History education for nation-building in Ethiopia, Germany, Rwanda, South Africa, Switzerland, and USA: A comparative analysis

Abstract This study examined the role of history education for nation building in Ethiopia, Germany Rwanda, South Africa, Switzerland, and USA using a comparative research method. Student textbooks and syllabi were the main data sources. Document review was the principal data-gathering tool and the data was analysed qualitatively. Findings revealed that there are some aim and learning objectives embedded in the textbooks and syllabi to cultivate unity and patriotism, and promote democratic values that facilitate nation building. Except in the context of Rwanda and USA, in all countries national history textbooks gave more emphasis to regional and global topics than national topics. In Rwanda, South Africa, and Ethiopia centrally prescribed one-size-fits-all contents focused on national narratives that appear to intentionally overlook ethnic-narratives. After the historic genocide in Rwanda and apartheid in South Africa, history textbooks focused on peace and reconciliation, and settlement of ethnic and race-based clashes. In the United States, Switzerland, and Germany, the instructional materials’ preparation process is decentralized to regional states or cantons. Except in South Africa, virtually in all countries, history is a compulsory subject. In Ethiopia, South Africa, and Switzerland history is taught as a separate subject, where as in the remaining countries it is taught as a combined social studies subject. Vis-à-vis the pedagogy, learner-centred methods and continuous assessment techniques appeared in the curricula often. The main lessons for Ethiopia include the need to incorporate more contents that help to ensure peace and national understanding, settle ethnic-based clashes, and facilitate national integration and the nation-building process.

Sisay Awgichew has completed his first degree in History education from Haramaya University and his second degree in Curriculum and Instruction from Addis Ababa University. He has been working as a teacher educator for more than one and half decade. Since 2013, he has been working as a lecturer and served as a department head and Associate dean at Haramaya University. His research areas are teacher education, multicultural education, and history education curriculum and instruction. Currently, he is a PhD candidate at Addis Ababa University.
Enguday Ademe (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at Addis Ababa University. She has been supervising PhD candidates in her field. Her research interests include Curriculum and Instruction, Teacher Education, and Gender and Education. She has published different scholarly articles on local and international peer-reviewed journals.

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
History education can enhance national cohesion, convey collective historical memory, create peaceful socialization in the society, and play a critical role in shaping the nation-building process and producing imagined communities. However, the issues of what to teach and how to teach or how can countries use history education for nation building have been contentious in history curriculum making in Ethiopia. Hence, this study intended to provide some insights about the experiences of selected countries history curriculum construction and the potential lessons to learn. Each country can benefit from the experiences of the other. More importantly, Ethiopia can get considerable lessons from global practices in a way that helps the country design and develop history curricula that serve its national interests and facilitate the overall nation building process.

Introduction
Education is the basis to social cohesion, harmony, and stability (John, 2010), and plays a role in shaping the nation-building project of a nation and its political, social, economic and historical consciousness (Suleymanov, 2008;;Paulson, 2015;Hawkey, 2015). History education, in particularly, can enhance national cohesion and socialization within a society. International organizations such as UNESCO recognized that history teaching plays a vital role in the development of identity and promotion of nationalistic ideologies, reconciliations, democratizations, and long-term stability (Klerides, 2018). Researchers also acknowledged that history education is a key site for constructing, integrating, and maintaining common identity. It also conveys collective historical memory and shapes imagined communities (Al-Haj, 2005;Astrom et al., 2017;Chin, 2012;Demise, 2016;Elizabeth, 2007;Hofman, 2007;Symcox & Wilschut, 2009;Warnasuriya, 2018). As a result, in many countries, history is one of the core subjects taught in schools (Ahmad & Ayudin, 2011;Green et al., 2010;Parkes & Donnelly, 2014), and it is compulsory in some countries for children up to age 14 (Carretero et al., 2012;Paulson, 2015, p. 17). However, in Ethiopia and globally, the issues of what to teach and how to teach or how can countries use history education for nation building are contentious in history curriculum making. In addition, the aim and objectives of history curriculum, the status of the subject, and assessment mechanisms are not investigated meticulously. Hence, in this study, we intended to provide some insights about the history curriculum construction experiences of selected countries.

