Forum: Raising the Standard for National History

‘World history rules, OK?' Before long, if, indeed it is not already there, we shall surely see this slogan chalked on the walls of examination boards and school history departments up and down the country. The ousting of British history from the syllabus proceeds apace, seemingly generally welcomed as a move which will banish insularity and boredom from the history class and promote a new sense of relevance and international understanding.

But is it, in fact, OK? After a term attempting to teach the Cambridge Local Board's World Affairs 1919-1974 O-Level course to fourth and fifth year classes, I am beginning to wonder whether we would not be much better to go back, if not necessarily to the Tudors and Stuarts, then at least to a manageable chunk of modern British history.

My doubts about world history are not founded on the old maxim that it is better for children to have a decent understanding of their own country's background and culture before they go on to look at the history of foreign parts. They are more fundamental, and, I hope, less chauvinistic than that.