Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 29 September 2011

29 Sep 2011 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Scottish Studies

Biagi, Marco SNP Edinburgh Central Watch on SPTV

From third time lucky to three strikes and you are out. I will continue—that intervention does not even deserve an answer.

Until Mr Findlay intervened, a consensus was developing. We all accept that learning about Scotland’s history, literature and music—the Scottish context—is a good thing, which is a decent starting point. Of course, much of that is happening already; we can agree on that, too. However, there is nothing incompatible in recognising that much great teaching of the Scottish context takes place while recognising that many shortfalls and inconsistencies exist and believing that what is good practice or even common practice must become standard practice.

The principle that is at stake is clear. The entitlement to an education is inseparable from the entitlement to an education about the society in which we live. Curriculum for excellence is strong on that. I do not accept the argument that, because Scottish studies would fit in well with curriculum for excellence’s ethos, it cannot happen. That seems to be an argument in favour of Scottish studies. I am left bemused at the state of a country in which the right to learn about the society in which we live is even contested.

Let us be clear: good practice exists, but gaps remain. That has been most obvious and most talked about in history. The last attempt that I could find to gauge knowledge of Scottish history was a study of 3,000 secondary 4s—it is a little dated and could perhaps do with being revisited—that was peer reviewed and published in The Curriculum Journal. It is most worrying that the main reason that was chosen—by 37 per cent—for the act of union was an English military conquest of Scotland. The most popular description of Culloden—chosen by 41 per cent—was a battle between wholly Scottish and wholly English armies. I put it very gently to anyone who is sceptical about Scottish studies that ending those misconceptions would in no way be nationalist brainwashing.

In case anyone thinks that I am singling out the youth of today—although the cohort to which I referred are my contemporaries—a 2004 study of 1,000 people across the United Kingdom on British history by the BBC found that distinctions between ages were minimal. However, 6 per cent of respondents to that study thought that the Spanish armada’s vanquisher was Gandalf from “The Lord of the Rings”, so perhaps the most important finding is a cautionary one about multiple-choice questions.

I am not the only one who thinks that there is a gap here. The Government has very much reflected civic society on the matter. As well as the Scottish studies working group, which has been given credibility by the involvement of figures such as Liz Lochhead, we had, in 2010, the literature working group, which worked with the Government in a cultural rather than educational context. One of the wide-ranging recommendations in its report, which I was drawn to in preparation for this debate, urged the inclusion of a mandatory question on Scottish literature in higher English. I do not know the background, but I suggest that that was the source of the current proposal. The group, which was chaired by The Herald’s literary editor, included Allan Massie and Andy Nicoll and I am sure that anyone who suggests that it was an agent of tartan parochialism can look forward to a very hearty write-up in The Sun.

Given the lack of any research, one cannot help citing personal experience in this debate. If members are going to be anecdotal, I should perhaps add my own anecdote, which, as I pointed out somewhat insensitively to some of my colleagues yesterday, is perhaps a little more contemporary than most.

For me, geography was the exemplar subject. Glaciation was taught with reference to the Clyde coast and Glen Fruin and the starting point for examining urban land use was the town in which we lived. It was a fine example of teaching of universal concepts through a Scottish context. Such an approach meant that learners could more readily access and identify the subject matter. It felt alive and relevant.

I have nothing but the highest praise for music, which ranged with a very even hand across cultures, genres and periods. However, I took English for six years and, aside from one Liz Lochhead poem, the closest it ever came to Scottish literature was “Macbeth”—which does not count. Do not even get me started on history. Two of my nephews now attend the same school and, as far as I can see, little has changed. That kind of patchwork needs to be addressed.

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 29 September 2011

In the same item of business