Economic crises in history teaching E-Book

Council of Europe

• Herausgeber: Council of Europe
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 256

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2026

Beschreibung

How can history education equip students to understand and confront the economic crises of yesterday and tomorrow? Since the beginning of the 21st century, the economic consequences of the debt crises of 2007 and 2008, of the Covid-19 pandemic and of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine have continuously challenged the livelihood of many families in Europe and around the world. Understanding economic crises from a historical perspective enables students to better respond to present and future experiences of such crises. The mission of the Observatory on History Teaching in Europe (OHTE) is to provide a clear picture of the state of history teaching in its member states. This is done through OHTE general reports on the state of history teaching in Europe and OHTE thematic reports, which explore particular areas of interest and how they are treated in history lessons. The second thematic report of the OHTE investigates the extent and the ways in which learners are being prepared to understand and cope with such crises through history education in the public schooling systems of OHTE’s 17 member states. It combines curriculum and textbook analysis with an explorative study of teachers’ experiences and summarises its most significant conclusions into 10 key findings listed in the introductory chapter.

Leseprobe

 

ECONOMIC CRISES IN

HISTORY TEACHING

 

Thematic report by the

Observatory on History Teaching in Europe

2025

 

Contents

Click here to see the whole table of contents, or go on the « Table of contents » option of your eReader.

Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION

Migratory Mexican field worker

’

s home on the edge of a frozen pea field. Imperial Valley, California

Economic crises have significantly shaped lives around the world since the turn of the century. The speculation and sovereign debt crises of 2007 and 2008, the experiences of the Covid-19 pandemic and the economic consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine have challenged the lives of many families, and particularly those of young people. Crises in public finances and national currencies as well as rising inflation have caused continuous or recurring economic instability in numerous European countries, which has been closely linked to rising social inequalities, xenophobia and the questioning of democratic values. In light of the rise of the political far right, economic crises represent a fundamental challenge for democratic governments.

Considering the omnipresence of economic crises and the grave impact they have on the lives of young people, the second thematic report of the Observatory on History Teaching in Europe (OHTE) investigates the extent to which learners are being prepared, and the ways they are being prepared, to understand and live through such crises through history education in the public schooling systems of the OHTE’s 17 member states. The report examines the teaching of economic crises in lower and upper secondary education within the framework of history education, which is understood to be a process of historical learning in which knowledge about the past is presented in relation to the present and the future. The methods of appropriation in the learning process provide a frame of reference for reflection and action that expand the pupils’ immediate experiences of the real world.

Dålig ekonomi 20 oktober 1967 by Örebro Kuriren - Örebro County Museum, Sweden - Public Domain.

The Observatory on History Teaching in Europe

The OHTE is an Enlarged Partial Agreement of the Council of Europe, comprising 19 member states and one observer state.1 It was established in November 2020 on the initiative of the French Government as one of the priorities of its presidency of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The OHTE’s mission is to promote quality history education in order to enhance democratic culture in its member states. It carries out this mission through its reporting activities and through a co-operation platform that engages various stakeholders in the field of history education. This platform is currently implemented through the Transnational History Education and Co-operation Laboratory (HISTOLAB), a joint project between the Council of Europe (Education Department) and the European Union (European Commission Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture).2

Strumpan 11 november 1967 by Örebro Kuriren - Örebro County Museum, Sweden - Public Domain.

To achieve its objective of providing a clear picture of the state of history teaching in its member states, based on reliable data and evidence on how history is taught, the OHTE produces general and thematic reports. The general reports provide a snapshot of how history is taught from a myriad of angles. Over time, the general reports aim to create a longitudinal overview of the state of history teaching in Europe and how it has evolved. The thematic reports, of which this one on economic crises in history teaching is the second, are focused on exploring specific subjects and issues in depth.

The OHTE is composed of the Governing Board, the Scientific Advisory Council (SAC) and the Secretariat. The Governing Board consists of one representative from each member state. It defines and adopts medium-term and annual programmes, selects the topics for the thematic reports and monitors their implementation and the management of OHTE’s resources. The Governing Board may also support the data collection for the thematic report by providing official documents or by encouraging teachers to participate in the research. However, the board has no influence over the final content of the report, which shields the OHTE’s work from undue political influence.

