It is more important for schoolchildren to learn about local history than world history. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1:

The history curriculum has always been one of the key subjects during school years. Some people suppose that acquiring knowledge from world history is a significant process for school children, while from my perspective, setting the course of local history should be attached more importance to.

Admittedly, there are good grounds to argue that it is the process of learning international history that drives school children to broaden their horizons. Considering that world history courses function as a platform for students to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the difference between cultures and civilizations, school children may gradually comprehend how to embrace the distinction in the background of globalization. Therefore, in the long run, the conflicts, caused by prejudice and misunderstanding, can be significantly mitigated provided that citizens have generally been cultivated with multi-perspectives from an early age.

However, the sense of identity that national history classes prepare the young generation with should not be ignored. For one thing, the knowledge from local history can be easily understood and digested by school children since what the course covers lead students to trace their own origins, which means they can learn to appreciate local characteristics combined with the specific environment they live in. For another, setting national history courses is also significant for cultural heritage. The contents, whether it be the documents of public events or the records of historical figures, guide students to recognize their roots, therefore helping them raise the awareness of maintaining the uniqueness of local culture. Under the circumstance of globalization, when cultural assimilation is likely to take place, this kind of consciousness instilled in young individuals makes them take initiative to inherit national features, contributing to the distinct advance of countries.

In conclusion, attaining local cultural literacy should be given top priority to for school children compared with learning world history in contemporary society.

Sample 2:

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.

Sample 3:

History is a subject that is present in most school systems and is compulsory at many levels of education. Regarding this matter, debate has been heated about the importance of teaching of local history, instead of world history to schoolchildren. In my point of view, the focus of this subject should be placed on the local history rather than the history of the world.

Firstly, local history provides a foundation for the youth to explore their own identity and that of their nation. For example, Vietnamese school children should be educated about the Great Hunger occurred in 1945 during the war with the Japanese in order to fully appreciate the plight that their forefathers had experienced and therefore value the life of peace, freedom and independence today. I feel it is essential that the youth, the leaders of tomorrow, are given the broadest, most accurate platform on which they can construct their own perceptions of life.

Opponents of this view claim that the world history should not be removed from the school programs as it is related to local history and students will have a better understanding of the subject. I am convinced that this view is flawed. In fact, much history teaching is concerned simply with memorising “facts” in the world that have little to do with their own countries and therefore students will feel overburdened if they are obligated to learn it. This, in the long run, would not benefit children.

All things considered, for school children, the relevance of receiving knowledge about local history dwarfs that of learning world history.

Sample 4:

It is argued that children in the age of schooling should place more emphasis on learning the history of the place where they live than the global history. While I agree that finding the local history will help them gain more knowledge of their origin, I believe that there are some benefits of accessing the world history.

On the one hand, it is true that teaching children understanding of the local history helps them promote a sense of patriotism. In fact, the whole Vietnamese had suffered numerous strauma during the war against Western enemies, just because thousands of Vietnam heroes sacrificed their live to protect the independence and freedom. Therefore, they have to a duty to increase the nationalism in the preservation of the peace that they are enjoying. Furthermore, nowadays more young people are reluctant to studying history compared to epochal significance. This means that the value of historical events will be put aside to some extent and gradually sink into oblivion, hence it is vital that children should learn the past of ancestors and predecessors.

On the other hand, studying history in the world brings numerous benefits to young learners. Firstly, obtaining knowledge from the world enhances our horizons of the civilization and developments of humans. During the globalization, more children are likely to access international education, so they face misunderstanding and backwardness when moving to a new country if they fail to recognize the importance of human history. In addition, attaining cultural literacy on a world scale is another advantage. Human beings, unlike other species, have the gift of language, that is, symbolic thinking and communication, so communicating intelligently in any language, requires that we share a common fund of knowledge, information, vocabulary, and conceptual tools to become global citizens.

In conclusion, I hold my firm belief that by learning history at a local and international level in educational system, future generations will get deeper insights into the past human dignity.

Sample 5:

The debate on whether local history or world history is more crucial for school children's learning is ongoing. I stand in opposition to the view that local history holds more significance than global history, believing that both are of equal importance.

