Osborne outlines five claims and counterclaims regarding whether history or social studies should be taught in Canadian schools. He covers historical background to the debate, then goes on to outline the current dominant position of social studies in Canadian schools. Osborne admits that he is a supporter of history and therefore a critic of social studies as a subject. The five claims and counterclaims are as follows:

• Social studies lacks conceptual and philosophical coherence/History is often little more than a pointless coverage of quickly forgotten information.
• Social studies does not do justice to the past/History’s concern with the past is obstructing attention to the present.
• Social studies does not pay enough attention to the teaching of historical thinking/the value of historical thinking can be exaggerated.
• Social studies is more an exercise in socialization than education/Social studies is no more an exercise in socialization than is history, which has often been taught as an instrument of propaganda.
• Social studies takes too limited a view of what students can do/Social studies pays more attention to students needs and interests than does history. 

Osborne contests that only history as a discipline can provide a systematic approach to acquiring knowledge about the past, and create an interest in the subject that will go beyond school years. He believes that ideally both history and social studies should be taught, but if a choice between the two has to be made, history should be chosen.