Why Our History Curriculum Needs a Hard Reset

Let me start with a disclaimer, I do not claim authority in the complex matters of curriculum development. In the grand scheme of things am nothing but a school teacher, a mere foot soldier in the trenches of education, whose understanding of curriculum stems from one or two courses I took at university, a couple of books and research journals I have read, and a decade of teaching. What I offer here is not an academic treatise, please quote me right, but a set of heartfelt, experience-rooted reflections. My humble two kwacha on the ongoing curriculum review process at the Malawi Institute of Education (MIE), particularly on the state of our primary and secondary History syllabus.

What Even Is History?

We cannot talk about teaching History without first addressing what it is. While definitions vary depending on whom you ask; historians, politicians, or philosophers, I will settle for one: History is the study of past events, particularly in relation to humans, that are both significant and factually true. The last part, ‘truth’, is key. Because when History becomes detached from truth, it becomes something else entirely: propaganda, mythology, or worse, mis-education.

History is not simply a chronicle of what happened; it is a carefully constructed narrative of how and why it happened. It is both art and science, an interpretation and interrogation of events, contexts, and consequences. This is especially critical in a nation like Malawi, still grappling with its post-colonial identity, development aspirations, and political maturity. A well-structured and truthful historical curriculum can serve as a compass for national coherence and transformation.

Teaching the Wrong Past

Let’s begin with what our children are learning in primary schools, specifically in Standard 7 and 8. The curriculum proudly features the Greek and Roman Civilizations, a commendable inclusion that introduces learners to classic historical frameworks. However, it is marred by glaring inaccuracies. In the current Standard 8 Social and Environmental Sciences (SES) textbook, for instance, the Greek civilization is said to have been founded in 5 BCE. This is egregiously false. Most scholarly sources place the emergence of Ancient Greek civilization around 850–800 BCE, with the Archaic Period beginning around 750 BCE.

This is not a minor factual slip; it is a fundamental error that undermines the credibility of our educational system. Worse still, this mistake was also present in previous editions, suggesting that the last curriculum review process either missed or ignored it entirely. It reflects a culture of cut-and-paste pedagogy, devoid of intellectual rigour or cross-verification.

Our students are being taught wrong history, a betrayal not only of academic standards but of the public trust. Teachers, following the syllabus and relying on approved texts, deliver this inaccurate content in good faith. In time, however, they risk being labelled incompetent by their own students, who, upon discovering the discrepancies, may question their teachers' credibility. This creates a corrosive cycle of mistrust in the education system. And let’s not forget: history is foundational. Errors made at this level ripple across years of academic development.

Misplaced Priorities in Secondary Education

Now let’s turn to secondary education, particularly the Junior Secondary School History syllabus. One inclusion that strikes me as curious, even pointless, is the study of the Aztec Civilization. While the Aztecs indeed offer rich historical material, one must ask: to what end? What analytical or developmental value does the study of Aztec society offer to a Form 2 student in Malawi, grappling with issues of food insecurity, governance failures, and limited access to learning resources?

Meanwhile, our own complex, often painful, historical milestones are relegated to side-notes or completely omitted. Where is the Cabinet Crisis of 1964? Where is Yatuta Chisiza and his rebellion? Where are the Mikuyu detentions, or the economic boom of the 1970s under Dr. Banda’s regime, and more importantly, why has it not been replicated since the dawn of democracy in 1994?

To teach History without addressing the political shifts and socio-economic decisions that have shaped modern Malawi is to engage in academic malpractice. We do our students no favour by shielding them from the difficult truths of our national story. In fact, we handicap their ability to critically assess their country’s trajectory.

The Need for Difficult Conversations

Some argue that delving into Malawi’s post-independence political history risks politicising the classroom. But History is political. Every decision to include or exclude certain events, individuals, or ideologies from the syllabus is itself a political act. The question is not whether we politicise History, but how responsibly we do it.

Germany confronted its Nazi past. South Africa wrestled with the legacies of apartheid through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. America continues to debate its historical narratives around slavery, segregation, and systemic racism. These nations understand a profound truth: you cannot build a future while ignoring your past. Malawi must follow suit.

We need what I call a national curriculum of difficult conversations. Our students must be taught to think about why and how Malawi transitioned from multiparty politics to one-party rule, and later, back to democracy. They must question, not memorize. History should challenge, not comfort. Only then can it be truly transformative.

A Scientific Approach to Teaching History

Beyond curriculum content, the pedagogy itself needs a revamp. History is too often taught as a static subject, focused on memorisation. Names, dates, wars. But it can be dynamic, analytical, and even practical.

Let us imagine a scientific approach to History, where learners investigate historical problems, compare sources, analyse motives, and draw evidence-based conclusions. Think of it as History Labs, similar to science practicals. Students could study primary documents, watch documentaries, stage debates, or simulate historical events. They could examine how colonial land policies affect today’s land disputes, or compare Kamuzu’s development model to the current administration’s.

Assessment must follow suit. Let’s go beyond essays and short answers during national examinations. Introduce project-based evaluations, presentations, peer reviews, and community history investigations. Let them research their village’s history, interview elders, and present findings in both Chichewa and English. That is the kind of education that breeds thinkers, not robots.

Decolonising the Mind

The philosopher Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o wrote about decolonising the mind – urging Africans to reclaim their narratives and cultural memory. Our History curriculum should be an instrument of this reclamation. By centring our national story, warts and all, we build a citizenry that knows where it has come from, and can decide, with clarity, where it is going.

Too often, our curriculum is saturated with European triumphalism and sanitized global history, while our own histories are oversimplified or left out entirely. A history syllabus that only teaches the coming of missionaries, the construction of Chilembwe Day, and Kamuzu Banda's portrait does a disservice to a generation that deserves to know why things are the way they are.

Final Thoughts

I repeat, I am not an expert. I do not hold a PhD in curriculum development, nor do I sit on any education board. I am just a teacher who cares deeply about what and how our learners are taught.

But perhaps it is from this position that I have the clearest view of what is broken. Maybe it takes someone who has spent hours explaining the factors that led to the decline of the Aztec Empire to a hungry child in a rural classroom to truly grasp how disconnected our curriculum has become from our context.

These are my humble observations. Let them be taken, challenged, or even rejected, but let them also serve as a call to rethink, reimagine, and rebuild. Because to understand our future, we must first get our past right.

If my thoughts resonated with you, feel free to share them and join the conversation. Malawi’s curriculum review is not just a technocratic exercise, it’s a national project that affects every learner, teacher, and citizen.