Many people assert that teaching local history to students is more essential than that of world history. From my perspective, I completely disagree with this notion because both of them equally play a vital role for youngsters.
On the other hand, the option to study the history of their hometown in students’ curriculum is crucial for several reasons. Chief among these is that schoolchildren who have a thorough insight into their country will enhance their patriotism. To exemplify, the youth in my Viet Nam studied how their ancestors defended the enemy and regained territory for the people when they were in primary school. Therefore, young people always take pride in their origin and commit actions to conserve traditional values and identity. Apparently, with a wide range of knowledge of local history, youngsters not only have more motivation to become productive citizens but also strengthen the appreciation they have for life as they know it today.
On the other hand, I believe that learning about world history is equally major as the local one. One rational reason is that students can have a more well-rounded perspective of life by obtaining knowledge about the world’s past events. Indeed, world history courses function as a platform for school children to delve into the difference between culture and civilizations, resulting in a reduction in some of the conflicts and prejudices that still exist. Moreover, the youth who have a multitude of country’s historical backgrounds will have more career opportunities. This is because several foreign firms currently require and evaluate people’s attitudes to their company culture such as the Japanese enterprises might assess their personnel via the culture of always being on time.
In summary, for the reasons I mentioned above, I maintain that domestic and international history have their merits, enhancing the understanding of young people. Therefore, children should extend their grapes of history instead of comparing its potential meanings.