What History was taught in your schools?

What history subjects were compulsory in your schools (before Uni)?

  • I grew up in Europe and was taught abt ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc.
  • I grew up in Europe and was taught abt WWI and WWII.
  • I grew up in Europe and was taught abt US Revolutionary & Civil War.
  • I grew up in Europe and was taught abt Korea/Vietnam wars.
  • I grew up in Europe and was taught abt Asian history.
  • I grew up in Europe and was taught little history in school.
  • I grew up in US and was taught abt ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc.
  • I grew up in US and was taught abt WWI and WWII.
  • I grew up in US and was taught abt US Revolutionary & Civil War.
  • I grew up in US and was taught abt Korea/Vietnam wars.
  • I grew up in US and was taught abt Asian history.
  • I grew up in US and was taught little history in school.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught abt ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught abt WWI and WWII.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught abt US Revolutionary & Civil War.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught abt Korea/Vietnam wars.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught abt Asian history.
  • I grew up in Asia and was taught little history in school.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught abt ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught abt WWI and WWII.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught abt US Revolutionary & Civil War.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught abt Korea/Vietnam wars.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught abt Asian history.
  • I grew up elsewhere and was taught little history in school.

0 voters

I recently recognized that in my US education I was taught about the Civil War and Revolutionary War, and trivia such as the French and Indian War, but I don’t recall being taught about WWI and WWII in school. Shocking omission. I wonder if others also feel their schools failed to teach basic history. My poll’s not perfect, but it may show something. In any event, comments are always welcome.

In Australia, we covered ancient Egypt and Greece, Australian history, and WW1 as it applied to Australian soldiers only. The WW1 history didn’t look at causes. outcomes etc of the war, just the Anzac myth/legend.

I only did the compulsory history in grade 7/8 and elementary school stuff. I guess the elective history from grade 9 onwards covered a lot more.

Haha, now you’re doomed to repeat it! :smiley:
I went to a private school, and they taught us a heck of a lot more than the history you listed. :astonished:

I loved history, so I remember it very well.

In New Zealand the curriculum int eh late 80s was:

Social Studies up to Year 10 with various topics.

Year 11, first year of dedicated history class, there were four themes with two examples from each. Like one was ‘Conflict’ and we looked at Northern Ireland and Palestine. We also looked at War in E Asia (Malaya to Vietnam), apartheid in South Africa and other topics.

Year 12 was topics in European history. The origins of WW1, and the origins of WW2, the unification of Italy, and the unification of Germany. Also the rise of nationalism and its extreme forms.

Year 13 was two in-depth studies. One a broad NZ history with focus on the Treaty of Waitangi and the NZ Wars. The other was a history of Tudor/Stuart England from Elizabeth I, through the Civil War and Restoration to James II.

I find it shocking that anyone anywhere would not learn about the world wars.

MT,
I think the reason that you didn’t get World War and the sequel World War Two is because it was too recent when you were in school. More current events than history. :slight_smile:

[quote=“Bu Lai En”]I find it shocking that anyone anywhere would not learn about the world wars.[/quote] Me too. Note that MT never claimed WWI/II were never taught. Instead his claim is that he has no memory of such a teaching.

Ahem. I for one suspect that MT suffers from stoner memory. I wouldn’t be surprised, because I suspect that I too suffer from such a memory lapse (not about WWI or WWII, but about C. and the effect of a certain pineapple, er event that I have absolutely no memory of, no clear memory that is, despite vigorous assertions by C. during an alleged evening spent in a certain Mercury Cougar ca1974 that I in fact do mostly recall clearly.) (although it may have been a banana). :blush:

Likely MT is goin’ through a middle age thing and no longer remembers his yoot clearly. :cactus:

We were taught everything. The world wars in detail, the Industrial, French and Russian revolutions. Some European history, a bit of SE Asian history but not that much, and Indian history ofcourse. They did the Indian part very nicely at the time, in elementary school, they taught us about heroes from the past. I used to think they were fairy tales and only when I grew up, I realized these were real men and women, then they taught us about the Indus valley civilization, mughal period, colonization and of course the Indian freedom Struggle in great minutae and detail. Later, we also learnt about the UN, NATO and other world bodies. Pretty comprehensive IMO.

We were taught about Egypt and Greece and Romans and their civilizations but not a lot. Although at a school level, I think it was enough, besides I can see the curriculum makers wanting to teach kids about India - thoroughly.