Statement of the problem
History education is indispensable for fostering social cohesion and nation-building (Chin, 2012;Elizabeth, 2007;Hoefte & Veenendaal, 2019;Symcox & Wilschut, 2009). Despite its importance, historical controversies are ubiquitous, and in many nations, history subject has been a contested field/discipline, and is a subject of continuous discourse and interpretation (Black & MacRaild, 2000;Takako, 2011;Warnasuriya, 2018). Some argue history education is partial to political ideologies and open to critical political debates that frenzied history curriculum reform (Metzger & Harris, 2018). Others claim that dominant ideologies have affected the nature and contents of history education (Elizabeth, 2007;Zajda, 2009). Besides, the international debates on history education are centred on the undecided nexus between ideology (political expectations) and curricular assumptions (Zajda, 2009).
Researchers elucidated that history education is frequently an area of public debate, a cause for government unrest, and a site of struggle over collective memory and cultural literacy (Astrom et al., 2017;Chin, 2012;Hultin, 1996). The debates over national narratives have frequently led to public clashes over what and how history should be taught in schools. In some nation-states, these debates have become so intense that they are described as "history" and "culture wars" (Catherine, 2017. p.vi) and "history wars" (Hofman, 2007;Symcox & Wilschut, 2009;Carretero et al., 2012;Parkes & Donnelly, 2014.p.13). As a result, nations are forced to rethink their past: their competing interpretations, rival narratives, and revisionist histories. Besides, what Green et al. (2010) argued as, "the selection and legitimation of certain historical knowledge as what, as a nation, we remember, and what, as a nation, we forget" (p. 308) is among the critical agendas for many countries. All these questions need critical investigations.
The sources of contest are different such as individual historical thinking, political interests of pressure groups, and consciousness of constructionist and primordial historian views on history (Ahonen, 2005;Black & MacRaild, 2000;Elizabeth, 2007;Levine, 1974;Parkes & Donnelly, 2014;Sorenson, 1992). To manage the contest, some countries encourage multiple narratives in history education contrary to those who advocate single narratives. For instance, in Japan, China, Taiwan, South Korea, and the Russian Federation history textbooks are carefully checked by the state and use them as national ideological dissemination and nation-building tools (Zajda, 2009).On the other hand, in India, Sweden, and Canada (Astrom et al., 2017), and England (Zajda, 2009) state controls are minimal in history textbook preparation.
In Ethiopia, history education in secondary schools is a highly centralized subject. However, there are elite-based public clashes as there is no consensus among different groups on the history of Ethiopia (Mekonnen & Hindeya, 2012). Besides, the political entrepreneurs manipulated the history of the country and fostered ethnic conflicts in the country (Jessner, 2012). Since the 1970s, ethno-nationalists have been questioning the state-building process, national symbols and narratives. Moreover, history education became more complicated after the Tigray Liberation Front (TPLF) controlled the country and restructured it along ethnic-lines. To show the degree of complexity of the problem Tareke (2009) argued that few countries in Africa are as enriched and burdened by the past as Ethiopia. As a result, in many schools teachers are reluctant to teach some of the questioned history topics (Gerald, 2003). To draw lessons and address these challenges, this study compared and contrasted the experiences of Ethiopia, Germany, Rwanda, South Africa, Switzerland, and USA with the guidance of the following basic research question: (1) What are the aim and objectives of history education in Ethiopia, Germany, Rwanda, South Africa, Switzerland, and USA?
(2) What are the commonalities and differences in the history curriculum construction practices of these countries?
(3) What lessons can history curriculum makers in Ethiopia learn from these practices?
The outcomes of the study might have several significances. It can ignite interest on other researchers to deal with the issue in a broader scope. Furthermore, history education practitioners and curriculum makers can get access to the overview of the most vital concerns on history education and nation building. It may serve policy makers to figure out essential elements in history curriculum development that help to cultivate national consensus, democratization, and facilitate nationbuilding endeavours. It may also help countries to learn from the experiences of others.

Methodology
The study examined the upper secondary school (grades 11-12) history textbooks and syllabi of Ethiopia, Germany, Rwanda, South Africa, Switzerland and USA. Their state formation and institutional arrangement practices, geographical diversity, and historical experiences were considered as key factors in selecting the countries. A comparative research method with international education perspectives (Crossley & Broadfoot, 1992;Sweeting, 2005) and theories of transnational analyses (Popkewitz, 2019) was used. These approaches help to compare educational similarities and differences between nation states in a global framework (Crossley & Broadfoot, 1992) as new history is promoted in universal pedagogical norms (Klerides & Zembylas, 2017). The transnational analyses help us to understand the features of history curriculum and its practices that are connected beyond the local context, and recognize multinational perspective. In this regard, Popkewitz (2019) argued that transnational comparative history education analyses can provide a vital mode of thinking about history curriculum making without the geographical boundaries of the nations.
With this theoretical understanding, the researchers developed six major criteria to compare and contrast the history textbooks and syllabi of the selected countries. The major criteria were the aim and objectives of the curriculum, status of the subject, contents, methods of teaching, and assessment mechanisms proposed in the history curriculum materials. Document review was used as primary data collection tools. The data were organized based on the criteria mentioned above and analysed qualitatively.