The SAC is a collective of well-respected experts in the field of history education.3 The SAC ensures the scientific quality of the OHTE’s work. It is consulted on the OHTE’s programme and assists the Governing Board by delivering opinions on matters concerning the OHTE’s activities. The OHTE’s Secretariat is headed by an Executive Director, and under the responsibility of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, it ensures the smooth daily running of the OHTE and provides organisational support to the work of the statutory bodies. To produce the reports, the OHTE convenes expert groups that operate under the supervision of the SAC. This thematic report is co-produced by the Leibniz Institute for Educational Media – Georg Eckert Institute (GEI), a long-standing partner of the Council of Europe in the field of history education, and its international network of researchers (Fuchs, Henne and Sammler 2022). The GEI, as a reference library for the Council of Europe, collects history textbooks produced by the member states of the Council of Europe and makes them available for use.4

The overall aim of this thematic report is to provide empirical evidence on the ways in which economic crises are taught in history classes across 17 OHTE member states. The OHTE is not a monitoring body and explicitly refrains from judging the ways in which economic crises are taught in the member states. Instead, through the presentation of empirical findings, the OHTE intends to inspire a dialogue within and among stakeholders in the member states. This dialogue should foster an appreciation for democratic responses to economic crises, which respect the human rights and different perspectives of all members of our societies, in line with the values of the Council of Europe.

Why are economic crises a relevant topic for history teaching?

Economic conditions shape societies in many ways. They can affect the willingness of different societies to communicate and exchange information and they are used to measure prosperity and the equality of social relationships. The susceptibility of economic conditions to crisis and their ability to trigger change “in various domains, including: politics and political structures, the distribution of wealth and privilege, rights granted to subjects or citizens, the organisation of private and family life, and the arts and popular culture” mean such situations have come to the attention of key European political institutions (OHTE n.d.a).

Economic crises can affect individual areas (such as agriculture or finance) or the overall economy of a state; their effects can be felt regionally or internationally. Economic crises that affect many countries at the same time are described as global economic crises. Examples of economic crises are overproduction and underconsumption crises, currency crises, banking crises resulting from speculation and sovereign debt crises.

The potential of economic crises to significantly shape the lives of people around the world has been evident since the turn of the century. Therefore, it is vital to encourage students to gain a complex and nuanced understanding of economic crises in order to provide them with the necessary tools to fully understand the social, political and economic context they live in, and how the economic situation and their living conditions could be improved. History classes have enormous potential in this regard.

Teaching about economic crises in a historical perspective

“exposes students to a vast array of facts and events, giving them concrete knowledge about economies. This will allow them to better understand how things evolved and came to be… Learning about the diversity of economic patterns and forms of organisation throughout history helps students get a better feeling for the wide variety of future possibilities that exist. As such, teaching economic history (and economic crises as a crucial element) will help students to better grasp current phenomena and come to realise that economies are ever-changing.” (Muijnck and Tielemann 2021: 84).

Understanding economic crises from a historical perspective can provide important points of reference enabling students to better respond to present and future experiences of crises. More specifically, as recent studies in the field of history education have shown, studying economic crises in history classes provides an opportunity for students to better understand the different causes of economic crises and, if the teaching includes the search for solutions to the crisis and social engagement in the face of the consequences, students can learn about tolerance of ambiguity and self-efficacy (Apostolidou and Solé 2017).

When studying the different reactions in the face of crisis by entrepreneurs, working men and women, politicians and civil society stakeholders, students can understand what influences decision making, factors such as political beliefs and interests, as well as economic concepts and ideas that gained influence at a particular point in time (laissez-faire liberalism, the social market economy or the planned economy, for example). Studying responses to crises also allows students to evaluate the results of the actions taken, including effects on the overall economic situation and the impacts on different sectors and strata of society.

