Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Churchill dropped from England's history syllabus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Churchill dropped from England's history syllabus

    Churchill dropped from England's history syllabus
    Posted Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:16am AEST
    Updated Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:57am AEST


    Just not cricket ... the exclusion of Winston Churchill is likely to leave traditionalists aghast. (File photo) (Reuters: Toby Melville)

    Britain's World War II prime minister Winston Churchill has been cut from a list of key historical figures recommended for teaching in English secondary schools, a government agency says.

    The radical overhaul of the school curriculum for 11- to 14-year-olds is designed to bring secondary education up to date and allow teachers more flexibility in the subjects they teach, the Government said.

    But although Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Joseph Stalin and Martin Luther King have also been dropped from the detailed guidance accompanying the curriculum, Sir Winston's exclusion is likely to leave traditionalists aghast.

    A spokesman for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority said the new curriculum, to be taught from September 2008, does not prescribe to teachers what they must include.

    But he added: "Teachers know that they need to mention these pivotal figures. They don't need to be instructed by law to mention them in every history class.

    "Of course, good teachers will be teaching the history of Churchill as part of the history of Britain. The two are indivisible."

    Sir Winston's grandson Nicholas Soames, also a Conservative Member of Parliament, described the move as "madness."

    "It is absurd. I expect he wasn't New Labour enough for them ... this is a Government that is very careless of British history and always has been.

    "The teaching of history is incredibly important," he added.

    "If you're surprised that people do not seem to care that much about the country in which they live, the reason is that they don't know much about it."

    The History Curriculum Association said it was "appalled" by the move, saying the new curriculum would "promote ignorance" and was pandering to a politically-correct agenda.

    The Conservatives' schools spokesman Michael Gove added: "Winston Churchill is the towering figure of 20th century British history.

    "His fight against fascism was Britain's finest hour. Our national story can't be told without Churchill at the centre."

    Schools Secretary Ed Balls defended the move, saying a slimmed-down curriculum was overdue and traditional elements in all subjects had been protected.

    Among the few named figures that stay in the new history curriculum are William Wilberforce, the British law maker who was instrumental in efforts to abolish the slave trade.

    Sir Winston, who was British prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955, was famous for his defiance to the Nazis, stirring oratory and trademark cigar and "V for victory" sign.

    In 2002, a BBC poll with more than one million votes saw him voted the Greatest Briton of all time.
    Follow the latest news headlines from Australia's most trusted source. Read in-depth expert analysis and watch live coverage on ABC News.
    ...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
    ...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - Snotty

  • #2
    No great loss. WW2 will still feature in the syllabus, and Churchill's action's in WW2 will be featured as part of it. Outside of WW2, he didn't really do enough to qualify- as a peacetime leader he was fairly useless.
    The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

    Comment


    • #3
      He doesn't rate as worthy of study in his own right? What about Hitler, Stalin and MLK - who were also dropped?
      ...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
      ...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - Snotty

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
        No great loss. WW2 will still feature in the syllabus, and Churchill's action's in WW2 will be featured as part of it. Outside of WW2, he didn't really do enough to qualify- as a peacetime leader he was fairly useless.
        Exactly. Churchill is going to be mentioned. Just because a person isn't listed doesn't mean that they won't teach about him/her. I'm thinking (since the one they did name was Wilberforce) this is more like a "don't forget about X" list.
        “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
        - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

        Comment


        • #5
          Does it matter? I'd be amazed if a lesson on World War II didn't incidentally mention Churchill or Hitler. That, and it kind of implies history is learnt by just parroting names, dates and places.

          And I thought Brunel won the vote. :shrug:
          One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

          Comment


          • #6
            He should even get mentioned (if only in a bit role) in WWI... didn't he come up with Galipoli?

            -Arrian
            grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

            The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Caligastia
              He doesn't rate as worthy of study in his own right? What about Hitler, Stalin and MLK - who were also dropped?
              You have probably about 100 or so hours of studytime available for this history syllabus. Already fewer than 1% of English schoolchildren can tell you how, when or why England actually came to exist.

              It's a Briitish history syllabus. Stalin and Hitler will appear as part of the WW2 studies. MLK won't, and really doesn't need to. He really didn't mean much in Britain.
              The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


                You have probably about 100 or so hours of studytime available for this history syllabus. Already fewer than 1% of English schoolchildren can tell you how, when or why England actually came to exist.

                It's a Briitish history syllabus. Stalin and Hitler will appear as part of the WW2 studies. MLK won't, and really doesn't need to. He really didn't mean much in Britain.
                Agreed, 100 hours isn't really enough. I reckon the history syllabus could do with some expansion within the curriculum.
                ...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
                ...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - Snotty

                Comment


                • #9
                  Won't happen. Our new PM wants to increase sports from 2 hours weekly to 5 hours weekly. Something's got to give.

                  It means our kids will probably be even more ignorant about their history, but at least they might not be hammered by the Aussies at sports so often.
                  The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Even when they did use to teach Churchill, his more imperialist, racist and anti-working class tendencies didn't get much coverage. His phuckup at Gallipoli did though, in my day.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cort Haus
                      Even when they did use to teach Churchill, his more imperialist, racist and anti-working class tendencies didn't get much coverage.
                      I'm positive his pro-gassing attitude towards Iraqi Kurds met with great approbation, at least in Saddam's Anfal campaign.

                      "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes _ [to] spread a lively terror _"
                      Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

                      ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        That's actually a mis-quote. If you read the full speech, he's clearly talking about using non-lethal conentrations of mustard gas in a way similar to modern-day riot control methods- in preference to bombing or shooting them.
                        The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          There's also his take on 'Jewish Bolshevism'

                          "There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews."

                          Illustrated Sunday Herald on February 8 1920.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            - and his post WW2 comment "We killed the wrong pig".

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
                              That's actually a mis-quote. If you read the full speech, he's clearly talking about using non-lethal conentrations of mustard gas in a way similar to modern-day riot control methods- in preference to bombing or shooting them.
                              Winston preferred his mustard gas Lite ?


                              I think that's a bit disingenuous.

                              It was synthesised much earlier than its first reported use, by a man named Frederick Guthrie in 1860, who reacted ethylene with Cl2, and noticed the toxic effects it had on his own skin.

                              (1) The effects of mustard gas exposure include the reddening and blistering of skin, and, if inhaled, will also cause blistering to the lining of the lungs, causing chronic impairment, or at worst, death. Exposure to high concentrations will attack the corneas of the eyes, eventually rendering the victim blind. (6)

                              It is important to note here that not only are mustard gas and hemi-mustard both vesicants (blister skin), but the hydrolysis reaction also produces three molecules of HCl, which in itself is a skin irritant.

                              I don't we can expect any of the recalcitrant tribespeople to have had ready access to this kind of treatment:


                              One of the reasons that exposure to mustard gas must be prevented, rather than cured, is that detoxification is quite difficult due to its insolubility, and that the effects of mustard gas are devastating - essentially if the inhalation of the mustard gas itself does not kill you, it is very likely to cause cancer later in life. (7)

                              During WW1, doctors were fairly helpless for treating victims, as the only means of detoxification was by oxidation with hypochlorite bleaches - NaOCl- and (CaCOCl-)2 (a super-chlorinated bleach) were most commonly used.
                              Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

                              ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X