Review of related literature
This section reviewed existing knowledge, contrast, and debate about the role of history education for nation building in Ethiopia, Rwanda, South Africa, Germany, the USA, and Switzerland.
In Ethiopia, history education focuses on the dominant narratives with little attention to contested and counter-narratives (Elizabeth, 2007). Yet, there are some questioned, contested, and unsettled parts of history (Demise, 2016;Gillespie, 2003). For example, historical versions constructed by those who are centrist in their political position identified themselves as "Ethiopianist" and favoured the "grand narratives". But they are challenged by the "Ethno-nationalist" who are critical of the "Great Narrative" or Master Narratives of Ethiopian history (Hultin, 1996;Triulzi, 1994). Donald Levine (1974) schematized this historical version in to three phases: the "Amhara thesis," the "Oromo anti-thesis" and the "Ethiopian synthesis" (p. 264). In this extreme contest, we suggest to create a balanced view that accommodates multiple versions. Supporting this assertion Klerides and Zembylas (2017) as cited in Klerides (2018) argued that "mixing of traditional and new history leads to hybridizations, imaginary of history teaching and identity formation" (p. 235). Besides, in Ethiopia the political entrepreneurs manipulated the history of the country and fostered ethnic conflicts among the different communities (Jessner, 2012). Due to this, Zahorik (2014) argued that Ethiopian history has been very complex, multi-faceted and dynamic. Researchers noted that as a result of lack of shared understanding of history, contested contents are excluded from textbooks, and students have limited opportunities to learn from divergent historical issues (Mekonnen & Hindeya, 2012). In addition, Zahorik (2014) argued that Ethiopian history gives high emphasis to the political and military history than the social and economic history of the country. This is not only the problem of Ethiopia, and it was manifested in France and Germany (Klerides, 2018). Mekonnen and Hindeya (2012) also criticized student textbooks as focusing on war rather than engaging students in historical inquiry. The above descriptions show that history textbooks do not adequately include different historical and social symbols, values, stories, and perspectives and they require proper interventions as this can possibly affect the nation-building process and development of the national history curriculum. To alleviate such cross-national problems the Franco-German historian agreement suggested to "shift the focus of history textbook from military and diplomatic history to social history" (Klerides, 2018.p.230).
In Rwanda, after the 1994 genocide which exterminated more than 800,000 people with in a hundred days, authorities have begun a "fresh start", "from zero" to avoid "the error of the past" (Bianchini, 2009;Gaye, 2012). In this regard, some believe that one of the causes of the genocide was textbooks that emphasized the differences between Hutus and Tutsis (Bianchini, 2009). Hence, the Rwandans re-established historical truth, and focused on the promotion of national unity and reconciliation (Nantulya, 2006), and teaching history advocated constructivist oriented participatory methods of teaching. The country also focuses on promoting peaceful co-existence, justice, reconciliation, healing and forgiveness (Nantulya, 2006). "According to the Rwandan Ministry of Education" (2015), secondary school students are expected to demonstrate some competencies such as living in harmony; appreciating the Rwandan and universal values; developing a patriotic spirit, a sense of civic pride and commitment; and promoting the moral, intellectual and social values, a spirit of self-reliance, dignity and cooperation. Based on the above explanation, we can understand that in Rwanda the new history curriculum erased ethnic narratives in favour of a unified Rwanda that facilitates the nation-building processes.
In South Africa, history curriculum emphasizes on historical skills and the diversity of voices rather than only focusing on a dominant white narrative (Chisholm, 2005). The national curriculum plays a de-racialized and de-tribalized role (Ndlovu, 2009), using non-racial approach (Van Eeden, 2010). Following the termination of apartheid, they set about rewriting the history subject inclusively, allowing alternative interpretation, transform the pre-1994 situations, and considered history education as a part of the national political process (Kitson & Steward, 2011;Van Eeden, 2010), and the curriculum designed to inculcate citizenship (Paulson, 2015). To organize the history curriculum chronological, comparative and logical approach were employed (Department of Basic Education, 2011b). In South Africa, the Revised National Curriculum Statement put Nationbuilding' at the centre of its vision (Chisholm, 2005. p. 85). Furthermore, Van Eeden (2010) described, "the primary aim of teaching history in South Africa's is to present a balanced multiplevoice approach" (p. 118). In South Africa, Education and nation building, models non-racism, democracy, and "Ubuntu" as a vehicle for social and political transformation (Msila, 2007). These experiences may be useful to other countries such as Ethiopia in revisiting their history curriculum.
