It is more important for school children to learn about local history than world history.
To what extent to you agree or disagree?
Many people have
valued the role of local history to school children over that of world history.
In my opinion, I disagree with those people as both of them are equally
essential for young learners.
Studying the
history of their hometown is for sure an indispensable part of school’s
curriculum during students’ early education. I believe having thorough insights
into what happened in the past at one’s locality develops his patriotism. For
example, children of primary and secondary schools in my village are taught
about how their ancestors defended their land against outside intruders and
reclaimed sovereignty. Therefore, those young children would take pride in
their origin and treasure the life they know as it is today. Additionally, I think
it is not only students’ privilege but also their responsibility to know about
their own history to understand their hometown’s traditional values and
identity.
From another
angle, learning about world history shares equal importance just as local one.
Acquiring knowledge about the world’s past events equips students with a more
well-rounded perspective of life. Lessons about the World War or Feminism
protest against women’s abuse and discrimination would help those learners
enhance their understanding about various aspects of the world. Furthermore, I
think that being taught about the other countries’ historical backgrounds would
benefit young learners in their future career. Students who accumulate
knowledge of this particular field at an early age would possess a golden
selling point to work for foreign enterprises, especially those who highly
value company culture like Japan.
In conclusion, I
believe the significance of domestic and international history cannot be
brought into comparison to see which one is more necessary because they have
distinctively equal meanings to children.
Follow Us