'Hitlerisation' is damaging pupils' historical knowledge

History lessons for secondary pupils are now dominated by the study of Adolf Hitler and the Second World War, the Government's school inspectors have found.

A report by Ofsted, the school inspection body, warned that the "Hitlerisation" of courses threatened to damage understanding of history, and could result in pupils leaving school ignorant of key events.

Of all the history lessons monitored during the last school year, more lessons focussed on Hitler's Germany than on any other topic.

Although the study of Hitler was "properly treated" in secondary school lessons for the youngest pupils, the danger for older children was that they are forced to repeat the topic at latter stages of their education.

The inspectors' warning echoes the concerns of eminent historians and the Prince of Wales who recently called for the "narrow and fragmented" school syllabus to be abandoned.

The Ofsted analysis, History in Secondary Schools, concluded that although Hitler's Germany dominated GCSE and A-level courses schools had many other options to choose from. While many schools choose wisely and constructed "rich courses", others opted for "more of the same" and constantly repeated the study of Hitler.

"If course programmes are constructed with narrow objectives, with 'more of the same' being seen as a route to success, students' experience of history is likely to suffer as a consequence, as is the preparedness of those wanting to continue with the study of history at a higher level," the inspectors' report warned.

History is currently a compulsory school subject for pupils aged between five and 14 years old. It is only optional at GCSE level but around 220,000 candidates sit the exams every year although fewer than 40,000 students continue to A-level.

The inspectors also found that many schools failed to develop pupils' lasting knowledge of the subject and a sense of chronology of historical events.

While pupils had a good understanding of the topic they were currently studying, many had no idea how it related to periods already studied, the education watchdog warned.

They concluded: "In these cases, although pupils demonstrate a reasonable contextual knowledge to support the work they are currently doing, they cannot locate that knowledge more broadly or make sensible links, recalling previous work."

Chris McGovern, director of the History Curriculum Association and a former curriculum adviser, yesterday agreed that too much emphasis was given to Hitler and argued that history lessons should cover the "landmarks of British history" with a renewed focus "on military and political events".

"Too few children could tell you which British monarch united the thrones of England and Scotland and who Nelson was", he added.

In an article for the Royal Society of Literature last month, the Prince Charles wrote: "I would contend that what is needed in both English and history is a coherent, chronological narrative which allows young people to be rooted in their tradition and to understand how they have arrived at the present."

This followed a call by Professor Simon Schama, the broadcaster and academic, who said that he would prefer history teaching be abolished altogether rather than continue with the current situation in which lessons are restricted to "Hitler and the Henrys".