In the USA, history education is essential subject among most American schools (Gloria et al., 2015;Marla, 2017;Thornton, 2006). History education designed in a more positivistic approach (Black & MacRaild, 2000). In the United States, the very purpose of history education is to inculcate the moral direction of the nation (Black & MacRaild, 2000). It also plays a part in defining "Americanness" (ibid), and the schools play critical role in the Americanization and nationbuilding project. In the U.S. history education discourse, there are two major approach, the traditional approach focus on the grand narratives (Faden, 2012), and alternative approach focus on the stories of middle and working classes. In the traditional approach, national unity, patriotism and national pride (Faden, 2012) are the main criteria for selection historical contents. Yet, in the United States, the debate on the history curriculum often related with contents (Gloria et al., 2015;Marla, 2017) because it is often a politicized document (Stenros, 2019). Besides, contents and methods of teaching varies across different level or state (Gloria et al., 2015). Mostly history textbook in the United States portray a constant story of the role of American leaders and heroes in major world events. In the United States, history textbook designed to support the present ideology and politics (Wagner et al., 2018).The above explanation shows that in the United States, there were little consensuses on teaching history (Faden, 2012).
In Germany, the Ministries of Education and Cultural Affairs is responsible for education plans and syllabi (UNESCO-IBE, 2007), and all states are obliged to maintain educational standards (Faden, 2012), and the entire school system is supervised by the state (Weldon, 2009). The textbooks prepared by independent textbook publishers and implemented after the approval of individual state (ibid). After its reunification in 1990, re-written German history textbooks were problematic (Zajda, 2009). In addition, post-WW-II political memory including the legacy of the Holocaust, and the political divisions in the cold war make it the history curriculum-making complex (Faas, et al., 2014). However, political leaders in post-war Germany recognized that "history of politics and the history of ideas, beliefs, ideology, narratives, discourse and representations were inseparable from one another" (Weldon, 2009. p. 82). The metaphysical foundations of the history curriculum in German schools aims to explore the connections between humans and their environment in time, space and place (Faas, et al.,2014). Besides, the researcher disclosed that the German curricula focus on tolerance and pluralism, and identity formation throughout the teaching and learning process (ibid) to facilitate the nation-building process. Moreover, Symcox and Wilschut (2009) as cited in Klerides (2018) disclosed, "history education in Germany strives to create real German spirits" (p. 228). The Franco-German historian agreement also promotes the history of Europe and its unity (Siegel and Harjes as cited in Klerides, 2018. p. 233). They also promote shared western European identities and transatlantic integration (ibid).
In Switzerland, the process of creating multilingual nation with the integration of various ethnic affiliations has been successful. Supporting this assertion, Wilner (2009) argued that modern Switzerland nation-building considered the mixture of great diversity and undeniably exemplary for the establishment of other stable multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic, and multi-religious nationstates. Switzerland's nation-building has been successful (Linder, 1996). Besides, the researcher argued that the Swiss established a stable multi-ethnic identity due to several factors such as elite accommodation and guidance, and willingness among various groups to cohabitate, cooperate, and participate in nation-building (Wilner, 2009). Besides, in Switzerland, the operation of schooling is frequently understood as a means of nation building. Teaching history is considered as a part of patriotic education (Horlacher, 2020). In Swiss, history is a basis for a Swiss consciousness and fostering national unity via enhancing common history (Dahn & Boser, 2015). Swiss history is considered as a pillar of national identity construction. The Swiss curricula focus on tolerance towards diverse identities. In Switzerland, however, schooling has not yet been free from debates (ibid).
From the above analyses, we can learn that contested ethnic, racialized, and tribalized narratives were excluded from the textbooks in Ethiopia, Rwanda and South Africa. These countries give due emphasis to common narratives, political and military history, promote national unity, peaceful co-existence, and harmony; and develop patriotic spirit and justice. Likewise, in Germany and Switzerland, history education focused on tolerance, fostering national unity, pluralism, and identity construction to facilitate the nation-building process. In South Africa, alternative interpretations and balanced multiple-voices were presented in history textbooks, and nation building was at the centre of their vision. Similarly, in the U.S. traditional and alternative approaches are used in teaching history to inculcate the moral direction, "Americanness", "Americanization" and nationbuilding. Although contents and methods of teaching vary across different States in the United States, they commonly portray the role of American leaders and heroes, and support the national ideology and politics. In Rwanda, South Africa, USA, Switzerland, and Germany there are contested history contents. For example, after the 1990 reunification in Germany, apartheid in South Africa, and the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, re-writing history textbooks was problematic. This shows that the ethno-nationalistic historical and political experiences of these countries affected the cultivation of global identity in general and national identity in particular. As a result, the European Council and UNESCO promoted the cultivation of European identities and world citizen identity framework (Klerides, 2018.p.229).