Exploring such questions can help learners understand that an economic crisis is much more than an isolated economic phenomenon and instead often affects all aspects of societal life (Tanner 2014). It can also sharpen learners’ awareness of the different consequences and experiences that economic crises have had on different strata of society – for instance, according to wealth, profession, gender or national identity – and how those consequences are also heavily dependent on the prevailing political system and the historical period. This enables students to develop empathy for those that lived in the past and to boost their historical thinking skills by detecting similarities and differences in the lives of people affected by economic crises in the past and today. This constitutes an important step in preparing learners to tackle the historical inaccuracies, oversimplifications and manipulations that are ubiquitous in today’s online world. In addition, critically studying the political developments and responses to economic crises in history helps students understand that there are different ways in which economic crises can be tackled. This in turn enables them to critically evaluate the choices made by contemporary policy makers in response to economic crises. Therefore, studying economic crises in history classes has great potential to foster learners’ understanding of the variety of economic crises that have occurred throughout history, their various causes and the complex political and social dynamics they have triggered. It informs them of both the dangers and the opportunities for positive change that different responses to economic crises have brought about that may, while appreciating the differences in historical contexts, provide orientation for navigating the challenges learners may be confronted with in the present.

Reisefotos. Straßenbild mit schlafendem Bettler by Grasser, Franz (Herstellung) (Fotograf) - Deutsche Fotothek, Germany -Public Domain.

For all these reasons, studying economic crises is particularly suited to helping students identify values and develop attitudes, skills and knowledge as well as critical understanding, as formulated in the Council of Europe’s (2018a) Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture (RFCDC) and adapted specifically to history education in the principles and guidelines for quality history education in the 21st century (Council of Europe 2018b). The development of an understanding of values such as human dignity, fairness or equality in the field of economics and the economy, the advancement of attitudes such as curiosity and openness to others, respect, tolerance of ambiguity or self-efficacy, as well as of skills such as empathy, co-operation and conflict resolution, and an in-depth critical understanding of economic connectivity are important aspects of the RFCDC. Using the treatment of economic crises in history as an example, the present report explores how the principles of the RFCDC and of the Council of Europe’s recommendations on history education are applied in history education in the OHTE member states.5 This thematic report on economic crises in history teaching thereby makes a valuable contribution to the understanding of the significance of learning about economic crises for democratic societies, as overcoming and learning from crises may subsequently lead to the development of new institutional settings. Thus, it seems particularly important to strengthen students’ ability to confront economic challenges by supporting a systematic understanding of economic processes and providing information from numerous perspectives on their historical contexts. Teaching about economic crises can offer students the knowledge and skills to resist one-sided and simplistic attributions of blame for economic crises to minorities and stigmatised groups through scapegoating. Cultural openness (curiosity) and a greater inclusion of the knowledge and experience of broad sections of the population in history lessons, as stipulated in, among other key documents, the principles and guidelines for quality history education in the 21st century by the Council of Europe, form a sound basis for such learning.

To examine this, the report pays particular attention to the changing self-understanding of history education and the rising importance of competence-based learning. Since the 1970s, history teaching has developed from defining itself as being geared towards imparting academic knowledge to a teaching and learning practice focusing on the process of historical learning. History teaching and learning focusing on the acquisition of competences has become more prominent, certainly since the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) studies introduced by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) made output-oriented learning and its measurement a clear priority in relation to input-oriented learning.

Matti Kivekäs / Otava / Press Photo Archive JOKA / Finnish Heritage Agency

This report examines the inclusion of historical economic crises in history teaching with respect to a wide range of factors, ranging from historical periods and geographical scope to various perspectives and approaches included in teaching. This analysis constitutes an interesting and evidence-based contribution to debates on the frequent criticism from economists and economic historians that economic history topics are not allocated sufficient space or emphasis in school history lessons (Holub 2021). Part of the analysis focuses on the consequences of economic crises for social development, taking the solutions developed and implemented at the time in specific historical cases into account. In addition, the report examines the competences that the curricula, textbooks and teachers seek to develop in students when teaching about economic crises in history classes, and the methods they use in doing so.

History education research distinguishes between the following competences: knowledge competence, methodological competence, orientation competence, judgment competence and action competence. In light of the multifaceted and sometimes controversial discussions about competences in history education among the member states of the OHTE (Leyrat 2021), three competences – knowledge competence, methodological competence and orientation competence – were selected for the report’s focus. The required knowledge and critical understanding of the world is compatible with the competence requirements formulated in the RFCDC and the Council of Europe principles and guidelines for quality history education in the 21st century, both of which require a deeper understanding of economic contexts and their link to politics, law, human rights, cultures and religions. Methodological competence refers to students acquiring the ability to analyse and interpret a range of source material, such as texts, images, audiovisual content and representational documents, as well as academic texts, developing the analytical and critical thinking skills defined in the RFCDC and the guidelines for quality history education in the 21st century. Orientation competence enables pupils to develop values and attitudes that allow them to orientate themselves in space and time. Through historical education, pupils acquire the competence to orientate themselves in the present and to develop their own ideas about the future. The development of orientation competences is closely linked to the development of values, norms and skills as defined in the principles and guidelines for quality history education in the 21st century. These include openness to cultural otherness and to other beliefs, world views and practice, empathy, civic-mindedness, self-efficacy or tolerance of ambiguity.

