He is a fellow of the Historical Society of Nigeria and a Reader in History at the Department of History and Strategic Studies, University of Lagos. With over 26 years experience in lecturing history, Godwin Onyekpe, in this interview with MOTUNRAYO ABODERIN says a generation without indepth knowledge of its history is a lifeless generation.

The Historical Society of Nigeria presented a bill to the National Assembly to make history compulsory in secondary schools. What’s the latest?

The bill was presented in the first place because the Historical Society of Nigeria was very much worried about the decline of History and we thought that if care was not taken, our children would lose the history of their country. We felt the fortunes of History were fast declining. Having interacted with the Ministry of Education and other government agencies, we were asked to send a bill to the National Assembly.

We prepared the bill that stated that History should be made compulsory in schools. This bill was sent to the National Assembly in 2009/2010 at the time the sixth National Assembly was in power. Since then, we haven’t got feedback from the National Assembly. However, I’m optimistic that the bill would be passed because it’s for the nation’s benefit.

The bill is for the purpose of getting official endorsement of History as a compulsory subject in the nation’s secondary schools. If History is not encouraged at the secondary level, they may not be able to study it at the university level. Many students at tertiary level lack background knowledge of History because they did not take it at secondary school level. But we are saying that pupils should be exposed to History early enough in the career development. The bill is to get official endorsement of the subject at the secondary level.

Why is HSN interested in making history compulsory in secondary schools?

A child may be very brilliant, but if the child lacks the historical knowledge of his nation, his analysis of issues will be superficial. Our history is being ignored. Children are now interested in knowing the history of western world rather than their own history. They are not interested in studying it as a subject. They prefer to study Government because the syllabus is not heavy and can be completed in two or three days.

However, HSN is saying that History should not be ignored. It plays a key role in nation-building. This is the time to build the interest of our children in history because they are the leaders of tomorrow. We all must understand our past and know the way problems were solved in the past. When you don’t know the history of something, how will you know the way to handle that thing? Nigeria will move forward when our leaders go back to our history.

Does Nigeria have leaders who are history-conscious?

No. It’s sad to say, but Nigeria lacks leaders who are history-conscious. And it would be impossible to produce a successful generation. The present is a product of the past. And the past is the foundation of today, and today is the foundation of tomorrow. There is always that inter-organic connection between the past, present and the future. Historical knowledge helps to cast life on the problems of the society.

The United States of America, the former USSR and the rest encountered problems which Nigeria is encountering. So, knowledge of their history and how they solved their problems would give us light on how to solve ours. You don’t operate in a vacuum. Every profession has a past. There must be something to fall back on. Nigeria needs documentation on how to find solutions to its contemporary problems. A society that is not historically conscious cannot have a sense of history. That society is bound to repeat the problems of the past.

What role can the government play in promoting history in schools?

The government could also assist by encouraging the development of historical centres where pupils can visit. It could also fund research and financially support the development of historical centres. Historical centres need to be established. Through their establishment, the society will be more conscious of its history. Pupils would also be interested in the subject, because they will have a picture of what they are being taught in class. We must provide the theoretical and practical aspects of history.

Why are pupils disinterested in History as a subject?

I believe they think when you study History, you would become a teacher. But this is not true. There are so many professions that are linked to History. One can become a diplomatic officer, a family historian, and the likes.

Also, historians have marketed themselves well. Until historians promote our profession, it would be looked down upon. During my time, we had to study History of West Africa from the earliest time to 1,800, history of empires and kingdoms, abolition of slave trade and colonial rule among others. It was very extensive. So the HSN had to review the syllabus to make it more interesting for pupils. For history, it’s not area covered that matters, rather it’s the understanding of the significance of history for example or the relationship between the past of Nigeria and today that matters. If it’s 10 topics that are taught, that’s fine. As long as pupils have a good grasp of the subject, the nation will be the better for it.

What other measures is HSN embarking upon to promote History in schools?

We plan to award prices to the best History pupil in our various geo-political zones. We also plan to take the award to the university level. Aside the awards, we have gone ahead to set up regional historical societies that would promote local community history. This also must be enforced. School pupils should know the history of Lagos and then the history of Nigeria. From micro studies we will progress to macro studies.

What happens if the bill is not passed?

Why won’t the bill be passed? It must. We are very optimistic and we have done what we can do. However, if the bill is passed, pupils would benefit a great deal. However, the bill was sent when the sixth National Assembly was in power, so change of power could have affected the bill, but we will monitor the progress of the bill.

What is your message to the National Assembly?

The HSN would want to appeal to the National Assembly to look into the bill. We have tried every possible means to make ourselves heard. It’s high time the nation realised that we cannot relegate our history to the background. A nation without knowledge of its history is a lifeless nation. If this bill is passed, the nation would benefit.