Results and discussion
This section described and interpreted data in relation to the basic research questions and explained the new understanding that emerged from the study.

The AIM and objectives of history education in nation-building
The main aim and objectives of history education are to socialize individuals, teach moral values, create stability, and develop a shared value and national identity (Symcox & Wilschut, 2009); facilitate peace building, promote mutual understanding and reconciliation (Warnasuriya, 2018); appreciate cultural pluralism and tolerance (MoE, 2009;Njeng'ere, 2014;Yilmaz, 2008); make citizen (Chin, 2012); and promote democratic citizenship (Al-Haj, 2005;Low-Beer, 2003). Having these in mind, Table 1 below summarizes the stated aim and objectives in the history textbooks and syllabi reviewed.
: Note: In USA, Germany, and Switzerland, there is no single or one size fits all history textbook for secondary schools. Hence, the above aims and objectives are extracted from syllabi, guidelines, and course outlines prepared by individual states or cantons.
As shown in Table 1, in Ethiopia some history education aim and learning objectives embedded in the textbooks intended to develop students' sense of patriotism, peaceful co-existence, and carry out their responsibility, appreciate and respect cultures, and protect the human rights, which foster nation-building. Similarly, in Rwanda, some history education aim and learning objectives focused on creating patriotic and responsible citizens, developing a patriotic spirit and sense of civic pride, participating in national duties and obligations, and appreciating the national and international judicial systems and instruments (Nturo, 2017). Likewise, in South Africa, the most important aim of teaching history was to encourage civic responsibility and leadership, promote human rights, peace and reconciliations, and understand and appreciate the past. Consistent to this study, Chisholm (2005) reported that in African states, particularly, in a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, and multi-tribal society such as South Africa's, after apartheid, history curriculum has been focused on historical skills and the diversity of voices rather than only focusing on a dominant narrative of white progress.
In Switzerland, grade 11-12 history textbooks promoted international-mindedness, historical consciousness, and historical perspectives. Correspondingly, in Germany (Dresden International School, 2019), the suggested learning objectives encouraged students to learn and link the significance of events of the past to understand the modern day, and how the past was interpreted and represented. In the United States, Fairfield public secondary schools (2016b), the stated aim  Thornton (2006) reported in his study that history education in the USA enabled students to know racial diversity and identity. In Table 2 below, comparisons were also made in relation to how many objectives are linked to nation building. Table 2 depicts that in all countries a minimal number of learning objectives embedded the issues of equality, justice, democracy, national duties and obligations, self-reliance, sense of patriotism, peaceful co-existence, and carry out their responsibility, appreciate and respect cultures, and protect the human rights that help to facilitate nation building. In Ethiopia 95 (8.2%), in Rwanda 134 (62.9%), in South Africa 39 (81.25%), in the USA (Fairfield high school) 122 (87.76%), in Germany (Munich International School) 25 (83.3%), and in Switzerland (ICS Inter-Community School Zurich) 24 (82.75%) of learning objectives did not relate with nation building. Hence, it is possible to say that history textbook and syllabi did not adequately facilitate the socialization of individuals, construction of shared identity, peace building, and reconciliation, cultural pluralism, and tolerance, respect, making and inculcating moral values, and promoting democratic citizenship.

