I am with you, Sophie!

I live in Australia, so naturally there isn't as much English history being taught. That being said though, what they do teach over here would be lucky to be considered the bare minimum. Virtually everything that I know about history (be it Tudor history, Roman history, Russian history, Australian history etc) has been self-taught. I can say with complete confidence that I came out of high school having learned virtually nothing about the billions of people that have come before me that I hadn't taught myself.

I think history is extremely undervalued. I am a strong believer in the sayings “To know your future you must know your past” and “Those who cannot remember the past are condemmed to repeat it”. When I have children, I am going to make sure that they know far more about history than I was ever taught in school!

And just so you all know, I finished high school in 2003 (just for a little perspective!)

I'm a student of the early 90s Australian eductation system and during the time of compulsory History (Years 7-8) I learnt a lot about ancient history and the middle ages. Stuff that was fascinating to me. The 7 Ancient Wonders, Babylonia, THe Tudors and The Stuarts. Fascinating stuff. I was then forced to choose either Geography or History and naturally chose History. Big mistake as it was all the boring stuff about WWI and WWII. Or Modern History as it was liked to be known us. It bored me as taht's not why I chose History. Naturally I did not choose History for my Senior years. Well that and Ancient History clashed with Chemistry, which was more important for my university degree.

I am now a Science teacher and I must admit that I am appalled with what students of today are taught. They have very little idea of anything pre-1901 on a world scale. A lot of focus is on Australia pre-1788, which is fine as I think it is important to know about that aspect of our past, but it seems too much focus has been placed on it through Political Correctness and many other topics are required to be ignored to cover it. As you move up through the years a lot of emphaiss is then placed on the 2 World Wars but from Australia's perspective, so the kids are drilled with ANZAC stories but are often totally clueless about what was happening in Europe and the Nazis.

By the time they get towards the end of junior school the kids are over Australian history, hate it with a passion but are yet still clueless about world history pre-WWI. The Ancient History course for Seniors is still very interesting in my eyes, while I wouldn't want to sit Modern History if you paid me. The problem here is that The Middle Ages are totally ignored. So you end up with Australian kids who grow up having no real understanding of the history of a country that settled (or invaded) Australia. No real idea about this monarchy that is our Head Of State. Gosh, I wouldn't even be surprised if Anglican children of Australia today have no idea how their church came into existence.

I actually have a story from the other week, where I spent some time in one of my senior Science classes, giving a quick run down of Henry VIII and his wives cause the kids had no idea who Anne Boleyn was and I was flabbergasted. It seems Australian History classes are too focussed on political events to focus on stuff that actually interest children. I actually fear that our History syllabus is moving away from knowing about the world, to being too Australian focussed and I fear our children will become like American children, too self absorbed in their own country to actually acknowledge there is a fascinating world outside our shores. Something that our news services have slowly become – too one country approached as opposed to presenting stuff around the world including stuff that doesn't involve a single Australian.

It's kinda heartening to know that it is not just Australia losing its touch with history though. So we aren't losing the plot alone.

Sophie1536 said:

Why don't they teach kids in school history like I was taught?

I'm seriously worried as my daughter is 11 and going to secondary school in September and she has NO knowledge at all about English history and it's quite worrying. The other day she asked about this forum I love going on “Who's Anne Boleyn”? I laughed and said c'mon you must have learnt about Henry the eighth? Wrong no idea! Then I got onto the Battle of Hastings still no idea! so then I mentioned the Magna Carta….that was a complete mystery to my daughter! I am seriously worried as Louisa has no idea about ANY history or any important dates…..just what are they teaching in schools in the UK????
I asked Louisa further questions about the Civil War, Queen Victoria, Elizabeth the first…..she has no clue as to any of these and no idea about important dates. Iam SHOCKED! Looks like I'm gonna be busy this summer teaching my daughter history lessons
What's your opinion of this guys? I'm interested!

My little brother is 12, he's in his first year in secondary school andthe curriculum is terrible. I went to the same school and we learnt a fair bit about the battle of Hastings and were allowed to do a reenactment day which everyone loved, the school had been doing the reenactment for year 7's for at least 10 years, probably more. Then when my brother started they stopped doing it as it was not part of the new school curriculum

I think they did about 2 lessons on it, if that, and basically all they learnt was 'the battle happened in 1066'

Also I get really annoyed about the way they teach the Tudor era…when he was still in primary school he came home and said 'Anne Boleyn had her head chopped off because she was a bad tempered, moody wife' when I tried to expalin he said 'but that's what the teacher told us' !!!!!