Hugo Sundström / Hufvudstadsbladet / Press Photo Archive JOKA / Finnish Heritage Agency

The report does not study judgment competences because they have proved controversial. It does not treat action competence as a separate competence but develops elements of action competence from the orientation competences. When analysing orientation competence, the report explores whether curricula and textbooks facilitate students to develop skills and abilities that enable them to apply historical reflection to current and future actions.

Defining economic crises

The word “crisis” originates from the Greek for “decision” in the legal, theological and medical fields in society: “The term challenged hard alternatives: right or wrong, salvation or damnation, life or death” (Koselleck 1982: 617). Since the early modern period, it has been applied to numerous other areas of society, including the field of economics, and the processual nature and the reproducibility of crises have also come more into focus (Koselleck ibid.: 627).

This report does not focus on the totality of the concepts of crisis developed by social theory, but on economic crises in their links with political, social and cultural developments. In doing so, the report builds on the work of philosophers such as Paul Ricœur, who pointed out that economic crises should not be studied as an economic phenomenon alone but in a wider social context (Ricœur 1988). The report derives its definition of economic crises from economics, economic history and sociolinguistic research on key notions and concepts of this phenomenon. The concept of economic crises in this report refers particularly to those definitions from the field of economic history that have understood economic crises as turning points in economic development (Borchardt 1993, Plumpe 2012). The report shares an understanding of crisis as a crossroads for societal development and emphasises the importance of crises for the social discussion about forecasts and the active search for solutions in crisis situations.

The investigation of economic crises is not limited to the field of economics. As the causes and consequences of these crises are intertwined with social, political and even environmental issues, it is appropriate to consider definitions from multiple areas of study within the social sciences. Consequently, the definition of economic crises in this report is related to definitions of crisis from other areas of the social sciences.

This report uses the term economic crises in the plural, in line with sociolinguistic research on economic crises. As Daniele Besomi points out:

“in a world where crises are seen as disconnected accidents temporarily and unsystematically disturbing an otherwise serenely fluid state of affairs, the phenomenon can either be ignored … or discussed under the heading “crisis” in the singular… When the recurring character of crises was recognised, in view of their periodical returning and thanks to a conceptual switch, making it possible to understand their role in the working of the economic system, the use of the word in the singular was no longer appropriate for the account of the phenomenon.” (Besomi 2012: 111).

The definition of crises in the plural not only highlights the periodic recurrence of economic crises throughout history but also encourages a plurality of perspective when contemplating their origins, progression, consequences and solutions. Research into economic history has frequently highlighted the often “emotionally loaded” language used to describe economic crises, such as the Great Famine in Ireland (1845-52), the Depression of 1873 in Europe, the consequences of the Wall Street Crash of 1929 or the bursting of speculation bubbles such as in 2007 (Tanner 2014; Holub 2021).

Alimentara„BIG” din Sighetu Marmației by Béreș Iosif - 1979 - Maramures Village Museum, Romania - CC BY-SA.

Summary of key findings

1 Economic crises are included in the national history curricula of all member states. In 16 out of 17 member states, teaching about economic crises is a compulsory element of history lessons. The topic is included in textbooks and in practice by teachers in all member states. More than four out of five survey respondents indicated that they consider teaching about economic crises to be important or extremely important.

2 The most widely taught economic crisis is the Great Depression, and economic crises are most frequently taught in the context of 19th and 20th-century history. Nevertheless, economic crises are taught in a broader temporal perspective, including ancient and early modern history, the Middle Ages to a lesser extent and, rarely, prehistory.

3 A national history perspective is combined with European and world history elements in the curricula and textbooks of all member states. However, a general Western centrism can be identified in the treatment of economic crises as a topic. Economic crises outside Europe and North America and the effects of global economic crises on African, Asian or Latin American societies are rarely present. Local history perspectives feature to a lesser extent than national and European history perspectives.

