<p>My school offers AP World History, but most schools offer European History instead. AP WOrld History is my all-time favorite course; the information was just really interesting. However, most students I've conversed with prefer European History, "cuz that's where the important stuff happened". This really ****es me off; there are so many civilizations and cultures they are neglecting! So CC, which do you prefer?</p>
<p>I haven’t taken either, I’m taking AP Euro next year since our school doesn’t offer AP World History. </p>
<p>I prefer AP World because it’s more broad and doesn’t just focus on Western Civilizations.</p>
<p>Both, imho. I took World my soph year and am taking Euro next year</p>
<p>I personally like World better but I took Euro for a challenge… and it really was haha</p>
<p>The amount of info learned in Euro is probably way harder to understand then World since everything in Euro is somehow connected to something else where in World you go from country to country. </p>
<p>If you want a challenge go with Euro and if you want something interesting go with World (not saying that world isnt challenging or euro isn’t interesting)</p>
<p>^interesting, I found US History more challenging than world because it was boring as hell</p>
<p>Take AP world, the world doesn’t revolve around Europe.</p>
<p>I think my school offers every social studies and history AP, and it has (except for US Gov, which we just added this year) for a long time, so I’ve always had a lot of choice, and I chose World. I’ve never chosen a history that really concentrated on the Western world when I didn’t have to. I had to either take APUSH on regular US History, so then I did, but I’ve taken Art History and Human Geography.</p>
<p>I’m a rising senior and after all these years I am so tired of consistently getting only (or mostly) European/Western history. Especially because American history bores me to no end. And my school is very into giving me a classical education - Latin is required - so I might get more of it than you. Not that it isn’t sometimes interesting. I’m obsessed with Russia, but Eurocentrism is just really annoying sometimes. Sometimes I want to know what Leopold II thought of the Congolese and other times I just want to know about the Congolese.</p>
<p>Leopold II was stupid. He used the Congolese as slaves to expand his empire.</p>
<p>the congolese weren’t just a single ethnic group… although i’m sure leopold thought thery were</p>
<p>Of course, the concept of Congo as a country didn’t even exist until Europeans colonized Africa and divided it into their own borders with no regard to existing tribes and already established borders.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So an individual country’s history has no connection to another country’s?</p>
<p>i am going to take AP World History next year and European History the following year. i took honors for like a prep for AP and i found out the European part of history is way more interesting.</p>
<p>Is Congo a really really significant part of World History? Because that’s our school’s summer reading for apworld and it seems that was one of the first things cc’ers seemed to talk about lol I imagined each african kingdom would’ve been equally significant but i dunno =/</p>
<p>European history is filled with a lot of the romanticized things we’ve heard about since our childhood, so it’s easy to undersatnd that people think it’s where all the cool stuff happens. Hell, even I think so (to some extent; I’m East Asian and I think East Asian history is a total bore, except maybe Chinese. I think African history is really interesting, and South American as well, but with Asia, even though it constitutes like half the world’ sland mass, its just really uninteresting) Plus, I think it’s rather difficult for AP World to cover a general history of the entire world’s civilizations in one year =/ I would rather take multiple indepth courses on just one focused region.</p>
<p>^ No congo is not that significant in the course. It’s pretty well rounded, but World tries to stay away from Europe due to overlap with Euro history</p>
<p>I agree w/ messiah that the world doesnt revolve around europe 
but i would suggest taking world history b/c having the overall context is better that one specific place and there is a significant amount of euro history in world (i took it this yr.) but also a large focus on other parts specifically asia and africa. I liked the class overall even though most of the yr I had a love-hate w/ my teacher but he was a really good teacher in the end lol cuz I got a 5!! </p>
<p>-Sandra</p>
<p>I’ve taken World and US, but not Euro.
I never liked world and never paid attention, but I really liked US History. I’m planning to probably take a Euro course in college.</p>
<p>^OMG, why do u like US over World! lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OMG, you guys, I was just saying something random. Perhaps should have said, sometimes I want to know about the Kingdom of France and sometimes I want to know about the Kingdom of Aksum.</p>
<p>@akabane
i dunno lol, but i never really liked history until 11th grade</p>
<p>i’m thinking about restudying world as a senior next year and challenging the exam</p>
<p>^world history is what sparked my interest in history</p>
<p>im thinking about restudying the material too. It’s nice to know a lot of history and be a smart-ass all the time =)</p>