This issue’s call for papers stated that the field of history of education “is shrinking in many parts of the world—both in its institutional footprint and in its membership.” What does “the field” mean in this statement, and is it a reasonable description of the knowledge production and practice of scholars in the field? In this essay I want to illuminate how different approaches to the history of education, taken in different national and regional contexts, shape how and why we describe the field, and what kind of research and practices are considered to be significant.

From a Nordic and British context, the field of history of education in the last few decades has produced vital knowledge and grown in many areas.Footnote ¹ This has become evident during my time as a PhD student visiting Sheffield University, UK, from Uppsala University, Sweden. According to Johannes Westberg, the field has grown stronger in the last twenty or thirty years “in terms of active research, environment, output and coordination.”Footnote ² This growth should be understood as a development “in accordance with its institutions’ and the national conditions of higher education.”Footnote ³ The flourishing of the history of education is linked to changes in how scholars have posed and answered scientific questions regarding education as a historical phenomenon. In the 2023 double special issue of the UK’s History of Education, titled “Histories of Education in the Past, Present and Future: Trends and Intersections,” this trend can be seen globally, where multiple developments in the field have taken and still are taking place.Footnote ⁴ The field’s expansion is thus interrelated with how one defines and practices the history of education. With a broader and more inclusive mindset, scholars are shedding new light on the field. This has affected how theoretical and methodological approaches are being applied, how scholars explain educational projects, and how education is related to wider historical contexts.

In a Nordic and British context, scholars have moved from focusing primarily on formal school histories and producing celebratory jubilee volumes about universities, to including these institutions in a wider discussion of the continuities and changes in education, as well as Bildung, nurturing, learning, and teaching over time.Footnote ⁵ Scholars of the humanities and the social sciences are contextualizing both formal and informal educational projects as they relate to different social and cultural developments, and explaining education’s role in the complex processes of societal change.Footnote ⁶ Today, Nordic scholars collectively have an awareness of methods and perspectives from different disciplines and therefore are able to have a wider and more critical discussion about what the history of education has been historically, and what it is today. The same trend can be seen in Britain and Ireland, where education has increasingly been located in larger contexts and conceptualized in new ways to make sense of the continuities and changes in British and Irish history.Footnote ⁷

In Nordic countries, the history of education is not a formal academic discipline but a multidisciplinary operation, one which is interwoven within research environments in pedagogy, history, and sociology of education. It can also be found in departments of history of science and ideas.Footnote ⁸ Swedish scholars have seen this as particularly significant for knowledge production and practice within the history of education, which becomes apparent in conversations with scholars from overlapping fields, such as intellectual history and the history of knowledge.Footnote ⁹ The focus has been on developing an inclusive approach regarding different theoretical and methodological perspectives.Footnote ¹⁰ For instance, several Swedish universities have created an annual workshop on history of education for PhD students from different disciplinary backgrounds in Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands. During these workshops, the emphasis has been on producing high-quality research and creating an active and inclusive network for the next generation of scholars.Footnote ¹¹

One of the field’s most significant and overarching attributes is its ability to contextualize and recontextualize preexisting narratives and myths about education.Footnote ¹² The use of contextualization can reveal how different ideas, activities, and practices have shaped formal state-governed school systems as well as informal education projects. This trend has definitely had an impact on the research conducted in Nordic and British contexts. There are several examples of these research efforts—such as the Centre of Excellence in History of Experiences (HEX) at Tampere University in Finland, and Uppsala Studies of History and Education (SHED) at Uppsala University—that, because of their more inclusive approach, successively are able to recontextualize and link historical educational projects to larger social, economic, scientific, religious, and cultural structures.Footnote ¹³ One example of this is SHED member Emma Hellström’s ongoing PhD project, which is recontextualizing pre-existing narratives about how the Swedish primary school (folkskola) became a secular project in the early twentieth century.Footnote ¹⁴ Hellström argues that instead of being a purely secular project, the primary school was part of a broader ongoing negotiation between religious and secular groups until the late 1960s. The groups were thus trying to define what a democratic education should entail from different ideological points of departure. One of her big findings is that the simultaneous transformation of Christianity during the twentieth century enabled Swedish Protestantism to remain at the center of the primary school’s democratic education mission. Hellström’s project helps us understand the complex relationship between religion, education, secularization, and democratization in new, meaningful ways, and also shows this project’s relevance to other overlapping areas, in this case church history and intellectual history.

A broader and more inclusive field also affects how historians of education communicate, ask questions, and influence policymaking and public practice. Education is an issue that tends to stir up emotions in political and public settings. Without larger and longer perspectives on educational issues, debates concerning education today can become historically disconnected. Historians of education have been applying different approaches to explain how and why politicians and policymakers (both past and present) use different historical myths for their own ends.Footnote ¹⁵ These historians also help journalists and policymakers to understand educational phenomena from a wider historical perspective.Footnote ¹⁶ Depending on how the study is conducted, new possibilities can arise for creating dialogues with the general public. Using approaches such as oral history helps scholars not only to have a dialogue with study participants; it also creates wider awareness and possibilities to connect with new audiences through social media and other public platforms.Footnote ¹⁷ There is a democratic and intellectual need to uphold a transparent and respectful relationship between scholars and the general public through discourse, particularly on a topic as complex as education. In the dialogue between historians of education, policymakers, and the general public, we could benefit from what Peter Galison calls “trading zones” for knowledge.Footnote ¹⁸

Social media, articles, and public presentations are important mediums for historians of education to extend their knowledge to the field of public practice. Being in direct dialogue with teachers, parents, and other engaged citizens is crucial to demonstrating the relevance of the history of education. However, another useful though sometimes forgotten approach is through one of the core elements of the university: teaching and course development. In Swedish teacher training programs, there is a compulsory module on the history of education in Sweden that shows the field’s practical value and significance. Here the idea of an inclusive field could be implemented even further—for example, through the development of joint courses between departments. There are a few good examples of this approach at the postgraduate level, such as the Graduate School in Applied History of Education (PEDASK), but this needs to be implemented at the undergraduate level as well, and it should be connected not only to teacher training programs but to other departments, faculties, and universities.Footnote ¹⁹

One could ask, does a broader and more inclusive approach pose the risk that the field loses part of its core mission? Looking at the thriving output and practice that has been presented here, it is clear that education as a broad category for historical analysis is appealing and relevant not only on its own but also in relation to other fields of research, policy, and practice. Underlining the field’s breadth not only enhances the understanding of education as a historical phenomenon but also highlights its strong scientific foundation and scholarly expertise. A better awareness of the conditions of the field’s framework today in turn creates a greater overarching awareness of its meaningful role in research, policy, and practice.