No matter how much history is taught, or who teaches it, I doubt if it will make us learn from the past. Take Afghanistan - a known disaster area when it comes to foreign interventions, including the Soviet invasion within recent memory. Did that stop the Coalition of the Willing?

CJ Morgan.

“Who should teach history at schools, if not teachers?”

Students could always try "hyperhistory".

http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/History_n2/a.html

What is there to learn from a teacher in Australia?

How to read from an excuse manual.
How to ask for more and more taxpayer funding.
How to spend as much taxpayer funding as possible on imports from other countries.
How to use the Australian public as a scapegoat.

I don't know about anywhere else but in Australia the term teacher is a misnomer, it should really be repeater.

Cripes vanna/HRS/Timkins et al, you'd have to do better than that pathetic and superficial effort. If that's the sort of crap that you try and flog to schools, it's unsurprising that they're not buying. You don't know much about history, do you?

I see that one of OLO's other scholars has weighed in to the debate. individual has demonstrated on other threads that he has little knowledge of, nor interest in, history - so I guess his motivation for contributing is his antipathy towards teachers. While vannakins' perpetual bleating about teachers is attributable to his personal relationship failures, what's your problem, individual?

It wouldn't surprise anybody that your personal experience with education is limited, so on what basis do you make your slurs about contemporary teachers?

CJ wins.

Bears don't need Air conditioners, if they did they would have invented them.
The problem with the "Technological" approach to history is that it then becomes totally one sided due to the fact that outside the West there is no ingenuity and invention, the Majority world has been intellectually for hundreds if not thousands of years and is looking like it'll stay that way.
You could argue that due to Western innovation the majority world has stopped innovating after their exposure to our technology, they don't need to invent things, if we haven't bothered to invent it they're not likely to need it anyway.
I may seem to be thinking in counter intuitive way to people who have read my other posts but a balanced curriculum based on the history of human interactions is probably more valuable than one based on "Technology", after a certain point theres nothing to learn about Majority world technological prowess.
If you really THINK about technology, where it comes from and what it means you're not going to be intimidated by Lefty Guilt Trips and "Bash The Dead White Males" rhetoric.