History curriculum: commonalities and differences
All subjects are important. However, they may not have equal status in a curriculum construction process. One subject may be taught as a separate/independent subject and the other may be taught under the border social science, as a combined subject. One subject may be designed as compulsory and the other may be offered as an elective non-compulsory course. Besides, subjects may have different time allocations per week. In this section, commonalities and differences in the history curriculum of those countries are analysed in terms of the status of history as a separate or combined subject, as a compulsory or non-compulsory subject, the responsible body to prepare the curriculum, prescribed contents as well as national, regional and global issues in it, and suggested methods and assessment mechanisms. Table 3, in the USA, Germany, Ethiopia, and Switzerland primary education level, history is taught under a broader social sciences/studies subject. In Rwanda and South Africa, history is taught under social and religious studies, and life skills respectively. In Ethiopian second cycle primary level and in South African intermediate levels history is taught under social science/ studies subject. In Germany and Switzerland, lower secondary level history subject is taught as a separate subject. In addition, in Ethiopia, South Africa, secondary level history is taught as a separate subject. In contrary, in Rwanda, Germany and Switzerland, and USA, history taught under humanities and social sciences, individual and society, and global studies respectively.

As shown in
From the above the evidence, one can argue that there are recognizable variations among countries on the status of the history subject because some countries taught it as independent subject, and other taught it under social sciences/studies subject. Looking at levels, virtually all primary and lower secondary schools of selected countries "history subject" was not taught as separate subject'. On the other hand, almost in all countries of upper secondary school as well as in upper secondary vocational schools or pre-university college "history" was taught as independent subject'. Level of education and subject taught varies in German, USA and Switzerland states/ cantons, while in Ethiopia, Rwanda and South Africa the level of education and subject were prescribed. For example, in Switzerland, the main responsibility of history education lies with the cantons and teachers has freedom to design syllabus. Consistent with this finding, Furrer (2004), in their study reported that teachers have substantial freedom to choose history textbook and instructional materials, and they are free to decide what to teach, and how to teach. Based on the above explanation, one can say that history education did not have similar status across countries. In addition, the history subject is not have equal status with mathematics and language studies because the subject did not designed as separate subject across school levels and  countries. Besides, in the subsequent section, the essentiality of history subject and the time allotted for it examined to know its status. Table 4 portrayed that except in South Africa in all secondary schools history was a compulsory subject. Despite this fact, in Germany, South Africa, the USA, and Switzerland there are several elective courses in pre-university program. As shown in the above table, there are variations among countries on the amount of time given to teach history subject per week. For example, in Rwandans, to teach history subject 7 periods per week were allocated which was the highest and the lowest 2 periods per week allotted in Germany. The time allotted for any subject is grounded on the depth and breadth of the contents. The following Table 5 illustrates the main decision making body in the construction of secondary school history textbook.

Note: Ministry of Education (MoE), National University of Rwanda (NUR), African National Congruence (ANC), Swiss Conference of Cantonal Ministers of Education (EDK)'s, and National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) and American Historical Association (AHA).
As depicted in Table 5, in Ethiopia, Ministry of Education (MoE) is mandated to develop secondary school students' textbooks. Regional Education Bureau (REB) obliged to prepare primary school students textbook and teachers guide. In Ethiopia, Germany and USA ministry of education or department of education, private consultant and university based intellectuals were participated in textbook development. For example, in Germany, the Ministries of Education and Cultural Affairs is in charge for textbook and syllabi (UNESCO-IBE, 2007), and all states are obliged to keep learning standards (Faden, 2012;Weldon, 2009).
After a tragic genocide, in Rwanda, the pedagogical offices, the Technical and Scientific Research Institute, and the National University of Rwanda (NUR), History Department of NUR, and the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission participated in history textbook development. Likewise, in South Africa, NC, the teacher Unions and University-based intellectuals were participated in history curriculum making. Despite this fact, "Rwandan Ministry of Education" (2015), Ministry of Education in Ethiopia (2009), Department of Basic Education (2011a) in South Africa are the key actor in textbook development.
In the United States, history textbooks were prepared by private business peoples but the U.S. Department of Education, the NCSS and AHA suggested standards and curricula. States and schools have the right to develop module, content outlines based on the suggested standards and syllabi. The U.S. basic education standard emphasized on the purpose and nature, and  (Thornton, 2006).
In Switzerland, the national government and the cantons jointly mandated on the education system. In Switzerland, the Swiss Conference of Cantonal Ministers of Education (EDK)'s curriculum framework expected to apply nationwide. Unequivocally, the cantons are responsible for the student textbook and guidelines development. Likewise, in Germany, the Ministries of Education and Cultural Affairs were responsible for syllabi development. The contents determined by the state overseen syllabi. In Germany, independent textbook publishers prepared textbooks and implemented after the approval of individual states. Hence, there was no centralized or one size fit all students textbook in United States, Germany and Switzerland. In contrast, in Ethiopia, South Africa and Rwanda secondary school history textbooks are prescribed and implemented in a fidelity approach. Table 6 shows that in Ethiopian grade 11 history subject prescribed contents focused on ancient and medieval history of Ethiopia and Africa. In contrary, in South Africa, Rwanda, Switzerland, and USA, high emphasis given to local and international historical phenomenon. Capitalism and industrialization were the common contents in Switzerland, USA, Ethiopia, and South Africa. In the US, many contents focused on the American issues that enable students to understand the foundation of the country. In the United States, history subject played a critical role in indoctrinating "Americanization". Except in the United States, the remaining countries history subject preassigned contents didn't gives emphasis to the process of the nation's history rather it gives high attention to global history. In South Africa, the contents emphasize to improve students historical skill on divers historical events such as the idea of race and apartheid. In Germany and Switzerland, history subject in the International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP) (2015) focused on Global War, WW-I-& WW-II-, Spanish Civil War, Vietnam War, Chinese Civil War, Unification of Italy and Germany, Colonization, Authoritarian ruler and Soviet Union. These major global topics presented at grade twelve in Ethiopia, Rwanda and South Africa. Hence, it is possible to conclude that the main contents prescribed in history subject did not have direct connection with nation building rather it focused on major past global phenomenon.

