The National Assembly's Resolution states: "Continue to keep history subject in the new textbook program". So how should we understand this issue?

Recently, the National Assembly voted on the final resolution, which included a sentence: "Continue to keep history as a subject in the new textbook program." Ignoring the question of why this sentence was included in the resolution, we can analyze the consequences of this sentence as follows:

- If we follow the wording of the resolution, it can be simply understood that the new textbook program has removed History subject and now this resolution requires it not to be removed, but to be kept.

In fact, History has not been "eliminated" in the new textbook program, but has only been presented in a new model with new names. Therefore, if understood in this simple literal sense, the above statement in the resolution has no value at all.

- In a broader sense, the above statement means that the new textbook program needs to retain the name of the subject "History".

In fact, the name "History" is not lost or removed in the new textbook program. For high school level, the History subject remains intact, for primary and secondary school level, the general subject name is changed to "Social Science" or "Social Studies", the sub-subjects and knowledge topics of "History" remain intact, therefore, even with this "broad" meaning, the above resolution of the National Assembly has no meaning at all.

- It can be understood in another "figurative" sense that the above statement of the resolution means that in the new textbook program, the History subject needs to be separated from the integrated subjects "Social Studies" and "Social Sciences" at the primary and secondary school levels. This will probably be a lot more controversial. If the top leaders really want it that way, the Ministry of Education and Training can change the names of the subjects "Social Studies" and "Social Sciences" to "History - Geography" or "Science of History - Geography" to still ensure the idea of ​​reforming the education program and still satisfy historical researchers.

- There could also be another, more half-hearted option: in the upcoming innovation program, the Ministry of Education and Training will only innovate the natural science subjects, while keeping the social science subjects the same as before without any innovation, which would satisfy everyone in society.

Illustration photo

In fact, recently there has been a heated debate (actually one-sided, from the side of historical scientists) with the Ministry of Education and Training about the History subject in the new education program. There are 2 things:

1. Historians have misunderstood the meaning and role of History in the new textbook program. With the integration of History into Social Science at the primary and secondary school levels, historians have misunderstood that the Ministry of Education and Training does not take history seriously, and have even heavily criticized the Ministry of Education and Training for intending to "abolish History". Many experts have pointed out these misunderstandings from historians.

2. In the new textbook program, History at the high school level (which is designed to differentiate science subjects) is considered an elective subject similar to all other science subjects (except Literature, Mathematics, Foreign Languages ​​and Civic Education). With this design, historical researchers are fighting fiercely to make History a compulsory subject like Literature, Mathematics, English and Civic Education. But this opinion has not been reflected in the National Assembly's resolution.

According to VOV