family, they usually talk a lot about [Franco’s dictatorship]’ (Mu.154), but in some cases, it was possible to find references to specific conversations. That was the case of a trainee teacher that admitted that ‘because I was born in Andalusia, my family occasionally talks about some elements from over there’ (Mu.201), and another that pointed out that ‘the older members of my family have always told me personal stories that happened [during the Spanish civil war]’ (An.1004).
Precisely, parents were specifically cited in 149 occasions (6.3%), and grandparents in an additional 65 instances (2.7%). In these cases, participants recalled specific conversations, such as ‘my parents talked about [Picasso’s Guernica] once, when we were discussing about Spanish art’ (Mu.146), ‘my grandfather really likes talking about the history of Spain’ (An.1381), or ‘my grandmother tells me a lot of things about the post-war era, because she was born in 1939’ (Mu.189). Brothers were also mentioned a total of 16 times, and the role of friends appeared with 190 mentions (8.0%): ‘my friends study art history and have mentioned [Las Meninas] on many occasions’ (CL.1340).
Focusing this time on fiction and documentaries, including films, TV series, as well as comics and novels, results indicated that this category was considered the least prominent source of information for the iconic elements that were selected (M = 4.69, SD = 3.17), lagging behind formal education and any other option. Additionally, more than half of the open answers linked to this category were left blank, indicating that participants were not always able to find examples.
Films were the type of media that were mentioned more frequently in this category: in 200 occasions (8.7%), with an additional 101 mentions (4.4%) to documentaries. Here, it was possible to detect the prevalence of ‘multiples movies and documentaries connected to the Spanish civil war [1936–1939] and the post-war’ (Ca.2700). While most of the responses were generic, simply stating that information was obtained by watching TV series (129 mentions in total, 5.6% of the 2292 responses in this category), additional responses specified particular titles, such as the Spanish TV series Isabel (with 26 mentions) or Ministerio del tiempo (with an additional 12 mentions). Novels and books were mentioned in 46 occasions (generically in nearly all instances), while comics were referenced only two times.
On the other hand, Internet and social media was used by trainee teachers as a relevant source of information for the elements previously selected (M = 6.29, SD = 3.07). Participants mentioned using the Internet up to 242 times (10.4%), with some of them talking about how they ‘had the curiosity of looking information up on the Internet [about the Guernica]’ (Mu.51) or recognising having ‘looked for information online due to personal interest’ about the Alhambra (CL.1056). The use of Google was specifically mentioned 39 times, and Wikipedia in 17 occasions.
A total of 73 participants admitted using traditional media as a source of information, mainly pointing to the use of television. For instance, one pre-service teacher mentioned how the Valley of the Fallen ‘was a topic of debate on TV recently’ (Mu.171). Conversely, mentions to social media were overwhelmingly higher, with 264 mentions. This figure includes 58 explicit mentions to Instagram, 38 to Twitter, 9 to TikTok and 8 to Facebook, usually in combination with each other: ‘[I follow] accounts about interesting facts in Instagram or Facebook’ (CL.477). In addition, 65 participants mentioned YouTube and its videos as a key source of information, mentioning from ‘educational videos’ (CL.1261) to specific songs.
Finally, museums, exhibitions and visits were also reported as a relevant source of information (M = 6.13, SD = 3.47), although this category was not as prevalent as others, it was significant to find 368 (14.5% of the 2337 responses in this category) mentions to specific visits to many of the iconic elements that were mentioned. This figure also included touristic visits, which were widely cited. Specifically, additional 212 (9.1%) mentions to museums were detected, including many generic answers (‘many exhibitions’, CL.559), but some variety was identified. Some participants mentioned particular places that they remembered being relevant (‘I have visited some museums with objects used in the Holy Week’, Mu.6) or even specific personal experiences when they were younger or when they were accompanied by their parents. While the Prado Museum was the most widely-cited iconic element (51 different responses), it was possible to find many examples mentioning the Reina Sofía Museum (‘I have visited the Reina Sofía at least in two occasions’, CL.1314), the Fine Arts Museum in Seville, or the National Museum of Sculpture in Valladolid, among others.
Focusing exclusively on school lessons, it was possible to analyse the degree in which the different iconic cultural elements connected with specific functions were covered during formal education. By isolating the iconic elements by their predominant function at their creation, it was possible to detect whether history education at schools usually highlight elements connected to one or other type of function to the detriment of the rest of them.
After analysing the results (Table 6), those iconic elements closely connected with political and economic functions were found to be the ones that participants recalled as having been covered during school lessons (M = 8.00, SD = 2.43 and M = 7.14, SD = 3.02, respectively). These were followed by those iconic elements connected to religious (M = 6.53, SD = 3.09) and cultural functions, or at least, connected with leisure time (M = 5.25 SD = 3.48). This was the case of elements such as museums, art galleries, or even festivities, among others.
In contrast, those iconic cultural elements that were, in their genesis, linked to social interaction (for instance, town squares and some festivities) or functions connected to basic needs (for example, those elements associated with gastronomy) were mainly absent from school lessons (M = 4.18, SD = 2.88 and M = 3.48, SD = 3.33, respectively).
In order to further examine the contrast in valuations, a Kruskal-Wallis test was performed. Results allowed to detect statistically significant differences between the different categories (χ2(5) = 446, p < 0.01), corroborating that some of the functions were much more prominent than others. Effect size was also found to be elevated (ε² = 0.19). In addition, Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner post-hoc tests were also conducted with the aim of determining potential contrasts between specific categories. The analysis of the results allowed the detection of statistically significant differences between political and all other functions: religious (W = 13.39, p < 0.01), cultural (W = 17.39, p < 0.01), economic (W = 5.14, p < 0.01), social interaction (W = 16.21, p < 0.01), and basic needs (W = 23.79, p < 0.01). This was also found to be true regarding the contrast between economic function and the rest of the categories (W between 4.10 and 15.44, p < 0.01).
The typology of the different iconic cultural elements covered at school was also examined, detecting that, in line with the most prominent functions, architectonical constructions, artistic productions and artist, and the legacy of historical figures and events were usually covered in schools, while elements connected to gastronomy, traditions, festivities, etc. were not as present in school lessons (Fig. 4).
The figure shows participants’ level of agreement with the statement that the different iconic elements selected were addressed during school lessons.
In addition, and focusing this time on the nature of the iconic cultural elements, the degree in which the tangible and intangible cultural iconic elements were covered during school lessons was also examined. In this regard, results indicated that, at least in formal settings, tangible elements were much more prone to be covered at school (M = 7.56, SD = 2.69) than intangible elements (M = 4.95, SD = 3.48).
This contrast was corroborated by a Kruskal-Wallis test, indicating statistically significant differences between categories (χ2(2) = 325, p < 0.01), and an elevated effect size (ε² = 0.14). Due to the fact that some iconic elements were not clearly delineated as material or immaterial, Dwass–Steel–Critchlow–Fligner post-hoc tests were conducted, also allowing the detection of statistically significant differences between the tangible and intangible categories (W = 24.77, p < 0.01).
link
