Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

[neoptolemos]

It would have been rather difficult to define how "Scottish history" haven not been taught in Scottish schools when this history is integrated within British history itself.

In any case I can't see how this "Scottish studies"-"Scottish history" will affect this referendum.

It is too late for the nationalists to emphasize on things that distinguish Scotland from the rest of UK.

[removeduser_487563287433]

It would have been rather difficult to define how "Scottish history" haven not been taught in Scottish schools when this history is integrated within British history itself.

A point I have already made.

[Copperknickers II]

I am questioning how "your experience" amounts to the history of the Scottish education system.

It amounts to a perfectly good account of the Scottish education system from the start of the 21st Century until last year. As I have already said, I am not arguing Selder's side here, I am just presenting you with the facts. Until the recent changes that only came into effect this year, Scottish history was taught as piecemeal modules within the subject of history, frequently within modules about British history. As of the new system, there will be a thread of 'Scottish studies' throughout various subjects within the curriculum that will include a more detailed and coherent structure of Scottish history that will bring different schools more into line. Perhaps by 'recently' Selder means 50-100 years ago, but that is not my concern. I'm giving you an account of the system that was in place from the 90s up until last year.

[removeduser_487563287433]

It amounts to a perfectly good account of the Scottish education system from the start of the 21st Century until last year.

Which would be a minute proportion of the time we're talking about. How are you not getting this?

Christ you even admit in your post that Scottish history has been taught before. Do you even know what the original claim was?

[selder]

Then report me.

Why would I have to do that when my purpose was to simply remind you of the ToS?

Do you even know what the original claim was?

The original claim was in response to a post that stated...

I've always considered England and Scotland as one country

so you see, I was simply suggesting that it is not surprising that people would feel that way as history is taught as General History. Their is no Scottish history subject, until the proposal of Scottish studies that is, which just happend recently. I still can't see how this is hard to follow. But like I said I think this has more to do with trying to derail the thread than anything else.

Scottish history was taught as piecemeal modules within the subject of history

indisputable

[neoptolemos]

indisputable

So?
That means that in a highly integrated Scotland within UK, British history had more value than the Scottish but nevertheless the system provided the option of learning bits of Scottish history.

Besides you did have educational excursions to historical sites, castles, monuments etc didn't you?

That's fair if you ask me but having Scottish studies as an optional module in education is again something i agree with.

Now if there was an attempt in the past of indoctrination about "Britishness" over "Scottishness" i can't tell but i regard it highly improbable to be honest.

[removeduser_487563287433]

The original claim was in response to a post that stated...

Don't lie about what you have posted and can be seen by everybody. You said:

Scottish history has not been taught in school until very recently. Neither was Scottish literature for that matter

This statement was an outright lie, and representative of the victim mentality of nationalists, regardless of the facts.

[ShockBlast]

Scotland stands to win a lot in terms of economic growth if it goes independent since it has a lot of resources to exploit and it can bring a big income in relation to it`s 5.2 million population.An independent Scotland wouldn`t suffer any significant economic backlash if at all since it goesn`t without saying that they will at least be part of EU(NATO maybe if they so desire) so no border checks or taxes on imported and exported goods.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Ha, because the resources aren't being exploited now? Silly post.

[ShockBlast]

Ha, because the resources aren't being exploited now? Silly post.

it can bring a big income in relation to it`s 5.2 million population

Silly post.

[removeduser_487563287433]

And... what about independence would suddenly make these people work harder? Are you aware that UK oil production has been declining for years and will continue to do so?

[selder]

It would have been rather difficult to define how "Scottish history" haven not been taught in Scottish schools when this history is integrated within British history itself.

Only if you think I was referring to subject material, but in fact I was referring to a course. As in an entire History class devoted to Scottish History. My point was that if people are taught British history as if Britain were one country then it is not surprising that they may feel Britain is one whole country, when in fact it is an island with several separate countries that are united by a political union. Which is what I meant when I made the original post. I have no problem with each country devoting an entire History class/course/subject to its individual history as each country has been independent longer than they have been in union.

can be seen by everybody

Thats right it can, so no need for you to try and quantify it. Considering I went on to further explain that I meant specifically. So it would seem you are arguing semantics.

This statement was an outright lie

Such melodrama.

and representative of the victim mentality of nationalists, regardless of the facts.

How can the post of one man represent the mentality of the entire group? Don't forget that unionists are nationalists as well...they just live in a different nation.

[The Great Montrose]

Don't forget that unionists are nationalists as well...they just live in a different nation.

