David Cannadine on History Teaching

One of Michael Gove's advisers, the historian David Cannadine, has published a paper this week - "The Right Kind of History" - on how History should be taught in British Schools. In it, he suggests that the problem with current teaching is not the type of subjects taught, but the length of time they are given, and that History should be made compulsory up to the age of 16 to fit this all in. He points out that Britain and Albania are the only countries in Europe which do not make it compulsory beyond the age of 14. He explains his point of view further in this article from the Guardian and in this interview from the Today Programme.

Michael Gove has invited several historians, including Richard Evans, Simon Schama and Niall Ferguson to consider reforms to the curriculum. It remains to be seen what steps will actually be put in place. What do you think should be done?

UPDATE: Check out this fantastic audio slideshow where various ex-history students talk about how they were taught from the 1930s through to the 1960s - there are lots of photos of history classes and textbooks (complete with scribbles). You also get to learn a useful way to remember the medieval kings of England, and find out what a Baldric is! It's well worth 4 minutes of your time.

Disastrous History Teaching

Nonsuch HP has just discovered this extract (5 minutes long - well worth listening to) from an discussion that took place over Christmas on the Today Programme. On it the historians Niall Ferguson and Tariq Ali (shown above) are both in agreement that the current teaching of History in schools is "disastrous" and a "disgrace". Ferguson argues that History is taught in a very fragmented way, wih no narrative structure, and students are giving it up too soon. Ali says that students come away from school with "virtually worthless" knowledge and standards are considerably lower than anywhere else in Europe, India or China, a problem that is continuing into university as well.

This connects in with the coalition's ongoing interest in reforming the curriculum, as discussed before in the blog. Do you agree with these views? Has your education been disastrous? What should be changed?

Simon Schama's vision

The historian Simon Schama, who is advising the government on revising the History Curriculum, has written this article in the Guardian about his vision for his vision for how British History should be taught in an increasingly globalised culture. "Even during the toughest trials it's our history that binds us together as a distinctive community in an otherwise generically globalised culture," he writes. "Mother Teresa and Lady Gaga are multinationals; Oliver Cromwell and Margaret Thatcher are peculiarly ours."

The six subjects he thinks every child should know are:

1. The murder of Thomas Becket
2. The Black Death and Peasants Revolt
3. The excecution of Charles I
4. The British Empire in India
5. The Irish Conflict - in particular the relationship between Charles Parnell and William Gladstone
6. The Opium Wars between Britain and China

Nonsuch covers the first four topics at Key Stage 3. Should we include the others? What other subjects do you think are essential for every child to know?

Simon Schama gives his advice

Michael Gove has spoken at the Conservative Party Conference of his intention to overhaul the History curriculum. He attacked the current approach to history teaching, which he said denied children the chance to learn "our island story" in favour of a jumbled mixture of topics. "Children are growing up ignorant of one of the most inspiring stories I know – the history of our United Kingdom," he said. "Our history has moments of pride and shame, but unless we fully understand the struggles of the past we will not properly value the liberties of the present." He has asked Simon Schama, the historian who presented the BBC's "The History of Britain" to provide advice on how to instil "excitement and joy" into the curriculum. Schama himself has said, "A return to coherent gripping history is not a step backwards to dry as dust instruction." This is not the first time Gove has spoken on this subject, always a popular topic with the Tories, but it looks like substantial change to the way History is taught will soon be on the way. What do you think, and what do you think should be included?

PS: Here is an interview between Simon Schama and David Cameron from the FT Magazine.

PPS: Here is Gove's speech in full

Niall Ferguson and the History Curriculum

The historian Niall Ferguson has been invited by Michael Gove to overhaul the way history is taught in schools. Ferguson has spoken regularly about the need to teach the "Big Story" in history, encouraging a greater sense of chronology and connection between more popular school topics such as Henry VIII, Adolf Hitler and Martin Luther King. He is working on a four year syllabus (supported by a Channel Four series) that would emphasize in particular the rise of Western European society. Michael Gove is certainly impressed by this, although he has stopped short of supporting Ferguson's call for History to be made compulsory. Here is one response to his comments. What are your thoughts on this?

PS: Here is a comment from Martin Kettle who believes modern multicultural Britain lacks a common culture to support the sustainable teaching of a common history. Do you agree?

PPS: Here is a Daily Mail article from 2009 that believes "Trendy teaching is 'producing a generation of history numbskulls"

PPPS: The Radio 4 Programme "Analysis" has just covered this issue, asking whether Ferguson's proposals can really be a force for social cohesion. You can listen to the programme here and read a summary of it here.