Note: The International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programme (DP) is a rigorous two-year university-preparation programme for students aged 16 to 19. In Germany and Switzerland IBDP program is a two-year High Level (HL) and Standard Level (SL) course provided in a modular and continuous ways.
As depicted in Table 7 from the total contents included in history textbook or syllabi in grade eleven, 27 (57.4%) in Ethiopia, 60 (62.5%) in South Africa, 26 (78.78%) in Switzerland, and 12 (52.17%) in Germany were talked about global topics. This shown that these countries focused on creating students who has more knowledge on global historical events than national and regional issues because national and regional topics did not get proper consideration and coverage in the students textbook and syllabi. In Rwanda, national and regional topics got almost equivalent attentions by 18 (42.8%) and 17(40.47%), respectively. Exceptionally, USA provided excessive attention to national topics. In the United States, of the total contents included in grade eleven course guide, 26 (83.87%) presented about national issues. This indicated that Americans history textbook designed to instruct students about American history than regional and global history.
Knowing about their own history in-depth may facilitate their nation-building project.
Likewise, of the total contents included in grade twelve, 23 (52.27%) in Ethiopia, 26 (78.78%) in Switzerland, 12 (52.17%) in Germany, and 36 (58.06%) in USA talked about global historical topics. Of the total grade twelve history textbook contents in Rwanda, 31 (55.35%) talked about national issues. Contrary to Rwanda, in Switzerland, national historical issues got very small attention in the history textbook. In Ethiopia, Switzerland and USA regional issues acquired minor coverage in the textbook. Virtually in all countries, history students textbook and syllabi regional topics did not acquire appropriate attention. This may have demonstrative impact on student's regional understanding and integration issues. Grounded on the above data, one can conclude that there are substantial variation among countries in designing history subject in grade eleven and twelve. Nearly all countries provided high emphasis to global topics, and the remaining give minor and medium attention regional and national topics respectively. This might be the influence of the western world in curriculum making. In this regard, Muller (2011) disclosed that history textbook and pedagogical discourse (history teaching and curriculum development) influenced by the western model-western pedagogical discourse.
Despite the above facts, history is not a simple subject to design and teach in secondary schools after 1994 genocide in Rwanda, and apartheid in South Africa, and post 1991 in Ethiopia because the curriculum makers while selecting contents/topics influenced by political factors. The Textbook development need to include range of values, symbols and stories. This was not for example happen in Ethiopia because the history textbooks did not properly contain range symbols, values, and stories (Mekonnen & Hindeya, 2012). Similarly, in the US, Switzerland and Germany there is little agreement on history curriculum making especially who decide the contents because in these countries "those who write history textbooks and design curriculum have been influenced by changing ideological sensitivities" (Zajda, 2009. p. 383). Besides, there is strong debate in USA, Switzerland, and Germany on the role of historical narratives in the nation-building process. Similarly, in other countries such as Japan, Canada, France, Ukraine, Italy, Greece, Korea, China, and Russian there are intense debate on the role of historical narratives in the nation-building process since 1990s (ibid). In addition, one of the major challenges in history education is overuse of the opposing narratives because practically it affects classroom instructions. Teacher miss-consumption and misconception of history subject negatively affected national unity and nation building. Supporting this assertion Siraw (2016) in his study reported that history teachers misconception towards their subject matter agitate mutual mistrust and communal conflict in South Africa and Rwanda. However, this issue need further investigation.
In this study, suggested assessment techniques prescribed in the curriculum materials were reviewed. Table 8 above shows that virtually all countries use teacher generated formative assessment mechanisms to check student progress while the teaching learning process is going on, and also, schools and districts implement summative assessments techniques to evaluate students' performances and make decisions. With regard to the suggested methods of teaching, Table 8 shows that in Ethiopia and Rwanda learner-centred methods of teaching such as activity based-learning, group work, pair work, discussion, debate and problem-solving are often suggested in the curriculum materials. In Rwanda, after the historic ethnic-based catastrophe, they advocated constructivist oriented participatory methods of teaching. The curriculum substituted ethnic narratives in favour of a unified Rwanda. Teachers allow learners to express their views (Bianchini, 2009). Also, research investigation and interpretation; independent research essay writing and source analysis; and questioning, argumentation, explanation of claims, and counter-claims are suggested methods in South Africa, Germany (Dresden International School, 2019), and USA (Fairfield, 2016b) schools respectively. In Switzerland, at Baccalaureate schools and upper secondary specialized schools teachers are permitted to select their teaching methods that best suit objectives and contents. In Swiss, a comparative and multi-perspective approach is often suggested in the curriculum materials.