A point I have made on many occasions but they seem to ignore it and continue insulting Scottish nationalism.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Only if you think I was referring to subject material, but in fact I was referring to a course. As in an entire History class devoted to Scottish History. My point was that if people are taught British history as if Britain were one country then it is not surprising that they may feel Britain is one whole country, when in fact it is an island with several separate countries that are united by a political union. Which is what I meant when I made the original post. I have no problem with each country devoting an entire History class/course/subject to its individual history as each country has been independent longer than they have been in union.


Thats right it can, so no need for you to try and quantify it. Considering I went on to further explain that I meant specifically. So it would seem you are arguing semantics.


Such melodrama.


How can the post of one man represent the mentality of the entire group? Don't forget that unionists are nationalists as well...they just live in a different nation.

Your evasion is pathetic, Selder. You could not have stated more explicitly what you stated: that Scottish history and literature was not taught until recently. You lied. And it seems you will not yet have the courage to admit it, but instead choose to pin your argument on independence on such lies.

Which is the crux of why this referendum is doomed to failure.

[selder]

Your evasion is pathetic, Selder.

If I were trying to evade, I would have simply refrained from commenting. I instead chose to clarify what I meant, and as you have already pointed out my posts are there for anyone to read. You can drop the aggressive attitude and pretending to be able to read my mind act and read what I have posted instead.

You could not have stated more explicitly what you stated: that Scottish history and literature was not taught until recently.

And I stand by that. Scottish history is not a class or course taught in school, instead British history is taught. I also stand by my point that Scottish literature is not taught, instead British/English literature is taught. So I really don't know how I can be any more clear about what I meant and what I was saying. If you choose to interpret it another way, then that is not my problem.

You lied. And it seems you will not yet have the courage to admit it

You have said that repeatedly, but the fact still remains that it is you who have misinterpreted what I was saying and I have already clarified it. The fault lies in reason not in morality.

but instead choose to pin your argument on independence on such lies.

This can not be serious, the argument for Scottish independence is self-determination. Not some trivial argument about semantics.

Which is the crux of why this referendum is doomed to failure.

As has already been pointed out, either way this referendum goes Scotland has already won. We will gain more and more autonomy, inch by inch we will claw our way out of this primordial hole that some have become so fond of. I would hardly call that failure, more like progress. Their is a reason that one by one, the Empire cookie did crumble, because it was stale and moldy just like the arguments that support it.

[Derpy Hooves]

Why does there need to be a Scottish history class? There was never a Pennsylvanian history class when I went to school and you don't see me complaining.

[removeduser_487563287433]

And I stand by that. Scottish history is not a class or course taught in school

More lies. You explicitly stated Scottish history and literature was not taught at all until recently, not a class devoted to it. Stop lying please, the horse has bolted, and the more you drag this through the mud the more people see that you lied.

[Azog 150]

Why does there need to be a Scottish history class? There was never a Pennsylvanian history class when I went to school and you don't see me complaining.

Because the national curriculum is apparently viewed as a political tool by Scottish Nationalists

[Colossus]

Selder, you obviously don't believe in teaching for its own sake, rather everything should have a nationalist and political spin on it. Scotland is part of the island of Britain. You cannot properly study Scottish history without an awareness of the context. That context is Britain. For example, there is no point learning about David I without learning about Henry I, because he was essentially an English proxy who fought against other people within Scotland to take the throne. The current Highers course does teach David I alongside Henry I, as it should. Actually understanding history should not be corrupted by nationalist preoccupations of how that history is labelled.

I also stand by my point that Scottish literature is not taught, instead British/English literature is taught.

There is a distinction between works in the English language (i.e. everything you would study at school) and works that have a direct relationship to a nation. Everyone studies Shakespeare. I said in my last post that this is the case because of the huge literary importance of the works. The content of Shakespeare does not have any particular national bearing (indeed, Macbeth, one of the most studied, is in Scotland, though as with most of his plays that aren not histories, the setting is secondary). My point is that in this case, the national context is not really a factor at all in determining whether it is a valuable piece of literature to study; Shakespeare would be studied regardless of where he was from assuming the works were still in the English language. In France, they might study Moliere or Voltaire. Regardless of what national messages are contained within these works (or not) this is obviously done because the works are in French, the language of study. I studied Jekyll and Hyde at school, which is by Stevenson, a Scottish author. It is entirely false to say that Scottish authors are neglected.

You may be meaning that literature with an underlying Scottish sentiment should be taught (some Burns or Scott perhaps, though I would be surprised if it isn’t already studied), but in that case, you are wrong to say that English literature is taught, when Scottish is not, when the ‘English’ literature that is taught is not done so for any nationalistic purposes as it is - just as the work of various Scottish authors is already studied.

[The Great Montrose]

Why does there need to be a Scottish history class? There was never a Pennsylvanian history class when I went to school and you don't see me complaining.

Scotland is a country, we dont learn enough about our own history therefore we should learn more.