[rv3392]

FWIW, history teaching seems to have moved away from just looking at dates - at least where I am.

I graduated high school <10 years ago and most of our history classes (including WW1 and 2) were spent on what, why and how. A significant amount of time was spent looking at the leadup and aftermath of both WW1 and WW2 as well as the ideas of the time. We pretty much didn't look at troop movements, generals, battles, etc. apart from mentioning the really significant ones. Same goes for pretty much every other unit of history (mediaeval Europe, colonialism in Asia and Africa, etc.).

Maybe this is a reflection of differences in teaching styles in different parts of the world?

[aidenn0]

I graduated HS >20 years ago and did not have to memorize a single date in HS history. We did need to know the general ordering of events though. For example, we had to know that the Munich Agreement was before Pearl Harbor, and that the Korean War was after WWII, but it's hard to know anything about these events without knowing that.

OTOH I know people my age who went to different schools that had to memorize things like the exact date that Lincoln was assassinated, so there's definitely disparate pedagogy.