+1

It is argued that local history is a more necessary source for students to study than world history. However, I completely disagree with the idea because I believe that schools should teach both national and world history.

On the one hand, there is a wide range of reasons why local history plays a crucial role in teaching schoolchildren. Firstly, it helps students to realize their originals and then treasuring what they are having. It is not simple to have a peaceful world nowadays because everything came at a price by suffering from blood, sweat, and tears. For example, in Vietnam’s history, there was a large number of soldiers and heroines, for example, Phan Dinh Giot or Vo Thi Sau, who were willing to sacrifice in order not to reveal national secrets. Therefore, by studying how earlier generations fought and made sacrifices for the freedom of the nation, children would appreciate more the value of their life and the freedom that they have today. Secondly, schoolchildren would have a chance to access traditional values and see how it has changed. Knowing deeply about these traditions, they are responsible for carrying on the best customs for generations to come.

On the one hand, world history should not be underestimated because of various reasons. Firstly, world history provides schoolchildren an overview of relationships between countries in the world, especially in the wartime. They may have more knowledge about how international historical events, such as the end of colonialism, have established a contemporary society. Secondly, it is a good chance for students to understand about other cultures and the setbacks that people from other countries had to suffer from the war. Therefore, the solidarity of human being would be enhanced, which contribute to a peaceful world.

In conclusion, I would argue that it is equally important for schoolboys and schoolgirls to study local history as well as world history.

+0

What are the essay instructions?

It is argued that local history is a more necessary source (wrong word) for students to study than world history. However, I completely disagree with the idea because I believe that schools should teach both national and world history.

On the one hand, there is a wide range of reasons why local history plays a crucial role in teaching a school curriculum. schoolchildren. Firstly, First, it helps students to realize their originals (wrong word) and then treasuring what they are having. (wrong form) It is not simple to have a peaceful world nowadays because everything came at a price by suffering from blood, sweat, and tears. For example, in Vietnam’s history, there was a large number of soldiers and heroines, for example, Phan Dinh Giot or Vo Thi Sau, who were willing to sacrifice in order not to reveal national secrets. Therefore, by studying how earlier generations fought and made sacrifices for the freedom of the nation, children would appreciate more the value of their life and the freedom that they have today. Secondly, Second, schoolchildren would have a chance to access (wrong word) traditional values and see how it (wrong word) has changed. Knowing deeply about these traditions, they are responsible for carrying on the best customs for generations to come.

On the one (wrong word) hand, world history should not be underestimated because of various reasons. First, Firstly, world history provides schoolchildren an overview of relationships between countries in the world, especially in the wartime. They may have more knowledge about how international historical events, such as the end of colonialism, have established a contemporary society. Secondly, Second, it is a good chance for students to understand about other cultures and the setbacks that people from other countries had to suffer from the war. Therefore, the solidarity of human being (wrong word) would be enhanced, (wrong word) which contribute (wrong form) to a peaceful world.

In conclusion, I would argue that it is equally important for schoolboys and schoolgirls to study both local history and as well as world history.

Comments  

Welcome to the forum.

Please note that we have different sections for different types of questions. So you should not post your essays in the sentence structure forum.

Thread Moved!

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.

It is [sometimes] argued that local history is a more necessary source [subject] for students to study than world history. However, I completely disagree with the idea because I believe that schools should teach both national and world history.

On the one hand, there is a wide range of reasons why local history plays a crucial role in teaching schoolchildren. Firstly, it helps students to realize their originals [origins/background] and then treasuring what they are having. [Why not present simple?] It is not simple to have a peaceful world nowadays because everything came at a price by [along with?] suffering from [involving?] blood, sweat, and tears. For example, in Vietnam’s history, there was a large number of soldiers and heroines, for example, Phan Dinh Giot or Vo Thi Sau, who were willing to sacrifice in order not to reveal national secrets. Therefore, by studying how earlier generations fought and made sacrifices for the freedom of the nation, children would [should] appreciate more the value of their life and the freedom that they have today. Secondly, schoolchildren would have a chance to access traditional values and see how it has changed. Knowing deeply [exactly? in depth?] about these traditions, they are responsible for carrying [passing?] on the best customs [traditions?] for generations to come.

On the one [other?] hand, world history should not be underestimated because of [for?] various reasons. Firstly, world history provides schoolchildren an overview of relationships between countries in the world, especially in the [No article required if generalizing ] wartime. They may have more knowledge about how international historical events, such as the end of colonialism, have established a [No article required if generalizing ] contemporary society. Secondly, it is a good chance for students to understand about other cultures and the setbacks that people from other countries had to suffer from the [the war in Vietnam? Which one? or no article if war in general.] war. Therefore, the solidarity of human being [Not sure what 'solidarity of human being' would mean. Harmony between nations?] would be enhanced, which [would] contribute to a peaceful world.

In conclusion, I would argue that it is equally important for schoolboys and schoolgirls to study local history as well as world history.

In my experience, war casts a very long shadow, but there is no guarantee that history can provide solutions for today's problems.

 AlpheccaStars's reply was promoted to an answer.