I don't know why this bill is not getting all the attention it deserves since 2009. Its a shame our law makers will rather debate how to share money than to debate how to raise patriotic and progressive future generation. This bill need to scale through the house, because I believe If we study our history well enough, we'll understand what makes it great. If we understand what makes it great, we'll learn to cherish it. If we cherish it, we'll want to preserve it. If we want to preserve it; we'll fight against injustice of any kind, religion speculation, boko harram, sectionalism, disintegration of any kind and for social development. I believe this bill have a chance to rewrite the history of this country.

To those honourables Histoty is bunk, I pity them, because when the revolution comes History shall be used against them. History is to a nation, what soul is to human body. According to Einstein, the difference between the past,present and future is just an illusin. Methinks the HSN liase with stakeholders like ASUU, min of education. The national Assembly for now still busy with the bill on FAROUKING and 0TTE$LLARING.

I'm surprised that it isn't mandatory already.

It is amazing that this is even up for discussion. One would think it would be a given.

Anyway, I would advice to also be very specific that we are talking about NIGERIAN HISTORY here. Imagine the shock I got when a friend's younger sister, who attends one of the so called "assor" schools in Lagos (owned by Nigerians oh) was doing her history assignment and majority of the questions were based on American History.

What has that got to do with us for heaven's sake? If it were British now, it is a little understandable. . .at least our path crossed small. . .but American History. Seriously, Who gives a flying fig what caused the American Revolution??!!

eh

i think most HS history classes cover not only local history, but world history.

The American revolution would be covered in pretty much any discussion of world history..

Err. . . I believe there is a difference between WORLD HISTORY and AMERICAN HISTORY.

Except of course you think America is the world.

Sisi_Kill: Err. . . I believe there is a difference between WORLD HISTORY and AMERICAN HISTORY.

Except of course you think America is the world.

I once meet a historian on this website. He is from and lives in Nigeria. The funny part is that he knew next to nothing about Africa or Nigeria history. The only thing he knew was that we sold our "brothers and sisters to slaveri".
That guy knew alot about Europe and America history though.

One thing im sure about is that my forefathers sold their enemies, and not their "Brothers or Sisters".

Sisi_Kill: Err. . . I believe there is a difference between WORLD HISTORY and AMERICAN HISTORY.

Except of course you think America is the world.

Pretty much any world history class, unless they for some reason decide to skip the 1700s, is going to discuss the American Revolution (for example).

So, not at all surprising....

@Post

I don't know why history is currently not a compulsory subject in schools in Nigeria. Are our people not aware that if we don't learn from our past mistakes, we are bound to repeat them again? This is why history is important. We learn from the past so as to better the future. No wonder so many Nigerian youths back home are suffering from identity crisis. You see them acting more amnerican and british than the real americans and british themselves.

eh

i think most HS history classes cover not only local history, but world history.

[s]The American revolution would be covered in pretty much any discussion of world history[/s]..

Ode Oshi. What would people in my "hinterland" gain from learning about some boring American revolution? And why should they care? They might as well learn about the Chinese, Indian, Russian, Korean, Japanese, Spanish revolutions.

Why do you always think the world revolves around America?

If your America is so impressive, why not cross over to www.stormfront.org and have a ball with your fellow awesome Americans talking about American exceptionalism, all day long since you dont seem to never get tired bringing America into every discussion. Talking about America like its your job on a Nigerian forum is really annoying and downright disrespectful, IMO.

Your answer to every topic is: America or Like the Americans or something related to America. why? why?

Sisi_Kill: Err. . . I believe there is a difference between WORLD HISTORY and AMERICAN HISTORY.

Except of course you think America is the world.

Sadly, thats what he thinks. Cant seem to see beyond his nose.

The most likely reasons for not making history compulsory would probably be:

- ethnic controversy (pre colonial)
- ethnic controversy (1950s through 1970s)
- accuracy
- the lack of an overall positive situation in the present day (the history textbooks would be too depressing and uninspiring).

In all honesty, these might actually be good reasons to delay making history compulsory

A world history class should discuss significant events. One of the more significant events in the 1700s was the American revolution.

The rest of your posts are pretty much irrelevant nonsense

www.stormfront.org.

Yay American exceptionalism.

Your American brothers are waiting for you. . . lets go there

ekt_bear: A world history class should discuss significant events. One of the more significant events in the 1700s was the American revolution.

He does have a point though.

Do you remember learning about the French revolution or the Bolshevik revolution or the Meiji revolution in any detail in high school or middle school?

Unless one takes an AP class on the history of some other region of the world, I don't think much information (or in some cases, any) information about significant events in those regions is covered.

How on earth can you have a world history class and skip the French revolution.

Or the Bolshevik revolution.

Meiji restoration, I don't remember if we covered this in HS, but it was certainly in the textbook. We may have discussed it as well.

OK. So what events would you propose covering if one discusses 1700s?

Well, I don't think the French revolution was skipped, or the Bolshevik revolution in my case.

But if I recall correctly, the description of them amounted to a paragraph or two giving the briefest summary. Not something one can do a real assignment on and learn names of principal personalities, principal places and events, dates, etc.

