It is more important for schoolchildren to learn about local history than world history. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Một số bài làm tham khảo:
Teaching history for schoolchildren has been a heated topic constantly. There is a common belief that local history is more important to children than world history. However, I disagree with this belief.
I believe the notion that local history is more valuable than world history should be rejected. Some people may claim that the insights into the local historical values are completely enough for one to live. Their claim could be true a few decades ago when most interpersonal communications were between people of the same race and origin. However, this view is now outdated, as the world has become globalised and international business and migrant workers have made any community a global village. In this context, an understanding of a foreign country’s history would enable future local workers to reinforce the relationship between them and the expatriates from that country.
In addition, I am strongly convinced that children would benefit the most only when the learning of local history is placed parallel to that of world history. To understand a local historical event, children should put the regional and sometimes even world context in that historical era into consideration. For example, children should acknowledge that the event that Vietnam regained its independence after defeating the Japanese troops in Indochina in 1945 only happened after a series of relevant events in the World War II, one of which is the surrender of Japan to the Allies. In this way of learning, children would understand history more deeply and thoroughly.
All the existing data has provided a concrete foundation that the study of local history should always be parallel to that of world history. This practice would guarantee that children learn history more comprehensively and be able to tighten the bond with migrant workers in their country.
In recent years, many people have argued that school should concentrate more on teaching regional history instead of world history. Although I agree with this point of view, there could be a case for saying that learning world historical events is also important for children.
First of all, amongst there are several advantages associated with learning local past, the most significant of which is to understand thoroughly the origin and meaning of traditional events, customs and so on of their motherland. Therefore, the youngsters could maintain the valuable tradition for the next generation. Furthermore, local history is a storehouse of information about how the ancestors had lived, had thought and had fought to protect their land. For example, by listening about the rebellion of Trưng Sisters against the ruling yoke of Qin dynasty to liberate Vietnam, Vietnamese children could understand the value of freedom and respect the sacrifice of their ancestors. Accordingly, teaching local history is synonymous with educating about patriotism.
However, we should not underestimate the importance of world history. In order to understand more thoroughly and more deeply the regional past, it is necessary to relate the local historical events with corresponding world conditions. For instance, when studying about the Communist Party, which ruled Vietnam beginning in 1945, it is indispensable to acknowledge that the October revolution in Russia helped Nguyen Ai Quoc, later founder of the Vietnamese Communist Party, find the way to liberate Vietnam through Marxism ideology. Furthermore, as the world has become globalized, knowing the history of other countries is beneficial. People are prone to approach and support people who express respectfulness of the local culture and history. Consequently, it provides more opportunities for children to work and make friends with foreigners.
In conclusion, it is my belief that although local history is more necessary, world history has its important role. I am convinced that the study of local history should parallel with world history so the children could apprehend history more effectively.
The content of history subject in education is becoming a controversial problem around the world. While some people claim the world history should be taught more than the local one, I firmly believe that native history plays a much more significant role in terms of children education.
Focusing more on international history could lead to negative effects in schoolchildren due to several reasons. The first obvious matter is that children are overwhelmed their brains by striving themselves to remember all the international history events which is really hard to fully understand even with adults. For example, I can’t remember the names of all countries involving in World War 2 although I was taught so many times when I was in primary school. In addition, it is evident that almost the historic knowledge about the world is only useful with the researchers or experts in history. For that reason, educators doesn’t need to teach too much world history for those who are not being trained to become the historians.
On the contrary, it is necessary for every children to learn deeply about the history of their own countries. By learning carefully these knowledge from very young age, the patriotism of pupils is raised inside their minds naturally. Consequently, schoolchildren would be seriously aware about their duties and their contribution for their home countries when they mature. For instance, many develop countries like Japan always put their priorities on teaching local history in order to promote their national spirits. Furthermore, not as difficult to learn as the historic days of the world, the important country events are easier for children to remember as all these events are related to their life. As learners can witness the evidences of the milestone of their countries like historic buildings or national day, the lessons about their country’s history are more clearly and useful than the international historic knowledge.
To conclude, it is clear that native history plays an indispensable part in children education in every country. I strongly recommend educators and governments to concentrate on teaching local history instead of world history for their new generations.