Lessons to learn
The above review show that in the United States and Europe, history education played a critical role in inculcating "Americanness" or "Americanization", and "Europeanization", respectively. The "Europeanization" project happened since 1990s in France, Germany, Russian, and Ukrainians history textbook. They also impart western dimension of human right, democracy and social justice in their school system. Hence, redesigning the history textbook to develop a sense of "Africanization" in general and "Ethiopianization" in particular is recommendable to Ethiopian history curriculum makers to facilitate the regional integration and nation-building project. In most developed countries centralized or one-size-fit-all textbook has been discouraged. Hence, in Ethiopia, teachers, higher education institutions and regional education experts need to take part in the preparation of history textbook for secondary schools. There was a variation on the status of the history subject matter and the time allotted for it. Ethiopia should have to maintain the teaching of history as independent subject in secondary schools and reinvigorate the subject to strengthen its contribution for nation building. Rwanda and USA provided high emphasis to national topics. Hence, this may be good lesson for Ethiopian to include more national topics in their history textbook. These contents would help to ensure peace and national reconciliation, settle ethnic-based clash, and facilitate the nation-building process.

Conclusion and implications
Based on the result and discussion stated above one can conclude that prescribed history textbook remains a powerful instructional material in developing countries. For example in Ethiopia, South Africa and Rwanda history textbook is prescribed. On the contrary, in Germany, USA and Switzerland there was no centralized and prescribed textbook. In these countries, minimal learning objectives appeared in the history textbooks that facilitate nation-building. Hence, one can conclude that history textbooks and syllabi may not adequately facilitate the socialization of individuals, construction of shared identity and promoting democratic citizenship. Concerning the status of the subject matter and the time allotted variations were observed in the curriculum document. For example, in Ethiopia, South Africa, and Switzerland history taught as a separate subject in the secondary level whereas in Rwanda, Germany and USA history is taught under humanities, social sciences, and global studies subject respectively. Neither grade 11 nor grade 12 history textbook and syllabi contents in selected countries focused on nation-building. The main contents included in the textbook and syllabi are ancient and medieval history, Capitalism, Industrialization, global history (WW-I & WW-II-, Civil War in Spanish and China, Vietnam War, Unification of Italy and Germany, Colonization, Authoritarian ruler, Cold war, and USSR). Except for Rwanda and USA in all countries, global topics got major portion in the textbook and syllabi than regional and national topics. Hence, students may not have adequate opportunity to know about the history of their countries. The main lesson for Ethiopia is that regions need to be involved in secondary school textbooks preparation, and provide major emphasis to balanced national topics. These topics would help to ensure peace, settle ethnic-based clash, and facilitate the nation-building.