What are the changes between the new history curriculum and the traditional history curriculum?

The fundamental difference between the new curriculum and the old curriculum is the difference in ideas. The so-called curriculum concept is the teaching belief that the curriculum designer contains in the curriculum and needs the curriculum implementer to embody in the teaching. It is the soul and core of curriculum reform. Course purpose: First of all, we should pay attention to the proper orientation of the basic course of citizen quality education. In other words, we should re-examine the purpose and nature of junior high school history curriculum. This curriculum reform has made it clear that junior high school history course is a basic course of citizen quality education. This can be explained from two aspects. First, it plays an irreplaceable role in cultivating the humanistic spirit and literacy that modern citizens should have. Second, its purpose is not to train historians, but to lay the foundation for training qualified citizens.

Disadvantages of traditional history courses: (old courses) never dare to cut too many complicated knowledge points. The solidified "discipline system" has almost become a curse. Politics, economy, culture and nationality, events, figures and laws are all indispensable, so that they are all-inclusive and trivial. This not only makes middle school textbooks more conceptual and dogmatic than university textbooks ..... As a result, there are so many knowledge points in each class, and there are more concepts than historical facts, so teachers can't get on, let alone make them vivid and thorough. As for students, it is understandable that they can't remember and can't bear heavy pressure. It can be said that (the old course) is actually to let teachers and students dance in chains and practice at a monotonous rhythm. Why?

The new curriculum embodies the characteristics of universality, foundation and development. The so-called popularization means that the history course in junior high school is a compulsory course in compulsory education, and all school-age students should study this course to achieve the goals stipulated in the curriculum standards. The so-called foundation is that junior high school history class can neither be confused with senior high school history class, nor can it become a "compressed book" of college history courses, let alone an "encyclopedia" of history. Second, junior high school history curriculum should be conducive to students' lifelong development, and choose basic knowledge, basic skills and methods to adapt to lifelong learning.

The traditional history course has too many clues, dense knowledge points and great difficulty. Constructing a curriculum system that conforms to students' learning characteristics is one of the important contents of junior high school history curriculum reform. There are several changes in the new curriculum: First, it pays attention to the characteristics of history discipline, pays attention to the internal relationship between time series and learning content, and does not deliberately pursue the integrity of the discipline system. Second, pay attention to students' learning interest and experience, and strengthen the connection between course content and students' life and modern society. For example, increase the proportion of modern history. Many students are interested in transportation, clothing, movies, music and so on. Third, the course content selects the most influential major historical events, historical figures and historical phenomena in the development of human society. Fourth, it reduces the difficult, boring and abstract historical content. For example, a lot of knowledge about peasant uprisings, dynasty changes, laws and regulations has been deleted. The new curriculum of junior middle school history presents historical content through learning themes.

In traditional history learning, rote memorization and mechanical training are the main ways. Students passively accept historical facts and ready-made conclusions, and there are few opportunities to actively participate in teaching activities. Such history study will inevitably be rejected by students. Foreign countries have experienced the same confusion. For example, a survey in Britain in the mid-20th century showed that most students thought history was "very boring".