I was chatting away in another community entirely, using various historical parallels to describe things, and was informed by a couple of American posters that I was overestimating the historical knowledge of the average American by a considerable degree. Their description of "what Americans learn" seems to imply that by the end of senior school,
(
Read more... )
Comments 117
It is true that most of the history Americans learn is their own and that even that is spotty. American high schools mandate some world history, when I was a student it was two years, but some of my students have told me they received only one.
I should point out that I teach at a highly-selective state school (that's public school to you) and I have had students not know who Archduke Ferdinand was, I've had students tell me that Shakespeare imported the first novel to America, I've heard that Russia was an ally of Nazi Germany...
Not all Americans are ignorant of history, but those that are well versed in it seem to get their education after they leave school, not while they're there.
Reply
Are you serious? I knew US school history lessons focused mostly on recent American history (I can tell that just from watching American movies & TV) but I didn't realise it was as bad as getting only 1-2 years on world history. I did masses of both British and international history at school (even before I chose to do it for GCSE and A Level).
I'm still laughing a little at the "Shakespeare imported the first novel" idea. ;)
Reply
As far as the years of education, I can't speak to what's going on at the primary level, but I can tell you that many of my students barely remember the things they should have learned in high school, so I don't hold out much hope for them remembering things from further back.
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
However, the district I went to for the second half of high school barely did history at all. We were required to take US history, world history (which was really western European history from the French Revolution through the end of WWII), and US government, but since it wasn't considered a "real" subject like math, science, and English no one actually learned anything.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
In the UK, emphasis in compulsory history lessons (ie those before the age of 14) is often on much older periods. We generally do the world wars and the Holocaust, and possibly the Victorians or something like that, but mostly compulsory history focuses on the medieval period, the Tudors & Stuarts, the English civil war, the Romans, and perhaps in primary school the ancient Egyptians or Greeks.
Non-compulsory history lessons, btw, vary far more since schools have more choice in what they teach. I, for instance, did a lot of French and Russian history which isn't necessarily true of most Brits.
Reply
Reply
I've noticed that quite a few people commenting here have mentioned classes to do with law, government, politics, etc, and I'm curious as to why they're counted as relevant. Do they contain a lot of history?
Reply
Reply
That's... bizarre.
Reply
Reply
(In my English school, history was required up to the age of about 14 at which point it became optional - most people had to choose between history or geography.)
Reply
Reply
Normally Scottish schools offer Standard Grades (roughly equivalent to GCSEs), where students take 7-9 separate subjects; English, maths and science are usually required, then students choose the others. Later they can take 4-5 Highers (which I think are like AS-levels). There's something else too, but I can't remember what it is.
Reply
Leave a comment