I grew up in Australia. The first history we were taught was Aboriginal history (years 4-5), which was reasonably comprehensive for elementary school, and placed a heavy emphasis on the primacy of the Aboriginals, their culture, society, art and technology, as well as the immorality of the European displacement. This was combined with the history of early exploration and settlement (Janszoon, Hartog, de Torres, Van Diemen, Tasman, Cook, the First Fleet of 1787), and the little 18th century English history which was relevant. In years 6-7 we covered Egypt, Greece, and Rome, from 7-8 the Middle Ages, from 9-10 some 20th century history including (briefly), the two World Wars (including causes and outcomes), and studied the political framework of Australia and other nations (my personal study was on the Russian Revolution). That was it for compulsory history. In years 11-12 optional history units were available, and I studied Greek history from Solon to the Roman conquest, then the early Roman Republic, Henry V to the English Civil War and Restoration, the World Wars, and the Cold War.

When I was in the 4th grade we moved from New Mexico to Oklahoma. One of the first school things I did was go on a field trip to the museum, Gilcrease. The lady asked a question about a strange white man who came to Mexico on horseback as foretold in the local religions, and I was the only one who knew that it was Cortez. All my teachers thought it was so special and they were very proud of me, but it was just something you learned in New Mexico that wasn’t taught in Oklahoma.

UK here. From memory we seemed to learn a lot about British history through primary and early secondary education, lots on the Tudors I think and the Civil War, Wars of the Roses etc. I took O’ Level History (16 year olds exams) and we did the history of medicine (really interesting!), the industrial revolution, American Civil War (can’t remember a single fact!) and Chinese history, so Chiang Kai Shek, Mao Tse Tung, the Long March etc. This historical argument bit was Richard III and the Princes in the Tower

I think we covered some parts of the world wars but to be honest British culture is so steeped in memories of these wars I could be confusing what I know with what I was actually taught in school. Glaring omissions include later wars - most of what I know about the Korean War is derived from MASH - in particular the history of the conflict in Northern Ireland, which is conspicuously absent from British history books. I’m ashamed to say I know next to nothing about our historical relationship with Ireland. :blush:

Me too. And learnt so much about racism and sex and medicine. Thank God for cable television. :slight_smile:

In my elementary and high school in Canada we basically studied European history. We covered ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, and then European history (including British history) through the Dark Ages to the mid-20the century. This included other areas of the world when it was relevant to European history - thus we also studied American history from the colonization period onwards.
Then we also covered Canadian history in minute detail.

My history professor in first-year university told the class to just forget everything about history we had learned in school previously, because it was just a bunch of crap.

It’s a depressing combination of religion, bombs, and potatoes, in no particular order. That’s it. There may have been some woad.

I can’t submit my choices. I remember at least breifly touching all the subjects listed above except Asia. Growing up in Texas we also learned about early explorers like Cortez, De Vaca, etc. I’m now a Texas certified secondary social studies teacher. I love history.

It’s a depressing combination of religion, bombs, and potatoes, in no particular order. That’s it. There may have been some woad.[/quote]
I know that’s tongue in cheek, but still… its kind of offensive. Me no like.
We learned Rome, Egypt, Greece, Persia, Scandinavia, Prussia, Russia, Scotland, a bit of England. The two world wars, of course. Very little indeed about America. Nothing, in fact, as far as I remember. No Korea. No Vietnam (although one of my English teachers had just come back from two tours as a chopper pilot. He was seriously FUCKED UP!)
If I was as smart then as I am now, I’d have concentrated much harder on history.

I don’t think I was taught very much history outside the bare rudiments, and those were probably of American history; however, my recollection is probably not trustworthy. I was such a bad student, how would I know what they tried to teach me? I remember my eleventh-grade American history teacher keeping me after class at the end of one semester and telling me, “Charles, I’m giving you a D-minus for this semester. And I want you to know, you didn’t earn this D-minus; I’m giving it to you out of charity. Now get out of here.”