Local history undoubtedly has its place in education. It connects young learners to their nation's past, instilling a sense of pride and respect for the sacrifices made by previous generations. Take Vietnam, for instance, where the youth learn about the nation's fight for freedom through numerous wars. This knowledge not only enriches their understanding but also motivates them to live up to their ancestors' legacy.

However, diminishing the role of world history in the curriculum would be a mistake. In an era marked by globalization, it's imperative for students to gain a comprehensive understanding of different cultures and histories worldwide. Such knowledge fosters a global perspective and mutual respect among diverse nations. Moreover, studying global historical events like the abolition of slavery and decolonization offers insights into international relations and historical progress.

In sum, both local and world histories are invaluable to the educational journey, each contributing uniquely to students' learning and development.

Sample 6:

Many people have valued the role of local history to schoolchildren 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.

Sample 7:

It is contended that learning about local history holds greater significance than understanding global history for students. I partially agree with this view as I believe both local and global history education bear unique values and should complement each other in the learning journey.

On one hand, knowledge of local history allows students to gain a profound understanding of their roots and cultural identity. This is of vital importance in preserving traditions and values that define the uniqueness of their community. Furthermore, it encourages respect and pride for the heritage, which in turn instills a sense of belonging and responsibility towards the local environment and society.

On the other hand, global history education is pivotal in promoting empathy and broadening the students' perspective. It offers a broader view of diverse cultures, thereby fostering tolerance and understanding among different nations. However, it should not replace local history education but rather supplement it, creating a balanced understanding of the past, both near and far.

In conclusion, while the importance of teaching local history should not be understated, integrating it with global history lessons would indeed equip students with a more holistic perspective of the past, enriching their academic and personal development.

Sample 8:

While some history lessons in schools focus on the history of the children’s country, others take a more global approach and teach the history of other countries as well. I believe it is important to learn about the past of one’s own country but also the history of the world.

On the one hand, there are benefits to learning the history of one’s own country. It can foster a sense of pride and patriotism for children in the place they have come from by teaching them about the many achievements of their nation over history, such as wars they have won or freedoms gained. It is also important for children to understand where the customs and values of their country have emanated from in order for them to feel that they too would like to continue these into the future. Both of these will mean the children will grow up feeling a sense of belonging to where they have come from. 

On the other hand, it is important to learn about the rest of the world too. Every country has a different history and culture and if children are not taught about this, they will lack the analytical abilities to really understand their own nation and how it compares to other places. Countries are also intertwined in their histories. There have been two World Wars and so it is impossible to fully appreciate these without learning about world history.

All in all, it is paramount that children understand history at both the national and international level. Learning only about one’s own country would result in a very narrow-minded view of the world. 

Sample 9:

It is often argued whether schoolchildren should prioritize learning about local history or world history. While some may advocate for the significance of studying world history, I firmly agree that learning about one's local history holds greater importance and should be an essential component of the school curriculum. This essay will discuss how studying local history fosters a sense of patriotism and preserves valuable community values. Furthermore, it will argue against the inclusion of extensive world history in the curriculum, as it may confuse and overwhelm students.

Firstly, studying local history allows schoolchildren to develop a strong sense of patriotism. By understanding the struggles and triumphs of their ancestors in defending their lands from external threats, children can cultivate a deep pride in their roots. For instance, when they learn about the valor and bravery displayed by their great-grandparents in safeguarding their community's peace and prosperity, it instills a sense of belonging and identity. Consequently, this nurtures a genuine attachment to their local history and encourages them to contribute positively to their communities.

Additionally, local history encompasses a plethora of invaluable values and virtues, such as loyalty, bravery, and honesty, which need to be preserved and passed on to the next generation. These essential character traits form the ethical backbone of communities and promote harmonious relationships among individuals. Since children might not respond well to advice, the most effective way to inculcate these values in them is through the teaching of local history. By highlighting the exemplary conduct of past community members and their adherence to these virtuous ideals, children are not only inspired but also motivated to uphold these principles in their own lives.

