Welcome to H-World, a network for practitioners of world history. The list gives emphasis to research, to teaching, and to the connections between research and teaching.

Recent Content

Re: Can one civilization and then the next still be called world history?

Jonathan Burack writes, in response to my critique of the proosed Massachusetts standards: ‘So I say yes to "one civilization after another" as long as you also identify the ways they interacted and - to speak unfashionably - "appropriated" one another's cultures.’

Re: Can one civilization and then the next still be called world history?

Thanks for all the replies. Seems like we are in agreement.

I do agree with the themes and trends approach or as the WHAP (world history AP) standards call them Key Concepts.

Furthermore, I am not sure why the Framework creators did not just adopt / adapt the WHAP (world history AP) standards with whatever additions and editions they desired.

Re: Can one civilization and then the next still be called world history?

Jonathan,

Your Pro West and the Rest point of view is long, and well-established. It is certainly appropriate for a Western Civ approach. But when HS students are likely to take only a single swing at a World History pináta, I believe it is crucial that we embrace as wide a framework as possible , lest students end up with a trumpian view of the world.

Pages