4 Political, economic and social history perspectives on economic crises are frequently included in history teaching in all member states. Although social history approaches feature less often than political and economic history approaches in curricula and textbooks, teachers’ responses show that, in practice, they most frequently apply a social history perspective when teaching about economic crises. Connections to the history of ideas are commonplace in teaching about economic crises, while cultural history perspectives feature to a much lesser extent.

5 Macro-historical perspectives on economic crises feature predominantly in the curricula and textbooks of the 17 member states. Micro-historical perspectives, such as histories of everyday life, local history perspectives or approaches focusing on the role of individuals are less frequently represented; among these, the role of individuals is the most frequently used example of micro perspectives. By contrast, teachers indicate that histories of everyday life are the most widely adopted perspective in their practical history teaching.

6 Societies’ diversity is partially represented in history teaching in the member states in relation to the topic of economic crises. While the experiences and roles of people of different social status or occupation are frequently included in curricula and textbooks, there is generally far less diversity in terms of gender and sexual orientation; ethnic, cultural, religious, linguistic or national background; age; and ability.

7 Curricula and textbooks covering economic crises are generally designed to encourage students’ development of analytical and critical thinking skills. This corresponds with the preferences indicated by teachers in the survey, where classroom discussions and the analysis of historical sources emerge as the most widely used methods. Autonomous learning competences like project-based learning are present in curricula and textbooks to a much lesser extent. There are differences in the gradient of difficulty of tasks included in textbooks across countries.

8 Almost one third of teachers indicated in the survey that they were satisfied or extremely satisfied with the ways in which their curricula and educational materials treat economic crises; one quarter expressed that they were not satisfied or not at all satisfied. Some of the reasons for dissatisfaction cited by teachers include curriculum overload, exam pressures, a perceived overemphasis on political history, difficulties in finding suitable educational materials and superficial coverage of the topic in available resources.

9 Nearly half of the surveyed teachers have the impression that their students are interested or extremely interested in learning about economic crises in history. Fewer than two out of 10 respondents have the impression that their students are not interested or not interested at all in studying the topic.

10 In 14 of the 17 member states, economic crises are not taught using an interdisciplinary approach. This contrasts with the survey results, which indicate that teachers generally have a preference for such an approach.

1 Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Cyprus, France, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Portugal, Republic of Moldova (Observer), Serbia, Slovenia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Türkiye and Ukraine. At the time of research and writing, Montenegro and the Slovak Republic were observer states and were therefore not covered by the research for the present report. They have since joined the OHTE as full members in 2025 – see map pages 6-7.

2 Learn more at https://histolab.coe.int (HISTOLAB n.d.).

3 Learn more at: www.coe.int/en/web/observatory-history-teaching/scientific-advisory-council (OHTE n.d.b).

4 Learn more at https://www.gei.de/en/ (Leibniz Institute for Educational Media n.d.).

5 For an overview, see OHTE n.d.a.

Chapter 2. METHODOLOGY

Weihnachtsfeier des Schweizer Hilfswerks für notleidende Kinder -Blaha, Franz, 1904-nach 1969 [VerfasserIn]

In order to analyse the ways in which the member states teach about economic crises in history classes, this report adopts a comprehensive methodology, combining curriculum and textbook analysis with an explorative study of teachers’ experiences and employing both quantitative and qualitative methods. This is a direct reaction to the finding of the first OHTE (2024) general report, which revealed that history teaching in practice can significantly differ from the stipulations set forth in the curricula. Thus, to create a comprehensive snapshot of how economic crises are taught in history lessons in the OHTE member states, this report first analyses the regulatory dimension via the national curricula, and complements the respective findings with a textbook analysis, which remain on average the most widely used learning materials in the OHTE member states (ibid.). These two components are complemented by an explorative study of teachers’ experiences, which gives a voice to practitioners and allows for the representation of educators’ opinions on teaching about economic crises. All three elements follow a similar overarching analytical logic, which ensures that the findings of each component are related to one another. The methods of sampling and analysis are presented in detail below. To enable such an in-depth exploration of the topic, the scope of this research is limited to the secondary level, ISCED-2 (lower secondary level) and ISCED-3 (upper secondary level).

