Turn on thread page Beta

100 Schools Where Not One Pupil Studied GCSE History watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by History-Student)
    This is proof kids are stupider these days. You will never have an easier GCSE than History, but they don't take it because they perceive it as boring. They don't think about anything.
    I beg to differ. There is no GCSE more mindless than Religious Studies. 100% vomiting facts onto paper, and it is really hard to get anything below a B.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I find it more sad that some of us - who wanted to take history - Couldn't, because it clashed with taking triple science.

    It's even worse that my school didn't do languages D:
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by History-Student)
    So you're not a nationalist, just a bit of a xenophobe?
    No I'm not, but I do believe there should be more British history on the curriculum.

    Is it necessary for students to learn about the Civil Rights movement in the US in the 1960s?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mujeriego)
    Why, out of interest? Unless you are Jewish, American, East Asian, from the USSR or some other obscure peoples, I can't see why you would be so upset by this. Those are the groups whose histories are being marginalised if students don't register for the GCSE. There was hardly any English history in the syllabus to begin with. Maybe it was just my exam board?
    I know, the current syllabus is disappointing, even anti-British in parts. A large portion of it is, as not so academic said, political indoctrination which is designed to induce a sense of White liberal guilt in pupils. However, it's important to have a sense of international history too.

    If children are just not taking History, that will encourage schools to drop it altogether - and in the process, it will be difficult to re-establish the subject.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Phantom_X)
    or not.

    I find it rather depressing that most students are unaware of the antiquity, of the rennaissance, of the migration periods (where ironically, English culture was consolidated). In fact, many school children are also unaware of the conflicts of empires in general (ie. the Ottoman empire).

    on the note of simply teaching british history, how do you propose this ? Surely this would give an over-mythologised idea of British history that is founded in grandiose notions and fallacies, and taught in an unapologetic manner.

    Its not that kids dont know british history- its the fact that they actually know very little history in general.

    When I meant British history I do also meant the Renaissance, but also Medieval Britain as well.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Dogatonic)
    I beg to differ. There is no GCSE more mindless than Religious Studies. 100% vomiting facts onto paper, and it is really hard to get anything below a B.
    I personally know people who have attained Us, Ds, Gs - you name it, on GCSE RE (mock) papers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Willie, Willie, Harry, Steve
    Harry, ****, John, Harry three
    One, two, three Neds, Richard two
    Harrys four, five, six then who?

    ect


    I study History
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wednesday Bass)
    The idea is that History is a choice at GCSE and above - why force someone to do it if they don't want to? It's not like GCSE History teaches a sense of British-ness, it's a lot about the World Wars and periods around those years (IIRC).
    not quite- at my skool from next year, they will force yr 9 students to take GCSE Geography OR GCSE History and one subject of their choice- so some skools arent flexible with their GCSE options

    i was lucky loool
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It's because all you do is the war and nothing else. That's the single specific reason why I didn't take history myself at GCSE.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    No I'm not, but I do believe there should be more British history on the curriculum.

    Is it necessary for students to learn about the Civil Rights movement in the US in the 1960s?
    Yes, yes it is. It's a hell of a lot more relevant than learning about the Norman invasion and such like.

    (Obv. the Norman invasion should be taught as well, I'm just making a point.)
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by scriggy)
    Yes, yes it is. It's a hell of a lot more relevant than learning about the Norman invasion and such like.

    (Obv. the Norman invasion should be taught as well, I'm just making a point.)
    Why is it necessary?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Why is it necessary?
    Because it's about overcoming intolerance, gaining equality for all, and is just generally there as a reminder for what racism, intolerance and hate can lead too.

    Regardless of the nation involved, it's much more relevant than British medieval history. :facepalm2:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did it at GCSE, Jesus do I reget it.

    More kids would probably do history if the syllabus was at least somewhat interesting. It's lke they scanned through history, picked out the most bloody boring bits possible and decided to make us learn it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by History-Student)
    So you're not a nationalist, just a bit of a xenophobe?
    Xenophobia is a fear or dislike of other nations and the citizens of other nations, it is not (in a nutshell)?

    Why would teaching only British history be xenophobic? It would be promoting fear or dislike of other nations cultures, simply ignorance.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilickbatteries)
    Xenophobia is a fear or dislike of other nations and the citizens of other nations, it is not (in a nutshell)?

    Why would teaching only British history be xenophobic? It would be promoting fear or dislike of other nations cultures, simply ignorance.
    iso said they weren't a nationalist, yet made nationalist statements. The only other way of saying "I only want them taught about my nation's history" (nationalist) is saying "I don't want them taught about other nation's history" (which sounds xenophobic to me).

    There is probably an actual term for it, but that's the best I could come up with.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilickbatteries)
    Xenophobia is a fear or dislike of other nations and the citizens of other nations, it is not (in a nutshell)?

    Why would teaching only British history be xenophobic? It would be promoting fear or dislike of other nations cultures, simply ignorance.
    often fear and dislike stem from ignorance..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by History-Student)
    iso said they weren't a nationalist, yet made nationalist statements. The only other way of saying "I only want them taught about my nation's history" (nationalist) is saying "I don't want them taught about other nation's history" (which sounds xenophobic to me).

    There is probably an actual term for it, but that's the best I could come up with.
    Fair enough, I do think there should be more of an emphasis on British history though.

    I don't think anything is more important to learn about than the country you're educated in.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by boba)
    often fear and dislike stem from ignorance..
    I see HS's point, but fear and dislike aren't inevitable products of ignorance.

    I just replied to HS saying I think there should be more of an emphasis on British history anyways. After all, this is Britain and the majority of students are British. We have a very proud history that too many people don't know about.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    I'm not a nationalist, but I agree - it's disgusting that people know who MLK was (every single bloody year) but can't name more than a handful of monarchs (if any), any wars (apart from the ones in the 20th century) etc etc.

    It's time the whole history curriculum was replaced by British history.
    MLK?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Planar)
    MLK?
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.