Some people believe that for children learning about the local history is more important than knowing the World history. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

In the prevalent era, adopting new skills and historical events is a crucial part of the current lifestyle.

Overall

, a few civilizations speculate that youngsters should give more importance to domestic traditions than the universal times. In

this

essay, I partially agree with the statement that learning native stories has fewer benefits than global history. On the one hand, the main one is that children will stay up-to-date with new cultures and traditions.

In other words

, when they migrate to metropolitan cities, they will have a chance to learn new languages and professions.

For instance

, a few scientists and researchers have predicted that live sessions and visualizations make youngsters more vibrant and brilliant. Another positive point is that modern technologies will provide dozens of different ways to cope with current adversities. The

last

good point is that they will get better work opportunities and a wide range of unique options. On the flip side, there are some consequences of learning former time lessons. Limited knowledge will restrict them to current trends and fashions. It has a detrimental effect on children’s academic careers and future agendas. Another drawback is that learning in a countryside area will have adverse effects on their intellectual abilities. There is one advantage of knowing local history is that they will get a personal touch with their blood and flesh, which generates positive emotions and affection in them. In conclusion, learning about the former and worldwide times has an influx of benefits. Meanwhile, I believe that learning international stories has a greater amount of satisfaction than conventional, which will broaden their horizon and stay in touch with the cosmopolitan society.