That's the entire point of history classes, and makes a lot more sense than saying "in your first class you will learn every fact between the year 0 and 1000, in your second class between 1001 and 1500, ...". It's much more effective to start off with by providing context, then as minds get more educated to get into details.

The object of high school history wasn't to teach you the names of all the kings of England. It was to give you a context to understand the modern world. [1]

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/know.html

I was a homeschooled kid whose father taught him programming. I still managed to learn the value of history.

I'll just say, even though public school history education may have its problems, at least generally its not taught by someone who considers studying history to be a waste of time.

"Let's try and breeze past this useless mumbo jumbo as fast as we can; we have a LOT of web frameworks to cover!"

If one is home-schooled by parents who give the child a well-rounded education, why not. In this case, one parent is explicitly considering history to be a useless topic.

No ancestor of your comment said anything about homeschooling.