Essay task 2: History

[thaodang119]

Hi leaders, please help me check this essay, thank you in advance
It is more important for schoolchildren to learn about local history than world history.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Teaching history in schools has been traditionally divided into two sections: national history and international one. Many assume that children merely focus on learning historical knowledge related their own country rather than learning about historic event happened in the world. I disagree with this point of view and believe that both of them should be balanced in school curriculum.

To begin with, understanding the local history would possibly bring positive impacts on student’s mind. In fact, domestic history can provide learners thorough insights into what happened at their place of living as well as their own origin. For example, schoolchildren are taught about how their ancestors used to defend their land against outside invaders. This might cultivate young generation’s patriotism and raise their responsibility for protecting and developing their nation. Moreover, as children are equipped with local historic information, they are able to spread their customs and traditional values to foreign friends, which in turn may make their history become popular in the eyes of foreigners.

However, I believe that the international history also play vital role in student’s education. By gaining knowledge regarding the world’s past events could help develop well-rounded perspective of life. For instance, lesson about the world war or Feminism protect against women’s abuse and discrimination provide a real insight into various of the world. Furthermore, understanding historical knowledge about the other countries’ backgrounds would benefit to young learners in the future. The typical example for this case is that having deep knowledge about ancient architecture can give those who have an intention to become a future architect a source of inspiration.

In conclusion, the teaching of domestic history should parallel with international one because both of them have distinctively equal significance to schoolchildren.

[Luschen]

Hi Nancy, I think this is the one exception where it is ok to talk about both sides of the issue when dealing with a “to what extent to you agree/disagree” prompt. You have stated that both sides are equally valid, so it is proper to discuss both sides equally. Still, since the prompt asks for the “extent” of your belief, you should include an extent word, like “strongly”, “moderately”, “somewhat” or similar in your thesis statement. I thought your arguments were somewhat convincing, but I think in both paragraphs you could have “connected the dots” a little better by being more explicit and specific in your explanations. Your writing was quite clear, but there were a few mistakes here and there. Here are some specific comments:

@thaodang119

Teaching history {“History lessons in school have been …” or “History courses in school have been …” seem better here} in schools has been traditionally divided into two sections: national history and international [history]. {at least in the US, this is usually called “world history”} Many assume that children [should] merely focus on learning historical knowledge related their own country rather than learning about historic [events] [that] happened in [other parts of] the world. {or “that happened throughout the world”} I disagree with this point of view and believe that both of them should be balanced in [the] school curriculum.

To begin with, understanding the local history would possibly bring positive impacts [to] student’s [minds]. In fact, domestic history can provide learners thorough insights into what happened at their place of living {“place of living” sounds very odd} as well as their own origin. {this sounds a bit odd too - maybe “the origin of their country” - to learn about “their own origin”, I think biology is more suitable } For example, schoolchildren are taught about how their ancestors used to defend their land against outside invaders. This might cultivate young generation’s patriotism and raise their [awareness of their] responsibility for protecting and developing their nation. Moreover, as children are equipped with local historic information, they are able to spread their customs and traditional values to foreign friends, which in turn may make their history become popular in the eyes of foreigners. {this reason was not as convincing - I don’t really like the word “popular” here. Maybe better to say that teaching others about your country’s history can spread awareness of other cultures and increase goodwill among different nations.}

However, I believe that the international history also [plays a] vital role in student’s education. By [Gaining] knowledge regarding the world’s past events could help [students] develop [a ]well-rounded perspective of life. For instance, [lessons] about the world war {I think you need to define this better - World War One?} or Feminism {do not capitalize feminism} protect against women’s abuse and discrimination [by] [providing] a real insight into various [parts] of the world. {explain better why this is true. I understand the women’s abuse point, but you need to connect the dots between World War One or World War Two and discrimination} Furthermore, understanding historical knowledge about the other countries’ backgrounds would [provide] benefit to young learners {or “would benefit young learners”} in the future. [A ] typical example for this case is that having deep knowledge about ancient architecture can give those who have an intention to become [future architects] {“those” is plural, so continue with the plural} a source of inspiration.

In conclusion, the teaching of domestic history should [take place in] parallel with international [history] because both of them have distinctively equal significance to schoolchildren.