WWII History To Be Replaced By Wikipedia And Twitter

There will be no more teaching of the history of wwii in UK schools. Instead they will learn about Wikipedia and Twitter. Those in power can then make their own versions of history very easy. Kids will be programmed to know only what those in power wants them to know. The UK will be inside their own internet shell universe, with controlled information and special versions of historic events. Their own controlled Youtube. Their own controlled Wiki. Programming the masses. Very effective

Children will no longer have to study the Victorians or the second world war under proposals to overhaul the primary school curriculum, the Guardian has learned.

However, the draft plans will require children to master Twitter and Wikipedia and give teachers far more freedom to decide what youngsters should be concentrating on in classes.

From here: Pupils to study Twitter and blogs in primary schools shake-up

Now whilst I'm against the 'dumbing-down' of education generally, but I've a few problems regarding your post when compared to the The Grauniad's story.

Firstly, it's concerning a rethink of primary school education. Now it's 30 years ago since I left primary school, but I'm pretty sure topics such as 'World War II' were dealt with very superficially at best at my primary school. It wasn't a bad school either as many of I was one of many that went on to grammar school.

Secondly, as the story itself points out, this is partly because there's an element of redundancy involved. Why teach WWII at primary school when it's going to covered again, in far more detail, a couple of years later at either grammar school/secondary school?

On the face of it, topics like Wikipedia and Twitter seem very superficial and meaningless but both typify quite important core issues. Whilst Wiki isn't without faults by any means, it's a useful starting point for information. Encouraging children to access and utilise information is incredibly important.

Perhaps, we've got to be realistic and accept that generations of people are now growing up without access to decent 'dead tree' libraries and that there's not a lot we can do about it as libraries are closing down left, right and centre and are often reliant on being used as IT centres to bring a lot of service users through the door. Any means to encourage young people to be able to access information (and not everything on Wiki is useless by any means and people seem to have this weird idea that all books in libraries are good books should be encouraged. If books are no longer a preferred medium then we have no choice but to look elsewhere.

Similarly, Twitter and other forms of on-line messaging are what lies ahead for most of us, whether we like it or not. It doesn't have to be a bad prognosis as, ultimately, it's nothing more than a tool. It's pointless to somehow privilege other forms of communication as, in a similar sense to thinking that all books are better than all Wikipedia pages, not all verbal or face-to-face communication will have any kind of intrinsic merit.

Also, from a prospective Luddite point of view, there's some good points too, surely? There's a move to wean children off calculators; something that's been railed against for years. At my school it was logarithm table books and pen and paper!

I remember studying WW2 at school here in the UK(scotland)...absolute propaganda in the end.Britain was the good guy,America saved us..they mentioned Russia a few times,but we never delved much into that..and they certainly didn't teach us how it was really Russia that won the war for us in the end.And absolute no mention of who funded the Nazi regime ie London and Wallstreet.So its not going to really make a difference,the propaganda factories ie schools will keep doing what they are doing.

I simply don't get twitter and I'm a member! What on earth is it all about. "Tweets" seem to me to be self-induglent twaddle like a sound bite version of the intolerable "round robin" some include with Christmas cards.
Why it should be studied is beyond me.

The story of the OP I heard on the radio last night and thought "here we go again, the celebration of modernity." This is a callous and broken age which is presented as the most advanced, not to me. I appreciate anaesthetics as much as the next person but the rest of modernity simply leaves me cold and lamenting no one notices the irony of calling ourselves "civilized."

Wikipedia is full of lies, cover-ups and just wrong information from non-experts. You're better off teaching kids to watch the news on TV.

Twitter is important for schoolchildren how? Is there some sort of trivia bot on the Twitter network?

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Twitter is important for schoolchildren how? Is there some sort of trivia bot on the Twitter network?

Well Twitter would go some way to address a couple of the proposals: "fluency in handwriting and keyboard skills" and one of the core aspects: "communication and languages".

Bear in mind this is aimed at school children under the ages of 11 too.

What doesn't sit well with me, is the fact that the government are thinking of forcing the use of social networking sites onto our kids, at the very same time as they are talking about monitoring EVERYTHING we do on those same sites.

I do not want my kids being encouraged to use a government monitored facility.

I fail to see what "use" Twitter has, other than knowing what people are up to 24/7....really...who gives a damn?

I spend enough time teaching my kids about the dangers of social networking sites, what with all the weirdos in the world....last thing i want is the governmement encouraging them to use the sites!

As for Wiki... why teach kids about something that you do not know is factual?

CX.

reply to post by vcwxvwligen


Actually, almost every study done on Wikipedia shows it's just as accurate as any other Encyclopedia.

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

 

Actually, almost every study done on Wikipedia shows it's just as accurate as any other Encyclopedia.

The articles that I've found are from as recently as 2007.

I can tell you from personal experience that the site engages in politics. That also happens in the Encyclopedia Britannica, but that doesn't make it right.

Originally posted by CX
As for Wiki... why teach kids about something that you do not know is factual?

CX.

Surely you could ask the same about books? All books are not necessarily good books. A published author is as much prone to shoddy reasoning, poor research and an agenda as someone putting a wiki page together. I've come across many books that, for one reason or another, have been 'fast and loose' with facts.

The kids will not have access to youtube for sure.
Here is history for the back pages of wiki:


It won't matter cause the cause of the Illuminati must be served.