But the point is, the world history that one learns before college isn't real world history. It's necessarily slanted. You don't learn about Mehmet Ali of Egypt, or Tipu Sultan, or Suleiman "the Magnificent" do you? How much does one read in the U.S. on Toussaint Louverture and Simon Bolivar? Not much, if anything, I think. Or Giuseppe Garibaldi? I didn't even know who he was until a year or two ago.

One can't expect a group to learn all of the events happening everywhere in the world in each century. So they have to decide which ones to include and which included ones to emphasize. I don't think the American revolution would really have any reason to be included for West Africans.

Well, obviously any world history course will be slanted and emphasize some material over the other.

Whether it is biased or not is not what is being discussed here.

The question is, are there some events that would/should be included in any summary of history?

For example, if talking about the 60s, would the Americans landing on the moon be included?

I would argue that yes, it would. And more generally, in each century, there are events that everyone would include.

I would argue further that for the 1700s, the American revolution is one such event.

So. You seem to think that the American revolution is not of interest to West Africans learning about 18th century history, I take it?

If so, then what events from the 18th century would you include in your hypothetical West African world history course?

Speaking of West Africans.

Liberians. Would you say that they too would have no interest in the American revolution in a world history course?

Hehe

ekt_bear: The question is, are there some events that would/should be included in any summary of history?

Well, I'm not sure that there really are some events that should be included in any summary of world history because I don't know how they teach world history in Japan or Brazil or Indonesia or other places. All I know of is the U.S.

The French revolution, I see as something that could be given a mere footnote or sentence in a history textbook if it really must be included in all world history textbooks. The American revolution and the Bolshevik revolution could be given a bit more attention, although I don't think it's necessary to really focus on them and learn them in detail unless one has a particular interest in that country.

For example, if talking about the 60s, would the Americans landing on the moon be included?

Actually, I would put that the Soviets launched a satellite into space in the late 50s. That would convey the general idea of what was going on and it would be a more significant and representative event.

I would argue that yes, it would. And more generally, in each century, there are events that everyone would include.

I would argue further that for the 1700s, the American revolution is one such event.

So. You seem to think that the American revolution is not of interest to West Africans learning about 18th century history, I take it?

Well, I don't think it's something that would need to be studied to the point where a West African student would be doing assignments specifically over that event. Maybe a few sentences or a paragraph would be enough.

ekt_bear: Speaking of West Africans.

Liberians. Would you say that they too would have no interest in the American revolution in a world history course?

Hehe

It depends.

I don't think Liberians, even Americo-Liberian descended Liberians, view that part of American history as really part of their history. I doubt that they would give Paul Revere, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton, etc. much attention or go into it in any detail. It's not like Americans go into 18th century British history in detail in world history or anything.

OK. So you agree that this event should at least be mentioned when discussing world history.

Then my initial posts stand.

Now, whether one would go into depth or not is I suppose at the discretion of the school board. Or possibly a decision made by the school itself, or the instructor.

I'm actually not sure. They started settling heavily mostly in the 1800s? So some of them might actually view it as part of their history too.

Anyway, I don't really know what a world history course in Liberia looks like.

But I would not be surprised if they discuss it in some detail.

Well, I think the American revolution has to be mentioned just to explain what America is - where it came from. That revolution would only be mentioned because one wants to/has to talk about one of the most significant countries in modern times, not because the event itself demands actual historical study.

Btw, if one somehow managed to only mention Sputnik while not at all mentioning one of the more impressive achievements of mankind's history (landing on the moon)...well, that would be pretty unfortunate.

I understand that there is a latent anti-American bias among some Nigerians. But credit has to be given to great accomplishments, whether you like the country doing it or not..

ekt_bear: Btw, if one somehow managed to only mention Sputnik while not at all mentioning one of the more impressive achievements of mankind's history (landing on the moon)...well, that would be pretty unfortunate.

I understand that there is a latent anti-American bias among some Nigerians. But credit has to be given to great accomplishments, whether you like the country doing it or not..

Well if one has to emphasize particular events in the space race, a satellite being sent into space for the first time would be the most impressive achievement, and the one most representative of later space exploration.

The man on the moon thing was more of a political/cold war thing than anything. Kennedy himself didn't really care about space exploration and said as much.

Rgp92: One thing im sure about is that my forefathers sold their enemies, and not their "Brothers or Sisters".

They were their brothers and sisters , or were the "enemies" aliens?

Landing a human being on the moon >>> sending a satellite into space, as far as accomplishments go.

Both are historic. But the former more significant, and a bigger push of existing boundaries.

ekt_bear: Landing a human being on the moon >>> sending a satellite into space, as far as accomplishments go.

Both are historic. But the former more significant, and a bigger push of existing boundaries.

lol, I think you have it exactly backwards

Anyway, getting back on topic, I think maybe the space race is something Africans could really take something valuable from to inspire them if they studied it.

I think it would be easier to justify focus on that in history textbooks than on the history of a far away nation's revolution and founding.

Sure, I guess we can agree to disagree.