It is more important for school children to learn about local history than world history. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a school of thought that learning local traditions is more essential than

world

history

for school pupils.

Nevertheless

, I am in

favor

promote over another

favour

of the idea that it is equally important for them to study local, national and global

history

. On the one hand, the

history

of local and nation plays an irreplaceable role in the development process of children. Kids need to be aware of the events of their country’s past, which enhances their patriotism. Vietnam wars are particular examples of the erecting,

defensing

progress and heroes who sacrificed for the nation’s freedom.

Also

, local

history

probably increases the social knowledge of children. It can be clearly seen that an educational system involving the

history

of their own country or region enables children to know how important local cultural traditions have developed.

On the other hand

, the benefit of studying

world

history

should not be underestimated. Schoolchildren are able to develop an understanding of the past experiences of other peoples through historical lessons of the

world

.

As a result

, it will be easier for them to form an empathy by knowing about the origins and past development of people around the

world

.

Moreover

, children may understand how the

history

of one country has come to affect the

history

of other countries. To illustrate,

world

history

provided children with explanation why one nation became colony of another and the impacts remained until today. In conclusion, I would argue that not only local

history but

Accept comma addition

history, but

also

world

history

is worth teaching to schoolboys and schoolgirls.