A controversy has erupted in the United Kingdom over new History curriculum proposals. Conservative politicians are pushing for new national curriculum that would emphasize certain aspects of British history.
Many historians have criticized the new proposals as politically motivated attempts to instill a particular version of Anglocentric history.
Conservative popular historian Niall Ferguson has written in defense of the proposed new curriculum in the Guardian.
The Guardian also publishes historians’ comments on the controversy.
The controversy seems to center around the teaching of certain events in medieval and early modern English history that have often been viewed through a Whig interpretation of history.
Thanks to my colleague Sean Farrell, Associate Professor of History at Northern Illinois University, for sharing this piece.
It has been an interesting debate with both the Royal Historical Society and the Historical Association weighing in on the debate. There are clearly issues with choice of subject as it lack balance but all the comments I have seen on this miss the essential truth, which is that teaching history at this level lacks rigour and effective skills development. This is where the government should be focusing its efforts but has chosen instead to create a politically motivated curriculum.
Reblogged this on Dennis R. Hidalgo and commented:
I wonder what my British colleagues think about this.