Organisation of the research process

After the topic was selected by the Governing Board, the methodology and the research instruments of the report were developed by the GEI and confirmed by the SAC. The Secretariat served as a liaison between the OHTE statutory bodies and the GEI and monitored the overall progress of the project.

The research and drafting process itself involved multiple roles. The GEI research co-ordinator recruited the research team, liaised between the OHTE and the research team and ensured the overall quality and timeliness of the delivery of the report. Experts on history education from the OHTE member states played a significant role in the research, as they were tasked with translating and adapting research instruments, where needed, to their local languages and contexts; with supporting the collection of relevant curricula and textbooks in their country; and with conducting the respective analyses. Upon request of an expert, the GEI research co-ordinator asked the OHTE to confirm that the curriculum identified by an expert was in force. Based on the submissions from the experts, the chapter authors, mostly staff members of the GEI, drafted the comparative analyses for the curriculum and textbook chapters. These were cross-checked by the experts. With regard to the explorative study about teachers’ experiences, the experts supported the dissemination of the questionnaire in their country. The Secretariat and the GEI supported this process via their communication channels. The responses to the quantitative questions of the study were analysed by a statistician with the results submitted to the chapter author, who also conducted the qualitative analysis of open-ended questions. The GEI research co-ordinator harmonised the draft and submitted it to the Secretariat, which further edited the draft and co-ordinated the review process between the SAC and the GEI. Following the implementation of feedback, the SAC and the Governing Board approved the final version of the report.

Research instruments

As stated above, the thematic report comprises three elements – the curricula analysis, the textbook analysis and the explorative study of teachers’ experiences. For the curriculum and textbook analysis, a research grid was developed for each area, with both following the same analytical rationale in order to safeguard the compatibility of the findings and an interrelation of the conclusions of both parts. The grids examine both curricula and textbooks in terms of historical content and perspectives, as well as didactic approaches and competence orientation. The exploratory study makes use of a questionnaire directed at history teachers. This instrument asked the same questions addressed in the curriculum and textbook analyses, but additionally inquired into other practical aspects of teaching, such as percentage of time allocated to teaching about topics, opinions on and experiences with teaching about economic crises, as well as students’ perceived interest in learning about this topic. The development of each analytical grid and the questionnaire for teachers was guided by insights from state-of-the-art historical research on economic crises and by key Council of Europe recommendations on history education.6

Figure 2.1

Organisation of the research process

The analysis is structured according to the following logic and steps.

1. As a first step, the analysis looks at whether learning about economic crises in history is compulsory for all students, compulsory for students attending specific school types or only as part of an elective course. Furthermore, the report examines the extent to which teachers can determine whether to teach about economic crises in their history classes. These insights gained on the basis of the curriculum analysis are contrasted by the findings of the teachers’ questionnaire that asks what share of the total history teaching time is in fact allocated to the topic of economic crises.

2. In the second step, all research instruments seek to establish the temporal and geographical combinations that appear when teaching about economic crises. With regard to temporal scope, economic history research has warned against an overly narrow focus on the crises of the 20th century, which carries the risk of overusing the crisis of 1929 as a model for economic crises in general. At the same time, research in history didactics has shown that a broader temporal perspective makes it easier for students to develop knowledge, methods and orientation competences by establishing a distance to current economic crises (Borchardt 1985; Apostolidou 2017; Apostolidou and Solé 2017). Therefore, the report analyses which historical periods covered in curricula and textbooks include economic crises.7 In view of the interconnections and dependencies economic crises create on a worldwide scale, economic history research has argued in favour of a global history perspective. To this end, the report employs a broad spatial perspective looking beyond national history to attempt to grasp these worldwide connections, although it does not examine global interdependencies and power imbalances in depth. Furthermore, inspired by the Committee of Ministers’ (2001) Recommendation Rec(2001)15 on history teaching in twenty-first-century Europe, the report pays close attention to the geographical scope covered in curricula and textbooks. Besides exploring whether public schooling systems teach economic crises that affected their “own” country, another Council of Europe member state or other countries that are not members of the Council of Europe, all research instruments inquire whether a local history, a national history, a supranational, regional or European history, or a world history perspective is applied to the teaching of economic crises. The teachers’ questionnaire furthermore asks respondents to indicate the specific economic crises they have taught about. Besides a predefined list based on preliminary findings of the curricula and textbook analysis, teachers had the option to indicate other crises that are not listed.

3.