Working with historical sources has long been recognized as a core practice of historical scholarship. In contemporary history education, this practice is increasingly viewed as essential for developing students’ historical thinking and critical reasoning skills. Educational programmes aligned with international standards, including the Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (NIS) curriculum and Cambridge International approaches, emphasize source-based learning as a means of fostering analytical, evaluative, and interpretative competencies. However, despite this curricular emphasis, classroom practice and assessment outcomes do not always reflect the intended development of these skills.

Analysis of Grade 10 students’ performance in External Summative Assessment (ESA) in history revealed persistent difficulties in analyzing, evaluating, and interpreting historical sources. Students tend to focus on surface-level factual extraction rather than engaging critically with the origin, purpose, context, and reliability of sources. This gap between curriculum expectations and students’ demonstrated skills indicates a need for more systematic and methodologically grounded approaches to source-based instruction in history lessons.

How does the systematic organization of work with multiple historical sources in history lessons influence the development of Grade 10 students’ critical thinking skills and the quality of their learning outcomes?

The main aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of systematic work with historical sources in developing students’ critical thinking skills in history education.

To achieve this aim:

• to design and implement history lessons based on structured and consistent work with multiple historical sources;

• to align source-based tasks with the requirements of External Summative Assessment in Grade 10 history;

• to examine changes in students’ abilities to contextualize, compare, and evaluate historical sources;

• to analyze how evidence-based reasoning and historical interpretation develop through multi-source analysis;

• to reflect on the impact of source-based teaching on teachers’ professional practice and instructional decision-making.

The study is grounded in theories of historical thinking and source-based learning. A key theoretical foundation is provided by the work of Sam Wineburg, who conceptualizes historical thinking as a set of disciplinary heuristics rather than intuitive reasoning. Wineburg identifies three core heuristics - sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration - which enable learners to critically evaluate historical evidence and construct reasoned interpretations. These heuristics form an essential framework for designing classroom tasks that move students beyond factual recall toward analytical and evaluative thinking.

The study also draws on the work of Peter Seixas and Tom Morton, particularly their model of the Big Six Historical Thinking Concepts. This framework emphasizes key disciplinary concepts such as historical significance, cause and consequence, continuity and change, evidence, historical perspectives, and the ethical dimension of history. Within this study, these concepts provide a structured lens through which students’ critical thinking development is examined.

Together, these theoretical perspectives form a coherent conceptual framework that positions systematic work with historical sources as the foundation for developing critical thinking in history education.

Conceptually, the study views critical thinking in history as a multidimensional skill set encompassing contextual understanding, comparison of evidence, evaluative judgment, and reasoned interpretation. Methodologically, the research adopts an Action Research approach, enabling iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection within authentic classroom contexts. This approach supports both the improvement of teaching practice and the generation of practice-based knowledge.

By examining how structured, multi-source-based instruction influences students’ critical thinking skills, this study contributes to ongoing discussions on effective history pedagogy.

This study is grounded in an Action Research (AR) methodology, which enables practitioners to systematically investigate and improve their own teaching practices through iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection. Action Research was selected as an appropriate methodological framework because it allows for continuous professional inquiry while addressing authentic classroom challenges related to students’ critical thinking and source-based learning in history education. The research was conducted with Grade 10 students and history teachers working with these classes during the 2025–2026 academic year. The study was designed in two phases: the first phase was implemented during the first semester, while the second phase is ongoing in the second semester. This article reports the findings from the first phase of the research. Lessons were collaboratively planned by teachers in alignment with the NIS curriculum and External Summative Assessment (ESA) requirements, ensuring curricular and assessment validity. The intervention focused on systematic work with historical sources across selected Grade 10 units, including topics from Kazakhstan during the “Stagnation” period (1965–1985), urbanization processes in Kazakhstan, and the protection of national interests in the second half of the twentieth century. These units were explicitly aligned with historical thinking concepts such as change and continuity and historical significance. Instructional strategies emphasized multi-source analysis, where students examined four different sources related to a single historical event. Question-driven tasks were designed to support students in analyzing source origin, purpose, context, reliability, and evidentiary value. Data collection was conducted during Term II history lessons and drew on multiple qualitative sources to ensure triangulation. The primary data sources included students’ written work (comparative tables, cause-and-effect analyses, and source-based conclusions), arguments presented during group and pair discussions, students’ self-assessment reflections, survey responses, and teachers’ observation notes. These data sources captured both learning outcomes and learning processes, providing insight into students’ developing historical thinking skills. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, which allowed for the identification of recurring patterns and themes across different data sets. Students’ critical thinking skills were examined through four analytical dimensions: understanding historical context, constructing evidence-based arguments, comparing multiple sources, and evaluating historical significance. This analytical framework is consistent with methodological principles proposed by Peter Seixas and Sam Wineburg, who emphasize contextualization, corroboration, and evidence-based reasoning as core components of historical thinking. Overall, the combination of Action Research methodology, multi-source instructional design, and thematic analysis provided a robust framework for examining the effectiveness of systematic source-based learning in developing students’ critical thinking skills in history education.

The findings of this study demonstrate that systematic and purposeful work with historical sources in history lessons has a positive impact on the development of students’ critical thinking skills and overall learning quality. Instruction based on empirical and multi-source analysis enabled students to move beyond a surface-level, factual understanding of historical information toward higher-order skills such as analysis, comparison, evaluation, and interpretation. Throughout the research process, students showed significant improvement in their ability to identify historical context, recognize authorial perspectives, and evaluate the reliability and limitations of sources. Moreover, they learned to construct independent, evidence-based conclusions about historical events. These changes indicate a shift from passive reception of information to more conscious and reflective engagement in the learning process, which also contributed to increased student motivation and interest in history. The study also revealed positive changes in teachers’ professional practice. Through the systematic use of source-based tasks, teachers enhanced lesson planning, assessment, and reflective practices. This contributed to the development of a school-wide culture that values evidence-based teaching and learning. The Action Research approach proved particularly valuable, as it enabled teachers to view their own practice as an object of inquiry and to improve instruction through iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection. As a result, teachers strengthened their professional reflection and were able to address instructional challenges using classroom-based evidence. In response to the research question - How does systematic work with historical sources influence students’ critical thinking skills and learning outcomes? -the findings indicate that structured source-based learning fosters a comprehensive development of historical thinking skills, including contextualization, argumentation, comparison, evaluation, and interpretation. This, in turn, deepens students’ historical understanding and enhances the durability and applicability of their knowledge. Future research is recommended to explore the effectiveness of this approach across different grade levels and subject areas.

Atabayev, Q. M. (2002). Source studies of the history of Kazakhstan: A textbook [Қазақстан тарихының деректанулық негіздері: Оқу құралы]. Almaty, Kazakhstan: Kazakh University. Keleşzade, G., Güneyli, A., & Özkul, A. (2018). Effectiveness of history teaching based on social constructivist learning and development of historical thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 349–366. Seixas, P., & Morton, T. (2012). The big six historical thinking concepts. Toronto, Canada: Nelson Education. Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.