nashark said:
Whilst I agree that it is indeed an important subject, it shouldn't be taught as a subject alone much in the same way that Politics shouldn't be taught as a subject alone. Purely because impressionable children are at the mercy of someone who would have a view on these things and would likely tend to project those views on the children.
I would much rather those issues were touched upon in a History class (History being a great gateway subject).
You can't expect teachers to be specialists at higher levels in multiple subjects. Year 7 and 8, maybe even 9 at push (although GCSEs start at Year 9 quite often now with AS subjects for higher ability pupils in Year 10 and 11 as well). If you have History teachers teaching their non-specialist subject inevitably standards will be lower, an OFSTED bollocking will follow and History teachers will be forced to specialise in a subject other than their degree. Might as well employ specialists or don't bother to teach it. That's the choice facing education in my opinion. A narrower focused education or a holistic one with the same amount of teachers but more specialism.
As for historians being more impartial. Well, they've Niall Ferguson devising the new History curriculum which the tories have ordered to have a 'British narrative' - in other words, make us the good guys. No problem for Niall that one.