Nowadays, a number of people reckon that studying motherland history plays a much more significant role for undergraduate than world history lessons. From my point of view, the world-historical experience which is transferring through school’s lesson can teach contemporary youth better than if they learn the history by example only their own country.
On the one hand, people point out that historical knowledge of their country teaches adolescents to consider all previous mistakes and achievements. Country legacy, cultural norms, and traditions from the previous generation are able to give abundance numbers of remarkable practical lessons which could be applied within a country for its prosperous future. Furthermore, this heritage knowledge will help to avoid various civil conflicts or even wars. The proponents of this opinion think if each pupil knows his homeland history, he will care and protect it all his life.
On the other hand, world history includes an endless number of wise decisions from numerous generations and accordingly can incredibly extend horizons of understanding world problems from the current graduate. This world practice will help them not only find always the right solution but also avoid military conflicts. Apparently, our world has become so accessible due to the cutting-edge technology and it is simply unacceptable to allow our children to live with strict historical knowledge.
To conclude, despite the fact that some individuals insist on the priority of studying history only their own country at school, other people try to convince that world-historical experience hands to our kids much useful information for their further development. I definitely belong to followers of studying world history and believe that world-historical knowledge includes answers to all questions and it will help cope with all obstacles our children in the future.
Nowadays, a number of
people
reckon that studying motherland
history
plays a much more significant role for undergraduate than
world
history
lessons. From my point of view, the world-historical experience which is transferring through school’s lesson can teach contemporary youth better than if they learn the
history
by example
only
their
own
country.
On the one hand,
people
point out that historical knowledge of their
country
teaches adolescents to consider all previous mistakes and achievements.
Country
legacy, cultural norms, and traditions from the previous generation are able to give abundance numbers of remarkable practical lessons which could
be applied
within a
country
for its prosperous future.
Furthermore
, this heritage knowledge will
help
to avoid various civil conflicts or even wars. The proponents of this opinion
think
if each pupil knows his homeland
history
, he will care and protect it all his life.
On the other hand
,
world
history
includes an endless number of wise decisions from numerous generations and
accordingly
can
incredibly
extend horizons of understanding
world
problems from the
current
graduate. This
world
practice will
help
them not
only
find always the right solution
but
also
avoid military conflicts.
Apparently
, our
world
has become
so
accessible due to the cutting-edge technology and it is
simply
unacceptable to
allow
our children to
live
with strict historical knowledge.
To conclude
, despite the fact that
some
individuals insist on the priority of studying
history
only
their
own
country
at school, other
people
try to convince that world-historical experience hands to our kids much useful information for their
further
development. I definitely belong to followers of studying
world
history
and believe that world-historical knowledge includes answers to all questions and it will
help
cope with all obstacles our children in the future.