I am a high school history teacher and we’re about to get into the causes of WWI. I normally stick to the script of militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism as the tinder and the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and the “blank check” as the spark that sets it all off.

However, I’ve seen here and elsewhere some criticism of MAIN. Usually it’s part of a list of flawed or outdated ideas and there isn’t a specific explanation of what the flaws are. Could someone provide an explanation of why this is a flawed way of looking at things?

Also, would it be better to teach the same stuff then do a little critical thinking exercise looking at the potential flaws, or should I throw it out entirely and use a different framework. Remember this all has to be squeezed into about three 45 minute periods!