I graduated high school in 1999, and I recall a pretty decent basis in history.  I remember learning about Native Americans in elementary school and all the explorers that came to the Americas, as well as some of the “bigger” central and South American civilizations (the Aztecs, Incans, and Mayans).  In middle school we covered a lot of Tennessee history, and in 8th grade we did a lot of early American history (Plymouth Rock, the American Revolution, the Louisiana Purchase and all the other various purchases, the French and Indian War, the Lewis and Clark Expedition, the American move west and Manifest Destiny and the Civil War).  In high school US History was a graduation requirement, although my school also offered Bible History, Ancient History, World History, and European History.  I took Bible History, but I could never make the other classes fit into my schedule.  US History, if I recall, seemed to cover more recent history–the Civil War through World Wars I and II primarily, the Depression, FDR's New Deal, Korea, Vietnam, the Industrial Revolution, and the 1920's (I totally realize that these are in no way in any kind of the right order).  

Now, that's just me.  I remember learning all these things and not because I had any kind of huge interest in history.  But I was a good student in school, and even now I will surprise myself by spitting out some random thing or another that I learned when I was 11.  I probably couldn't put a specific date with many of those things listed above, but I could put them in chronological order if I had to.  And some of these things weren't even covered in any kind of great depth.  I also know a great many of my classmates who were exposed to the exact same material as I was that probably wouldn't remember half of that.  Some people, unfortunately, just don't see the relevance in history, and think it's just a bunch of dates and inconsequential events.  I think students would get a lot more out of history if we would include it into every other subject instead of trying to teach it as a stand-alone class.  And I think some of my students (especially my female students) get turned off by all the wars which get a lot of attention in traditional history classses, when the stuff that really interests students (and people in general) about history are the quirkier, dirtier parts of it.  Once students realize that these people weren't these stodgy old stuffy fuddy-duds that their portraits portrays them as, then they become more interested in them and you can really dig into the heart of history.

Sophie1536 said:

 

What saddens me most of all is that people through the centuries have died been martyred, murdered or given their lives for their beliefs and shaped the worlds history OUR history today and for what ever reason it's being completely overlooked at schools.
History IS IMPORTANT because it links OUR lives to people of yesterday.

Sophie, this statement is so true. The past is OUR past, and we need to learn, understand, and come to terms with what our ancestors and predecessors did or did not do. For instance, in Canada, there has been years of controversy about the treatment of Aboriginal peoples through the centuries. The sheer recongniztion of these wrongs (and an acceptance of historical wrongs) cannot be done if people are not aware of the cruelty of, say, colonialism.
I use this as an example as a way of the need to understand history. Some books used in my school life glossed over the abuse of many minority groups in Canada, and tried to make it seem everyone got along. Yet, that's not the case. There is a long way to go before Aboriginal peoples are equals in this coutry, but if their history is not taught, then how will the next generation continue to improve relations and avoid the pitfalls of the past?

As an amateur geneologist, my familiy roots are a connection to the past. I've always wanted to know where my familiy came from, and how they could tell me something about myself. After reading documents about familiy members long dead, I felt a connection to them, and a sense of my own history. I believe the same is true for learning about world events.

I hope I'm not too maudlin here. I really wanted to say, in a long about way, I understand the concerns about children lacking history lessons, and what a detriment it will be to our society.

The above link is now the correct one, apologies for anybody that tried the previous one as it linked into an unrelated Daily Mail story.

Also, apologies to anyone from the USA that the above link centres on their history student answers, I know things are this bad here too.

Yes Sharon, it's a case of “if you don't laugh you will cry”.

The teaching of history in this country has been in decline for many years, it is now considered an “uncool” subject, we also tend to suffer from a British Empire backlash, where it is thought non PC to teach the period of Empire to the modern generation.

Now I know many aspects of the Empire were wrong, but many aspects of all countries history are bad and we should be taught ALL of our history, the good and the bad. The good so that we can have a pride in our past and to know what standards we should try to attain, the bad in order to avoid the pitfalls of the past and by knowing, avoid them.

For the nation that has no history tomorrow is yesterday and without knowledge of it's past it will forever remain so.

http://www.snopes.com/humor/li…..tudent.asp

Here's the longer version.