Ignorance of WW1 history

Discussion in 'The Lounge Bar' started by Mike L, Nov 4, 2012.

  1. Mike L

    Mike L Very Senior Member

  2. Jonathan Ball

    Jonathan Ball It's a way of life.

    Mike, The idea of the GWF helping educate anyone rather than spending time slagging each other off, rubbishing television documentaries, social media and battlefield archaeology (i.e things kids might be interested in and relate to) is, to be honest, a distant one.
     
    geoff501 and Paul Reed like this.
  3. Paul Reed

    Paul Reed Ubique

    Shame the newspaper doesn't know when the Great War ended either - it certainly wasn't 1918. The Armistice was only a ceasefire, not an end to the war; that did not come until the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.
     
  4. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    I thought WW1 was part of the curriculum .
    Lots of kids arent interested in history , cant force them to be either.

    Non-story in my opinion.
     
  5. South

    South Member

    I really fail to understand how so many people could not know at least the basics. At secondary school we were taught all about it in both History and English, and that was before picking our GCSE choices (I picked history and learnt about it further).

    Even if we hadn't, it is mentioned enough on the tv, newspapers, social media etc.
     
  6. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    Just asked my 3 kids , who (as some of you will know) have been to lots of battlefields & cemeteries.
    All 3 got it wrong big time.

    Am I bothered ?
    Not really.
     
  7. bexley84

    bexley84 Well-Known Member

    Mildly amusing to read the DM readers' remarks - presumably these people are not representative of their wider readership (full disclosure - I'm not one of them).

    When I went to school (about 30 years ago) I learnt dates until they came out of my ..., 1066, 1215, 1346, 1415, 1485, 1588, 1605, 1649, 1688, 1715, 1745, 1776, 1789, 1805, 1815, 1856, 1914, 1926, 1945, 1956, July 30th 1966 to name a few off the top of my head. Spot the deliberate error...

    But to be honest, they're just numbers - and I'm still learning...and I shall never, ever, ever buy The Daily Mail.

    best
     
  8. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    Its not really shocking, I mean military history is widely deemed to be subversive, and like WW2 much crap is spouted by those who know very little.

    I've had many kids ask me questions in recent years which their parents have informed me their school teachers ignore or just try to sidestep. Since school teachers have to be general experts in everything thats to be expected. At the same time I know some historians who are school teachers... also lets be honest most kids never engage with history in schools seeing it as dull and irrelevant.

    I was lectured recently by a guy who got a 2.1 at University in History that "France never declared war on Germany in WW2 and betrayed Britain and never fought the Nazis." He honestly believed this and sadly, so much fiction is seen as reality that...

    Should we really care about the DM article? No.

    Should we really care about how people deal with schoolkids and get them to engage successfully on a subject matter? Yes.

    Two wildly different areas.
     
  9. South

    South Member


    I only know what 4 of those dates are for!

    I guess being respectful and having a basic understanding of what went on, is far more important than knowing the exact date something happened.
     
  10. bexley84

    bexley84 Well-Known Member

    South,

    I made them up, obviously...and I also lied about the number of years since I went to school. I've taught Mathematics to 'A' Level so I like numbers.. I think 1067, 1214, 1324 etc had as much going on as the years I mention.

    The other night on the train home at Vauxhall station, I was reading a book called "The 5th Army in Italy" and a young woman (I guess she was 18) asked me what I was reading and when I told her that it wasn't a well known book and hardly a best seller, she engaged with me in a conversation over about 20 minutes talking about the Second World War. She knew plenty of things that I didn't know. Doesn't prove anything, Just a personal observation...

    By the way, in my opinion the worst slice of supposed social "history" observation that I've recently seen on the TV is Dxxxxxn Axxxy - now that is truly hilarious.

    a bit of a rant there.,sorry. I might now be eligible to become a DM reader.

    best
     
  11. South

    South Member

    Ha well that shows my ignorance - I thought I had listened even less in school than my school reports said!:D
     
  12. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA

    I'd bet $100 that none of the people I know under 40 years old would be able to name the decade, yet alone specific years. The majority would have never even heard of WWI.

    Dave
     
  13. CaroleH89

    CaroleH89 Member

    I left school in 2007, and studied WW1 in Year 9 and Year 10 (i.e. before and after GCSE choices) and went on a school trip to the Somme and Ypres in 2004 aged 15, and I'd like to think that most of the kids would have at least retained a few basics, even if the detail did go in one ear and out of the other for some who weren't really interested.

    Okay, I've always been interested in WW1 and WW2 outside of school, but I think to an extent it depends what each individual school does, whether they brush over it briefly or spend more time on it.

    I would also say that the way that it's taught can help - although I'm quite happy learning from books, I still remember aged 13 or 14, having a re-enacment of trench warfare in the classroom with tables put on side each side of the room to mark out the "trenches" and balls of paper being used as bullets and shells... for a lot of kids, they'd retain that sort of learning better.
     
  14. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    It is.
    They aren't.
    We can't.
    Mine too.

    And I agree with Paul's 1919 pedantry ;), check yer local war memorial.
    (Though I'll happily admit to often using the common '14-18' shorthand.)


    It seems that certain papers are determined to cover this little 'story' on a regular basis - fills columns I suppose. Good excuse for a moan - I've outlined what my sprogs do at school when the curriculum hits remembrance here before, so I won't repeat it other than to say; it's covered, and covered as well as I'd hope.

    Though I will repeat myself briefly on the subject:
    "There's no accounting for thickos..."
     
    Dave55 likes this.
  15. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    What were the Q's?
     
  16. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    only 1, when did first world war end. same as the daily mail article.
     
  17. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

  18. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    Our history master put forward the argument that WW1 ended in 1945!
     
  19. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    ah , I've just re-read the article & none of my kids are yet old enough for the age range as given in the DM.

    age range, 16-24
     
  20. Mike L

    Mike L Very Senior Member

    Paul is obviously quite correct that the Treaty of Versailles (28th June 1919) is the end proper of WW1.
    Why then (apart from the signing of the Armistice and the end of actual combat) is 1918 so widely given as the end of the war?
    And Wills, I applaud your history teacher's argument.

    Owen, it was partly that age range that surprised me, I would have expected slightly better knowledge.
     

Share This Page