Ian Grosvenor's article points both to dangers and to positive potential in the National Curriculum for history. Critical of the published proposals for history in the current curriculum review, he points not only at the continuing narrowness of the perspectives enshrined by the proposed curriculum but at the reasons why such restricted perspectives on Britishness and Englishness have emerged. His article outlines a new and critical role for the historian in analysing the construction of such perspectives over time. In doing so he implicitly offers a range of insights and ideas to teachers trying to build their own subject knowledge in pursuit of effective teaching of National Curriculum Key Element 3 (Interpretations). In the last edition of Teaching History, Paul Coman's article reminded us of the danger that teachers will be reductionist with content requirements; Ian Grosvenor strengthens our professional imperative to teach pupils how interpretations and representations have arisen. Thus, like Coman, he highlights the need to interpret National Curriculum demands-in this instance by applying Key Element 3 to appropriate sections of content.