[quote=“Petrichor”]UK here. From memory we seemed to learn a lot about British history through primary and early secondary education, lots on the Tudors I think and the Civil War, Wars of the Roses etc. I took O’ Level History (16 year olds exams) and we did the history of medicine (really interesting!), the industrial revolution, American Civil War (can’t remember a single fact!) and Chinese history, so Chiang Kai Shek, Mao Tse Tung, the Long March etc. This historical argument bit was Richard III and the Princes in the Tower

I think we covered some parts of the world wars but to be honest British culture is so steeped in memories of these wars I could be confusing what I know with what I was actually taught in school. Glaring omissions include later wars - most of what I know about the Korean War is derived from MASH - in particular the history of the conflict in Northern Ireland, which is conspicuously absent from British history books. I’m ashamed to say I know next to nothing about our historical relationship with Ireland. :blush:[/quote]

Yup, also, as a northerner, I remember doing lots of local history. My skool was big on field trips, so I remember going to Holy Island, Lindisfarne, for the Saxon stuff, Hadrian’s Wall for Roman Britland, Conwy Castle for Norman invasion, and of course mills and whatnot for the industrial revolution and the Corn Laws and that sort of social stuff. Styal Mill. I remember having to do this stupid hippie homework where you had to write a first person account of being a mill apprentice.

Vikings. Tudors, which was always the best bit. Anne Boleyn, the reformation, Cromwell, Holbein, Bloody Mary, the Faerie Queen, and so on.

Yes, lots about wars. WW1 trenches, Sarajevo, WW2, Hitler, what caused it, Europe, read Anne Frank’s diary and the first world war poets, in Engerlish, also.

The medicine thing was cool! China less so. I remember our boring-o teechur showing us a video about a pauvre Chinese women being forced to have an 8 month abortion. All about Mao Ze Dong’s nonsense. I remember coming away with the impression that Chinese people must be feckin’ idiots and I had zero interest in those crazy nutjobs. Might have been nicer to have some overview of positive aspects of Chinese culture.

Huge gaps would be Scotland, aart from its involvement with England, the time between the Norman invasion and Henry VIII, and the time between the Queens Elizabeth and Victoria, oddly. Whenever really bothered with Cromwell and the republic, which seems strange.

I liked history because you got academic credit for remembering shit someone told you last week. No effort involved.

I liked history because it was just like story time.

So I majored in it at uni.

Uni courses included:

Modern Europe: 17th Century Britain, then Revolutionary France/Europe followed by 19th/early 20th Century Germany and Russia - that was 1st year - I skipped the NZ History because I’d done a lot at school.

The Northern Renaissance with a focus on art.

US History introduction

US History since WW2

Frontier History (visiting US prof)

Medieval Europe

Classical History was taught by the Classics Dept so I did some of that: Greek and Roman and Roman Social History

Those were just the courses I chose of course. Love the stuff.

My Asian history interest came later, through personal reading.

[quote=“Petrichor”]UK here. From memory we seemed to learn a lot about British history through primary and early secondary education, lots on the Tudors I think and the Civil War, Wars of the Roses etc. I took O’ Level History (16 year olds exams) and we did the history of medicine (really interesting!), the industrial revolution, American Civil War (can’t remember a single fact!) and Chinese history, so Chiang Kai Shek, Mao Tse Tung, the Long March etc. This historical argument bit was Richard III and the Princes in the Tower

I think we covered some parts of the world wars but to be honest British culture is so steeped in memories of these wars I could be confusing what I know with what I was actually taught in school. Glaring omissions include later wars - most of what I know about the Korean War is derived from MASH - in particular the history of the conflict in Northern Ireland, which is conspicuously absent from British history books. I’m ashamed to say I know next to nothing about our historical relationship with Ireland. :blush:[/quote]

That would make you normal then, since some of my British colleagues still seem to think Ireland is part of the UK. The English are always perplexed why the funny Irish don’t support their football team in the World Cup. Well even the Welsh and Scottish aren’t too keen on that.
We were taught Irish history from pre-historic to present day, including Viking, Normans, Anglo-Irish, penal times (look it up British!), famine period, Catholic emancipation, fair bit of British history, French and European history especially Louis IV, Voltaire etc, a lot about WWI and some about WWII (which Ireland did not directly participate in due to neutral stance and relatively recent independence, it was called ‘The Emergency’ ) next to nothing regarding Asia, Africa, Middle East or the Americas. WWI in Ireland was a hidden part of our history until recently as Ireland had the Easter rising during that time. The centre of Dublin was destroyed and did much to persuade people to agitate for full independence,. Most British don’t even know Ireland had a war of independence in 1921 (they also don’t know anything about penal law and little about Cromwell, who is infamous in Ireland), I think they assume they just gave us our country back peacefully (or the above, somehow still part of UK) , well you could talk to my grandmother about that one!

Huge dumb assumptions, there, as well as a fair dash of unattractive whiny-boy-ness.

I am also not remotely perplexed as to why Ireland don’t support the English team in the World Cup.