Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Firstly, international history knowledge may be important to some extent in children’s life later on; however, studying about local events and people is of more prominence as it initially builds up a strong sense of belonging among them. Obviously, students are inclined to acquire information about the history of their region in greater enjoyment compared to being delivered lessons of foreign past events and names. Subsequently, they gradually gain sufficient understanding of how previous generations formed and developed their hometown; as a result, they will treasure today life and are grateful to historically well-known figures among their community. In addition, teaching children about local history is, indeed, to familiarize them with local identities and cultural heritage; therefore, they are likely to be proud of their origins, insusceptible to cultural cringe and then become responsible citizens. Secondly, in comparison to world history lessons, local history ones impart better direct knowledge of history to school children. In fact, children are normally exposed to local names and events through parenting at a young age. During traditional holidays and community festivals or through bedtime stories and lullabies, pupils unconsciously learn local history; therefore, they tend to swiftly embrace the historic details of their homeland when receiving a formal history education. Furthermore, because of geographical proximity, schoolchildren have more opportunities to cement their local history knowledge by frequently paying a visit to historical sites in the vicinity. From what has been analyzed, it is my firm belief that local history lessons are more imperative for students than international history ones thanks to the solid background in history and cultural awareness they facilitate.