Child learning about slavery in primary school during Black History Month

[mamaM0]

Don't really know where to begin with this but... DD got homework which included a BHM theme as main part of English section.
They were given a timeline of "historic" events and asked to put them in correct order, there were at least 3 "events" referring to the transatlantic slave trade; Europeans "buying and selling of African slaves" , "the abolition of slavery act" and "slavery becoming illegal in the British Empire".
DD is in Y3.
I was not expecting these highly complex subjects to be taught in primary school let alone be rolled out in such a crude, crass way.
My heart is heavy with this subject matter and I feel the school could've taken a much more sensitive approach - better yet, focus on positive historic BH themes to actually inspire the kids - which is why it was created in the first place; to shine a light on black people too often portrayed as negative in western societies.
I'm posting this because I am in shock! And would like to know if this is being taught in your DC's primary schools? If so how have you approached it?
Is this normal?
My DH has refused to allow our DD to complete the homework.

My DS covered the transatlantic slave trade in high school (we are Scottish) and I was super-impressed by the way it was taught. However they didn't encounter the subject until S3 at which point history is an elective option. If he hadn't taken history he wouldn't have covered the topic at all, which I think is wrong. I'd rather everyone gets at least an overview at primary age than miss some children entirely.

However, I absolutely take your point that this shouldn't be linked to BHM which is supposed to be a celebration. We need to find time in the curriculum to do both things well.

Hi OP, just to say I think you're showing angelic patience towards Kellie45 who really needs to sit down.

I've taught history of slave trade and slavery at university level and the amount of misconceptions is astounding. So I've been assuming that more teaching on it in school could only be a good thing.

But on reflection, you're right - Atlantic slavery should not be taught as 'Black' history. It involved people of all skin colours. It's global history, and British, and Caribbean (and Portuguese etc etc). Positioning it as black history feels like victim blaming. And that has to be harmful for Black kids especially, who've got enough to contend with.

Im with you - think it is too complex and sensitive to skim through and park as "history" . Needs more of a positive focus and context, not just a random one off subject. Homework at primary isnt compulsory and if you want to why not raise with teachers and head? I m a bit gobsmacked that they teach 4 and 5 year olds about the crucifixion. My son was traumatised. Bloody schools

Does this timeline start near or with the transatlantic slave trade or does it include the long history in Africa and of Black people in Europe before that? Does it include any of the UK civil rights events beyond slavery becoming illegal?

That to me would be my focus with the homework. I agree with Doubtmyself, but rather than send the homework back, If it starts too close to transatlantic slave trade, I would grow the timeline to add more events, trying to find ones that would interest your child along with any that are local to your area or relate to your family would be things I prioritise. It sucks to need to, but I think schools sometimes need to be shown other ways of handling this than the timelines so often found online for this sort of thing. I've been utterly baffled by some things like this have come home and reinventing them with my child has worked well for us.

Black History Month is an American import that I think a lot of schools struggle with on both sides of the Atlantic as it so often becomes mostly Transatlantic Slave Trade or very specific US civil rights events history month instead, but even within the UK, there is so much more than that. If we're talking broader into Africa and the slave trade as this timeline, then many, many other events should also be on there. Having a couple of positive faces really isn't enough and trying to get into the details of who was doing in regard to slavery really isn't going to work with a child this age.

Henry Dundas... "As Home Secretary he used his influence to frustrate efforts to end the slave trade. Academics have calculated that this resulted in an additional 630,000 people being transported from Africa to British colonies in the West Indies."

An additional 630,000 people were enslaved because one man blocked a bill. Over Half. A. Million. Humans. Do not try to tell me the Brits were the good guys here @Kellie45

I have actually visited the countries where slave trading took place and done my own research thank you very much and talked to Africans firsthand in their own country.

I don't think I've ever seen you make a post that wasn't a personal attack of some kind.

Are you black, out of curiosity?

Why are you calling people "slaves"?

I think there's a distinction necessary here. They were enslaved people, people whom others enslaved. There is nothing innate about slavery.

@mamaM0 👍🏿🤩🙏🏾
@Doubtmyself 👍🏿🤩🙏🏾

Nothing like anecdotal research in the pursuit of truth, eh?😆

...fuck me...

Britain was the one European country that sought to abolish the slave trade

Someone's been hitting the Kool Aid hard, Imperial flavour methinks.

The myth of the Good Empire/ Britain as a beacon of righteousness to the rest of the world is taking a long time to find its way to the dustbin of history.

This is because it appeals to a sense of national pride, something that proper teaching of history, at an age when students are able to think (as opposed to responding to human interest stories in an emotional way) should stamp out.

I think 9 or 10 is far too young to learn anything about the Holocaust. The only lesson most children that old will take away from a module on the Holocaust is that the Germans were the baddies and everyone else were the goodies, and even that 'we' fought WWII to rescue the Jews.

The point of Holocaust courses is to underline how the population of a modern, well-educated nation state can fall prey to a set of very attractive myths. It's a lesson that is frequently missed, apparently.

I agree that BHM is a very American approach.

I only realised how little she knew about her own country's history (South Africa, specifically amaXhosa) when she talked about slavery being so terrible (it was) but seemed to think the impact of colonialism and apartheid on black South Africans was minor in comparison.

The conversation at school (and I'm glad they are tackling these issues) is entirely about trans-Atlantic slavery. It's an important topic, but not the only topic.

She was in awe of her school friend for having slave ancestors, because their parents were originally from Nigeria but grew up in the USA. She (and her friend) hadn't put together the timeline of abolition of slavery, and her friends parents growing up in Nigeria then ending up in the USA.

I agree that limiting it to a special month undercuts the historical and contemporary significance.

I’m not black, your post came up in active threads, so I hope you don’t mind me sharing my thoughts, I appreciate this space of Mumsnet isn’t for me broadly speaking.

Whilst I think children absolutely should learn about the slave trade and the repercussions of it, I strongly agree with you that 1) Black History Month is not the time, as you say there is more to black history than the slave trade 2) Year 3 is too young to take on the enormity of the slave trade. In the same way Year 3 would be too young to learn about, and take on the enormity of, the Holocaust.

Are you black? Why are you here?

@Kellie45 is undoubtedly a white troll and it did not take long for it to expose itself. I wish people would just ignore the racist trolls that come on blackmumsnet so that they can crawl back from whichever gutter they came.

It should be taught, but it is never taught truthfully. I never learned about the well established Arab slave trade already happening for centuries on the East Coast and that they castrated their slaves but cutting everthing off. A practice that only became illegal in the 1960s. I didn't learn about the push back from African leaders on ending the slave trade and how rich they became from it. 1 King made 250,000 a year in the 1700s.

As much as Britain profited and participated in the slave trade, they were also the only ones to begin the fight to end it and it cost them a lot. Since slavery was normal and common worldwide, there was no benefits to ending the slave trade where traders were concerned.

Thomas Sowell kick started my learning on this subject and I have been studying it for about 7 years now. Yes, it is an uncomfortable subject but it should be uncomfortable for all races. Everyone was complicit in slavery and that should be taught instead of making white kids believe their ancestors were all slavers and evil whilst teaching black kids that they were and always will be victims and oppressed.

This^ The problem is our Country is being scapegoated around the world as the ONLY ones that were involved in the slave trade and it seems to be accepted that this is ok and the truth. It's currently fashionable to bring the UK down in any way you can and that includes us.History is being re written left, right and centre. There is never the whole picture anymore with all the facts.

@mamaM0 I completely understand where you are coming from. This is a complex subject that requires detail and nuance. You post above showed that in itself. I am with you that BHM should be a celebration to kids this young.