Some argue that studying world history expands children's horizons and prepares them for the future. However, I believe that bombarding children with a multitude of historical events from around the world may overwhelm and confuse them. The sheer volume and complexity of global history can be daunting for young learners. By restricting their historical knowledge to local events, children are offered a more manageable framework from which they can comprehend and appreciate history.

In conclusion, while there are those who advocate for the inclusion of world history in school curricula, I strongly believe that the advantages of learning local history far outweigh those of studying the history of the world. By instilling a sense of patriotism and preserving valuable community values, local history not only enriches children's understanding of their past but also shapes their present and future identities.

Sample 10:

Exploring the history of their hometown undoubtedly forms an integral part of the school curriculum during early education. I firmly believe that gaining a comprehensive understanding of past events in one's locality fosters a sense of patriotism. For instance, primary and secondary school children in my village are educated about how their ancestors defended their land against external threats and reclaimed sovereignty. Consequently, these young individuals develop a sense of pride in their heritage and cherish their current way of life. Additionally, I opine that it is not merely a privilege but also a responsibility for students to familiarize themselves with their own history in order to comprehend their hometown's traditional values and identity.

From a different perspective, learning about world history holds equal importance to local history. Acquiring knowledge about past global events provides students with a more comprehensive view of life. Lessons on events such as World War or the Feminist movement against women's abuse and discrimination contribute to students' understanding of various aspects of the world. Furthermore, I believe that learning about the historical backgrounds of other countries would benefit young learners in their future careers. Early exposure to this field of knowledge could give students a competitive edge, particularly in pursuing opportunities with foreign enterprises, especially those that place a high value on company culture like Japan.

In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the importance of domestic and international history cannot be compared to determine which is more essential because they hold distinctively equal significance for children.

Sample 11:

It is believed by some that studying local history is more advantageous for children than studying world history. While the knowledge of local history is important, the study of world history is as important.

On the one hand, there are profound advantages of teaching local history to the students. To begin with, this information is relevant to the students' own surroundings. It touches children with their roots. The study of local history helps them become better voters and more effective members of any type of society. Secondly, local history fills the young minds with a sense of patriotism. For instance, it is through history alone that an Indian child comes to know of the various deeds performed by such patriots as Guru Gobind Singh, Rani Lakshmibai, Bhagat Singh, Gandhiji, etc. By reading their great lives and deeds, the child can easily be inspired to emulate them. A proper teaching of history can prepare the way for sober nationalism.

On the other hand, the study of world history cannot be undermined in today's era of globalization. All major civilizations of the world have common roots, which point to the basic unity of mankind. The cultures of different countries have contributed in one way or the other to the total heritage of mankind. One of the important aims of history is to point to this basic unity. History is one subject that can promote international understanding in the best possible way. It can destroy prejudices existing among nations, and it can also help develop unity among nations. Global history people understand how other cultures affect their own. It also encourages them to develop a greater appreciation for multicultural influences within their own communities as well.

To sum up, it can be reiterated that the study of history is important in toto, but local history must be taught before teaching the history of the world.

Sample 12:

It is argued that children at school should be taught about the history of their hometown rather than the global history. I firmly disagree with this view for the following justifications.

The main reason why it is better for schoolboys and schoolgirls to be informed of the world history is that it helps them to understand how the society which have changed in the past. It is true that many countries in Africa was dominated by the invasion of Westerners. Nevertheless, after the free social Africa, they are now developing in a quick manner. Therefore, by studying what happened around the world, students can analyze the wrong and right things. On the contrary, placing more priority on teaching young learners local history would end up making them bored with historical subject. Because if their hometown, having fewer historical events to emphasize the evolution of society, students can not understand all the social value.

In addition, only by learning the history of the world can the young become a global citizen. Unarguably, when they are global citizens, they can travel to their favorite place, they can also work overseas and experience other cultures. By contrast, it is proved challenging to students who do not know about world history, because they find it very difficult to make friends with foreigners or understand their behavior. Consequently, schoolchildren can only live around their hometown, thereby not developing comprehensively.

By way of conclusion, I totally believe that better emphasis should be placed on the importance of a student’s global history than development in local history, which both strengthens national identity and offers a comfortable and effective time learning that monotonous subject.