It is more important for school children to learn about their local history than the world history.

To
what extent do you agree or disagree.

History has always been recognised as one of the most essential subjects in the curricula of
students. However, regarding the focus of teaching history at school, some people are of the opinion
that local past events are more necessary for learners than the overall chronology of the world. In
my opinion, the idea is deeply flawed, and I strongly believe that reviewing the developments of the
world can never be outstripped by studying one country alone.

Compared to ancient time, the world has seen increasing globalisation in recent years, which
highlights on the need for everybody to be aware of not only the stories of their hometown, but also
other parts of the planet. As students have easier access to social media and the Internet is no
longer a luxury, they are exposed to a colossal amount of knowledge, many of which is exotic.
Therefore, neglecting the world history to emphasize more on local history is likely to discourage
students from getting to know more about what they read, or create difficulties comprehending
such kind of content. But (however,) if young people are conscious of what constituted the world,
they would be more inclined to broaden their horizon and also find it more convenient to follow up
on the history lessons taught at school. For example, students who have sessions on the history of
the US or the UK can more quickly understand the cultural traits of such countries, and even casual
jokes of Americans and British. From that, they can better socialize with foreigners, and exchange
new ideas.

Another reason why teaching local or national history should not be favoured over teaching
international history is that excessive or abusive use of the former could turn children into zealots
with their so-called patriotism. No matter how hard the international community is trying to
harmonize differences between nations, conflicts still persist, and many of which are related to
historical claims and disputed territories. This can be evidenced by the extremism of youngsters
enrolled in public schools in Vietnam and China. Both of these groups insist on their respective
country’s sovereignty over Spratly and Paracels Archipelago in the South China Sea. Even though the
name South China Sea is international accepted, many Vietnamese students would say it must be
named the East Sea, because such belief was engraved in their minds throughout their school years.
Teaching too much national history on the perspective of that country alone to small children,
without adequate international history based on various viewpoints, is guaranteed to create
prejudiced adults someday.

In conclusion, goverments in general and educators in particular should place emphasis on

teaching the history of the world of children. If this is not ensured, certain consequences would
definitely arise.